From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Jeremy Thacker [/O=MEX09/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP 

(FYDI BO H F23SPDL T)/CN =RE Cl Pl ENTS/CN=542E77FA 7E EA4951ADBE7E2C97E2FD54-J ERE MY. THACKER) 

2/17/20171:37:34AM 

'jeremy@thackerfamily.com' Lieremy@thackerfamily.com) 

FW: Amerisure 

Jeremy Thacker I Government Sales Manager - Southwest 

GPS Insight 

7201 E. Henkel Way, Suite 400 I Scottsdale, AZ 85255 

480.663.9472 

gpsinsight.com 

h ;. 

.,... ~ .. , 

·~ Gi?5 

I N S I H 

From: Jeremy Thacker 

Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 6:26 PM 

To: Tyler Mortensen <tyler.mortensen@gpsinsight.com> 

Subject: RE: Amerisure 

No worries and no need to apologize. I just wanted to check. 

Jeremy Thacker I Government Sales Manager - Southwest 

GPS Insight 

7201 E. Henkel Way, Suite 400 I Scottsdale, AZ 85255 

480.663.9472 

gpsinsight.com 

h~._ 

,~ 

Gi?5 

I N H 

From: Tyler Mortensen 

Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 6:13 PM 

To: Jeremy Thacker <jeremy.thacker@gpsinsight.com> 

Subject: Re: Amerisure 

No, I have completely forgot to bring it up with Jason. I apologize, I need to talk to him about it asap. 

Tyler Mortensen I Director of Strategic Sales 

GPSI 00021847 
EXHIBIT V 
From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Jeremy, 

Jason Walker [/O=MEX0S/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP 

(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=JASON.WALKERE23] 

8/26/2016 1:26:43 PM 

Jeremy Thacker [jeremy.thacker@gpsinsight.com] 

RE : Pushback 

No worries. I did not take it that way at all. I just needed to keep the meeting on course and the CRM issues were not a 

topic we can tackle in that meeting. 

All good. 

From: Jeremy Thacker 

Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 10:37 PM 

To: Jason Walker <jason.walker@gpsinsight.com> 

Subject: Pushback 

I wanted to apologize for insinuating James wasn't thorough and say thanks for pushing back. James is absolutely 

amazing and I didn't mean it to come across as me blaming him for anything. That is absolutely the last impression that I 

want anybody to have of how I feel about him. 

Jeremy Thacker I Government Sales Manager - Southwest 

GPS Insight 

7201 E. Henkel Way, Suite 400 I Scottsdale, AZ 85255 

480.663.9472 

gpsinsight.com 

h,. .. 

fj 

'5?5 

IN I · H 

GPSI 00028317 
EXHIBIT W 
CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Carrie M. Francis (020453)

Stefan M. Palys (024752)

Michael A. Vincent (029864)

STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP

1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4584

Tel: (602) 279-1600

Fax: (602) 240-6925

Email: carrie.francis@stinson.com

stefan.palys@stinson.com

michael.vincent@stinson.com

Attorneys for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jeremy Thacker, No. 2:18-cv-00063-PHX-DJH

DEFENDANT GPS INSIGHT, LLC'S

RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

Plaintiff,

v.

GPS Insight, LLC; Robert J. Donat,

Individually and as Trustee of The

Robert Donat Living Trust Dated

April 19, 2017;

Defendants.

Pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 34, Defendant GPS Insight, LLC ("GPSI" or

"Defendants") hereby responds to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents.

DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED

REQUEST NO. 1:

Most recent commission workbook provided to each GPSI salesperson reflecting

all sales data including all tabs from January 1, 2015 to present in native format. In our

June 2018 letter concerning your discovery deficiencies, we provided an example of the

Commission Worksheet. In Defendant's Initial Disclosures and Responses on 8:18, 9:1,

and 9:10, Defendants allege that Mr. Thacker is a "substandard" employee and

salesperson as well as only having "some sales results." In addition to evidence

supporting their assertions, this information will also provide us with information
2

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

needed to calculate Mr. Thacker's unpaid commissions based on GPSI' pattern and

practice of calculating commissions as to other GPSI employees who are similarly

situated.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 2:

Profit-sharing/Compensation Summary letters for each salesperson at GPSI for

the years 2016, 2017, and 2018 which represents the prior year's performance. i.e. 2017

Profit-Sharing/Compensation Summary represents 2016 performance.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 3:

Spreadsheet used by Mr. Donat to calculate Profit-sharing/Compensation

Summary for each salesperson for years 2016, 2017, and 2018 in native format.

///
3

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 4:

GPSI Sales Policy for each year from 2014-2018.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 5:

All documents and presentation materials included in company-wide meeting

presentations from January 1, 2014 to present in native format. Examples of these

meetings would include but not be limited to, All Company Semi-Annual status meeting

on June 2, 2016 and Close Strong 2016 on October 13, 2016.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,
4

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 6:

All documents and presentation materials included in All Sales Meetings from

January 1, 2015 to present in native format. Examples of these meetings include but are

not limited to All Sales Meeting on December 16, 2016 and All Sales Meeting on

November 11, 2016.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 7:

All documents related to Sagemount, equity investment in GPSI and/or change in

stock and/or ownership, including but not limited to contracts, terms and conditions,

evaluations, and financials.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's
5

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 8:

All documents related to stock options and/or bonuses related to Sagemount

and/or equity investment for all GPSI employees, including but not limited to any

spreadsheets used to calculate bonuses/commissions and documents

verifying/substantiating the data used to calculate the bonuses/commissions in native

format.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 9:

All Lexis Nexis reports for Mr. Thacker, Ms. Lisson, and/or Mr. Dennis in native

format including any communications reflecting when or why those reports were

generated and to whom they were sent.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.
6

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 10:

All documents that support Defendants' contention that Mr. Thacker was "written

up" and/or counseled regarding any alleged behavioral issues including being "caustic

and abrasive" and a "disruptive" employee. See Defendant's Initial Disclosure page

8:18-27.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 11:

All expense reports for all employees from 2014 through present in native format

including any document that reflects which employees were given access to use GPSI's

company credit card and on what terms they were allowed to use the card.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 12:

The last five years' worth of tax returns for GPSI and Mr. Donat.
7

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 13:

Any insurance or other agreements under which another person or entity may be

liable to satisfy all or part of the judgment or to indemnify or reimburse a party for

payments made by the party to satisfy the judgement. MDIP # 6.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 14:

All communications between, on the one hand, Mr. Donat and, on the other hand,

Mr. Thacker from January 1, 2017 to the present, including but not limited to texts,

emails, iMessages, Slack messages, cards, letters, notes, and messages on any social

media or messaging application.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served
8

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 15:

All communications between, on the one hand, Mr. Donat and, on the other hand,

Ms. Lisson from January 1, 2016 to the present, including but not limited to texts,

emails, iMessages, Slack messages, cards, letters, notes, and messages on any social

media or messaging application.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 16:

All communications sent by or to Mr. Donat, Mr. Walker, Mr. Mortensen, Mr.

Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald and Kristi Donat from February 22, 2017 to April 15, 2017,

including but not limited to texts, emails, iMessages, Slack messages, or messages sent

through any social media or messaging application.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.
9

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 17:

All communications between, on the one hand, Mr. Donat and, on the other hand,

Kate Wells regarding Mr. Thacker, Ms. Lisson, and/or any topic related to a workplace

romance from January 1, 2017 to the present, including but not limited to texts, emails,

iMessages, Slack messages, cards, letters, notes, and messages on any social media or

messaging application. In Defendant's Answer to Mr. Thacker's Complaint, Defendants

admit that Mr. Donat had conversations with Kate Wells regarding his relationship with

Ms. Lisson.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 18:

Any document that you contend reflects that GPSI provided a copy of any

employee policy to any of its employees including the company-wide email referred to

in 30(b)(6) deposition of Mr. Fitzgerald in which he claims that all GPSI employees

were made aware of the new policies available on Knowledge Base sometime in 2017.

///
10

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 19:

Slack Weekly Summary email for every week in the months of February 2017,

March 2017 and June 2018. An example of what we are looking for was included in the

June 2018 letter concerning your discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 20:

Any email that was sent or received by any GPSI employee between March 6,

2017 and April 15, 2017 which contains any of the following words:

a. Kristin

b. Lisson

c. KL

d. "K.L."
11

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

e. Jeremy

f. Thacker

g. JT

h. "J.T."

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 21:

Any email that was sent or received by David Pope, Mr. Walker, Joe Vidmar,

Josh Schwartz, Nathan Washington, Phil Eatman, or Mr. Mortensen at any time which

contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. "earn out"

b. "ear out"

c. "referral fee"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.
12

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 22:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr.

Walker, Mr. Donat, Mr. Mortensen, or Wayne Holder at any time which contains any of

the following words and/or phrases:

a. "discrimination charge"

b. devil

c. asshole

d. "witch"

e. "cult"

f. "piece of shit"

g. "reference" & "job offer" (Note: whenever the search term contains an &,

we are looking for emails that contain both search terms.)

h. "sexual harassment"

i. EEOC

j. "trail of bodies"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 23:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Walker, Phil Eatman,

Mr. Donat, or Mr. Mortensen at any time which contains any of the following words
13

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

and/or phrases:

a. Amerisure

b. "Fleet Connect"

c. "call records"

d. "activity tracking"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 24:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Walker, Josh Schwartz, Nathan

Washington, or Mr. Mortensen at any time which contains any of the following words

and/or phrases:

a. "State of Oklahoma"

b. "Oklahoma" & "commission" (Note: whenever the search term contains

an &, we are looking for emails that contain both search terms.)

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.
14

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 25:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Walker, Phil Eatman, Mr. Donat, or

Mr. Mortensen at any time which contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. "profit sharing"

b. "profit-sharing"

c. "profit" & "bonus" (Note: whenever the search term contains an &, we are

looking for emails that contain both search terms.)

d. "sales commission plans"

e. "rep commission plans"

f. "Sales Policy 2014"

g. "Sales Policy 2015"

h. "Sales Policy 2016"

i. "Sales Policy 2017"

j. "Sales Policy 2018"

k. "Sales Awards"

l. "sales team expenses"

m. "commission eligibility"

n. "territory exception"

o. reassigned

p. "taking away"

q. "keep list"

r. "back to GPS Insight"

s. Holdovers

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,
15

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 26:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Walker or Mr. Mortensen at any time

which contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. CalCartage

b. CMI

c. "Container Freight"

d. "California Multimodal"

e. "K&R Transportation"

f. Epicor

g. Glassdoor

h. "best places to work"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 27:

Every email thread which was sent or received by Barbara Somerside, Carrie

Race-Simms, Ray Kosick, or Mr. Donat from October 1, 2016 to present which contains

any of the following words and/or phrases:
16

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

a. Jeremy

b. Thacker

c. JT

d. "J.T."

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 28:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr.

Walker, or Mr. Mortensen from December 15, 2016 to present which contains any of

the following words and/or phrases:

a. Jeremy

b. Thacker

c. JT

d. "J.T."

e. Kristin

f. Lisson

g. KL

h. "K.L"

i. "Rob"

j. "Donat"

k. Robert
17

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

l. "RD"

m. "R.D."

n. "Gob"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 29:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Donat from January 1, 2016 to

present which contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. Kristin

b. Lisson

c. KL

d. "K.L."

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

///

///
18

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 30:

Every text message or instant message sent or received, including all messages

sent or received 48 hours before and after any such message, from the following

individuals: Mr. Donat, Mr. Walker, Mr. Mortensen, Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald,

Kristi Donat, or Phil Eatman between the dates of January 1, 2017 to present, including

but not limited to texts, iMessages, messages on any social media or messaging

application containing any of the following terms:

a. Jeremy

b. Thacker

c. JT

d. "J.T."

e. Kristin

f. Lisson

g. KL

h. "K.L."

i. "Rob"

j. Donat

k. "RD"

l. "R.D."

m. "Gob"

n. lawyer

o. legal

p. attorney

q. fired

r. firing

s. terminated

///
19

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 31:

NetSuite report containing status of all Government leads, prospects,

opportunities, and customers in Southwest Territory (AZ, CO, KS, MO, NM, OK, TX,

UT) to present. A copy of this report should include all fields found in the document

attached as Exhibit F to our letter concerning your discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 32:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers previously assigned to Mr. Thacker, from March 1, 2017 to present. A copy

of this report should include all fields found in the document attached as Exhibit F to

our letter concerning your discovery deficiencies.

///
20

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 33:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers associated with Amerisure, including but not limited to companies referred

by Amerisure, customers of Amerisure and/or any opportunities where Amerisure was a

reference from June 1, 2013 to the present. A copy of this report should include all

fields found in the document attached as Exhibit F to our letter concerning your

discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 34:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers associated with Epicor, including but not limited to companies referred by

Epicor, customers of Epicor and/or any opportunities where Epicor was a reference
21

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

from January 1, 2010 to the present. A copy of this report should include all fields found

in the document attached as Exhibit F to our letter concerning your discovery

deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 35:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers associated with "Wheels" (the company), including but not limited to

companies referred by Wheels, customers of Wheels and/or any opportunities where

Wheels was a reference from January 1, 2010 to the present. A copy of this report

should include all fields found in the document attached as Exhibit F to our letter

concerning your discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

///

///
22

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 36:

Report and/or documentation of acknowledgement of policies on Knowledge

Base by employees containing the status of acknowledgment for each policy on KB by

each employee for the following dates of March 6, 2017, one day prior to date of

companywide email notifying employees of policies on KB and 45 days after the same

email as referenced by Mr. Fitzgerald in 30(b)(6) deposition.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 37:

Daily attendance records for all salespeople from January 1, 2014 to present,

including but not limited to time of arrival and departure each day.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 38:

Summary report of phone calls and phone time for all salespeople from
23

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

January 1, 2014 to present, including but not limited to calls made from each

salesperson's extension, all work-related calls made from each salesperson's mobile

phone, all time using Clearslide's Soft Phone for communication during presentations.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 39:

The Exchange calendars of Mr. Donat, Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Walker, and Mr.

Mortensen for the time period of January 10, 2017 to March 6, 2017.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 40:

All mobile phone records and/or logs for Mr. Donat, Mr. Batcheller, Mr.

Mortensen, Mr. Walker and/or Kristi Donat between January 1, 2017 and March 30,

2017.

///
24

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 41:

All phone system records and/or logs of calls (internal and/or external) for Mr.

Donat, Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Mortensen, and/or Mr. Walker from March 2, 2017 to

March 6, 2017.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 42:

Produce all images embedded in GPSI_00108130,136-17 in native format.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more
25

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 43:

All items not containing a Custodian need to be produced with correct Custodian

assigned.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 44:

All items with a Custodian of "General" should be assigned to the correct

Custodian. Produce all group text messages identifiable as group text messages, and all

parties included in the group identified as well.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

///

///
26

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 45:

Produce GPSI_00103218-7847 in native format.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 20th day of August, 2018.

STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP

By: /s/ Michael Vincent

Carrie M. Francis

Stefan M. Palys

Michael Vincent

1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4584

Attorneys for Defendants
27

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 20th , 2018, I caused the foregoing document to

be transmitted via U.S. Mail and e-mail to the following:

Kraig J. Marton

Jeffrey A. Silence

JABURG & WILK, P.C.

3200 N. Central Avenue

Suite 2000

Phoenix, AZ 85012

kjm@jaburgwilk.com

jxs@jaburgwilk.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Timothy B. O'Connor, Esq.

SCHNEIDER & ONOFRY, P.C.

365 East Coronado Road

Phoenix, Arizona 85004

toconnor@soarizonalaw.com

Attorneys for Defendant Robert Donat

/s/ C. Roundtree
CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Carrie M. Francis (020453)

Stefan M. Palys (024752)

Michael A. Vincent (029864)

STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP

1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4584

Tel: (602) 279-1600

Fax: (602) 240-6925

Email: carrie.francis@stinson.com

stefan.palys@stinson.com

michael.vincent@stinson.com

Attorneys for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jeremy Thacker, No. 2:18-cv-00063-PHX-DJH

DEFENDANT ROBERT J. DONAT'S

RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

Plaintiff,

v.

GPS Insight, LLC; Robert J. Donat,

Individually and as Trustee of The

Robert Donat Living Trust Dated

April 19, 2017;

Defendants.

Pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 34, Defendant Robert J. Donat ("Mr. Donat" or

"Defendant") hereby responds to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents.

DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED

REQUEST NO. 1:

Most recent commission workbook provided to each GPSI salesperson reflecting

all sales data including all tabs from January 1, 2015 to present in native format. In our

June 2018 letter concerning your discovery deficiencies, we provided an example of the

Commission Worksheet. In Defendant's Initial Disclosures and Responses on 8:18, 9:1,

and 9:10, Defendants allege that Mr. Thacker is a "substandard" employee and

salesperson as well as only having "some sales results." In addition to evidence

supporting their assertions, this information will also provide us with information
2

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

needed to calculate Mr. Thacker's unpaid commissions based on GPSI' pattern and

practice of calculating commissions as to other GPSI employees who are similarly

situated.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 2:

Profit-sharing/Compensation Summary letters for each salesperson at GPSI for

the years 2016, 2017, and 2018 which represents the prior year's performance. i.e. 2017

Profit-Sharing/Compensation Summary represents 2016 performance.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 3:

Spreadsheet used by Mr. Donat to calculate Profit-sharing/Compensation

Summary for each salesperson for years 2016, 2017, and 2018 in native format.

///
3

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 4:

GPSI Sales Policy for each year from 2014-2018.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 5:

All documents and presentation materials included in company-wide meeting

presentations from January 1, 2014 to present in native format. Examples of these

meetings would include but not be limited to, All Company Semi-Annual status meeting

on June 2, 2016 and Close Strong 2016 on October 13, 2016.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,
4

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 6:

All documents and presentation materials included in All Sales Meetings from

January 1, 2015 to present in native format. Examples of these meetings include but are

not limited to All Sales Meeting on December 16, 2016 and All Sales Meeting on

November 11, 2016.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 7:

All documents related to Sagemount, equity investment in GPSI and/or change in

stock and/or ownership, including but not limited to contracts, terms and conditions,

evaluations, and financials.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's
5

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 8:

All documents related to stock options and/or bonuses related to Sagemount

and/or equity investment for all GPSI employees, including but not limited to any

spreadsheets used to calculate bonuses/commissions and documents

verifying/substantiating the data used to calculate the bonuses/commissions in native

format.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 9:

All Lexis Nexis reports for Mr. Thacker, Ms. Lisson, and/or Mr. Dennis in native

format including any communications reflecting when or why those reports were

generated and to whom they were sent.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.
6

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 10:

All documents that support Defendants' contention that Mr. Thacker was "written

up" and/or counseled regarding any alleged behavioral issues including being "caustic

and abrasive" and a "disruptive" employee. See Defendant's Initial Disclosure page

8:18-27.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 11:

All expense reports for all employees from 2014 through present in native format

including any document that reflects which employees were given access to use GPSI's

company credit card and on what terms they were allowed to use the card.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 12:

The last five years' worth of tax returns for GPSI and Mr. Donat.
7

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 13:

Any insurance or other agreements under which another person or entity may be

liable to satisfy all or part of the judgment or to indemnify or reimburse a party for

payments made by the party to satisfy the judgement. MDIP # 6.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 14:

All communications between, on the one hand, Mr. Donat and, on the other hand,

Mr. Thacker from January 1, 2017 to the present, including but not limited to texts,

emails, iMessages, Slack messages, cards, letters, notes, and messages on any social

media or messaging application.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served
8

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 15:

All communications between, on the one hand, Mr. Donat and, on the other hand,

Ms. Lisson from January 1, 2016 to the present, including but not limited to texts,

emails, iMessages, Slack messages, cards, letters, notes, and messages on any social

media or messaging application.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 16:

All communications sent by or to Mr. Donat, Mr. Walker, Mr. Mortensen, Mr.

Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald and Kristi Donat from February 22, 2017 to April 15, 2017,

including but not limited to texts, emails, iMessages, Slack messages, or messages sent

through any social media or messaging application.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.
9

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 17:

All communications between, on the one hand, Mr. Donat and, on the other hand,

Kate Wells regarding Mr. Thacker, Ms. Lisson, and/or any topic related to a workplace

romance from January 1, 2017 to the present, including but not limited to texts, emails,

iMessages, Slack messages, cards, letters, notes, and messages on any social media or

messaging application. In Defendant's Answer to Mr. Thacker's Complaint, Defendants

admit that Mr. Donat had conversations with Kate Wells regarding his relationship with

Ms. Lisson.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 18:

Any document that you contend reflects that GPSI provided a copy of any

employee policy to any of its employees including the company-wide email referred to

in 30(b)(6) deposition of Mr. Fitzgerald in which he claims that all GPSI employees

were made aware of the new policies available on Knowledge Base sometime in 2017.

///
10

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 19:

Slack Weekly Summary email for every week in the months of February 2017,

March 2017 and June 2018. An example of what we are looking for was included in the

June 2018 letter concerning your discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 20:

Any email that was sent or received by any GPSI employee between March 6,

2017 and April 15, 2017 which contains any of the following words:

a. Kristin

b. Lisson

c. KL

d. "K.L."
11

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

e. Jeremy

f. Thacker

g. JT

h. "J.T."

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 21:

Any email that was sent or received by David Pope, Mr. Walker, Joe Vidmar,

Josh Schwartz, Nathan Washington, Phil Eatman, or Mr. Mortensen at any time which

contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. "earn out"

b. "ear out"

c. "referral fee"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.
12

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 22:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr.

Walker, Mr. Donat, Mr. Mortensen, or Wayne Holder at any time which contains any of

the following words and/or phrases:

a. "discrimination charge"

b. devil

c. asshole

d. "witch"

e. "cult"

f. "piece of shit"

g. "reference" & "job offer" (Note: whenever the search term contains an &,

we are looking for emails that contain both search terms.)

h. "sexual harassment"

i. EEOC

j. "trail of bodies"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 23:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Walker, Phil Eatman,

Mr. Donat, or Mr. Mortensen at any time which contains any of the following words

and/or phrases:
13

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

a. Amerisure

b. "Fleet Connect"

c. "call records"

d. "activity tracking"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 24:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Walker, Josh Schwartz, Nathan

Washington, or Mr. Mortensen at any time which contains any of the following words

and/or phrases:

a. "State of Oklahoma"

b. "Oklahoma" & "commission" (Note: whenever the search term contains

an &, we are looking for emails that contain both search terms.)

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.
14

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 25:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Walker, Phil Eatman, Mr. Donat, or

Mr. Mortensen at any time which contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. "profit sharing"

b. "profit-sharing"

c. "profit" & "bonus" (Note: whenever the search term contains an &, we are

looking for emails that contain both search terms.)

d. "sales commission plans"

e. "rep commission plans"

f. "Sales Policy 2014"

g. "Sales Policy 2015"

h. "Sales Policy 2016"

i. "Sales Policy 2017"

j. "Sales Policy 2018"

k. "Sales Awards"

l. "sales team expenses"

m. "commission eligibility"

n. "territory exception"

o. reassigned

p. "taking away"

q. "keep list"

r. "back to GPS Insight"

s. Holdovers

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,
15

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 26:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Walker or Mr. Mortensen at any time

which contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. CalCartage

b. CMI

c. "Container Freight"

d. "California Multimodal"

e. "K&R Transportation"

f. Epicor

g. Glassdoor

h. "best places to work"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 27:

Every email thread which was sent or received by Barbara Somerside, Carrie

Race-Simms, Ray Kosick, or Mr. Donat from October 1, 2016 to present which contains

any of the following words and/or phrases:
16

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

a. Jeremy

b. Thacker

c. JT

d. "J.T."

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 28:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr.

Walker, or Mr. Mortensen from December 15, 2016 to present which contains any of

the following words and/or phrases:

a. Jeremy

b. Thacker

c. JT

d. "J.T."

e. Kristin

f. Lisson

g. KL

h. "K.L"

i. "Rob"

j. "Donat"

k. Robert
17

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

l. "RD"

m. "R.D."

n. "Gob"

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 29:

Any email that was sent or received by Mr. Donat from January 1, 2016 to

present which contains any of the following words and/or phrases:

a. Kristin

b. Lisson

c. KL

d. "K.L."

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

///

///
18

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 30:

Every text message or instant message sent or received, including all messages

sent or received 48 hours before and after any such message, from the following

individuals: Mr. Donat, Mr. Walker, Mr. Mortensen, Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Fitzgerald,

Kristi Donat, or Phil Eatman between the dates of January 1, 2017 to present, including

but not limited to texts, iMessages, messages on any social media or messaging

application containing any of the following terms:

a. Jeremy

b. Thacker

c. JT

d. "J.T."

e. Kristin

f. Lisson

g. KL

h. "K.L."

i. "Rob"

j. Donat

k. "RD"

l. "R.D."

m. "Gob"

n. lawyer

o. legal

p. attorney

q. fired

r. firing

s. terminated

///
19

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 31:

NetSuite report containing status of all Government leads, prospects,

opportunities, and customers in Southwest Territory (AZ, CO, KS, MO, NM, OK, TX,

UT) to present. A copy of this report should include all fields found in the document

attached as Exhibit F to our letter concerning your discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 32:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers previously assigned to Mr. Thacker, from March 1, 2017 to present. A copy

of this report should include all fields found in the document attached as Exhibit F to

our letter concerning your discovery deficiencies.

///
20

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 33:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers associated with Amerisure, including but not limited to companies referred

by Amerisure, customers of Amerisure and/or any opportunities where Amerisure was a

reference from June 1, 2013 to the present. A copy of this report should include all

fields found in the document attached as Exhibit F to our letter concerning your

discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 34:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers associated with Epicor, including but not limited to companies referred by

Epicor, customers of Epicor and/or any opportunities where Epicor was a reference
21

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

from January 1, 2010 to the present. A copy of this report should include all fields found

in the document attached as Exhibit F to our letter concerning your discovery

deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 35:

NetSuite report containing status of all leads, prospects, opportunities, and

customers associated with "Wheels" (the company), including but not limited to

companies referred by Wheels, customers of Wheels and/or any opportunities where

Wheels was a reference from January 1, 2010 to the present. A copy of this report

should include all fields found in the document attached as Exhibit F to our letter

concerning your discovery deficiencies.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

///

///
22

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 36:

Report and/or documentation of acknowledgement of policies on Knowledge

Base by employees containing the status of acknowledgment for each policy on KB by

each employee for the following dates of March 6, 2017, one day prior to date of

companywide email notifying employees of policies on KB and 45 days after the same

email as referenced by Mr. Fitzgerald in 30(b)(6) deposition.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 37:

Daily attendance records for all salespeople from January 1, 2014 to present,

including but not limited to time of arrival and departure each day.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 38:

Summary report of phone calls and phone time for all salespeople from
23

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

January 1, 2014 to present, including but not limited to calls made from each

salesperson's extension, all work-related calls made from each salesperson's mobile

phone, all time using Clearslide's Soft Phone for communication during presentations.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 39:

The Exchange calendars of Mr. Donat, Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Walker, and Mr.

Mortensen for the time period of January 10, 2017 to March 6, 2017.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 40:

All mobile phone records and/or logs for Mr. Donat, Mr. Batcheller, Mr.

Mortensen, Mr. Walker and/or Kristi Donat between January 1, 2017 and March 30,

2017.

///
24

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 41:

All phone system records and/or logs of calls (internal and/or external) for Mr.

Donat, Mr. Batcheller, Mr. Mortensen, and/or Mr. Walker from March 2, 2017 to

March 6, 2017.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 42:

Produce all images embedded in GPSI_00108130,136-17 in native format.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more
25

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 43:

All items not containing a Custodian need to be produced with correct Custodian

assigned.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

REQUEST NO. 44:

All items with a Custodian of "General" should be assigned to the correct

Custodian. Produce all group text messages identifiable as group text messages, and all

parties included in the group identified as well.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

///

///
26

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

REQUEST NO. 45:

Produce GPSI_00103218-7847 in native format.

RESPONSE:

Defendants object to this request as untimely because the request was served

after the cutoff date in the Court's scheduling order. See, e.g., Campbell v.

California Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 2009 WL 5064957, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16,

2009). Defendants also object to this request because Plaintiff has served more

than 25 requests for production, including subparts, in violation of the Court's

scheduling order.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 20th day of August, 2018.

STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP

By: /s/ Michael Vincent

Carrie M. Francis

Stefan M. Palys

Michael Vincent

1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4584

Attorneys for Defendants

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 20th , 2018, I caused the foregoing document to

be transmitted via U.S. Mail and e-mail to the following:

Kraig J. Marton

Jeffrey A. Silence

JABURG & WILK, P.C.

3200 N. Central Avenue

Suite 2000

Phoenix, AZ 85012

kjm@jaburgwilk.com

jxs@jaburgwilk.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff
27

CORE/3505308.0002/141437034.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Timothy B. O'Connor, Esq.

SCHNEIDER & ONOFRY, P.C.

365 East Coronado Road

Phoenix, Arizona 85004

toconnor@soarizonalaw.com

Attorneys for Defendant Robert Donat

/s/ C. Roundtree
EXHIBIT X 
Ill • # • • • Ti'm e To/From Number 

,;, • 03/05/2017 20:44:20 Elliot IB.atcheller (602) 790-7680 

CST 

Text 

I wantfue 

fundamental reason 

forTermina ·orn to be 

categoriized as his 

cu ure killing na l.llre 

(However you 

commu icated tltlat 

the other day) 

combined w ith 17e 

fact that II s'fiumbled 

oo his selif-1 recorded 

abusive d ialogue 

which wasted over an 

hour in a futile 

attempt o recover a 

coupe hurndred 

bucks he wasn't 

entitled! o an}'!,IVay. 

That's not the 

important part_ The 

important part was 

that I then r.o oked at 

his weekly call 

1reco:rd:S and he had 

less than an hour of 

actu:all phone based 

work (likely only 37 -

50 minutes) for 4 full 

days. This confirmed! 

in my mind he is 

p'honing it in and also 

a cancel" and then I 

brou:ght tliis to your 

attention. You then let 

me know about he 

prior day's 

conversation and we 

al l agreed th.at this 

was tlie pustl ovet" the 

cltff/finan straw/nail in 

the coffin and he 

couldn't contin e 

lhere. 

GPSI 00108036 
EXHIBIT Y 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jeremy Thacker, )

 )

 Plaintiff, ) Case No.

vs. ) 18-CIV-0063-PHX-DJH

 )

GPS Insight, LLC; et al., )

 )

 Defendants. )

____________________________________)

 DEPOSITION OF BOBBY WAYNE HOLDER

 Phoenix, Arizona

 May 15, 2018

 1:01 o'clock p.m.

 Walker Court Reporting

 Registered Firm No. R1046

 1900 W. Carla Vista, Suite 6284

 Chandler, Arizona 85246

 (480) 620-4472

PREPARED BY: Laura D. Walker, RPR

 Certified Reporter

 No. 50195
Page 11

1 I realize this isn't the policy that was in place at the 

2 time, it's the only one that's been produced. 

3 So I want to sort of ask about some of the 

4 substance in here and whether you know -- I just want to 

5 lay the foundation here for what I'm going to ask you, 

6 so you aren't confused -- about how and if that was 

7 practiced during Mr. Thacker's employment. Okay?

8 A. Uh-huh.

9 Q. Could you open the handbook, Exhibit 16, to 

10 page 7?

11 A. (Witness complies.)

12 Q. Under the heading "Equal Employment," after all 

13 the bullet points, it says, "The company takes 

14 allegations of discrimination, intimidation, 

15 harassment, and retaliation very seriously and will 

16 promptly conduct an investigation when warranted." 

17 Do you know if that was the policy or practice 

18 at GPSI during Mr. Thacker's employment?

19 A. I do not know.

20 Q. Okay. Do you have an understanding in terms of 

21 how complaints or allegations of discrimination, 

22 harassment, or retaliation were handled at the time that 

23 Mr. Thacker was employed?

24 A. I do not.

25 Q. Do you know who would know the answer to that 
Page 12

1 question?

2 A. I would ask the manager of whomever it's 

3 referring to.

4 Q. So the manager over the employee who made the 

5 allegation?

6 A. Correct.

7 Q. Because during Mr. Thacker's employment, the 

8 manager or supervisor, or whatever, was the primary 

9 person who handled those types of allegations; is that 

10 correct?

11 A. I don't know.

12 Q. Okay. You are not aware of anyone else that 

13 did though?

14 A. No.

15 Q. If you could turn over to page 10. 

16 A. (Witness complies.)

17 Q. Under the heading "Personnel Records" it talks 

18 about the maintenance of various employment files. 

19 Did you mention earlier, is that sort of part 

20 of your responsibility, the maintenance of the employee 

21 personnel files?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Is this first paragraph consistent with the 

24 practice of GPSI during Mr. Thacker's employment?

25 A. Yes.
Page 14

1 Q. Your practice. And that's a good point. 

2 Were references like that, were they filtered 

3 through anybody in particular during that time frame?

4 MS. FRANCIS: Object to foundation.

5 THE WITNESS: I don't know.

6 Q. BY MR. KRESIN: Okay. Do you know whether at 

7 the time of Mr. Thacker's employment there was a written 

8 harassment policy or not? Or anti-harassment.

9 A. I don't know.

10 Q. Okay. You don't have a recollection of -- 

11 A. I don't recall.

12 Q. On page 19, under "Performance Evaluation," it 

13 states, "Employees will generally receive an appraisal 

14 of their job performance annually," either written or 

15 oral. I'm sorry. I will read it. "This evaluation may 

16 be either written or oral." 

17 Was that the practice of GPSI at the time of 

18 Mr. Thacker's employment?

19 A. I don't know.

20 Q. Okay. Do you know whether this is being 

21 practiced now?

22 A. We are in the process of putting performance 

23 evaluations together.

24 Q. Okay. If you could turn to page 21. 

25 A. (Witness complies.)
Page 28

1 STATE OF ARIZONA )

 ) ss.

2 COUNTY OF MARICOPA )

3

 BE IT KNOWN that the foregoing testimony 

4

was taken before me, LAURA D. WALKER, RPR, a Certified 

5

Court Reporter, No. 50195; that the witness before 

6

testifying was duly sworn to testify to the whole 

7

truth; that the questions propounded to the witness 

8

and the answers of the witness thereto were taken down 

9

by me in shorthand and thereafter reduced to 

10

typewriting by me or under my direction; that the 

11

foregoing pages are a true and accurate transcript of 

12

all proceedings had upon the taking of said testimony, 

13

all done to the best of my skill and ability.

14

15

 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I have complied with 

16

the ethical obligations set forth in the Arizona Code 

17

of Judicial Administration 7-206(F)(3) and Arizona 

18

Code of Judicial Administration 7-206 J(1)(g)(1) and 

19

(2).

20

21

 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am in no way related 

22

to any of the parties hereto nor am I in any way 

23

interested in the outcome hereof.

24

25
Page 29

1 

2 DATED at Chandler, Arizona, this 28th day of 

3 May, 2018.

4

 Laura D. Walker, RPR 

5 Certified Reporter No. 50195 

6

 * * * * * * *

7

8

 I CERTIFY that WALKER COURT REPORTING, a 

9

Registered Reporting Firm in the State of Arizona, has 

10

complied with the ethical obligations set forth in the 

11

Arizona Code of Judicial Administration 

12

7-206(J)(1)(g)(1) and (2).

13

14

15

 ________________________

16

 Walker Court Reporting

17

 Registered Reporting Firm

18

 No. R1046

19

20 

21 

22

23

24

25
EXHIBIT Z 
outgoing , 2017-01-18 23 : 0 4 : 29 +0000,Jack Donat , (480) 677-9335 , 0 : 00:18 , 

outgoing, 2017-01-18 23: 03 : 1 4 +0000, Robert Donat , (480) 993-9886 , 0 : 00: 41, 

missed , 2017 -0 1 - 1 8 22: 27 : 40 +0000, --, (480) 893-1736 , 0 : 00: 00 , 

incoming,2 0 17-01- 18 21:06 :14 +0000 , --, Anonymous ,0:12 :2 0 , 

outgoing,2017-01-18 21:00 :1 4 +0000 , --, (480) 893-1736 , 0 : 02:32 , 

incoming, 2017-01-18 1 9 : 33 : 07 +0000,Alan Newmar k, (480) 266-4206, 0: 00 : 45, 

missed, 2017 - 01-18 18 : 02: 36 +0000, --, (480) 893 - 1736, 0: 00 : 00, 

outgoing,2017-01-18 15:15 : 28 +0000,Pat Mundle, (847) 398-2092,0 :2 2:42 , 

outgoing, 2017-01-18 05: 03 : 40 +0000,Alison Mcilroy, (602) 430-864 7, 0: 00 : 06, 

facetime cancelled, 2017-01-18 05 : 02:48 +0000,Alison Mcilroy, (602) 430-8647 , 0 : 00 : 00, 

incoming,2017 - 01 - 17 21:56 : 50 +0000,Al Dabagnaugh, (602) 653 - 5 753 , 0:00 : 37, 

outgoing,2017-01-17 21:55:47 +0000,Al Dabagnaugh, (602) 653-5753,0 : 00:03 , 

incoming,2017-01-17 19:54:50 +0000,--, (80 1) 621-2528,0:01 : 18 , 

outgoing, 2017-01-17 17: 51 : 29 +0000 , Grant Anderson, (480) 558-6809 , 0 : 00 : 43 , 

incoming,2017 - 01 - 17 1 7 :12:11 +0000, --, (480) 773 - 7308 , 0 : 01:23 , 

outgoing, 2017 - 01 - 17 1 6: 57 : 34 +0000, Elliot Batchel ler, ( 602) 790 - 7680, 0 : 00: 17, 

incoming, 2017-01-17 02 : 21 : 35 +0000,Adam Pritchett, (602) 819-10 14, 0: 02: 28, 

outgoing , 2017-01-16 23 : 42 : 10 +0000 , --, ( 602) 315-3843, 0: 08: 05 , 

outgoing, 2017-01-16 23: 38 : 43 +0000, --, ( 602) 315-3843, 0: 03: 06, 

incoming,2017 - 01 -1 6 1 7:47 : 33 + 0000 ,--, (347) 676- 2735 , 0 : 00:12, 

missed , 2017-01-16 17: 36 : 53 +0000, Christopher Mowrer, (240) 432-7388 , 0: 00 : 00 , 

incoming, 2017-01 - 1 6 1 7 : 24: 00 +0000, --, ( 602) 952-2081, 0: 00 : 20, 

incoming,2 017-01- 1 6 17: 03 :4 8 +0000 ,Joe Ciolli , (602) 363-1142 , 0 :11 : 35 , 

outgoing, 2017 - 01 - 16 05: 10: 4 8 +0000, Susan Mulligan, (602) 692 - 834 7 , 0: 3 1: 04, 

outgoing, 2017-01-16 02: 13: 14 +0000 , Robert Donat, (480) 993-9886, 0 : 16: 41, 

outgoing,2017-01-16 01 : 04 : 29 +0000,Pat Mundle, (847) 398-2092,0 : 19:34 , 

incoming,2017-01-15 23:19 : 45 +0000,Pat Mundle, (847) 398-2092,0 : 00:23 , 

incoming, 2017-01-15 22: 17 : 51 +0000, Gabby Barcenas, (719) 213-8145, 0: 00 : 33, 

outgoing, 2017-01-15 22: 15: 51 +0000, Gabby Barcenas, (719) 213-8145, 0: 00 : 03, 

outgoing , 2017-01- 1 5 21:42:36 +0000,-- , 911 ,0 :01 :1 4 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-15 

outgoing,2017-01-15 

incoming,2017-01-15 

outgoing,2017 - 01 -1 5 

outgoing,2017-01-15 

outgoing,2017-01-14 

outgoing,2017-01-14 

16:58:46 

16:58:16 

05:10 :4 7 

05:04 :4 3 

04:11 : 23 

22 : 29 : 23 

22:04 : 19 

+0000 , Robert Donat, (480) 993-9886,0 :0 4:16, 

+0000 , Robert Donat, (480) 993-9886,0 : 00:04, 

+0000 , Chanel Dugan, (602) 509-3839,0 : 09 :52, 

+0000,Chanel Dugan, (602) 509-3839,0:00:03, 

+0000,Robert Donat, (480) 993-9886 , 0:00:55, 

+0000,Joe Ciolli , (602) 363-1142,0 : 01:36 , 

+0000,Ron Bernaud, ( 602) 332-9714 , 0 : 00:45 , 

incoming,2017 - 01 - 14 21:02 : 36 +0000,Tim Woods , (602) 501 - 9597,0:00:37 , 

incoming,2 0 17-01- 14 20:40 :15 +0000 , Tim Woods , (602) 501-9597,0: 00 :54, 

incoming, 2017-01-14 1 8: 33: 06 +0000, Laszlo Pinter, ( 602) 327-3356 , 0 : 00 : 46, 

outgoing, 2017-01-14 1 8: 28 : 46 +0000 , GO AZ Motorcycles, (480 ) 609-1800 , 0: 03 : 32, 

outgoing, 2017 - 01 -1 4 1 8: 28 : 15 +0000, Laszlo Pinter, ( 602) 327 - 3356, 0: 00: 05, 

outgoing, 2017-01 -1 4 1 8: 27 : 33 +0000 , Pat Mundle , ( 84 7) 398-2092, 0: 00 : 07, 

outgoing , 2 0 17-01-14 1 7: 28 : 1 5 +0000 , Jack Donat , (480) 677-9335, 0 : 00: 05 , 

missed,2017-01-14 03 : 01:48 +0000,Ryan Donat, (480) 544-3899,0:00 : 00, 

incoming,2 0 17 -01- 14 02:30 : 43 +0000 ,Tim Woods , (602) 501-9597 , 0:02:59 , 

outgoing,2017 - 01 - 14 02 : 29 : 51 +0000,Thomas Pomeroy , (4 80) 318 - 3244,0 : 00 : 05, 

outgoing, 2017-01-14 01: 52: 09 +0000, Robert Donat, (480) 993-9886 , 0 : 03 : 35, 

GPSI_00109440 
out go i ng , 20 1 7 - 01 - 29 04 : 26 : 23 + 0000 , --, ( 602) 340- 1924 , 0 : 00 : 28 , 

outgoi ng , 20 1 7 - 01 - 29 03 : 1 4 : 08 + 0000 , Chanel Dugan , ( 602) 509- 3839 , 0 : 00 : 36 , 

outgoi ng , 20 1 7-0 1 -29 01: 02 : 25 +0000 , Robe rt Do n a t, (480) 993-9886 , 0 : 01 : 39 , 

outgoing , 201 7 -01-28 21:26 : 05 +0000 , Ron Be r naud , (602) 332-97 1 4 , 0 : 18 : 24 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-28 21 : 08 : 45 +0000 , Ryan Donat , (480) 544-3899 , 0 : 00 : 24 , 

incomi ng , 2017-01-28 1 9 : 53 : 07 +0000 , Travi s St eele , (602) 329-3900 , 0 : 01 : 05 , 

incoming , 20 1 7 - 01 - 28 1 8 : 04 : 45 + 0000 , --, (480) 225 - 9291 , 0 : 0 1: 32, 

facetime cancell ed , 2017 - 01-28 15 : 37:07 +0000 , Alison Mci l roy, (602) 430 - 8647 , 0 : 00 : 00 , 

outgoi ng , 2017 - 01 - 28 09 : 06 : 27 + 0000 , --, ( 520) 251-9678 , 0: 00 : 3 1, 

missed, 2017-01-28 05 : 04 : 32 +0000,Alison Mcilroy , ( 602) 430-8647 , 0 : 00 : 00 , 

outgoing , 2017 - 01 - 28 04: 22 : 42 + 0000 , Shelly Anzivino , (480) 293 - 4468 , 0: 01 : 36 , 

outgoing , 20 1 7 - 01 - 28 03 : 05 : 03 + 0000 , Ryan Donat , (480) 544 - 3899 , 0 : 01 : 05 , 

outgoing , 20 1 7-01-28 00 : 55 : 1 1 +0000 , Brian Mackin , (480) 363-0058 , 0 : 04 : 43 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-28 00 : 22 : 1 4 +0000 , Elliot Batcheller, ( 602) 790-7680 , 0 : 20 : 28 , 

incoming , 2017 - 01 - 27 20: 00 : 30 + 0000 , --, ( 480) 696- 6414 , 0 : 00: 38 , 

incoming, 2017 - 01 - 27 1 8 : 42 : 36 +0000 , --, ( 480) 635 - 3052 , 0 : 05: 00 , 

outgoi ng , 20 17 -01-27 1 8 : 40 : 46 +0000 , --, ( 480) 635-3052 , 0 : 00: 37 , 

incoming , 2017-01-27 1 8 : 29 : 1 4 +0000 , Al an Otto , ( 602) 57 1-8001 , 0 : 11 : 07 , 

outgoi ng , 2017-01-27 1 8 : 28 : 4 8 + 0000 , - -, ( 480) 635 - 3052, 0 : 00: 29 , 

incoming , 2017 - 01 - 27 1 8:22 : 57 + 0000 ,--, (480) 635 - 3052 , 0 : 00 : 17 , 

outgoing , 20 1 7-01-27 1 8 : 18 : 07 +0000 , Al ison Mci l roy, (602) 430-8647 , 0 : 09 : 57 , 

outgoing , 20 1 7-01-27 1 8 : 05 : 22 +0000 , Kri sti n Miller, (60 2 ) 828-74 1 7 , 0 : 12 : 15 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-27 1 7 : 53: 1 8 +0000 , Kerri MacLennan , (623) 308-4645 , 0 : 00 : 29 , 

incoming, 2017 - 01 - 27 1 7 : 43 : 55 + 0000 , --, (713) 528 - 4823 , 0 : 00: 09 , 

outgoing, 20 1 7-01-27 1 7 : 22 : 54 + 0000 , Al an Otto , ( 602) 57 1-8001 , 0 : 00 : 08, 

i ncomi ng , 20 1 7-01 - 27 05 : 20 : 09 +0000 , --, ( 617) 851-0473 , 0 : 1 1 : 57, 

outgoi ng, 2017-01-27 04 : 11 : 38 + 0000 , Robert Do n a t, ( 480) 993-9886, 0: 1 3 : 30, 

outgoing , 2017-01-27 01 : 25 : 00 +0000 , --, (760) 891-2928, 0 : 00 : 5 1, 

incoming , 2017-01-27 01: 20 : 35 + 0000 , --, ( 619) 218-3896 , 0 : 01 : 23 , 

i ncomi ng , 20 1 7-01-26 22 : 03: 26 +0000 , Crai g Krumweide , (480) 250-9612 , 0: 02 : 59 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-26 20:41 : 31 +0000 , Craig Krumweide , (480) 250-9612 , 0 : 00 : 02 , 

i ncoming , 2017-01-26 20: 11 : 38 +0000 , Al an Otto , ( 602) 57 1-8001 , 0 : 01 : 24 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-26 1 9 : 30 : 56 + 0000 , Brent Erickson , ( 480) 717-2153 , 0 : 00 : 59, 

outgoing, 2017 - 01 - 26 1 8: 58 : 23 + 0000 , Al an Otto, ( 602) 57 1- 8001 , 0 : 00: 02, 

outgoing , 20 1 7-01-26 1 5 : 46 : 32 + 0000 , Brian Macki n , (480) 363-0058 , 0:00 :13 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-26 1 5 : 03 : 37 +0000 , Lennon Kaler, ( 480) 980-7200 , 0 : 00 : 03 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-26 1 4 : 51 : 45 +0000 , Robert Dona t, (480) 993-9886 , 0: 01 : 01 , 

outgoing , 2017 - 01 - 26 00: 42 : 20 +0000 , Jennifer Dearing , (480) 5 1 0 - 0128, 0 : 00 : 34 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-25 22: 25 : 31 +0000 , --, ( 480) 585-0385 , 0: 00 : 28 , 

outgoing , 20 1 7-01-25 22 : 22 :1 7 +0000 , El l i o t Batchell e r , (602) 790-7680 , 0 : 02 : 46 , 

incoming , 2017-01-25 21 : 34 :1 3 +0000 , Ti m Woods , (602) 50 1-9597 , 0 : 01 : 34 , 

incoming , 2017 - 01 - 25 20: 53 : 07 + 0000 , Joseph Cafferelli , ( 602) 509 - 6085, 0 : 03 : 4 7, 

outgoing , 2017 - 01 - 25 20: 04 : 32 + 0000 , El liot Batchel ler, ( 602) 790 - 7680, 0 : 0 1: 28 , 

i ncomi ng , 20 1 7-01-25 1 9 : 03 :1 4 +0000 , Wayne Ho l der, (480) 695-2256 , 0 : 01 : 41 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-25 1 9 : 02 : 00 +0000 , Gabby Barcenas, ( 719) 213-8145 , 0: 00 : 25 , 

outgoing , 2017-01-25 1 8: 58 : 49 +0000 , Wayne Holder, (480) 695-2256 , 0 : 00 : 03 , 

outgoing , 2017 - 01 - 25 1 8 : 06 : 25 + 0000 , Konvalia Za k zrewski , (773) 485 -1 708 , 0 : 24 : 33 , 

out going , 20 1 7-01-25 1 7 : 52 : 05 +0000 , --, (480) 868-2702 , 0 : 00 : 28 , 

GPSI_00109437 
EXHIBIT AA 
215 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Not sure why I didn't say 

2017 12:49 it out loud. Maybe just 

PM don't want to mess any 

more with your stasis 

(ha). I love you. i:t"i", ♦ 

And miss you. And I'm 

sorry I got so far away 

from you. And I can't help 

you move. And I hope 

the 2 lost months don't 

damn any long term 

possibility together. 

Worst case I will have to 

go through what you did, 

which is my of own doing. 

And I'll be ok. Best case 

we can restart starting 

with frief.ldS and I promise 

not to 6Y'". Anything you 

need please ask. {jy--

216 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Thank you! I'm sorry that I 

2017 01 :28 didn't say anything 

PM sooner. It was all 

unfolding day by day, and 

I didn't know where you 

stood. Figured it was best 

to let you do your thing 

and not force you to 

discuss things if you didn't 

want to. Then everything 

with Jeremy happened so 

quickly and unexpectedly 

(sharing of feelings), and 

I'm more overwhelmed 

than ever about where I 

am, where I'm headed, 

and where I even live. I 

don't want to let you or 

anyone down, so I may 

purposely distance myself 

from everyone 

temporarily until I can get 

my bearings and figu re 

out what I'm doing. I have 

your number...and know 

where you live and work, 

for that matter. :) 

217 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, I get it and as long as it's 

2017 01 :38 equal opportunity 

PM distancing from all parties 

I will be a much much 

happier and more 

optimistic camper. 

GPSI_00108141 
EXHIBIT AB 
218 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Window ok? 

2017 01 :39 

PM 

219 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Yep ... oY-%0 

2017 01:40 

PM 

220 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Trying to find a gif of a 

2017 01:42 guy hitting himself in the 

PM head with a shoe saying 

"stupid stupid stupid" to 

show you how I really 

feel. 

221 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Just met with I RS guy 

2017 01:44 again and gotta get him 

PM something. I feel so 

much better even 

knowing what you told me 

than I did beforehand. 

Thank you. You've been 

so good for me and I'm an 

idiot for not protecting 

that. 

222 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Laughed at a€ceTrying to 

2017 02:41 find a gif of a guy hitting 

PM himself in the head with a 

shoe saying "stupid stupid 

stupid" to show you how I 

really feel. a€� 

223 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, You're not an idiot; you're 

2017 03:04 understandably cautious 

PM and protective of many 

other important things. I 

don't blame you for that. 

You've built an empire 

and it's not wise to fuck 

with that given how many 

people rely on it (and you) 

for their security. I'm glad 

you care so much. I 

LOVE the books ... for so 

many reasons. Thank you 

for telling me what they 

meant to you. I can't wait 

to set th�nJ up in the kids' 

room. oY-s 

GPSI_00108142 
EXHIBIT AC 
224 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, I'm glad you understand 

2017 03:06 and also hope you get 

PM that you're important 

enough to me to risk 

some (not all) of that. 

And how tangled this web 

could get. And why no 

one could know 

retroactively should we 

surface. 

225 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Also, not to pile on JT but 

2017 03:08 I just realized you live 

PM over there with him too 

now!!! What could go 

wrong? Please be 

deliberate and know I'm 

willing and able to get to 

the next level with you 

(�jther up OR down ... 

oY-z) 

226 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, What do you mean get to 

2017 03:09 the next level with me 

PM down? 

227 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Meaning if you want to 

2017 03:09 take it back down to 

PM friend zone permanently. 

228 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Except for the last part, I 

2017 03:10 thought that's where we 

PM were. (Nothing is ever 

permanent.) 

229 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, You mean you 

2017 03:11 need/should close it 

PM completely if I pursue 

something more with JT? 

230 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, Not what I meant 

2017 03:11 

PM 

231 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, If you want to close the 

2017 03:12 door on us permanently is 

PM what I meant 

232 Kristin Lisson Jan 10, I know I'm just trying to 

2017 03:14 reconcile the long wait for 

PM you to actually be "on the 

market" with "I've lost my 

long term chance possibly 

to JT''. "I've made a huge 

mistake" 

GPSI_00108143 
EXHIBIT AD 
LISSON0349 

3/1/17, 3:20 PM from Rob Donat 

Happy Anniversary nonetheless. Miss you. Last night weirdly I woke around 2 

and couldn't get back to sleep and it reminded me of the night I was going 

insane thinking about you 2. Was thinking about it again last night but it was the 

byproduct not the cause. Cause was I just went to sleep too early. Off to Condo. 

Call me if you want later I'll be free til 5:30 dinner with buddy. 

3/1/17, 3:48 PM to Rob Donat 

3/1/17, 4:31 PM from Rob Donat 

Yes 

3/1/17, 4:31 PM from Rob Donat 

Sorry was driving didn't see that. 

3/1/17, 4:32 PM to Rob Donat 

Ok. Now good? 

I'm driving now if you still have time 

Sure 

3/1/17, 4:32 PM from Rob Donat 

3/1/17, 6:22 PM to Rob Donat 

I really appreciated the talk today. Thank you. It wasn't how I wanted it to go or 

what I EVER would've imagined a year ago that we would be talking about, but I 

do value your candor. 

GPSI 00108620 

-
EXHIBIT AE 
Feb 23, 2017, 1 :49:19 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Did you get that cmi order sorted out yesterday? Carrie was 

getting frustrated trying to figure out what to do" 

Feb 23, 2017, 1 :54:53 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I think so. I was as frustrated. I entered the same information that was in 

Container Freight." 

Feb 23, 2017, 1 :56:15 PM Eastern Time: Me: "How would I know the part numbers for the new SKU we had for these 

devices? I don't understand why Sales is the only person who can enter information in NS when we don't know anything 

about it." 

Feb 23, 2017, 1 :57:23 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "K well let's chat about it later." 

Feb 23, 2017, 1 :57:29 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Just wanted to check in" 

Feb 23, 2017, 1:58:16 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Yeah, I think it's worked out." 

Feb 23, 2017, 2:00:16 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I think it worked out, but not without a mess, multiple people 

were upset about this yesterday" 

Feb 23, 2017, 2:06:39 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I literally copied and pasted from Container Freights record in NS." 

Feb 23, 2017, 2:09:12 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Not arguing, just explaining. We can chat about it later" 

Feb 23, 2017, 2:09:20 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Heading to lunch with prospects" 

Feb 23, 2017, 2:16:46 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Didn't think you were." 

Feb 23, 2017, 3:45:05 PM Eastern Time: Me: "https://slickdeals.net/share/android_app/fp/266935" 

Feb 23, 2017, 3:45:12 PM Eastern Time: Me: "$150 is hard to beat" 

Feb 23, 2017, 5:01 :59 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "That's a crazy good deal" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:10:06 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Any word on LCRA?" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:11:41 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I mean Amerisure." 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:26:19 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Yea I talked to Jason about it. He's trying to figure out details 

and what you would get, and how it would work. Any earnouts have to be approved by Rob, so once Jason figures that 

out he'll need Rob to approve it" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:27:36 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Oh jeez. Well that should be fun. I'm prolly best to write that off." 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:30:29 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Thanks for asking him about it regardless" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:31 :04 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Yea not the best timing, but he is trying to play it the right 

way" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:31 :27 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Might be better to see what happens with them this year and 

then see" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:32:07 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Hahaha" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:33:00 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Sorry, it's just comical how this is. Not your fault. It's just insane" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:34:04 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I don't mean the entire year, we may get all of the Amerisure 

units in within 4 months" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:34:20 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Then we could put together an ear out and get him to 

approve it" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:34:53 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Does anyone really believe that Rob is getting softer, more fair, or less 

prideful as time passes?" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:36:27 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Does anyone think he'll give you an ear out on that now?" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:36:41 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Earn out" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:37:52 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Jason had to figure out what you should get as well. The only 

earn-outs Rob's ever approved were Josh and David, and they had near or more than a thousand units sold before they 

passed them on" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:38:38 PM Eastern Time: Me: "He shouldn't have to. Jason told me I'd be taken care of on it. I don't 

remember the part of whether rob approves or anything else. If Rob is not willing to pay me because of who I'm dating, I 

shouldn't be the only one willing to say it" 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:40:25 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Like I said, I'm just writing it off. I won't ask about it again. It's not worth 

it." 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:57:26 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I will always try and do as much as I can to help you but at 

the expense of you getting mad every time I do, I wonder why I keep trying." 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:58:32 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I push too much with Jason to try and do right by you, you 

get upset when it doesn't work out, and I get nowhere ... " 

Feb 24, 2017, 5:59:26 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I'm not mad at you at all. I'm sorry it feels like that. I know where the 

blame lies" 

Feb 24, 2017, 6:01:10 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I just don't think it's right that anyone continues to ask people to trust the 

company" 

Feb 24, 2017, 6:02:32 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I understand where you're coming from as well.we need to 

figure out the best way to make this work." 

Feb 24, 2017, 6:03:09 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Or just realize that despite best intentions or efforts it's 

probably not going to" 

Feb 24, 2017, 6:08:33 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Whose best intentions? Mine and yours aren't enough." 

Feb 24, 2017, 6:09:39 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "That's why I said I don't know if it will work" 

THACKER65932 
EXHIBIT AF 
Feb 10, 2017, 11 :42: 16 AM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: Are you coming in? Need you here asap 

Feb 10, 2017, 11 :42:27 AM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: Or to look at Martin's and rays email asap 

Feb 16, 2017, 3:57:37 PM Eastern Time: Me: Please don't say anything. At least not yet, it will just escalate 

things at this point and that will only hurt the people who have already been hurt. 

Feb 16, 2017, 3:59:04 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: Ok, I won't 

Feb 16, 2017, 10:53:35 PM Eastern Time: Me: I just sent an email to your personal email. I am only texting 

you because you've mentioned you don't check it often not because I need a response of any kind. 

Feb 16, 2017, 10:54:12 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: Ok, I'll go check it out in a few. 

Feb 16, 2017, 10:54:32 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: I'm nervous 

Feb 16, 2017, 10:54:49 PM Eastern Time: Me: Don't be 

Feb 16, 2017, 10:55:24 PM Eastern Time: Me: I'm just explaining a little more of the situation so you have 

options and understanding. 

Feb 16, 2017, 10:56:54 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: Ok 

Feb 16, 2017, 11 :58:04 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: I read it, and understand all of your thoughts and 

feelings. You're not in an easy position, especially because of the type of person you are (a good person if you 

were wondering). Professionally I want to help you keep your job, and be successful in your role, in all ways 

that I can. Personally I want you to be happy. At some point I don't know how possible both will be. 

Feb 16, 2017, 11 :58:08 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: And by the way ..... 

Feb 16, 2017, 11:58:17 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: I finished ShoeDog 

Feb 16, 2017, 11:58:19 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: Loved it 

Feb 16, 2017, 11 :59:26 PM Eastern Time: Me: Glad you loved it. 

Feb 17, 2017, 12:00:34 AM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: We can chat more about all of this, I'm not sure I 

know how to handle or what to do though 

Feb 17, 2017, 12:01 :03 AM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: It will stay between us, I won't say anything to 

Jason 

Labels: Text 

THACKER01018 
EXHIBIT AG 
Feb 1, 2017, 6:31 :22 PM Eastern Time: Me: "What about Amerisure or is that my problem too" 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:32:42 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I'm still trying to talk to him about that one" 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:32:51 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Do you think I'm not trying to help you?" 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:34:03 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I know you are. I'm just tired of the shit rolling downhill. Im happy to go 

directly to the sources if need be. I don't want you to have to be in the middle. I'm not upset with you." 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:35:22 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I'm trying to help you get paid and also keep this from getting 

messy" 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:36:06 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "You don't have to listen to me but if you go directly to Jason or 

James it probably will, so if you do just approach it the right way" 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:37:06 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I know your are but maybe it needs to get messy. Ask James if he'll wait a 

quarter for his bonus because of an accounting change that he didn't know about" 

Feb 1, 2017, 6:37:41 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I totally get it, I'm not sure he thinks about it that way, but 

should" 

Feb 1, 2017, 7:41 :59 PM Eastern Time: Me: "What do you suggest that I do? I've been paid $5,036.86 in commission 

since June 2016. The third year in a row, the company has changed policy without telling me or made a ruling that I 

shouldn't get the $ I was expecting. I've got an owner breaking laws and every rule of decency in regards to my 

personal life. I have the flagship ELD on the books with more to come after 1.5 years of courting, after creating the 

solution that works after being told it wouldn't, and to top it off, I'm not only not being paid on half of the revenue 

because it's ELD but my pay is being delayed because it's ELD. I'm not asking for special treatment, apologies, or even 

acknowledgment. I just want to be able to know ahead of time when I will be paid. How can I plan? How can anyone 

plan when they aren't given information? Is Jason OK if I start forecasting AFTER the fact? I highly doubt it. I don't know 

what to do any more if this is the reward for hard work." 

Feb 1, 2017, 8:32:34 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I think we need to separate orders if ELD devices are in back 

order, for a number of reasons. Let me have that conversation with James and Jason. Otherwise I don't know what else 

I can do, but I understand you're frustration. I think you should have a conversation with Jason if it's affecting you're 

future with the company." 

Feb 1, 2017, 8:41 :50 PM Eastern Time: Me: "It is effecting my future with the company but, at this point, I'm not sure I 

trust that I can be honest without unfair repercussions. I think I'm better off saying nothing instead of trying to have a fair 

dialogue. While the company has held me accountable, they've never once taken any accountability. It's not just Rob 

and Elliot but Jason too." 

Feb 1, 2017, 8:55:37 PM Eastern Time: Me: "My mind isnt made up about anything and I know I'm just mad. I still am 

happy and don't want this to negatively effect this. I just don't see how to continue down this path of having my 

livelihood in the hands of people who are making decisions that have tremendous effects on others without even 

relaying those changes ahead of time. Like I said, I just need to be able to know what to expect." 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:03:44 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Yea I get that. I think we need to change this process 

specifically, as mentioned. It doesn't make sense to me" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:06:15 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Let me work on that" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:07:43 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I don't want to cause any trouble for you. I hate having to ask you to get in 

the middle. I don't want friction and, honestly, I can't understand how the company can be so short-sided in some of 

these situations. I didn't get paid for 5 months on Pasadena because of our Accounting issues and SHI (which is our 

fault too). What is the risk in paying the Salespeople in those situations? We are treated like we are in it together but we 

aren't in it together. My profit sharing bonus went up $200 annually. I dont want to leave or cause issues. I am happy 

and feel like the company should be happy with me. I don't know why it seems like they go out of their way to fuck with 

me or make an example of me." 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:11 :11 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I hope the irony of this happening on the day the company is doing an 

ELD launch by playing a game on the tablets using a browser that was "not possible to install" isn't lost on you. You've 

got to admit, it's pretty damn funny." 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:12:20 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I wasn't in there but that is funny" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:12:46 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "I'll stop when I should and when it's not worth pushing" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:22:15 PM Eastern Time: Me: "OK, I've been much happier flying under the radar and not arguing. That's 

where I've hoped to stay. I just couldn't afford for this to continue to drag on without an end in sight. If I hadn't invoiced 

them, I wouldn't be getting paid until at least April because it's Feb and we still haven't shipped the full order. I feel like 

I've been extraordinarily reasonable for the last year and not demand much of anything. I was much happier and the 

company was happier with me. I don't want to go backwards out of necessity. Thanks and I'm sorry if it comes across 

as me being upset with you and for it being a thing at all." 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:28:35 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Not a problem, no one is going to like waiting that long, you're 

just the first person to sell one that worked out jay way" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:28:37 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "That" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:29:16 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "We've never had two part hardware and software 

configurations that could buy bought at the same time but shipped and used and billed separately" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:31:10 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Lesson is to not be the pioneer because the company will not reward you. 

1st SHI deal, 1st big ELD deal." 

THACKER65927 
Feb 1, 2017, 9:31 :34 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "We're pioneers" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:32:28 PM Eastern Time: Me: "I know. Even with this shit, It's still better than staring at other peoples 

asses." 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:45:54 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "Lara and cmi will make this year amazing for you. Don't lose 

sight of that, let's make it happen and let me sort this other stuff out" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:46:23 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "You stay out of harms way and under the radar, the only 

attention you need is on your successes" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:48:23 PM Eastern Time: Me: "Thank you. I'll keep my eye on the prize. It just stings when I feel like I'm 

fighting James and Jason too. I'm good though" 

Feb 1, 2017, 9:48:54 PM Eastern Time: Tyler Mortensen: "You're not, even though it can feel like it" 

Labels: Text, lnbox 

THACKER65928 
EXHIBIT AH 
From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Robert Donat [/O=MEX09/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP 

(FYDI BO HF 23SPDL T)/CN=RECI Pl ENTS/CN =4 76FA6BF BF3 D497EB317D94B809 3325B-RDO NAT] 

3/11/2017 2:43:17 AM 

Jeremy Thacker [jeremy@thackerfamily.com] 

Re: Deleted emails. 

Thank you. That's what I needed to know. Believe it or not Jeremy, it's not your relationship with KL that you 

got fired over. It's the numerous things Jason and Tyler related to you Thursday without any of my 

knowledge. When numerous employees complain to me about you unsolicited and I rarely see you do any work 

related activity, I bring it to their attention. They investigated. You had one material phone call that week. We 

had no initial way to determine if you had done work at since you deleted your ( our) work email. It is not ok 

for you to nuke work emails just because you think there may be a backup. That's malicious and damaging 

behavior. Kristin actually suggested to me on the phone call SHE initiated 3/1 that I check your phone records 

since I was of the (correct) opinion you weren't actually working and she feels you are an amazing employee. I 

validated your lack of phone activity along with your character in 5 minutes flat Thursday AJ\tl. I didn't plan to 

bring the the recording to Jason's attention until Elliot explained your insolent conversation with Jason and 

Tyler the day prior. They immediately decided it was the final straw and that we needed to part ways. In fact 

Jason told me that after digesting your attitude from that meeting he was likely to let you go anyway. 

If any of us felt you were a good person, we (and specifically I) would have no issues whatsoever, in fact would 

be happy for, your relationship with Kristin. Good people don't jeopardize uninitiated single moms' lives, 

sanity, and custody with schedule I drugs. I find that act deplorable and dangerous. 

The reality you choose to ignore is you are an angry, unkind malcontented individual and not a positive factor to 

the culture in our company, which you know is important to me and us all. And this is not the first time you 

have started up a damaging and dangerous relationship with an employee. 

I'm fact, since you have "come out" with the relationship I hear nothing but negative comments regarding it to 

include Kristin. I let her know this a month or so ago, as I'm 

concerned with how people regard her as a manager and key employee. She and I recently revisited the 

conversation based on something she approached ME about and unfortunately my advice was relayed to you in 

a way I didn't expect to snowball as it did. 

As for the Chicago thing, I was curious if that was still something you were still interested in. Nothing 

more. Jason mentioned it to Kristin and you both read far more into it than was worth your time. 

That is precisely why your relationship puts Jason in a difficult position and why he has distanced himself from 

her, and why she approached me recently, upset about how others have begun to treat her. 

I don't want people in the company who damage others. I never damaged Kristin other than emotionally by 

distancing myself so I didn't affect her final decision about Jesse, and frankly, because it wasn't a good long 

term realistic relationship for either of us, as much we may have loved each other. I have plenty of backup from 

her to that effect, going back to day one. In fact the 2 times I upset her the most, she ran pretty much ( over the 

phone then over to Kona) into Robert's and your arms. I am 

glad she had someone to help her through that time. I couldn't be the reason she definitively left a good guy and 

shouldn't have gotten involved to begin with, but as you know, she is a wonderful person. 

I understand the rock and a hard place she was in and the reason for the leaks to you and the lies about 

them. We are all willing to forget everything happened and start work Monday moving forward. She is 

talented and valued and deserves to grow and succeed with GPS Insight and I am committed (quite obviously I 

think you should see) to doing everything possible to ensure her continued success and security. 

GPS1_00000045