Free Stipulation - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02844-JSW

Document 23-2

Filed 08/27/2007

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Joel A. Goodman (FL Bar No. 802468) Admitted pro hac vice Email: [email protected] Goodman & Nekvasil, P.A. 14020 Roosevelt Blvd., Suite 808 P.O. Box 17709 Clearwater, Florida 33762 Telephone: 727-524-8486 Facsimile: 727-524-8786 Cary S. Lapidus (CA Bar No. 123983) Email: [email protected] Law Offices of Cary S. Lapidus 425 California Street, Suite 2100 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 296-7101 Facsimile: (415) 296-7821 Local counsel Attorneys for Defendant Daniel Maria Cui

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I, Joel A. Goodman, declare and state as follows: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law before all courts of the State of Florida. I THE O.N. EQUITY SALES COMPANY, ) Case No. C 07-02844 JSW ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) DECLARATION OF JOEL A. ) GOODMAN DANIEL MARIA CUI, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

am a member of Goodman & Nekvasil, P.A., counsel for the Defendant in this cause and in the underlying arbitration. I am fully familiar with the facts set forth below. If called to testify at trial I would and could competently testify to the following. 2. Unlike most other cases, the ultimate issue for resolution in this case is narrow­the

"arbitrability" of Defendant's claims against Plaintiff as submitted to the arbitration panel of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. ("NASD"). As such, the parties anticipate filing three primary sets of motions for this case: (1) one set by both parties relating to the preliminary

-1[Declaration of Joel A. Goodman]

Case No. C 07-02844 JSW

Case 3:07-cv-02844-JSW

Document 23-2

Filed 08/27/2007

Page 2 of 2

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

issue of discovery, (2) a motion by ONESCO requesting that its motion for preliminary injunction be consolidated with the final hearing on the merits, and (3) a third set by both parties relating directly to the issue of arbitrability. 3. On the issue of discovery, Plaintiff expects to file a motion for an order authorizing

the parties to engage in immediate discovery on the issue of arbitrability, and Defendant expects to file a motion for protective order concerning discovery. Because these motions filed by Plaintiff and Defendant go to critical procedural aspects of this case, the parties agree that they have substantial case law and argument to present to this Court. 4. On the issue of arbitrability, Plaintiff expects to file a motion for preliminary

injunction, and Defendant expects to file a motion to compel arbitration. The parties have substantial case law to present to this Court on these motions. These motions are potentially dispositive of this case and are akin to a motion for summary judgment. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Dated this 27th day of August, 2007.

/s/ Joel A. Goodman Joel A. Goodman Counsel for Defendant

-2[Declaration of Joel A. Goodman]

Case No. C 07-02844 JSW