UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

ALERIS ALUMINUM CANADA L.P. and 

ALERIS ALUMINUM KOBLENZ GmgH, Case No. 09-10490-PJD-RSW 

 Plaintiffs, Honorable Patrick J. Duggan 

v. Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen 

VALEO, INC.,

 Defendant. 

________________________________________/ 

VALEO, INC., 

 Counter-Plaintiff, 

v. 

ALERIS ALUMINUM CANADA, L.P., 

 Counter-Defendant. 

________________________________________/ 

Letter Rogatory - Pascal Désilets 

 The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan to the Appropriate 

Authority in Canada, Greetings: 

1. This letter is a request for Canada’s international judicial assistance, and the request is 

made pursuant to the interests of justice. 

2. A civil lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District 

of Michigan, United States of America in which Aleris Aluminum Canada, L.P. 

(“Aleris”) is the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant and Valeo, Inc. (“Valeo”) is the 

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff. 

3. Aleris sued Valeo to collect certain alleged accounts receivable. Valeo 

counterclaimed against Aleris for breach of contract, breach of contract implied-infact, and promissory estoppel. Valeo’s claims are based on Aleris’: (i) failure to fully 

disclose to Valeo its dispute with its unionized workforce; (ii) promises to supply 

Valeo with goods after July 2, 2008; (iii) lock out of its unionized workforce; (iv) 

declaration of a force majeure; and (v) closing its facility in Cap-de-la-Madeleine, 

2:09-cv-10490-PJD-RSW Doc # 52 Filed 01/19/10 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 1022
 2 

Québec. Many of these events occurred in July of 2008. Aleris disputes the nature 

and existence of its contract with Valeo, and whether Aleris breached such contract. 

4. This Court is a competent court of law and equity and has proper jurisdiction over the 

civil lawsuit between Aleris and Valeo under the laws of the United States. 

5. This Court has the power to direct the taking of evidence outside of its jurisdiction 

under Rule 28(b) of the United States Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1781(b)(2). 

6. Aleris identified Pascal Désilets, a Canadian citizen domiciled at a location within 

your territorial juridiction at 22 Chemin Cousens, Bolton Ouest, Quebec, J0E 2T0, as 

a potential witness. 

7. Mr. Désilets was employed by Aleris to manage the Valeo account. In this capacity, 

Mr. Désilets has first-hand factual knowledge that is highly relevant to the claims and 

issues in this litigation, including with respect to: (i) the existence and nature of the 

contract between Valeo and Aleris; (ii) Aleris’ negotiations with its unionized 

workforce; (iii) its decision to lock-out its workforce; (iv) its declaration of force 

majeure; (v) its decision to close its manufacturing facility; (vi) its communications to 

Valeo regarding these issues; and (vii) promises to Valeo to continue to supply goods 

after July 2, 2008. Mr. Désilets may also have documents in his possession relating 

to these crucial facts and events. 

8. For these reasons, Mr. Désilets’ deposition testimony and files are necessary for trial 

and will be offered at trial, if admissible. 

9. This evidence cannot be obtained from another source. Mr. Désilets was the primary 

Aleris employee responsible for managing the Valeo account beginning in the second 

quarter of 2008. Accordingly, Mr. Désilets has unique and essential knowledge of the 

events and facts that occurred during that period. The documents in his possession—

particularly his personal notes and correspondence—cannot be obtained by or from 

Aleris or a third-party. 

10. The subject matters to be discussed at the deposition are described in the attached 

Schedule A. 

11. The documents that Valeo requests are described in the attached Schedule B. 

12. Valeo has attempted and failed to obtain Mr. Désilets’ cooperation in this matter. 

13. Valeo is willing to reimburse the judicial authorities of Canada for costs incurred in 

executing this request. 

 This Court requests that you will, by proper and usual process, cause Pascal Désilets to 

appear at a mutually convenient time and place, not later than 45 days after the execution and 

entry of an order approving this request, to be deposed and to produce all requested documents. 

2:09-cv-10490-PJD-RSW Doc # 52 Filed 01/19/10 Pg 2 of 6 Pg ID 1023
 3 

This Court is ready and willing to offer the same assistance to the judicial authorities of Canada 

when so requested. 

 s/Patrick J. Duggan

 Patrick J. Duggan 

 United States District Judge 

Dated: January 19, 2010 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on 

January 19, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

 s/Marilyn Orem

 Case Manager 

2:09-cv-10490-PJD-RSW Doc # 52 Filed 01/19/10 Pg 3 of 6 Pg ID 1024
 4 

Letter Rogatory to P. Désilets

Schedule A – Topics of Deposition

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Valeo, Inc. intends to depose Pascal Désilets regarding the 

following subjects: 

1. Mr. Désilets’ duties and responsibilities as an Account Manager at Aleris, 

including with respect to the business and contractual relationship between Valeo and Aleris. 

2. The business and contractual relationship between Aleris and Valeo. 

3. The business and contractual relationship between Aleris and its automotiveindustry customers. 

4. The contracts and agreements between Aleris and Valeo and the parties’ 

respective obligations under the same. 

5. The terms and conditions applicable to the agreements and contracts between 

Valeo and Aleris. 

6. The goods Aleris produced for Valeo during 2008 including their 

specifications, validation process, and the lead-time necessary to produce them. 

7. Valeo’s forecasts of its requirements of goods issued to Aleris. 

8. Aleris’ negotiations or disputes with its unionized workforce preceding Aleris’ 

lockout of its unionized workforce on or about July 2, 2008. 

9. Aleris’ disclosure to Valeo of its problems with its unionized workforce. 

2:09-cv-10490-PJD-RSW Doc # 52 Filed 01/19/10 Pg 4 of 6 Pg ID 1025
 5 

10. Promises, representations, or assurances by Aleris to Valeo that Aleris’ labor 

problems would not affect Aleris’ supply of goods to Valeo. 

11. Aleris’ decision to lock out its unionized workforce and declare a force majeure 

on about July 2, 2008, and to close its manufacturing facility on or about July 12, 2008. 

Letter Rogatory to P. Désilets

Schedule B – Document Requests

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Valeo, Inc. requests that Pascal Désilets produce the 

following documents and communications (including paper documents, electronically stored 

documents, and emails), to the extent he has any such documents in his possession, custody, or 

control. 

1. All documents and communications relating or referring to the business and 

contractual relationship between Valeo and Aleris, including the contracts and agreements 

between Aleris and Valeo and any applicable terms and conditions. 

2. All documents and communications relating or referring to Valeo’s forecasts of 

its requirements of goods issued to Aleris. 

3. All documents and communications relating or referring to the goods Aleris 

produced for Valeo during 2008, including their specifications and validation processes. 

4. All documents and communications relating or referring to Aleris’ negotiations or 

disputes with its unionized workforce preceding Aleris’ lockout of its unionized workforce on or 

about July 2, 2008. 

5. All documents and communications relating or referring to Aleris’ disclosure to 

Valeo of its negotiations or disputes with its unionized workforce. 

2:09-cv-10490-PJD-RSW Doc # 52 Filed 01/19/10 Pg 5 of 6 Pg ID 1026
 6 

6. All documents and communications relating or referring to promises, 

representations, or assurances by Aleris to Valeo that Aleris’ labor problems would not affect the 

supply of goods to Valeo. 

7. All documents and communications relating to Aleris’ decision to lock out its 

unionized workforce and declare a force majeure on about July 2, 2008, and to close its 

manufacturing facility on or about July 12, 2008. 

DETROIT.4021209.2 

2:09-cv-10490-PJD-RSW Doc # 52 Filed 01/19/10 Pg 6 of 6 Pg ID 1027