FILED
`10/5/2022 4:58 PM
`FELICIA PITRE
`DISTRICT CLERK
`DALLAS CO., TEXAS
`Treva Parker-Ayodele DEPUTY
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
`
`NO. DC-20-03275
`
`JAY KALI SON,
`
`INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,
`
`Defendant.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN, Individually
`and derivatively on behalf of
`JAY KALI SON,
`INC.,
`
`Counter-plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`JAY KALI SON,
`
`INC.
`
`Counter-defendant,
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA,
`
`Third Party Counter-
`defendant.
`
`eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeteeeeeeeteeeeee
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`TO THE HONORABLE COURT:
`
`NOW COME Plaintiff and Counter-defendant Jay Kali Son,
`
`Inc.
`
`(“Jay Kali”)
`
`
`and Third-Party Counter-Defendant Prajjwol Acharya
`
`(“Acharya”)
`
`and
`
`as
`
`their Opposition and Response
`
`to Bijaya
`
`Humagain’s
`
`(“Humagain”) Motion to Compel will
`
`show the Court
`
`the
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`Page 1 of 6
`
`

`

`following:
`
`I.
`
`Introduction.
`
`Objections Jay Kali and Acharya made
`
`in responding to the
`
`sought-after discovery are founded,
`
`in large part,
`
`on the fact
`
`that Humagain
`
`is not
`
`a
`
`Jay Kali
`
`shareholder.
`
`see copy of
`
`Responses
`
`and Answers
`
`to sought after discovery attached and
`
`
`
`
`marked Exhibit D.
`
`Humagain’s belief that objections to his written discovery
`
`propounded
`
`to
`
`Jay Kali
`
`and Acharya
`
`are waived because
`
`he
`
`calculated the due date from service of his written discovery on
`
`Jay Kali’s prior attorney, who withdrew,
`
`is unfounded.
`
`Because
`
`Humagain is not a Jay Kali Shareholder,
`
`Jay Kali’s objections to
`
`Humagain’s written
`
`discovery
`
`requests
`
`for
`
`documents
`
`and
`
`information concerning Jay Kali’s proprietary and operational
`
`data must be sustained.
`
`II. Material Facts.
`
`A.
`
`Jay Kali and Son,
`
`Inc.
`
`is a Texas Corporation founded
`
`in 2017.
`
`See Exhibit A.
`
`B.
`
`Jay Kali’s
`
`shares
`
`are
`
`held
`
`by Acharya
`
`(50%)
`
`
`(“Acharya”), Bijay Shrestha
`
`(“Shrestha”)
`
`(20%)
`
`and
`
`Ramesh
`
`Sapkota
`
`(30%).
`
`See Affidavit
`
`of Acharya
`
`attached and marked Exhibit B.
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`Page 2 of 6
`
`

`

`Acharya
`
`is
`
`Jay Kali’s President
`
`and is
`
`the person
`
`solely responsible
`
`for
`
`governing
`
`the
`
`corporation,
`
`authorizing transactions,
`
`and deciding whether
`
`and
`
`when to distribute dividends. Id.
`
`Jay Kali’s By-laws require consideration to be paid to
`
`the company for shares before issuance:
`
`ARTICLE6 . ISSUANCE AND TRANSFER OF SHARES
`
`kikk
`
`Certificates for Fully Paid Shares
`
`6.02. Neither shares nor certificates representing shares may be issued by the corporation until
`the full amount of the consideration has been paid. When the consideration has been paid to the
`corporation, the shares will be deemed to have been issued and the certificate representing the
`shares will be issued to the shareholder.
`
`Consideration for Shares
`
`6.03. The consideration paid for the issuance of shares may consist of any tangible or intangible
`benefit to the corporation or other property of any kind or nature, including cash, promussory notes,
`services performed, contracts for services to be performed, other securities of the corporation, or
`securities of any other corporation, domestic or foreign, or other entity.
`
`ee copy of Jay Kali Bylaws attached and marked Exhibit C.
`
`E.
`
`Humagain requested and received a copy of Jay Kali’s
`
`by-laws in 2019.
`
` Discovery in this case disclosed that while Humagain
`
`is recognized in some
`
`signed writings as
`
`a
`
`Jay Kali
`
`shareholder, Humagain never paid the
`
`consideration
`
`required by Jay Kali’s By-laws
`
`to become
`
`a
`
`Jay Kali
`
`shareholder.
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`Page 3 of 6
`
`

`

`G.
`
`Humagain, who
`
`owns
`
`a competing business venture,
`
`is
`
`not and never was a Jay Kali shareholder.
`
`H.
`
`Therefore, Humagain’s written discovery requests
`
`for
`
`documents
`
`and
`
`information
`
`concerning
`
`Jay Kali’s
`
`proprietary and operational data are subject
`
`to Jay
`
`Kali’s and Acharya’s responsive objections, which must
`
`be sustained.
`
`III. Points and Authority.
`
`Humagain, who
`
`owns
`
`a
`
`Jay Kali competitor, has propounded
`
`hundreds of document
`
`requests and interrogatories on Jay Kali
`
`
`
`and Acharya.
`
`In his discovery requests, Humagain
`
`demands
`
`information and documentation from Jay Kali and Acharya of and
`
`about
`
`Jay Kali’s
`
`profits,
`
`financial
`
`statements, merchant
`
`processing statements, point of sale reports,
`
`loans,
`
`revenues,
`
`internal communications, purchases, equity,
`
`communications with
`
`Jay Kali vendors and contractors, accounting, bank statements,
`
`employee
`
`personnel
`
`files
`
`and
`
`time
`
`cards
`
`and
`
`compensation
`
`information,
`
`tax filings,
`
`phone
`
`records,
`
`inventory valuations
`
`and pricing, property, board meetings,
`
`and documents subject
`
`to
`
`attorney client privilege.
`
`But because he
`
`is not
`
`a
`
`Jay Kali
`
`shareholder, Humagain
`
`lacks
`
`standing to demand discovery from Jay Kali
`
`and Acharya
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`Page 4 of 6
`
`

`

`about Jay Kali for any purpose.
`
`The Court should refrain from forcing Jay Kali and Acharya
`
`to incur
`
`the further burden and expense of providing discovery
`
`to Humagain without a decision about Humagain’s standing to sue
`
`Jay Kali or Acharya.
`
`See In re Crown Castle Intern. Corp., 247
`
`S.W.3d
`
`349
`
`(Tex. App.
`
`2008)
`
`(granting writ of mandamus
`
`and
`
`directing trial
`
`court
`
`to
`
`vacate
`
`order
`
`for
`
`corporation
`
`in
`
`shareholder
`
`derivative
`
`suit
`
`to
`
`produce
`
`discovery
`
`before
`
`shareholders established standing).
`
`The Court
`
`should
`
`instead,
`
`enter
`
`an
`
`order
`
`sustaining
`
`objections Jay Kali and Acharya made
`
`to producing the sought-
`
`after information and documents because Humagain is not
`
`a
`
`Jay
`
`Kali shareholder.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`ROQUEMORE SKIERSKI PLLC
`13155 Noel Rd., Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75240
`972.325.6591 Ext. 106
`Fmail:
`lynette@rogski.com
`
`
`
`/s/ E. Lynette Stone
`
`Kelvin Roquemore
`(Tx. Bar No.
`24002867)
`E. Lynette Stone
`(Tx. Bar No. 24057683)
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`Page 5 of 6
`
`

`

`JAY KALI SON,
`
`INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,
`
`Defendant.
`
`NO. DC-20-03275
`
`eeeeeeeeeeteeee
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
`
`Proof of Service
`
`her
`stead with
`her
`in
`someone
`or
`undersigned,
`The
`2022 along with a
`served this Proof on October 5,
`authority,
`copy of
`the appended Opposition and Response by Jay Kali Son,
`Inc. and Prajjwol Acharya to Bijaya Humagain’s Motion to Compel
`
`Discovery:
`
`
`
`E-Served
`
`
`Blake Edwards
`blake@mylawteam.com
`Robert J. Wood, Jr.
`robert@mylawteam.com
`
`ROQUEMORE SKIERSKI PLLC
`13155 Noel Rd., Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75240
`972.325.6591 Ext. 106
`Email:
`lynette@rogski.com
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ EB. Lynette Stone
`
`E. Lynette Stone (TBN 24057683)
`
`INC. AND PRAJJWOL
`OPPOSITION AND RESPONSE BY JAY KALI SON,
`ACHARYA TO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`Page 6 of 6
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`Office of the Secretary of State
`:
`:
`Peeteton
`WU. BOX
`Austin, Texas 78711-3697
`(Form 503)
`
`pied in the oace ormme
`ecretary of
`State of
`Texas
`Filing #; 804326760 12/1/2021
`Document #: 1098315580002
`Image Generated Electronically
`for Web Filing
`
`ASSUMED NAME CERTIFICATE
`FOR FILING WITH THE SECRETARYOF STATE
`
`1. The assumed name under which the business or professional service is or is to be conducted or
`rendered is:
`ABC SMOKE
`
`2. The nameofthe entity as stated in its certificate of formation, application for registration, or
`comparable documentis:
`RYDER RETAIL INC
`
`3. The state, country, or other jurisdiction under the laws of which it was incorporated, organized.
`or associated is TEXAS
`
`4. The period, not to exceed 10 years, during which the assumed namewill be used is: 10
`year(s)
`
`5. The entity is a: Domestic For-Profit Corporation
`
`6. The entity's principal office addressis:
`1186 W WASHINGTON STREET SUITE B, STEPHENVILLE, TX, USA 76401
`
`7. The county or counties where business or professional services are being or are to be conducted
`or rendered under such assumed nameare:
`ALL COUNTIES
`
`8. The undersigned, if acting in the capacity of an attorney-in-fact of the entity, certifies that the
`entity has duly authorized the attorney-in-fact in writing to execute this document. The undersigned
`signs this document subject to the penalties imposed by law for the submission of a materially false
`of fraudulent instrument.
`
`RYDER RETAIL INC
`
`Nameofthe entity
`
`By: PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`HUMAGAIN_000312
`
`

`

`Signature of officer, general partner, manager,
`representative or attorney-in-fact of the entity
`
`FILING OFFICE COPY
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`HUMAGAIN_000313
`
`

`

` Form 201
`Secretary of State
`P.O. Box 13697
`rQ.
`Austin, TX 78711-3697
`FAX. 512/463-5709
`Filing Fee: $300
`
`
`
`ef
`ae
`
`Certificate of Formation
`For-Profit Corporation
`Article 1 - Entity Name and Type
`The filing entity being formedis a for-profit corporation. The name ofthe entityis:
`
`
`RYDER RETAILINC
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`Filed in the Office of the
`Secretary of State of Texas
`_ Filing #: 804326760 11/27/2021
`Document #: 1097292700002
`_ Image Generated Electronically
`|
`for Web Filing
`
`|
`
`The name must contain the word "corporation," "company," "incorporated," "limited," or an abbreviation of one of these terms. The name must not
`‘be the same as, deceptively similar to or similar to that of an existing corporate, limited liability company, or limited partnership name on file with
`the secretary of state. A preliminary check for "name availability" is recommended.
`:
`Article 2- Registered Agent and Registered Office
`raTheinitialregisteredagent.isanorganization(cannotbe‘corporationnamedabove) bythenameof:
`
`OR
`I¥B. Theinitial registeredagentis an individual residentof thestate whosenameis setforth below:
`Name:
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`C. The business address of the registered agent and the registered office addressis:
`Street Address:
`2800 BRAZOS BLVD APT 14101
`
`EULESS TX 76039
`
`Consentof Registered Agent
`TA. A copy of the consent ofregistered agent is attached.
`OR
`Il¥ B. The consentof the registered agent is maintained bythe entity.
`Article 3 - Directors
`
`The number of directors constituting the initial board of directors and the names and addresses of the person or
`persons who are to serveasdirectors until the first annual meeting of shareholders or until their successors are
`elected and qualified are set forth below:
`Director 1: PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`Address: 2800 BRAZOS BLVD APT 14101
`Director 2: BIJAY SHRESTHA
`
`EULESS TX, USA 76039
`
`Address: 1018 SPRING RIDGE CIRCLE # 210 GRANBURY TX, USA 76048
`Director 3: RAMESH
`SAPKOTA
`
`Address: 4007 STONEHAVEN DRIVE COLLEYVILLE TX, USA 76034
`
`The total number of shares the corporation is authorized to issue and the par value of each of such shares, or a
`statement that such shares are without par value, is set forth below.
`Number of Shares
`Par Value (must choose and complete either A or B)
`
`Class
`
`Series
`
`10000
`
`[”A. has a par value of $
`¥ B. without par value.
`
`If the shares are to be divided into classes, you must set forth the designation of each class, the numberof shares of each class, and the par value
`(or statement of no par value), of each class. If shares of a class are to be issued in series, you must provide the designation of each series. The
`preferences, limitations, and relative rights of each class or series must be stated in space provided for supplemental information.
`
`HUMAGAIN_000314
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT A
`The purpose for which the corporation is organized is for the transaction of any andall lawful business for which
`corporations may be organized under the Texas Business Organizations Code.
`
`rereerETOPOTIC
`
`BIJAY SHRESTHA 20%
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA 50%
`RAMESH SAPKOTA 30%
`fis attached addendum,ifany,is incorporated herein by reference.]
`|
`Effectiveness of Filing
`WA. This document becomeseffective when the documentisfiled by the secretary of state.
`OR
`TB. This document becomeseffective at a later date, which is not more than ninety (90) days from the dateofits
`signing. The delayedeffective dateis:
`
`The name and addressof the organizer is set forth below.
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`2800 BRAZOS BLVD APT 14101 EULESS TX 76039
`
`Organizer
`
`The undersigned affirms that the person designated as registered agent has consented to the appointment. The
`undersigned signs this document subject to the penalties imposed by law for the submission of a materially false or
`fraudulent instrument and certifies under penalty of perjury that the undersigned is authorized under the provisions of
`law governing the entity to execute the filing instrument.
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`Signature of organizer
`
`FILING OFFICE COPY
`
`HUMAGAIN_000315
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT B
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
`
`NO. DC-20-03275
`
`JAY KALI SON,
`
`INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,
`
`Defendant.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN, Individually
`and derivatively on behalf of
`JAY KALI SON,
`INC.,
`
`Counter-plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`JAY KALI SON,
`
`INC.
`
`Counter-defendant,
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA,
`
`Third Party Counter-
`defendant.
`
`eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeteeeeeeeeeeteeee
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`BEFORE MBE,
`
`the undersigned authority,
`
`personally appeared
`
`Prajjwol Acharya,
`
`who being duly sworn,
`
`deposed as follows:
`
`"My name is Prajjwol Acharya.
`
`
`
`[ am the majority shareholder
`
`and President of Jay Kali Son,
`
` Inc.
`
`I am over 18 years of age and
`
`of sound mind.
`
`I have personal knowledge of the facts alleged in
`
`the Opposition and Response to Summary Judgment
`
`for which this
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`1
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT B
`
`Affidavit
`
`is submitted in support.
`
`I
`
`swear
`
`that
`
`the following
`
`statements are true and correct.
`
`"Jay Kali Son,
`
`
`Inc.
`
`is a Texas corporation that operates a
`
`smoke shop located at 1186 W Washington St Ste B, Stephenville,
`
`Texas, doing business as ABC Smoke Shop.
`
`ABC Smoke Shop is a retail establishment that sells tobacco
`
`products and accessories to local customers. ABC Smoke Shop does
`
`
`not sell products online nor does ABC Smoke Shop ship products to
`
`any other state in the United States.
`
`ABC Smoke Shop is the only store operated by Jay Kali Son,
`
`
`Inc.
`
`
`
`serve as the President of Jay Kali.
`
`In March of 2019,
`
`60% of Jay Kali shares were transferred to
`
`
`
`me.
`
`The 20% remaining shares were owed by Bijay Man Shrestha 20%
`
`(hereinafter referred to as “Shrestha”).
`
` In the beginning of 2020, Acharya held 50% of Jay Kali’s
`
`shares, Shrestha 20% and Ramesh Sapkota (“Sapkota”) purchased 30%.
`
`This is the current breakdown of the shareholders.
`
`Bijaya Humagain is my cousin. Attached and marked 000089,
`
`000097,
`
`000117,
`
`000119
`
`are true and correct
`
`copies of bank
`
`statements for Jay Kali asset accounts which reflect unauthorized
`
`transfers that Humagain made from Jay Kali’s assets while Humagain
`
`worked for Jay Kali
`
`"
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF PRAJJWOL ACHARYA
`
`2
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT B
`
`
`site_CHASITY BOYD
`‘anarNumber786686
`"Becober 28,roe,20A}
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF PRAJJWQL ACHARYA
`
`3
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT C
`
`BYLAWSOF
`
`JAY KALI SON INC.
`
`ARTICLE | . OFFICES
`
`Registered Office
`
`1.01. The registered office of the corporation is set forth in the Certificate of Formation.
`
`Registered Agent
`
`1.02. The nameofthe registered agent of the corporation at its address is RABI BASNET.
`
`Principal Office
`
`1.03. The Board of Directors has full power and authority to change the principal office from
`one location to another by noting the changed addressandthe effective date.
`
`Other Offices
`
`1.04. The corporation may also have offices at other places, within or without the State of
`Texas, where the corporation is qualified to do business, that the Board of Directors may from time
`to time designate, or the business of the corporation may require.
`
`ARTICLE 2 . SHAREHOLDERS' MEETINGS
`
`Place of Meetings
`
`2.01. Meetings of shareholders will be held at any place within or without the State of Texas
`designated by the Board of Directors pursuant to the authority granted to the Board in these Bylaws,
`or by the written consent of all persons entitled to vote at shareholder meetings. In the absence of
`any designation, shareholders’ meetings will be held at the principal office of the corporation. Any
`meeting is valid wherever held if held by the written consentofall the personsentitled to vote at the
`meeting, given either before or after the meeting and filed with the Secretary of the corporation.
`
`Time of Annual Meeting; Business Transacted
`
`2.02. The annual meeting of shareholders will be held on the first Tuesday of January of each
`year. If this day falls on a legal holiday, the annual meeting will be held at the same time on the next
`following business day. At annual meetings, Directors will be elected, reports of the affairs of the
`
`Jay Kali Son Inc. 000929
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT C
`
`Treasurer or any Assistant Treasurer, or by any other officer or agent of the corporation to whom
`the Board of Directors, by resolution, has delegated that power, or by hand-stamped impression in
`the nameof the corporation.
`
`Signing of Instruments
`
`(3) All checks, drafts or other order for payment of money, notes or other evidences of
`indebtedness, issued in the name of or payable to the corporation, must be signed or endorsed by the
`person or persons and in the mannerthat is determined from time to time by resolution of the Board
`of Directors.
`
`ARTICLE6 . ISSUANCE AND TRANSFER OF SHARES
`
`Classes and Series of Shares
`
`6.01. The corporation may issue one or more classes or series of shares, or both, any of which
`classes or series may be with par value or without par value and with such designations,
`preferences, limitations, and relative rights, including voting rights, as are stated in the Articles of
`Incorporation or Certificate of Formation. All shares of the same class must be of the same par
`value or be without par value. Unless the shares of a class have been divided into series, all shares
`of the same class must be identical in all respects. If the shares of a class have been divided into
`series, shares of the same class may vary betweenseries, but all shares of the same series must be
`identical in all respects. Any such class or series must be so designated as to distinguish the shares
`of that class or series from the shares of all other classes and series. There must always bea class or
`series of shares outstanding that has complete voting rights except as limited or restricted by voting
`rights conferred on some other class or series of outstanding shares.
`
`Certificates for Fully Paid Shares
`
`6.02. Neither shares nor certificates representing shares may be issued by the corporation until
`the full amount of the consideration has been paid. When the consideration has been paid to the
`corporation, the shares will be deemed to have been issued and the certificate representing the
`shares will be issued to the shareholder.
`
`Consideration for Shares
`
`6.03. The consideration paid for the issuance of shares may consist of any tangible or intangible
`benefit to the corporation or other property of any kind or nature, including cash, promissory notes,
`services performed, contracts for services to be performed, other securities of the corporation, or
`securities of any other corporation, domestic or foreign, or other entity.
`
`Jay Kali Son Inc. 000953
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT C
`
`8.02. Notwithstanding the powers conferred on the Board of Directors by Paragraph 8.01,
`above,
`the shareholders may amend or repeal these Bylaws, or adopt new bylaws, unless the
`Articles of Incorporation or Certificate of Formation or a bylaw adopted by the shareholders
`provides otherwise as to all or some portion of the Bylaws.
`
`Adopted by the Board of Directors on this the September 20, 2017.
`
`
`
`RABI BASNET
`Sole Director and Shareholder
`
`Jay Kali Son Inc. 000960
`
`

`

`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`ve
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN
`Defendant.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,Individually
`and Derivatively on behalf of JAY
`KALI SON, INC.
`Counter-Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Counter-Defendant,
`
`and
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA,
`Individually,
`Third-Party Counter-Defendant.
`
`LhSALNLP)LALPLNLNLNLNSI)LPLNSHLhLNLPLHLhLhLPLHLP
`
`EXHIBIT D
`
`CAUSE NO: DC-20-03275
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`192NP JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLASCOUNTY, TEXAS
`
`PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S
`SEVENTH SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO
`PLAINTIFF JAY KALI SON, INC.
`
`Now comes, Plaintiff, Jay Kali Son, Inc., and through its undersigned counsel, Jay Kali
`
`respondsas follows to Defendant Bijaya Humagain’s 7 Request for Production:
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 7" Requests for Production
`
`Page 1 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`PROOF OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned, or someonein her stead with her authority, served this Proof on August
`26, 2022 along with a copy of the appendedPlaintiffs Response to Defendant’s 7" Requestfor
`Production of Documents upon the following individuals using the identified method:
`
`E-Served
`Blake Edwards
`blake@mylawteam.com
`Robert J. Wood,Jr.
`robert@mylawteam.com
`
`By: ROQUEMORESKIERSKI PLLC
`13155 Noel Rd., Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75240
`972.325.6591 Ext. 106
`Email:
`lynette@rogski.com
`
`/s/ E. Lynette Stone
`
`Kelvin Roquemore(TBN 24002867)
`E. Lynette Stone (TBN 24057683)
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 7" Requests for Production
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 1: A copy of Your engagement letter with Mathur Law
`Offices, P.C.
`
`OBJECTION: The document demandedseeks information that is subject to privilege.
`
`As a further objection, Bijaya Humagain is not a shareholder of Jay Kali Son, Inc. Therefore, the
`information demanded is irrelevant, overbroad and sought for the purpose of conducting a
`fishing expedition and for harassment.
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 2: All documents supporting your answerto interrogatory
`Number | to Defendant’s Third Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff.
`
`RESPONSE: None.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 3: All documents supporting your answer to interrogatory
`Number 2 to Defendant’s Third Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff.
`
`RESPONSE: None.
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 4: All documents supporting your answer to interrogatory
`Number 3 to Defendant’s Third Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff.
`
`RESPONSE: Plaintiff believes the documents demanded by Request Number 4 were previously
`requested and either already produced. To the extent
`that
`that
`the undersigned finds the
`documents demanded by this Request were already produced,
`the Request
`is harassing,
`propoundedfor purposes of delay and the undersigned reserves the right to request sanctions for
`discovery propounded in a manner that
`is inconsistent with the applicable rules of civil
`procedure.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 5: All documents supporting your answer to interrogatory
`Number 4 to Defendant’s Third Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff.
`
`RESPONSE: None.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION6: All documentsrelating to the sale of the Ford Transit Van
`by You and/or Prajjwol Acharya.
`
`the
`Inc. Therefore,
`OBJECTION: Bijaya Humagain is not a shareholder of Jay Kali Son,
`information demanded is irrelevant, overbroad and sought for the purpose of conducting a
`fishing expedition.
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION8: All documents and communicationsrelating to payments
`made by Defendant in exchange for a 20% share of Jay Kali.
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 7" Requests for Production
`
`Page 3 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`RESPONSE: None.
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION9: All documents relating to the purchase and/or exchange of
`any vehicle using Your money.
`
`OBJECTION: Objection, Bijaya Humagain is not a shareholder of Jay Kali Son, Inc. Therefore,
`the information demanded is irrelevant, overbroad and sought for the purpose of conducting a
`fishing expedition.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 10: All documents relating to the purchase and/or
`exchange of any vehicle for personal use using Jay Bhairav money.
`
`RESPONSE: None.
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION11: All documentsrelating to any inventory purchases by You
`from PBB GroupInc. d/b/a ABC Wholesale from 2019 to the present.
`
`OBJECTION: Objection, Byaya Humagain is not a shareholder of Jay Kali Son, Inc. Therefore,
`the information demanded is irrelevant, overbroad and sought for the purpose of conducting a
`fishing expedition.
`
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 12: All documents relating to any sale of your inventory
`to PBB GroupInc. d/b/a ABC Wholesale from 2019 to the present.
`
`OBJECTION: Objection, Biyjaya Humagain is not a shareholder of Jay Kali Son, Inc. Therefore,
`the information demanded is irrelevant, overbroad and sought for the purpose of conducting a
`fishing expedition.
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 7" Requests for Production
`
`Page 4 of 4
`
`

`

`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`ve
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN
`Defendant.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,Individually
`and Derivatively on behalf of JAY
`KALI SON,INC.
`Counter-Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Counter-Defendant,
`
`and
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA,
`Individually,
`Third-Party Counter-Defendant.
`
`LhSALNLPLALPLNLNASLLNSI)LPLNSHLPLNLPLPLhLhLPLrLP
`
`EXHIBIT D
`
`CAUSE NO: DC-20-03275
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`1928? JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLASCOUNTY, TEXAS
`
`PLAINTIFF’S ANSWERSTO BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S
`THIRD SET OF INTERROGATORIES
`
`NOW COMESJay Kali Son,Inc., Plaintiff, and answers Bijaya Humagain’s Third Set of
`
`Interrogatories.
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275. Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant’s 3" Set of Interrogatories
`
`Page 1 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`PROOF OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned, or someonein her stead with her authority, served this Proof on August
`26, 2022 along with a copy of the appended Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant’s Third Set of
`Interrogatories upon the following individuals using the identified method:
`
`E-Served
`Blake Edwards
`blake@mylawteam.com
`Robert J. Wood,Jr.
`robert@mylawteam.com
`
`By: ROQUEMORESKIERSKI PLLC
`13155 Noel Rd., Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75240
`972.325.6591 Ext. 106
`Email:
`lynette@rogski.com
`
`/s/ E. Lynette Stone
`
`Kelvin Roquemore(TBN 24002867)
`E. Lynette Stone (TBN 24057683)
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275. Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant’s 3" Set of Interrogatories
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES
`
`INTERROGATORY1: Identify all “proprietary material” that You claim in paragraph 10 of
`Your Fourth AmendedPetition (“Petition”) that Humagain removed and/or used.
`
`ANSWER:_Jay Kali reasonably believes Bijaya Humagain removed pricing information,
`vendorlists and customer lists from Jay Kali Son, Inc. when he opened a competing business
`venture near Jay Kali’s store after Jay Kali terminated Humagain for making unauthorized
`transfers to his account from Jay Kali’s asset accounts.
`
`INTERROGATORY2: Identify all customers, vendors, and prospective customers that You
`claim in paragraph 10 of the Petition that Humagain interfered with.
`
`Byaya Humagain is in possession of the proprietary information that he
`OBJECTION:
`misappropriated from Jay Kali Son.
`
`ANSWER:—Subject to and without waiving objections, Plaintiff is conducting an investigation
`to determine identities and will supplement.
`
`INTERROGATORY3: Identify all assets and property that you claim in paragraph 30 of the
`Petition that Humagain misappropriated.
`
`This interrogatory was asked and answered previously. To the extent that
`OBJECTION:
`that the undersigned finds the interrogatory was already asked, the Interrogatory is harassing,
`propounded for purposes of delay and the undersigned reserves the right to request sanctions for
`discovery propounded in a manner that
`is inconsistent with the applicable rules of civil
`procedure.
`
`to and without waiving objections, Bijaya Humagain acknowledged
`Subject
`ANSWER:
`during his deposition that he transferred funds from Jay Kali’s asset accounts to his own. The
`transfers are reflected in documents that Jay Kali produced in discovery Bates marked Bates
`Mark 000089, 000097, 000117, 000119.
`
`INTERROGATORY4: Identify all business relationships with a third party that You refer to in
`paragraph 37 of the Petition.
`
`the
`Inc. Therefore,
`OBJECTION: Biaya Humagain is not a shareholder of Jay Kali Son,
`information demanded is irrelevant, overbroad and sought for the purpose of conducting a
`fishing expedition. The undersigned counsel was recently retained and replaces a prior attorney
`whoserved on the instant case for more than a year. The undersigned counsel is conducting an
`investigation to determine if, among the countless interrogatories already propounded,
`this
`Interrogatory waseither already asked or subject to a valid objection. To the extent that that the
`undersigned finds
`the interrogatory was already asked,
`the Interrogatory is harassing,
`propounded for purposes of delay and the undersigned reserves the right to request sanctions for
`discovery propounded in a manner that
`is inconsistent with the applicable rules of civil
`procedure.
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275. Plaintiff's Answers to Defendant’s 3" Set of Interrogatories
`
`Page 3 of 4
`
`

`

`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`0.
`
`BIAYA HUMAGAIN
`Defendant.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,Individually
`and Derivatively on behalf of JAY
`KALI SON,INC.
`Counter-Plaintiff,
`
`0.
`
`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Counter-Defendant,
`
`and
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA,
`Individually,
`Third-Party Counter-Defendant.
`
`
`
`MOMMANMMMMNMMMMMMMMMMMMMMm
`
`CAUSE NO: DC-20-03275
`
`EXHIBIT D
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`1928P JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLASCOUNTY, TEXAS
`
`PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S
`SIXTH REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO
`PLAINTIFF JAY KALI SON, INC.
`
`NOW COMESJay Kali Son, Inc., Plaintiff, and responds to Bijaya Humagain’s 6"
`
`Request for Production in the above numbered cause.
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 6" Request for Production
`
`Page 1 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`PROOF OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned, or someonein her stead with her authority, served this Proof on
`
`September 2, 2022 along with a copy of the appended Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 6"
`
`Request for Production upon the following individuals using the identified method:
`
`E-Served
`Blake Edwards
`blake@mylawteam.com
`Robert J. Wood,Jr.
`robert@mylawteam.com
`
`By: ROQUEMORE SKIERSKI PLLC
`13155 Noel Rd., Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75240
`972.325.6591 Ext. 106
`Email: lynette@roqski.com
`/s/ E. Lynette Stone
`Kelvin Roquemore(TBN 24002867)
`E. Lynette Stone (TBN 24057683)
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 6" Request for Production
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`OBJECTIONS
`
`Plaintiff Jay Kali Son, Inc. objects to each of the 39 Requests for Production propounded
`
`by Bijaya Humagainin his 6" Request for Production of Documents.
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the Requests to the extent they seek information that
`
`is
`
`protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine or
`
`any other recognized privileges.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the Requests to the extent they require Plaintiff to search for
`
`and produce documents or information that are not within Plaintiff's possession, custody, or
`
`control.
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the Requests to the extent they seek information or documents
`
`that cannot be located by Plaintiff after reasonably diligent inquiry, are readily available from
`
`public sources, or are available to from another source or by other means that are more
`
`convenient, more appropriate, less burdensome, or less expensive.
`
`4.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the Requests to the extent they seek legal conclusions and/or
`
`would require Plaintiff to reach a legal conclusion in order to prepare a response.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the Requests to the extent they are argumentative, prejudicial,
`
`improper, incorrect, harassing, vague, and/or ambiguous.
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the Definitions to the extent that certain Definitions imply
`
`legal conclusions or formal or informal legal relationship by, between, or amongst any parties,
`
`whether individually or together.
`
`7.
`
`Plaintiff objects to the extent that the sought-after documents were previously
`
`demanded and already produced and Defendant Humagain refused to withdraw the Request after
`
`Cause No. DC-20-03275: Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant’s 6Requests for Production
`Page 3 of 4
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT D
`
`CAUSE NO: DC-20-03275
`
`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`ve
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN
`Defendant.
`
`BIJAYA HUMAGAIN,Individually
`and Derivatively on behalf of JAY
`KALI SON,INC.
`Counter-Plaintiff,
`
`ve
`
`JAY KALI SON,INC.,
`Counter-Defendant,
`
`and
`
`PRAJJWOL ACHARYA,
`Individually,
`Third-Party Counter-Defendant.
`
`LhSALNLPLALPLNLNSLLnSI)LPLNSHLhLNLPLPLrLhLPLHLP
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT
`
`192NP JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
`
`PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT BIJAYA HUMAGAIN’S
`EIGHT SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF
`JAY K