Motion Strike

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.March 24, 2021

\OOOflQM-bUJNo-n NNNNNNMNNo-IHHv-tn-Ap-nn-nn-Ab-AH OOQQM-bbJNI-‘O000flONLII-FUJNHO El t ' l| F'l d Michael G. Ackerman, Esq. (SBN 64997) ec romca y le LAW OFFICES 0F MICHAEL G. ACKERMAN by S”'°e”°’ cw” °f CA, . County of Santa Clara, 2391 The Alameda, Sulte 100 _ PM Santa Clara, CA 95050 0" 6_/1 1/2021 _3-07 Telephone: (408) 261-5800 Rev'ewed BY-BI‘I1D190' Mundo Facsimile: (408) 261-5900 Case #21 <_3V3 Email: mga@mgackermanlaw.com EnveIOPG- 6635029 Attorneys for Defendant, PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ANNE TING, an individual; JACK TING, ) Case N0.: 21CV381 1 10 an individual; and NICOLE TING-YAP, an ) individual; ) DEFENDANT PANIDA ) CHINSUPAKUL’S NOTICE OF MOTION Plaintiffs, ) AND MOTION T0 STRIKE 3 PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT vs. ) Date: 4-3-3. . . 9-28-21 ) Time: 9:00 a.m. PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL, an individual; ) Dept; 7 and DOES 1 through 10; ) Judge: Hon. Christopher G. Rudy ) ) Defendants. g TO THE COURT AND T0 ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on a date to be determined, in Department 7 of the above entitled Court, Defendant, PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL, will move the Court for an Order to strike the following portions portions of Plaintiffs’ Complaint pursuant to C.C. P. §§ 435 and 436 on the ground that the material is irrelevant, improper, and not in conformity with the law of this state: 1) Paragraph 14, page 4, lines 15-21, as follows: “Additionally, on or about March 8, 2021, Julian Ting informed Plaintiffs that Defendant was asking questions about companies, real property, and assets for which he had no ownership interest in whatsoever, but rather were owned and/or managed by Plaintiff Nicole Ting-Yap, her husband, and/or her in-laws. Defendant would have had no knowledge of these companies, real property, and assets unless she had illegally viewed _ 1 _ DEFENDANT PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL’S NOTICE 0F MOTION AND MOTION T0 STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT CASE N0.: 21CV381110 \oooqo‘mgwmfl NNNNNNNNNHHn-t-t-IHn-nt-It-In-n OOQQMAUJNHOOOOQQMAUJNHO or accessed the private information contained on Julian Ting’s MacBook Pro, iPad, and iPhone, without his permission.” 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Paragraph 17, page 5, lines 11-15, in its entirety. Paragraph 18, page 5, lines 16-27, in its entirety. Paragraph 23, page 7, lines 7-16, in its entirety. Paragraph 24, page 7, lines 17-22, in its entirety. Paragraph 26(b), page 8, lines 6-1 1, as follows: “Emails between Nicole Ting-Yap, her assistant, and Julian Ting, concerning several entities for which JCT Holdings is a shareholder, and for which Julian Ting has no ownership interest. JCT Holdings is wholly owned by Setima, an entity owned by Nicole Ting-Yap and others, excluding Julian Ting. Nicole Ting-Yap and Julian Ting are each Directors for JCT Holdings and Setima, and Nicole Tong-Yap is also the custodian of record for both of these entities.” 7) 3) 9) 10) Paragraph 30, page 9, lines 13-23, in its entirety. Paragraph 3 l, page 9, line 24 to page 10, line 2, in its entirety. Paragraph 75, page 17, lines 11-13, in its entirety. Paragraph 76, page l7, lines 17-18, as follows: “. . ., and the entities whose trade secrets she held, . . .” Said motion to strike shall be heard by the Honorable Christopher G. Rudy in Department 7 of the above-entitled court located at 191 North First Street, San Jose, California. The motion will be based on the Notice of Motion, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Michael G. Ackerman, and the pleadings and other records filed with the Court in this action, and upon such other further evidence and argument as may be presented at or -2- DEFENDANT PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL’S NOTICE 0F MOTION AND MOTION T0 STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 21CV381110 ALAN \OOOflQUu 10 11 12 13 14 15 l6 l7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 before the hearing of the Motion. DATED: June /2, 2021 LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL G. By: / // KERMAN / //%"“ MICHAEL . ACKERMAN, ESQ. Attorneys r Defendant, PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL -3- DEFENDANT PANIDA CHINSUPAKUL’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 21CV381 110