Service of Process 

Transmittal 

12/08/2016 

CT Log Number 530306548 

TO: Alicia Odette 

Porsche Cars North America, Inc. 

1 Porsche Dr 

Atlanta, GA 30354-1654 

RE: Process Served in Minnesota 

FOR: Porsche Cars North America, Inc. (Domestic State: DE) 

ENCLOSED ARE COPIES OF LEGAL PROCESS RECEIVED BY THE STATUTORY AGENT OF THE ABOVE COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: 

TITLE OF ACTION: State of Minnesota, etc., and Minnesota Pollution Minnesota Pollution, 

Pltfs. vs. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, etc., et al., Dfts. // To: Porsche Cars North 

America, Inc. 

DOCUMENT(S) SERVED: Summons, Complaint, Attachment(s) 

COURT/AGENCY: HENNEPIN COUNTY - FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, MN 

Case # NONE 

NATURE OF ACTION: Product Liability Litigation - Manufacturing Defect - Audi's Model Year 2004-2008 V6 

ON WHOM PROCESS WAS SERVED: CT Corporation System, Inc, Saint Paul, MN 

DATE AND HOUR OF SERVICE: By Process Server on 12/08/2016 at 11:18 

JURISDICTION SERVED : Minnesota 

APPEARANCE OR ANSWER DUE: Within 20 days of the date on which you received this Summons 

ATTORNEY(S) / SENDER(S): KATHERINE T. KELLY 

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1200 

St. Paul, MN 55101-2130 

651) 757-1308 

ACTION ITEMS: SOP Papers with Transmittal, via UPS Next Day Air , 1Z0399EX0119243954 

Image SOP 

Email Notification, Alicia Odette alicia.odette@porsche.us 

Email Notification, Amy McLaren cls-ctsopsupport@wolterskluwer.com 

Email Notification, Sherie Boykin sherie.boykin@porsche.us 

SIGNED: CT Corporation System, Inc 

ADDRESS: 1010 Dale St. N. 

Saint Paul, MN 55117-5603 

TELEPHONE: 216-802-2121 

Page 1 of 1 / SC 

Information displayed on this transmittal is for CT 

Corporation's record keeping purposes only and is provided to 

the recipient for quick reference. This information does not 

constitute a legal opinion as to the nature of action, the 

amount of damages, the answer date, or any information 

contained in the documents themselves. Recipient is 

responsible for interpreting said documents and for taking 

appropriate action. Signatures on certified mail receipts 

confirm receipt of package only, not contents. 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 1 of 30
STATE OF MINNESOTA 

COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 

State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, 

Lori Swanson, and the Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency, 

Plaintiff, 

DISTRICT COURT 

FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

Case Type: Other Civil 

(Environmental) 

Court File No. 

SUMMONS 

VS. 

Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft d/b/a 

Volkswagen Group and/or Volkswagen AG; 

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; Audi 

AG; Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG d/b/a 

Porsche AG; and Porsche Cars North America, 

Inc. 

Defendants. 

THIS SUMMONS IS DIRECTED TO VOLKSWAGEN AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT D/B/A 

VOLKSWAGEN GROUP AND/OR VOLKSWAGEN AG; VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF 

AMERICA, INC.; AUDI AG; DR. ING. H.C.F. PORSCHE AG D/B/A PORSCHE AG; AND 

PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC., 

1. YOU ARE BEING SUED. The Plaintiff has started a lawsuit against you. The 

Plaintiff's Complaint against you is attached to this summons. Do not throw these papers 

away. They are official papers that affect your rights. You must respond to this lawsuit even 

though it may not yet be filed with the Court and there may be no court file number on this 

summons. 

2. YOU MUST REPLY WITHIN 20 DAYS TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS. 

You must give or mail to the person who signed this summons a written response called an 

Answer within 20 days of the date on which you received this Summons. You must send a copy 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 2 of 30
of your Answer to the person who signed this summons located at: 445 Minnesota Street, 

Suite 1200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2130. 

3. YOU MUST RESPOND TO EACH CLAIM. The Answer is your written 

response to the Plaintiffs Complaint. In your Answer you must state whether you agree or 

disagree with each paragraph of the Complaint. If you believe the Plaintiff should not be given 

everything asked for in the Complaint, you must say so in your Answer. 

4. YOU WILL LOSE YOUR CASE IF YOU DO NOT SEND A WRITTEN 

RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT TO THE PERSON WHO SIGNED THIS 

SUMMONS. If you do not Answer within 20 days, you will lose this case. You will not get to 

tell your side of the story, and the Court may decide against you and award the Plaintiff 

everything asked for in the complaint. If you do not want to contest the claims stated in the 

complaint, you do not need to respond. A default judgment can then be entered against you for 

the relief requested in the complaint. 

5. LEGAL ASSISTANCE. You may wish to get legal help from a lawyer. If you 

do not have a lawyer; the Court Administrator may have information about places where you can 

get legal assistance. Even if you cannot get legal help„ you must still provide a written 

Answer to protect your rights or you may lose the case. 

2 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 3 of 30
6. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parties may agree to or be 

ordered to participate in an alternative dispute resolution process under Rule 114 of the 

Minnesota General Rules of Practice. You must still send your written response to the 

Complaint even if you expect to use alternative means of resolving this dispute. 

Dated: December 8, 2016 LORI SWANSON 

Attorney General 

State of Minnesota 

/s/ Katherine T. Kelly 

KATHERINE T. KELLY 

Assistant Attorney General 

Atty. Reg. No. 0337535 

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1200 

St. Paul, MN 55101-2130 

Telephone: (651) 757-1308 

Fax: (651) 296-7438 

katherine.kelly@ag.state.mn.us 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

STATE. OF MINNESOTA 

MINN: STAT. § 549.211 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

The party on whose behalf the attached document is served acknowledges through its 

undersigned counsel that sanctions, including reasonable attorney fees and other expenses, may 

be awarded to the opposite party or parties pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211. 

/s/ Katherine T. Kelly 

ICATHERIN T. KELLY 

3 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 4 of 30
STATE OF MINNESOTA 

COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 

State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, 

Lori Swanson, and the Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency, 

Plaintiff, 

VS. 

DISTRICT COURT 

FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

Case Type: Other Civil 

(Environmental) 

Court File No. 

COMPLAINT 

Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft d/b/a 

Volkswagen Group and/or Volkswagen AG; 

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; Audi 

AG; Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG d/b/a 

Porsche AG; and Porsche Cars North America, 

Inc., 

Defendants. 

The State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, Lori Swanson, and the Minnesota 

Pollution Control Agency, for its Complaint against Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft d/b/a 

Volkswagen Group and/or Volkswagen AG, Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Audi AG, Dr. 

Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG d/b/a Porsche AG, and Porsche Cars North America, Inc., (collectively 

"Defendants" or "Volkswagen") hereby states and alleges as follows: 

INTRODUCTION 

1. A motor vehicle's air pollution control system is supposed to mitigate the harmful 

air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides, emitted by the vehicle's engine. For over ten years, 

Volkswagen carried out a scheme to render inoperative the air pollution control systems in 

certain diesel engine vehicles it sold and leased in Minnesota. It did so by installing illegal 

devices in these vehicles that recognized when the vehicles were being tested on a laboratory 

treadmill. When the illegal device detected that the vehicle was undergoing laboratory testing, it 

1 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 5 of 30
would activate or increase the effectiveness of the vehicle's air pollution control system. During 

every day, real-world driving conditions, however, the device would render the vehicle's air 

pollution control system inoperative. From 2008 through 2015, Volkswagen sold and leased 

more than 11,500 tampered vehicles in Minnesota. 

2. Volkswagen marketed its diesel engine vehicles to Minnesotans as new "clean 

diesel" vehicles that are not only quiet, fuel efficient, and high performing, but also 

environmentally friendly by emitting low levels of nitrogen oxides. Nitrogen oxides produce 

ground-level ozone, also known as smog. Smog can make breathing difficult, especially for 

people who suffer from conditions like asthma, chronic bronchitis, or emphysema. The 

tampered vehicles that Volkswagen sold and leased in Minnesota emitted up to 35 times the legal 

limit of nitrogen oxides. 

3. Volkswagen has admitted, both publicly and to the State of Minnesota, to 

installing devices that tamper with, alter, and render inoperative the air pollution control systems 

in certain diesel engine vehicles it sold and leased in Minnesota, in violation of Minnesota's antitampering laws. The State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, Lori Swanson, and the 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, brings this .action to enforce Minnesota's anti-tampering 

laws. 

PARTIES 

4. Lori Swanson, the Attorney General of the State of Minnesota, is authorized 

under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 8, including sections 8.01 and 8.31, and has common law 

authority, including parens patriae authority, to bring this action on behalf of the State of 

Minnesota and its citizens to enforce Minnesota law. 

2 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 6 of 30
5. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is a statutory agency of the State of 

Minnesota responsible for, among other things, administering and enforcing rules prohibiting the 

removal, alteration, or operating status of any motor vehicle air pollution control system. The 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is authorized under Minnesota Statutes section 115.071 to 

initiate enforcement actions in district court related to the violation of any rule it has issued. 

6. Defendants are the German automaker Volkswagen AG, and its subsidiaries Audi 

AG and Porsche AG, and their wholly-owned American affiliates and subsidiaries, VW of 

America, and Porsche North America, Inc. 

7. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft d/b/a Volkswagen Group and/or Volkswagen AG 

("Volkswagen AG") is a corporation organized under the laws of Germany and has its principal 

place of business in Wolfsburg, Germany. According to Volkswagen AG's 2015 Annual Report, 

its sales revenue for North America was over $39.6 billion in 2015 (over $8.7 billion more than 

in 2014). 

8. Volkswagen AG is the parent company of the Volkswagen Group ("VW 

Group")—an organizational and trade term referring to Volkswagen AG's automotive brands 

(including Volkswagen Passenger Cars and subsidiaries Audi and Porsche) and financial services 

business. 

9. Each brand in the VW Group also has its own Brand Board of Management. The 

members of the Brand Boards of Management manage their respective brands, pursuant to 

targets and requirements laid down by the Volkswagen AG Board of Management. 

10. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., ("VW of America") is a New Jersey 

corporation that is registered to do business in Minnesota. VW of America's principal place of 

business is located at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive, Herndon, Virginia. It is a wholly-owned 

3 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 7 of 30
subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is closely controlled and directed by Volkswagen AG. 

Within VW of America, the Engineering and Environmental Office ("EEO"), interacts with 

United States regulators and handles regulatory compliance and certification-related issues for 

Volkswagen AG and Audi AG. 

11. Audi AG ("Audi") is a member of the VW Group. Audi is a corporation 

organized under the laws of Germany and has its principal place of business in Ingolstadt, 

Germany. Volkswagen AG, which owns 99.55% of Audi's stock, contrOls Audi. Audi of 

America, LLC, also known as Audi of America, Inc., ("Audi of America") is an operating unit of 

and wholly owned by VW of America. VW of America is responsible for the acts of Audi of 

America in Minnesota and the United States. Audi of America is closely controlled and directed 

by Volkswagen AG and Audi AG. Audi of America, Inc., is registered as an assumed name in 

Minnesota. 

12. Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche d/b/a Porsche AG ("Porsche") is a member of the VW 

Group. Porsche is a corporation organized under the laws of Germany, has its principal place of 

business in Stuttgart, Germany, and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Volkswagen AG. 

13. Porsche Cars North America, Inc., ("Porsche NA") is a Delaware corporation that 

is registered to do business in Minnesota, and has its principal place of business at One Porsche 

Drive, Atlanta, Georgia. Porsche NA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Porsche and is closely 

controlled and directed by Porsche. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

14. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 

Minnesota Statutes sections 8.01, 8.31, 325E.0951, and 115.071, and Minnesota Rules part 

7023.0120 (2016). 

4 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 8 of 30
15. Volkswagen AG, and its subsidiaries Audi and Porsche, designed the Vehicles at 

issue specifically for sale to United States customers, including in Minnesota, by their United 

States affiliates. 

16. At all relevant times, Volkswagen AG, Audi, and Porsche acted with and through 

their United States affiliates, in particular, VW of America's Michigan-based EEO and Porsche 

NA, to obtain legal certification to the sell the vehicles at issue in the United States, including in 

Minnesota. 

17. At all relevant times, Volkswagen AG, Audi, and Porsche oversaw the sales and 

marketing efforts of their United States affiliates' actions in the United States, including in 

Minnesota. 

18. The Defendants transact business in Minnesota through at least 10 Minnesota 

Volkswagen dealers located in: St. Paul, Minneapolis, Inver Grove Heights, St. Louis Park, 

Brooklyn Center, Maplewood, Rochester, Burnsville, Mankato, and Duluth. 

19. This Court has personal jurisdiction over all Defendants because they transacted 

business in Minnesota and committed acts inside and outside Minnesota causing injury to 

Minnesota and its citizens and residents in violation of Minnesota law.. The exercise of 

jurisdiction over all Defendants is consistent with due process. 

20. Venue in Hennepin County is proper under Minnesota Statutes section 542.09 

because the cause of action arose, in part, in Hennepin County. 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 

I. DEFENDANTS KNOWINGLY SOLD VEHICLES CONTAINING ILLEGAL DEFEAT DEVICES 

THAT TAMPER WITH AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS IN MINNESOTA. 

21. In September .2015, Volkswagen for the first time publicly announced that it had, 

for many years, installed illegal devices that tampered with and altered the air pollution control 

5 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 9 of 30
systems in its diesel turbocharged direct injection ("TDI") 2.0-liter light-duty vehicles. As 

revealed by Volkswagen's subsequent admissions and the State's investigation, Volkswagen 

knowingly designed and installed the illegal devices, known as "defeat devices," in all of its 2.0-

and 3.0-liter TDIs ("Subject Vehicles") sold and leased in the United States, including in 

Minnesota, from 2008 through 2015. 

22. The Subject Vehicles emitted up to 35 times the legal limit of nitrogen oxides 

("NO."). The pollutant, NO., is the generic term for a group of nitrogen-based compounds that 

are produced by the combustion engines of motor vehicles, among other sources. The emission 

of high levels of NO has long been a particular problem for diesel engines. 

23. Volkswagen's defeat-device scheme began when it decided to transform the 

reputation Of its diesel engines among some American consumers as noisy, smog-inducing 

engines into ones that would deliver fuel efficiency, high performance, and low NO. emissions. 

Volkswagen marketed its defeat-device equipped diesel vehicles with slogans and tag-lines such 

as: 

• "Diesel has really cleaned up its act"; 

• "Di*sel — it's no longer a dirty word"; and 

• "The Volkswagen TDI engine is cleaner than conventional diesels, 

emitting as much as 95% less soot than previous diesel engines, as well as 

a reduction in oxides of nitrogen and sulphur." 

24. NO negatively impacts the health of Minnesotans and Minnesota's environment 

in a variety of ways. For example, NO. contributes to fine particulate matter and ground-level 

ozone, also known as smog. Children, the elderly, people with heart and lung diseases such as 

asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and emphysema, and people who work 

or exercise outside, are especially susceptible to adverse effects on their lungs due to smog. The 

6 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 10 of 30
presence of NO. can also reduce driving visibility in urban areas and elsewhere. NO also 

contributes to the formation of acid rain. In addition, NO. emissions can increase the nitrogen 

load in bodies of water, thereby upsetting the chemical balance of nutrients relied upon by 

aquatic plants and animals by causing harmful algal blooms that deplete the oxygen content of 

the water. Algal blooms can make water uninhabitable for fish populations and aquatic plants. 

25. In developing a purported "clean diesel" vehicle for the United States market, 

Volkswagen faced numerous challenges in engineering diesel engines that did not generate 

excessive NO and soot. As explained below, Volkswagen chose not to spend the time or money 

necessary to address these engineering challenges in a lawful manner. Instead, Volkswagen 

developed defeat devices that turn on the vehicle's air pollution control systems only when the 

device detects they are being tested on a treadmill in a laboratory. When the defeat device 

software detects such testing, it activates or increases the effectiveness of the vehicle's emissions 

controls. In real world driving conditions, however, the defeat device software lowers the 

emissions controls, essentially rendering them inoperative. 

26: According to Volkswagen's records, it sold or leased more than 11,500 defeat 

device-equipped vehicles in Minnesota, spanning several vehicle lines and diesel engine models. 

Throughout this Complaint: 

a. the 2.0-liter Generation 1/EA-189s, the Generation 2/EA-189s, and 

Generation 3/EA-288s will be referred to, respectively, as "Generation is," "Generation 2s," and 

"Generation 3s," and collectively as the "2.0s"; 

b. the 3.0-liter models will be referred to collectively as the "3.0s"; and 

c. the 2.0s and 3.0s are referred to collectively as "the Subject Vehicles." 

7 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 11 of 30
8 

Lb IRV 

2o1noi, MA 

OM' EOIXGV3 

011ZO.£0.1XCEVD ZIOZ 

Lb 1PV 

8oluno,l, MA 

DflEO.E0IXCIVE1 

onzo• £0.1.XCIVEL 1 I OZ 

Lb !Pulir taiunoi, MA G-IEO'EOIVIVV 010Z 

Lb Mule Toignoi, MA CrIEWEOIXCIV6 600Z 

(s)iaporAT putt 33IVI4I OppiaA (s)dnoa9 pal, vaa 

auaA 

ppm' 

wpm' mom JaWI 

EV !PV `TessucI MA 

tnof MA `uo2em2iods moo MA 'Roo 

MA companuop oPooEl MA `2110oH MA 'IVATZOAVOAd 88ZVW Luo0 S I OZ 

wssud MA 

St11.0.ZOAXMAa 

St7110.ZOAXMACI 

StflO.ZOAXMAD 68 I vai z tmo 

VIOZ 

EIOZ 

zIOZ 

uarmwds uuof MA 'M01 MA 'moo 

MA `oiciplonuop apoog MA `oIlootl MA NISf1070AXMA3 68IV3/ 1 u00 tIOZ 

EV NortV 

ta8umliods Elpf MA tuof MA I100 

MA `olcutionuop allaag MA `01100E1 MA NISf1070AXMACE 681V/ 1 u00 E1OZ 

EV !PV 

'uo8umpods 'gun MA 'nor MA :TIoD MA IsIS11070AXMA3 681V3./ 1 uoD ZIOZ 

EV IlmV 

`uaSumpods vnof MA tnof MA `J100 MA NS11070AXMAEI 681V1/ 1 uoD I IOZ 

EV WV 

`uaumpods unof MA 'BIM MA `JI00 MA NSf1070AXMAV 681V/ 1 uoD OIOZ 

uo8umuods unof MA tn2f MA 

NSf10.ZOAXMA6 

NISE070AXMA6 681V2/ I uo0 600Z 

(s)ppoiN pull anumi apppA dnoao lsoi Vcia 

aupuw(u39) 

uopulaua9 

inaA 

ppow 

sppoN IOSOM IOW' 07 

ppoul 91 0Z liVtionD 600Z olp ioj tlosauugAi in 2umn1ou! torlS pollun. 042u! pasgaI 

10 pps slop= puu =pm 2upn0lloj oq aptipu! sapp.pA parqns s‘uarmolloA *LZ 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 12 of 30
Model 

Year 

EPA Test Group(s) Vehicle Make and Model(s) 

2013 DADXT03.02UG 

DADXT03.03UG 

DPRXT03.0CDD 

VW Touareg 

Audi Q7 

Porsche Cayenne Diesel 

2014 EADXT03.02UG 

EADXT03.03UG 

EPRXT03.0CDD 

EADXJ03.04UG 

VW Touareg 

Audi Q7 

Porsche Cayenne Diesel 

Audi A6 Quattro, A7 Quattro, A8, A8L, Q5 

2015 FVGAT03.0NU2 

FVGAT03.0NU3 

FPRXT03.0CDD 

FVGAJ03.0NU4 

VW Touareg 

Audi Q7 

Porsche Cayenne Diesel 

Audi A6 Quattro, A7 Quattro, A8, A8L, Q5 

2016 GVGAT03.0NU2 

GPRXT03.0CDD 

GVGAJ03.0NU4 

VW Touareg 

Porsche Cayenne Diesel 

Audi A6 Quattro, A7 Quattro,A8, A8L, Q5 

II. VOLKSWAGEN'S DEFEAT DEVICE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION WAS AN 

INTENTIONAL PROCESS IMPLEMENTED ACROSS DIFFERENT AIR POLLUTION CONTROL 

SYSTEMS AND THREE SEPARATE BRANDS: VOLKSWAGEN, AUDI, AND PORSCHE. 

A. The First Defeat Device: Audi's Model Year 2004-2008 V6 For the European 

Market. 

28. In 1999, Audi engineers at Audi headquarters in Neckarsulm, Germany, 

developed a new technology that could eliminate the traditional noise typical of diesel engines at 

start-up through the injection of additional fuel into the engine on ignition. This caused the 

engine, however, to exceed European emissions standards during laboratory testing. 

29. To solve this problem, Audi invented defeat device software that was able to 

recognize when the vehicle was undergoing testing on a laboratory treadmill and to deactivate 

the excess fuel-injection during such testing. Because of its noise-reducing properties, Audi 

dubbed this defeat device the "Acoustic Function." 

9 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 13 of 30
B. The Second Defeat Device: Volkswagen's Generation is. 

30. In the early-to-mid 2000s, as it was planning to launch its Generation 1 diesel 

engine vehicles in the United States, including in Minnesota, Volkswagen explored equipping its 

Generation 1 diesel engines with a urea-spraying air pollution control system, which chemically 

reduces NO. emissions by spraying a fluid called urea in the exhaust stream to create N2 and 

H20. This would have required outfitting the Generation is (including the small, model year 

2009 Jetta), however, with one or more tanks capable of storing gallons of the urea fluid. 

31. In 2006, the engineers and managers responsible for developing the Generation 1 

diesel engine abandoned this urea-spraying air pollution control system and decided instead to 

use an air pollution control system that used catalytic converter technology that would trap NO. 

emissions and periodically convert the NO. into N2. Early in the development of this catalyticconverter air pollution control system, it became apparent to Volkswagen's engineers that it 

produced too much soot. 

32. In late 2006, facing these major engineering challenges and a managementimposed production deadline, and with the knowledge and approval of their managers, 

Volkswagen's engineers in Wolfsburg adapted Audi's Acoustic Function defeat device to 

overcome these issues. Like the Audi defeat device, the defeat device Volkswagen implemented 

in the Generation Is featured software that could detect when the vehicles were undergoing 

laboratory testing on a treadmill. During such testing, the defeat-device software, among other 

things, substantially increased the air pollution control system's conversion of NO. into N2. In 

contrast, during real-world driving conditions, the defeat device software tampered with the 

vehicle's air pollution control systems such that fuel-efficiency increased, but soot and NO. 

emissions did as well. 

10 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 14 of 30
33. Volkswagen knowingly tampered with, adjusted, altered, changed, rendered 

inoperative, and/or disconnected the air pollution control systems of the Generation is by 

installing defeat devices that tampered with their catalytic-converter air pollution control systems 

described above. According to Volkswagen's records, at least 7,000 of these Generation is with 

altered air pollution control systems were sold or leased in Minnesota. 

C. The Third Defeat Device: Audi's and Volkswagen's 3.0 SUVs. 

34. As Volkswagen engineers in Wolfsburg were developing the Generation 1 diesel 

engine, their colleagues at Audi's Neckarsulm headquarters were developing a United Statesmarket 3.0-liter diesel engine for the anticipated release of a new line of luxury diesel SUVs in 

the United States, including in Minnesota: the Audi Q7 and Volkswagen Touareg. 

35. To enter the United • States market, however, Audi's 3.0-liter diesel engine 

vehicles—which were equipped with a urea-spraying air pollution control system—would 

require large amounts of urea fluid, necessitating either larger urea tanks or more frequent 

service visits to refill them. In or around July 2006, the problem reached the attention of Martin 

Winterkorn, then the CEO of Audi (later of the parent company, Volkswagen AG) as well as • 

Matthias Muller, then the head of Project Management for Audi and now Mr. Winterkorn's 

successor as CEO of Volkswagen AG. 

36. Ultimately, Volkswagen and Audi decided not to expend the time and money 

necessary to re-engineer the 3.0s to equip them with larger urea storage tanks. Nor did they seek 

to address the storage tank issue, as they could have, by shortening the length of the 3.0s service 

interval. Some competitors, for example, had service intervals as low as 7,500 or even 5,000 

miles. Volkswagen and Audi, however, chose to maintain a 10,000-mile service interval to gain 

a competitive edge and again decided to employ a defeat device. 

11 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 15 of 30
37. Like .the other defeat devices, the defeat device software in the 3.0s recognizes 

when the vehicle is undergoing testing on a laboratory treadmill and, among other things, 

increases the urea spray during such testing. During real-world driving conditions, however, the 

3.0s' defeat device tampers with the urea-spraying air pollution control system by, in part, 

reducing the urea spray to enable the 3.0s' too-small urea tanks to last for 10,000 miles between 

service intervals. 

38. Volkswagen and Audi approved and installed the above-described defeat device 

for production into the Q7 and Touareg 3.0s for sale in the United States, including in 

Minnesota, from 2009 to 2015. By doing so, Volkswagen and Audi knowingly tampered with, 

adjusted, altered, changed, rendered inoperative, and/or disconnected the 3.0s' urea-spraying air 

pollution control systems. According to Volkswagen's records, not including the Porsche 

Cayenne diesel SUVs discussed below, at least 1,000 3.0s containing defeat devices were sold in 

Minnesota. 

D. The Fourth Defeat Device: Volkswagen's Generation 2s. 

39. In 2009, Volkswagen began planning to roll out its Passat TDI in the United 

States, including in Minnesota, which was heavier than the Generation is and therefore 

unsuitable for the catalytic-converter air pollution control system they utilized. In designing a 

urea-spraying air pollution control system for the Passat, however, Volkswagen's engineers now 

faced what their Audi colleagues had confronted—insufficient space in the vehicle to incorporate 

urea tanks large enough to meet the 10,000-mile service interval for the Generation 2s. 

40. Rather than resolve or mitigate this engineering problem, Volkswagen again 

opted to implement a similar defeat device that would unlawfully tamper with the Generation 2s' 

urea-spraying air pollution control systems. Once the defeat device software recognizes the 

12 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 16 of 30
vehicle is being tested on a laboratory treadmill, the defeat device increases, among other things, 

the urea spray. Outside of test conditions, however, the defeat device alters the Generation 2s' 

air pollution control systems by reducing the urea-spray to allow the Generation 2s' too-small 

urea tanks to last for 10,000 miles between service intervals. 

41. Volkswagen knowingly tampered with, adjusted, altered, changed, rendered 

inoperative, and/or disconnected the urea-spraying air pollution control systems of the 

Generation 2s by installing the above-described defeat devices. With the approval of 

Volkswagen .supervisory executives, company engineers went forward with this defeat device, 

installing it in a minimum of 1,900 Volkswagen Passats in Minnesota, spanning from model 

years 2012 to 2014. 

E. The Fifth Defeat Device: The Porsche Cayenne. 

42. • In 2010, Volkswagen AG acquired Porsche, and the founding family of Porsche 

became Volkswagen's leading shareholders. The following year, Porsche, too, decided it wanted 

to enter the United States diesel engine vehicle market, including in Minnesota, with its new 

Cayenne SUV. 

43. Porsche approached its sister company, Audi, about acquiring Audi's 3.0-liter V6 

diesel engine for use in the Cayenne. Audi agreed to supply Porsche the engine, lightly re-tuned 

for Porsche. In supplying the engine, Audi personnel educated their counterparts at Porsche 

about the engine's primary features, including its defeat device that tampered with and altered 

the vehicles' urea-spraying air pollution control systems, among other things. 

44. In communications in or around September 2011, which included Audi engineer 

Martin Gruber, the then-head of Volkswagen AG Engine Development, Ulrich Hackenberg, and 

Porsche's electronics development chief, Carsten Schauer, among others, Audi explained to 

13 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 17 of 30
Porsche personnel the 3.0s' urea tank-size limitation and the resulting defeat device strategy that 

Audi had devised. 

45. Notwithstanding this information, Porsche's engineering department, then led by 

Wolfgang Hatz, proceeded to source the Audi defeat-device equipped 3.0-liter engine for its 

entry into the United States diesel market, including in Minnesota, with the model year 2013 

Cayenne diesel SUV. According to Volkswagen's records, at least 90 Porsche vehicles with 

defeat devices that tampered with, adjusted, altered, changed, rendered inoperative and/or 

disconnected the air pollution control systems were sold or leased in Minnesota. 

F. The Sixth Defeat Device: Volkswagen's Generation 3s. 

46. In or about 2013, Volkswagen discontinued the catalytic-converter systems in 

favor of its urea-spray systems for its Generation 3s, the model year 2015 2.0s. It also decided to 

implement defeat devices in all its Generation 3s (the Beetle, Golf, Jetta, Passat, and the Audi 

A3). In doing so, Volkswagen knowingly installed defeat devices that tampered with, adjusted, 

altered, changed, rendered inoperative and/or disconnected the urea-spraying air pollution 

control systems in its Generation 3s. According to Volkswagen's records, it sold or leased at 

least 1,300 Generation 3s in Minnesota.,, 

III. VOLKSWAGEN'S SCHEME BEGINS TO UNRAVEL AND VOLKSWAGEN FINALLY ADMITS 

THAT IT INSTALLED DEFEAT DEVICES THAT ALTER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES' AIR 

POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS. 

47. On March 31, 2014, West Virginia University's ("WVU") Center for Alternative 

Fuels, Engines & Emissions presented findings from a study it had conducted, which showed 

that two of three unnamed light duty diesel vehicles it tested emitted between five and thirty-five 

times more NO,, during real-world driving conditions than the vehicles emitted during laboratory 

testing on a treadmill. WVU's study was commissioned by the International Council on Clean 

14 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 18 of 30
Transportation (the "ICCT Report"), which was concerned about the discrepancy between 

Volkswagen's NO emissions in Europe versus the United States. WVU researchers conducted 

tests using a portable emissions measurement system—essentially a lightweight laboratory used 

to test and assess mobile source emissions in real-world driving conditions—rather than on a 

treadmill. 

48. Within days, ICCT researchers told VW of America's Engineering and 

Environmental Office ("EEO") that the vehicles that appeared to have air pollution control 

systems that did not function appropriately included a 2012 Jetta (a Generation 1) with a 

catalytic-converter air pollution control system and a 2013 Passat (a Generation 2) with a ureaspraying air pollution control system. 

49. Soon thereafter, VW of America's EEO began fielding calls and requests for 

reports and analyses of the ICCT Report from multiple high-ranking Volkswagen executives, 

including Michael Horn (then-CEO and President of VW of America), Carsten Krebs (a Director 

at VW of America), Frank Tuch (then-head of Group Quality Management for Volkswagen AG), 

Bernd Gottweis (then-head of Product Safety within Volkswagen AG Group Quality 

Management) and Christian Klingler (then-Volkswagen AG Management Board member 

responsible for Sales and Marketing). 

50. For the next 17 months, from May 2014 until September 3, 2015 (and beyond for 

the 3.0s), Volkswagen waged a campaign to mislead and confuse the public about Volkswagen's 

installation and sale of vehicles with illegal defeat devices that tampered with, adjusted, altered, 

changed, rendered inoperative and/or disconnected the vehicles' air pollution control systems. 

51. Not until September 3, 2015, did Volkswagen finally admit that it had installed 

illegal defeat devices in its vehicles, That September, for the first time outside the companies, 

15 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 19 of 30
Volkswagen admitted that the Generation 2s' engine contained a defeat device that has two 

calibrations: one for real world driving (Calibration 1) and one for testing (Calibration 2). In 

Calibration 1, Volkswagen disclosed that, among other things, the urea-spray is lowered. In 

Calibration 2, Volkswagen disclosed that the urea-spray is increased. In addition, Volkswagen 

provided greater detail regarding the enable/disable values for these calibrations. 

52. On October 8, 2015, Mr. Horn admitted in his testimony before the United States 

House of Representatives Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy 

and Commerce that VW of America's and Volkswagen AG's installation of defeat devices in the 

2.0-liter Subject Vehicles was a knowing and willful decision to deceive regulators and 

consumers. 

53. On November 19, 2015, VW of America and Audi of America admitted to 

regulators that all 3.0s from model years 2009 through 2016 had similar defeat devices that 

tampers with, adjusts, alters, changes, removes, renders inoperative and/or disconnects the 

vehicles' air pollution control systems. 

54. On September 9, 2016, a Volkswagen engineer pleaded guilty in U.S. District 

Court for the Eastern District of Michigan for his 10-year role in Volkswagen's defeat device 

scheme. According to the plea agreement, the engineer admitted to helping design and 

implement the defeat device used in the EA189 engines for sale in the United States. From 1983 

until 2008, he worked in Volkswagen AG's diesel development department in Wolfsburg, 

Germany, and from 2008 through 2016, he worked in VW of America's California testing 

facility. 

55. On June 27, 2016, Volkswagen executed a partial settlement agreement with the 

State of Minnesota ("Partial Settlement Agreement" or "PSA"). On November 14, 2016, the 

16 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 20 of 30
State filed an Assurance of Discontinuance ("Assurance") in Ramsey County District Court 

further memorializing the PSA, which the Court entered on November 18, 2016. The PSA and 

Assurance partially settled the State's claims related to Minnesota Statutes sections 325F.67 

(False Statement in Advertisement Act), 325F.69 (Consumer Fraud Act), and 325D.44 

(Deceptive Trade Practices Act). The PSA and Assurance, however, did not settle or resolve the 

State's consumer protection claims under these statutes against Volkswagen regarding the 3.0s, 

in part, because Volkswagen has not yet proposed an acceptable fix to ensure that the 3.0s air 

pollution control systems are fully functional during real-world driving conditions. 

56. In the PSA and Assurance, Volkswagen admits the following, among other 

things: • 

(a) that software in the 2.0 Liter Subject Vehicles enables the vehicles' [engine 

control module] to detect when the vehicles are being driven on the road, rather 

than undergoing Federal Test Procedures; (b) that this software renders certain 

emission control systems in the vehicles inoperative when the [engine control 

module] detects the vehicles are not undergoing Federal Test Procedures[.] 

The PSA and Assurance also enjoin Volkswagen from "advertising, marketing, offering for sale, 

selling, offering for lease, leasing, or distributing in Minnesota any vehicle that contains a Defeat 

Device." 

57. Paragraph 8.B of the PSA and Paragraph 12.8 of the Assurance expressly 

preserve the State's anti-tampering claims under Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951 and 

Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120 (2015). Specifically, in Paragraph 12.B of the Assurance the 

State reserves and did not settle, release, or resolve: 

any claims, rights and remedies against Volkswagen, Porsche and their affiliates . 

. . including, without limitation. . . any claims arising under state environmental 

laws and regulations, including laws and regulations regarding. . . anti-tampering 

provisions (including but not limited to Minn. Stat. § 325E.0951 and Mimi. R. 

7023.0120) 

17 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 21 of 30
58. Volkswagen's admission that it installed software that rendered inoperative 

emissions control systems is an admission that it knowingly tampered with, adjusted, altered, 

changed, rendered inoperative and/or disconnected the 2.0-liter Subject Vehicles' air pollution 

control systems in violation of Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951 and Minnesota Rules part 

7023.0120. 

IV. DEFENDANTS ACTED IN CONCERT TO TAMPER WITH THE SUBJECT VEHICLES' AIR 

POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS AND CONCEAL THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEFEAT 

DEVICES. 

59. At all times material to this Complaint, Defendants worked in concert with the 

common objective of engaging in the illegal defeat-device scheme described in this Complaint. 

Each of the Defendants was, and still is, the agent of the others for this purpose, and each has 

acted, and is acting, for the Common goals and profit of them all. Therefore, all acts and 

knowledge ascribed to one of them are properly imputed to the others. Among other things: 

a. Volkswagen AG allocates and controls the overall research and 

development and marketing budgets for the brands in the VW Group; 

b. Audi of America is an operating unit of VW of America; and 

c. The three brands (Volkswagen, Audi, and Porsche) share engineering 

research and development and engine concepts and designs, including but not limited to 

Volkswagen's incorporation of Audi-designed software and hardware elements into its EA 189 

diesel engine for the Generation is and Generation 2s, and Porsche's use of the Audi 3.0-liter 

diesel engine for its Cayenne SUV Subject Vehicle. 

60. Officers and employees of Defendants, including several of those involved in the 

unlawful conduct described in this Complaint, are shared among Defendants, and moved from 

the employ of one Defendant to another. 

18 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 22 of 30
61. At a minimum, each of the Defendants knowingly and intentionally provided each 

of the other Defendants with substantial assistance, or aided and abetted one another, in carrying 

out individual company-by-company unlawful defeat device schemes, as described in this 

Complaint. 

62. Each Defendant engaged in violations of Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951 

and Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120. 

63. Until September 2015,. each Defendant fraudulently concealed and failed to 

disclose to the State of Minnesota and the public that it had installed illegal defeat devices in the 

Subject Vehicles sold in the United States, including in Minnesota. 

64. The conduct of Volkswagen AG, VW of America, Audi, Porsche, and Porsche 

NA alleged in this Complaint was knowing and willful. 

COUNT I 

MOTOR VEHICLE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS ACT 

MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 325E.0951 

65. The State re-alleges all prior paragraphs of this Complaint. 

66. Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951, subdivision 2(a), provides that "[a] person 

may not knowingly tamper with, adjust, alter, change, or disconnect any air pollution control 

system on a motor vehicle or on a motor vehicle engine." 

67. Defendants repeatedly violated Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951, 

subdivision 2(a), • by knowingly tampering with, adjusting, altering, changing, and/or 

disconnecting the Subject Vehicles' air pollution control systems through installing defeat 

devices in the Subject Vehicles it.sold and leased in Minnesota. 

68. Defendants' conduct, practices, and actions, described in this Complaint 

constitute multiple, separate violations of Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951. 

• 

19 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 23 of 30
COUNT II 

ENFORCEMENT OF THE MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY'S 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS RESTRICTIONS RULE 

MINNESOTA RULES PART 7023.0120 

69. The State re-alleges all prior paragraphs of this Complaint. 

70. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 116.07, in 2005 the Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency adopted and issued Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120, which provides that "(n] 

person shall remove, alter, or otherwise render inoperative any air pollution control system." 

71. Defendants repeatedly violated Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120 by selling and 

leasing Subject Vehicles in Minnesota containing defeat devices that remove, alter, and/or 

otherwise render inoperative the Subject Vehicles' air pollution control systems. 

72. Defendants' conduct, practices, and actions, described in thjs Complaint 

constitute multiple, separate violations of Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, the State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, Lori Swanson, and the 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, respectfully requests a jury trial and asks this Court to 

award judgment against Defendants as follows: 

1. Declaring that Defendants' actions, as set forth above, constitute multiple separate 

violations of Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951 and Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120; 

2. Awarding judgment against Defendants solely for the recovery of civil penalties 

pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 8.31, subdivision 3, for each separate violation of 

Minnesota Statutes section 325E.0951 and/or pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 115.071, 

subdivisions 1 and 3, for each separate violation of Minnesota Rules part 7023.0120; 

3. Awarding the State its costs, including costs of investigation and attorney's fees, 

as authorized by Minnesota Statutes sections 8.31, subdivision 3a and 115.072; and 

20 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 24 of 30
4. Granting such further relief as provided by law or as the Court deems appropriate 

and just. 

Dated: 1212 /24/6 LORI SWANSON 

Attorney General 

State of Minnesota 

JAMES W. CANADAY 

Deputy Attorney General 

JASON PLEGGENKUHLE 

Assistant Attorney General 

KATHERINE T. KE Y 

Assistant Attorney General 

Atty. Reg. No. 0337535 

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1200 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2130 

katherine.kelly@ag.state.mn.us 

(651) 757-1308 (Voice) 

(651) 296-1410 (TTY) 

Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Minnesota by its 

Attorney General, Lori Swanson, and the 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

21 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 25 of 30
141if KELL i.

KATHERINE T. 

MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 549.211 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

The parties on whose behalf the attached document is served acknowledges through its 

undersigned counsel that sanctions, including reasonable attorney fees and other expenses, may 

be awarded to the opposite party or parties pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 549.211. 

22 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 26 of 30
STATE OF MINNESOTA District Court 

HENNEPIN COUNTY Judicial District: FOURTH 

Court File Number: 

Case Type: OTHER CIVIL 

State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General 

Lori Swanson and the Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency, 

Plaintiff, 

Civil Cover Sheet 

VS (Non-Family Case Type) 

Minn. R. Gen. Prac. 104 

Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft d/b/a 

Volkswagen Group and/or Volkswagen AG: 

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; 

Audi AG; Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG 

d/b/a Porsche AG; and Porsche Cars North 

America, Inc., 

Defendants. 

Date Case Filed: December 8, 2016 

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 

Katherine T. Kelly 

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS 

unknown 

Attorney Name Attorney Name 

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1200 

Postal Address Postal Address 

St. Paul, MN 55101 

City State Zip Code City State Zip Code 

(651) 757-1308 ) 

Telephone Number Telephone Number 

katherine.kelly@ag.state.mn.us 

E-mail address E-mail address 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 27 of 30
0337535 

Minnesota Attorney License No. Minnesota Attorney License No: 

PLAINTIFF, Self-represented DEFENDANTS, Self-represented 

Name Name 

Postal Address Postal Address 

City State Zip Code City State Zip Code 

Telephone Number Telephone Number 

E-mail address E-mail address 

1. Provide a concise statement of the case including facts and legal basis: 

This is a civil environmental enforcement action by the State of Minnesota, through its Attorney 

General Lori Swanson and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, against Volkswagen 

Aktiengesellschaft d/b/a Volkswagen Group and/or Volkswagen AG: Volkswagen Group of 

America. Inc.; Audi AG; Dr. lng. h.c.F. Porsche AG d/b/a Porsche AG; and Porsche Cars 

North America, Inc., ("Volkswagen"), which are diesel vehicle manufacturers and sellers. 

Volkswagen installed illegal defeat devices in certain vehicles sold in Minnesota that tampered 

with and altered the vehicles' air pollution control systems in violation of Minnesota's Motor 

Vehicle Air Pollution Control Systems Act (Minn. Stat. § 325E.0951) and Air Pollution Control 

Systems Restrictions Rule (Minn. R. P. 7023.0120). The State of Minnesota, through its 

Attorney General and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, brings this enforcement action to 

obtain penalties for Volkswagen's violations. 

2. Date Complaint was served: December 8, 2016. 

3. For Expedited Litigation Track (ELT) Pilot Courts only: 

a. 0 the parties jointly and voluntarily agree that this case shall be governed by the 

Special Rules for ELT Pilot. Date of agreement: 

2 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 28 of 30
b. 0 The court is requested to consider excluding this case from ELT for the following 

reasons: 

Note: ELT is mandatory in certain cases, and where mandatory, exclusion may also be 

sought by timely motion under the Special Rules for ELT Pilot. 

c. Anticipated number of trial witnesses: 

d. Amount of medical expenses to date: 

e. Amount of lost wages to date: 

f. Identify any known subrogation interests: 

4. Estimated discovery completion within 6 months from the date of this form. 

5. Disclosure / discovery of electronically stored information discussed with other party? 

X No 0 Yes, date of discussion: 

If Yes, list agreements, plans, and disputes: 

6. Proposed trial start date: December 11, 2017. 

7. Estimated trial time: 5 days hours (estimates less than a day must be 

stated in hours). 

8. Jury trial is: Requested. 

o waived by consent of pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 38.02. 

(specify party) 

O requested by (NOTE: Applicable fee must be enclosed) 

(specify party) 

9. Physical/mental/blood examination pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 35 is requested: 

O Yes X No 

10. Identify any party or witness who will require interpreter services, and describe the 

services needed (specifying language, and if known, particular dialect): None known. 

11. Issues in dispute: Defendants' tampering and altering of air pollution control systems in 

vehicles sold in Minnesota in violation of the State's anti-tampering laws. 

12. Case Type / Category: 14/Other Civil (NOTE: select case type from Form 

23, Subject Matter Index for Civil Cases, appended to the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure). 

3 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 29 of 30
13. Recommended Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism: Mediation. 

(See list of ADR processes set forth in Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 114.02(a)) 

Recommended ADR provider (known as a "neutral"): To be determined. 

Recommended ADR completion date: June 15, 2017. 

If applicable, reasons why ADR not appropriate for this case: 

By signing below, the attorney or party submitting this form certifies that the above information 

is true and correct. 

Submitted by: 

LORI SWANSON 

Attorney General 

State of Minnesota 

/s/ Katherine T. Kelly 

KATHERINE T. KELLY 

Assistant Attorney General 

Atty. Reg. No. 0337535 

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1200 

St. Paul, MN 55101-2130 

Telephone: (651) 757-1308 

Fax: (651) 296-7438 

katherine.kelly@ag.state.mn.us 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

STATE OF MINNESOTA 

Date: December 8, 2016 

4 

Case 3:17-cv-00187-CRB Document 1-4 Filed 12/22/16 Page 30 of 30