Motion_in_limine

Motion

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.April 5, 2017

© VW 0 NN OO wn A W O N = N B N O R O R Y B Y B D B Y O N O B ) de h m , ee e a pe d ge pe d ee d e a e a ® N A Un A W N = O O WV N S W O E O o = ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange 01/09/2019 at 06:57:00 FM Clerk of the Superior Court By Christin Dawson, Deputy Clerk BRANDON C. ROESLER Attorney At Law, SBN#296389 5000 Birch Street, West Tower, Suite 3000 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Telephone: (949) 610-9064 Attorney for Defendant: M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE-CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF CASE # 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC-CJC OPUS BANK, a California Corporation, MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE Plaintiff, ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY VS. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR FARIBORZ WOSOUGHKIA, an individual; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA. an individual; VASKEN TATARIAN., an individual; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, an individual; MUSA MADAIN., an individual; M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., a California Corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive. Defendants. STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM; DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER Date: 1/14/2019 Time: 8:30 Department: C22 Complaint Filed: 4/25/2017 Trial Date: 1/14/2019 Judge: Hon. Glenn Salter, Dept 22 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc., *“M3Live,” moves this Court for an order instructing Defendant Natasha Wosoughkia, “Ms. Wosoughkia,” her attorney and witnesses regarding the following matter(s): 1. Ms. Wosoughkia is precluded from presenting any evidence, testimony or claim that she entitled to or is the owner of the stock or money, hereinafter and collectively referred to as “Subject Property,” that was interpled in this case. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION: SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER S S OO XX N N wn As W N == BY BI I S B D RM O N M O N O R ee em ae ge m o g e e en ee aa ee ® NN A UL BA W R N = © VV ® N O N P E W O o = The basis for this is Ms. Wosoughkia’s answer did not made a claim to the Subject Property as required under Code of Civil Procedure 386(d). Further, there has been no modification or her answer or discovery responses that would satisfy the elements of Code of Civil Procedure 386(d). Therefore, under Code of Civil Procedure 590, 386(d) and Evidence Code 350, Defendant M3Live asks this Court to preclude Ms. Wosoguhkia from presenting any evidence to claim a right or ownership to the Subject Property. This motion is based on all pleadings, papers, and records in this action; the evidence presented at the hearing of this matter; the attached memorandum of points and authorities; and any evidence received at the hearing. Dated: 1/%/2019 LAW OFFICE OF BRANDON C. ROESLER i C. Roeser, Attofeyfor— M3live Bar & Grill, Inc. 2 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM; DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER SS © 0 N N SN nn A W N = N O N O N BN O N N O N N O N e m mm p t e m e s p d em p m e s ed 0 NN O N Wn A W N = O OO N S N Es W N MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AN AUTHORITIES I. INTRODUCTION Ms. Wosoughkia is be barred from presenting any evidence or making a claim of ownership to the Subject Property that was interpled in this case. This is a result of her not complying with Code of Civil Procedure § 386(d). IL STATEMENT OF FACTS On April 25, 2017, Plaintiff Commerce Escrow filed their first amended complaint against the named Defendants in the caption. As part of their complaint, Commerce Escrow interpled 100,000 dollars and 30% shares of stock in M3Live. On September 12, 2017, Ms. Wosoughkia filed her answer, a general denial with four affirmative defenses. She neither makes an affirmative claim to the Subject Property nor does she request the Subject Property in her prayer for relief. (Exhibit 1). Ms. Wosoughkia has not modified her answer, nor has she made any affirmative claims to the Subject Property though discovery. With the exception of Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia, all other Defendant’s made affirmative claims in their answers. Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia never filed an answer and was defaulted by Commerce Escrow on September 13, 2017. III. MOTIONS IN LIMINE AUTHORITY While not expressly authorized by statute, motions in limine are commonly used trial tools that are entertained and granted within the trial court’s inherent powers. K.C. Multimedia, Inc. v. Bank of America Technology & Operations, Inc., 171 Cal.App.4th 939 (2009). The usual purpose of motions in limine is to preclude the presentation of evidence deemed inadmissible and prejudicial by the moving party: a typical order in limine excludes the challenged evidence and directs counsel, parties, and witnesses not to refer to the excluded matters during trial. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. v. Superior Court, 200 Cal. App. 3d 272, 3 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER Oo 0 NN O N wn A W N N O N O R O N N O N O N N O N e e e e em ed ps em ea ® NN & Uh A W N = © ©V WW NN O&O Yn & W N =~ © 288, (1988); Hyatt v. Sierra Boat Co., 79 Cal. App. 3d 325, 337, (1978): K.C. Multimedia, Inc. v. Bank of America Technology & Operations, Inc., 171 Cal.App.4th 939 (2009). A typical in limine order excludes the challenged evidence. Kelly v. New West Federal Savings, 49 Cal. App. 4th 659, 669 (1996). “Under appropriate circumstances, a motion in limine can serve the function of a ‘motion to exclude’ under Evidence Code section 353 by allowing the trial court to rule on a specific objection to particular evidence.” People v. Morris, 53 Cal.3d 152 (1991). While trial judges ordinarily enjoy broad discretion with respect to the admission and exclusion of evidence in ruling on motions in limine, a court’s discretion is limited by the legal principles applicable to the case. Katiuzhinsky v. Perry, 152 Cal. App. 4th 1288 (2007), McIntyre v. Colonies-Pacific, LLC, 228 Cal.App.4th 664 (2014), Cuevas v. Contra Costa County, 11 Cal, App. 5th 163,(2017). Thus, if the trial court’s in limine ruling was based upon a misinterpretation of applicable law, an abuse of discretion has been shown. Dillingham-Ray Wilson v. City of Los] Angeles, 182 Cal. App. 4th 1396, (2010), Mcintyre v. Colonies-Pacific, LLC, 228 Cal.App.4th 664 (2014). Finally, matters that are lacking in “factual support or argument” are not properly the subject of motions in limine. Kelly at 670. The court should not have to rule in a vacuum or guess at what evidence should be included within the scope of its ruling. Kelly. Further, motions in limine may be inappropriate where it is difficult to specify exactly what evidence is the subject of the motion. People v. Morris, 53 Cal.3d 152 (1991). IV. INTERPLEADER AUTHORITY The interpleader proceeding is traditionally viewed as two lawsuits in one. The first dispute is between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the right to interplead the funds. The second dispute to be resolved is who is to receive the interpleaded funds. San Francisco Sav. Union v. Long, 123 Cal. 107, (1898); State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Pietak| 90 Cal. App. 4th 600, (2001); Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Mitchell, 41 Cal. App. 3d 16, 19, (1974), Dial 800 v. Fesbinder, 118 Cal. App. 4th 32, (2004). 4 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER NO 00 NN O N wn As W N BB 2 N O N N O N OB R N y pe s pm e s mb m d fe d e k pe d f e d pe d 0 NN O N Wn A W N = O O VO ® N N n s , W D ~ ~ © A defendant forfeits the right to contest the propriety of the interpleader action by not doing so during the initial phase of the proceeding. Farmers New World Life Ins. Co. v Rees 219 CA4th 307, 317-318, (2013), Southern Cal. Gas Co. v Flannery 5 CA5th 476, 483-485, (2016), Further, a demurrer is the appropriate response where the complaint or cross-complaint does not sufficiently allege the right to interplead. City of Los Angeles v. Amidor, 140 Cal. 400, (1903). If not raised by demurrer, answer, or motion, a challenge to the propriety of the interplead i waived. Continental Nat. Bank of Los Angeles v. Stoltz, 46 Cal. App. 532, (1920). In the second phase of an interpleader proceeding, the trial court has the power to adjudicate the issues raised by the interpleader action including the alleged existence of conflicting claims regarding the interpleaded funds, plaintiffs’ alleged position as a disinterested mere stakeholder, and ultimately the disposition of the interpleaded funds after deducting plaintiffs’ attorney fees. Code of Civil Procedure § 386, Shopoff & Cavallo LLP v. Hyon, 167 Cal. App. 4th 1489 (2008). Finally, as required under Code of Civil Procedure § 386(d), “a defendant named in 2 complaint to compel conflicting claimants to interplead and litigate their claims, or a defendant named in a cross-complaint in interpleader, may, in lieu of or in addition to any other pleading, file an answer to the complaint or cross-complaint which shall be served upon all parties to the action and which shall contain allegations of fact as to his ownership of or other interest in the amount of property and any affirmative defenses and the relief requested.” IV. MS. WOSOUGHKIA IS BARRED FROM PRESENTING EVIDENCE TO CLAIM OWNERSHIP OF THE ‘SUBJECT PROPERTY’ INTERPLED IN THIS CASE Under Code of Civil Procedure 386(d), Ms. Wosoughkia is barred from presenting evidence that she is entitled to the Subject Property at issue in this case. On September 12, 2017, Ms. Wosoughkia filed an answer (Exhibit 1). It is a general denial of the claims and she asserted three affirmative defenses: Failure to state a cause of action, fraud and mistake. She does not offer any language claiming ownership of Subject Property in the case. Ms. Wosoughkia’s fourth affirmative defense is right of reservation for her to amend her claims during the discovery proceedings in this action. However, Ms. Wosougkia has neither 5 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER S S CC 0 N S n s W NY —- N N ND N D D N D N ND N N = mm e m e m e m e m e m m m e n e e 0 NN A N Un A W N = OO OC 0 N N E R W N amended her answer, nor is it believed that she has conducted any discovery towards any of the parties in this action to amend her pleadings and discovery is now closed. (See Dec. of Brandon C. Roesler). Finally, Ms. Wosoughkia’s prayer for relief does not request the Subject Property. Therefore, Ms. Wosoughkia is missing two of the three essential elements required under CCP 386(d). The first is her lack of making an affirmative claim on the Subject Property and the second is not requesting it in her prayer for relief. Thus, she should be barred from now presenting evidence of alleged ownership in the Subject Property at trial. W hkia’s Cond | It's Prejudicial Eff Not only did Ms. Wosoughkia not make an affirmative claim to the Subject Property in her answer, but she never had standing to do so. On August 9, 2016, Ms. Wosoughkia transferred any alleged ownership she had in M3Live to Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia. (Exhibit 2). As provided in this stipulation, the transfer of the stock was consideration for Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia’s onus to be solely liable for any community debt to third parties incurred during the marriage. (Exhibit 2, Pg. 2, lines 14-19). Thereafter, the First Amended Complaint to this interpleader action was filed on April 25, 2017. Thus, any claim to the stock in Ms. Wosoighkia’s answer would have been in bad faith since she had already transferred any interest she had to Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia. The reasons for Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia’s lack of response to pleadings in the interpleader action, is irrelevant. The fact is he was defaulted by Commerce Escrow on September 13, 2017 and therefore cannot make any claim to the Subject Property. However, just recently, Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia attempted to re-transfer any alleged stock to Ms. Wosoughkia. (Exhibit 3). This document is not enforceable under Orange County Local Rules 303, is not supported by consideration, and was done in bad faith to not only avoid liability in Case#30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC (related to this case), but to circumvent Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia’s default in this action. Orange County Local Rule 303 This rule states the following: “Cases which are subject to civil case management will be randomly assigned to a judicial officer for all purposes, who will thereafter handle all 6 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER SS © 0 N N n n A W N —- proceedings in the case, including but not limited to, law and motion, pretrial (settlement) conferences, in limine motions and the trial. Nothing herein should be construed to interfere with the power of the presiding judge to assign or reassign cases.” Here, on 7/13/2018, a notice of related actions was filed, which not only included this action, but the Wosoughkia’s family law case. (Exhibit 4). Thereafter, on 8/16/2018, a minute order was produced in the family law case acknowledging this matter had been reassigned to Judge Salter for all purposes. (Exhibit 5). Therefore, any attempted re-transfer by the Wosoughkia’s in family Court, would have to do so and approved by Judge Salter. This was not done and thus their attempted re-transfer is invalid. Attempted Re-Transfer Not Supported By Consideration It is clear that in Ms. Wosoughkia’s deposition in Case#30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC, a related matter, that this attempted re-transfer was a sham for the Wosoughkia’s to potentially avoid the legal consequences of their actions. Ms. Wosoughkia could not identify what was filed in family law Court, if she signed it, or any material terms of consideration (including timing for performance). (See Dec. of Brandon C. Roesler) (Exhibit 6, Pg. 47-53, Lines 9-21 & Pg. 66-69, lines 17-16). Thus the only purpose of this, would be so one of the Wosoughkia’s would have a claim in the interpleader action and negate any liability in Case#:30-2016-00874746-CU- FR-CIC!. Special Interrogatories Provided by Ms. Wosoughkia It is believed Ms. Wosoughkia will make two arguments to oppose this motion in limine. The first is that she does have standing as Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia re-transferred the stock back to her, but this flawed argument is detailed above. The second will likely be that in her Response to Special Interrogatories, dated 12/17/2018, Ms. Wosoughkia claims the following: “On 5/19/16, the Court granted the motion and issued a minute order stating, in part and file a proposed judgment, including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates and any funds deposited in escrow to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. On 1/13/2017, the Court issued a clarifying order of its 5/19/16 order. The Court ruled that under the terms of I In Case #30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC, a majority of the claims that M3Live makes deal with the improper transfer that Ms. Wosoughkia made to Mr. Fariborz Wosoughkia in family court on August 9, 2016. 7 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER © OV 0 N N oO wn A W N —- N O R N O N O B O N N N O N O N e a m t m s p d e s md e d b d p w ( e d 0 ~ N O N Wn hh W N = O VO N N n A W N —- the settlement agreement, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA are entitled to the stipulated judgment of $150,000 and the stock certificates.” (Exhibit 7-Pg. 3, Lines 17-23). This argument would be misleading for two reasons. First, these alleged claims do not address the failure for Ms. Wosoughkia to request the stock and/or money in her Prayer for Relief. This element has never been satisfied under CCP 386(d). The second is any alleged evidence of what the Court said is not relevant to Ms. Wosoughkia’s obligation, as an individual, to make an affirmative claim under CCP 386(d) on the Subject Property. These fact of what allegedly happened with a prior court would only be relevant to the first phase (lawsuit) of an interpleader action, which is to determine if the Subject Property was properly interpled. If interpleader was improper based on a prior Court ruling, Ms. Wosoughkia should have filed a demurrer or contested this when Commerce Escrow filed its motion to discharge from the case on 12/7/2017. (Exhibit 8). Since Ms. Wosoughkia did neither, she has waived the invocation of the interpleader actions as addresses in cases provided above and thus the information in her special interrogatory is irrelevant. (Pg. 4-5, lines 21-7). V. MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS In the alternative, Defendant M3Live asks the Court to consider the merits of the foregoing argument as a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 438(e), a Motion For Judgment on the Pleadings that is made within 30 days before trial, must be done with the Courts permission. Here, the issues presented in this Motion in Limine can also be argued as a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Ms. Wosoughkia’s answer fails to satisfy CCP 386(d). Given the fact she has not amended her pleadings, a Motion For Judgment on the Pleadings is also appropriate under these circumstances and thus it is requested for the court to consider these arguments under this platform as well. VI. PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS An interpleader action is an equitable remedy. The Court has great deference to decide how to properly resolve these issues. As presented, Ms. Wosoughkia should be barred from presenting evidence that she has any ownership to the property. Mr. F ariborz Wosoughkia has 8 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION: SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER — S OO 0 N N nn As W N N N N N D N D N D N D N DN m= e m e m e m e m e m e m e m e s e e 0 N9 9 O N wn AE W I N D = O O 0 NN N n Ee W N Y —- defaulted and therefore the only party with a real interest in the stock is Defendant M3Live, as alleged in Case#:30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC. However, as asserted in Defendant M3Live’s answer, it was understood M3Live was going to have to pay money to the Mr. and Ms. Wosoughkia in order to receive back the stock. (Exhibit 9). By filing this motion, M3Live is not trying to circumvent its obligation to pay for the stock. However, procedural fairness would be most achieved by M3Live paying the two lien claimants in this case, Mr. Baha Abhari and the Wosoughkia’s former attorney, Mr. Goodrich an appropriate amount as deemed by the Court. This would be equitable for the two lien holders that] have been harmed and the Wosoughkia would still have their Judgment of 150,000 that M3Live has been ordered to pay. This would be mutually beneficial for all parties and achieve the highest degree of equitable fairness. VII. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, Ms. Wosoughkia is precluded from providing any evidence of a claim to the Subject Property. Dated: 1/4/2019 LAW OFFICE OF B ON C. ROESLER randon C. Roesler, Attorney for: M3live Bar & Grill, Inc. 9 MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION: SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM: DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER OO 00 9 OA Wn Bp W O N DD B N R O N D N N O N O N e t ee e k e d e t e d em e s ed ® N N A Un A W N = O V V ® N O V A W N = Oo I, BRANDON C. ROESLER, declare: 1. I'am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California. My bar number is 296389. 2. My office represents M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc., in Case#: 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC- CJC and the related actions to that case. 3.0n February 13, 2018, a substitution of attorney was filed with the Court authorizing me to represent M3Live Bar in Grill, Inc., in this current action. 4. To my knowledge, Defendant Natasha Wosoughkia did not conduct any discovery before my substitution was filed. 5. Since February 13, 2018, my office has not been propounded any discovery by Natasha Wosoughkia in this matter. 6. This matter was set for a Court trial to begin on January 14, 2019. 7. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 2024.020, the discovery cut off date is 30 days before trial. 8. At no time, was this discovery cut off date extended to any of the parties for this matter: 9. Further, on October 4, 2018, Defendant Natasha Wosoughkia’s deposition was taken at my office at 5000 Birch Street, Suite 3000, Newport Beach, CA 92660 on Case#: 30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC, a related action concurrently set for trial with this matter. 10.Attached as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct version of her deposition. 11. I will also bring the original transcript and have it available for the Court to review for this motion. 1 DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER Oo 0 NN O N Wn BA W N AN i N BR R O N O R OB R O N RN oe s em el e k em pe e l e s ae d ed © N N ON Un A W R N = O O WV W N W EA W N = Oo I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 4% day of January 2019 in Newport Beach, California. AE aaa ‘Brandon C. Roesler 2 DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER OO 0 N N Un BA W N NN BN (R N O M O R OB R O D K O R Y ek pm e h e d md pe pe d (p e pe d be d ® NN ON Un A W D = OC VW X N U E W N = PROOF OF SERVICE Case Title: Commerce Escrow vs. Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. Case No: 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC-CJC Court: Orange County Superior I'am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years] and not a party to the within action; my business address is 5000 Birch St., Suite 3000, West Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92660 On January 4, 2019, I served the following documents: 1. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OR CLAIM BY DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA FOR THE MONEY OR STOCK INTERPLED IN THIS ACTION; SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM; DECLARATION OF BRANDON C. ROESLER 2. [PROPOSED] ORDER IN LIMINE on all interested parties in said action, by: [ ] OVERNIGHT MAIL: Placed true copies thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, via overnight mail at Los Angeles, California. [] FAX: I sent a true copy thereof via facsimile transmission to the above numbers. [| HAND DELIVERY: Delivered by hand to addressee. [X] EMAIL: Sent via electronic mail to the email addresses listed below. [X] MAIL: Placed true copies thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Newport Beach, California. See Service List below I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January Sp 2018, at Newport Beach, California. ae randon C. Roest_—" 1 PROOF OF SERVICE © OO 0 NN O N wn A W N O N N Y RN N N N N R e e e m e e e e e e e e be p m e e 0 NN O N Wn B A W N N D = O O VO N N nN E W N D Ron W. Betty, Esq. BETTY AGAWA, APC P.O. Box 515381 #50549 Los Angeles, CA 90051 Email: rwbetty @bettyagawa.com John J. Gulino, Esq. 2107 N. Broadway, Ste 306 Santa Ana, CA 92706 Email: john@gulinolawoffice.com Musa Madain 1818 W. Embassy Ave. Anaheim, CA 92804 Elizabeth Camarillo 2045 S. State College Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92806 2 PROOF OF SERVICE EXHIBIT 1 © 00 39 O N nn B A W o N N N N N N N ND N N m E e m e m e m e m e m e m e d c o NN O N Ln BA A W I N D = O OO 0 0 N D R E W I N D = O Thomas K. Agawa, Esq. [SBN 175952] Ron W. Betty, Esq. [SBN 291670] AGAWA LAW 1000 S. Hope St., #413 Los Angeles, CA 90015 T: (213) 804-1138 E: agawalaw @gmail.com Attorneys for Defendant NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange 0912/2017 at 03:43:00 Fi Clerk of the Superior Court By Jeanette Tomes-hendoza, Deputy Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE- CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER COMMERCE ESCROW A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK, a California Corporation, Plaintiff, V. FARABORZ WOSOUGHKIA, an individual; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA, an individual; VASKEN TATARIAN, an individual; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, an individual; MUSA MADAIN, an individual; M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., a California Corporation; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants. CASE NO.: 30 2017 00913039-CU-MC-CIC I/C Judge Derek W. Hunt, Dept. C23 Unlimited Jurisdiction DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER 700 W. Civic Center Dr. Santa Ana, CA 92701 T: (657) 622-5223 Action Filed: April 5, 2017/ No Trial Date DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER © 00 39 O N Ln BA W N = N N N N N N N N N O N m E e m e m e m e m e m e m e d c o NN O N Ln BR A W N D = O O 0 0 R E W I N D = O Defendant NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA ("Defendant"), for herself alone and for no other defendant, answers Plaintiff COMMERCE ESCROW A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK'S (“Plaintiff”) unverified complaint (“Complaint”) as follows: L GENERAL DENIAL. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 431.30(d), Defendant generally denies each and every allegation of the Complainant, as it pertains to her, and denies generally and specifically that Plaintiff is entitled to interplead and/or recover statutory attorneys’ fees and csots as a result of the acts and/or omissions of Defendant as alleged in the Complainant. IL. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State a Cause of Action) 1. The causes of action alleged in the Cross-Complainants are barred in whole, or in part, by Cross-Complainants’ failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action or causes of action against Cross-Defendants. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Fraud) 2. Plaintiff is bound not to release the funds to the other defendants because the escrow was entered into under false pretenses (fraud) by defendant MUSA MADAIN and/or M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., a California corporation. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Mistake) 3s Plaintiff is bound not to release the funds to the other defendants because the escrow was entered into under mistake by defendant MUSA MADAIN and/or M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., a California corporation. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER 2 © 00 39 O N Ln BA W N = N N N N N N N N N O N m E e m e m e m e m e m e m e d c o NN O N Ln BR A W N D = O O 0 0 R E W I N D = O FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Reservation of Right) 4. Defendant reserves the right to rely on any and all further affirmative defenses that become available or appear during discovery proceedings in this action, and Defendant reserves the right to amend this Answer for the purpose of asserting any such additional affirmative defense. IIL. PRAYER FOR RELIEF. WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment against Plaintiff on its Complaint as follows: FOR ALL CAUSES OF ACTION I. That Plaintiff take nothing by way of its Complaint and that this action be dismissed against Defendant with prejudice; 2. For costs of suit incurred herein; and, 3. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper. Dated: September 12, 2017 AGAWA LAW Amar VA Gaw/R Thomas K. Agawa Ron W. Betty Attorney for Defendant NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER 3 © 00 39 O N Ln BA W N = N N N N N N N N N O N m E e m e m e m e m e m e m e d c o NN O N Ln BR A W N D = O O 0 0 R E W I N D = O PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is: 1000 S. Hope St. #413, Los Angeles, CA 90015. On September 12, 2017, I caused the foregoing document described as DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER to be served on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: Defendant in Pro Per** Defendant in Pro Per** ELIZABETH CAMARILLO MUSA MADAIN 2045 S. State College Blvd. 1818 W. Embassy Ave. Anaheim, CA 92806 Anaheim, CA 92804 T: (714) 277-4077 T: (714) 299-1170 Defendant M3LIVE’S Lawyer* Plaintiff’s Lawyer* John J. Gulino [SBN 160189] Timothy S. Camarena, Esq. 2107 North Broadway, Suite 306 RELAW, APC Santa Ana, California 92706 699 Hampshire Road, Suite 105 E: john@ gulinolawoffice.com Westlake Village, CA 91361 T: (714) 745-1327 Telephone: (805) 265-1031 Facsimile: (805) 265-1032 *VIA EMAIL —- ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: I served the aforesaid listed part(ies) designated by a single asterisk (“*”’) with the aforesaid document(s) by electronic service pursuant to Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1010.6(a) (6), California Rules of Court, rule 2.250-2.261, and Superior Court of California, Orange County Local Rule 352. The receiving part(ies) has (have) agreed to accept service electronically in this action pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 2.251 which states that a party by electronically filing any document with the court thereby agrees to accept electronic service. I understand that electronic service is complete at the time of transmission, but any period of notice or any right or duty to do any act or make any response within any period or on a date certain after the service of the document, which time period or date is prescribed by statute or rule of court, shall be extended after service by electronic transmission by two court days, but the extension shall not apply to a specific exception provided for by any other statute or rule of court. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER 1 © 00 39 O N Ln BA W N = N N N N N N N N N O N m E e m e m e m e m e m e m e d c o NN O N Ln BR A W N D = O O 0 0 R E W I N D = O **VIA U.S. MAIL — PREPAID FIRST CLASS I served the aforesaid listed part(ies) designated by a double asterisk (“**”) with the envelope for collection and mailing following ordinary practices. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice it would be deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day with postage fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in this declaration. Executed on September 12, 2017, at Los Angeles, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Thomas K. Agawa DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER 2 EXHIBIT 2 N o y oT o s Ww 10 11 12 13 14 15 is 17 ig is 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 — £ = D Cour Law offices of Alan A. Pace Bar #158544 LAMORETY OF SF Shiro Alan A. Pace attomey at law “CENTER 23151 Moulton Pkwy Aug 1g 2006 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Atom, A “9 Copy Attorney for Natasha Ann Wosoughkia Br. Le TEER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE MARRIAGE OF Case No. 150008524 NATASHA ANN WOSOUGHKIA STIPULATION AND ORDER Petiti REGARDING DIVISION OF NET elitioner PROCEEDS BETWEEN PETITIONER ~ FARIBURZ MIKE WOSOUGHKIA AND RESPONDENT. Respondent Comes now the petitioner Natasha Ann Wosoughkia through her attorney of record Alan A. Pace and respondent Fariborz Mike Wosoughkia In Pro Per and make the following stipulation and order: 1. The family residence located at 21 Vista Luci, Newport Coast, California was listed for sale by the parties and now it is sold for $5,725,000.00. The escrow is set to close on August 29, 20186. 2. The first loan against the family residence is agreed to be approximately $3,200,000.00. There are several liens against the property totaling to $1,102,000.00. The validity and true amount of such liens are disputed by petitioner and petitioner was planning to file joinder of such parties to this case before close of the escrow, 3. There are additional community debts in the approximate amount of $849,000.00 claimed by the respondent that have been borrowed from his friends and relatives during marriage. The validity and true amount of such indebtedness to friends and Ww Ow N o y u t a p 10 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 relatives is also disputed by petitioner. To resolve the issues of disputed liens and debts and divide net proceeds from sale of the family residence upon close of the escrow parties have compromised and agreed fo divide the net proceeds from sale of family residence and instruct the North American Title Company Escrow as follows: {a) Petitioner shall receive sum of $560,000.00 as her sole and separate property from the escrow. {b) Respondent shall receive sum of $575,000.00 as his sole and separate property from escrow. | © All disputed liens against the property shall be honored and paid by escrow directly fo lien holders. {d} Respondent shall remain solely responsible to all his friends and relatives and any other creditor for all known and unknown individual or community debts. (e) As equalization respondent shall receive the business known as M3live as his sole and separate property and petitioner shall cooperate in all aspects of transferring the business and other issues if necessary. 5. Parties agree that the amounts indicated on paragraphs (a) and (b) are approximate and the escrow is authorize to increase or decrease such amounts proportionately based on net final balance disbursable to pefitioner and respondent. 6. Parties shall equally benefit from all Federal and State tax credits, benefits and advantages attributable to community financial activities during marriage. For the purpose of this stipulation and to take full and equal benefits of tax deductions and advantages parties will file joint Federal and State income tax return for the year 2016 and if there are additional tax advantages in following years parties will share such 2 w o w ~~ g y u r 10 11 iz 13 14 15 ie 17 18 is 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 advantages equally to reduce their tax ability from sale of the family residence and other community activities. Parties are advised to consult a tax advisor regarding their rights and obligations related to sale cf family residence and past community activities. Parties shall cooperate in executin_ all documents necessary to accomplice the purpose of this stipulated order. it is so stipulated: petec_3/ 4) 261(p 725 Natasha Ann Wosoughkia Dated: £ /7 //¢ & Alan A. Pace attorney for petitioner Detect 5/7/ 20/6 N= et S—— Fariborz i -N Dated:_3/ 7 1b ANT ® Fariborz Mike Wosoughkia in Pro Per It is so ordered: Dated: & 10 — i } ; Judge of the SIRSHORGEREE JOHN L. FLY? 15 EXHIBIT 3 14 13 16 17 18 14 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 1B wo RH 5 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORMA COUNTY OF ORANGE LAMIME SAUY JUISTICE CENTER OCT 15 2018 DAVIE. YAASAR), Clark of fhe Goud Respondent in Pro Per BYR CARDENAS. DERRY SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE, FAMILY LAW COURT Fariborz Mike Wosoughkia In re the Marriage of: Case No.: 15D008524 NATASHA ANN WOSOUGHKIA, Petitioner, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO AMEND ORDER REGARDING DIVISION OF NET PROCEEDS BETWEEN PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT and FARIBORZ MIKE WODOUGHKIA, Respondent, rt Se M t r e t ” s t ” st s e ” V n ? S g ” S p t ? tr e? Petitioner, NATASHA ANN WOSQUGHKIA, and Respondent, FARIBORZ MIKE WODQUGHKIA, (jointly referred as “Parties” hereby stipulate to the following: L. Parties hereby agree to amend the Stipulation and Order Regarding Division of Net Proceeds Between Petitioner and Respondent entered on August 10, 2016. This stipulation is based on specific language that needs to be omitted as there has been a change in circumstances, A. Parties agree to amend portions of paragraph 16 on page 2 of said Stipluation and Order Regarding Divison of Net Proceeds Between Petitioner and Respondent change the equalization of the payment towards Respondent in regards to the business M3live. nH The Stiplution and Order language reads as follows: “As equalization respondent shall receive the business known as M3live as his sole and separate property and petitioner shall cooperate in all aspects of transferring the business and other issues if necessary.” (emphases added) 2) The amended Stipulation and Order language should read as follows: * Petitioner to keep all inlerest in the business known as M3live as her sole and separate property. “ STIPULATION TO AMEND JUDGMENT AND ORDER - 1 ENC N 14 ib 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 B. Parties agree that all other terms and conditions of the Stipluation and Order Regarding Divison of Net Proceeds Between Petitioner and Respondent entered on August 10, 2016 accept for item (2) above shall remain the unchanged and in full force and effect, 2. Partics recognize that they each have a right to seek advice from independent counsel of their choosing and that they knowingly and with due regard for the importances of same have clected Lo proceed with this Stipulation to Amend Judgment and Order. 3 Parties have read the entire stipulation and agree to the terms. Parties understand it fully and request the court to make our Stipulation to Amend Judgment and Order the Court’s Order. IT 1S SO STIPULATED: ~~ Dated: /0 / 1” r= Po NATASHA ANN WOSOUGHKIA, Petitioner in Pro Per Dated: SO 1-20) © «Fh \ a, JA Pa FARIBORZ MIKE WODOUGHKIA, Respondent in Pro Per IT IS SO ORDERED JOHN L. FLYNN I17 Dated: 001.1 52018 Er LYNNT i JUDGE/COMMISSIONER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT STIPULATION TO AMEND JUDGMENT AND ORDER - 2 CALIFORNIA CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT 2 RECUR fut tata and SOLA ACO HOA LEM A Ea Dt EM INTL Eh tb {A PLL EGA HE SETA VTA rh TR ET CL ELL DLL DCs gl beet LEMEHTACARD AL FDC (A140 ML LUG YI AAL A000 ar LEGAMLRT AC diiT [DA HERAL LECEL I 1M, Rod ERE MIAC PION Cg Tt HERAT LOG 2 V e r y A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who sighed the document fo which this-certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. ' State of California } 1 County of Ovouy = ) Cv PT Ved 10 TYTN TY T womes TY TIVE 1 EA s SR m er T G , On of tilly before me, Kunng Jos JC / Natory Fob Jie : (here insert narhe and title of the offices} personally appeared Four bor 2 Wosey gh SPN ” Natasha Av Wosoog la bie, Tn Ar e —, i IE IC E T w T ) | who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personfs) whose name(s) jg/are subscribed to | the within instrument and acknowledged to me that h€/she/they executed the same in his/her/their ‘| authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/héer/their sighature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity : upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. f ; 4 | certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the T ; walle : : d KWANG SCO KIM | | State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. ff COMM. #2229335 = 2 Notary Public - California 3 i ENG ; Orange County = : WITNESS my hand and official seal. LSE wy Com Expres on 25, 2022 Signature jr — Ee (Seal) i BT FUE ee Blea) Balt BN CR Tr NR LI Jud LE “aN ASC nA LA TT TTT a TAI Ty aL LL RTT hee 1 Ye IT aT SERIF coy SAL ge Fe bieaT § 7 aL Prgh rr ER 2] 2 a oh Although the information in this section is not required by law, it could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this acknowledgment to an unauthorized document and may prove usefui to persons relying on the attached document. Description of Attached Document The preceding Certificate of Acknowledgment is attached to a document Method of Signer tdentific 1 nformation ation Proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence: titled/for the purpose of + LG Purp ! pul at Ug QO forms) of identification (O credible witness(es) Notarial event is detailed in notary journal on: containing ‘Z- pages, and dated [oft / 1% Page Entry # The signer({s) capacity or authority is/are as: Notary contact: [} tndividuaits) Other [] Attomey-in-Fact J Conporafeitificerti [J Additional Signedts) ~~ [] Signer(s) Thurmbpint(s) Title{s) 0 [2] Guardian/Consesvator [J Partner - Limited/Generai [] Trustees) [J Other: representing; Name(s} of Person(s) or Entitylies) Signe: is Representing © Copyright 2007-2017 Notary Rotary, PO Box 41400, Das Moines, 1A 50311-0507. All Rights Reserved. tem Number 101772. Please contact your Authorized Reseller to purchase copies of this form. EXHIBIT 4 CM-015 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY Brandon C. Roesler, SBN#296389 — 5000 Birch Street, Suite 3000 Newport Beach, CA 92660 E-MAIL ADDRESS (Options): Brandon @roeslerlaw.com ATTORNEY FOR (Name): M[3L.ive Bar & Grill tecepHone No: (949) 610-9064 FAX NO. (Optional): SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF streeTaooress: 700 Civic Center Drive West MAILING ADDRESS: cyano zecope: Santa Ana, CA 92701 erancr nave: Central Justice Center PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. CASE NUMBER: 30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. JUDICIAL OFFICER: Judge Glenn R. Salter DEPT. NOTICE OF RELATED CASE C22 Identify, in chronological order according to date of filing, all cases related to the case referenced above. 1. a. b. GC. Title: Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. vs. M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc., et al. Case number: 30-2014-00752186-CU-FR-CJC Court: [__] same as above [1 other state or federal court (name and address): d. Department: Unknown . Case type: |__| limited civil [| unlimited civil [1 probate [__] family law [__] other (specify): e f. Filing date: 10/21/2014 g. Has this case been designated or determined as "complex?" [1 Yes [1 No h. Relationship of this case to the case referenced above (check all that apply): [Z1 involves the same parties and is based on the same or similar claims. [Z] arises from the same or substantially identical transactions, incidents, or events requiring the determination of the same or substantially identical questions of law or fact. W/1 involves claims against, title to, possession of, or damages to the same property. [LZ] is likely for other reasons to require substantial duplication of judicial resources if heard by different judges. [1 Additional explanation is attached in attachment 1h i. Status of case: 1 pending [1 dismissed [1 with [| without prejudice [1 disposed of by judgment 2. a Title: Marriage of Natasha Ann Wosoughkia vs. Fariborz Mike Wosoughkia Case number: 15D008524 ¢. Court: [__] same as above [Z1 other state or federal court (name and address): Lamoreaux Justice Center, 341 The City Drive, Orapy d. Department: Judge John L. Flynn, L53 Page 1 of 3 Fe Counc of Cafomia” NOTICE OF RELATED CASE Oo Rotini ca gov CM-015 [Rev. July 1, 2007] CM-015 PLAINTIEE/PETITIONER: M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. CASE NUMBER: 30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC 2. (continued) e. — 7 a Case type: [limited civil [1 unlimited civil [__] probate [| family law [1 other (specify): Filing date: 9/29/2015 Has this case been designated or determined as "complex?" C1 Yes [1 No Relationship of this case to the case referenced above (check all that apply): [1 involves the same parties and is based on the same or similar claims. [1] arises from the same or substantially identical transactions, incidents, or events requiring the determination of the same or substantially identical questions of law or fact. 1 involves claims against, title to, possession of, or damages to the same property. [IZ] is likely for other reasons to require substantial duplication of judicial resources if heard by different judges. [1 Additional explanation is attached in attachment 2h . Status of case: [1 pending [1 dismissed [1 with [| without prejudice [1 disposed of by judgment Title: Commerce Escrow, A Division of Opus Bank v. Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. Case number: 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC-CIC Court: [o/] same as above [1 other state or federal court (name and address): . Department: Central 22, Judge Glenn R. Salter _ Casetype: [| limited civil [+] unlimited civil [__] probate C1 familylaw [__] other (specify): Filing date: 04/25/2017 Has this case been designated or determined as "complex?" [1 Yes [1 No Relationship of this case to the case referenced above (check all that apply): [1 involves the same parties and is based on the same or similar claims. [/] arises from the same or substantially identical transactions, incidents, or events requi ring the determination of the same or substantially identical questions of law or fact. [1 involves claims against, title to, possession of, or damages to the same property. [/] islikely for other reasons to require substantial duplication of judicial resources if he ard by different judges. [1 Additional explanation is attached in attachment 3h . Status of case: L/1 pending [1 dismissed [1 with [__] without prejudice [1 disposed of by judgment 4. [/] Additional related cases are described in Attachment 4. Number of pages attached: 1 Date: 07/13/2018 mE Brandon C. Roesler, Esq. > ili (TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) &refATure OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) OM-019TIREY: IV 12007] NOTICE OF RELATED CASE Page 2 of 3 © 0 3 a nm B W = N N ND N N N N N N N D = e e e e e s e s e s e a oO NN aN Ln pA W D = D O D N N N RA W N D Y = o Attachment 4 Plaintiff: M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. Defendant: Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. Case Number: 30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC in FE ho oo on Ra Title: Natasha Wosoughkia, et al. v. M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc., et al. Case Number: 30-2017-00960046-CU-BT-CJC Court: Same Court Department: Central 22, Judge Glenn R. Salter Case Type: Unlimited Civil Filing Date: 12/08/2017 Complex: No Relationship to Cases: All four apply a. b. C. d. Involves the same parties and is based on the same or similar claims arises from the same or substantially identical transactions, incidents, or events requiring the determination of the same or substantially identical questions of law or fact. involves claims against, title to, possession of, or damages to the same property. is likely for other reasons to require substantial duplication of judicial resources heard by different judges. Status of Case: Pending 1 Attachment 4 H O W oO 0 3 S Y Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 24 28 PROOF OF SERVICE Case Title: M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. v. Fariborz Wosoughkia, et al. Case No: 30-2016-00874746-CU-FR-CJC Court: Orange County-Central I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is 5000 Birch St., Suite 3000, West Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92660 On July 13, 2018, I served the following documents: 1. NOTICE OF RELATED CASES; on all interested parties in said action, by: [1 MAIL: Placed true copies thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Newport Beach, California. [ ] OVERNIGHT MAIL: Placed true copies thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, via overnight mail at Los Angeles, California. [1 FAX: I sent a true copy thereof via facsimile transmission to the above numbers. [| HAND DELIVERY: Delivered by hand to addressee. [X] EMAIL: Sent via electronic mail to the addresses listed below. Addressed as follows: Thomas K. Agawa, Esq. Oscar R. Roesler, Esq. 1000 S. Hope Street, Suite 413 3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2050 Los Angeles, CA 90015 Los Angeles, CA 90010 agawalaw@gmail.com oroesler@yahoo.com John J. Gulino, Esq. James D. Menke, Esq. 2107 N. Broadway, Ste 306 625 The City Drive S., Suite 190 Santa Ana, CA 92706 Orange, CA 92868 john@gulinolawoffice.com jmenke@menke-menke.com I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July I<, 2018, at Newport , California. Brandon C. Roesltp——""" 1 PROOF OF SERVICE EXHIBIT 5 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE MINUTE ORDER 7/31/2018 Judge / Commissioner: JOHN L. FLYNN, Ill Dept.: L53 at N/A Clerk: VICTORIADO Bailiff: NONE PRESENT Reporter: NONE PRESENT Case Type: DISSOLUTION WITH CHILD Case Number: 15D008524 WOSOUGHKIA V WOSOUGHKIA Hearing Type File Date Filing Party N/A N/A N/A APPEARANCES NONE Off the record: This matter has been referred for hearing by the direction of Judge Lon F. Hurwitz to be heard by J udge Glenn R. Salter for all purposes on August 16, 2018 at 1:30 PM in Department C22 at Central Justic e Center. Case number, 30-2014-00960046-CU-BT-CJC, Wosoughkia v. M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. to be heard concurrently with case number 150008524, Wosoughkia v Wosoughkia. FARIBORZ MIKE WOSOUGHKIA 21 VISTA LUCI NEWPORT COAST CA 92657 ALAN ALI PACE 23151 MOULTON PARKWAY LAGUNA HILLS CA 92653 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING Clerk's certificate of mailing (CCP 1013A) — | certify that | am not a party to this cause, that | am ov er the age of 18, and that a copy of this document was mailed first class postage prepaid in a sealed envelope addressed as shown above. Mailing and execution of this certificate occurred on 07/31/2018 at Orange, California. "DAVID H. YAMASAKI, Clerk of the Court ned: 2018 2:04:33 PM By: v Victoria Do Page 1 of 1 MNOO1 EXHIBIT 6 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. ~ www.depo.com SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ‘COUNTY OF ORANGE - CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., Case No.: 30-2016-00874746~ CU-FR-CJC Plaintiff, vs. MOSEN WOSOUGHKIA aka MIKE W. } ) ) ) ) ) ) FARIBORZ WOSOUGHKIA aka ) ) KIA; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIZ; and ) ) ) ) ) October 4, 2018 10 DOES ‘1 .to 50, inclusive, 11 Defendants. 12 13 - 14 15 16 DEPOSITION OF NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA 17 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 18 OCTOBER 4, 2018 19 20 21 ATKINSON-BAKER, INC. COURT REPORTERS 22 (800) 288-3376 - Wwww.depo.com 23 24 REPORTED BY: GRACIELA WARNER, CSR NO. 9502 FILE NO.: ACOA47A 25 Page 1 Natasha Wosoughkia ‘Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1 INDEX 2 COUNTY OF ORANGE - CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER 2 3 3 WITNESS: NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA 4 : 4 EXAMINATION PAGE 5 M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC,, ) Case No.: : BY MR. ROESLER - 8 ; } 30-2016-00874746- 7 : 6 Plaintiff, } CU-FR-CIC g AMEE ) DEFENDANT'S 7 vs, ) 9 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE ) 10 1 - Second Re-Noticed Deposition for Natasha 6 8 FARIBORZ WOSOUGHKIA aka J Wosoughkia . MOHSEN WOSQUGHKIA aka MIKE W. ) 11 9 -KIA; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA; and.) 2 ~ Requests for Admission Propounded by Plaintiff 11 DOES 1 to 50, inclusive ) 12 to Defendant Natasha Wosoughkia 10 ! y 13 3 - Defendant Natasha Wosoughkia’s Responses to 12 ’ Defendants. ) 5 Plaintiff's Requests for Admission, Set No, 1 ) 4 - Form Interrogatories ~ General 13 15 ) &9 5 - Defendant Natasha Wosoughkia’s Responses to 13 14 16 Plaintiff's Requests for Admission, Set No. 1 15 i7 6 - Complaint for Damages 16 is DEPOSITION OF NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA, taken on 18 7 - Defendant Natasha Wosoughki's Answer to 17 17 behalf of Plaintiff at 5000 Birch Street, West Tower, - Plaintiff's Complaint 18 Suite 3000, Newport Beach, Califomia commencing at 1s ; 19 1:00 p.m,, Thursday, October 4, 2018 before Graciela 5 8 - Memorandum of Understanding 21 20 gi ee, TSR No. S202 9 - Stipulation and Order Regarding Division of Net 39 22 21 Proceeds Between Petitioner and Respondent a 22 10 - Handwritten Agreement: . 58 Bi 23 11 - Xerox Copy of Natasha Wosoughkia's Signature ~~ 70 24 25 25 Page 2 Page 4 1 APPEARANCES 1 z : 2 3 . . 4 FOR THE PLAINTIFF: 4 QUESTIONS WITNESS WAS INSTRUCTED NOT TC ANSWER: 5 . 4 (NONE) LAW OFFICES OF BRANDON C. ROESLER 5 € BY: BRANDON C. ROESLER, ESQUIRE 6 3000 Birch Street 7 INFORMATION TO BE SUPPLIED: 7 West Tower g GE Suite 3000 (NONE) 8 Newport Beach, California 92660 9 9 ; 10 10 FOR THE DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA: 11 11 BETTY AGAWA 12 BY: RON W. BETTY, ESQUIRE 12 P,0. Box 515381 13 Los Angeles, California 90051 14 13 15 14 16 - ALSO PRESENT: Musa Madain ye 15 1 16 18 17 1g 18 . 1 9 20 20 21 2i 22 z 23 23 24 24 5 25 Page 3 Page 5 2 (Pages 2 to 5) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA, 1 matter, 2 having first been duly sworn, was z This deposition will be just about this case. 3 examined and testified as follows: 3 There may be some issues that do cross over slightiy, but 4 . 2 it will be limited to the facts of this case. Obviously, 5 EXAMINATION 5 your attorney will have an opportunity to do any € BY MR. ROESLER: ) 6 discovery that he wants on.any of the parties or 7 Q. Good morning -- or good afternoon. I need my 7 defendants or plaintiffs, but I don't want you to feel 8 coffee, ) 8 like we are going outside of that realm. We're going to 9 Ms. Wosoughkia, how are you doing? 2 try to stick within the boundaries as much as possibile. 10 A. Great. } 10 Okay? 11 Q. Is that how you go by, Ms. Wosoughkia, or do" 11 A. Okay. 12 you have a nickname you go by? 12 Q. - The rules of the deposition: You're here to 13 A. ByKia. 13 tell the truth. 14 Q. Would you be preferred to be called Ms, Kia? 14 You understand that? 15 A. Yes, 15 A. Correct. 16 MR. ROESLER: You are here for a noticed 16 Q. One person talking at a time, so the court 17 deposition. I want you to take a look at this document. 17 reporter can take everything down. I will be the first 18 I'll provide one to counsel. Here's a copy. 1g to admit that I'm very bad at violating that rule. 19 This will be Exhibit 1. 19 Are you under any medication right now that 20 {Exhibit 1 marked and attached.) 20 will prevent you from testifying? 21 Q. BY MR, ROESLER: Aside from the horrible 21 A. No, 22 printing job that apparently is going on there, do you 22 Q. Audible answers only. No head nods. If you 23 recognize this document? 23 don't understand a question, please ask, and I can 24 A. Yes. 24 rephrase it or try to say it in a better way, 25 Q. And this is a document that I presume you | 2 If I ask a question and you answer it, I'll Page 6 Page 8 1 received from your attorney noticing this deposition for 1 assume you understood the question I have asked. 2 today? 2 Understand? 3 A. Correct. 3 A. Okay. 4 Q. You understand that we are here to talk about 4 Q. No guessing, but I am entitled to your best 5 the Orange County Case 30-2016-00874746; is that correct? 5 approximation. A classic example is -- well, first of 6 A. Correct. € all, do you understand the difference between guessing 7 Q. You can go ahead and give that to her. 7 and approximations? 8 Ms. Kia, can you give your full name, just for 8 A. Um, approximation is close to what I'm assuming 8 the record, 8 versus guessing which is just giving a random. 10 A. Natasha Ann Wosoughkia. 10 Q. Pretty good. The example I'll give is if I 11 Q. And what's your current address? 11 asked you to guess how long this table is, you may say 12 I A. It's 284 Ambroise, A-m-b-r-0-i-s-e, Newport z feet, 15, 20 feet, somewhere in that range. That would 13 Coast, California 92657. ’ 13 be an approximation. ‘ 14 Q. Okay. And has your deposition been taken iz But if I asked you to guess how big the table 15 before in the past? 15 is at my house, you would not be able to do that because 16 A. Yes. 18 you do not know if I have a table in my house. 17 Q. Okay. Can you approximate how many times? 17 Understood? 18 A. Twice. ) i8 A. Yes, . 19 Q. Twice. Now, as you are aware, there are 1s Q. Okay. If you need a break, let me know. But 20 several matters, ongoing lawsuits, going on right now [3% if I do have a question that I have asked, I'll ask you 21 where M3Live, or Mr. Madain, is named either as a poe to answer the question before you go on that break. 22 plaintiff or a defendant and you are named here as a 2z Okay? 23 plaintiff or a defendant in those cases. This case in 23 The transcript will be available after this at 24 particular M3Live is a plaintiff, and you, as well as 24 some point for you to make any changes or corrections 25 Mr. Wosoughkia, have been named defendants in this boos which you can go through with your attorney, However, if Page 7 | Page 9 3 (Pages 6 to 9) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 -Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 you do make any corrections, I am allowed to highlight |x Q. Do you remember at any point in time where some 2 those corrections you've made at trial down the line. z discovery was propounded on you by Mr. Gulino? 3 Okay? 3 A. At this point I don't recall, to be honest. 4 A. Okay. ) ’ . 4 MR. ROESLER: Okay. I'm going to show you 5 Q. Is there any reason why we cannot go forward 2 another document which will be marked as Exhibit 3, a 6 today? ‘ 6 copy to counsel and a copy to Ms, Kia. ? A. No. 7 (Exhibit 3 marked and attached.) 8 Q. So, Ms. Wosoughkia, when were you born -- 8 MR. BETTY: Can you actually hand that -- 8 sorry, Ms. Kia? 9 THE WITNESS: This one (indicating). 10 A. H's okay. November 20, 1976. 10 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Exhibit 2, go ahead and take a 11 GQ. And where were you borg? 11 look at this, } 12 A.. Memphis, Tennessee. 12 Does this refresh your memory at all about 13 Q. Have you lived anywhere other than Southern 13 Exhibit 2? 14 California and Memphis, Tennessee? 14 A. When was this done? 15 A. . No. 15 Q. Well, I'm looking at the last two pages. It 1€ Q. When did you come to Southern California? 16 looks like there's a Verification signed on August 11, 17 A. 19- -- well, I have -- actually, I lived 17 2007 by someéone named "Natasha Wosoughkia." And there's 18 outside the country ~ 1g a Proof of Service -- 19 Q. Okay. 19 A. 2007? 20 A. «but I have lived in Orange County, in 20 Q. 2007 -- Proof of Service that was executed. 21 california, from 1981. 2 A, 2017, you mean? 22 GQ. Okay. Now, aside from these lawsuits that I 22 Q. I'm sorry, 2017 ~~ Proof of Service executed on 23 previously spoke about, where either M3Live or Mr. Madain 23 August 11, 2017. 24 is named as either a plaintiff or a defendant, are you 24 A. don't -- it doesn't refresh my memory. I 25 involved in any other cases that are currently ongoing in 25 don't remember this, Page 10 Page 12 1 litigation right now? | 1 Q. Okay. Looking at Exhibit 3, the second to fast 2 A. No. 2 page, the top says "Verification,” and at the bottom it 3 Q. And at this time are you married? 3 says "Natasha Wosoughkia.” 4 A. No. 4 A. Yeah, I may have looked at this at the time, 5 Q. Do you have any children? 5 but I don't recall today. - It was a year ago, so I don't "6 A. Yes.- 6 recall. 7 Q. How many children do you have? 1 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: I understand. I guess my 8 A. Two. , 8 question is though, as far as the signature on -- 9 Q. I see there have been some documents that have $ A. It's my signature. 10 been provided for this deposition, 10 Q. ~-- you recognize that signature? 11 Have you reviewed these documents? il A. Yes. : . . : 12 A. Yes. 12 MR. ROESLER: Ali right. You can go ahead and 13 Q. Have you reviewed anything else before taking 13 give that to her. 14 the deposition today? ’ 14 I'm going to do the same thing here. There's 15 A. No. 15 an additional document. It's a Request for Form" 16 MR. ROESLER: I want to go through, just 16 Interrogatories. Marking it as Exhibit 4. 17 briefly -- the prior attorney for M3Live was Mr. Gulino. 17 (Exhibit 4 marked and attached.) 18 I believe some discovery was propounded on you. 18 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Briefly, do you recognize this 19 I'm asking if you recognize this document right 19 document at all? 20 here, which wili be marked as Exhibit 2. 20 A. Idon't recall. 21 (Exhibit 2 marked and attached.) 21 MR. ROESLER: Okay. Go ahead and give it to 22 THE WITNESS: Sorry, it's been a while so I 2z her. 23 don't. 23 Marking Exhibit 5 and giving a copy to 24 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. 24 counsel. 2% A. It's been too long. 2% (Exhibit 5 marked and attached.) Page 11 Page 13 4 (Pages 10 to 13) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 ps Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Can you please take a look at 1 A. Life insurance. 2 Exhibit 5, Ms. Kia, and see if you recognize that 2 Q. And is this through online classes or -- 3 document? [3 A. Uh-huh, yes, correct. 4 A. They are starting to become a blur, That's the - Poe Q. Atsome point in time, you had to take a 5 problem. - 5 certification for that? 6 Q. Let me-ask you this then, the second to the 8 A. Correct, 7 last page, it says "Verification" on the back, and at the 7 Q. Allright. You said you had your -- you have 8 bottom it says "Natasha Wosoughkia." & been working with a broker for the past year and a half. 9 A. That's my signature. 9 Were you working prior to that? 10 Q. So you believe you signed this document? 10 A. No. 11 A. Correct. } 11 Q. Before that, when was the last time that you 12 Q. You can go ahead and give that to her. 1: held employment? 13 So let me ask you this, Ms. Kia, are you 13 A. It's a long time ago. 14 currently working right now? 14 Q. If you don't remember, you don't remember. 15 A Yes. 15 A. Idon't remember. 16 Q. And what are you doing for work? le MR. ROESLER: Okay. I'm going to show you 17 A. 1do real estate. : 17 Exhibit 6. 18 Q. Real estate, Are you a REALTOR? 18 Showing a copy to counsel and a copy to 1¢ A. Yes, 1 19 Ms. Kia of the lawsuit in this case, 20 Q. How long have you had your license for? I 20 "(Exhibit 6 marked and attached.) 21 A. Ten years. : 21 Q. BY.MR. ROESLER: Do you recognize this 22 Q. I'm assuming, then, you are currently working 22 document, or are you aware of the allegations contained 23 with a broker; is that correct? © 23 in this document? ) 24 A. Correct. 24 A." Yes. 25 Q. And what broker company is that? 25 Q. Atsome point in time, was this complaint Page 14 Page 16 1 A. McMadel Group. i 1 served on you? 2 Q. How long have you had your license with them? 2 A. [don't remember. 3 A, Avyear and a half, 3 Q. But you are aware of what is contained in this 4 Q. Can you please briefly describe your 4 complaint; is that correct? > education. 5 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. 6 A. - Um, high school diploma, bachelor's degree, um, € Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Are you aware of the causes of 7 pretty much that's it. 7 action that are in this complaint as directed towards C8 Q. Where did you get your bachelor's degree? 8 you? 9 A. Chapman University. 9 A. Well, as I'm reading, yes. 10 Q. Did you do any other schooling other than ~- 10 ) MR. ROESLER: Okay. You can go zhead and give 11 A. 1did one year of law school. 11 that to her, : 12 Q. Okay. And where was that? 12 One more marked as Exhibit 7. A copy to 13 A. Western. 13 counsel and giving a copy to Ms. Kia. 14 MR. BETTY: And that was enough for you? 14 (Exhibit 7 marked and attached.) 15 THE WITNESS: I'm done. 15 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Do you recognize this 16 MR. ROESLER: She's smarter than us, Le document? 17 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Aside from -- well, let me ask 17 A. Yes, ig you this: To get your real estate license, was it a 18 - Q. And what is this? 18 program you did online, or was it classes you took? 1s A. Well, it's an answer to the defendant's -- I 20 A. It was classes, online classes, 20 mean, it's the answers to the claim -- the complaint. 21 Q. And then at some point you have to get 21 Q. Okay. And who prepared this document? 22 certified to become a REALTOR; is that correct? 22 A. I don't know. 23 A. Yes, I had to take a test. 23 Q. You don't remember if you prepared it? 24 Q. Is there any other certification that you have, 24 MR. BETTY: Objection; asked and answered. 25 that you're aware of? 25 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: If you look on the back -- on Page 15 Page 17 5 (Pages 14 to 17) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 the second to last page, page 3, it has a date, 1 thousand -- 2001, maybe. 2 12/1/2016, and aiso a signature. 2 Q. Prior to Mr. Wosoughkia saying that he was 3 Da you recognize that signature? 3 interested in purchasing shares on the two of yours 3 A. Correct. ¢ behalf -- I'm not trying to misstate what you are 5 Q. Whose signature is that? =< saying -- did you have any kind of knowledge that he was 8 A.. Mine. & speaking to Mr. Madain about a restaurant or an entity in 7 Q. Do you remember -- did you file this document 7+ Anaheim? . 8 with the court? 8 A. 1--equivocate that. I think the M3Live is 2 A. 1don't recall. 9 the restaurant in Anaheim, so M3Live would be -- 10 Q. Have you ever been to Central Justice Center in 10 Q. So I guess -- well, were you aware that Mr. 11 Santa Ana? 11 Wosoughkia was interested in a restaurant called M3Live 12 A. Yes, 12 Bar & Grill before he informed you that you guys were 13 Q. Okay. Do you know whether they do file 13 going to purchase shares? 14 documents there? * 14 A. No, 15 A. Yes, 1do know, 15 Q. Okay. Had he told you he was going to be 1é Q. Where is that? 16 seeing Mr. Madain frequently or often before he had that 17 A. Downstairs, 17 conversation with you? 18 Q. Okay. You can go ahead and give that to her. 12 MR. BETTY: Objection; compound. ig So as contained in the complaint, there's some 18 Q. BY MR, ROESLER: Had he informed you that he 20° allegations about a Memorandum of Understanding that was 20 was seeing Mr, Madain frequently before he had that 21 signed in approximately April of 2014 for shares of 21 conversation with you about purchasing the shares? 22 M3Live Bar & Grill. - 22 A. 1don't remember. 23 Are you aware of that? 23 Q. Were you at any time present for the 24 A. Yes. 24 negotiations with Mr. Madain and Mr. Wosoughkia about 25 Q. Now, prior to the signing of that document, 25 purchasing shares for M3Live Bar & Grill? Page 18 Page 20 1 when did you first hear about M3Live Bar & Grill? Do you 1 A. No. 2 remember? 2 MR. ROESLER: I'm going to show a copy which 3 A. Please ask the question again. 3 will be Exhibit 8. Giving a capy to counsel and giving a 4 Q. Okay. When was the first time you heard of an 4 copy to Ms. Kia. 5 entity cailed Bar & Grill -- do you remember -- M3Live 5 {Exhibit-8 marked and attached.) . 6 Bar & Grill, I'm sorry? & Q. BY MR, ROESLER: I believe this was also turned 7 A. When Mike had said that he is purchasing shares 7 over -- 8 from Musa Madain. 8 MR. BETTY: That's correct. ¢ Q. And when you say "Mike," would that be Mr. ¢ MR, ROESLER: -- in discovery or at the 10 Wosoughkia? Sr 10 request. . 1 A. Correct, 11 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Do you recognize this 12 GQ. Also named as a defendant in this case? 12 document, Ms, Kia? 13 A. Correct. 13 A. Yes, Ido. 14 Q. You said that he was purchasing shares from 14 Q. Okay. And how do you recognize this document? 13 Musa Madain? 15 A. It looks like a contract. This is a contract i€ A. Well, what he spoke to him, yes, he's 16 that we signed. 17 purchasing shares on our behalf. i7 Q. Signed for what? 18 Q. So at that time were the two of you married? 1g A. For shares of M3Live Bar & Grill. 1¢ A. Yes. . 19 Q. And if you look on page 2, at the bottom it 26 Q. Did you know who Musa Madain was at that time? 20 says "Natasha Wosoughkia.” 21 A. Yes. 21 Do you recognize that signature? 22 Q. How long have you known Mr. Madain? 22 A. Correct, 23 A. Many years. 23 Q. And who signed that? 24 Q. Do you remember when you first met him? 24 A. Idid. 25 A. Two thousand -- no, more than that. Two 25 Q. Was anyone present when you signed that? ~ Page 19 Page 21 6 (Pages 18 to 21) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. w o m 9 w m » www.depo.com 1 A. Yes, 1 A. Um, yes, 2 Q. Who was present? 2 Q. Do you know approximately how many? 3 A. Mike Wosoughkia, 2 A. We bought and sold real estate, so multiple 4 _ Q. Okay. Do you know where he signed it at? transactions, if you want to call them each individual A. Home. businesses, but it was under one umbrella, Q. Your house? Do you remember where in your house? A. No, . Q. Do you have an understanding of why you signed this document and not Mr. Wosoughkia? A. Um, yes and no, Q. What was your understanding, when you say "yes," of why you signed this and not Mr, Wosoughkia? A. Um, because Mr. Wosoughkia has a felony on his record and therefore -~ I have good credit, sé it would be -- for me to be on the bar license and to just make a smooth transition so everything would be under my hame, Q.. Is that information and knowledge that you had. at the time of signing this, or did someone inform you of that? MR. BETTY: Objection; compound. Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Do you have knowledge that, since you don't have a felony on your record, it would look as ~~ if you had good credit, for you to sign it? A. Yes. Page 22 W o w d N a Q. Okay. And when you say you "bought and sold real estate,” are you talking about commercial properties, residential, or both? A. Both, Q. And when you bought and sold real estate, were you always the one -- let me put it this way: When you bought and sold these commercial and residential properties, was it only your name that went on the signature fine, was it his name, or was it both of your names? : A. Both of our names. an Q. Isthere any other community assets that the two of you acquired that you are aware of where only your name was on the signature line? A. Not that I recall right now. Q. Okay. Before signing this document, did you have a general understanding of the terms in this document, referring to Exhibit 82 A, Tread the contract and signed it. General understanding is pretty much written in the contract, Page 24 Ww N o ~ [ C I C S w N e ON N R wn Q. Did Mr. Wosoughkia at all encourage you to sign the document instead of himself? A. No. Q. So when he spoke to you about -- that he was interested in purchasing these shares on the two of yours behalf, whose idea was it to put your name down on the document? A. 1don’t remember. Q. You don't remember having a conversation as to why his name would not be down there? MR, BETTY: Objection; argumentative, asked and answered. MR. ROESLER: Are you instructing her not to answer? # MR. BETTY: Na. THE WITNESS: 1 don't recall how it went back and forth, but I'm sure there was a conversation. It would be more helpful to Musa if I was on the contract, rather than him, so it would be successful. Q. BY MR. ROESLER: During the course of your marriage with Mr. Wesoughkia -- and, by the way, how long approximately were you married for? A. Approximately 14 years. Q. Were there any other businesses that the two of you invested in together? ~ Page 23 “ o y an Ww Ry wv «© so -- beforehand, not too much, just whatever was said in the contract is what was stated tc me. Q. Okay. So you didn't have any questions before signing this document? A. [I believed Musa Madain a hundred percent, so no, I had no questions and thought it was a straight contract. Q. Now; if we go to page 2 again, the signature above yours, do you see that signature there? A. Correct. Q. And that says "M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, Incorporated By Musa Madain,"” when you signed below that, were you aware if that signature was on the top line, or not, at that time? A. Idon't recall. Q. Has Mr. Wosoughkia ever signed any documents on behalf of you? MR, BETTY: Objection; speciation. You can answer if you know. THE WITNESS: I don't know if he would. How would I have known that? Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Have you ever authorized Mr. Wosoughkia during the course of your marriage? A. Isign documents -- I sign my own documents. Q. So would the answer be "no" then? Page 25 7 (Pages 22 to 25) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 A. No. 1 Do you see that part? 2 Q. You never authorized him to sign documents on 2 A. Correct. 3 your behalf? or : Q. Do you have any prior experience when it.comes 4 A. Idon't recall, but 99 percent I sign my own 4 to running bookkeeping or office administration? 5 documents. 5 A. Yes, very minimum, college years, so I don't 6 Q. Okay. Now, taking a look at this document on 6 know if that would, um — 7 page 1, on the third line -- or, I'm sorry, the fourth 7 Q. What did you do in college? & fine, I'm going to read it, 8 A. Tran a doctor's office administration. $ It says: “Wosoughkia is a married 9 Q. And like I said, you were classified under 10 individual” -- and "Wosoughkia," if you look at the top, 10 business administration? 11 1 believe it's referring to you, Natasha Wosotighkia -- 11 A. Correct. 12 "is a married individual with a residential and business 12 Q. Any experience with bookkeeping in the past? 2 address of 21 Vigta" ~- i3 A. No. ) 14 A. Luci 14 Q. Okay, This line I read also says "agrees that 15 Q. ~~ "Luci, Newport Coast, California 92657.” 15 Wosoughkia's representative” -- who was your 16 What does it mean when it says "business 16 representative? 17 address"? 17 A. Mike Wosesughkia. 18 A. 1don't know. 18 Q. Are you aware of him having any bookkeeping 18 Q. Did you have a current business at that time at 19 experience? 20 your house? 20 A. Yes. 21 A. Well, most of our transactions of real estate 21 Q. And can you please elaborate on that? 22 would be going through our own home address, so this 22 A. All our real estate transactions would go 23 would be our business address, but no other -- no other 23 Mike would manage all of them with our bookkeeping. 24 businesses were running through this. This is a home 24 Q. All right. And again, I apologize if I asked 25 residence, so it would only be the transaction -- the ) 28 this before: Do you remember approximately how many Page 26 Page 28 1 real estate transactions we wauld do. 1 transactions the two of you have had when you were 2 Q. So I just want to make sure I'm clear, there 2 married? 3 was never a dba with your home listed as a Business 3 A. Multiple. 4 address that you're aware of? 4 Q. More than ten? } 5 A. No. 5 A. Maybe, Perhaps more than ten. 6 Q. At least from your point of view? § Q. How about Mr. Wosoughkia's experience when it 7 A. No. 7 came to business administration, did he have any? 8 Q. And no corporation that was set up with your 8 A. Yes. 5 home's address that you are aware of? 9 Q. And what was that? 10 A. Not that I'm aware of. 10 A. He managed paralegals — he had a paralegal 11 Q. And I don't know or remember if I asked this or 11 firm, so he managed that. ) 12 not, but are you aware of who drafted this document? 12 Q. Does he have any experience with restaurant or 13 A. Um, today I do. I believe, um, Mike drafted 13 live entertainment that you are aware of? 14 this document, Mike Wosoughkia. 14 A. Not that I know of, 15 Q. Okay. Did you know that at the time you 135 Q. What about yourself? 16 signed? 16 A. No, 17 A, Yes. 17 Q. I'm also going to refer to the third paragraph 1g Q. So I want to go down to the last paragraph. 18 in the bottom. 1¢ It says: "M3Live understands and agrees 18 It says: "If any stocks are to be sold, the 20 wosoughkia's representative will responsible and manage 20 non-selling shareholder will have a 45 day first right of 21 only the bookkeeping and other administrative aspects of 21. refusal to purchase said stock on the same terms and 2z M3" -- which. believe is referring to M3Live -- "and 22 conditions.” : 22 that neither the representative, nor Natasha, shall have 23 Do you see that? 24 any control over any aspects of the business other than 24 A. Yes. 25 the office administration.” : 28 Q. What do you understand that term in this Page 27 Page 29 8 (Pages 26 to 29) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 document to be? name, 2 MR. BETTY: Objection; calls for a legal 2 Q. And at any point within a year after signing 3 conclusion, 3 this document, you don't remember anyone else purchasing 4 MR..ROESLER: You can answer, if you know, 4 shares of M3Live Bar & Grill? § THE WITNESS: Can I answer that? 5 MR. BETTY: Objection; leading, 6 MR. BETTY: Yeah, if you know. : 6 THE WITNESS: Can I answer? 7 THE WITNESS: I believe it gives —- if I'm | ? Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Yes, C8 going to sell shares, I have to tell the shareholders 8 A. 1do, yes. 9 45 -- they have the first 45 days to purchase the shares, Poe Q. And who is that? 10 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: And who would be the p10 A. Cyrus. 11. shareholders in this case? : 1 Q. And would his last name -- I'm not going to 12 A. 1don't know. 2 wy, ‘ To 13 Q. Do you know of any shareholders of M3Live? 13 A. Alimadadian. 14 A. At this point? 14 MR. BETTY: Spell that, please. 15 Q. Yes. 1s MR. ROESLER: T'li spell it for the record. 16 A. No. 16 It's A-l~i-m-a-d-a-d-i-a-n. ) 17 Q. At the time of signing the document, ware you 17 Q. BY MR.ROESLER: Call him "Ali"? 18 aware? 18 A. Yeah.. 19 A. Yes, i¢ Q. Okay. How do you know Ali? 20 Q. Who were you aware was the shareholder? 2 A. He's a family friend. 21 A. Musa Madain. 21 Q. How long have you known him for? 22 Q. How many shares were you getting pursuant to 22 A. Let's see. Now, it's probably ten years. 23 this document? 23 .Q. Ishe married at afl? 24 A 33. 24 A. Yes, 25 Q. And are you aware Mr, Madain had at the time? 25 Q. And do you know who his wife is? Page 30 Page 32 1 A. 67, 1 believe ~- yeah, 67 percent. 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. So hypothetically, if you had decided to sell 2 Q. And what is his wife's name? . 3 the shares a day after that you signed this document -- 3 A. Ghazal. 4 or hypothetically you have 33 percent of the shares the 4 Q. Ghazal. Is Ali your friend or is Ghazal your 5 day after you signed this document and Mr. Madain is the 5 friend? PR 6 only other shareholder, would you be able to sell those 6 A. Ghazal is my friend. 1 shares off without contacting him? 7 Q. Okay. How long have the two of you been 8 MR. BETTY: Objection; calls for a legal 8 friends for? 9 conclusion, argumentative and incomplete hypothetical, 5 A. About the same time, ten years. 10 THE WITNESS: I would have to give him the 10 Q. Where did you guys meet? Where did you meet 11 first -- the first chance of refusal, basically, so'I 11 Ghazal? } 12 would have to talk to him and see if he would like to i2 A. Through a friend. 13 purchase the shares first. 13 Q. Do you still stay in contact with her? 14 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. You can give that over 14 A. Yes. 15 to her, 15 Q. How often? 16 At any other time, were you aware of any other 16 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. 17 shareholders of M3Live after signing this document? 17 THE WITNESS: Once a month. 18 A. Today I believe there's someone else that owns 18 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. Do you still speak to 19 the shares and not Musa Madain, but I'm not very -- I is Ali? ) 20 don't know the exact, who is who and what is going on, 120 A. Yes. 21 but I don't know who owns the shares at this point. 21 Q. Inthe past year or so, can you approximate how 22 Q. When you say you believe someone other than Mr. 22. many times you have spoken or seen him? 23 Madain owns the shares, who do you believe that 23 A. Throughout the ten years? 24 individual to be? 24 Q. Past year. 25 A. His first name is Paul. I forgot his fast 25 A, Oh, past year? Maybe four or five times. Page 31 Page 33 9 (Pages 30 to 33) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. - www.depo.com 1 Q. Okay. Do you have any reason to believe that 1 Q. Are you aware of any capital that was invested 2 Ali is dishonest at ali? 2 on yours and Mr. Wosoughkia's behalf that was put into 3 MR. BE¥TY: Objection; specuiation. 3 M3Live Bar & Grill? 4 THE WITNESS: No. 4 A. Yes, & " Q. BY MR. ROESLER: What about Ghazal? 5 Q. Do you know approximately how much that was? 6 A. No. 6 A. $250,000. 7 Q. How are you aware that Ali invested in M3Live? 7 Q. Would the $250,000 be pursuant to Exhibit 8 8 MR, BETTY: Objection -- withdrawn. 8 that you saw, the Memorandum of Understanding? 2 THE WITNESS: Um, I believe that we were 9 A. That 250-, yés, that is pursuant. 10. supposed to give a percentage of my sharesand a 10 Q. Was there any additional capital invested on 11 percentage of Musa's shares. I don't remember if it was 11 behalf of you and Mr. Wosoughkia into M3Live Bar 8 Grill? 12 1 percent or 2 percent of our shares and some percent of iz A. Not that I know. 13 his shares. Total of -- I don't recall -- 7 percent, I 13 Q. ‘Are you aware of how the business is ~~ 14 believe -- 14 withdrawn, 15 Q. Okay. 1s Are you aware if the business is profitable 16 A. -- to give up some shares, for him to have some 1¢ today? 17 shares. Co 17 A. Idon't know. 18 Q. As a shareholder? 18 Q. Are you aware if the business has any debts? 13 A. As a shareholder. 19 A. Ihave no idea. ’ 20 Q. Did you ever personally have that conversation 20 Q. Can you go ahead and take a look at Exhibit 21 with Ali? : 21 . ‘Number 8. . 22 A. No, 22 Are you aware, when you signed this document, 23 Q. Did you have that conversation with his wife? 23 if there are any additional debts that had to be provided 24 A. No. 24 to the corporation that you would be liable for 33 25 Q. Did you ever have that conversation with Mr. 25 percent? Page 34 Page 36 1 Madain? 1 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague, compound. 2 A. No. 2 THE WITNESS: No. 3 Q. Is it fair to say you had that conversation 3 Q. BY MR, ROESLER: Okay. You can go ahead and 4 with Mr. Wosoughkia? 4 put that back. a 5 A. Yes. 5 Now, you said that you are now divorced from 3 _ Q. And did you agree to giving up =~ whether it's 6 Mr. Wosoughkia; is that correct? 7 1 or 2 or 3 percent of your shares in order for Ali to be 7 A. Correct. 8 a shareholder? 8 Q. When did you file for divorce? 5 A. Yes. 9 A. 1don't even remember now. I don't remember 10 Q. Do you remember when you made that decision? 10 to -- I don't know the exact date -- 2013, two 11 A. don't recall. 11 thousand =~ 12 Q. Was it orally, or did you ever sign a document 1z MR. BETTY: Just give him your best estimation. 13 agreeing to that? 13 THE WITNESS: Yeah, 2013. I don't recall, to 14 A. I believe I signed a document. 14 be honest. 2015 -- maybe 2015. 15 Q. And that would be your signature on the i5 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: So sometime -- let's just say 16 document? : 16 sometime in the last five years? Would that be fair? 17 A. Yes. 17 A. Yes, 18 Q. Did you ever file a lawsuit against M3Live Bar 18 Q. Did you file for divorce? is & Gril? 1% A. Yes. } 20 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. 20 Q. Are you aware of when the divorce was 21 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: In 2014, did you ever file a 21 formalized ~~ or finalized? 22 lawsuit against M3Live Bar & Grill and Mr. Madain? 22 A. Yes, 23 A. Idon't know. There's been lawsuits back and 23 Q. When was that? 24 forth, and, you know, I'm part of it so I would probably 24 A. 2017. 25 say yes. 25 Q. 2017? You previously mentioned that you are Page 35 Page 37 10 (Pages 34 to 37) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com | | 1 aware that Mr. Wosoughkia was convicted of a felony; is 1 property and petitioner shall cooperate in all aspects of 2 that correct? 2 transferring the business and other issues if necessary." 3 A. Correct. 3 Do you see where it says that? 4 Q. Do you remember when that was? 4 A. Uh-huh, 5 A. Thirty years ago, 5 Q. Now, who is the "respondent in this case? 6 Q. Was that before you met him then? 5 A. Mike Kia -- Mike Wosoughkia. 7 A. Correct. ; 7 Q. And so is the "petitioner" you then? & Q. Are you aware -- since you have met Mr. 8 A. Yeah, Basically it's saying that he would . - $ Wosoughkia, has he ever been arrested on any other 9 potentially get the shares. 10 charge? 10 Q. What do you mean by "potentially get the 1 A. No, 11 shares" 1z Q. Has he ever been violent with you? 12 "A. Well, when I have to release it the first 45 13 A. Um, no. 13 days to the shareholders and then -- 1¢ Q. What about physical? 14 Q. I'm asking you, what is your understanding? 1s A. Yes, 15 A. My understanding is that he would potentially 1€ Q. How many times? 16 get the shares. 17 A. Once. 1? Q. So let's back up, then, a little bit. If we 18 Q. Do you remember when that was? 18 look at "a," it says: "Petitioner shall receive sum of 19 A. Before I filed, 2015. 12 $550,000"; is that correct? 20 Q. Was that the trigger of you filing divorce, or 20 A. Yes. 21 the last straw? 21 Q. "Respondent shall receive sum of $575,000." 22 A. Yes, C 22 Do you see that? 23 MR. ROESLER: I'm going to show you -- and I 23 A. Correct. 24 believe you have been provided ~~ Exhibit 9. 24 Q. At the time that your divorce was finalized, 25 Showing a copy to counsel -- actually, I only 25 were there any debts with -- were there any debts that Page 38 Page 40 1 have one copy. Do you mind? Til iet counsel take a 1 the family owed to anyone else? 2 look at it, if he wants to see it. 2 A. Yes. 3 (Exhibit 9 marked and attached.) 3 -Q. Okay. Are you aware of how much debt the 4 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Do you recognize that 4 family owed? 5 document? 5 A. I'm not aware. & A. Yes. © Q. Would it be more than $100,000? 7 Q. And what does this document purport to be? 7 MR. BETTY: Objection, asked and answered, & A. It's my divorce settlement, 8 THE WITNESS: I'm not aware. } g Q. Okay, This, at the top, says Filed on August 9 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Did you enter into any i0 10, 2016, ) 10 agreements on behalf of the community where debt was 11 Is it fair to say the divorce was not finalized i owed? “ 12 until 2017 though? 12 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague, calls for a legal 13 A. Yes, correction. . 13 conclusion. 14 Q. Okay. But this was the stipulation that you 14 THE WITNESS: I don't understand the question. 15 had entered into in 2016? 13 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: How did the family get those 16 A. Itwas done in 2016, I made a mistake. 1 16 debts? 17 should have said 2016, not 2017. 17 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. 18 Q. Okay. Would this be the final date then? ig THE WITNESS: It was borrowed. 12 A, Yes, this is the final date. 18 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Who borrowed -- would it be 26 Q. Allright. If you look at the last page, above 20 money, first of all? 21 “Natasha Ann Wosoughkia," would that be your signature? 21 A. It would be money. 2z A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. Who borrowed money? az Q. looking at page number 2, I'm looking at "e" 23 A. Mike Kia. 24 where it says: "As equalization respondent shall receive 24 Q. Did you have knowledge of him borrowing money? 25 the business known as M3live as his sole and separate ! 25 A. Yes. Page 39 Page 41 11 (Pages 38 to 41) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 Q. Do you know how many people he borrowed money 1 A. Do you have that? I don't know ifitisin 2 from? Po2 here or not. Oh, in here? ; 3 A. No. 3 Q. No, in the documents that you provided. 4, Q. And you said you don't know how much he 4 A. Not that I know of. 5 borrowed? 5 MR. ROESLER: Can we take a ten-minute break? 6 ~ A. No. € MR. BETTY: Yeah, I was going to say. 2 ’ Q. Were you involved at all in asking people for & (Break taken.) ’ . & money? 8 "MR. ROESLER: Okay. So we are back here on the 9 A. No. record. We are still looking at - I believe it is 10 Q. So these were all acts done by Mr. Wosoughkia? 9 -- we are still looking at Exhibit 9. 11 A Yes, MR. BETTY: I'm sorry, before we go on, my 12 Q. All right. Have you filed anything to client notified me that she misspoke. 13 supplement this document in court since this agreement MR. ROESLER: Please, if she wants to. 14 has been reached? ) MR. BETTY: You were talking about the -- 1s A. Yes. : THE WITNESS: The stipulation? 1¢ Q. And what has been filed? MR, ROESLER: Yeah, when it was filed. 17 A. To give me back my shares, like the possibility THE WITNESS: Filed was this week -- last week. 18 of my shares going to Michael, not —- he won't get my " -Q. BY MR. ROESLER: What stipulation? 19 shares. : A. The shares -- the stipulation on the shares 20 Q. What did you file? going back. Last week. I misunderstood you, so — 21 A. Where did I file? ~ Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. So ‘sometime it's been z2 Q. What document is it? Are you aware? filed within -- let's call it two weeks? =3 A. It's just written -~ a new stipulation of A. Two weeks, ’ 24 saying that he does not get my shares, to clarify. Q. With the court? 25 Q. Are you aware of when that was filed? A. Correct. Page 42 Page 44 1 A. [don't remember. 1 Q. Under this same case? 2 Q. Would it be more or less than a year? 2 A. Correct. 3 A. Yes. 3 Q. For the shares to go back to you? 4 Q. What do you mean by "yes"? 4 A. Correct. 5 A. Yes, more or less. Pos Q. Okay. And we'll get to that in a second. 6 Q. About a year? 6 Looking at this document, looking at "d," it 7 A. About a year, 7 says: "Respondent shall remain solely responsible to ail 8 Q. Okay. And this has been filed with - 2 his friends and relatives and any other creditor for all 9 associated with the same case number that's shown on this 3 known and unknown individual or community debts.” 10 document? 1c Do you see that? 1 A. Yes. 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. Are you aware of what it says as far as you § 12 Q. So this would be Mr. Wosoughkia in this case, 3 getting your shares back? go 13 correct? 14 MR. BETTY: Objection; asked and answered. 4 MR. BETTY: Objection; calls for a legal 15 THE WITNESS: Well, it's not getting my shares 15 conclusion, argumentative. ie back. It's clarifying that they are my shares. I can't 16 THE WITNESS: Yes. 17 give something back that I don't have, so ~ and also, he 17 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: And below that, for "e,” most i8 didn't -- he didn't fulfil! his obligation to me. Pole previously read, it says: "As equalization respondent 1g Q. BY MR. ROESLER: When you say “he," who are you P18 shall receive the business known as M3live" --- was this 20 referring to? 2¢ negotiated that if he was to be liable for all the debts 21 A. Mike Kia. 21 for the community, he would get the business known as 22 GQ. So you have provided some documents pursuant to 22 M3Live at the time you guys signed this? 23 this deposition. The document that you are referring to, 3 MR. BETTY: Objection; argumentative. 24 as far as getting the shares back because he has not 24 THE WITNESS: Yes. 25 fulfilled his obligation, is that in this? 25 Q. BY MR, ROESLER: So when you signed this, it Page 43 . Page 45 12 (Pages 42 to 45) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. ~ www.depo.com Q. BY MR. ROESLER: And that would be pursuant to i was your understanding that -- well, let me ask you 1 2 this: Do you physically have the shares of M3Live Bar & z this agreement we are looking at here; Exhibit 9? 3 Grill? 2 A. Correct. : 4 A. No. 4 Q. But yet he is helping you in family court file s Q. Where are they? 5 a document where he is now not going to get the shares? € A. In escrow. © MR, BETTY: Objection; argumentative, Hh Q. Do you still believe you are the owner of 33 d THE WITNESS! Yes. percent of M3Live Bar & Grill? 8 Q. BY MR.ROESLER: You did have an attorney when A. Um, yes. 2 you signed this document; is that right? Q. Okay. Were you -- did you believe that at the 10 A. Correct, time you signed this document? il Q. Did you -- it's fair to say you did not retain A Yes. 12 that same individual before filing this document and Q. So at the time you signed this document, you 13 ‘going into family court? had agreed to give Mr. Wosoughkia the shares as soon as 14 A. No. } you were in possession of them, correct? is Q. - Are you aware if Mr. Wosoughkia hired anyone MR. BETTY: Objection; argumentative. 16 before filing -- I don't know what you would call it -- And just for the record, "this document" is 17 this new agreement ~ is it a stipulation that was turned Exhibit 9. - 18 in to court, or was it something that you are arguing on MR. ROESLER: Thank you. 18 your behalf? THE WITNESS:. I'would, yes. . 20 A. It's a -- I don't know, I don't remember, Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Prior to signing this 21 Q. Do you remember approximately how many pages document, Exhibit 9, did you speak to anyone about giving 22 the document is? the shares to Mr. Wosoughkia? 23 A. don't remember, A. No. 24 Q. Are you aware if Mr. Wosoughkia signed the Q. Are you aware of any third party asting on your 25 document as welf? "Page 46 Page 48 . behalf speaking to anyone -- strike that. 1 A. Idon't know. Are you aware of any third-party action on your 2. Q. Did you file it with the court? behalf informing anyone that you were giving the shares 3 A. Um -- to Mr. Wosoughkia? 4 Q. And again, what I'm referring to is -- A. No. 5 A. didn't physically go there, no. . Q- Have you ever been offered any money for the 6 Q. Are you aware -- shares that you believe are yours? 7 A. It's been filed. I don't know who filed it. A. No. & Q. Did you give it to anyone to file? - Q. And can we go back, you said, approximately two 9 A. Iasked Mike Kia to take care of it for me, but weeks -- within the past two weeks you filed something in 10 1 didn't do it myself. family court. i1 Q. Okay. What is your interests in retaining 33 You're trying to reassert the shares; is that 12 percent of M3Live Bar & Grill? correct? 13 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. A. I'm trying to clarify. Yes, basically, yes. 14 THE WITNESS: - Can you --- I don't understand Q. Okay. Did you do this -- do you do this with = i5 your question. the help of an attorney, or are you doing this on your i6 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Why is it that you want own, the document that was filed in court? 17 approximately 33 percent of the shares back after A. On our own, 18 agreeing to give it to Mike? Q. When you say "our," who is that? 19 A. Well, he -- he didn't pay the debts. He owes A. Mike helped me. 20 me money from — he promised me money that he didn't give Q. Okay. So you believe that he =~ and I don't 21 me, outside businesses he was going to give me, I mean, want to put words in your mouth -- did not honor the 22 he was going to do -- um, a lot of promises that he was agreement that he had with you, correct? 23 gonna -- he made me that didn't come through. MR. BETTY; Objection; argumentative. 24 Q. Well, let me ask you this: This document right THE WITNESS: Correct. 25 here, Exhibit 9, this lists all the community assets at Page 47 Page 49 13 (Pages 46 to 49) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com i the time you guys had in 2016? i A. - After? 2 A. Yes. 2 Q Yes. E Q. Okay. And presumably this was all the terms as 2 ‘A. No. 4 far as the distribution of assets as well, correct? 4 MR. BETTY: Vague as to "promises." 5 A. Correct. 5 THE WITNESS: It was during =~ it was in 6 Q. So did you receive the $550,000? € between all the discussions that we have made throughout 7 A, Yes. 7 our divorce. 8 Q. Did he receive the $575,000? 8 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: So why aren't these businesses 9 A. Yes. ¢ or assets listed in this document? 10 Q. Were all disputed liens against the property -- i0 A. Because -- I don't know. I don't know. 11 which I'm assuming would be your home, correct? 11 Q. You had an attorney helping you out, correct? 12 A. Correct. 12 A. Right, correct. 13 Q. -- was that honored and paid to escrow 13 Q. And you were aware of these businesses at the 14 directly? 14 time that you filed for divorce? 15 A. Yes. 18 A. Iwas aware of businesses. I don't know in 16 Q.. Has anyone -- anyone that he's liable -- well, 1¢ particuiar what businesses, but I know he was — you 17 strike that. 17 know, he does multiple stuff I don't know about. So I 18 Are you liable right now for any debts that he 18 was counting on him, ’ 19 created with the family? 18 Q. Okay. And so there was never any promises 20 MR. BETTY: Objection; speculation. 2¢ made, other than what you're saying in this document, 21 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 21 about receiving any other money other than this $550,000 22 MR. BETTY: Answer if you know. 22 from Mr. Wosoughkia? * 23 THE WITNESS: Yes. 23 MR. BETTY: Objection; asked and answered, 24 Q. "BY MR. ROESLER: Which is what? 24 misstates prior testimony, argumentative. 25 A. Family debt that he -- that he had borrowed 25 THE WITNESS: On paper, no. Page 50 Page 52 1 money for our living expenses, yes. They are still 1 Q. BY MR, ROESLER: Are you aware when you filed 2 asking me for it. 2 for divorce if you have to jist all of your assets with 3 Q. Who is asking you for it? 2 the court? 4 A, His family, 4 A. Yes. ; 5 'Q. Are we talking about immediate family? S Q. Is there any reason why you would not list all 6 A. Yeah. 6 of your assets with the court? 7 Q. How much are they asking for? 7 A. No. 8 A. didn't get into how much he borrowed, but -- 8 Q. So you are not -- you don't know why those 9 1 really don't know how much he borrawed. ) 9 businesses or those ventures were not listed in the 10 . Q. What I'm confused on is that -- you're saying 10 stipulation? 11 that he made a bunch of promises that he didn't follow-up 11 A. They're like adventures [sic] that are not 12 on and because of that you are asking for the shares of 12 businesses. These are potential ventures that could 13 M3Live back? i3 perhaps develop or not develop. They're ifs. So I was 14 A. Yes, because he didn't -- he was supposed to 14 counting on his ifs making it, so hopeful. 15 give me money from businesses -- international business 15 Q. These businesses were developed while the two 16 deals he was doing. He promised me a lot of money 1€ of you were married, correct? iy outside of this contract. And verbally he told me once 17 A. He did multiple businesses — I mean, multipie 18 that comes through -- and I don't have the shares yet, so 18 things I don't know of or aware of what he does, But he 1 this was sort of like debts paid off, and then I would 18 promised me ~ he had international deals going on. I 20 give him the shares. 1 don't have the shares physically 20 don’t know what they are. I just -- we're in the middle 21 in my hand. How can I give someone something that I 21 of a divorce. 22 don't even have? 22 Q. So when was the first time you heard of him 23 Q. Iunderstand that. I guess what I'm trying to 23 having an international deal? 24 inquire though is about these promises that he made to 24 A. Oh, he's had international deals throughout our 25 you were after the signing of Exhibit 9, this document? 25 marriage. Page 51 Page 53 14 (Pages 50 to 53) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 Q. Okay. Did you see these from your viewpoint 1 A. No. 2 only? Were these international deals part of the z Q. After signing this document, did you ever go to 3 community property where you had 50 percent? 2 the Alcohol Beverage Control and ask them if Mike 4 MR. BETTY: Objection; calls for a legal 4 Wosoughkia owning 33 percent of the shares would affect 5 conclusion, 3 the liquor license? 6 THE WITNESS: I -- no, it would not be part of 6 A. No. 2 my community property. 1 Q. Why is that? 8 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Why is that? £ A. Didn't think of it. ¢ MR. BETTY: Objection; calls for a legal 3 Q. Would it matter to you? ie conclusion. oo 1c MR. BETTY: Objection; argumentative. 11 THE WITNESS: Because I don't even know what — i1 THE WITNESS: Would it matter to me? 12 they are international deals with other peaple in 12 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Uh-huh. 13 different countries. I have no idea. They are not -- 13 A. That - yes, I guess. I don’t know. Would it ola maybe, I have no idea. 14 matter to me if he could or he couldn't? 15 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. Do you know any of 15 Q. Would it matter to you if the business license 16 those businesses’ or ventures’ names that he's a part of? 1€ would be affected if he -- because he was a prior felon 17 A. No. 17 owned shares? 18 Q. Sohe made promises to you about businesses, 18 A. Yes, it would matter ta me. 19 and you never inquired exactly what he was doing or why is Q. Okay. So you knew that he was a prior felon? 20 he was doing it? 20 A. Correct. 2k MR. BETTY: Objection; compound. 21 Q. You knew that he had you sign the document z THE WITNESS: There were like land sales and 22 because it could have an effect on the ABC? 23 international land sales. There would be a commission. 23 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague, 24 That's the only one that I was aware of. 24 THE WITNESS: He didn't have to be on the ABC 25 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: How often does he travel 25 license. Page 54 Page 56 1 outside of the country, while the two of you were 1 Q. BYMR. ROESLER: No, but owning 33 percent of a 2 married? 2 corporation, he would have to notify ABC. Wouldn't that 3 A. He doesn't. 3 be correct? 4 Q. You can give that to her now. 4 MR. BETTY: Objection; speculation. 5 Are you aware of any duties you have as a 5 You can answer if you know. & . shareholder of M3Live to the company? & THE WITNESS: Correct. But Musa has a felon as 7 A. No. 7 well and he's on the license. So, for me, it doesn't -- 8 Q. "No"? Are you aware if someone has a felony if 8 it's the same thing. If he can be on the license, then 2 this will affect a liquor license at all? 9 how is that going to-affect if someone else has a 10 A. Yes. felony? 11 Q. Okay. So at the time that you signed the Q. BY MR. ROESLER: But Mr. Wosoughkia still put 12 document, which will be Exhibit 9, the stipulation, had you on the business and not himself? 13 you inquired with the ABC how Mike Wosoughkia receiving A. Correct, thinking -- I did not know that he 14 the shares would affect the liquor license? had -- Mr. Madain had a felony. And had I known that, 15 A. This stipulation? then I wouid have told Mike to put himself on. We would 16 Q. Yeah. have just said, "Put it on." 17 A. I'm confused as to your question. Q. When were you aware of Mr. Madain having a 18 Q. At the time you signed this document -- felony? 1a A. Correct. MR. BETTY: Sorry, can you restate the 20 Q. - or shortly before, did you ever ask the ABC, question? 21 Alcohol Business [sic] Control -~ Q. BY MR. ROESLER: When were you aware of Mr. 22 A. Uh-huh. 22 Madain having a felony? 22 Q. -- whether Mike Wosoughkia having the shares, 23 A. Tthink throughout -- throughout the -- 24 being a prior felon, would affect the liquor license of 24 throughout this Jawsuit I have come to find out. 25 M3Live Bar & Grill? 25 MR. ROESLER: Okay. I'll show you what will be Page 55 Page 57 15 (Pages 54 to 57) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 marked as Exhibit 10, which, again, I think you were 1 MR. ROESLER: Thank you. 2 provided a copy. Z Q. BY MR. ROESLER: You don't remember at all if 3 {Exhibit 10 marked and attached.) : 3 you informed Cyrus, also known as Ali, about you signing 4 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Do you recognize this ioe the stipulation with M3Live Bar & Grill and Mr, Madain? 5 document? : A. Idon't recall. 6 A. Vaguely. [os Q. What about his wife? 7 Q. If you look at the last page, page 3, there is bos A. 1don't recall. 8 a signature above "Natasha Woasoughkia."” 3 Q. If they came and testified in court saying that 9 Is that your signature? ) Pog you and Mr, Wosoughkia informed them about this 10 A Itis. [10 stipulation, would that surprise you? 11 Q. There's also -- on all three pages, there's Poa MR. BETTY: Objection; argumentative, 12 three initials on the left-hand side of each page. iz incomplete hypothetical, 13 Do any of these initials look familiar to you? i3 THE WITNESS: I have no idea. I don't 14 A. Mine, 14 remember. 15 Q. Which one would be yours? 15 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: I want you to turn to the last 16 A. "NK." 16 page. At the top, number 12, can you please read that? 17 Q. Okay. And on how many -- is "NK" on just one P17 Should be the first paragraph. 18 page or is it on ail of the pages? 18 (A. "The parties agree that this agreement shall 12 A. All three, 1% + remain- confidential and the disclosure of any of the 20 Q. I'm going to ask you to do something, Ms. 20 terms of the agreement" - 1 don't remember, something -- 21 Wosoughkia. There's a blank piece of paper right here. 21 "to take parties attorneys, or as may be ordered by the 2z With the blue pen, I'm going to ask you to sign your name 22 court shalt be a" matter -- "of this agreement" -- matter 23 three times as you would in normai circumstances. 23 of "breach of this agreement." 24 A. (Witness complies.) 24 Q. "Matter of breach"? 23 MR. ROESLER: Okay. Thank you. 25 A. Breach, matter of breach, so it's — Page 58 Page 60 1 MR. BETTY: Let the record reflect the deponent 1 Q. Okay. 2 signed her name three times. 2 A. -- breaching the contract. 3 MR. ROESLER: In a blue pen. 3 Q. Could it also be interpreted as a "material 4 MR. BETTY: In a blue pen. Po breach of this contract"? 5 Q.. BY MR. ROESLER: You said you vaguely remember | 5 MR, BETTY: Objection; asked and answered, 6 seeing this document. § argumentative, calls for a legal conclusion. Zl Would that be accurate? 7 THE WITNESS: I don’t know. 8 A. It's from 2015, yes. 8 €. BY MR. ROESLER: But you said it would be null 9 Q. Okay. Before signing this document, would you 8 and void; is that correct? 10 have looked through it to understand what the terms were? 10 MR. BETTY: Objection; calls for a legal 11 A. Yes. . 11 conclusion, argumentative, misstates prior testimony. 12. Q. After signing this document, which it says on 12 THE WITNESS: Breach means -- breach of this 13 here would be 10/16/2015 -~ do you see that on the last 13 agreement means to break -- yeah, to break the agreement. 14 page? 4 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. Based on your reading 15 A, Okay. ) . 15 of provision 12, page 3, aside from talking to your 16 Q. Do you remember having discussions with anyone 16 attorneys, Mr. Wosoughkia or Mr. Madain, would you feel 17 other than Mr. Madain or Mr. Wosoughkia about the terms 17 entitled or be able to speak to anyone else about this 18 of this? 1 agreement? . 13 A. 1don't recall. i9 A. Idon't remember this agreement, let alone to 20 MR. BETTY: Objection; instruct the client not 20 speak about it. I don't remember this agreement, so no. 21 to answer as long as it pertains to any attorney-client 21 Q. Do you ever remember having a conversation at 22 communications. 22 all with Cyrus after signing this agreement? 23 You can answer outside of any attorney-client 23 MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. 24 communications you have had. 24 THE WITNESS: I don't remember. 25 THE WITNESS: I don't remember. 25 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Are you aware if Mr. Page 59 Page 61 16 (Pages 58 to 61) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 Wosoughkia ever spoke to Mr, Cyrus? i Q. So you are not ~~ it is fair to say you are not 2 A. I'm not aware. z aware of why he's serving this document on your behalf? 3 Q. Are you aware any time at all if Cyrus was 2 A. Idon't know. 4 advised by Mr. Wosoughkia ~~ [et me go back. é Q. You can give that back to her. 5 Are you aware -- is it Ali? Cyrus? Do they 5 You mentioned the name Paul Sang -- when you € call him "Ali"? -- if Ali ever filed a lawsuit against é said first name is Paul, maybe Sang -- about potentially L M3Live Bar & Grill? 7 owning the shares of M3Live Bar & Grill? ’ § A. Not aware, 8 A. So I have heard. 9 Q. Okay. Are you aware if he ever filed a lawsuit a Q. Who have you heard this from? 10 against Mr. Madain? ie A. From Paul. 11 A. don't know, not aware. ii Q. How do you know Paul? 2 Q. Are you aware if Ali has any interest in M3Live 12 A, From the jawsuits that are happening. 13 Bar & Grill at this current time? 13 Q. Do you remember when you first met Paul? 14 A. 1don't know. 14 A. Idon't really remember when I met him first. 15 Q. At some point in time, you believe that he did 135 Q. Did you meet him during the course of these 16 own some of the shares though, correct? 1d lawsuits, or did you know him before you became an 17 A. Correct, 17 investor of M3Live Bar & Grill? 18 Q. Up until what point are you aware that he owned 1g A, During the course. 19 shares with M3Live Bar & Grill? 19 Q. Have you heard from anyone aside from Paul -- 20 A. When we were involved. So when we were 20 and again, not trying to ~- aside from attorney-client 21 involved, when we were participating in — at the 21 privilege -- anyone aside from Paul that he is the owner 2z restaurant, ) 2z of M3Live Bar & Grill? 23 Q. And how long were you participating at the 23 A. No. 5 3 24 restaurant until? 24 Q. Mr. Wosoughkia has never told you he believes 25 A. 1don't really remember exactly how long it 25 Paul Sang is the owner or has shares in M3Live Bar & Page 62 Page 64 1 was. 1 Grill? - 2 Q. Okay. Do you remember where you signed this 2 A. Ihave -- we have spoken about it, but he has 3 document? 3 not told me -- I mean, Paul has told me directly. 4 A. don't remember. 4 Q. How many times have you spoken to Paul about - 5 Q. Do you remember -- are you aware of who wrote 5 this? 6 this document up? € MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. 7 A, Idon't remember. 7 THE WITNESS: Probably twice, 8 Q. Did you have an attorney at the time you signed 8 Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Has that been fair to say over 9 this agreement? 9 the past year? 10 A. Honestly, I don't remember. I don't recall io A. Correct. . 11 this. I don't remember this. 21 Q. Is Paul someone you would consider a friend? 12 ~ Q. Ms. Kia, I'm going to ask you to look at this i A. No. 13 again. This is the Answer. 13 Q. Okay. An acquaintance through this lawsuit? 14 Can you turn to the last page on that document? 14 A. Correct. 15 A. Proof of Service? 15 Q. Okay. On those occasions when you spoke to 16 Q. Yes. At the bottom, do you see the name down 1€ Paul, where were they? 17 there? 17 A. Over the phone. 18 A. Uh-huh. 1& Q. Do you remember why you were speaking to him 19 Q. Who is that? 1s over the phone? 20 A. Idon't know. 20 A. don’t remember exactly. 21 Q. The name is Mohammad and the last name is 21 Q. Okay. Do you have Paul's number in your phone? 22 R-a-h-g-o-s-h-a-y. 22 A. Ido. 23 A. Idon't'know — I don't know this person. 23 Q. Are you aware at all when Paul is saying he 24 Q. You don't know who that is? 24 became the owner or bought shares of M3Live Bar & Grill? 23 A. Huh-uh, 25 MR. BETTY:™ Objection; vague, compound. Page 63 Page 65 17 (Pages 62 to 65) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com H O O Ww m A oh ae Ww bb gm fa Bo N o r r w o o s o w N e THE WITNESS: I don't -- I didn't get into the details of it. Q. BY MR. ROESLER: Okay. Has Paul ever offered you money for your shares in M3Live Bar & Grill -- © A No. -Q. ~~ you are purporting to have? A. No. Q. Are you aware of Paul's relationship with Mr. Wosoughkia at all? MR. BETTY: Objection; vague. THE WITNESS: They know each other, I don't know how deep it gees. I have no idea. MR. ROESLER: I'll let you guys stay inside this time. Take another five-minute break? MR. BETTY: Yeah, sure. {Break taken.) Q. BY MR, ROESLER: So, Ms, Kia, just a few last questions. We were talking before about the stipulation that was signed on August 10, 2016, which, I believe, is Exhibit 9 -- okay? -- in family court, correct? A. Uh-huh. Q. And you said there were promises that were made outside of the stipulation by Mr. Woscughkia to you that he never followed through on? ’ Q. Did you ever have any kind of memorialization of this agreement? A. No. Q. So there's no reference in any text messages? No. No reference in any emails? Huh-uh, ) Letters? No. Q. Is anyone else aware of this agreement you had with Mr. Wosoughkia? A. No. Q. Okay. How long did he tell you, if at ail -- strike that. Did he give you a time estimate as to when he was going to be able to provide some of these loose terms to you? A, No, Q. So why is it now, approximately within the past two weeks, you're trying to go into court and get the shares back, or they go to you first? MR. BETTY: Objection; misstates the evidence. THE WITNESS: Because not only has he not provided me with more, he hasn't even given me child support. 50 -- : »> 0 > 0 > Page 68 S o w N e ww o w o D o o Wn Page 66 A. Correct. -Q. Was there ever an amount of money that he promised that he was going to give you? A. No. Q. What was your expectation that you were supposed to receive? ) A. Buy me a house or he'll put a down payment on a house or, you know, stuff like that. He'll give me, eventually, money, but no -- no exact currency price was told to me. No money amount was told. Q. So this was not an actual contract with hard terms? These were loose terms? A. Loose terms, exactly, Q. Okay. So you had an expectation that he was going to provide you something? A. Yes, Q. Whether it's money or a house or something else? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And has he provided anything to you ‘outside of what is in this? A. No. } Q. Okay. Did you give a time which he was supposed to get this done by? W o N e U B Ww RY Q. BY MR, ROESLER: Is the lack of child support also in the stipulation that's been filed -- A. No. ) Q. -- this document that has been filed with the court? A. No, no, it's not. Q. Okay. Are you -- in Exhibit 8, it also refers to, on "d" ~~ A 9 Q. Yeah. Just to be precise, "Respondent shall remain solely responsible to all his friends and relatives and any other creditor for all known and unknown individual or community debts,” did Mr. ~ Wosoughkia inform you at all how long it would take for him to pay off the community debts? A. No. MR. ROESLER: Okay. I don't think I have anything further at this point. MR. BETTY: Okay. (Telephonic interruption. } THE WITNESS: It's the school calling. MR. ROESLER: Off the record. (Brief break.) MR. ROESLER: Al right. So there was a A. No. document that was signed by Ms. Kia, her signature, three * Page 67 Page 69 18 (Pages 66 to 69) Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 1 times on a plain white piece of paper. Counsel on behalf 1 ? of M3Live is going to keep the original. A copy is being = 3 given to Mr. Betty -- almost called you Mr. Agawa - and 2 4 also to the court reporter, which will be marked as ‘ 5 Exhibit 11, T believe. 5 1, the undersigned, declare under penalty of 5 (Exhibit 11 marked and attached.) 5 perjury that I have read the foregoing transcript, and 2 MR. ROESLER: And at this time I think there's 7 I have made any corrections, additions or deletions that & : & I was desirous of making; that the foregoing is a true : no further questions. 9 and correct transcript of my testimony contained therein, 9 Counsel, do you have any questions for your 10 10 dient? 11 EXECUTED this day of 11 MR. BETTY: No. 12° 20, at , 12 MR. ROESLER: Okay. So at this point we can (City) (State) 13 conclude. 12 1é Do you just want to do this per Code? 14 15 MR. BETTY: ‘How about the -- we just break the +2 16 code, as far as the original wili go to my office and 18 17 then I will provide it to Ms. Wosoughkia for her ! 18 signature and review within 30 days. - 19 MR. ROESLER: Okay. i; NATASHA WOSOQUGHKIA 20 MR. BETTY: And then if no changes are made, or 4 21 I fail to give it back to her, an unsigned copy can be 21 22 used as the signed original. oo 22 23 ‘MR. ROESLER: As the original. Okay. 23 24 MR. BETTY: Does that work? 2¢ 25 MR. ROESLER: That's fine with me. 25 Page 70 Page 72 1 _MR. BETTY: Oh, and relieve the court reporter 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2. of her duty. And then — can I give you my address off 2 3 the record? B 4 MR. ROESLER: The court reporter is relieved of 4 1, GRACIELA WARNER, CSR No. 9502, Certified 5 her duties. And then -- s0 you are going to keep the 5 Shorthand Reporter, certify; € original and then return it to my office, or you are 0 That the foregoing proceedings were taken 7 going to keep it and I get a copy? 7 before me at the time and place therein set forth, at 8 MR. BETTY: Let's go off the record. g which time the witness was put under oath by me; 9 (Discussion held off the record.) 9 That the testimony of the witness, the 10 MR. ROESLER: So counsel is going to have the = . questions propounded, and all objections and statements 11 original. Once he receives it, he will have 30 days if i rade Be Ee Oe ee ds iz his client wants to make any corrections; after those 30 13 rat bie ferapains Rp ! 13 days, counsel will return it to my office within 15 days 53 transcript of my shorthand notes so taken. i. after that. : i 15 I further certify that I am not a relative or : MR. BETTY: So stipulated. 16 employee of any attorney of the parties, nor financially 5 (Ending time: 2:48 P.M.) 17 interested in the action. 17 1g Reading and signing was requested, Ls 1s 1 declare under penalty of perjury under the 12 [20 laws of California that the foregoing is true and ad 21 correct. ~ 21 P22 Dated this 15th day of October, 201845 22 i 23 23 {24 24 4 finial Lda freer . 25 |e GRACIELA WARNER, C.5.R. No. 9502 Page 71 | Page 73 19 (Pages 70 to 73) Natasha Wosoughkia ‘October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com Page 1 A apologize 28:24 68:21 70:21 69:23 70:15 commencing 2:18 apparently 6:22 bad 8:18 - Brief 69:23 commercial 247,12 A-l-i-m-a-d-~a-d-i-a-n 32:16 . A-m-b-r-o-i-s-e 7:12 ABC 55:13,20 56:22 24 57:2 able 2:16 31:6 61:17 68:16 ACO0A4TA 1:24 accurate 59.7 acquaintance 65:13 acquired 24:18 acting 46:25 action 17:7 47:2 73:17 acts 42:10 | actual 67:11 additional 13:15 36:10 36:23 additions 72:7 address 7:11 26:13,17 26:22,2327:4971:2 administration 27:25 28:4,8,10 29:7 administrative 27:21 Admission 4:11,13,16 admit 8:18 adventures 53:11 advised 62:4 affect 55:9,14,24 56:4 57:9 afternoon 6:7 Agawa 3:11 70:3 ago 13:5 16:13 38:5 agree 35:6 60:18 agreed 46:14 agreeing 35:13 49:18 agreement 4:22 42:13 47.23 48:2,17 60:18 60:20,22,23 61:13,13 61:18,19,20,22 63:9 68:2,10 agreements 41:10 agrees 27:12 28:14 ahead 7:7 12:10 13:12 13:21 14:12 17:10 18:18 36:20 37:3 aka 1:8,9 2:8,8 Alcohol 55:21 56:3 "Ali 32:17,19 33:4,19 34:2 34:7,21 35:7 60:3 62:5 62:6,6,12 Alimadadian 32:13 allegations 16:22 18:20 allowed 10:1 Ambroise 7:12 amount 67:2,10 Ana 18:11 Anaheim 20:7,9 Angeles 3:12 Ann 7:10 39:21 answer 4,18 5:3 8:25 9:2117:19 23:14 25:19,25 30:4,5 32:6 50:22 57:5 59:21,23 63:13 answered 17:24 23:12 41:7 43:14 52:23 61:5 answers 8:22 17:20 approximate 7:17 33:21 approximately 18:21 23:22,23 24:2 28:25 36:5 47.9 48:21 49:17 68:19 approximation 9:5,8,13 approximations 9:7 April 18:21 arguing 48:18 argumentative 23:11 31.9 45:15,23 46:18 47:24 48:6 52:24 56:10 60:11 61:6,11 arrested 38:9 . aside 6:21 10:22 15:17 61:15 64:19,20,21 asked 9:1,11,14,20 17:24 23:11 27:11 28:24 41:7 43:14 49:9 52:2361:5 asking 11:19 40:14 42.7 51:2,3,7,12 aspects 27:21,24 40:1 assets 24:17 49:25 50:4 52:9 53:2,6 associated 43.9 assume 9:1 assuming 9:8 14:22 50:11 ATKINSON-BAKER 1:21 attached 6:20 11:21 12:7 13:17,25 16:20 17:14 21:5 39:3 58:3 70:6 attorney 7:1 8:5 9:25 11:17 47:16 48:8 52:11 63:8 73:16 attorney-client 59:21,23 64:20 attorneys 60:21 61:16 Audible 8:22 August 12:16,23 39:9 66:20 authorized 25:22 26:2 available 9:23 aware 7:19 15:25 16:22 17:3,6 18:23 20:10 © 24:18 25:13 27:4,9,10 27:12 28:18 29:13 30:18,20,25 31:16 34:7 36:1,13,15,18,22 37:20 38:1,8 41:3,5,8 42:22,25 43:12 46:25 47:2 48:15,24 49:6 52:13,15 53:1,18 54:24 55:5,8 57:17,21 61:25 682:2,3,5,8,9,11 62:12,18 63:5 64:2 65:23 66:8 68:10 bachelor's 15:6,8 back 14:7 17:25 23:16 35:23 37:4 40:17 42:17 43:13,16,17,24 44:8,20 45:3 47:9 49:17 51:13 62:4 64:4 bar 1:5 2:5 18:22.19:1,5 19:6 20:12,25 21:18 22:16 25:11 32:4 35:18,22 36:3,11 46:2 46:8 49:12 55.25 60:4 62:7,13,19 64:7,17,22 64:25 65:24 66:4 Based 61:14 basically 31:11.40:8 47:14 Beach 1:17 2:18 3:8 behalf 2:17 19:17 20:4 23:6 25:17 26:3 36:2 36:11 41:10 47:1,3 48:12 64:2 70:1 believe 11:18 14:10 21:6 26:11 27:13,22 30.7 31:1,18,22,23 34:1,9 34:14 35:14 38:24 44:9 46:7,10 47:7, 21 62:15 66:20 70:5 believed 25:5 believes 64:24 best 9:4 37:12 better 8:24 Betty 3:11,11 12:8 15:14 17:5,24 20:18 21:8 22:21 23:11,15 25:18 30:2,6 31:8 32:5,14 33:16 34:3,8 35:20 37:1,12 41:7,12,17 43:14 44:6,11,14 45:14,23 46:16 47.24 48:6 49:13 50:20,22 52:4,23 54:4,9,21 56:10,23 57:4,19 59:1 59:4,20 60:11 61:5,10 61:23 65:6,25 66:10 66:15 68:22 69:19 70:3,11,15,20,24 71:1 71.8,15 Beverage 56:3 big 9:14 Birch 2:17 3:6 bit 40:17 blank 58:21 blue 58:22 59:34 blur 14:4 bookkeeping 27:21 28:4 28:12,18,23 born 10:8,11 borrowed 41:18,19,22 42:1,5 50:25 51:8,8 borrowing 41:24 bottom 13:2 14:8 21:19 29:18 63:16 bought 24:3,6,10,12 65:24 boundaries 8:9 Box 3:12 BRANDON 3:5,6 breach 60:23,24,25,25 61:4,12,12 breaching 61:2 break 9:19,21 44:57 61:13,13 66:14,16 briefly 11:17 13:18 15:4 broker 14:23,25 16:8 bunch 51:11 business 26:12,16,19,23 27:3,24 28:10 29:7 36:13,15,18 39:25 40:245:19,21 51:15 55:21 56:15 57:12 businesses 23:24 24:5 26:24 49:21 51:15 52:8,13,15,16 53:9,12 53:15,17 54:18 businesses’ 54:16 Buy 67:7 Cc C 3:1,56 C.8.R73:25 California 1:1,17 2:1,18 3:8127:1310:14,16 10:21 26:15 73:20 call 24:4 32:17 44.22 48:16 62:6 called 6:14 19:5 20:11 70:3 calling 69:21 calls 30:2 31:8 41:12 45:14'54:4,9 61:6,10 capital 36:1,10 care 49:9 . case 1:52:57.5,23 8:24 16:19 19:12 30:11 40:5 43:9 451,12 cases 7:23 10:25 causes 17.6 Center 1:2 2:2 18:10 Central 1:2 2:2 18:10 CERTIFICATE 73:1 certification 15:24 16:5 certified 15:22 73:4 certify 73:5,15 chance 31:11 changes 9:24 70:20 Chapman 15:9 charge 38:10 child 68:24 69:1 children 11:5,7 circumstances 58:23 City 72:12 claim 17:20 clarify 42:24 47:14 clarifying 43:16 classes 15:19,20,20 16:2 classic 9:5 - classified 28:9 clear 27:2 client 44:12 59:20 70:10 71:12 close 9:8 Coast 7:13 26:15 code 70:14,16 coffee 6:8 college 28:57 come 10:16 49:23 57:24 comes 28:3 51:18 commission 54:23 communications 59:22 + 59:24 community 24:17 41:10 45:9,21 49:25 54:37. 69:13,15 company 14:25 55:6 complaint 4:17,18 16:25 17:4,7,20 18:19 complies 58:24 compound 20:18 22:21 37:1 54:21 65:25 conclude 70:13 conclusion 30:3 31:9 41:13 45:15 54.510 61:6,11 conditions 29:22 confidential 60:19 confused 51:10 55:17 consider 65:11 contact 33:13 contacting 31:7 contained 16:22 17:3 18:19 72:9 contract 21:15,15 23:18 24:24,25 25:27 51:17 61:24 67:11 control 27:24 55:21 56:3 conversation 20:17,21 23:9,17 34:20,23,25 35:361:21 convicted 38:1 cooperate 40:1 copy 4:23 6:18 12.6.6 13:23 16:18,18 17:12 17:13 21:2,3,4 38:25 39:1 58:2 70:2,21 71.7 corporation 27:8 36:24 57:2 correct 7:3,5,6 8:15 14:11,23,24 15:22 16:3,6 17:4 18:4 19:11 19:13 21:8,22 25:10 28:2,11 37:6,7 38:2,3 38:7 40:19,23 44:25 45:2,4,11,13 46:15 47:13,23,25 48:3,10 50:4,5,11,12 52:11,12 53:16 55:19 56:20 57:3,6,1361:9 62:16 62:17 65:10,14 66:21 67:1 72:9 73:13,21 correction 39:13 corrections 9:24 10:1,2 71:12 72:7 counsel 6:18 12:6 13:24 16:18 17:13 21:3 38:25 39:1 70:1,0 71:10,13 counting 52:18 53:14 countries 54:13 country 10:18 55:1 County 1:2 2:2 7:5 10:20 course 23:20 25:23 64:15,18 court 1:1,21 2:1 8:16 Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Se Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com 18:8 42:13 44:24 . -47:11,17 48:413,18 49:2 53:3,6 60:8,22 66:21 68:20 69:5 70:4 71:14 created 50:19 credit 22:15,24 creditor 45:8 69:12 cross 8:3. CSR 1:24 2:20 73:4 CU-FR-CJC 1:6 2:6 currency 67:9 current 7:11 26:19 62:13 currently 10:25 14:14,22 | Cyrus 32:10 60:3 61:22 62:135 : D d 4:1 45:6 69:8 Damages 4:17 date 18:1 37:10 39:18,19 Dated 73:22 day 29:20 31:3,5 72:11 73:22 days 30:9 40:13 70:18 71:11,13,13 dba 27:3 deal 53:23 deals 51:16 53:19,24 54:2,12 debt 41:3,10 50:25 debts 36:18,23 40:25,25 41:16 45:9,20 49:19 © 50:18 51:19 69:13,15 decided 31:2 decision 35:10 declare 72:5 73:19 deep 66:12 defendant 3:10 4:12,13 4:15,18 7:22,23 10:24 19:12 defendant's 4:8 17:19 defendants 1:11.2:10 7:25 8:7 degree 15:6,8 deletions 72:7 deponent 59:1 deposition 1:16 2:16 4:106:17 7:1,14 8:2 8:12 11:10,14 43:23 describe 15:4 DESCRIPTION 4:9 desirous 72:8 details 66:2 develop 53:13,13 developed 53:15 difference 9:6 different 54:13 diploma 15:6 directed 17:7 directly 50:14 65:3 disclosure 60:19 discovery 8:6 11:18 12:2 21.9 Discussion 71:9 distribution 50:4 Division 4:20 divorce 37:8,18,20 38:20 39:8,11 40:24 52:7 14 53:2,21 divorced 37:5 doctor's 28:8 document 6:17,23,25 11:19 12:5 13:15,19 14:3,10 16:22,23 17:16,21 18:7,25 21:12,14 22:10 23:2,7 24:21,23 25:4 26:6 27:12,14 30:1,17,23 31:3,5,17 32:3 35:12 35:14,16 36:22 39:5,7 42:13,22 43:10,23 45:6 46:11,13,17,22 47:17 48:5,9,12,22,25 49:24 51:25 52:9,20 55:12,18 56:2,21 58:5 59:6,9,12 63:3,6,14 64:2 69:4,25 documents 11:9,11 18:14 25:16,24,24 26:2,5 43:22 44:3 doing 6:9 14:16 47:16 51:16 54:19,20 Downstairs 18:17 drafted 27:12,13 duly 6:2 duties 55:5 71.5 duty 71:2 E e 3:1,14:1 39:23 45:17 education 15:5 effect 56:22 either 7:21 10:23,24 elaborate 28:21 emails 68.6 employee 73:16 employment 16:12 encourage 23:1 enter 41:9 entered 39:15 entertainment 29:13 entitled 9:4 61:17 entity 19:5 20:6 equalization 39:24 45:18 equivocate 20:8 escrow 46:6 50:13 ESQUIRE 3:6,11 estate 14:17,18 15:18 24:3,7,10 26:21 27:1 28:22 estimate 68:15 estimation 37:12 eventually 67:9 evidence 68:22 ° | exact 31:20 37:10 67:8 exactly 54.19 62:25 65:20 67:13 examination 4:4 6:5 73:11 ) Exhibit 6:19,20 11:20,21 12:5,7,10,13 13:1,16 13:17,23,25 14:2 16:17,20 17:12,14 21:3,5 24:23 36:7,20 38:24 39:3 44:10 46:18,22 48:2 49:25 51:25 55:12 58:1,3 66:21 69:7 70:5,6 EXHIBITS 4:7 expectation 67.5,14 expenses 51:1 experience 28:3,12,19 29:6,12 = facts 8:4 fail 70:21 | fair 35:3 37:16 39:11 48:11 64:1 65:8 familiar 58:13 family 32:20 41:1,4,15 47:11 48:4,13 50:19 50:25 51:4,5 66:21 far 13:8 43:12,24 50:4 70:16 FARIBORZ 1:8 2:8 feel 8:7 61:16 feet 9:12,12 felon 55:24 56:16,19 57.6 felony 22:14,23 38:1 55:8 57:10,14,18,22 file 1:24 18:7,13 35:18 35:21 37:8,18 42:20 42:21 48:4 49:2,8 filed 38:19 39:9 42:12,16 42:25 43:8 44:16,17 =~ 44:22 47:10,17 49:77 52:14 53:1 62:6,9 69:2 69:4 filing 38:20 48:12,16 final 39:18,19 finalized 37:21 39:11 40:24 financially 73:16 find 57:24 fine 70:25 firm 29:11 first 6:2 8:17 9:5 19:14 19:24 29:20 30:9 31:11,11,13,25 40:12 41:20 53:22 60:17 64.6,13,14 68:21 five 33:25 37:16 - five-minute 66:14 follow-up 51:11 followed 66:25 follows 6:3 foregoing 72:6,8 73:6,13 73:20 forgot 31:25 Form 4:14 13:15 formalized 37:21 forth 23:17 35:24 73:7 frequently 20:16,20 friend 32:20 33:4,5,6,12 65:11 : friends 33:8 45:8 69:11 fulfill 43:18 fulfilled 43:25 full 7:8 further 69:18 70:8 73:15 G general 4:14 24:22 24 getting 30:22 43:13,15 43:24 Ghazal 33:3,4,4,6,11 34:5 ’ give 7:7,8 9:10 13:13,21 14:12 17:10 18:18 31:10,14 34:10,16 37:12 42:17 43:17 46:14 49:8,18,20,21 51:15,20,21 55:4 64:4 67:3,8,23 68:15 70:21 71:2 given 68:24 70:3 gives 30:7 giving 9:9 13:23 17:13 21:3,3 35:6 46:22 47:3 go 6:11,12 7:7 9:21,25 10:5 11:16 12:10 13:12,21'14:12 17:10 18:18 25:8 27:18 28:22 36:20 37:3 44:11 45:3 47.9 49:5 56:2 62:4 68:20,21 70:16 71:8 goes 66:12 going 6:22 7:20 8:8,8 12:4 13:14 16:16 20:13,15 21:2 26:8,22 29:17 30:8 31:20 32:11 38:23 42:18 44:6,20 48:5,13 49:21 49:22 53:19 57:9 58:20,22 63:12 67:3 67:15 68:16 70:2 71:5 71:7,10 gonna 49:23 good 6:7,7 9:10 22:15,24 Graciela 1:24 2.19 73:4 73:25 ’ Great 6:10 Grill 1:5 2:5 18:22 19:1, 19:6 20:12,25 21:18 25:11 32:4 35:19,22 36:3,11 46:3,8 49:12 55:25 60:4 62:7,13,19 64.7,17,22 65:1,24 66:4 Group 15:1 guess 9:11,14 13.7 20:10 51:23 56:13 guessing 9:4,6,2 Gulino 11:17 12:2 guys 20:12 33:10 45:22 50:1 66:13 Page 2 half 15:3 16:8 hand 12:8 51:21 Handwritten 4:22 happening 64:12 hard 67:11 he'll 67:7,8 head 8:22 hear 19:1 heard 19:4 53:22 64.8,9 64:19 held 16:12 71:9 help 47:16 helped 47:20 helpful 23:18 helping 48:4 52:11 high 15:6 highlight 10:1 hired 48:15 home 22:5 26:22,24 27:3 50:11 home's 27:9 honest 12:3 37:14 Honestly 63:10 honor 47:22 honored 50:13 ‘hopeful 53:14 horrible 6:21 house 9:15,16 22:6,7 26:20 67.7,8,17 Huh-uh 63:25 68:7 hundred 25:5 hypothetical 31:8 60:12 hypothetically 31:2,4 i idea 23:6 36:19 54:13,14 60:13 66:12 ifs 53:13,14 immediate 51:5 inclusive 1:10 2:8 incomplete 31:9 60:12 Incorporated 25:11 indicating 12:9 individual 24:4 26:10,12 31:24 45:9 48:12 69:13 inform 22:19 69:14 information 5:7 22:18 informed 20;12,19 60:3 60:9 informing 47:3 initials 58:12,13 -inquire 51:24 inquired 54:19 55:13 inside 66:13 instruct 59:20 INSTRUCTED 5:3 instructing 23:13 insurance 16:1 interest 62:12 interested 20:3,11 23.5 73:17 interests 49:11 international 51:15 53:19,23,24 54:2,12 discussions 52:6 59:16 | examined 6:3 forward 10:5 } 54:23 dishonest 34:2 example 9:5,10 four 33:25 H interpreted 61:3 disputed 50:10 executed 12:20,22 72:11 | fourth 26:7 Interrogatories 4:14 Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com Page 3 13:16" limited 8:4 McModel 15:1 negotiations 20:24 71:11 interruption 69:20 line 10:2 24:14, 19 25:13 | mean 12:21 17:20 26:16 | neither 27:23 ongoing 7:20 10:25 26:7,8 28:14 40:10 43:4 49:21 Net 4.20 online 15:19,20 16:2 invested 23:25 34:7 36:1 36:10 investor 64:17 involved 10:25 42:7 62:20,21 issues 8:3 40:2 J job 6:22 Justice 1:2 2:2 18:10 K keep 70:2 71.57 Kia 1:9 2:9 6:13,14 7:8 10:9 12:6 14:2,13 16:19 17:13 21:4,12 40:6 41:23 43:21 49:9 63:12 66:17 69:25 kind 20:5 68:1 knew 56:19,21 know 9:16,19 17.22 18:13,15 19:20 22:4 24:2 25:19,20 26:18 27:11,15 28:6 28:14 30:4,6,12,13 31:20,21 32:19,25 35:23,24 36:5,12,17 37:10 42:1 42:4 44:14 48:16,20 49:1,7 50:22 51.9 52:10,10,15,16,17,17 53:8,18,20 54:11,15 56:13 57:5,13 61:7 62:11,14 63:20,23,23 63:24 64:3,11,16 66:11,1267:8 knowledge 20:5 22:18 22:22 41:24 known 19:22 25:21 32:21 39:25 45:9,19 45:21 57:14 60:3 69:12 L . lack 69:1 land 54.22,23 law 3:5 15:11 laws 73:20 | lawsuit 16:19 35:18,22 57:24 62:6,9 65:13 lawsuits 7:20 10:22 35:23 64:12,16 leading 32:5 left-hand 58:12 legal 30:2 31:8 41:12 45:14 54:4,961:6,10 let's 32:22 37:15 40:17 44:22 71:8 Letters 68:8 liable 36:24 45:20 50:16 50:18 license 14:20 15:2,18 22:16 55:9,14,24 56:5 liquor 55:9,14,24 56:5 list 53:2,5 listed 27:3 52:8 53:9 lists 49:25 litigation 11:1 little 40:17 live 28:13 lived 10:13,17,20 living 51:1 long 9:11 11:25 14:20 15:2 16:13 19:22 23:21 32:21 33:7 59:21 62:23,25 68:13 69:14 } look 6:17 12:11 14:1 17:25 21:19 22:24 26:6,10 36:20 39:2,20 40:18 58:7,13 63:12 looked 13:4 59:10 looking 12:15 13:1 39:23 + 39:23 44:9,10 45:6,6 48:2 looks 12:16 21:15 loose 67:12,13 68:16 Los 3:12 ot 49:22 51:16 Luci 26:14,15 M3 27:22 M3Live 1:5 2:5 7:21,24 10:23 11:17 18:22 19:1,5 20:8,9,11,25 21:18 25:11 27:19,22 30:13 31:17 32:4 34:7 35:18,22 36:3,11 39:25 45:19,22 46:2,8 49:12 51:13 55:6,25 60:4 62:7,12,18 64.7 64:17,22,25 65:24 66:4 70:2 Madain 3:14 7:21 10:23 19:8,15,20,22 20:6,16 20:20,24 25:5,12 30:21,25 31:5,19,23 35:1,22 57:14,17,22 59:17 60:4 61:16 62:10 making 53:14 72:8 manage 27:20 28:23 managed 29:10,11 marked 6:20 11:20,21 . 12:57 13:17,25 16:20 17:12,14 21:5 39:3 58:1,370:4,6 Marking 13:16,23 marriage 23:21 25:23 53:25 married 11:3 19:18 23:22 26:9,12 29:2 - 32:23 53:16 55:2 53:17 65:3 means 61:12,13 medication 8:19 meet 33:10,10 64:15 Memorandum 4:19 18:20 36:8 memorialization 68:1 memory 12:12,24 Memphis 10:12,14 mentioned 37:25 64:5 messages 68:4 met 19:24 38:6,8 64.1 64:14 i Michael 42:18 middle 53:20 Mike 1:9 2:8 19:7,9 22:3 27:13,14 28:17,23 40:6,6 41:23 43:21 "47:20 49:9,18 55:13 55:23 56:3 57:15 mind 39:1 Mine 18:6 58:14 minimum 28:5 misspoke 44:12 misstate 20:4 misstates 52:24 61:11 68:22 mistake 39:16 ) misunderstood 44:20 Mohammad 63:21 MOHSEN 2:8 . money 41:20,21,22,24 '42:1,8 47:6 49:20,20 51:1,15,16 52:21 66:4 67:2,9,10,17 month 33:17 morning 6:7 MOSEN 1:9 mouth 47:22 multiple 24:3 29:3 52:17 53:17,17 Musa 3:14 19:8,15,20 23:18 25:5,12 30:21 31:19 57:6 Musa's 34:11 N N 3:1 4:1 name 7:8 22:17 23:6,10 24:13,14,19 31:25 32:1,11 33:2 58:22 59:2 63:16,21,21 64:5 64.6 named 7:21,22,25 10:24 12:17 19:12 names 24:15,16 54:16 Natasha 1:8,16 2:9,16 3:10 4:3,10,12,13,15 4:18,23 6:1 7:10 12:17 13:3 14:8 21:20 26:11 27:23 39:21 58:8 never 26:2 27:3 52:18 54:19 64:24 66:25 new 42:23 48:17 Newport 1:17 2:18 3:8 7:12 26:15 nickname 6:12 i NK 58:16,17 nods 8:22 non-selling 29:20 normal 58:23 notes 73:14 noticed 6:16 noticing 7:1 notified 44:12 notify 57:2 November 10:10 | null&1:8 number 4:9 36:21 39:23 43:9 60:16 65:21 0 -oath 73:8 Objection 17:5,24 20:18 22:21 23:11 25:18 30:2 31:8 32:5 33:16 34:3,8 35:20 37:1 41:7 41:12,17 43:14 45:14 45:23 46:16 47:24 48:6 49:13 50:20 52:23 54:4,9,21 56:10 56:23 57:4 59:20 60:11 61:5,10,23 65:6 65:25 66:10 68:22 objections 73:10 obligation 43:18,25 Obviously 8:4 occasions 65:15 : October 1:18 2:19 73:22 offered 47:6 66:3 office 27:25 28:4,8 70:16 71:6,13 OFFICES 3:5 Oh 33:25 44:2 53.24 71:1 okay 7:14,17 8:10,11 &:3 9:19,22 10:3,4,10,19 10:22 11:24 12:4 13:1 13:21 15:12 16:16 17:10,21 18:13,18 24:6,21 25:3 26:6 27:15 28:14 31:14 32:19 33:7,18 34:1,15 37:339:2,14,18 41:3 41:22 43:8 44:8,21 45:5 46:10 47:15,21 49:11 50:3 52:19 54:1 54:15 55:11 56:19 57:25 58:17,25 59:9 59:15 61:1,14 62:9 63:2 65:13,15,21 66:3 19:4 20:15 21:14 22:4 opportunity 8:5 orally 35:12 Orange 1:2 2:2 7:5 10:20 order 4:20 35.7 ordered 60:21 original 70:2,16,22,23 71:6,11 outside 8:8 10:18 49:21 51:17 55:1 59:23 66:24 67:21 owed 41:1,4,11 owes 49:19 owned 56:17 62:18 owner 46.7 64:21,25 65:24 = owning 56:4 57:1 64:7 owns 31:18,21,23 . P P 3:11 p.m 2:19 71:16 P.O 3:12 page 4:4, 13:2 14:7 18:1,1 21:19 25:8 26:7 39:20,23 58:7,7,12,18 59:14 60:16 61:15 63:14 pages 12:15 48:21 58:11 58:18 paid 50:13 51:19 paper 52:25 58:21 70:1 paragraph 27:18 28:17 80:17 paralegal 29:10 paralegals 29:10 part 28:1 35:24 54:2,6,16 | participating 62:21,23 - particular 7:24 52:16 parties 8:6 60:18,21 73:16 party 46:25 Paul 31:25 64:5,6,10,11 64:13,19,21,25 65:34 65:11,16,23 66:3 Paul's 65:21 66:8 pay 49:19 69:16 payment 67:7 pen 58:22 59:34 penalty 72:5 73:19 people 42:1,7 54:12 percent 25:5 26:4 31:1,4 34:12,12,12,13 35:7 36:25 46.8 49:12,17 54:3 56:4 57:1 percentage 34:10,11 perjury 72:6 73:19 person 8:16 63:23 personally 34:20 pertains 52:21 petitioner 4:21 40:1,7,18 phone 65:17,19,21 . material 61:3 72:18 66:21 67:14,20,23 physical 38:14 _ 56:15.2557:7.8 matter 8:1 56:9,11,14,15 | necessary 40:2 68:13 69:7,17,19 physically 46:2 49:5 fiens 50:10 56:18 60:22,22,24,25 | need 6:7 9:19 70:12,19.23 51:20 Life 16:1 matters 7:20 negotiated 45:20 once 33:17 38:17 51:17 | piece 58:21 70:1 Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com Page 4 place 73:7 plain 70:1 plaintiff 1:6 2:6,17 3:4 4:11 7:22,23,24 10:24 Plaintiff's 4:13,16,18 plaintiffs 8:7 please 8:23 14:1 15:4 19:3 28:21 32:14 44:13 60:16 . point 9:24 12:1,3 15:21 16:4,25 27:6 30:14 31:21 32:2 62:15,18 69:18 70:12 possession 46:15 possibility 42:17 possible 8:9 potential 53:12 potentially 40:9,10,15 64:6 precise 69:10 preferred 6:14 prepared 17:21,23 present 3:14 20:23 21:25 22:2 presumably 50:3 presume 6:25 pretty 9:10 15:7 24:25 prevent 8:20 previously 10:23 37:25 45:18 price 67:9 printing 6:22 prior 11:17 16:9 18:25 20:2 28:3 46:21 52:24 55:24 56:16,19 61:11 privilege 64:21 probably 32:22 35:24 65:7 problem 14:5 proceedings 73:6 Proceeds 4:21 profitable 36:15 program 15:19 promised 49:20 51:16 53:19 67:3 promises 49:22 51:11 51:24 52:4,19 54:18 66:23 Proof 12:18,20,22 63:15 properties 24:8,13 property 40:1 50:10 54:3 54.7 propounded 4:11 11:18 12:2 73:10 provide 6:18 67:15 68:16 70:17 provided 11:10 36:23 38:24 43:22 44:3 58:2 67:20 68:24 provision 61:15 purchase 20:13 29:21 30:8 31:13 purchasing 19:7,14,17 20:3,21,25 23:5 32:3 purport 39:7 purporting 66.6 pursuant 30:22 36.7.9 43:22 48:1 put 23:6 24:11 36:2 37:4 47:22 57:11,15,16 67:7 73:8 Q question 8:23,25 9:1,20 9:21 13:819:3 41:14 49:15 55:17 57:20 questions 5:3 25:3,6 66:18 70:8,2 73:10 R R 3:1 } R-a-h-g-o-s-h-a-y 63:22 ran 28:8 random $:9 range 9:12 Re-Noticed 4:10 reached 42:14 read 24:24 26:8 28:14 45:18 80:16 72:6 reading 17:9 61:14 .73:18 “real 14:17,18 15:18 24:3 24:7,10 26:21 27:1 28:22 really 51:9 62:25 64:14 realm 8:8 REALTOR 14:18 15:22 reason 10:5 34:1 53.5 reassert 47:12 recall 12:3 13:5,6,20 18:9 23:16 24:20 25:15 26:4 34:13 35:11 37:13 59:19 60:5,7 63:10 receive 39:24 40:18,21 45:19 50:6,8 67:6 received 7:1 receives 71:11 receiving 52:21 55:13 recognize 6:23 11:19 13:10,18 14:2 16:21 17:1518:3 21:11,14 21:21 39:4 58:4 record 7:9 22:15,23 32:15 44:9 46:17 59:1 69:2271:3,89 recorded 73:11 refer 29:17 reference 68:4,6 referring 24:23 26:11 27:22 43:20,23 49:4 refers 69.7 reflect 59:1 refresh 12:12,24 refusal 29:21 31:11 Regarding 4:20 relationship 66:8 relative 73:15 relatives 45:8 69:12 release 40:12 relieve 71:1 relieved 71:4 remain 45:7 60:19 69:11 remember 12:1,25 16:14 16:14,15 17.2,23 18.7 19:2,5,24 20:22 22:6 23:8,9 27:11 28:25 32:3 34:11 35:10 37:9 37:9 38:4,18 43:1 48:20,21,23 59:5,16 59:25 60:2,14,20 61:19,20,21,24 62:25 63:2,4,5,7,10,11 64:13 64:14 65:18,20 rephrase 8:24 REPORTED 1:24 reporter 8:17 70:4 71:1,4 73:5 REPORTER'S 73:1 REPORTERS 1:21 representative 27:20,23 28:15,16 request 13:15 21:10 requested 73:18 Requests 4:11,13,16 residence 26:25 residential 24:8,12 26:12 respondent 4.21 39:24 40:5,21 45:7,18 69:10 Responses. 4:13,15 responsible 27:20 45:7 69:11 restate 57:19 restaurant 20:6,9,11 29:12 62:22,24 retain 48:11 retaining 49:11 return 71:6,13 review 70:18 reviewed 11:11,13 right 7:20 8:19 11:1,1¢9 13:12 14:14 16:7 24.20 28:24 29:20 39:20 42:12 48:9 49:24 50:18 52:12 58:21 69:24 ROESLER 3:56 4.56:6 6:16,21 11:16,24 12:4 12:10 13:7,12,18,21 14:1 15:16,17 16:16 16:21 17:6,10,15,25 20:19 21:2,6,9,11 22:22 23:13,20 25:22 30:4,10 31:14 32:7,15 32:17 33:18 34:5 35:21 37:3,15 38:23 39:4 41:9,15,19 43:19 44:5,8,13,16,18,21 45:17,25 46:19,21 48:1,8 49:16 50:24 52:8 53:1 54:8,15,25 56:12 57:1,11,21,25 58:4,25 59:3,5 60:1,2 60:15 61:8,14,25 65:8 66:3,13,17 69:1,17,22 69:24 70.7,12,19,23 70:25 71:4,10 RON 3:11 rule 8:18 rules 8:12 running 26:24 28:4 S S$ 3:1 sales 54:22,23 Sang 64:5,6,25 Santa 18:11 saw 36:8 saying 20:2,5 40:8 42:24 51:10 52:20 60:8 65:23 says 13:2,3 14:7,8 21:20 25:11 26:9,16 27:19 28:14 29:19 39:9,24 40:3,18 43:12 45:7,18 59:12 school 15:6,11- 69:21 | schooling 15:10 second 4:10 13:1 14:6 18:1 45:5 see 11:9 14:2 25:9 28:1 29:23 31:12 32:22 39:2 40:3,22 45:10 54:1 59:13 63:16 seeing 20:16,20 59:6 seen 33:22 ) sell 30:8 31:2,6 separate 39.25 served 17:1 Service 12:18,20,22 63:15 serving 64:2 set 4:13,16 27:8 73:7 settlement 39:8 shareholder 29:20 30:20 31:6 34:18,192 35:8 55.6 shareholders 30:8,11,13 31:17 40:13 shares 18:21 19:7,14,17 20:3,13,21,25 21:18 23:5 30:8,9,22 31:3,4 31:7,13,19,21,23 32:4 34:10,11,12,13,16,17 35:7 40:9,11,16 42:17 42:18,19,24 43:13,15 43:16,24 44:19,19 45:3 46:2,14,23 47:3,7 47:12 48:5 49:17 . 51:12,18,20,20 65:14 55:23 56:4,17 62:16 62:19 64:7,25 65:24 66:4 68:21 shorthand 73:5,14 shortly 55:20 show 12:4 16:16 21:2 38:23 57:25 Showing 16:18 38:25 shown 43:9 sic 53:11 55:21 side 58:12 sign 22:24 23:1 25:24,24 26:2,4 35:12 56:21 58:22 | signature 4:23 13:8,9,10 14:9 18:2,3,5 21:21 24:14,19 25:8,9,13 35:15 39:21 58:8,9 69:25 70:18 signed 12:16 14:10 18:21 21:16,17,23,25 22:4,9,13 24:24 25:12 25:16 27:16 31:3,5 35:14 36:22 45:22,25 46:11,13 48:9,24 55:11,18 59:2 63:2,8 66:20 69:25 70:22 signing 18:25 22:19 24:21 25:4 30:17 31:17 32:2 46:21 51:25 56:2 59:9,12 60:3 61:22 73:18 slightly 8:3 smarter 15:16 smooth 22:17 sold 24:3,6,10,12 29:19 sole 39:25 solely 45:7 69:11 soon 46:14 sorry 10:9 11:22 12:22 19:6 26:7 44:11 57:19 sort 51:19" . Southern 10:13,1 speak 33:18 46:22 61:17 61:20 speaking 20:6 47.1 65:18 speculation 25:18 34:3 50:20 57:4 spell 32:14,15 spoke 10:23 19:16 23:4 62:1 65:15 spoken 33:22 65:24 starting 14:4 State 1:1 2:1 72:12 stated 25:2 staternents 73:10 stay 33:13 66:13 stenographically 73:12 stick 8:9 stipulated 71:15 stipulation 4:20 39:14 42:23 44:15,18,19 48:17 53:10 55:12,15 60:4,10 66:19,24 69:2 stock 29:21 stocks 29:19 straight 25:6 straw 38:21 Street 2:17 3:6 strike 47:1 50:17 68:14 stuff 52:17 67:8 successful 23:18 Suite 2:18 3:7 sum 40:18,21 SUPERIOR 1:1 2:1 supplement 42:13 SUPPLIED 5:7 support 68:25 69:1 supposed 34:10 51:14 67:6.24 sure 23:17 27:2 66:15 surprise 60:10 sworn 8:2 T table 2:11,14,16 take 6:17 8:17 12:10 14:1 15:23 16:4 36:20 Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 Atkinson-Baker, Inc. www.depo.com Page 5 39:1 44:5 49:9 60:21 66:14 68:14 taken 2:16 7:14 44:7 66:16 73:6,14 talk 7:4 31:12 talking 8:16 24:7 44:14 51:5 61:15 66:19 Telephonic 69:20 teil 8:13 30:8 68:13 ten 14:21 29:4,5 32:22 33:9,23 ten-minute 44:5 Tennessee 10:12,14 term 29:25 terms 24:22 29:21 50:3 59:10,17 60:20 67:12 67:12,13 68:16 test 15:23 testified 6:3 60:8 testifying 8:20 testimony 52:24 61:11 72:973:9 text 68.4 Thank 46:19 58:25 60:1 thing 13:14 57:8 ’ things 53:18 think 20:8 56:8 57:23 58:1 69:17 70:7 thinking 57:13 third 26:7 29:17 46:25 third-party 47:2 Thirty 38:5 thought 25:6 thousand 19:25 20:1 37:11 three 58:11,12,19,23 59:2 69:25 Thursday 2:19 time 8:16 11:3 12:1 13:4 16:4,11,13,25 19:4,18 19:20 20:23 22:19 ‘25:14 26:18 27:15 30:17,25 31:16 33:9 40:24 45:22 46:11,13 50:1 52:14 53:22 55:11,18 62:3,13,15 63:8 66:14 67:23 68:15 70:7 71:16 73.7 73:8,11 times 7:17 33:22,25 38:16 58:23 59:2 65:4 70:1 today 7:2 10:6 11:14 13:5 27:13 31:18 36:16 fold 20:15 51:17 57:15 64:24 65:3,3 67:10,10 top 13:2 25:13 26:10 39:9 60:16 Total 34:13 Tower 2:17 3.7 transaction 26:25 transactions 24:4 26:21 27:1 28:22 29:1 transcribed 73:12 transcript 9:23 72:6,9 73:14 transferring 40:2 ‘t transition 22:17 travel 54:25 trial 10:2 trigger 38:20 : true 72:8 73:13,20 truth 8:13 try 8:9,24 32:12 trying 20:4 47:12,14 51:23 64:20 68:20 turn 60:15 63:14 turned 21:6 48:17 twice 7:18,19 65:7 two 11:8 12:15 19:18,25 19:25 20:3 23:5,24 24:18 29:1 33:7 37:10 44:22 23 47:9,10 53:15 55:1 68:20 u Uh-huh 16:3 40:4.55:22 56:12 63:18 66:22 um 9:8 15:6,6 22:11,14 24:1 27:13,13 28:6 34:9 38:13 46:9 48:3 49:22 umbrella 24:5 undersigned 72:5 understand 7:4 8:14,23 9:2,6 13:7 29:25 41:14 49:14 51:23 59:10 understanding 4:19 18:20 22:9,12 24:22 24:25 36:8 40:14,15 46:1 understands 27:19 understood 9:1,17 University 15:9 unknown 45:9 69:13 ‘unsigned 70:21 Vv vague 17:5 33:16 35:20 37:1 41:12,17 49:13 52:4 56:23 61:23 65:6 65:25 66:10 vaguely 58:6 59:5 . ventures 53:9,12 ventures' 54:16 verbally 51:17 Verification 12:16 13:2 14:7 versus 9:9 view 27:6 viewpoint 54:1 violating 8:18 violent 38:12 Vista 26:13 void 61.2 vs 1.7 2.7 Ww WwW 1:9 2:8 3:11 want 6:17 8:7 11:16 24:4 27:2,18 47:22 49:16 60:15 70:14 wants 8:6 39:2 44:13 71:12 Warner 1:24 2:20 73:4 73:25 way 8:24 23:21 24:11 we'll 45:5 : ‘we're 8:8 53:20 week 44:17 17,20: weeks 44:22,23 47:10,10 68:20 went 23:16 24:13 West 2:17 3.7 Western 15:13 white 70:1 wife 32:25 34:23 60:6 wife's 33:2 withdrawn 34:8 36:14 witness 4:3 5:3 11:22 12:9 15:15 23:16 25:20 30:5,7 31:10 32:6 33:17 34:4,9 37:2 © 37:13 41:8,14,18 43:15 44:15,17 45:16 45:24 46:20 47:25 48:7 49:14 50:21,23 52:5,25 54:6,11,22 © 56:11,24 57:6 58:24 58:25 60:13 61:7,12 161.24 65:7 66:1,11 68.23 69:21 73:8,9 ‘words 47:22 work 14:16 70:24 working 14:14,22 16:8,9 Wosoughki's 4:18 Wosoughkia 1:8,9,9,16 2:8,8,9,16 3:10 4:3,10 4:12 6:1,8,11 7:10,25 10:8 12:17 13:3 14:8 19:10 20:2,11,24 21:20 22:3,10,13,14 23:1,21 25:16,23 26:9 26:10,11 27:14 28:17 35:4 36:11 37:6 38:1,8 39:21 40:6 42:10 45:12 46:14,23 47:4 48:15,24 52:22 55:13 55:23 56:4 57:11 58:8 58:21 58:17 60:9 © 61:16 62:1,4 64:24 66:9,24 68:11 69:14 70:17 72:18 Wosoughkia's 4:13,15 4:23 27:20 28:15 29:6 36:2 Wouldn't 57:2 written 24:25 42:23 wrote 63.5 www.depo.com 1:22 X X 4:1 Xerox 4.23 Y yeah 13:4 30:6 31:1 32:18 37:13 40:8 44:6 44:16 50:21 51:6 55:16 61:13 66:15 69:10 year 13:5 15:3,11 16:8 32:2 33:21,24,25 43:2 43:6,7 65:9 . years 14:21 19:23 23:23 28:5 32:22 33:9,23 37:16 38:5 Zz 0 1 11:10 2:9 4:10,13,16 6:19,20 26:7 34:12 35:7 1:00 2:19 10 4:22 39:10 58:1,3 66:20 10/16/2015 59:13 100,000 41:6 11 4:11,23 12:16,23 70:5 70:6 12 4:13 9:11 60:16 61:15 42/1/2016 18:2 134:14,15 14 23.23 $59:1271:13 15th 73.22 16 4:17 17 4.18 19- 10:17 1976 10:10 1981 10:21 2 24:11 11:20,21 12:10,13 21:19 25:8 34:12 35.7 39:23 2:48 71:16 209:1210:10 72:12 12001 20:1 2007 12:17,18,20 2013 37:10,13 2014 18:21 35:21 2015 37:14,14 38:19 59:8 2016 39:10,15,16,17 50:1 66:20 2017 12:21,22,23 37:24 37:25 39:12,17 2018 1:18 2:19 73:22 21 4:18 26:13 250- 36:9 250,000 36:6,7 284 7:12 288.3376 1:22 3 34:13 12:57 13:1 18:1 35:7 58:7 61:15 30 70:18 71:11,12 30-2016-00874746 7:5 30-2016-00874746- 1:5 2:5 3000 2:18 3.7 33 30:24 31:4 36:24 46:7 49:11,17 56:4 57:1 394:20 4 41:18 2:19 4:14 13:16 13:17 45 29:20 30:9,9 40:12 § 54:15 13:23,25 14:2 50 1:10 2:9 64:3 5000 2:17 3:6 515381 3:12 550,000 40:19 50:6 52:21 575,000 40:21 50:8 58 4:22 6 6 4:510,17 16:17,20 67 31:1,1 7 74:18 17:12,14 34:13 70 4:23 8 84:19 21:3,5 24:23 36.7 38:21 800 1:22 9 94.20 38:24 39:3 44:10 44:10 46:18,22 48:2 48:25 51:25 55:12 66:21 69:7,9 90051 3:12 92657 7:13 26:15 92660 3:8 . 9502 1:24 2:20 73:4,25 99 26:4 Natasha Wosoughkia October 4, 2018 EXHIBIT 7 OC 00 NN O N wn B A W ND £ 2 B Y B D K O N O K O R B O N O N = e n d = h t = k e s A E e s BE 0 2 S A hh B&B W N = © WV ® N & O Vn A L N D = O Ron W. Betty, Esq. [SBN 291670] BETTY AGAWA APC PO Box 515381 #50549 Los Angeles, CA, 90051-6681 T: (323) 240- 0666 E: rwbetty@bettyagawa.com Attorneys for Defendant NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE- CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER COMMERCE ESCROW A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK, a California Corporation, Plaintiff, V. FARABORZ WOSOUGHKIA, an individual; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA, an| individual; VASKEN TATARIAN, an individual; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, an individual: MUSA MADALIN, an individual; M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., a California Corporation; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants. RESPONDING PARTY: SET NO.: 1 PROPOUNDING PARTY: CASE NO.: 30-2017-00913039 I/C Judge Glenn R. Salter, Dept. C22 Unlimited Jurisdiction DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT’S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 700 W. Civic Center Dr. Santa Ana, CA 92701 T: (657) 622-5222 Action Filed: April 5, 2017 Trial: January 14, 2019 Defendant NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA Defendant M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. O© © J oO wn BH WwW MN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PREFATORY STATEMENT 1. This Responding Party’s Responses are based upon its present knowledge, information and belief. This Responding Party has not completed its investigation and discovery of the facts relating to this proceeding. Without acknowledging any obligation to do so, except as required and allowed by applicable law, this Responding Party reserves the right to amend or supplement these Responses and produce additional documents when and if new or additional material or information becomes available, if necessary, under the California Code of Civil Procedure and/or with leave of Court. 2 Nothing contained in these Responses should be construed as an admission as to the relevance or admissibility of any documents referenced unless made in conjunction with a specific request to admit the genuineness of specific documents under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.010 et seq., Cal. Evid. Code § 351 et seq. 3 The following Responses are submitted without prejudice to this Responding Party’s right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered fact or facts and/or documents which this Responding Party may later recall or discover pursuant to applicable California law, California procedures and/or orders of this Court. The Responses contained herein are made in a good faith effort to supply as much information as is presently known and to provide good faith Responses (and/or objections) as expressly allowed by Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 2030.210 et seq., 2031.210 et seq. & 2033.210 et seq., but in no way prejudices this Responding Party’s ability to engage in further discovery, research or analysis pursuant to Court order and/or applicable law. \\ DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. | PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 2 © 0 NN S N wn BA W N 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 RESPONSES SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1: State all facts that support your first affirmative defense. RESPONSE: In October 2015, the parties entered into a handwritten settlement agreement. The agreement required MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE to make certain, specified payments to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA on certain, specified dates and to deposit shares equal to a certain percentage to escrow no later than a certain date. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE defaulted on any of the obligations, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to provide notice and an opportunity to cure.. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE failed to cure, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were entitled to the deposited shares and a stipulated judgment in favor of Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA and against Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. in the amount of $150,000. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE deposited the initial payment of $100,000 into escrow rather than making the payment to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA as required by the agreement. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA gave notice of the default. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE did not cure. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. On 5/19/16, the Court granted the motion and issued a minute order stating, in part: and file a proposed judgment, including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates and any funds deposited in escrow to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. On 1/13/2017, the Court issued a clarifying order of its 5/19/16 order. The Court ruled that under the terms of the settlement agreement, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA are entitled to the stipulated judgment of $150,000 and the stock certificates. They are not additionally entitled to the $100,000 deposited in escrow although they may seek a writ of attachment on the deposit to partially satisfy the stipulated judgment, if they so desire. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to file a proposed order including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. If Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA elect not to seek a writ of attachment on DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. | PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 3 O© 0 3 o O wn BH WwW N = N O N BD O D O M 8 O N RN B o e r Ee E s e e E r e r Ee E E e e 5 ® 9 6 UK Dd W R N = O WV N V M E W ND —~ O the deposit, the proposed order should also include instructions to the escrow agent to release the deposited funds of $100,000 to Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. Once the order has been finalized and signed by the Court, the Court will enter the stipulated judgment which is attached to the parties’ settlement agreement. On 3/28/17, the Court, signed a stipulated judgment that had previously been provided to the Court 1/31/2016, which failed to include the disbursement of the shares held in escrow. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Identify all witnesses that support your first affirmative defense. RESPONSE: Mike Wosoughkia, 405 Rockefeller Unit 503, Irvine, CA 92612, mikewkia@gmail.com; Natasha Wosoughkia, whom may be contacted through Ron W. Betty, PO Box 515381 #50549, Los Angeles, CA, 90051-6681, T: (323) 240-0666; Kimberly Lee, 801 Glenhaven Dr., La Habra, CA 90631, T: (714) 840-6546; Kaoru Nakagawa, 16181 Chipper Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92649, T: (714) 840-5644; MUSA MADAIN 1813 W. Embassy Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804; MUSTAFA ELDEEB 23635 Golden Springs Dr Unit B-9, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-2110; Boules (Paul) Antonious, Phenomenal Tax Services, 1500 Rosecrans Ave. Ste 500, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266, T: (310) 406-4880; Vasken S Tatarian, (714) 484-3961, State: CA, City: Cypress, Zip Code: 90630; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, 1100 N. ACACIA ST., ANAHEIM , CA 92805, T: (714) 635-5206; Cyrus Almadadian; Max Ahmadi; Larry Witsoe; Nariman Zarrabi, 896 Town and Country Rd # 2, Orange, CA 92868, Phone: (714) 558-7444; Raul Zuniga, Escrow Officer, Commerce Escrow; 1055 Wilshire Blvd. Ste. 1000, Los Angeles, California, 90017, T; (213) 484-0855. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Identify all documents that support your first affirmative defense. RESPONSE: The answer to this Interrogatory necessitates the preparation or the making of a compilation, abstract, audit, or summary of or from the document(s) of this Responding Party, and the DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030210 ET SEQ. 4 OO 00 NN OO wn SH WwW Nh - E Y 2 N O O D O R O R B O R N e e p m p k E E pe e R e m E R e m ® u O hh A W N = OS V V ® N W N B A W N = O burden or expense of preparing or making it would be substantially the same for the Propounding Part(ies) as it is for this Responding party. Pursuant to Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.230, this Responding Party specifies the writing(s)/document(s) from which the answer may be derived or ascertained and the original(s) of said writing(s)/document(s) is/are available for examination, audit, or inspection upon written notice to this Responding Party’s attorneys. See this Responding Party’s responses to Defendant’s Inspection Demand, Set One. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4: State all facts that support your second affirmative defense. RESPONSE: In October 2015, the parties entered into a handwritten settlement agreement. The agreement required MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE to make certain, specified payments to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA on certain, specified dates and to deposit shares equal to a certain percentage to escrow no later than a certain date. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE defaulted on any of the obligations, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to provide notice and an opportunity to cure.. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE failed to cure, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were entitled to the deposited shares and a stipulated judgment in favor of Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA and against Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. in the amount of $150,000. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE deposited the initial payment of $100,000 into escrow rather than making the payment to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA as required by the agreement. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA gave notice of the default. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE did not cure. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. On 5/19/16, the Court granted the motion and issued a minute order stating, in part: and file a proposed judgment, including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates and any funds deposited in escrow to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. On 1/13/2017, the Court issued a clarifying order of its 5/19/16 order. The Court ruled that under the terms of the settlement agreement, Mr. and DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 5 © 0 JN Oo wn BH WwW Nh N O N N O N N N N N O N E s e s e e pe e d e d E e © a O O WU BE W O N = © WV o e N n E W N = O Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA are entitled to the stipulated judgment of $150,000 and the stock certificates. They are not additionally entitled to the $100,000 deposited in escrow although they may seek a writ of attachment on the deposit to partially satisfy the stipulated judgment, if they so desire. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to file a proposed order including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. If Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA elect not to seek a writ of attachment on the deposit, the proposed order should also include instructions to the escrow agent to release the deposited funds of $100,000 to Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. Once the order has been finalized and signed by the Court, the Court will enter the stipulated judgment which is attached to the parties’ settlement agreement. On 3/28/17, the Court, signed a stipulated judgment that had previously been provided to the Court 1/31/2016, which failed to include the disbursement of the shares held in escrow. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Identify all witnesses that support your second affirmative defense. RESPONSE: Mike Wosoughkia, 405 Rockefeller Unit 503, Irvine, CA 92612, mikewkia@gmail.com; Natasha Wosoughkia, whom may be contacted through Ron W. Betty, PO Box 515381 #50549, Los Angeles, CA, 90051-6681, T: (323) 240-0666; Kimberly Lee, 801 Glenhaven Dr., La Habra, CA 90631, T: (714) 840-6546; Kaoru Nakagawa, 16181 Chipper Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92649, T: (714) 840-5644; MUSA MADAIN 1813 W. Embassy Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804; MUSTAFA ELDEEB 23635 Golden Springs Dr Unit B-9, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-2110; Boules (Paul) Antonious, Phenomenal Tax Services, 1500 Rosecrans Ave. Ste 500, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266, T: (310) 406-4880; Vasken S Tatarian, (714) 484-3961, State: CA, City: Cypress, Zip Code: 90630; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, 1100 N. ACACIA ST., ANAHEIM , CA 92805, T: (714) 635-5206; Cyrus Almadadian; Max Ahmadi; Larry Witsoe; Nariman Zarrabi, 896 Town and Country Rd # 2, DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 6 © 0 uN oo wn Bs W N 9 1 K O K O r W O BN NW e e E E e e R a e e p s e n e ( E D ® 9 6 Kh A L N = ) © V V 0 NN 6 Un hd W D D = O Orange, CA 92868, Phone: (714) 558-7444; Raul Zuniga, Escrow Officer, Commerce Escrow; 1055 Wilshire Blvd. Ste. 1000, Los Angeles, California, 90017, T; (213) 484-0855. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Identify all documents that support your second affirmative defense. RESPONSE: The answer to this Interrogatory necessitates the preparation or the making of a compilation, abstract, audit, or summary of or from the document(s) of this Responding Party, and the burden or expense of preparing or making it would be substantially the same for the Propounding Part(ies) as it is for this Responding party. Pursuant to Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.230, this Responding Party specifies the writing(s)/document(s) from which the answer may be derived or ascertained and the original(s) of said writing(s)/document(s) is/are available for examination, audit, or inspection upon written notice to this Responding Party’s attorneys. See this Responding Party’s responses to Defendant’s Inspection Demand, Set One. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7: State all facts that support your third affirmative defense. RESPONSE: In October 2015, the parties entered into a handwritten settlement agreement. The agreement required MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE to make certain, specified payments to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA on certain, specified dates and to deposit shares equal to a certain percentage to escrow no later than a certain date. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE defaulted on any of the obligations, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to provide notice and an opportunity to cure.. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE failed to cure, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were entitled to the deposited shares and a stipulated judgment in favor of Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA and against Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. in th e amount of $150,000. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE deposited the initial payment of $100,000 into escrow rather than making the payment to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA as DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 7 OVO 0 NN OO wn BA WW ND = £ 9 : & N N B y B O R B D B Y e s e k p b p e l e d e d h e d e R e e 6 0 3 A W h BH W N = OS VW o e A Wn Bs W N CO required by the agreement. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA gave notice of the default. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE did not cure. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. On 5/19/16, the Court granted the motion and issued a minute order stating, in part: and file a proposed judgment, including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates and any funds deposited in escrow to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. On 1/13/2017, the Court issued a clarifying order of its 5/19/16 order. The Court ruled that under the terms of the settlement agreement, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA are entitled to the stipulated judgment of $150,000 and the stock certificates. They are not additionally entitled to the $100,000 deposited in escrow although they may seek a writ of attachment on the deposit to partially satisfy the stipulated judgment, if they so desire. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to file a proposed order including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA.. If Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA elect not to seek a writ of attachment on the deposit, the proposed order should also include instructions to the escrow agent to release the deposited funds of $100,000 to Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. Once the order has been finalized and signed by the Court, the Court will enter the stipulated judgment which is attached to the parties’ settlement agreement. On 3/28/17, the Court, signed a stipulated judgment that had previously been provided to the Court 1/31/2016, which failed to include the disbursement of the shares held in escrow. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Identify all witnesses that support your third affirmative defense. RESPONSE: Mike Wosoughkia, 405 Rockefeller Unit 503, Irvine, CA 92612, mikewkia@gmail.com; Natasha Wosoughkia, whom may be contacted through Ron W. Betty, PO Box 515381 #50549, Los Angeles, CA, 90051-6681, T: (323) 240-0666; Kimberly Lee, 801 Glenhaven Dr.. La Habra, CA 90631, T: (714) 840-6546; Kaoru Nakagawa, 16181 Chipper Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92649, T: (714) 840-5644; MUSA MADAIN 1813 W. Embassy DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030210 ET SEQ. 8 OO 0 NN O N n n BB W N N N N N N N N N N = e e e m e e e e e e e e e d 00 NN O N wn bh O W N = OS OV N N W ND —= OC Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804; MUSTAFA ELDEEB 23635 Golden Springs Dr Unit B-9, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-2110; Boules (Paul) Antonious, Phenomenal Tax Services, 1500 Rosecrans Ave. Ste 500, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266, T: (310) 406-4880; Vasken S Tatarian, (714) 484-3961, State: CA, City: Cypress, Zip Code: 90630; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, 1100 N. ACACIA ST., ANAHEIM , CA 92805, T: (714) 635-5206; Cyrus Almadadian; Max Ahmadi; Larry Witsoe; Nariman Zarrabi, 896 Town and Country Rd # 2, Orange, CA 92868, Phone: (714) 558-7444; Raul Zuniga, Escrow Officer, Commerce Escrow; 1055 Wilshire Blvd. Ste. 1000, Los Angeles, California, 90017, T; (213) 484-0855. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Identify all documents that support your third affirmative defense. RESPONSE: The answer to this Interrogatory necessitates the preparation or the making of a compilation, abstract, audit, or summary of or from the document(s) of this Responding Party, and the burden or expense of preparing or making it would be substantially the same for the Propounding Part(ies) as it is for this Responding party. Pursuant to Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.230, this Responding Party specifies the writing(s)/document(s) from which the answer may be derived or ascertained and the original(s) of said writing(s)/document(s) is/are available for examination, audit, or inspection upon written notice to this Responding Party’s attorneys. See this Responding Party’s responses to Defendant’s Inspection Demand, Set One. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10: State all facts that support your fourth affirmative defense. RESPONSE: In October 2013, the parties entered into a handwritten settlement agreement. The agreement required MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE to make certain, specified payments to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA on certain, specified dates and to deposit shares equal to a certain percentage to escrow no later than a certain date. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 9 © 0 uN oo wn BB W D 10 11 12 13 14 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 defaulted on any of the obligations, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to provide notice and an opportunity to cure.. If MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE failed to cure, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were entitled to the deposited shares and a stipulated judgment in favor of Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA and against Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. in the amount of $150,000. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE deposited the initial payment of $100,000 into escrow rather than making the payment to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA as required by the agreement. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA gave notice of the default. MUSA MADAIN and M3LIVE did not cure. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. On 5/19/16, the Court granted the motion and issued a minute order stating, in part: and file a proposed judgment, including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates and any funds deposited in escrow to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. On 1/13/2017, the Court issued a clarifying order of its 5/19/16 order. The Court ruled that under the terms of the settlement agreement, Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA are entitled to the stipulated judgment of $150,000 and the stock certificates. They are not additionally entitled to the $100,000 deposited in escrow although they may seek a writ of attachment on the deposit to partially satisfy the stipulated judgment, if they so desire. Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA were to file a proposed order including instructions to the escrow agent to release the lodged stock certificates to Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA. If Mr. and Mrs. WOSOUGHKIA elect not to seek a writ of attachment on the deposit, the proposed order should also include instructions to the escrow agent to release the deposited funds of $100,000 to Defendant M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. Once the order ha s been finalized and signed by the Court, the Court will enter the stipulated judgment which is attached to the parties' settlement agreement. On 3/28/17, the Court, signed a stipulated judgment that had previously been provided to the Court 1/31/2016, which failed to include the disbursement of the shares held in escrow. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Identify all witnesses that support your fourth affirmative defense. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. | PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 10 © © NN Oo wm A WwW N = 5 9 RK B O R y O A ) 8 W r B D o e s = k E R E L E R W E R W E R B e E E O S M N A E W N = S S VV N n Es W N ~~ O RESPONSE: Mike Wosoughkia, 405 Rockefeller Unit 503, Irvine, CA 92612, mikewkia@gmail.com; Natasha Wosoughkia, whom may be contacted through Ron W. Betty, PO Box 515381 #50549, Los Angeles, CA, 90051-6681, T: (323) 240-0666; Kimberly Lee, 801 Glenhaven Dr., La Habra, CA 90631, T: (714) 840-6546; Kaoru Nakagawa, 16181 Chipper Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92649, T: (714) 840-5644; MUSA MADAIN 1813 W. Embassy Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804; MUSTAFA ELDEEB 23635 Golden Springs Dr Unit B-9, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-2110; Boules (Paul) Antonious, Phenomenal Tax Services, 1500 Rosecrans Ave. Ste 500, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266, T: (310) 406-4880; Vasken S Tatarian, (714) 484-3961, State: CA, City: Cypress, Zip Code: 90630; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, 1100 N. ACACIA ST., ANAHEIM , CA 92805, T: (714) 635-5206; Cyrus Almadadian; Max Ahmadi; Larry Witsoe; Nariman Zarrabi, 896 Town and Country Rd # 2, Orange, CA 92868, Phone: (714) 558-7444; Raul Zuniga, Escrow Officer, Commerce Escrow: 1055 Wilshire Blvd. Ste. 1000, Los Angeles, California, 90017, T; (213) 484-0855. SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Identify all documents that support your fourth affirmative defense. RESPONSE: The answer to this Interrogatory necessitates the preparation or the making of a compilation, abstract, audit, or summary of or from the document(s) of this Responding Party, and the burden or expense of preparing or making it would be substantially the same for the Propounding Part(ies) as it is for this Responding party. Pursuant to Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.230, this Responding Party specifies the writing(s)/document(s) from which the answer may be derived or ascertained and the original(s) of said writing(s)/document(s) is/are available for examination, audit, or inspection upon written notice to this Responding Party’s attorneys. See this Responding Party’s responses to Defendant’s Inspection Demand, Set One. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIAL LY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. | PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030210 ET SEQ. 11 OVO 0 0 ~ N O&O wn A» WwW N D - E Y £ 2 A O W O B O M BD O R O R p t e t d e t f s Be pe s de E w = E S © gO O&O Kh BA WL W ND = O VW N N Wn A W N = O Dated: December 17, 2018 BETTY AGAWA APC ED By: Ron W. Bett Attorney for Defendant NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. | PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 12 —_ — OO 0 0 NN O&O wn o b s W N N O R O N ON D O N RN O N O N O R mm ms ems em ee em e e e e © 9 Oh Lh AE L N = © VW 0 0 N O Wn sr W N = OC VERIFICATION I am a defendant and a party to this proceeding. I am familiar with the contents of the foregoing DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. The information supplied therein is based on my own personal knowledge and/or has been supplied by my attorneys or other agents and/or compiled from available documents and is therefore provided as required by law. The information contained in the foregoing document is true, except as to the matters which were provided by my attorneys or other agents or compiled from available documents, including all contentions and opinions, and, as to those matters, I am informed and believe that they are true. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Verification was executed on December 17, 2018 in the City of Los Angeles, State of California. ; = - Z. - NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA Defendant DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. | PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 13 OO 0 JN Oo nn AH WwW NN N N N N N N O N O N ND N N N O N e s m s e m a a e d m d p d e a 0 J O O Wn BA W N = O O VO NN B R A W N —- CO PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is: PO Box 515381 #50549, Los Angeles, CA, 90051-6681. On December 17, 2018, I caused the foeegong document described as DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT’S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. to be served on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: John J. Gulino, Esq. MusaMadai 2107 N. Broadway, ste 306 1 Sie Bimbasey hie. Santa Ana, CA 92706 Anaheim, CA 92804 Elizabeth Camarillo Attorney for M3Live: 2045 S. State College Blvd. Brandon Roesler Anaheim, CA 92806 5000 Birch St., Ste. 3000 West Tower Newport Beach, CA 92660 VIA U.S. MAIL - PREPAID FIRST CLASS I served the parties below with the envelope for collection and mailing following ordinary practices. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice it would be deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day with postage fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California in the ordinary course of business. Iam aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in this declaration. Executed on December 17, 2018, at Los Angeles, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Ron W. Betty, Esq. DEFENDANT NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORIES, SET NO. 1 PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 2030.210 ET SEQ. 1 EXHIBIT 8 E E p k p k p d je F O E S E E C E a E —) RE LA W, AP C > 69 9 Ha mp sh ir e Ro ad , Su it e 10 5 + We st la ke Vi ll ag e, CA 91 36 1 (8 05 ) 26 5- 10 31 (T el ep ho ne ) * je nn if er @r el aw ap c. co m (E ma il ) No nN No No No No No No —_ — — —_ — ~J aN Nn += Ww No — > \ o 0 ~J DN [o o Qo ELECTRONICALLY FILED JENNIFER FELTEN, ESQ. (Bar No. 249347) Superior Court - Califamia, TIMOTHY S. CAMARENA, ESQ. (Bar No. 98042) County of Orange RELAW, APC 12/28/2017 at 03:53:00 PM 699 Hampshire Road, Suite 105 Clerk of the Superior Court Westlake Village, CA 91361 By Jeanette Torres-hendoza, Deputy Clerk (805) 265-1031 (Telephone) (805) 265-1032 (Facsimile) tim@relawapc.com (Email) Attorneys for Plaintiff, COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE — CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF Case No.: 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC-CIC OPUS BANK. a California corporation, NOTICE OF NEW HEARING DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR MOTION FOR DISCHARGE AND DISMISSAL OF COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK., FROM INTERPLEADER ACTION AND FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS Plaintiff, VS. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FARIBORZ WOSOUGHKIA, an individual; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA, an individual; ) Date: February 8, 2018 ) Time: 1:30 p.m. ) Place: Dept. C22 ) Reservation No.: 72712496 ) ) ) ) ) VASKEN TATARIAN, an individual, ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, an individual, MUSA MUDAIN, an individual; M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., a California corporation; DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants. TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the hearing date, time and place for the motion of Commerce Escrow, a Division of Opus Bank, for discharge and dismissal of Commerce Escrow from Interpleader action and for attorney fees and costs has been changed from January 23, 2018, to February 8, 2018, at 1:30 p.m. in Dept. C22, the Honorable Glenn Salter, presiding, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard in Department C22 of the above entitled Court located {1 aie NOTICE OF NEW HEARING DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR MOTION AND MOTION FOR DISCHARGE AND DISMISSAL OF COMMERCE ESCROW, FROM INTERPLEADER ACTION No 0 9 A N a W N p p d p d f k pe d a O W O N =m Do RE LA W, AP C 7 69 9 Ha mp sh ir e Ro ad , Su it e 10 5 « We st la ke Vi ll ag e, CA 91 36 1 (8 05 ) 26 5- 10 31 (T el ep ho ne ) * je nn if er @r el aw ap c. co m (E ma il ) | ) | ) nN n o No nN nN No —_— —_ — Ey ~~ aN Nn = Ww 1) — > \ o © ~ J ND [o d oe at 700 W. Civic Center Drive, Santa Ana, California 92702 DATED: [3 ey 7 RELAW, APC EE oe. JENNIFER FELTEN, ESQ. TIMOTHY S. CAMARENA, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff, COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK ny NOTICE OF NEW HEARING DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR MOTION AND MOTION FOR DISCHARGE AND DISMISSAL OF COMMERCE ESCROW, FROM INTERPLEADER ACTION — No a S N n n es W N p f e d e d e d a h O W O N = oO R E L A W , A P C > 69 9 Ha mp sh ir e Ro ad , Su it e 10 5 « We st la ke Vi ll ag e, CA 91 36 1 (8 05 ) 26 5- 10 31 (T el ep ho ne ) * je nn if er @r el aw ap c. co m (E ma il ) |] No |] No NN NN No nN — —_— — — ~ aD Nn = ww So ) pd > \ o = ~ =a ) No oo COMMERCE ESCROW v. WOSOUGHKIA, et al. 2447.004 Orange County Superior Court Case Number: 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC-CJC PROOF OF SERVICE I declare that I am a citizen of the United States, that I am over the age of 18, and that I am not a party to this action. My business address is 699 Hampshire Road, Suite 105, Westlake Village, California, 91361. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing of correspondence for delivery with the United States Postal Service as well as other methods used for delivery of correspondence. On the below stated date, in the manner indicated, I caused the within document entitled: NOTICE OF NEW HEARING DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR MOTION FOR DISCHARGE AND DISMISSAL OF COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK., FROM INTERPLEADER ACTION AND FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS to be served on the party(ies) or its (their) attorney(s) of record in this action: x Via MAIL: I caused each envelope (with postage affixed thereto) to be placed in the U.S. mail in Thousand Oaks, California. O Via CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: I caused each envelope (with postage affixed thereto) to be placed in the U.S. mail in Thousand Oaks, California. OJ Via PERSONAL SERVICE: I instructed each envelope to be hand delivered via hand delivery to the address(es) listed below. Od Via OVERNIGHT COURIER: I cased each envelope to be delivered via overnight delivery by Federal Express, to the address(es) listed below. O Via FACSIMILE: I instructed such to be transmitted via facsimile addressed below. addressed as follows: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST X State: I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. J Federal: I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction service was made. Executed on December 28, 2017, at Westlake Village, Ca ils PROOF OF SERVICE Jt COMMERCE ESCROW v. WOSOUGHKIA, et al. 2447.004 Orange County Superior Court Case Number: 30-2017-00913039-CU-MC-CJC No 0 9 SN Un se W N p k e k N = OO SERVICE LIST Musa Mudain In Pro Per M3 Live Bar & Grill, Inc. 1818 W. Embassy Avenue Anaheim, CA 92804 Elizabeth Camarillo In Pro Per 2045 S. State College Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92806 Fariborz Wosoughkia In Pro Per 405 Rockefeller, Unit 503 Irvine, CA 92612 RE LA W, AP C n a » pt =a ) John J. Gulino, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF JOHN J. GULINO 2107 North Broadway, Suite 306 Santa Ana, CA 92706 Tel: (714) 745-1327 Fax: (714) 242-9042 john@gulinolawoffice.com Attorney for Vasken Tatarian and M3 Live Bar & Grill, Inc. (By Mail and Email) pt ~1 69 9 Ha mp sh ir e Ro ad , Su it e 10 5 + We st la ke Vi ll ag e, CA 91 36 1 (8 05 ) 26 5- 10 31 (T el ep ho ne ) * je nn if er @r el aw ap c. co m (E ma il ) rr 0 N e S e Thomas K. Agawa, Esq. AGAWA LAW 1000 S. Hope Street, Suite 413 Los Angeles, CA 90015 Tel: (213) 804-1138 agawalaw(@gmail.com Attorney for Wosoughkias (By Mail and Email) BN O N N N N N N N 0 J SN Nn a W N ax PROOF OF SERVICE EXHIBIT 9 a a ~~ Ww W N ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 180 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOHN J. GULINO SBN 160189 GULINO LAW OFFICE 2107 North Broadway, Suite 306 Santa Ana, California 92706 TEL (714) 745-1327 FAX (714) 242-9042 Attorneys for Defendant, M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC. ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange OT2T7201T at 11:45:00 Ad Clerk of the Superior Court By Jeanette Tomes-hWendoza, Deputy Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE - CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK, a California corporation, ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) VS. FARIBORZ WOSOUGHKIA, and) individual; NATASHA WOSOUGHKIA, ) and individual; VASKEN TATARIAN, an) individual; ELIZABETH CAMARILLO, ) and individual; MUSA MADAIN, an) individual; M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC., ) a California corporation; and DOES 1) through 50, inclusive, Defendants. N r N r N e N e Case Number: 30-2017-00913039 Assigned for all purposes to: HONORABLE JAMES J. DI CESARE DEPT: C16 ANSWER OF DEFENDANT M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC. COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER Complaint Date: Trial Date: April 6, 2017 None Set Defendant, M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC. for itself alone, and no others, answers the unverified First Amended Complaint of the Plaintiff COMMERCE ESCROW, A DIVISION OF OPUS BANK (“Plaintiff”) as follows: 1. Defendant admits each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the First Amended Complaint. 2. Answering Paragraph 8 of the First Amended Complaint, Defendant has no information or belief sufficient to enable it to answer the allegations thereof and basing its denial on that ground denies each and every allegation thereof. -1- ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT a a ~~ Ww W N ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 180 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. Answering Paragraph 9 of the First Amended Complaint, Defendant has no information or belief sufficient to enable it to answer the allegations thereof and basing its denial on that ground denies each and every allegation thereof. Defendant is informed and believes that Defendants Wosoughkia, M3 Live Bar & Grill, Inc., and Madain executed certain escrow instructions causing an escrow to be opened and that Plaintiff was designated as the escrow holder. Defendant is further informed and believes that the escrow instructions required that the parties thereto perform certain acts and that certain payments be made by Defendants M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. and Madain to Defendants Wosoughkia. Defendant is further informed and believes that Plaintiff was provided with the fully executed escrow instructions and agreed to comply with the terms of those instructions. 4. Answering Paragraph 10 of the First Amended Complaint, Defendant is informed and believes that the Plaintiff received the sum of $100,000 delivered in the form of cashiers checks or certified funds from this Defendant which checks were delivered to the Plaintiff. Other than as specifically admitted herein, Defendant has no information and belief sufficient to enable it to answer the remaining allegations of Paragraph 10 and based thereon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 10 of the First Amended Complaint. 5. Answering Paragraph 11 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant is without information or belief sufficient to either admit or deny the allegations of Paragraph 11 and based thereon denies the allegations contained therein. 6. Answering Paragraph 12 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant is without information or belief sufficient to either admit or deny the allegations of Paragraph 12 and based thereon denies the allegations contained therein. 7. Answering Paragraph 13 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant admits that it demanded of the Plaintiff that the $100,000 delivered to the Plaintiff by Defendant Madain be returned to Defendant. Other than as specifically admitted, Defendant has no information and belief sufficient to enable it to answer the remaining allegations of -2- ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT a a ~~ Ww W N ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 180 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Paragraph 13 and based thereon denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 13 of the First Amended Complaint. 8. Answering Paragraph 14 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant is without sufficient information or belief to either admit or deny the allegations of Paragraph 14 and based thereon denies the allegations contained therein. 9. Answering Paragraph 15 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant incorporates herein its answers and responses to Paragraphs 1 through 14. 10. Answering Paragraph 16 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant admits that the sum of $100,000 was delivered to the Plaintiff for or on behalf of the Defendants. Other than as specifically admitted, Defendant has no information or belief sufficient to enable him to answer the remaining allegations of Paragraph 16 and based thereon denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 16 of the First Amended Complaint. 11. Answering Paragraph 17 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant is without information or belief sufficient to either admit or deny the allegations of Paragraph 17 and based thereon denies the allegations contained therein. 12. Answering Paragraphs 18 and 19 of the First Amended Complaint, this Defendant is without information or belief sufficient to either admit or deny the allegations of Paragraphs 18 and 19 and based thereon denies the allegations contained therein. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Negligence) 13. At all times mentioned in the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff had a duty to perform as the designated escrow holder in compliance with the terms of the escrow instructions and in accordance with the standard of care generally applicable to similarly situated escrow holders. 14. Defendant is informed and believes that the escrow instructions were prepared by the Plaintiff. Defendant is also informed and believes that Plaintiff was provided by other parties to this litigation with the Settlement Agreement executed by the Parties in -3- ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT a a ~~ Ww W N ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 180 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the matter of Wosoughkia v M3Live Bar & Grill, Inc. et al., Orange County Superior Court case number 30-2014-00752186 (“The Prior Litigation”) Defendant is informed and believes that the Escrow Instructions and the Settlement Agreement in The Prior Litigation did not provide that Plaintiff was to receive any funds for deposit but was to accept stock certificates only. 15. Plaintiff was negligent and careless in accepting the $100,000 and depositing those funds into its escrow accounts. Plaintiff acted carelessly, recklessly and negligently in retaining the funds, depositing the funds into its escrow account and refusing to return those funds as was requested. As a result of the negligence and carelessness of the Plaintiff, Defendant has been damaged in the principal sum of $100,000. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Comply with Escrow Instructions) 16. At all relevant times mentioned in the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff had a duty to perform as the designated escrow holder in compliance with the terms and provisions of the escrow instructions and in accordance with the standard of care generally applicable to similarly situated escrow holders. 17. Defendant is informed and believes that Plaintiff prepared escrow instructions and accepted its appointment as the escrow holder and agreed to strictly comply with those escrow instructions. Defendant is informed and believes that Plaintiff was provided with the Settlement Agreement prepared in connection with The Prior Litigation and that representatives of the Plaintiff read and understood the Settlement Agreement. Defendant is informed and believes that the Escrow Instructions and the Settlement Agreement detailed with specificity the scope of the Plaintiff's duties and obligations as the escrow holder. Neither the Escrow Instructions nor the Settlement Agreement allowed for the Plaintiff is accept any funds, retain any funds or deposit funds into its escrow accounts. The Escrow Instructions and the Settlement Agreement provided that Plaintiff was to accept only stock certificates to be held in escrow. 18. Plaintiff failed to comply with the escrow instructions and the Settlement -4- ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT a a ~~ Ww W N ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 180 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Agreement provided to the Plaintiff. Pursuant to the escrow instructions and the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff was not to accept or deposit the funds provided. As a result of the Plaintiff's failure to comply with the escrow instructions the Defendant has been damaged in the principal sum of $100,000. WHEREFORE, Defendant M3 Live Bar & Grill, Inc. prays for Judgment as follows: 1. That this is not a proper case for interpleader due to the Plaintiff’s negligence and breach of its obligations as set out in the escrow instructions and the settlement agreement provided to the Plaintiff; 2. That the principal sum of $100,000,presently in the possession of the Plaintiff, be awarded to this Defendant; 3. For reasonable attorneys fees where allowed of contract or statute; 4. For costs of suit; 5. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper in the premises. DATED: July 25, 2017 GULINO LAW OFFICE fn Grlono By fe 7 JOHN J. GULINO Attorney for Defendant M3LIVE BAR & GRILL, INC. -5- ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT a a ~~ Ww W N ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 180 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I, Barbara Bornheimer , am employed in the aforesaid County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is: 2107 North Broadway, Suite 309, Santa Ana, CA 92706. On July 27, 2017, I served the foregoing document described as ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the interested parties in this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: JENNIFER FELTEN TIMOTHY S. CAMARENA RELAW, APC 699 Hampshire Road, Suite 105 Westlake Village, CA 91362 I caused such envelope with postage thereon fully paid to be placed in the United States mail at Santa Ana, California. I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. It is deposited with the U. S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of a party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. EXECUTED July 27, 2017, at Santa Ana, California. Barbora Bornheimer BARBARA BORNHEIMER = ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT