EXHIBIT 2

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 1 of 75
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

REPORTED BY : Blend Document Technologies, LLC 

1015 Central Parkway North, Ste. 100

San Antonio, TX 78232 

TEL : (210) 227-9500 

FAX : (877) 255-8158

EMAIL : records@blendlit.com

6596.001

5:20-CV-00746-JKP-HJB

MELODY JOY CANTU AND 

DR. RODRIGO CANTU 

V. 

DR. SANDRA GUERRA AND 

DIGITAL FORENSICS CORPORATION, LLC 

DELIVER TO : Ricardo G. Cedillo

DAVIS, CEDILLO & MENDOZA, INC.

755 E. Mulberry Ave., Ste. 250

San Antonio, TX 78212-3135

RECORDS FROM : United Services Automobile Association

See Attached Exhibit 'A' 

PERTAINS TO : See Attached Exhibit 'A'

WITH AFFIDAVIT

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 2 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 3 of 75
6596.001

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

MELODY JOY CANTU AND §

DR. RODRIGO CANTU §

§

V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-00746-JKP-HJB 

§

DR. SANDRA GUERRA AND §

DIGITAL FORENSICS CORPORATION, LLC §

NOTICE OF DELIVERY

RE: See Attached Exhibit 'A' requested from United Services Automobile Association

I, Rex Rexilus, Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, hereby certify pursuant to the Rule 30 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure:

1. That this Deposition by Written Questions of Frank Meredith, the Custodian of Records for the above-named, is a true and exact

duplicate of the records pertaining to See Attached Exhibit 'A', given by the witness named herein, after said witness was duly

sworn;

2. That the transcript is a true record of the testimony given by the witness: 

3. That $146.25 is the taxable cost for the preparation of the completed Deposition by Written Questions and any copies of exibits,

charged to attorney for Defendant(s), Ricardo G. Cedillo, SBA #04043600;

4. That the deposition transcript was submitted on September 13th, 2022, to the witness for examination, signature and return to the

officer by a specified date;

5. That changes, if any made by the witness, in the transcript and otherwise, are attached thereto or incorporated therein;

6. That the witness returned the transcript;

7. That the original Deposition by Written Questions and a copy thereof, together with copies of all exhibits, was delivered to the

attorney or party who noticed the first questions for safekeeping and use at trial;

8. That pursuant to information made a part of the records at the time said testimony was taken, the following includes all parties of

record:

J. David Apple 

APPLE & FINK, LLP

Rain Levy Minns 

MINNS LAW FIRM, P.C.

Ricardo G. Cedillo 

DAVIS, CEDILLO & MENDOZA, INC.

Tor Ekeland 

TOR EKELAND LAW, PLLC

and

9. A copy of this Notice of Delivery was served on all parties shown herein.

10. Given under my hand and seal of office on October 6, 2022 .

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 4 of 75
6596.001

Blend Document Technologies, LLC

1015 Central Parkway North, Ste. 100

San Antonio, TX 78232

Tel: (210) 227-9500 | Fax: (877) 255-8158

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 5 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 6 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 7 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 8 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 9 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 10 of 75
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 11 of 75
PAGE 1 OF 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

MELODY JOY CANTU and

DR. RODRIGO CANTU, 

Plaintiffs

V.

DR. SANDRA GUERRA and

DIGITAL FORENSICS 

CORPORATION, LLC

Defendants

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NO.: 5:20-CV-00746-JKP (HJB)

EXHIBIT A

A. DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS:

1. The term “person” means natural persons, general partnerships, limited partnerships, 

joint ventures, associations, corporations, governmental agencies (whether federal, state 

or local or any agency of the government of a foreign county), departmental units or 

subdivisions thereof, and any other form of business entity or association, as the case 

maybe.

2. The terms “document” and “documents” mean all documents and tangible things, in the 

broadest sense allowed under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and include, but are

not limited and include the original and each non-identical copy (whether different from 

the original because of marginal notes or other material inserted, or attached, or 

otherwise) of any written or graphic matter however produced or reproduced, whether 

sent or received or neither, including, without limitation, drafts and both sides thereof, 

and including but not limited to: spreadsheets, papers, books, letters, correspondence, 

telegrams, cables, telex messages, memoranda, typed or handwritten notes, notations, 

files, work papers, transcripts, minutes, reports and records of telephone or other 

conversations or of interviews or of conferences or meetings, maps, charts, plans, 

specifications, diagrams, photographs, affidavits, statements, summaries, opinions, 

reports, studies, analyses, evaluations, contracts, agreements, ledgers, journals, financial 

statements, statistical records, desk calendars, appointment books, diaries, expense 

account records, lists, tabulations, and sound recordings, computer disks, computer 

printouts, data processing input and output, film, microfilm, e-mail, electronically stored

information (“ESI”), and all other records kept by electronic, photographic, magnetic, or 

mechanical means and items similar to any of the foregoing. 

3. A request for "electronically stored information" or documents "in electronic form" calls 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 12 of 75
PAGE 2 OF 6

upon You to produce such information, without deletion or alteration of meta-data, in its 

native form, and to indicate the computer hardware and software program(s) needed to 

translate the information into usable form in the information's native format.

4. You are to produce all documents, as defined above, that are in your possession, control 

or custody or in the possession, control or custody of any attorney for you. Without 

limiting the term “control,” a document is deemed to be within your control if you have

ownership, possession or custody of the document, or the right to secure the document 

or copy thereof from any person or public or private entity having physical possession 

thereof. This includes documents in the possession of your attorneys, accountants, 

advisors or other persons directly or indirectly employed by or connected with you, or 

your attorneys, and/or anyone else otherwise subject to your control.

5. Each document produced should be specifically identified with the specific request 

made herein and should be produced in a form which renders the document susceptible 

to copying.

6. All duplicates or copies of documents are to be provided to the extent they have 

handwriting, additions, or deletions of any kind different from the original document 

being produced.

7. The term “and/or,” “or,” and “and” are used inclusively, not exclusively.

8. Wherever the words “evidencing,” “reflecting,” “relating,” “demonstrating,” “pertaining

to” and/or “concerning” appear herein, the meaning intended shall include: directly or 

indirectly referring to, related to, relating to, alluding to, having any relationship to, 

pertaining to, comprising, evidencing, constituting evidence of, connected with, 

commenting on, regarding, discussing, mentioning, analyzing, constituting, showing, 

referring in any way to, embodying in whole or in part, or being relevant to that subject 

matter, and is meant to include, among other documents, documents underlying,

supporting, now or previously attached or appended to, and/or used in the preparation of 

any document called for by the Request.

9. Use of the singular shall be taken to include the plural and vice-versa.

10. The term “communication” refers to any transfer of information, oral or written, be it in 

the form of facts, ideas, inquiries, opinions or otherwise, by any means, at any time or 

place, under any circumstances, and is not limited to transfers between persons, but

includes other transfers, such as records and memoranda to the file.

11. If you object to any request or any portion of any request on the ground that it would 

constitute an undue burden to respond, respond to the request as fully as possible 

without undertaking an undue burden and identify all reasons it would constitute an 

undue burden to respond fully and completely.

12. If you object to any request or any portion of any request on the ground that it is vague, 

ambiguous, and/or indefinite, set forth Your understanding of the allegedly vague, 

ambiguous, and/or indefinite term(s) and respond to the Interrogatory based upon such 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 13 of 75
PAGE 3 OF 6

stated understanding(s).

13. If any request cannot be complied with in full, it should be complied with to the extent 

possible and an explanation provided as to why full compliance is not possible.

14. If any claim of privilege is asserted as to any requested documents (or any portion 

thereof), you shall furnish in lieu of any documents withheld, a schedule or log which 

specifically describes the information or materials withheld and states the specific 

privilege for each item or group of items withheld. All segregable portions of any 

document, as to which no claim of privilege is being asserted, should be produced in 

redacted form, clearly identifying the portion redacted and the basis for the redaction.

15. If you assert that any document requested herein is privileged, provide the following 

information with respect to each such document:

a. its date;

b. its author;

c. all addressees or recipients of the original or copies thereof, including blind 

copies;

d. a brief description of its subject matter, number of pages, and attachments or 

appendices;

e. all persons to whom the document was distributed, shown or explained;

f. its present custodian; and

g. the nature of the privilege claimed.

16. “Identity” or “Identify” or “Identification”:

a. When used in reference to a natural person, "identity," "identify," or 

"identification" means to state his or her full name and present or last known 

address and present employer, specifying in each instance the title or position 

and the dates so held.

b. When used with respect to document, "identity," "identify," or "identification" 

means to state the date, subject and substance, author, all recipients, type of 

document (e.g., letter, telegraph, memorandum, computer printout, sound 

reproduction, chart, etc.), its present location and the identity of its present 

custodian. This shall include documents with respect to which a privilege is or 

may be claimed, if such document was, but no longer is, in your possession or 

subject to your control, state whether (a) it is missing or lost; (b) has been 

destroyed; (c) has been transferred voluntarily to others; or ( d) otherwise

disposed of. In each such instance explain the circumstances surrounding an 

authorization for such disposition.

c. When used in respect to an occasion, event, meeting or conversation, "identity," 

"identify," or "identification" means to state the date, place, duration and persons 

attending or participating.

17. In the event that any document called for by any request has been discarded or 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 14 of 75
PAGE 4 OF 6

destroyed, placed beyond your control or otherwise disposed of, that document shall be 

identified as follows: (a) preparer(s); (b) addressee(s); (c) recipient(s) of indicated or 

blind copies; (d) date; (e) type of document; (f) subject matter; (g) number of pages; (h) 

number and identity of attachments or appendices; (i) all persons to whom distributed, 

shown or explained; (j) date of disposal or destruction; (k) reason for disposal or 

destruction; (l) person(s) authorizing disposal or destruction; and (m) person(s) 

discarding or destroying the document.

18. To the extent you withhold any documents responsive to these requests, Defendant 

hereby requests that you identify the information and material being withheld as

required pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

19. The term “USAA” and means USAA and its employees, agents, contractors, 

representatives and any other person presently or formerly acting on behalf of USAA.

20. The term “USAA Investigation” means the investigation Plaintiffs allege in paragraph

43, below, of Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint was conducted by USAA, at the 

request of Melody Joy Cantu, of her secure work internet network connection, as more 

particularly described in paragraph 43, below, of Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint:

21. “Melody Joy Cantu” means Melody Joy Cantu and her attorneys, agents, employees, 

representatives and any other person or entity acting on or for her behalf.

22. “Dr. Rodrigo Cantu” means Dr. Rodrigo Cantu and his attorneys, agents, employees, 

representatives and any other person or entity acting on or for his behalf.

23. “Plaintiffs” mean Melody Joy Cantu and Dr. Rodrigo Cantu.

24. The “First Amended Complaint” means the First Amended Complaint filed by Melody 

Joy Cantu and Dr. Rodrigo Cantu, attached hereto as Exhibit A-1 and incorporated herein 

by reference.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 15 of 75
PAGE 5 OF 6

25. “The Cantus’ Counsel”, means Tor Ekeland and the attorneys, paralegals, legal 

assistants, law clerks, employees, contractors, agents and representatives of Tor Ekeland 

Law, PLLC, 30 Wall Street, 8th Floor, New York, NY and Rain Minns and the attorneys, 

paralegals, legal assistants, law clerks, employees, contractors, agents and representatives 

Minns Law Firm, 4412 Spicewood Springs Rd., Suite 500, Austin, Texas 78759-8583.

26. “Lawsuit” means Case No. 5:20-CV-00746-JKP (HJB), Melody Joy Cantu and Dr. 

Rodrigo Cantu, Plaintiffs v. Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC, 

in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas San Antonio 

Division.

27. The “Parties Pleadings” means the First Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiffs, and the 

First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and First Amended Counter claims of 

Defendant Dr. Sandra Guerra, attached hereto as Exhibit A-2 and incorporated herein by 

reference.

PERIOD OF TIME

Unless a specific date or dates is set forth in any specific interrogatory herein, you are 

directed that each question shall be answered for the period of time beginning on January 1, 2018

up to and including the present date.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 16 of 75
PAGE 6 OF 6

B. DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED:

1. All communications and documents (including any recordings) USAA received from, 

transmitted to, or exchanged with Melody Joy Cantu (or any person or entity acting on 

behalf of Melody Joy Cantu, including, without limitation, any attorney or private 

investigator) that reflect, demonstrate, or otherwise refer or relate in any way to Melody 

Joy Cantu’s request for the USAA Investigation.

2. All communications and documents (including any recordings) USAA received from, 

transmitted to, or exchanged with Melody Joy Cantu (or any person or entity acting on 

behalf of Melody Joy Cantu, including, without limitation, any attorney or private 

investigator) that reflect, demonstrate, or otherwise refer or relate in any way to Melody 

Joy Cantu’s allegation in Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint that the Cantus’ home internet 

connection was hacked.

3. All communications and documents (including any recordings) USAA received from, 

transmitted to, or exchanged with Melody Joy Cantu (or any person or entity acting on 

behalf of Melody Joy Cantu, including, without limitation, any attorney or private 

investigator) that reflect, demonstrate, or otherwise refer or relate in any way to Melody 

Joy Cantu’s allegation that she reported to USAA that she “was worried that her work 

internet connection was hacked as well.”

4. All communications and documents (including any recordings) USAA received from, 

transmitted to, or exchanged with Melody Joy Cantu (or any person or entity acting on 

behalf of Melody Joy Cantu, including, without limitation, any attorney or private 

investigator) that reflect, demonstrate, or otherwise refer or relate in any way to the 

results, findings, and/or outcome of the USAA Investigation requested by Melody Joy 

Cantu.

5. All written reports regarding the USAA Investigation.

6. All communications and documents (including any recordings) USAA received from, 

transmitted to, or exchanged with Melody Joy Cantu (or any person or entity acting on 

behalf of Melody Joy Cantu, including, without limitation, any attorney or private 

investigator) that reflect, demonstrate, or otherwise refer or relate in any way to Melody 

Joy Cantu’s allegation in Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint that “one of the [USAA] 

investigators commented that he thought someone hacked the Cantus’ home internet 

connection.”

7. All communications and documents (including any recordings) USAA received from, 

transmitted to, or exchanged with Melody Joy Cantu (or any person or entity acting on 

behalf of Melody Joy Cantu, including, without limitation, any attorney or private 

investigator) that reflect, demonstrate, or otherwise refer or relate in any way to Melody 

Joy Cantu’s allegation that USAA replaced all of her work equipment following her 

request for the USAA Investigation. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 17 of 75
EXHIBIT A-1

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 18 of 75






















EXHIBIT A-2

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 41 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 1 OF 28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

MELODY JOY CANTU and

DR. RODRIGO CANTU, 

Plaintiffs

V.

DR. SANDRA GUERRA and

DIGITAL FORENSICS 

CORPORATION, LLC

Defendants

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO 5:20-CV-00746-JKP

FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND FIRST AMENDED 

COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANT DR. SANDRA GUERRA

TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

NOW COMES Defendant, DR. SANDRA GUERRA (hereinafter “Defendant” or “Dr. 

Guerra”), and reserving the right to file other and further pleadings, exceptions and denials, files 

this her First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Amended Counterclaim and in support 

thereof would respectfully show unto the Court as follows:

DEFENDANT, DR. SANDRA GUERRA’S, FIRST AMENDED ANSWER

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Dr. Guerra denies she violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 

18 U.S.C. §§ 1030 et. seq. (“CFAA”), the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et. seq., the 

Texas Harmful Access by Computer Act (“HACA”), Texas Penal Code § 33.02(b-1) (1) and

denies committing the Texas torts of malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional 

distress. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 1 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 42 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 2 OF 28

2. Dr. Guerra denies that she hacked, surveilled, and damaged Plaintiffs’ protected 

computers and computer networks without authorization or effective consent, and intentionally 

damaged those computers or networks causing losses greater than $5,000.00. Dr. Guerra denies 

having any intention to maliciously prosecute Plaintiff Melody Joy Cantu (“Melody”) and/or cause 

the intentional infliction of emotional distress upon Plaintiffs. Dr. Guerra asserts that, based upon 

information and belief, Melody was arrested as a result of a legitimate police report filed by Dr. 

Guerra after a systematic campaign by Melody to harass Dr. Guerra. Dr. Guerra has no knowledge 

of the disposition for which Melody was arrested. Dr. Guerra further denies filing a false Child 

Protective Services (“CPS”) complaint against Plaintiffs and asserts, instead, that she did file a 

legitimate CPS report after becoming aware of (1) verbal abuse to her daughters by Melody and 

(2) Dr. Rodrigo Cantu’s (“Dr. Cantu”) failure to protect Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu’s daughters 

from Melody’s verbal attacks. 

3. Dr. Guerra denies seeking any type of revenge on Dr. Cantu or Melody. Dr. Guerra 

further denies her divorce with Dr. Cantu was the result of any alleged affair on Dr. Guerra’s part, 

but rather, was the result of Dr. Cantu’s anger issues and financial issues. 

4. Dr. Guerra denies ever stalking or harassing Plaintiffs or weaponizing Dr. Guerra 

and Dr. Cantu’s children against Dr. Cantu through parental alienation.

5. Dr. Guerra does not have the requisite knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint as they relate to Digital Forensics 

Corporation, LLC (“DFC”). Dr. Guerra admits she did file a police report as recommended by 

DFC.

6. Dr. Guerra denies engaging in a campaign of hacking, surveillance, damage, and 

malicious prosecution for any reason and denies responsibility for any of the resulting harm 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 2 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 43 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 3 OF 28

claimed by Plaintiffs for any alleged campaign against them. 

II. PARTIES

7. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of the First Amended 

Complaint.

8. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of the First Amended 

Complaint.

9. Dr. Guerra does not have the requisite knowledge to admit or deny the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 9 of the First Amended Complaint.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10. Dr. Guerra does not stipulate the Court has jurisdiction in this case but asserts that 

she did not violate any statute as stated in Paragraph 1 of the First Amended Complaint.

11. Dr. Guerra does not stipulate the Court has jurisdiction in this case but asserts that 

she did not violate any statute as stated in Paragraph 10 of the First Amended Complaint. 

12. Dr. Guerra does not stipulate the Court has jurisdiction in this case but asserts that 

she did not engage in any acts or omissions giving rise to any state law causes of action as stated 

in Paragraph 12 of the First Amended Complaint.

13. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of the Amended 

Complaint as they relate to jurisdiction over her person. 

14. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of the Amended 

Complaint as they relate to venue over her person. 

IV. FACTS

15. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 15 of the First 

Amended Complaint.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 3 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 44 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 4 OF 28

16. Dr. Guerra partially admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 16 in that she 

and Dr. Cantu were divorced after 10 years of marriage but denies that the divorce was due to her 

alleged affair with another man.

17. Dr. Guerra partially admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 17 in that she 

and Dr. Cantu do have two daughters together, although their current ages are 17 and 19, rather 

than 17 and 18.

18. Dr. Guerra partially admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 18, but denies 

that Melody’s children live in fear based on her surveilling them or “coming for” their mother. 

19. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 19.

20. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 20.

21. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 21. 

Discovery will be conducted. Subject thereto, deny. 

22. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegation contained in Paragraph 22. 

23. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 23.

24. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 24. 

Discovery will be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

25. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 25. 

Discovery will be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

26. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 26. 

Discovery will be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

27. Dr. Guerra partially admits and partially denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 27. Dr. Guerra admits she did hire DFC on or about May 16, 2018, but denies she did 

so with the intent to hack, surveil, and damage Plaintiffs’ computers and computer networks.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 4 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 45 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 5 OF 28

28. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegation contained in Paragraph 28.

29. Dr. Guerra partially admits and partially denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 29. Dr. Guerra admits she did file a CPS report against the Cantus on or about May 29, 

2018 but denies that this report was false. 

30. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegation contained in Paragraph 30. 

31. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 31. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny. 

32. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 32. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

33. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 33.

34. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 34.

35. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 35. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

36. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegation contained in Paragraph 36. 

37. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 37.

38. Dr. Guerra admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 38.

39. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 39. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

40. Dr. Guerra partially admits and partially denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 40. Dr. Guerra admits to all portions of Paragraph 40 but denies that the police report 

filed against Melody was false. 

41. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 41. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 5 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 46 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 6 OF 28

42. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 42. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

43. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 43. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

44. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 44. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

45. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 45. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

46. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 46. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

47. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 47. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

48. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 48. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

49. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 49. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

50. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 50. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

51. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 51. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

52. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 52. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

53. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 53. Discovery will 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 6 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 47 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 7 OF 28

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

V. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A 

PROTECTED COMPUTER 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(2)(c)

54. Dr. Guerra is unable to admit or deny this allegation contained in paragraph 54 of 

the Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

55. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 55. 

56. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 56. Discovery will 

be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

57. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 57.

58. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 58.

VI. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED DAMAGE TO 

A PROTECTED COMPUTER 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A)

59. Dr. Guerra is unable to admit or deny this allegation contained in Paragraph 59 of 

the Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

60. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 60.

61. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 61.

62. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 62.

VII. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A 

PROTECTED COMPUTER RECKLESSLY CAUSING DAMAGE 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(B)

63. Dr. Guerra is unable to admit or deny this allegation contained in Paragraph 63 of 

the Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 7 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 48 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 8 OF 28

64. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 64.

65. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 65.

66. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 66.

67. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 67.

VIII. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO 

PROTECTED COMPUTER CAUSING DAMAGE AND LOSS

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(C)

68. Dr. Guerra is unable to admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 68 of 

the Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

69. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 69.

70. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 70.

71. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 71.

72. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 72.

IX. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(2)(c) & 1030(b)

73. Dr. Guerra is unable to admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 73 of 

the Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

74. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 74.

75. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 75.

76. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 76.

77. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 77.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 8 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 49 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 9 OF 28

X. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

UNAUTHORIZED DAMAGE TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A) & 1030(b)

78. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 78 of the 

Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

79. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 79.

80. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 80.

81. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 81.

82. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 82. 

XI. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

RECKLESS DAMAGE TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(B) & 1030(b)

83. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 83 of the 

Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied.

84. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 84.

85. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 85.

86. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 86.

87. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 87.

XII. COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER CAUSING 

DAMAGE AND LOSS 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(C) & 1030(b)

88. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 88 of the 

Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 9 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 50 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 10 OF 28

89. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 89.

90. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 90.

91. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 91.

92. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 92.

XIII. KNOWINGLY ACCESSING WITHOUT EFFECTIVE CONSENT, A 

COMPUTER, COMPUTER NETWORK, OR COMPUTER SYSTEM

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 & Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(a)

93. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 93 of the 

Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it is 

denied. 

94. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 94. 

95. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 95.

96. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 96.

97. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 97.

XIV. KNOWINGLY ACCESSING A COMPUTER, COMPUTER NETWORK, OR 

COMPUTER SYSTEM WITH THE INTENT TO DEFRAUD, OR HARM 

ANOTHER OR ALTER, DAMAGE, OR DELETE PROPERTY WITHOUT 

EFFECTIVE CONSENT

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 & Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(b-1) (1)

98. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 98 of the 

Amended Complaint as it is not an allegation. 

99. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 99. 

100. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 100.

101. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 101.

102. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 102.

103. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 103.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 10 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 51 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 11 OF 28

XV. ELECTRONIC ACCESS INTERFERENCE

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 & Tex. Penal Code § 33.022

104. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 104 of the 

Amended Complaint because it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it 

is denied. 

105. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 105. 

106. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 106.

107. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 107.

108. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 108.

XVI. INTENTIONAL INTERCEPTION, OR ENDEAVOURING TO USE ANY 

ELECTRONIC WIRE, ORAL OR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS

18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et. seq.

109. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 109 of the 

Amended Complaint because it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it 

is denied.

110. Dr. Guerra admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 110.

111. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 111. 

XVII. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION

112. Dr. Guerra cannot admit or deny the allegation contained in Paragraph 112 of the 

Amended Complaint because it is not an allegation. To the extent any portion is an allegation, it 

is denied. 

113. Dr. Guerra partially admits the allegation in Paragraph 113 that DFC did tell her 

that to continue to “Phase II” a police report was required and that Dr. Guerra did file a police 

report against Melody. Dr. Guerra denies all other allegations contained in Paragraph 113, 

including that the police report which was filed against Melody was false.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 11 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 52 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 12 OF 28

114. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 114 that the police report 

she filed against Melody was false. Dr. Guerra can neither admit nor deny the allegation in 

Paragraph 114 that the police report led to Melody’s arrest. Discovery will be conducted. Subject 

thereto, deny. 

115. Dr. Guerra can neither admit nor deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 115. 

Discovery will be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

116. Dr. Guerra denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 116.

117. Dr. Guerra can neither admit nor deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 117. 

Discovery will be conducted. Subject thereto, deny.

118. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 118.

119. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 119.

120. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 120.

121. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 121. 

XVIII.INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

122. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 122.

123. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 123.

124. Dr. Guerra denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 124.

XIX. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

125. Dr. Guerra is not liable to plaintiffs for any of their claims under the Computer 

Fraud & Abuse Act (causes of action 1-8) because the statute of limitations bars the plaintiffs’ 

claims. The statute of limitations for this cause of action is two (2) years.

126. Dr. Guerra is not liable to plaintiffs for any of their claims under the Computer 

Fraud & Abuse Act (causes of action 1-8) because the statute’s damage threshold bars the 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 12 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 53 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 13 OF 28

plaintiffs’ claims. The damage threshold is $5,000.00 and the plaintiffs cannot prove that they

suffered damages, as defined by the statute, of or in excess of $5,000.00.

127. Dr. Guerra is not liable to plaintiffs for any of their claims under Texas Civil 

Practice & Remedies Code § 143.001 (causes of action 9-11) because the statute of limitations 

bars the plaintiffs’ claims. The statute of limitations for this cause of action is two (2) years.

128. DFC Dr. Guerra is not liable to plaintiffs for their claim under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 

et. seq. (cause of action 12) because the statute of limitations bars the plaintiffs’ claim. The statute 

of limitations for this cause of action is two (2) years.

129. DFC Dr. Guerra is not liable to plaintiffs for their claim of malicious prosecution 

(cause of action 13) because the statute of limitations bars the plaintiffs’ claim. The statute of 

limitations for this cause of action is one (1) year.

130. Dr. Guerra is not liable to plaintiffs for their claim intentional infliction of 

emotional distress (cause of action 14) because the statute of limitations bars the plaintiffs’ claim. 

The statute of limitations for this cause of action is two (2) years.

131. Dr. Guerra pleads the affirmative defense of illegality.

132. Dr. Guerra pleads the affirmative defense of laches.

133. Dr. Guerra pleads the affirmative defense of unclean hands.

134. Dr. Guerra pleads the affirmative defense that Plaintiffs’ own acts and omissions 

caused and contributed to plaintiffs’’ alleged damages, if any.

DR. SANDRA GUERRA’S FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action for violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 

1030(a)(2)(c); the Harmful Access by Computer Act, Tex. Pen. Code § 33.02(a); and the Texas 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 13 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 54 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 14 OF 28

torts of stalking, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and abuse of process.

2. Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants Dr. Rodrigo Cantu and Melody Joy Cantu 

intentionally and knowingly accessed Dr. Guerra’s computer, computer network, or computer 

system without Dr. Guerra’s effective consent by attempting to hack into her Verizon online 

account and Verizon voicemail. Furthermore, the Cantus hacked into Dr. Guerra’s email from an 

iPad purchased by Dr. Guerra that she allowed her daughter to use but was made believe to be was 

later lost. Melody also created fake accounts in Dr. Guerra’s name for dating websites for person 

with HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, the creation of which led to a plethora of 

unwanted emails being sent to Dr. Guerra from unknown suitors in this regard. As a result of 

these unlawful acts, Dr. Guerra believed it necessary to hire Co-Defendant Digital Forensics 

Corporation, LLC (“DFC”) to investigate on her behalf.

3. Additionally, Melody Cantu verbally abused Dr. Guerra and her daughters to the 

point Dr. Guerra felt compelled to file a police report and a subsequent complaint with Child 

Protective Services. Dr. Guerra and her daughters also began counseling as a result of the 

collective incidents.

4. Defendants’ collective acts against Dr. Guerra have not only been harassing and 

wholly unwarranted but have also had a detrimental effect on her reputation. These acts have 

resulted in emotional, reputational, and monetary harm, including, but not limited to, costs and 

expenses of counseling, lost wages, hiring security, retaining DFC, and obtaining legal counsel. 

Thus, she seeks compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages.

II. THE PARTIES

5. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff, Dr. Sandra Guerra (“Dr. Guerra”) is an individual 

residing in San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 14 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 55 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 15 OF 28

6. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendants Melody Joy Cantu (“Melody”) and Dr. Rodrigo 

Cantu (“Dr. Cantu”) (collectively “Plaintiffs” or “Counter-Defendants”) are individuals residing 

in Boerne, Texas and are already parties to this lawsuit. 

III. JURISDICTION & VENUE

7. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 

(“CFAA”) claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332, as the claims present issues of federal 

question under the CFAA, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(2)(C) (prohibiting unauthorized access to a 

computer), 1030(a)(5)(A)-(C) (prohibiting unauthorized damage to a computer), 1030(g) (creating 

civil cause of action), 1030(c)(4)(A)(i)(I) (creating civil jurisdiction predicate for CFAA losses 

aggregating $5,000 or more), and 1030(e) (defining “loss,” “damage,” and other key terms). As 

alleged below, the actions complained of resulted in CFAA loss of more than $5,000, all within 

the last two years from the date of the original Complaint. 

8. For the Texas State Law claims, this Court has supplemental jurisdiction under 28 

U.S.C. § 1367. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 provides for a civil cause of action for 

violations of the Texas Harmful Access by Computer Act (“HACA”), Texas Penal Code § 33.02(b1)(1). Texas courts recognize the torts of harassment, defamation, and abuse of process.

9. The Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because Dr. Cantu and 

Melody Joy Cantu reside in the jurisdiction.

10. Venue is proper in the Western Division of Texas under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) 

because the Defendants reside in this judicial district and the events complained of substantially 

occurred in this District.

IV. TEXAS SAVINGS STATUTE: TCPRC § 16.069 

11. If a counterclaim or cross claim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 15 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 56 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 16 OF 28

that is the basis of an action, a party to the action may file the counterclaim or cross claim even 

though as a separate action it would be barred by limitation on the date the party's answer is 

required. This counterclaim was filed not later than the 30th day after the date on which the Dr. 

Guerra's answer is required. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 16.069.

V. FACTS

12. In 2009, after ten years of marriage, Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu divorced and 

managed to maintain an amicable relationship for approximately an additional ten years while coparenting their two daughters.

13. In 2014, Dr. Cantu married his second wife, Melody Joy Cantu (“Melody”).

14. In 2015, when Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu’s daughters were approximately twelve 

(12) and fourteen (14) years old, Melody verbally abused the children on multiple occasions. 

Unfortunately, Dr. Cantu did not take any action to protect or defend the children from Melody’s 

outbursts. Dr. Cantu later apologized to his daughters and committed to divorce Melody and keep 

her away from his children if Dr. Guerra agreed not to make a report to Child Protective Services 

(“CPS”).

15. Upon information and belief, the Dr. Cantu and Melody’s divorce was finalized in 

2016. 

16. On or about April 1, 2018, Melody accosted Dr. Cantu, Dr. Guerra, her nowhusband, David Bellinger, and her minor daughters at night in a dark restaurant parking lot after 

the family had finished eating dinner together. Melody was disheveled and crying. She kept her 

hands in her pockets standing strangely nervous and yelling which caused Dr. Guerra to fear that 

Melody intended to cause her and/or her daughter bodily harm. Melody proceeded to yell insults 

at Dr. Guerra and shout angrily, describing a then-secret relationship between her and Dr. Cantu. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 16 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 57 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 17 OF 28

Dr. Cantu did nothing to protect his daughters or calm Melody. In an effort to escape from the 

dangerous and explosive situation caused by Melody, Dr. Guerra and her daughters ran to their 

vehicle for safety as they were chased by Melody who pursed them closely from behind while 

continuing to yell and behave hysterically, which further caused Dr. Guerra to fear that Melody 

intended to cause her and/or her daughters imminent bodily harm. Melody’s behavior and state of 

hysteria were so severe that Dr. Guerra and her daughters were unable to go to their home as they 

reasonably feared that Melody would follow them and attempt to physically harm them. Melody’s 

actions were so threatening and disturbing that even Dr. Cantu feared for his life. Dr. Cantu called 

his parents to help protect him from Melody and they met him at a hotel that night where he kept 

a gun for self-defense. 

17. Later that night, Melody began relentlessly harassing Dr. Guerra via social media, 

sending her many threatening messages and photos via text and through Facebook’s messenger 

feature around 2:00–3:00 a.m. following her ambush of Dr. Guerra and her daughters in the 

restaurant parking lot. Melody specifically threatened to post intimate pictures of Dr. Guerra and 

Dr. Cantu. Melody also contacted Dr. Cantu’s parents (Dr. Guerra’s former in-laws) by sending 

them approximately sixty-four (64) text messages and placed approximately eighty (80) phone 

calls to Dr. Cantu. Although not romantically involved, at this time, Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu 

were on good terms and were making a concerted effort to co-parent their children. 

18. On April 2, 2018, Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu met at the Bexar County Courthouse 

Annex to file a restraining order against Melody. Dr. Guerra was informed that she was unable to 

obtain a restraining order against Melody because she had not had a sexual relationship with 

Melody. Dr. Cantu proceeded to request a restraining order against Melody which was timely 

issued. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 17 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 58 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 18 OF 28

19. Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu also went to the San Antonio police station where Dr. 

Cantu filed a police report against Melody for harassment. Dr. Cantu reported to SAPD Officer 

Ducatt, among other things, Melody had been sending messages to Dr. Cantu threatening to send 

intimate photos of Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu from when they were married. Officer Ducatt 

included in his report that Dr. Guerra reported to him that Melody sent her messages via text and 

Facebook threatening to post pictures of Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu. Dr. Cantu told the Officer 

Ducatt that Melody had repeatedly sent electronic communications to him in a manner to harass 

and embarrass him.

20. Following the incident at the restaurant, Dr. Cantu stayed with his father for the 

next six (6) weeks to help him feel safe from Melody. Dr. Guerra and her daughters began 

counseling as a result of the incident, which Dr. Cantu supported, at the time. 

21. In May of 2018, Dr. Guerra began to receive notices from Verizon Wireless that 

someone was attempting to access her account online. These attempts to gain unauthorized access 

to her Verizon account continued for several weeks until Dr. Guerra was forced to shut down all 

online access for that account. During this time, someone also attempted to hack into Dr. Guerra’s 

Verizon voicemail. Upon information and belief, these attempts to hack and gain unauthorized 

access were committed by Melody and/or Dr. Cantu. 

22. Melody also intentionally engaged in other forms of cruelty and aggression against 

Dr. Guerra with the intent to carry out a course of revenge and inflict harm against Dr. Guerra. 

Melody contacted Dr. Guerra’s then-boyfriend’s ex-wife and told her Dr. Guerra stole money and 

was suspected to have sexually transmitted diseases. These were complete fabrications by Melody 

and were intended to cause Dr. Guerra embarrassment and harm to her reputation.

23. Melody contacted Dr. Guerra’s professional colleagues via social media and 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 18 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 59 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 19 OF 28

telephone calls in an effort to disparage her. In May of 2018, Dr. Guerra received a phone call 

from Humana’s human resources department stating that an anonymous complaint had been filed 

against her claiming she was posting proprietary information on social media. This complaint was 

entirely falsified. Upon information and belief, Melody also called Humana’s human resources 

department pretending to be an employee of Dr. Guerra’s and falsely claiming that Dr. Guerra was 

retaliating against her for dating Dr. Cantu. As a result of this false report, an investigation was 

opened by Humana’s human resources which included interviews of Dr. Guerra’s staff until 

Humana was able to learn that Melody never worked for Dr. Guerra.

24. There was also a subsequent complaint to Humana that Dr. Guerra was participating 

in human trafficking. This complaint was wholly false, and the Cantus previously publicly and 

falsely accused Dr. Guerra of grooming Melody’s daughter for human trafficking.

25. Several weeks after the incident at the restaurant, Dr. Guerra learned through 

Dr. Cantu’s mother that Dr. Cantu and Melody reconciled. At this time, Dr. Guerra began to 

suspect that the attempted hacks into her accounts and the false complaint to Humana were 

perpetrated by Melody. 

26. Upon their reconciliation, Melody and Dr. Cantu initiated legal action against 

Dr. Guerra in state court, contacted Dr. Guerra’s workplace in a harassing manner, and continued 

to harass Dr. Guerra online. Dr. Guerra began receiving angry and harassing messages from 

Dr. Cantu insisting that Dr. Guerra accept his relationship with Melody.

27. Shortly after these events, near or around the end of May or beginning of June 2018, 

Dr. Guerra received “terms and conditions” emails from dating websites designed for persons who 

have HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases that she had been signed up for without her 

consent. Dr. Guerra began to receive inappropriate messages from strangers to her email as a 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 19 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 60 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 20 OF 28

result of these fake accounts set up in her name and with her email. Dr. Guerra attempted to have 

the profiles shut down but did not have the passwords to the accounts. Dr. Guerra was able to 

speak with the owners of the various website who shared the IP address that was used to create the 

profiles. Dr. Guerra cross-checked this information with Verizon who told her this same IP address 

was used to attempt to access her accounts and that the IP address was located somewhere in San 

Antonio, Texas. Dr. Guerra later learned the IP address was Melody’s.

28. Additionally, at this time, the family law case between Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu 

regarding their children began to intensify. Dr. Cantu responded to written discovery in the family 

law case wherein he admitted to accessing Dr. Guerra’s personal email via an iPad bought by Dr. 

Guerra that she allowed her daughter to use with Dr. Guerra’s Apple ID. The iPad in question was 

knowingly and falsely reported to Dr. Guerra as being “lost.” 

29. Dr. Guerra’s attorney, on behalf of Dr. Guerra, sent a cease and desist letter to 

Counter-Defendants demanding that they stop making false statements and engaging in unlawful 

conduct against Dr. Guerra and that they remove/correct false statements and allegations made and 

posted about Dr. Guerra. Nevertheless, Counter-Defendants failed and/or refused to do so.

30. The above described events precipitated the hiring of Digital Forensics Corporation 

(“DFC”) by Dr. Guerra. 

31. As described in DFC’s “Phase I” report reference in Plaintiffs’ Amended 

Complaint, DFC sent a link from an unknown phone number to Melody which she chose to click. 

This link allowed DFC to access Melody’s IP address and confirm that her IP address matched the 

IP address from which the fake social media accounts were created and from which the attempted 

hacking into Dr. Guerra’s Verizon account occurred. Dr. Guerra did not authorize and is not aware 

of any other surveillance on Dr. Cantu or Melody. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 20 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 61 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 21 OF 28

32. DFC also found Melody waged a harassment effort against Dr. Guerra via social 

media, where Dr. Guerra received numerous unsolicited messages disparaging her character. As 

a result of DFC’s findings, Dr. Guerra filed a police report and charges were brought against 

Melody. Dr. Guerra later learned when she was contacted by SAPD that Melody had filed a false 

police report against Dr. Guerra claiming that the CPS report Dr. Guerra filed on or about May 29, 

2018 was a “false” report and federal crime. As a result of the false police report filed by Melody, 

Dr. Guerra was forced to hire criminal counsel and was interviewed by SAPD. She was advised 

by the detective that they didn’t see any reason to proceed with criminal charges but was later 

advised by the same detective that the District Attorney was requesting the case be forwarded to 

his office because Melody was calling them multiple times a day. Despite Melody’s sustained 

efforts to force prosecution of her false claims, no criminal charges were ever filed against Dr. 

Guerra and the case was closed. 

VI. COUNT ONE –UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER, 

NETWORK, OR COMPUTER SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF CFAA, 

18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(c)

33. Counter-Plaintiff Dr. Guerra incorporates the above paragraphs by reference as 

though fully set forth herein.

34. Dr. Guerra’s iPad computer is used in interstate commerce and comprises a 

“protected computer” as that term is used in 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2)(B).

35. Dr. Guerra maintained and secured her iPad by reasonable means, and never 

authorized the Cantus to access it. The iPad was purchased and owned by Dr. Guerra, but she 

permitted her daughter to use it. Counter-Defendants’ accessed the subject iPad and Dr. Guerra’s 

personal communications and account information thereon by deception under false pretenses and 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 21 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 62 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 22 OF 28

for the nefarious purpose of accessing Dr. Guerra’s personal and private accounts, information, 

and documents without permission for the purposes of harassment, which Counter-Defendants 

carried out. Dr. Guerra submits that the iPad and the information thereon were not obtained by Dr. 

Cantu as a parent monitoring his minor child’s electronic communications, as Counter-Defendants 

suggest to this honorable Court, but rather it was done in his capacity as an ex-spouse in connection 

with his and Melody’s bitterly motivated attacks upon Dr. Guerra. Dr. Guerra had been made to 

believe that the iPad had been “lost” during the time that Dr. Guerra and/or Melody were accessing 

the iPad, which eviscerates any plausible argument by Counter-Defendants that they were merely 

monitoring Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu’s daughter’s activity online and instead establishes that 

Counter-Defendants were concealing the iPad from Dr. Guerra and her daughter while continuing 

to access the content on the device.

36. The Cantus intentionally, and for illegitimate and unlawful purposes, accessed Dr. 

Guerra’s protected computer without authorization and thereby obtained information. This 

unauthorized access includes knowingly accessing the iPad purchased and owned by Dr. Guerra, 

operating under Dr. Guerra’s Apple ID and using it to access personal and private accounts, 

information, and documents owned by Dr. Guerra without permission. This includes, but is not 

necessarily limited to, her email accounts, accounts with her cellular phone provider, and 

photographs. This was all done under the guise that the iPad was allegedly lost.

37. As a result of the Cantus’ unlawful conduct, Dr. Guerra suffered loss in expending 

time, money, and resources reasonably related to the computer intrusion in the aggregate of at least 

$5,000.00 in value, which includes costs incurred by Dr. Guerra to engage DFC, investigate the 

intrusion of the iPad and other computers potentially intruded upon, assess the damage, and 

attempt to restore security to her various intruded-upon systems, as well as time Dr. Guerra had to 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 22 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 63 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 23 OF 28

take off from work to address and resolve these matters.

VII. COUNT TWO – HACA UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A COMPUTER, 

COMPUTER NETWORK, OR COMPUTER SYSTEM, 

Tex. Penal Code § 33.02(a) & Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001

38. Counter-Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs by reference as though fully 

set forth herein.

39. Counter-Defendants violated Section 33.02(a) of the Texas Penal Code—the 

Harmful Access by Computer Act (“HACA”)—by intentionally or knowingly accessing Dr. 

Guerra’s computer, computer network, or computer system, as stated above, without Dr. Guerra’s 

effective consent.

40. This intentional or knowing violation gives rise to a civil cause of action under 

Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code Section 143.001.

41. As a result of the Cantus’ unlawful conduct, Dr. Guerra suffered loss in expending 

time, money, and resources reasonably related to the computer intrusion in the aggregate of at least 

$5,000.00 in value, which includes costs incurred by Dr. Guerra to engage DFC, investigate the 

intrusion of the iPad and other computers potentially intruded upon, assess the damage, and 

attempt to restore security to her various intruded-upon systems, as well as time Dr. Guerra had to 

take off from work to address and resolve these matters.

VIII. COUNT THREE – STALKING AND HARRASSING BEHAVIOR, 

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 85.001 et. seq.

42. Counter-Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs by reference as though fully 

set forth herein.

43. In violation of Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 85.001 et. seq., Melody Joy Cantu 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 23 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 64 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 24 OF 28

repeatedly sent electronic communications in a manner reasonably likely to—and, in fact, with the 

intent to—harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, embarrass, or offend Dr. Guerra. In addition to 

harassing communications to Dr. Guerra directly, Melody repeatedly engaged in harassing 

behavior and called and messaged Dr. Guerra’s former in-laws and professional colleagues in an 

intrusive and disparaging manner. 

44. As a result of Melody’s deliberate campaign of stalking and harassment, Dr. Guerra 

reasonably feared for her safety or the safety of a member of her family due to threats of bodily 

injury and had to hire security for her wedding and has felt compelled to sacrifice larger business 

opportunities in order to feel safe and insulated from the stalking and harassment. Melody had the 

apparent ability to carry out such threats as evidenced by her ambush of Dr. Guerra in a public 

parking lot and Dr. Cantu’s demonstrated heightened level fear that compelled him to call his 

parents for help and to keep a gun with him as protection against Melody. Dr. Guerra made 

repeated prior demands that Melody stop engaging in such harassing behavior but Melody 

nonetheless continued undeterred. Both Dr. Guerra and Dr. Cantu reported Melody’s harassing 

and stalking behavior to the police. 

45. Counter-Defendant Melody Cantu’s stalking and harassing behavior is the 

proximate cause of actual and exemplary damages.

IX. COUNT FOUR – INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

46. Counter-Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs by reference as though fully 

set forth herein.

47. Dr. Cantu and Melody Cantu acted intentionally or recklessly by impersonating Dr. 

Guerra for the purposes of creating false online profiles for dating websites for persons with HIV 

and other sexually transmitted disease websites, concealing her iPad and using it to attempt to hack 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 24 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 65 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 25 OF 28

into her email and Verizon accounts, publicly and falsely accusing Dr. Guerra of participating in 

human trafficking and grooming minors for human trafficking, spreading falsehoods about Dr.

Guerra to Dr. Guerra’s former employer, professional colleagues and in-laws, filing a false police 

report against Dr. Guerra, verbally harassing Dr. Guerra and her daughters and engaging in conduct 

causing severe psychological harm which manifested in physical pain and suffering. 

48. Melody, by her repeated and unrelenting actions against Dr. Guerra, intended to 

inflict emotional distress, or knew or should have known that emotional distress was a likely result 

of her actions, and such conduct was extreme and outrageous. 

49. The Cantus’ conduct proximately caused severe emotional distress and anxiety to 

Dr. Guerra by the resulting damage to her reputation, custody arrangement of her daughters, and 

the once-amicable relationship with her ex-husband. As a result of the above-mentioned incidents 

and circumstances, Dr. Guerra developed and was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 

(PTSD). Dr. Guerra now experiences heightened suspicion and fear, particularly in regard to being 

watched or targeted. Dr. Guerra has experienced heartbreak, tears, sleepless nights, increased 

illness and vomiting as a result of the related and traumatic events, inability to perform 

professionally, and damaged reputation.

50. Dr. Guerra’s severe emotional distress cannot be remedied by any other cause of 

action.

51. Counter-Defendant Melody Cantu’s tortious behavior is the proximate cause of 

actual and exemplary damages.

COUNT FIVE – DEFAMATION

52. Counter-Plaintiff Dr. Guerra incorporates the above paragraphs by reference as 

though fully set forth herein.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 25 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 66 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 26 OF 28

53. The statements and representations made and published by Melody Joy Cantu to 

Dr. Guerra’s former employer, colleagues, friends, and family were false and were recklessly and

maliciously made, including, without limitation, that Dr. Guerra contracted a sexually transmitted 

disease and engaged in human trafficking and groomed minors for human trafficking. Melody

Cantu had no right, privilege or justification to make the statements.

54. The statements were defaming to Dr. Guerra in the conduct of her personal life and 

business and were concerning to her. Despite written demand from Dr. Guerra’s attorney to cease 

and desist from making false statements and to correct such statement, Melody refused and/or 

failed to do so. Melody Cantu acted with actual malice and/or with negligence regarding the truth 

of her statements. Furthermore, the statements and representations were so egregious and 

obviously hurtful as to constitute libel and slander per se.

55. Dr. Guerra has been materially damaged as a direct and proximate result of the 

defaming statements and representations made by Melody Cantu. Specifically, after the two 

complaints were made to Humana by the Cantus, Dr. Guerra was fired in February of 2020.

56. Counter-Defendant Melody Cantu’s tortious behavior is the proximate cause of 

actual and exemplary damages.

X. COUNT SIX – ABUSE OF PROCESS

57. Counter-Plaintiff Dr. Guerra incorporates the above paragraphs by reference as 

though fully set forth herein.

58. Dr. Cantu and Melody Joy Cantu filed this lawsuit against Dr. Guerra without any 

probable cause for the suit. The lawsuit was filed with the ulterior motive of inflicting damage to 

Dr. Guerra, her reputation, and her career and is just another form of aggression utilized by 

Counter-Defendants as part of their sustained campaign of harassment against Dr. Guerra. As with 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 26 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 67 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 27 OF 28

Counter-Defendants’ prior unlawful actions, this lawsuit is predicated on Counter-Defendants’ 

attempt to create a power imbalance for the purposes of personal retaliation and revenge against 

Dr. Guerra and is otherwise a domestic/family dispute that Counter-Defendants are attempting to 

play out in a public forum under the auspice of a “proper” use of process for the illegitimate 

purpose of causing embarrassment and harm to Dr. Guerra and her family. 

59. Dr. Guerra has been materially damaged as a direct and proximate result of 

Counter-Defendants’ improper use of process.

XI. ATTORNEYS’ FEES

60. As a result of this lawsuit initiated by Counter-Defendants, Dr. Guerra has been 

required to retain the law firm of Davis, Cedillo & Mendoza, Inc. to defend and prosecute her 

counterclaims in this action and has agreed to pay the law firm reasonable and necessary attorney’s 

fees. Accordingly, an award of reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees, costs and expenses to 

Dr. Guerra would be equitable and just, and Dr. Guerra is entitled to recover such reasonable and 

necessary attorney’s fees, costs and expenses under applicable law.

XII. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant, DR. SANDRA GUERRA, prays 

that Plaintiffs take nothing by this suit against Dr. Sandra Guerra, and the Court grant Defendant, 

Dr. Sandra Guerra, all such other and further relief, including actual, economic, and consequential 

damages, including reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees, both general and special, at law or 

in equity, to which she may justly be entitled.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 27 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 68 of 75
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENDANTS, AND 

FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM OF DR. SANDRA GUERRA PAGE 28 OF 28

Dated: November 27, 2020. Respectfully submitted,

DAVIS, CEDILLO & MENDOZA, INC.

McCombs Plaza, Suite 500

755 E. Mulberry Avenue

San Antonio, Texas 78212

Telephone No.: (210) 822-6666

Telecopier No.: (210) 822-1151

 

By: /s/Ricardo G. Cedillo __________ 

RICARDO G. CEDILLO

Texas State Bar No. 04043600

rcedillo@lawdcm.com

LESLIE J. STRIEBER, III.

 Texas State Bar No. 19398000

lstrieber@lawdcm.com

BRANDY C. PEERY

Texas State Bar No. 24057666

bpeery@lawdcm.com

COURTNEY R. GAINES

State Bar No. 24098273

cgaines@lawdcm.com

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, DR. SANDRA 

GUERRA

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 27th day of November 2020, a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send 

electronic notification of such filing to the parties on record. 

 /s/Ricardo G. Cedillo 

RICARDO G. CEDILLO

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP-HJB Document 37 Filed 12/08/20 Page 28 of 28 Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 69 of 75
6596.001 - United Services Automobile Association 000001

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 70 of 75
6596.001 - United Services Automobile Association 000002

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 71 of 75
6596.001 - United Services Automobile Association 000003

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 72 of 75
6596.001 - United Services Automobile Association 000004

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 73 of 75
6596.001 - United Services Automobile Association 000005

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 74 of 75
6596.001 - United Services Automobile Association 000006

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 109-2 Filed 10/14/22 Page 75 of 75