UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CIVIL DIVISION

DEVIN FILIPPELLI as 

Personal Representative of the 

ESTATE OF KRYSTAL TALAVERA, CASE NO.: 9:22-cv-81731 

on behalf of the Estate and her Survivors, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KD INCORPORATED 

and THE KRATOM DISTRO); and SEAN 

MICHAEL HARDER, individually. 

Defendants. /

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER 

PROTECTION TO PRODUCE SUBPOENA DOCUMENTS PURSUANT 

TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 45

COMES NOW, Plaintiff, DEVIN FILIPPELLI, as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of KRYSTAL TALAVERA, on behalf of the Estate 

and her Survivors, and files this motion to compel U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (“CBP”) to produce certain documents as outlined in Plaintiff’s 

subpoena duces tecum dated March 10, 2023. As grounds for such request, 

Plaintiff states as follows: 

EVIDENCE RELIED UPON

Exhibit A: Section 14 of the Hague Convention

Exhibit B: Autopsy excerpt

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 1 of 90
2

Exhibit C: Discovery Requests and Responses

Exhibit D: Plaintiff’s subpoena to U.S. Customs and Border Protection ("CBP")

Exhibit E: CBP’s Objection to Plaintiff’s subpoena

Exhibit F: Plaintiff's response to CBP

Exhibit G: Affidavit of Tamara Williams

I. FACTS

Kratom is a botanical ingredient that makes its way into the U.S. from 

Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Papua New Guinea. R. Termini & V. 

Sannuti, A Look Back at the DSHEA - over 25 Years Later: The Dangers of a

Reactionary Approach to Dietary Supplement Regulation, 22 Quinnipiac 

Health L.J. 171, 200 (2019). The kratom exporters in these countries are 

generally not subject to jurisdiction or judgment in the United States; none of 

the kratom producing countries have agreed to the Hague Convention on 

Service of Process. See Gould v. P.T. Krakatau Steel, 957 F.2d 573, 576–77 

(8th Cir. 1992) (dismissing Indonesian manufacturer for lack of minimum 

contacts); Section 14 of the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the 

Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or 

Commercial Matters – County Status Table (attached as Exhibit A). Kratom 

that is successfully brought across the United States border is marketed to 

consumers as a safe and all-natural dietary supplement. (See ECF 5). 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 2 of 90
3

Defendants, GROW and HARDER, worked with importers, manufacturers, 

suppliers, and distributors to obtain kratom products that were sold to 

consumers, including Krystal. Id. 

 Krystal died at the tender age of thirty-nine (39). (See Autopsy excerpt, 

attached as Exhibit B). She died as a result of acute mitragynine intoxication 

caused by kratom products that were sold by Defendants, GROW, LLC (d/b/a 

KD INCORPORATED and THE KRATOM DISTRO) (hereinafter “GROW”) 

and SEAN MICHAEL HARDER (hereinafter “HARDER”) (collectively referred 

to as Defendants). (See ECF 5 and Exhibit B). 

Plaintiff filed suit against GROW and HARDER on November 4, 2022.

(See ECF 1). As a defense, Defendants alleged that, “the negligence of another, 

not of this Defendant, caused or contributed to the loss alleged; and that such 

negligence of another was the sole proximate cause, superseding or 

independent intervening cause of the loss alleged.” (See ECF 16 and 17).

Since that time, Plaintiff has diligently pursued information on the 

identities of these other non-defendants, including upstream manufacturers 

and suppliers who share responsibility for the dangerous kratom product that 

led to Ms. Talavera’s death, so that they may be timely added as defendants.

(See ECF 20; 23; and 28). At the onset, Plaintiff’s counsel spoke with Defense 

counsel and inquired about the identity of upstream suppliers. (See ECF 28, 

Exhibit A). It immediately became clear that Defendants were not willing to 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 3 of 90
4

provide this information voluntarily. Id. Defendants’ failures and refusals to 

provide this critical information continued through initial disclosures and also 

through responses to Plaintiff’s discovery requests, which sought the “person(s) 

responsible for the manufacture, sale, and/or distribution of kratom...between 

January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022” and “all importers, suppliers, 

manufacturers, distributors, or other sources who supplied kratom to 

[Defendants] between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022.” (See Discovery 

Requests and Responses, attached as Exhibit C). Defendants, HARDER and 

GROW, supplied nothing more than Fifth Amendment objections coupled with 

claims that Defendant GROW does not have responsive information. Id. 

Ultimately, when facing the Court’s ruling on a motion to compel, 

HARDER and GROW announced their plan to withdraw their answers and 

affirmative defenses, and consent to default judgment – a plan that has 

effectively terminated Plaintiff’s efforts to discover upstream kratom suppliers 

from HARDER and GROW. (See ECF 36 - 39).

In addition to discovery from HARDER and GROW, Plaintiff has been 

pursuing information through a third-party subpoena to U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (“CBP”), pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, 

requesting copies of kratom importation documents filed by Defendants. (See 

Plaintiff’s subpoena to CBP attached as Exhibit D). On March 22, 2023, CBP

objected to Plaintiff’s subpoena, stating that Plaintiff’s request was not in 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 4 of 90
5

compliance with 19 C.F.R. Part 103, Subpart B. (See CBP Objection attached 

as Exhibit E).

On March 23, 2023, Plaintiff responded to CBP’s objection, and provided 

the agency with additional documents in compliance with 19 C.F.R. Part 103, 

Subpart B. (See Plaintiff’s response to CBP, attached as Exhibit F). On April 

3, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel conferred with a CBP representative regarding the 

subpoena. (See Affidavit of Tamara Williams, attached as Exhibit G). CBP 

advised that they are not inclined to comply with the subpoena unless and until 

the Court orders the agency to produce such documentation. Id. 

Plaintiff now brings this motion to compel, requesting that an order be 

entered compelling CBP to produce responsive documents as outlined in 

Plaintiff’s March 10, 2023 subpoena duces tecum. 

II. LEGAL STANDARD

Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the process of 

issuing subpoenas. Fed. R.Civ.P. 45. A proper Rule 45 subpoena can command 

a non-party to attend and testify for depositions and to produce requested 

documents. Fed. R.Civ.P. 45(a)(1)(A). A subpoenaed non-party may object to 

the command, after which the serving party may move to compel compliance 

with the subpoena. Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(c)(2)(B). The Court may order compliance 

with the subpoena if the party serving the subpoena shows it has a substantial 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 5 of 90
6

need for the information that it otherwise cannot obtain without undue 

hardship. Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(c)(3)(C). 

In ruling on discovery requests, Rule 45 must be read in conjunction with 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, since the latter rule “clearly defines the 

scope of discovery for all discovery devices.” Madeline L.L.C. v. Street, 2009 WL 

1563526 *1 (S.D.Fla.2008). Thus, a party may obtain discovery regarding any 

nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense and 

proportional to the needs of the case, considering the important issues at stake 

in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant 

information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving 

the issues, and whether the burden of expense of the proposed discovery 

outweighs its likely benefit. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1). Information within this 

scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable. Id. 

III. DISCUSSION 

 Plaintiff seeks relevant and essential information from CBP regarding 

“other” upstream parties and affiliates responsible for the kratom that was 

consumed by Ms. Talavera before her death. CBP is tasked with protecting 

and facilitating international trade into the United States and works closely 

with importers to ensure compliance with importing laws and regulations.1

1 See https://www.cbp.gov/about (last accessed April 17, 2023). See also 

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Importing%20into%20the%20U.S.pdf (last accessed April 17, 

2023). 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 6 of 90
7

Before any imported good is granted clearance, each importer of record 

is required to file various documents that disclose critical information, 

including, but not limited to: a description of the imported goods, the identity 

of the seller and buyer of the goods, the name of the vessel that transported

the goods into the U.S., and the amount of goods imported on each shipment. 

Id. Once these documents are completed and filed by importers, they are kept 

in the regular course of business by CBP. (See footnote 1).

The subpoena Plaintiff served on CBP requests certain importation 

documents that Defendants were obligated to file, related to the importation of 

kratom. Id. Plaintiff’s request is narrow and focused, solely seeking 

importation documents filed by Defendant HARDER from July 1, 2018 to July 

1, 2021 involving kratom. (See Exhibit D). The documents requested by 

Plaintiff will likely identify those manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, and 

importers responsible for Krystal’s death. 

CBP initially objected on the basis that Plaintiff had not complied with 

the requirements of 19 C.F.R. 103. (See Exhibit E). Subsequently, Plaintiff 

cured that defect, showing CBP how the requested documentation: is relevant 

and material to the pending action; necessary to the proceeding; not available 

from other sources; reasonable in scope; does not violate the Trade Secret Act; 

would not improperly reveal confidential commercial information; would not 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 7 of 90
8

relate to documents produced by another agency or entity; and shows that CBP 

has an interest in the matter. (See Exhibit F). 

If the Court does not order CBP to produce the requested documents, 

there is a great risk that Plaintiff will never be able to recover from those 

responsible for the tragic death of Krystal Talavera. 

IV. CONCLUSION 

For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff respectfully asks this Court to 

enter an order compelling U.S. Customs and Border Protection to produce all 

documents identified in Plaintiff’s subpoena duces tecum, dated March 10, 

2023. 

CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH CONFERRAL

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3)(A), I hereby certify that counsel for the 

movant has conferred with opposing counsel via electronic mail in a good faith 

effort to resolve the issues addressed herein but has been unable to resolve the 

issues. Defense counsel objects to the filing of this motion.

Counsel for the movant has also conferred with non-party, U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection, who may be affected by the relief sought. On April 3, 

2023, via telephone conference, CBP instructed Plaintiff’s counsel to file the 

foregoing motion, and does not object to the filing of this motion. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 8 of 90
9

Dated this 17th day of April 2023.

_________________________________

Tamara J. Williams, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 127625 

Michael J. Cowgill, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 1010945 

mctlaw 

1605 Main Street, Suite 710 

Sarasota, FL 34236 

Telephone: 888.952.5242 

Facsimile: 941.952.5042 

Primary: twilliams@mctlaw.com

Primary: mcowgill@mctlaw.com

Secondary: hdiener@mctlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that on this 17th day of April 2023, a true electronic copy of the 

foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using the 

CM/ECF system, and has been submitted to Defendants’ counsel, Justin 

Niznik Esquire, Bowman and Brooke LLP, at 

justin.niznik@bowmanandbrooke.com; orfa.diaz@bowmanandbrooke.com; and 

kara.thomas@bowmanandbrooke.com.

_________________________________

Tamara J. Williams, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 127625 

mctlaw 

1605 Main Street, Suite 710 

Sarasota, FL 34236 

Telephone: 888.952.5242 

Primary: twilliams@mctlaw.com

Secondary: hdiener@mctlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 9 of 90
1

Text of Hague Service Convention and 

Signatories 

1. Information and purchasing instructions for the Practical Handbook on the

Operation of the Hague Service Convention.

http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=publications.details&pid=2728

2. Table of countries that participate, with links to the information for each

country’s Central Authority and other practical information about service in

that country.

http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.statusprint&cid=17

3. Table listing the applicability of certain Convention articles in each country.

http://www.hcch.net/upload/applicability14e.pdf

4. PDF model form for request of service abroad.

Fillable: http://www.hcch.net/upload/act_form14e.pdf

Printable: http://www.hcch.net/upload/form14e2.pdf

5. Instructions for filling out the model form.

http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=publications.details&pid=27&dtid=2

6. More general info. (i.e. not limited to Hague Service Convention) from the

U.S. State Department on service abroad.

http://www.travel.state.gov/law/judicial/judicial_680.html

(information above provided by Offices of the AOC)

Exhibit A

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 10 of 90
2

14. CONVENTION ON THE SERVICE ABROAD OF JUDICIAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL 

DOCUMENTS IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS 

(Concluded 15 November 1965) 

The States signatory to the present Convention, 

Desiring to create appropriate means to ensure that judicial and extrajudicial documents to be 

served abroad shall be brought to the notice of the addressee in sufficient time, 

Desiring to improve the organisation of mutual judicial assistance for that purpose by simplifying 

and expediting the procedure, 

Have resolved to conclude a Convention to this effect and have agreed upon the following 

provisions: 

Article 1 

The present Convention shall apply in all cases, in civil or commercial matters, where there is 

occasion to transmit a judicial or extrajudicial document for service abroad. 

This Convention shall not apply where the address of the person to be served with the document 

is not known. 

CHAPTER I – JUDICIAL DOCUMENTS 

Article 2 

Each Contracting State shall designate a Central Authority which will undertake to receive 

requests for service coming from other Contracting States and to proceed in conformity with the 

provisions of Articles 3 to 6. 

Each State shall organise the Central Authority in conformity with its own law. 

Article 3 

The authority or judicial officer competent under the law of the State in which the documents 

originate shall forward to the Central Authority of the State addressed a request conforming to the 

model annexed to the present Convention, without any requirement of legalisation or other 

equivalent formality. 

The document to be served or a copy thereof shall be annexed to the request. The request and 

the document shall both be furnished in duplicate. 

Article 4 

If the Central Authority considers that the request does not comply with the provisions of the 

present Convention it shall promptly inform the applicant and specify its objections to the request. 

Article 5 

The Central Authority of the State addressed shall itself serve the document or shall arrange to 

have it served by an appropriate agency, either –

a) by a method prescribed by its internal law for the service of documents in domestic actions 

upon persons who are within its territory, or 

b) by a particular method requested by the applicant, unless such a method is incompatible with 

the law of the State addressed. 

Subject to sub-paragraph (b) of the first paragraph of this Article, the document may always be 

served by delivery to an addressee who accepts it voluntarily. 

If the document is to be served under the first paragraph above, the Central Authority may require 

the document to be written in, or translated into, the official language or one of the official 

languages of the State addressed. 

That part of the request, in the form attached to the present Convention, which contains a 

summary of the document to be served, shall be served with the document. 

Article 6 

The Central Authority of the State addressed or any authority which it may have designated for 

that purpose, shall complete a certificate in the form of the model annexed to the present 

Convention. 

The certificate shall state that the document has been served and shall include the method, the 

place and the date of service and the person to whom the document was delivered. If the 

document has not been served, the certificate shall set out the reasons which have prevented 

service. 

The applicant may require that a certificate not completed by a Central Authority or by a judicial 

authority shall be countersigned by one of these authorities. 

The certificate shall be forwarded directly to the applicant. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 11 of 90
3

Article 7 

The standard terms in the model annexed to the present Convention shall in all cases be written 

either in French or in English. They may also be written in the official language, or in one of the 

official languages, of the State in which the documents originate. 

The corresponding blanks shall be completed either in the language of the State addressed or in 

French or in English. 

Article 8 

Each Contracting State shall be free to effect service of judicial documents upon persons abroad, 

without application of any compulsion, directly through its diplomatic or consular agents. 

Any State may declare that it is opposed to such service within its territory, unless the document 

is to be served upon a national of the State in which the documents originate. 

Article 9 

Each Contracting State shall be free, in addition, to use consular channels to forward documents, 

for the purpose of service, to those authorities of another Contracting State which are designated 

by the latter for this purpose. 

Each Contracting State may, if exceptional circumstances so require, use diplomatic channels for 

the same purpose. 

Article 10 

Provided the State of destination does not object, the present Convention shall not interfere with 

–

a) the freedom to send judicial documents, by postal channels, directly to persons abroad, 

b) the freedom of judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the State of origin to

effect service of judicial documents directly through the judicial officers, officials or other 

competent persons of the State of destination, 

c) the freedom of any person interested in a judicial proceeding to effect service of judicial 

documents directly through the judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the State 

of destination. 

Article 11

The present Convention shall not prevent two or more Contracting States from agreeing to 

permit, for the purpose of service of judicial documents, channels of transmission other than 

those provided for in the preceding Articles and, in particular, direct communication between their 

respective authorities. 

Article 12 

The service of judicial documents coming from a Contracting State shall not give rise to any 

payment or reimbursement of taxes or costs for the services rendered by the State addressed. 

The applicant shall pay or reimburse the costs occasioned by –-

a) the employment of a judicial officer or of a person competent under the law of the State of 

destination, 

b) the use of a particular method of service. 

Article 13 

Where a request for service complies with the terms of the present Convention, the State 

addressed may refuse to comply therewith only if it deems that compliance would infringe its 

sovereignty or security. 

It may not refuse to comply solely on the ground that, under its internal law, it claims exclusive 

jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the action or that its internal law would not permit the action 

upon which the application is based. 

The Central Authority shall, in case of refusal, promptly inform the applicant and state the reasons 

for the refusal. 

Article 14 

Difficulties which may arise in connection with the transmission of judicial documents for service 

shall be settled through diplomatic channels. 

Article 15 

Where a writ of summons or an equivalent document had to be transmitted abroad for the 

purpose of service, under the provisions of the present Convention, and the defendant has not 

appeared, judgment shall not be given until it is established that –

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 12 of 90
4

a) the document was served by a method prescribed by the internal law of the State addressed 

for the service of documents in domestic actions upon persons who are within its territory, or 

b) the document was actually delivered to the defendant or to his residence by another method 

provided for by this Convention, 

and that in either of these cases the service or the delivery was effected in sufficient time to 

enable the defendant to defend. 

Each Contracting State shall be free to declare that the judge, notwithstanding the provisions of 

the first paragraph of this Article, may give judgment even if no certificate of service or delivery 

has been received, if all the following conditions are fulfilled –

a) the document was transmitted by one of the methods provided for in this Convention, 

b) a period of time of not less than six months, considered adequate by the judge in the particular 

case, has elapsed since the date of the transmission of the document, 

c) no certificate of any kind has been received, even though every reasonable effort has been 

made to obtain it through the competent authorities of the State addressed. 

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraphs the judge may order, in case of 

urgency, any provisional or protective measures. 

Article 16 

When a writ of summons or an equivalent document had to be transmitted abroad for the purpose 

of service, under the provisions of the present Convention, and a judgment has been entered 

against a defendant who has not appeared, the judge shall have the power to relieve the 

defendant from the effects of the expiration of the time for appeal from the judgment if the 

following conditions are fulfilled –

a) the defendant, without any fault on his part, did not have knowledge of the document in 

sufficient time to defend, or knowledge of the judgment in sufficient time to appeal, and 

b) the defendant has disclosed a prima facie defence to the action on the merits. 

An application for relief may be filed only within a reasonable time after the defendant has 

knowledge of the judgment. 

Each Contracting State may declare that the application will not be entertained if it is filed after 

the expiration of a time to be stated in the declaration, but which shall in no case be less than one 

year following the date of the judgment. 

This Article shall not apply to judgments concerning status or capacity of persons. 

CHAPTER II – EXTRAJUDICIAL DOCUMENTS 

Article 17 

Extrajudicial documents emanating from authorities and judicial officers of a Contracting State 

may be transmitted for the purpose of service in another Contracting State by the methods and 

under the provisions of the present Convention. 

CHAPTER III – GENERAL CLAUSES 

Article 18 

Each Contracting State may designate other authorities in addition to the Central Authority and 

shall determine the extent of their competence. 

The applicant shall, however, in all cases, have the right to address a request directly to the 

Central Authority. 

Federal States shall be free to designate more than one Central Authority. 

Article 19 

To the extent that the internal law of a Contracting State permits methods of transmission, other 

than those provided for in the preceding Articles, of documents coming from abroad, for service 

within its territory, the present Convention shall not affect such provisions. 

Article 20 

The present Convention shall not prevent an agreement between any two or more Contracting 

States to dispense with –

a) the necessity for duplicate copies of transmitted documents as required by the second 

paragraph of Article 3, 

b) the language requirements of the third paragraph of Article 5 and Article 7, 

c) the provisions of the fourth paragraph of Article 5, 

d) the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 12. 

Article 21 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 13 of 90
5

Each contracting State shall, at the time of the deposit of its instrument of ratification or 

accession, or at a later date, inform the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands of the 

following –

a) the designation of authorities, pursuant to Articles 2 and 18, 

b) the designation of the authority competent to complete the certificate pursuant to Article 6, 

c) the designation of the authority competent to receive documents transmitted by consular 

channels, pursuant to Article 9. 

Each Contracting State shall similarly inform the Ministry, where appropriate, of –

a) opposition to the use of methods of transmission pursuant to Articles 8 and 10, 

b) declarations pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 15 and the third paragraph of Article 

16, 

c) all modifications of the above designations, oppositions and declarations. 

Article 22 

Where Parties to the present Convention are also Parties to one or both of the Conventions on 

civil procedure signed at The Hague on 17th July 1905, and on 1st March 1954, this Convention 

shall replace as between them Articles 1 to 7 of the earlier Conventions. 

Article 23 

The present Convention shall not affect the application of Article 23 of the Convention on civil 

procedure signed at The Hague on 17th July 1905, or of Article 24 of the Convention on civil 

procedure signed at The Hague on 1st March 1954. 

These Articles shall, however, apply only if methods of communication, identical to those 

provided for in these Conventions, are used. 

Article 24 

Supplementary agreements between Parties to the Conventions of 1905 and 1954 shall be 

considered as equally applicable to the present Convention, unless the Parties have otherwise 

agreed. 

Article 25 

Without prejudice to the provisions of Articles 22 and 24, the present Convention shall not 

derogate from Conventions containing provisions on the matters governed by this Convention to 

which the Contracting States are, or shall become, Parties. 

Article 26 

The present Convention shall be open for signature by the States represented at the Tenth 

Session of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. 

It shall be ratified, and the instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Ministry of 

Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. 

Article 27 

The present Convention shall enter into force on the sixtieth day after the deposit of the third 

instrument of ratification referred to in the second paragraph of Article 26. 

The Convention shall enter into force for each signatory State which ratifies subsequently on the 

sixtieth day after the deposit of its instrument of ratification. 

Article 28

Any State not represented at the Tenth Session of the Hague Conference on Private International 

Law may accede to the present Convention after it has entered into force in accordance with the 

first paragraph of Article 27. The instrument of accession shall be deposited with the Ministry of 

Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. 

The Convention shall enter into force for such a State in the absence of any objection from a 

State, which has ratified the Convention before such deposit, notified to the Ministry of Foreign 

Affairs of the Netherlands within a period of six months after the date on which the said Ministry 

has notified it of such accession. 

In the absence of any such objection, the Convention shall enter into force for the acceding State 

on the first day of the month following the expiration of the last of the periods referred to in the 

preceding paragraph. 

Article 29 

Any State may, at the time of signature, ratification or accession, declare that the present 

Convention shall extend to all the territories for the international relations of which it is 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 14 of 90
6

responsible, or to one or more of them. Such a declaration shall take effect on the date of entry 

into force of the Convention for the State concerned. 

At any time thereafter, such extensions shall be notified to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the 

Netherlands. 

The Convention shall enter into force for the territories mentioned in such an extension on the 

sixtieth day after the notification referred to in the preceding paragraph. 

Article 30 

The present Convention shall remain in force for five years from the date of its entry into force in 

accordance with the first paragraph of Article 27, even for States which have ratified it or acceded 

to it subsequently. 

If there has been no denunciation, it shall be renewed tacitly every five years. 

Any denunciation shall be notified to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands at least six 

months before the end of the five year period. 

It may be limited to certain of the territories to which the Convention applies. 

The denunciation shall have effect only as regards the State which has notified it. The Convention 

shall remain in force for the other Contracting States. 

Article 31 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands shall give notice to the States referred to in 

Article 26, and to the States which have acceded in accordance with Article 28, of the following –

a) the signatures and ratifications referred to in Article 26; 

b) the date on which the present Convention enters into force in accordance with the first 

paragraph of Article 27; 

c) the accessions referred to in Article 28 and the dates on which they take effect; 

d) the extensions referred to in Article 29 and the dates on which they take effect; 

e) the designations, oppositions and declarations referred to in Article 21; 

f) the denunciations referred to in the third paragraph of Article 30. 

In witness whereof the undersigned, being duly authorised thereto, have signed the present 

Convention. 

Done at The Hague, on the 15th day of November, 1965, in the English and French languages, 

both texts being equally authentic, in a single copy which shall be deposited in the archives of the 

Government of the Netherlands, and of which a certified copy shall be sent, through the 

diplomatic channel, to each of the States represented at the Tenth Session of the Hague 

Conference on Private International Law. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 15 of 90
7

SIGNATORIES 14: Convention of 15 November 1965 

on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial 

Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters

Entry into force: 10-II-1969, Last update: 27-I-2011

Number of Contracting States to this Convention: 62 

1) S = Signature

2) R/A/Su = Ratification, Accession or Succession

3) Type = R: Ratification;

A: Accession;

A*: Accession giving rise to an acceptance procedure; click on A* for details of acceptances of the 

accession;

C: Continuation;

Su: Succession;

Den: Denunciation;

4) EIF = Entry into force

5) Ext = Extensions of application

6) Auth = Designation of Authorities

7) Res/D/N = Reservations, declarations or notifications 

Members of the Organisation (click here for the non-Member States)

States S1 R/A/Su 2 Type 3 EIF 4 Ext 5 Auth 6 Res/D/N 7

Albania 1-XI2006 A 1-VII2007 3

Argentina 2-II-2001 A 1-XII2001 2 D,Res5,10,15,16

Australia 15-III2010 A 1-XI2010 7 5 D5,8,9,10,15,16,17,29

Belarus 6-VI1997 A 1-II1998 1

Belgium 21-I1966

19-XI1970 R 18-I1971 2 D8,15,16

Bosnia and Herzegovina 16-VI2008 A 1-II2009 1

Bulgaria 23-XI1999 A 1-VIII2000 3 D5,8,10,15,16

Canada 26-IX1988 A 1-V1989 4 D5,8,10,11,12,15,16,2

China, People's Republic of 6-V-1991 A 1-I1992 8 D,N5,8,10,15,16

Croatia 28-II2006 A 1-XI2006 3 Res,D5,6,8,9,10,15,16

Cyprus 26-X1982 A 1-VI1983 4 D8,10,15,16

Czech Republic 28-I-1993 Su 1-I1993 4 D,Res8,10,15,29

Denmark 7-I- 2-VIII- R 1-X- 3 D10,15,16

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 16 of 90
8

1969 1969 1969

Egypt 1-III1966

12-XII1968 R 10-II1969 1 Res8,10

Estonia 2-II-1996 A 1-X1996 1 D10,15,16

Finland 15-XI1965

11-IX1969 R 10-XI1969 2 D2,9,10

France 12-I1967

3-VII1972 R 1-IX1972 1 3 D8,15,16

Germany 15-XI1965

27-IV1979 R 26-VI1979 3 D5,8,10,15,16

Greece 20-VII1983

20-VII1983 R 18-IX1983 1 D8,10,15

Hungary 13-VII2004 A 1-IV2005 3 D2,5,6,8,9,10,15,16

Iceland 10-XI2008 A 1-VII2009 1 D,Res10,15,16

India 23-XI2006 A 1-VIII2007 1 D,Res10,15,16

Ireland 20-X1989

5-IV1994 R 4-VI1994 3 D,Res10,15

Israel 25-XI1965

14-VIII1972 R 13-X1972 2 D,Res10,16

Italy 25-I1979

25-XI1981 R 24-I1982 3 D5,12

Japan 12-III1970

28-V1970 R 27-VII1970 3 D10,15

Korea, Republic of 13-I-2000 A 1-VIII2000 2 D,Res8,10,15

Latvia 28-III1995 A 1-XI1995 4 D5,8,10,15

Lithuania 2-VIII2000 A 1-VI2001 1 D,Res8,10,15,16

Luxembourg 27-X1971

9-VII1975 R 7-IX1975 1 D,Res5,8,15,16

Mexico 2-XI1999 A 1-VI2000 1 D5,6,8,10,12,15,16

Monaco 1-III-2007 A 1-XI2007 2 D8,10,15,16

Netherlands 15-XI1965

3-XI1975 R 2-I1976 1 5 D15,16

Norway 15-X1968

2-VIII1969 R 1-X1969 3 D,Res8,10,15,16

Poland 13-II1996 A 1-IX1996 4 Res8,10

Portugal 5-VII1971

27-XII1973 R 25-II1974 2 D8,15,16

Romania 21-VIII2003 A 1-IV2004 2 D8,16

Russian Federation 1-V-2001 A 1-XII2001 4 D,Res2,3,5,6,8,9,10,12,15

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 17 of 90
9

Serbia 2-VII2010 A 1-II2011 2 D5,6,8,10,15,16

Slovakia 15-III1993 Su 1-I1993 4 D8,10,15,29

Slovenia 18-IX2000 A 1-VI2001 1

Spain 21-X1976

4-VI1987 R 3-VIII1987 3 D15,16

Sri Lanka 31-VIII2000 A 1-VI2001 3 D7,8,10,15

Sweden 4-II1969

2-VIII1969 R 1-X1969 2 D5,10

Switzerland 21-V1985

2-XI1994 R 1-I1995 3 D,Res1,5,8,10,15

The former Yugoslav 

Republic of Macedonia

23-XII2008 A 1-IX2009 1 D,Res5,6,8,9,10,15,16,21

Turkey 11-VI1968

28-II1972 R 28-IV1972 3 Res,D8,10,15,16

Ukraine 1-II-2001 A 1-XII2001 3 D,Res8,10,15,16

United Kingdom of Great 

Britain and Northern Ireland

10-XII196517-XI1967 R 10-II1969 14 4 D2,5,10,15,16,18

United States of America 15-XI1965

24-VIII1967 R 10-II1969 1 1 D2,15,16,29

Venezuela 29-X1993 A 1-VII1994 1 D,Res5,8,10,1516

Non-Member States of the Organisation (click here for the Members)

States S1 R/A/Su 2 Type 3 EIF 4 Ext 5 Auth 6 Res/D/N 7

Antigua and Barbuda 1-V-1985 Su 1-XI-1981 1

Bahamas 17-VI1997 A 1-II-1998 1

Barbados 10-II-1969 A 1-X-1969 1

Belize 8-IX-2009 A 1-V-2010 

Botswana 10-II-1969 A 1-IX-1969 3 D5,10,15

Kuwait 8-V-2002 A 1-XII-2002 3 D,Res6,8,9,10,15,16,18

Malawi 24-IV1972 A 1-XII-1972 1

Pakistan 7-XII-1988 A 1-VIII1989 3 D8,15,16

Saint Vincent and the 

Grenadines 6-I-2005 Su 27-X-1979 3 D5,10,15

San Marino 15-IV2002 A 1-XI-2002 3 D8,10,15

Seychelles 18-XI1980 A 1-VII-1981 1 D8,10,15,16

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 18 of 90
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER

DISTRICT 15 – STATE OF FLORIDA

PALM BEACH COUNTY

3126 GUN CLUB ROAD

WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33406-3005

(561) 688-4575

(561) 688-4592 FAX

NAME: TALAVERA, KRYSTAL CASE NUMBER: M21-01109

DATE OF DEATH: June 20, 2021 AGE: 39 SEX: F RACE: W

DATE OF AUTOPSY: June 21, 2021 / 0833 hours

MEDICAL EXAMINER REPORT

I. Acute mitragynine intoxication, see separate toxicology record

A. Heavy brain, 1335 grams

B. Circumstances of death: History of Kratom use, per report

C. How injury occurred: Ingested supratherapeutic amount(s) of mitragynine (kratom)

II. Hypertensive cardiovascular disease: Nephrosclerosis

III. Hepatomegaly, 2437 grams

IV. Gastritis

V. Duodenal polyp, benign

VI. Status post organ/tissue procurement, see separate record(s)

VII. Cardiac Pathology Report, see separate record: No significant histopathologic change

VIII. Vitreous electrolyte panel, see separate record: Noncontributory

Cause of Death: Acute mitragynine intoxication

Manner of Death: Accident

Opinion: The decedent died from an acute mitragynine intoxication. At high concentrations, mitragynine 

produces opioid-like effects; such as, respiratory failure. The manner of death is “Accident.” 

 Terrill Tops, M.D.

 Associate Medical Examiner

 Date Signed: 07/29/2021

Exhibit B

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 19 of 90
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CIVIL DIVISION

DEVIN FILIPPELLI, as Personal 

Representative of the ESTATE OF 

KRYSTAL TALAVERA, on behalf of the 

Estate and her Survivors,

Plaintiff,

v. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KD 

INCORPORATED and THE KRATOM 

DISTRO); and SEAN MICHAEL 

HARDER, individually

Defendants.

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Civil Action No. 9:22-cv-81731

GROW LLC (D/B/A KD INCORPORATED and THE KRATOM DISTRO)’S 

RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S INTERROGATORIES AND 

REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS

Defendant, GROW, LLC (d/b/a KD INCORPORATED and THE KRATOM 

DISTRO) (“GROW”), by and through its undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Rules 33 and 34 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby serves its Responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of 

Interrogatories and First Request for Production served on January 27, 2023, as follows: 

OBJECTIONS

1. GROW objects to Plaintiff’s Request for Production to the extent that its requests

are vague, overly broad, and contain definitions contrary to ordinary and customary usage. 

GROW’s responses assume common sense and common meaning. 

2. GROW objects to the extent that Plaintiffs’ Request for Production seeks the

production of attorney/client privileged communications, privileged work product or any other 

information or documents which are irrelevant, confidential, privileged or beyond the scope of 

Exhibit C

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 20 of 90
2

information or documents reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 

A privilege log will be provided, upon Plaintiffs’ request, in accordance with Florida law for any 

documents subject to attorney-client and/or work product privilege.

3. GROW also objects to the extent that Plaintiffs’ Request for Production seeks to 

impose unreasonable, unduly burdensome, or overly broad obligations upon GROW.

4. The assertion of the same, similar, or additional objections or the provisions of 

partial answers in response to individual interrogatories does not waive any of GROW’s general 

objections set forth as follows:

5. GROW objects to any interrogatories requiring an answer containing information 

or identification of documents protected by the attorney, client and/or work product privileges.

6. GROW objects to any interrogatories requiring an answer or documents containing 

information or identification of documents not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 

admissible evidence.

7. GROW has not completed a review of all documents related to this action, 

investigated all facts related to this action, interviewed all witnesses in this action, completed 

discovery in this action, or completed preparation for trial. Consequently, the answers to 

interrogatories set forth herein are based upon information known or believed by GROW at the 

time these responses were prepared. As such, GROW reserves the right to amend its responses set 

forth herein as discovery proceeds in this matter.

8. GROW specifically reserves the right to challenge the competency, relevancy, 

materiality, and admissibility of, or to object on any ground to the use of, information or 

identification of documents set forth herein in any subsequent proceeding, trial, or any other action.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 21 of 90
3

RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES

1. Please describe the person(s) responsible for the manufacture, sale, and/or 

distribution of kratom from GROW in Meridian, Idaho between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 

2022. In your response, please include the owners, officers, directors, managers, and/or affiliates 

overseeing GROW’s operations relating to the acquisition, manufacture, packaging, marketing, 

and sale of GROW’s kratom products to consumers.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

2. Please describe the extent to which you believe GROW’s kratom products are 

subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and the Dietary Supplement Health 

and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). Your description should specify any FDCA and/or DSHEA 

regulations GROW contends it has attempted to comply with, such as regulations governing 

premarket notifications, premarket analyses of safety and efficacy, development of manufacturing 

controls, labeling and branding requirements, and any exemptions from such regulations. If you

believe GROW’s products are notsubject to FDCA and/or DSHEA, please specify the factual basis 

for that belief including any industry guidance received to support that belief.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after

Ms. Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was 

not in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

3. Please identify all importers, suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, or othersources

who supplied kratom to GROW between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. In your answer,

please include the name, address, and phone number for all manufacturers; the forms and specific 

kratom product types provided; and whether the facility where manufacturing takes place has been 

registered under the FDCA.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

4. Please describe the extent to which each person identified in the previous 

interrogatory supplied you with information about their kratom, including but not limited to 

information regarding the quality, safety, content, potencies, purities, properties, uses, misuses, 

benefits, risks, warnings, labeling and/or marketing of the kratom supplied. In your description

specify the date(s) you received such information provided, the arrangements made, the form and 

content of the information, and the individuals involved in the exchange of information.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 22 of 90
4

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

5. Please describe the manufacturing processes followed with respect to the kratom 

products sold by GROW between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. Your description should 

include the standards, procedures and practices applied for each of GROW’s kratom product types, 

and the persons involved (whether GROW, a GROW affiliate, or an importer/manufacturer who is

separate from GROW). The term “standards” refers to any regulatory or industry standards, such as

standards and/or related certifications utilized by the FDCA, DSHEA, the supplement industry, 

the American Kratom Association (AKA), or other entities. In your response, please specify the 

nature and extent of any audits or evaluations of compliance with such processes.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

6. Please identify all employees and contractors who have been paid by GROW to 

assist in the production and sale of kratom products between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022.

This includes employees and contractors involved in the ordering, manufacture, refining, 

packaging, marketing and distribution of those kratom products, as well as any other GROW’s 

administrative and/or business operations. In your identification, please include the name and 

contact information for each employee and contractor, the dates of employment and/or contracts,

and the nature of the employment and services paid for.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

7. Please describe the extent to which the kratom products sold by GROW between 

January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022 were lab tested. In your description specify the person’s 

responsible for testing GROW’s kratom, and the type of testing utilized -- including but not limited

to any testing for heavy metals, specific alkaloids, product purity, and/or product potency. Your 

response should include the extent to which each of your specific kratom product types (i.e., Space 

Dust, Green Maeng, Green Horned Maeng Da, Green Riau, etc.) were or were not all subject to the

testing described.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 23 of 90
5

8. Please describe the differences in quality and content for GROW’s kratom products 

offered for sale between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. In your description include the full 

extent of your knowledge about GROW’s kratom products’ biological and psychoactive 

compounds (and potencies thereof), purity (including heavy metal content), strains, and variability

in any of the foregoing. Your description should specify the bases for such knowledge, including

all testing results, and testing processes.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

9. Please describe the extent to which GROW has familiarized itself with the risks and 

dangers associated with the human consumption of GROW’s kratom products. This would include 

GROW’s efforts to identify and address risks from kratom, and the types of risks GROW believes 

its consumers would expect to be notified about (for instance, what if anything has GROW done 

to ascertain the risks of overdose or death from kratom use?). In your description, please explain

when and how you became aware of each particular risk of harm described in your response.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

10. Please describe the nature and extent of your representations to consumers on

whether there is or is not a risk of death to persons consuming GROW’s kratom products. Your 

description should include but not be limited to verbal and written representations; marketing 

materials; contracts, forms, templates and commercial documentation; website and blog

publications; correspondence, invoicing and e-mail communications with retailers; and scripts or 

guidance for salespersons, telemarketers, and/or retailers of GROW products. In describing each

representation or collection of representations, please include the location and content of each 

representation, the dates or timeframes of the representation(s), and the persons making the 

representations (including agents and affiliates) and the persons receiving the representations

(including but not limited to consumers making online or telephone inquiries, or individuals raising 

complaints or concerns).

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

11. Please describe the nature and extent of any other representations you or your agents

have made about the safety and efficacy of GROW’s Kratom related to human health. Your 

description should include but not be limited to verbal and written representations; marketing 

materials; contracts, forms, templates and commercial documentation; website and blog

publications; correspondence, invoicing and e-mail communications with retailers; and scripts or

guidance for salespersons, telemarketers, and/or retailers of kratom products. In describing each

representation or collection of representations, please include the location and content of each 

representation, the dates or timeframes of the representation(s), and the persons making the representations 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 24 of 90
6

(including agents and affiliates) and the persons receiving the representations (including but not limited to

consumers making online or telephone inquiries, or individuals raising complaints or concerns).

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

12. Please describe the extent to which you have received information that adverse 

events may have been suffered by persons using GROW kratom products (such as reports, claims, 

complaints, or allegations that a product user has suffered or may have suffered addiction, 

withdrawal, overdose, seizures, disabilities, death, disruption to enjoyment of life, or other 

negative symptoms or side effects from a GROW product). Potential sources of such information 

would include, but not be limited to: medical professionals; suppliers; customers and consumers; 

retailers; comments or complaints submitted via website, social media, e-mail, or otherwise; 

communications from consumer family members; communications from regulatory or law 

enforcement officials; communications from local doctors; etc.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

13. For each adverse event identified above, please describe what you did in response to

the reported adverse event. In your description, please include the dates, names and locations of 

the resulting activities identified, and any related reports, documentation, or analyses.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

14. State your knowledge of any claims for damages for injury relating to kratom sold 

by GROW. State the date you learned of the claim, the nature and alleged basis for the claim, the 

disposition of the claim, and the person(s) making each such claim (including their contact

information).

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

15. Describe the extent of your knowledge regarding Krystal Talavera’s death. In your 

description, include the date and manner by which you first received notice of her death, and any

ensuring response, investigation and/or actions taken because of the death.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 25 of 90
7

16. Please describe the factual basisfor any belief that GROW’s kratom was not a cause

of Krystal Talavera’s death. In your description, please detail the extent to which you believe: (1)

there are other causes or persons (including but not limited to Ms. Talavera) who are at fault for 

Ms. Talavera’s death; and (2) other causes for Ms. Talavera’s death are greater than GROW’s 

degree of fault.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

17. State the name and present address of each person you expect to call as an expert 

witness at the trial of this action and for each such witness state:

(a) The background, training, experience, and other qualifications of each such 

person;

(b) The substance of each fact to which he orshe is expected to testify;

(c) The substance of each opinion to which he or she is expected to testify;

(d) A summary of the grounds for each opinion;

(e) Please have each such expert affix his/her signature to the Answer to this

Interrogatory; or, in the alternative, attach to your answers to these Interrogatories a 

report signed by each such expert, incorporating the information contained in (b)

through (d).

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

18. Except for those persons identified in the preceding Interrogatory, state the name 

and present address of any person who has been retained, employed or consulted by you as an 

expert in connection with the claim in this action or any defense to the claim in this action.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

19. Please describe any and all liability insurance policies in force and effect to provide

liability insurance with respect to the damages that are the subject of this action, including any

excess coverage policies. In your description, please include the name and address of each

insurance company issuing each of said policies; the policy number of each of such policies; and 

the amount of liability insurance provided by each of such insurance policies for personal injuries.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 26 of 90
8

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

20. Describe the extent to which any representative of you or your insurer has

conducted any investigation on your behalf relating to the claim in this action or any defense to 

said claim. In your description, please state the name and address, employer, and job title, position 

or capacity of each such person, and whether any of the persons named have prepared any notes,

memoranda orsummariesin connection with any such investigation.

ANSWER: No insurer has conducted an investigation. Grow has not conducted an 

investigation. Grow objects to the extent this seeks to invade the work product privilege as 

the only “investigation” conducted was by counsel after the instant lawsuit was filed. 

21. Please set forth the factual basis that supports each affirmative defense you set forth

in your Answer(s) to Plaintiff’s Complaint, including any witnesses and documents that were relied 

upon when alleging the defense. This request does not seek a dress rehearsal of GROW’s 

anticipated position at trial, but merely seeks a reasonable summary of the facts that GROW

believes sufficient to avoid a motion for summary judgment dismissal of each defense.

ANSWER: Affirmative defenses were pled to avoid waiver. Specific facts are in the process 

of being developed. 

22. Please specify the extent of GROW’s knowledge about the quantities and qualities 

and content of the kratom products sold to Krystal Talavera. Your description should specify the 

bases for such knowledge, including any documentation of transactions between Krystal Talavera 

and GROW.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after Ms. 

Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was not 

in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

23. Please state the name, address, and telephone number, of the person(s) responding

to each of these interrogatories, the requests for production of documents, and the requests for

admissions. In your statement, include the specific discovery request(s) they assisted with (listed 

by request number), and the capacity in which the person responds on behalf of GROW.

ANSWER: GROW objects as overbroad and unduly burdensome as it was formed after

Ms. Talavera’s death to operate a brick and mortar retail store in a mall in Idaho, and was 

not in the business of selling, distributing, or marketing Kratom products.

24. Describe GROW’s document retention and/or destruction policy regarding

Kratom, including without limitation, the policy itself, and documents modifying, suspending or 

interpreting the policy.

ANSWER: GROW did not have a document retention policy.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 27 of 90
9

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

1. All documents containing written or recorded statements made by any person, 

which relate to Krystal Talavera’s death.

RESPONSE: None.

2. All documents and materials relating to the investigation of Krystal Talavera’s 

death. This request does not include documents and materials created by or for your lawyers after 

the filing of this lawsuit.

RESPONSE: None.

3. Correspondence, reports, documents and materials of any kind providing

information about the Subject Incident and its cause received by GROW from any other party or 

entity (exclusive of employees, agents, servants, attorneys and investigators of GROW) or sent by

GROW to any other person or entity (exclusive of employees, agents, servants, attorneys and 

investigators of GROW).

RESPONSE: None.

4. All experts’ reports, including any tests, supporting data, calculations, or

photographs, factual observations and reports or facts on which such experts intend to rely.

RESPONSE: None.

5. All documents, films, computer recreations, test results, graphic evidence,

demonstrative evidence, compilations of data, statistics, books, treatises or any other type of 

evidence whatsoever that support GROW’s defense of this lawsuit. This includes items that are 

impeaching in nature.

RESPONSE: None.

6. Statements of witnesses, whether written, recorded or otherwise memorialized, 

which support GROW’s defense of this lawsuit. This includes items that are impeaching in nature.

RESPONSE: None.

7. All marketing materials, advertisements, brochures, catalogs, promotional 

materials, television commercials, and other documents and materials that mention, describe, or

refer to the qualities, characteristics, capabilities, capacities and virtues of the GROW’s kratom

products sold between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 28 of 90
10

RESPONSE: None.

8. All insurance agreements or policies under which any person or entity carrying on 

an insurance business may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment which may be rendered in

this action or to indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy any judgment.

RESPONSE: None.

9. All documents and materials for every lawsuit, claim or complaint that has been 

made against GROW relating to a kratom product, wherein it was alleged that an injury or death

may have resulted from ingesting a GROW’s kratom product.

RESPONSE: None other than this lawsuit.

10. Please produce all documents containing safety-related information about

GROW’s products that GROW has used or considered for its product consumers. This

would include labels, warnings, disclaimers, guidance, or other information relating to the 

relative safety or danger of GROW products for human consumption. This would also include

documents drafted, considered, proposed, rejected, and/or utilized for disseminating safetyrelated information; as well as correspondence, meeting agendas, minutes, notes, transcripts,

worksheets, notices or reports which discuss or analyze, revised or new safety-related information 

for any GROW kratom product.

RESPONSE: None.

11. Please provide GROW’s governing corporate records (including amendments)

since incorporation to present. This would include but not be limited to the Certificate of

Organization; By-Laws; Agreements; Buy-Sell Agreements; Licenses and other company

authorizations for the sale of kratom products.

RESPONSE: None.

12. Please produce all documentation relating to lab testing of GROW’s kratom 

products, including lab testing documentation referenced or relied upon in your response to

Interrogatory 7 above. Your response should include any and all testing standards, procedures, 

protocols, references and results for such testing.

RESPONSE: None.

13. Please produce all contractual documents and agreements between GROW and

entities, contractors, employees or other personswho havemanufactured, processed and/or supplied 

kratom to GROW between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 29 of 90
11

RESPONSE: None.

14. Please produce all documents discussing or analyzing the risks, warnings, or

harms associated with GROW’s kratom products, including any documents relied upon or

identified in preparing the response to Interrogatory 9 above.

RESPONSE: None.

15. Please produce all documents relating to the standards, policies, procedures,

and/or practices used in preparing, marketing, and selling GROW’s kratom products. This

would include but not be limited to documents relating to and arising from efforts to qualify 

GROW’s kratom products for the American Kratom Association’s Good Manufacturing Practice 

(GMP) Qualified Vendor Status, or any other manufacturing standards, such as industry or 

regulatory standards; and any other documents referenced or relied upon in your response to 

Interrogatory No. 5.

RESPONSE: None.

16. Please produce all documents discussing, referencing or arising from adverse 

events described in your responses to Interrogatories 12, 13, 14, and 15.

RESPONSE: None.

17. Please produce all documents regarding the marketing, distribution and sale of

GROW’s kratom products from between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. These documents 

should include all proposals, contracts, agreements, warranties, invoices, marketing materials, 

labeling or other product guidance, and documentation of communications regarding GROW

kratom products sold, including electronic communications.

RESPONSE: None.

18. Please produce all documents which reflect or reference the effort by any defendant 

to gather information on the extent to which GROW’s kratom products may be presenting a risk 

of harm to consumers of the product.

RESPONSE: None.

19. Please produce all documents which reflect GROW’s effort to monitor the extent 

to which complications (such as overdose and/or death) are arising with regard to kratom sold in 

the United States.

RESPONSE: None.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 30 of 90
12

20. Please provide all documents that GROW has exchanged with the American 

Kratom Association regarding the sale and distribution of kratom in the United States.

RESPONSE: None.

21. Please provide all documents that GROW has provided, received, or exchanged 

with federal regulatory agencies (including but not limited to the FDA, the DEA, or the FTC) 

regarding GROW’s kratom products.

RESPONSE: None.

22. Please produce all documents and representations referenced or relied upon in 

preparing your response to Interrogatory 2, including but not limited to all copies of applications,

submissions, notices, labels and/or branding prepared in connection with the federal regulations.

RESPONSE: None.

23. Please provide all other documents referenced in your responses to the 

Interrogatories above, but not otherwise produced in the Requests for Production.

RESPONSE: None.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 3, 2023, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was 

served via email on Michael J. Cowgill and Tamara J. Williams, mctlaw, mcowgill@mctlaw.com; 

twilliams@mctlaw.com; hdiener@mctlaw.com; and mpowell@mctlaw.com.

/s/ Justin D. Niznik

Designated email addresses:

justin.niznik@bowmanandbrooke.com 

kara.thomas@bowmanandbrooke.com

orfa.diaz@bowmanandbrooke.com

JUSTIN D. NIZNIK

Florida Bar No. 774901

BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP

1064 Greenwood Boulevard - Suite 212

Lake Mary, Florida 32746-5419

(407) 585-7600

(407) 585-7610 – Fax

Attorneys for Defendants

GROW, LLC and 

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 31 of 90
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CIVIL DIVISION

DEVIN FILIPPELLI, as Personal 

Representative of the ESTATE OF 

KRYSTAL TALAVERA, on behalf of the 

Estate and her Survivors,

Plaintiff,

v. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KD 

INCORPORATED and THE KRATOM 

DISTRO); and SEAN MICHAEL 

HARDER, individually

Defendants.

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Civil Action No. 9:22-cv-81731

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER’S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S

INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS

Defendant, SEAN MICHAEL HARDER (“Harder”), by and through his undersigned 

counsel, and pursuant to Rules 33 and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby serves 

his Responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories and First Request for Production served on 

January 27, 2023, as follows: 

OBJECTIONS

1. Harder objects to Plaintiff’s Request for Production to the extent that its requests 

are vague, overly broad, and contain definitions contrary to ordinary and customary usage. 

Harder’s responses assume common sense and common meaning. 

2. Harder objects to the extent that Plaintiffs’ Request for Production seeks the 

production of attorney/client privileged communications, privileged work product or any other 

information or documents which are irrelevant, confidential, privileged or beyond the scope of 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 32 of 90
2

information or documents reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 

A privilege log will be provided, upon Plaintiffs’ request, in accordance with Florida law for any 

documents subject to attorney-client and/or work product privilege.

3. Harder also objects to the extent that Plaintiffs’ Request for Production seeks to 

impose unreasonable, unduly burdensome, or overly broad obligations upon Harder.

4. The assertion of the same, similar, or additional objections or the provisions of 

partial answers in response to individual interrogatories does not waive any of Harder’s general 

objections set forth as follows:

5. Harder objects to any interrogatories requiring an answer containing information or 

identification of documents protected by the attorney, client and/or work product privileges.

6. Harder objects to any interrogatories requiring an answer or documents containing 

information or identification of documents not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 

admissible evidence.

7. Harder has not completed a review of all documents related to this action, 

investigated all facts related to this action, interviewed all witnesses in this action, completed 

discovery in this action, or completed preparation for trial. Consequently, the answers to 

interrogatories set forth herein are based upon information known or believed by Harder at the 

time these responses were prepared. As such, Harder reserves the right to amend its responses set 

forth herein as discovery proceeds in this matter.

8. Harder specifically reserves the right to challenge the competency, relevancy, 

materiality, and admissibility of, or to object on any ground to the use of, information or 

identification of documents set forth herein in any subsequent proceeding, trial, or any other action.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 33 of 90
3 

RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES

1. Please describe the person(s) responsible for the manufacture, sale, and/or 

distribution of kratom from HARDER’s residence at 1061 North Cliff Creek Avenue, Meridian, 

Idaho 83426 between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. In your response, please include the 

owners, officers, directors, managers, and/or affiliates overseeing HARDER’s operations relating 

to the acquisition, manufacture, packaging, marketing, and sale of HARDER’s kratom products to 

consumers. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Further, the interrogatory 

is over broad, not proportional to the needs of this case and unduly burdensome because Mr. 

Talavera passed away on June 20, 2021. This is not a chronic exposure toxic tort case. 

Plaintiff’s own experts opine that the cause of death was acute mitragynine intoxication and 

Plaintiff has produced the package of the single product that Ms. Talavera allegedly ingested

on that single date that allegedly caused her death. Therefore, asking about the entire scope 

of “manufacturing, sale, and/or distribution” of Kratom and any every person or entity 

involved over a six-year period, including after Ms. Talavera’s death, seeks completely 

irrelevant information. 

2. Please describe the extent to which you believe HARDER’s kratom products sold 

to consumers are subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and the Dietary 

Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). Your description should specify any 

FDCA and/or DSHEA regulations HARDER contends it has attempted to comply with, such as 

regulations governing premarket notifications, premarket analyses of safety and efficacy, 

development of manufacturing controls, labeling and branding requirements, and any exemptions 

from such regulations. If you believe HARDER’s kratom products are not subject to FDCA and/or 

DSHEA, please specify the factual basis for that belief including any industry guidance received 

to support that belief. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

3. Please identify all importers, suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, or other sources 

who supplied kratom to HARDER between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. In your answer, 

please include the name, address, and phone number for all distributors; suppliers; importers; 

manufacturers; the forms and specific kratom product types provided; and whether the facility 

where manufacturing takes place has been registered under the FDCA. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 34 of 90
4 

4. Please describe the extent to which each person identified in the previous 

interrogatory supplied you with information about their kratom, including but not limited to 

information regarding the quality, safety, content, potencies, purities, properties, uses, misuses, 

benefits, risks, warnings, labeling and/or marketing of the kratom supplied. In your description 

specify the date(s) you received such information provided, the arrangements made, the form and 

content of the information, and the individuals involved in the exchange of information. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

5. Please describe the manufacturing processes followed with respect to the kratom 

products sold by HARDER between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. Your description should 

include the standards, procedures and practices applied for each of HARDER’s kratom product 

types, and the persons involved (whether HARDER, a HARDER affiliate, or an 

importer/manufacturer who is separate from HARDER). The term “standards” refers to any 

regulatory or industry standards, such as standards and/or related certifications utilized by the 

FDCA, DSHEA, the supplement industry, the American Kratom Association (AKA), or other 

entities. In your response, please specify the nature and extent of any audits or evaluations of 

compliance with such processes. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Further, the interrogatory 

is over broad, not proportional to the needs of the case and unduly burdensome because Mr. 

Talavera passed away on June 20, 2021. This is not a chronic exposure toxic tort case. 

Plaintiff’s own experts opine that the cause of death was acute mitragynine intoxication and 

Plaintiff has produced the package of the single product that Ms. Talavera allegedly ingested 

on that single date that allegedly caused her death. Therefore, asking about the entire scope 

of “manufacturing, sale, and/or distribution” of Kratom and any every person or entity 

involved over a six-year period, including after Ms. Talavera’s death, seeks completely 

irrelevant information. 

6. Please identify all employees and contractors who have been paid by HARDER to 

assist in the production and sale of kratom products between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. 

This includes employees and contractors involved in the ordering, manufacture, refining, 

packaging, marketing and distribution of those kratom products, as well as any other HARDER’s 

administrative and/or business operations. In your identification, please include the name and 

contact information for each employee and contractor, the dates of employment and/or contracts, 

and the nature of the employment and services paid for. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Further, the interrogatory 

is over broad, not proportional to the needs of the case and unduly burdensome because Mr. 

Talavera passed away on June 20, 2021. This is not a chronic exposure toxic tort case. 

Plaintiff’s own experts opine that the cause of death was acute mitragynine intoxication and 

Plaintiff has produced the package of the single product that Ms. Talavera allegedly ingested 

on that single date that allegedly caused her death. Therefore, asking about the entire scope 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 35 of 90
5 

of “manufacturing, sale, and/or distribution” of Kratom and any every person or entity 

involved over a six-year period, including after Ms. Talavera’s death, seeks completely 

irrelevant information. 

7. Please describe the extent to which the kratom products sold by HARDER between 

January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022 were lab tested. In your description specify the person’s 

responsible for testing HARDER’s kratom, and the type of testing utilized -- including but not 

limited to any testing for heavy metals, specific alkaloids, product purity, and/or product potency. 

Your response should include the extent to which each of your specific kratom product types (i.e., 

Space Dust, Green Maeng, Green Horned Maeng Da, Green Riau, etc.) were or were not all subject 

to the testing described. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Further, the interrogatory 

is over broad, not proportional to the needs of the case and unduly burdensome because Mr. 

Talavera passed away on June 20, 2021. This is not a chronic exposure toxic tort case. 

Plaintiff’s own experts opine that the cause of death was acute mitragynine intoxication and 

Plaintiff has produced the package of the single product that Ms. Talavera allegedly ingested 

on that single date that allegedly caused her death. Therefore, asking about the entire scope 

of “manufacturing, sale, and/or distribution” of Kratom and any every person or entity 

involved over a six-year period, including after Ms. Talavera’s death, seeks completely 

irrelevant information. 

8. Please describe the differences in quality and content for HARDER’s kratom 

products offered for sale between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. In your description include 

the full extent of your knowledge about HARDER’s kratom products’ biological and psychoactive 

compounds (and potencies thereof), purity (including heavy metal content), strains, and variability 

in any of the foregoing. Your description should specify the bases for such knowledge, including 

all testing results, and testing processes. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

9. Please describe the extent to which HARDER has familiarized himself with the 

risks and dangers associated with the human consumption of HARDER’s kratom products. This 

would include HARDER’s efforts to identify and address risks from kratom, and the types of risks 

HARDER believes his consumers would expect to be notified about (for instance, what if anything 

has HARDER done to ascertain the risks of overdose or death from kratom use?). In your 

description, please explain when and how you became aware of each particular risk of harm 

described in your response. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 36 of 90
6 

10. Please describe the nature and extent of your representations to consumers on 

whether there is or is not a risk of death to persons consuming HARDER’s kratom products. Your 

description should include but not be limited to verbal and written representations; marketing 

materials; contracts, forms, templates and commercial documentation; website and blog 

publications; correspondence, invoicing and e-mail communications with retailers; and scripts or 

guidance forsalespersons, telemarketers, and/or retailers of HARDER products. In describing each 

representation or collection of representations, please include the location and content of each 

representation, the dates or timeframes of the representation(s), and the persons making the 

representation (including agents and affiliates) and the persons receiving the representations 

(including but not limited to consumers making online or telephone inquiries, or individuals raising 

complaints or concerns). 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

11. Please describe the nature and extent of any other representations you or your 

agents have made about the safety and efficacy of HARDER’s Kratom related to human health. 

Your description should include but not be limited to verbal and written representations; marketing 

materials; contracts, forms, templates and commercial documentation; website and blog 

publications; correspondence, invoicing and e-mail communications with retailers; and scripts or 

guidance for salespersons, telemarketers, and/or retailers of kratom products. In describing each 

representation or collection of representations, please include the location and content of each

representation, the dates or timeframes of the representation(s), and the persons making the 

representations (including agents and affiliates) and the persons receiving the representations 

(including but not limited to consumers making online or telephone inquiries, or individuals raising 

complaints or concerns). 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

12. Please describe the extent to which you have received information that adverse 

events may have been suffered by persons using HARDER kratom products (such as reports, 

claims, complaints, or allegations that a product user has suffered or may have suffered addiction, 

withdrawal, overdose, seizures, disabilities, death, disruption to enjoyment of life, or other 

negative symptoms or side effects from a HARDER product). Potential sources of such 

information would include, but not be limited to: medical professionals; suppliers; customers and 

consumers; retailers; comments or complaints submitted via website, social media, e-mail, or 

otherwise; communications from consumer family members; communications from regulatory or

law enforcement officials; communications from local doctors; etc. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 37 of 90
7 

13. For each adverse event identified above, please describe what you did in response 

to the reported adverse event. In your description, please include the dates, names and locations of 

the resulting activities identified, and any related reports, documentation, or analyses. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

14. State your knowledge of any claims for damages for injury relating to kratom sold 

by HARDER. State the date you learned of the claim, the nature and alleged basis for the claim, 

the disposition of the claim, and the person(s) making each such claim (including their contact 

information). 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

15. Describe the extent of your knowledge regarding Krystal Talavera’s death. In your 

description, include the date and manner by which you first received notice of her death, and any 

ensuring response, investigation and/or actions taken because of the death. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

16. Please describe the factual basis for any belief that HARDER’s kratom was not a 

cause of Krystal Talavera’s death. In your description, please detail the extent to which you 

believe: (1) there are other causes or persons (including but not limited to Ms. Talavera) who are 

at fault for Ms. Talavera’s death; and (2) other causes for Ms. Talavera’s death are greater than 

HARDER’s degree of fault. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

17. State the name and present address of each person you expect to call as an expert 

witness at the trial of this action and for each such witness state:

a. The background, training, experience, and other qualifications of each such person;

b. The substance of each fact to which he or she is expected to testify; 

c. The substance of each opinion to which he or she is expected to testify;

d. A summary of the grounds for each opinion; 

e. Please have each such expert affix his/her signature to the Answer to this 

Interrogatory; or, in the alternative, attach to your answers to these Interrogatories 

a report signed by each such expert, incorporating the information contained in (b) 

through (d). 

ANSWER: No expert witnesses have been retained at this time.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 38 of 90
8 

18. Except for those persons identified in the preceding Interrogatory, state the name 

and present address of any person who has been retained, employed or consulted by you as an 

expert in connection with the claim in this action or any defense to the claim in this action. 

ANSWER: Not applicable. 

19. Please describe any and all liability insurance policies in force and effect to provide 

liability insurance with respect to the damages that are the subject of this action, including any 

excess coverage policies. In your description, please include the name and address of each 

insurance company issuing each of said policies; the policy number of each of such policies; and 

the amount of liability insurance provided by each of such insurance policies for personal injuries. 

ANSWER: None. 

20. Describe the extent to which any representative of you or your insurer has 

conducted any investigation on your behalf relating to the claim in this action or any defense to 

said claim. In your description, please state the name and address, employer, and job title, position 

or capacity of each such person, and whether any of the persons named have prepared any notes, 

memoranda or summaries in connection with any such investigation. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder objects to this Interrogatory as it seeks information about 

what his attorneys have done in response to this lawsuit and claim and violates the attorneywork product privilege. 

21. Please set forth the factual basis that supports each affirmative defense you set forth 

in your Answer(s) to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, including any witnesses and documents that 

were relied upon when alleging the defense. This request does not seek a dress rehearsal of 

HARDER’s anticipated position at trial, but merely seeks a reasonable summary of the facts that 

HARDER believes sufficient to avoid a motion for summary judgment dismissal of each defense. 

ANSWER: Affirmative defenses were plead to avoid waiver. Discovery is ongoing. 

22. Please specify the extent of HARDER’s knowledge about the quantities and 

qualities and content of the kratom products sold to Krystal Talavera. Your description should 

specify the bases for such knowledge, including any documentation of transactions between 

Krystal Talavera and HARDER. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

23. Please state the name, address, and telephone number, of the person(s) responding 

to each of these interrogatories, the requests for production of documents, and the requests for 

admissions. In your statement, include the specific discovery request(s) they assisted with (listed 

by request number), and the capacity in which the person responds on behalf of HARDER. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder with the assistance of counsel.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 39 of 90
9 

24. Describe HARDER’S document retention and/or destruction policy regarding 

Kratom, including without limitation, the policy itself, and documents modifying, suspending or 

interpreting the policy. 

ANSWER: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

1. All documents containing written or recorded statements made by any person, 

which relate to Krystal Talavera’s death. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

2. All documents and materials relating to the investigation of Krystal Talavera’s 

death. This request does not include documents and materials created by or for your lawyers after 

the filing of this lawsuit. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

3. Correspondence, reports, documents and materials of any kind providing 

information about the Subject Incident and its cause received by HARDER from any other party 

or entity (exclusive of, attorneys and investigators of HARDER) or sent by HARDER to any other 

person or entity (exclusive of attorneys and investigators of HARDER). 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

4. All experts’ reports, including any tests, supporting data, calculations, or 

photographs, factual observations and reports or facts on which such experts intend to rely. 

RESPONSE: Not applicable. 

5. All documents, films, computer recreations, test results, graphic evidence, 

demonstrative evidence, compilations of data, statistics, books, treatises or any other type of 

evidence whatsoever that support HARDER’s defense of this lawsuit. This includes items that are 

impeaching in nature. 

RESPONSE: None. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 40 of 90
10 

6. Statements of witnesses, whether written, recorded or otherwise memorialized, 

which support HARDER’s defense of this lawsuit. This includes items that are impeaching in 

nature.

RESPONSE: None.

7. All marketing materials, advertisements, brochures, catalogs, promotional 

materials, television commercials, and other documents and materials that mention, describe, or 

refer to the qualities, characteristics, capabilities, capacities and virtues of the HARDER’s kratom 

products sold between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

8. All documents associated with or otherwise relating to HARDER’s document 

retention and/or destruction policy, including without limitation, the policy itself, and documents 

modifying, suspending or interpreting the policy. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder does not have a document retention policy.

9. All insurance agreements or policies under which any person or entity carrying on 

an insurance business may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment which may be rendered in 

this action or to indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy any judgment. 

RESPONSE: None.

10. All documents and materials for every lawsuit, claim or complaint that has been 

made against HARDER relating to a kratom product, wherein it was alleged that an injury or death 

may have resulted from ingesting a HARDER’s kratom product. 

RESPONSE: None other than this lawsuit.

11. Please produce all documents containing safety-related information about 

HARDER’s products that HARDER has used or considered for its product consumers. This would 

include labels, warnings, disclaimers, guidance, or other information relating to the relative safety 

or danger of HARDER products for human consumption. This would also include documents 

drafted, considered, proposed, rejected, and/or utilized for disseminating safety-related 

information; as well as correspondence, meeting agendas, minutes, notes, transcripts, worksheets, 

notices or reports which discuss or analyze, revised or new safety-related information for any

HARDER kratom product. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 41 of 90
11 

12. Please produce all documentation relating to lab testing of HARDER’s kratom 

products, including lab testing documentation referenced or relied upon in your response to 

Interrogatory 7 above. Your response should include any and all testing standards, procedures, 

protocols, references and results for such testing. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

13. Please produce all contractual documents and agreements between HARDER and 

entities, contractors, employees or other persons who have manufactured, processed and/or 

supplied kratom to HARDER between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

14. Please produce all documents discussing or analyzing the risks, warnings, or harms 

associated with HARDER’s kratom products, including any documents relied upon or identified 

in preparing the response to Interrogatory 9 above. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

15. Please produce all documents relating to the standards, policies, procedures, and/or 

practices used in preparing, marketing, and selling HARDER’s kratom products. This would 

include but not be limited to documents relating to and arising from efforts to qualify HARDER’s 

kratom products for the American Kratom Association’s Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) 

Qualified Vendor Status, or any other manufacturing standards, such as industry or regulatory 

standards; and any other documents referenced or relied upon in your response to Interrogatory 

No. 5. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

16. Please produce all documents discussing, referencing, or arising from adverse 

events described in your responses to Interrogatories 12, 13, 14, and 15. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

17. Please produce all documents regarding the marketing, distribution and sale of 

HARDER’s kratom products from between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2022. These documents 

should include all proposals, contracts, agreements, warranties, invoices, marketing materials, 

labeling or other product guidance, and documentation of communications regarding HARDER 

kratom products sold, including electronic communications. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 42 of 90
12 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

18. Please produce all documents which reflect HARDER’s effort to monitor the extent 

to which complications (such as overdose and/or death) are arising with regard to kratom sold in 

the United States. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

19. Please provide all documents that HARDER has exchanged with the American 

Kratom Association regarding the sale and distribution of kratom in the United States.

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

20. Please provide all documents that HARDER has provided, received, or exchanged 

with federal regulatory agencies (including but not limited to the FDA, the DEA, or the FTC) 

regarding HARDER’s kratom products. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

21. Please produce all documents and representations referenced or relied upon in 

preparing your response to Interrogatory 2, including but not limited to all copies of applications, 

submissions, notices, labels and/or branding prepared in connection with the federal regulations. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

22. Please provide all other documents referenced in your responses to the

Interrogatories above, but not otherwise produced in the Requests for Production. 

RESPONSE: None. 

23. Please produce all text messages, voicemails, social media posts, blog posts, and 

any other form of electronic communication or media between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 

2022, that you have authored and/or published which references or discusses Kratom. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in response to this 

inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Further, this request is 

over broad, not proportional to the needs of this csae and unduly burdensome because Mr. 

Talavera passed away on June 20, 2021. This is not a chronic exposure toxic tort case. 

Plaintiff’s own experts opine that the cause of death was acute mitragynine intoxication and 

Plaintiff has produced the package of the single product that Ms. Talavera allegedly ingested 

on that single date that allegedly caused her death. Therefore, seeking all the above materials 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 43 of 90
13 

over a six-year period is overbroad to the extreme. 

24. Please describe the extent to which you sought guidance on kratom from a medical 

provider, or any other person or entity that you believe was qualified to provide reliable guidance 

on kratom’s safety, efficacy, toxicology and/or pharmacology. In your description, please identify 

the dates that any guidance was sought and received, the persons or entities providing such 

guidance, the substance of the guidance, and its form (written, verbal, electronic, etc.). 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder objects as this Request for Production asks for him to 

describe the extent he did something which is not a proper document request. To the extent 

this is deemed an interrogatory, Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in 

response to this inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

25. Please describe the extent to which you sought and received guidance on the safety 

and efficacy of kratom from any persons other than those described in the preceding interrogatory. 

In your description please identify the dates guidance was sought and received, the persons or 

entities providing the guidance, and the substance and form of the guidance.

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder objects as this Request for Production asks for him to 

describe the extent he did something which is not a proper document request. To the extent 

this is deemed an interrogatory, Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in 

response to this inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 

26. Please describe your personal experience with kratom use. In your description, 

please identify the specific kratom products and forms of kratom used; the amount and frequency 

of your use; how that use has changed through the years; the reasons why you have increased or 

decreased your use of kratom; any adverse effects from your kratom use; and the nature and extent 

of any guidance you have sought treatment or guidance from medical providers or other qualified 

professionals related to your kratom use. 

RESPONSE: Mr. Harder objects as this Request for Production asks for him to 

describe the extent he did something which is not a proper document request. To the extent 

this is deemed an interrogatory, Mr. Harder asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege in 

response to this inquiry. Pisciotti v. Stephens, 940 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 44 of 90
14 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 3, 2023, a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

was served via email on Michael J. Cowgill and Tamara J. Williams, mctlaw, 

mcowgill@mctlaw.com; twilliams@mctlaw.com; hdiener@mctlaw.com; and 

mpowell@mctlaw.com. 

/s/ Justin D. Niznik

Designated email addresses:

justin.niznik@bowmanandbrooke.com 

kara.thomas@bowmanandbrooke.com 

orfa.diaz@bowmanandbrooke.com

JUSTIN D. NIZNIK

Florida Bar No. 774901 

BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP

1064 Greenwood Boulevard - Suite 212 

Lake Mary, Florida 32746-5419 

(407) 585-7600 

(407) 585-7610 – Fax

Attorneys for Defendants

GROW, LLC and 

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 45 of 90
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CIVIL DIVISION

DEVIN FILIPPELLI as

Personal Representative of the CASE NO.: 9:22-cv-81731

ESTATE OF KRYSTAL TALAVERA,

on behalf of the Estate and her Survivors, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

GROW, LLC (b/d/a KD INCORPORATED 

and THE KRATOM DISTRO); and SEAN 

MICHAEL HARDER, individually. 

a California corporation. 

Defendant.

SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DESIGNATED DOCUMENTS

IN A CIVIL ACTION 

TO: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

C/O: Office of Chief Counsel 

1300 Pennsylvania Ave, Suite 4.4-B 

Washington, D.C. 20229 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, 

you are commanded to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the 

following documents, electronically stored information, or objects, and to permit 

inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of the material outlined in Exhibit A. 

Place:mctlaw

1605 Main Street, Suite 710

Sarasota, Florida 34236

Date: March 27, 2023

Time: 9:00 AM

Exhibit D

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 46 of 90
You may also send the requested documents by electronic mail to counsel on 

or before the date and time specified above. If you wish to produce the documents 

by mail, please mail the documents to Attn: Heather Diener, mctlaw, 1605 Main 

Street, Suite 710, Sarasota, Florida 34236. If alternative delivery arrangements are 

necessary, please contact me directly at: 941-201-3002.

The following provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 are attached, 

Rule 45(d), relating to your protection as a person subject to a subpoena; and Rule 

45(e), relating to your duty to respond to this subpoena and the potential 

consequences of not doing so.

Dated: March 10, 2023

Respectfully, 

_________________________

Michael Cowgill, Esq.

mctlaw 

1605 Main Street, Suite 710 

Sarasota, FL 34236

Phone: 888-952-5242 

Fax: 941-952-5042 

Email: mcowgill@mctlaw.com

 Email: hdiener@mctlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 47 of 90
Exhibit A

Definitions

1. The term "DOCUMENT" shall mean the original and all non-identical copies 

and drafts, regardless of origin or location, of any writing and any written, 

printed, typed, or other graphic or photographic matter of any kind or 

description, in draft or final form, including, but not limited to, 

correspondence, letters, telegrams, facsimiles, cables, telex messages, e-mail, 

memoranda, notes, interoffice and interdepartmental communications, 

transcripts, minutes of conversations or meetings, reports, studies, any audio 

or video recordings, voicemail, contracts, calendar or diary entries, pamphlets, 

handwritten notes, charts, tabulations, records of meetings, conferences, 

telephone or other conversations or communications, and tapes or slides, and

other data compilations from which information can be obtained or translated. 

2. The term “COPY” shall mean a reproduction or duplicate of an original 

document. 

3. The term “CONCERN” shall mean relating to, referring to, describing, 

evidencing, on constituting, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, the 

stated subject matter.

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

1. Complete copies of all bills of lading from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021

concerning buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Aditama 

Sentosa Indonesia; and cargo description: green tea powder fertilizer HS 

Code: 3101.00.99.

2. Complete copies of all bills of lading from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 

concerning buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Tiga Cemara

Sentosa; and cargo description: green tea powder fertilizer HS Code: 

3101.00.99.

3. Complete copies of bills of lading from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 concerning 

buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Aditama Sentosa 

Indonesia; and cargo description: mitragyna speciosa powder H.S. Code: 

2525.20.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 48 of 90
4. Complete copies of bills of lading from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 concerning 

buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Tiga Cemara Sentosa; and 

cargo description: mitragyna speciosa powder H.S. Code: 2525.20.

5. Complete copies of shipping receipts from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 

concerning buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Aditama 

Sentosa Indonesia; and cargo description: green tea powder fertilizer HS 

Code: 3101.00.99.

6. Complete copies of shipping receipts from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 

concerning buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Tiga Cemara 

Sentosa; and cargo description: green tea powder fertilizer HS Code: 

3101.00.99.

7. Complete copies of shipping receipts from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 

concerning buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Aditama 

Sentosa Indonesia; and cargo description: mitragyna speciosa powder H.S. 

Code: 2525.20.

8. Complete copies of shipping receipts from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021 

concerning buyer/consignee: Sean Harder; supplier/shipper PT Tiga Cemara 

Sentosa; and cargo description: mitragyna speciosa powder H.S. Code: 

2525.20.

9. Complete copies of entry summary documents, CBP form 7501, CBP 7533, 

and CBP 3461 concerning Sean Harder from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021, 

regarding cargo description: green tea powder fertilizer HS Code: 3101.00.99.

10. Complete copies of entry summary documents, CBP form 7501, CBP 7533, 

and CBP 3461 concerning Sean Harder from July 1, 2018 – July 1, 2021, 

regarding cargo description: mitragyna speciosa powder H.S. Code: 2525.20.

11. Complete copies of entry summary documents, CBP form 7501, CBP 7533, 

and CBP 3461, concerning Sean Harder and Ability Customs Brokers, 13910 

Doolittle Drive, Sean Leandro, CA 94577, regarding cargo description: 

mitragyna speciosa powder H.S. Code: 2525.20.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 49 of 90
***NOTE: The address and telephone number associated with Sean Harder is 

as follows:

Address: 1061 N. Cliff Creek Ave, Meridian, ID 83642 

(some records may reflect an address of: 1061 N. Clift Creek Ave, 

Meridian, ID 83642)

Telephone: 208-713-0742

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 50 of 90
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. Subpoena

(d) PROTECTING A PERSON SUBJECT TO A SUBPOENA; ENFORCEMENT.

(1) Avoiding Undue Burden or Expense; Sanctions. A party or attorney 

responsible for issuing and serving a subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid 

imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The court 

for the district where compliance is required must enforce this duty and impose an 

appropriate sanction—which may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's 

fees—on a party or attorney who fails to comply.

(2) Command to Produce Materials or Permit Inspection.

(A) Appearance Not Required. A person commanded to produce documents, 

electronically stored information, or tangible things, or to permit the inspection 

of premises, need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection 

unless also commanded to appear for a deposition, hearing, or trial.

(B) Objections. A person commanded to produce documents or tangible 

things or to permit inspection may serve on the party or attorney designated in 

the subpoena a written objection to inspecting, copying, testing or sampling any 

or all of the materials or to inspecting the premises—or to producing 

electronically stored information in the form or forms requested. The objection 

must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days 

after the subpoena is served. If an objection is made, the following rules apply:

(i) At any time, on notice to the commanded person, the serving party may 

move the court for the district where compliance is required for an order 

compelling production or inspection.

(ii) These acts may be required only as directed in the order, and the order 

must protect a person who is neither a party nor a party's officer from 

significant expense resulting from compliance.

(3) Quashing or Modifying a Subpoena.

(A) When Required. On timely motion, the court for the district where 

compliance is required must quash or modify a subpoena that:

(i) fails to allow a reasonable time to comply;

(ii) requires a person to comply beyond the geographical limits specified 

in Rule 45(c);

(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no 

exception or waiver applies; or

(iv) subjects a person to undue burden.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 51 of 90
(B) When Permitted. To protect a person subject to or affected by a subpoena, 

the court for the district where compliance is required may, on motion, quash or 

modify the subpoena if it requires:

(i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or 

commercial information; or

(ii) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not 

describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study 

that was not requested by a party.

(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative. In the circumstances described 

in Rule 45(d)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a 

subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the 

serving party:

(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be 

otherwise met without undue hardship; and

(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated.

(e) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO A SUBPOENA.

(1) Producing Documents or Electronically Stored Information. These 

procedures apply to producing documents or electronically stored information:

(A) Documents. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents 

must produce them as they are kept in the ordinary course of business or must 

organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the demand.

(B) Form for Producing Electronically Stored Information Not Specified. If a 

subpoena does not specify a form for producing electronically stored 

information, the person responding must produce it in a form or forms in which 

it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms.

(C) Electronically Stored Information Produced in Only One Form. The 

person responding need not produce the same electronically stored information 

in more than one form.

(D) Inaccessible Electronically Stored Information. The person responding 

need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources 

that the person identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden 

or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the person 

responding must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because 

of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless 

order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 52 of 90
considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify 

conditions for the discovery.

(2) Claiming Privilege or Protection.

(A) Information Withheld. A person withholding subpoenaed information 

under a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation 

material must:

(i) expressly make the claim; and

(ii) describe the nature of the withheld documents, communications, or

tangible things in a manner that, without revealing information itself 

privileged or protected, will enable the parties to assess the claim.

(B) Information Produced. If information produced in response to a subpoena 

is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, 

the person making the claim may notify any party that received the information 

of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly 

return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; 

must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take 

reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being 

notified; and may promptly present the information under seal to the court for 

the district where compliance is required for a determination of the claim. The 

person who produced the information must preserve the information until the 

claim is resolved.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 53 of 90
TP-2023-00148 KEM

March 22, 2023 

Via Electronic Mail to: mcowgill@mctlaw.com

Michael Cowgill, Esq. 

mctlaw

1605 Main Street, Suite 710 

Sarasota, FL 34236 

Re: The Estate of Krystal Talavera v. GROW LLC

Case No. 9:22-cv-81731 

Dear Mr. Cowgill: 

This letter responds to the Subpoena to Produce Designated Documents in a Civil Action

(“Subpoena”) received by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP” or “Agency”) on or about 

March 13, 2023, regarding the above-referenced action. In the Subpoena, you seek bills of lading, 

shipping receipts and entry summary documents, CBP Forms 7501, CBP Forms 7533 and CBP 

Forms 3461 concerning Sean Harder, PT Aditama Sentosa Indonesia, and PT Tiga Cemara Sentosa

The United States Supreme Court has specifically recognized the authority of a federal agency to 

restrict the production of information, documentation, and/or testimony of its subordinate 

employees. United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951); Boske v. Comminfore, 177 

U.S. 459 (1900). The procedures for requesting CBP information in any proceeding in which the 

U.S. Government is not a party are set forth in 19 C.F.R. Part 103, Subpart B. In particular, Section 

103.22(c) of these regulations explains the requesting party’s initial burden in the event of a 

demand for CBP information in any civil proceeding. It provides in relevant part: 

A party seeking CBP information shall serve on the appropriate CBP employee the 

demand, a copy of the Summons and Complaint, and provide an affidavit, or, if that 

is not feasible, a statement that sets forth a summary of the documents or testimony 

sought and its relevance to the proceeding. 

Your request is not in compliance with this requirement. Therefore, we could not evaluate the 

Subpoena under the provisions of 19 C.F.R. § 103.22(f), which permits the production of CBP 

documents only if disclosure is appropriate under those factors specified in 19 C.F.R. § 103.23(a), 

and if none of the factors specified in 19 C.F.R. § 103.23(b) exist with respect to such CBP 

documents. 

3811 Corporex Park Drive

Tampa, Florida 33619

Exhibit E

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 54 of 90
Nevertheless, after evaluating the Subpoena without the benefit of the information noted above, 

CBP will not comply with the Subpoena for reasons that include, but are not necessarily limited 

to, the following:

• There is no evidence that the documentation is relevant or material to the pending action 

(19 C.F.R. § 103.23(a)(3)(i));

• There is no evidence that the documentation is genuinely necessary to the proceeding (19 

C.F.R. § 103.23(a)(3)(ii));

• The information sought appears to be available from other sources (19 C.F.R. § 

103.23(a)(3)(iii));

• There is no evidence that the request is reasonable in scope (19 C.F.R. § 103.23(a)(3)(iv));

• Disclosure would violate the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1905 (19 C.F.R. § 

103.23(b)(1)); 

• Disclosure would improperly reveal confidential commercial information without the 

owner’s consent (e.g., entry information) (19 C.F.R. § 103.23(b)(6));

• Disclosure may relate to documents which were produced by another agency or entity (19 

C.F.R. § 103.23(b)(7)); and

• CBP has no interest in the above-referenced matter (19 C.F.R. § 103.23(b)(9)).

Furthermore, it has been determined that it is unacceptable for CBP to become embroiled in this 

type of action when there is no real need for CBP to do so. Production of CBP documents in 

response to this Subpoena entails the expenditure of public resources for a purely private purpose. 

Accordingly, CBP will not search for any of the requested documents. If you have any questions, 

you may contact me at (813) 623-6331, ext. 1. 

Sincerely,

 Karen E. Makkreel

Assistant Chief Counsel

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 55 of 90
4/17/23, 10:30 AM Re: Estate of Krystal Talavera v. GROW LLC et al. (9:22-cv-81731) - Tamara J. Williams - Outlook

about:blank 1/1

From: Tamara J. Williams <twilliams@mctlaw.com>

Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 5:03 PM

To: MAKKREEL, KAREN E (OCC) <KAREN.MAKKREEL@CBP.DHS.GOV>

Cc: Michael Cowgill <mcowgill@mctlaw.com>; Talis Abolins <tabolins@mctlaw.com>; Heather Diener

<hdiener@mctlaw.com>

Subject: Estate of Krystal Talavera v. GROW LLC et al. (9:22-cv-81731)

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of DHS. DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize and/or trust t

sender. If you feel this is a suspicious-looking email, please report by using the Report Phish button opt

Good afternoon Ms. Makkree

We are in receipt of CBP's response to our subpoena dated March 13, 2023. Attached is the summon

complaint, and affidavit regarding the above-referenced matter. Additionally, we would like to schedu

to discuss. We are available to discuss the week of April 3rd except on April 4th from 1pm - 3:30pm. Please let us

know what date and time is best and we will give you a cal

Tamara

Tamara J. Williams, Esq.

twilliams@mctlaw.com

mctlaw

1605 Main Street, Suite 710

Sarasota, FL 34236

Office: 888.952.5

This message is personal and confidential. If you have received it and it is not intended for you, please delete the mes

immediately and via reply e-mail inform the sender of your unintended receipt of the message. No attorney-clie

relationship can be established with mctlaw absent a signed retainer agreement signed by an authorized atto

from mctlaw.

Exhibit F

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 56 of 90
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CIVIL DIVISION 

DEVIN FILIPPELLI, as 

Personal Representative of the 

ESTATE OF KRYSTAL TALAVERA, CASE NO: 9:22-cv-81731

on behalf of the Estate and her 

Survivors, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KD INCORPORATED 

and THE KRATOM DISTRO); and 

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER, individually. 

Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT OF TAMARA J. WILLIAMS, ESQ. PURSUANT TO 19 C.F.R. § 

103.22(C)

I, Tamara J. Williams, Esq., state the following concerning documents sought 

from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) through party subpoena, and its 

relevance to the above-captioned case. 

1. On June 20, 2021, thirty-nine year old Krystal Talavera (“Krystal”), died as a 

result of acute mitragynine (kratom) toxicity. 

2. Krystal regularly and routinely purchased kratom from Defendants, GROW 

LLC (d/b/a KD Incorporated and The Kratom Distro) (“GROW”) and Sean 

Michael Harder (“Harder”) under the belief that kratom was an all-natural and 

safe dietary supplement. 

3. On November 4, 2023, Plaintiff initiated a wrongful death action against 

Defendants GROW and Harder, alleging strict products liability, breach of 

warranty, fraudulent misrepresentation, and negligence. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 57 of 90
4. Kratom is an herbal extract derived from the leaves of Mitragyna speciosa, a 

tropical tree native to Southeast Asia.

5. Although kratom is not formally classified as an opiate, Kratom contains 

dozens of psychoactive compounds or alkaloids, many of which are not 

understood. 

6. The two (2) most-studied alkaloids are mitragynine and 7-

hydroxymitragynine. These two alkaloids bind to the same opioid brain 

receptors as morphine. Like opiates, these compounds can lead to analgesia 

(release of pain), euphoria, and sedation.

7. Kratom is not approved for medical purposes, and Kratom is illegal in several 

states and cities. 

8. Kratom is not FDA approved. The FDA issued numerous warnings against the 

use of products containing Kratom or its psychoactive compounds and has 

taken action against those who illegally sell the product for pain treatment and 

other medical uses.

9. Kratom is not approved for importation and distribution in interstate 

commerce without a premarket substantiation that the product containing 

Kratom is reasonably safe for human consumption. The FDA has issued 

numerous warnings to companies importing and selling Kratom for human 

consumption and for medicinal purposes. Federal officials have also pursued 

enforcement actions against those illegally importing and selling adulterated 

and misbranded products.1

1 See FDA and Kratom (https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/fda-and-kratom) (last 

accessed Mar. 23, 2022); See also FDA issues warnings to companies selling illegal, unapproved 

kratom drug products marketed for opioid cessation, pain treatment and other medical uses 

(https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-issues-warnings-companies-sellingillegal-unapproved-kratom-drug-products-marketed-opioid) (last accessed March 23, 2023); see also 

DOJ DEA Drug Fact Sheet – Kratom (https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/Kratom2020_0.pdf) (last accessed Mar. 23, 2022).

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 58 of 90
10. Defendants, GROW and Harder are in the business of manufacturing, 

distributing, importing, supplying, and/or selling kratom to U.S. consumers.

11. On March 13, 2023, Plaintiff sent a subpoena to CBP, seeking specific 

documents that would identify those companies, entities, and/or individuals 

that supplied the kratom products to Defendant’s that ultimately killed 

Krystal. 

12.CBP is required to consider the following factors in determining whether to 

disclose information: 

(1) Whether the disclosure would be appropriate under the relevant 

substantive law concerning privilege;

(2) Whether the disclosure would be appropriate under the rules of procedure 

governing the case or matter in which the demand arose; and,

(3) Whether the requesting party has demonstrated that the information 

requested is:

(i) Relevant and material to the action pending, based on copies of the 

summons and complaint that are required to be attached to the 

subpoena duces tecum or other demand;

(ii) Genuinely necessary to the proceeding, i.e., a showing of 

substantial need has been made;

(iii) Unavailable from other sources; and,

(iv) Reasonable in its scope, i.e., the documents, information, or 

testimony sought are described with particularity.

(4) Whether consultation with the originating component requires that the 

Chief Counsel make a separate determination as to the disclosure of the 

information requested.

19 C.F.R. 103.23(a)

13.This is an action that was filed in the U.S. District Court of Florida on the basis 

of diversity jurisdiction. Florida’s substantive law applies and documents 

requested by Plaintiff are not privileged. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 59 of 90
14. Privileges recognized in Florida are: lawyer/client privilege; 

psychotherapist/patient privilege; sexual assault counselor/victim privilege; 

domestic violence advocate/victim privilege; husband/wife privilege; 

clergy/parishioner privilege; and accountant/client privilege. See FL. Stat. 

§90.501-90.5055. 

15. A plain reading of the statute reveals that Defendants are not subject to any 

privilege thus, disclosure is appropriate. 

16.Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern this proceeding. This matter concerns 

the death of Krystal Talavera due to the Defendants sale of Kratom, a botanical 

imported into the U.S. and sold to consumers. Plaintiff seeks disclosure of 

specific documents that are directly related to the importation of kratom by 

Defendants. Disclosure is appropriate. 

17. A careful review of the summons, complaint, this affidavit, and additional 

pleadings filed in this action reveals that the information sought is relevant, 

material, and necessary. Specifically, Plaintiff seeks to name all parties within 

the chain of distribution, and the documents sought from CBP will potentially

identify liable parties. 

18. Additionally, Defendant Harder has asserted the Fifth Amendment, opting 

not to reveal any information that would further this litigation.

19. If Plaintiff is unable to identify the necessary parties to add to this suit within 

the statute of limitations, Plaintiff will be unfairly prejudiced and left without 

an adequate legal remedy.

20. The requested materials cannot be obtained through any other means. 

Through use of the 5th Amendment, Defendants refuse to turnover any 

information sought, including initial disclosures pursuant to F.R.C.P. 26 and 

upstream suppliers responsible for Krystal’s death. 

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 60 of 90
21. Plaintiff is now forced to seek the necessary information needed to bring 

justice from third parties like CBP. 

22.Plaintiff respectfully requests CBP to take an interest in this production as it 

involves the unlawful importation of a dangerous substance harming U.S. 

citizens. 

23. Plaintiff’s counsel is available for a meet and confer to discuss the matter in 

further detail.

Dated: March 23, 2023

Signed and filed under penalty of perjury:

Tamara J. Williams, Esq.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 61 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 62 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 63 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 64 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 65 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 66 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 67 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 68 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 69 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 70 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 71 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 72 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 73 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 74 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 75 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 76 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 77 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 78 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 79 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 80 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 81 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 82 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 83 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 84 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 85 of 90
Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 86 of 90
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

for the 

Southern District of Florida 

DEVIN FILIPPELLl,as Personal Representative 

of the ESTATEOF KRYSTAL TALAVERA, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

on bhalf of the Estate and her Survivors 

Plaintiff(s) 

V. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KO INCORPORATED 

and THE KRATOM DISTRO);and 

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER, individually 

Defendant(s) 

Civil Action No. 9:22cv81731 

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION 

To: (Defendant's name and address)

Sean Michael Harder, Registered Agent 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KO Incorprated and The Kratom Distro) 

1061 N Clif Creek Ave. 

Meridian, ID 83642 

A lawsuit has been filed against you. 

Within 21 days afer service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it)-or 60 days if you 

are the United States or a United States agency, or an ofcer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12 (a)

(2) or (3)-you must serve on the plaintif an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintifs attorey,

whose name and address are: Michael J. Cowgill, Esq. (mcwgill@mctlaw.com) 

TamaraJ. Williams, Esq. (twilliams@mctlaw.com) 

mctlaw 

1605 Main Street, Suite 710 

Sarasota, FL 34236 

Telepone 888.952.5242 

If you fail to respond, judgment by defult will be entered against you fr the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the comt. 

CLERK OF COURT 

Date: 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

Nov 7, 2022 s/ Nadhege Augustin

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 87 of 90 Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/07/2022 Page 2 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

for the 

Southern District of Florida 

DEVIN FILIPPELLl,as Personal Representative 

of the ESTATEOF KRYSTAL TALAVERA, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

on bhalf of the Estate and her Survivors 

Plaintiff(s) 

V. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KO INCORPORATED 

and THE KRATOM DISTRO);and 

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER, individually 

Defendant(s) 

Civil Action No. 9:22cv81731 

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION 

To: (Defendant's name and address)

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER, individually 

1061 N. Clif Creek Ave. 

Meridian, ID 83642 

A lawsuit has been filed against you. 

Within 21 days afer service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it)-or 60 days if you 

are the United States or a United States agency, or an ofcer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12 (a)

(2) or (3)-you must serve on the plaintif an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintifs attorey,

whose name and address are: Michael J. Cowgill, Esq. (mcwgill@mctlaw.com) 

TamaraJ. Williams, Esq. (twilliams@mctlaw.com) 

mctlaw 

1605 Main Street, Suite 710 

Sarasota, FL 34236 

Telepone 888.952.5242 

If you fail to respond, judgment by defult will be entered against you fr the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the comt. 

CLERK OF COURT 

Date: 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

Nov 7, 2022 s/ Nadhege Augustin

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 88 of 90 Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/07/2022 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CIVIL DIVISION 

DEVIN FILIPPELLI, as 

Personal Representative of the 

ESTATE OF KRYSTAL TALAVERA, CASE NO: 9:22-cv-81731

on behalf of the Estate and her 

Survivors, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

GROW, LLC (d/b/a KD INCORPORATED 

and THE KRATOM DISTRO); and 

SEAN MICHAEL HARDER, individually. 

Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT OF TAMARA J. WILLIAMS, ESQ.

I, Tamara J. Williams, Esq., state the following in support of Plaintiff’s motion to 

compel subpoena documents from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”):

1. I was admitted to practice law in the State of Florida April 2017, and 

my Florida Bar number is: 0127625.

2. I am in good standing with the Florida Bar Association.

3. I am in good standing and admitted to practice law in the Southern District of

Florida.

4. I am one of the attorneys who represent the Plaintiff in the above-captioned

case. 

Exhibit G

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 89 of 90
5. On April 3, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel had a conference call with attorney Karen 

Makkreel, Assistant Chief Counsel of U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(“CBP”), regarding the subpoena served on CBP by Plaintiff on March 10, 2023. 

6. Plaintiff’s counsel and Ms. Makkreel discussed CBP’s objection to the served 

subpoena and Plaintiff’s response to CBP’s objection. 

7. Ms. Makkreel explained that, while CBP understands why Plaintiff has

requested the documents identified in the subpoena, CBP is not in a position 

to provide the documents requested absent an order from the court. 

8. CBP further explained that once a court order is received, CBP will provide the

documents Plaintiff seeks pursuant to the March 10, 2023 subpoena. 

Dated: April 17, 2023

Signed and filed under penalty of perjury:

Tamara J. Williams, Esq.

Case 9:22-cv-81731-DMM Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2023 Page 90 of 90