Non-Party James P. King, Accountant For Dr. Jerome Swartz, Memorandum in Opposition To Motion To Compel Discovery.

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT A
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
THE WIMBLEDON FUND, SPC (CLASS TT),
Plaintiff,
v.
DAVID BERGSTEIN, JEROME SWARTZ,
AARON GRUNFELD, and KIARASH K. JAM,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 4:15-cv-02193
DECLARATION OF JEROME JERRY SWARTZ

I, Jerome Jerry Swartz, Ph.D., declare as follows:
1.
I am a Defendant in the above-captioned action. The statements in this
Declaration are from my personal, firsthand knowledge, and if called and sworn as a witness, I
could and would testify as follows.
2.
I am a citizen and resident of New York, and intend to remain there. I was born
in 1940. I have lived, studied and worked in New York State my entire adult life.
3.
I do not do business in Texas.
4.
I do not own, lease or control any real or personal property in Texas.
5.
I have never paid real or personal property taxes in Texas.
6.
I do not maintain bank accounts in Texas.
7.
I do not employ any employees in Texas.
8.
I earned a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Polytechnic University in
Brooklyn, New York.
One of my professors was Professor Leonard Bergstein; Professor
Bergstein and I became friends.
9.
Among my professional achievements, I patented various technologies relating to
hand-held laser bar code scanners now ubiquitous in consumer retail stores and other
applications. I co-founded Symbol Technologies in 1973 on Long Island, New York; Symbol
was a leader in handheld laser bar code scanning devices and related technologies. Symbol was
acquired by Motorola Corporation in 2007.
10.
In 1994, I founded The Swartz Foundation, an organization dedicated to exploring
the application of physics, mathematics and computer engineering principles to neuroscience. I

am the Chairman of The Swartz Foundation.
11.
son, David.
Through my friendship with Professor Bergstein, I became acquainted with his

Beginning around 2007, David would approach me, directly or through my
representatives (chiefly James King, my longtime accountant) about various business

opportunities in which David was interested. Between August 2007 and June 2008, I invested
more than $6 million in Davids ventures. I also consulted for Davids ventures, giving him the
benefit of my business and technical experience. My investments in Davids ventures were
never repaid.
12.
In July 2008, I suffered a severe, debilitating stroke and required brain surgery. I
retired from active business affairs following my stroke.

13.
In or around November 2010, David raised the idea of forming a company jointly
owned by myself and him (or an entity owned by him) called Swartz Management Company.
Davids idea was for me, through Swartz Management Company, to assist a Texas company
named Geotag Inc. with its intellectual property issues. My advisors and I evaluated whether to
enter into co-ownership with such a venture, but ultimately I decided against becoming affiliated
with Geotag, and rejected the opportunity. I did not agree to join a company with David, and I
did not give him permission to use my name in a company I did not own or control. I considered
the matter closed after that.
14.
I learned in November 2011 that David was using my name in the company called
Swartz IP Services Group Inc. (SIP). Both Mr. King and I instructed David to remove my
name from the company.
15.
I was never an employee, officer, director or shareholder of SIP.
I never
participated in SIPs management. I never controlled any accounts belonging to SIP at any
financial institution or contributed any capital to SIP. I never used SIPs offices, equipment or
employees for any purpose. I never signed a document on SIPs behalf. When I learned that SIP
was doing business using my name in November 2011, I asked Bergstein to change its name.
16.
I never discussed SIPs business with Albert Hallac or Jeffrey Hallac. Although
Jeffrey Hallac asked me to invest in the Wimbledon Fund in March and April 2012, I declined to
make any investment in Wimbledon, directly or indirectly.
17.
I never received payment from Cascade Technologies Corp., a company that had
appointed me to its advisory board.

18.
I declined to make any investment in the ClearSky Power & Technology Fund.
19.
In April 2012, I received $80,000 by wire from a Bergstein company called
Integrated Administration. The payment was under a consulting agreement I entered into with
that company, and was compensation for services I had performed for services years earlier. I
received another $20,000 from the same company in May 2013. Those were the only payments I
received from Integrated Administration.
EXHIBIT B

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Requesting Party,
v.
JAMES P. KING,
16 MISC 140
Responding Party.
______________________________________________________________________________
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Plaintiff,
v.
Defendants.
Case No. 2:16-CV-02287-CAS-AJW
DECLARATION OF LANCE C. ARNEY

I, Lance C. Arney, declare as follows:
1.
I am a counsel for Defendant Jerome Swartz and Non-Party James P. King, of the
firm Moulton, Wilson & Arney, LLP. The statements in this Declaration are from my personal,
firsthand knowledge, and if called and sworn as a witness, I could and would testify as follows.
2.
I make this Declaration in support of Non-Party James P. Kings Memorandum in
Opposition to Motion To Compel Discovery (the Opposition).

3.
Plaintiff The Wimbledon Fund, SPC (Class TT) (the Fund) has moved to
consolidate the Bergstein case (in which Dr. Swartz is also a defendant) with Case No. 2:15-cv-
06633-CAS-AJW, also pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California. A true and correct copy of the minutes of the Scheduling Conference is attached as
Exhibit 1. According to those minutes, that case is set for a jury trial beginning October 24,
2017.
4.
A true and correct copy of Non-Party James P. Kings amended responses and
objections to the Funds subpoena, served April 18, 2016, is attached as Exhibit 2.
5.
The Funds subpoena requests documents relating to Bergstein and other
individuals and entities. Based on the records in the case, including but not limited to Dr.
Swartzs declaration, the business relationship between Dr. Swartz and Bergstein began in
2007nine years ago. I am also aware that Dr. Swartz is involved in a divorce lawsuit in New
York state court which is set for trial this summer, and that Mr. King has been heavily involved
in gathering documents for that proceeding as well. In my opinion, and based on my experience
with discovery in this and other cases, it will reasonably take four to six weeks for Mr. King to
gather the additional Bergstein documents from his files, forward the documents to me for
review, and for our firm to prepare the documents for production to the Fund and the other
parties.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed April 19, 2016, at Houston, Texas.
___________________________
Lance C. Arney
EXHIBIT 1
Case 2:15-cv-06633-CAS-AJW
Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1
Document
Document
123 7-2
FiledFiled
03/28/16
04/19/16
PagePage
1 of 15 ofPage
15 ID #:5810
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
CV15-6633-CAS(AJWx)
Title
The Wimbledon Fund, SC CLass TT v. Graybox LLC et al
Present: The Honorable
Date
March 28, 2016
CHRISTINA A. SNYDER, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Connie Lee
Lisa Gonzalez
N/A
Deputy Clerk
Court Reporter / Recorder
Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:
Attorneys Present for Defendants:
James Walker
Rebecca Wester
Patrick McGarrigle
Patricia Glaser
Richard Buckner
Tracey Hom
Proceedings:
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
Hearing held and counsel are present. The Court confers with counsel and
schedules the following dates:
Request for leave to file amended pleadings or to add parties: April 25, 2016;
Settlement Completion Cutoff: July 28, 2017;
Factual Discovery Cut-off: March 31, 2017;
Last Day to File Motions: September 9, 2017;
Exchange of Expert Reports Cut-off: July 25, 2017;
Exchange of Rebuttal Reports Cut-off: August 24, 2017;
Expert Discovery Cut-off: September 20, 2017;
Status Conference re: Settlement (11:00 A.M.): August 14, 2017;
Pretrial Conference/Hearing on Motions in Limine (11:00 A.M.): October 2, 2017; and
Jury Trial (9:30 A.M.): October 24, 2017.
Motions in limine shall be noticed for the same date and time of the Pretrial Conference,
and filed 28 days prior thereto. Motions in limine/oppositions shall not exceed five (5)
pages in length and no replies will be accepted.
00
Initials of Preparer
19
CL
cc: ADR
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 2

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Requesting Party,
v.
JAMES P. KING,
16 MISC 140
Responding Party.
______________________________________________________________________________
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Plaintiff,
v.
Defendants.
Case No. 2:16-CV-02287-CAS-AJW
JAMES P. KINGS AMENDED OBJECTIONS TO DOCUMENT

REQUESTS UNDER RULE 45
James P. King serves these Amended Objections under Rule 45(d)(2)(B) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure to the document requests in the Subpoena dated February 12, 2016, by
Plaintiff The Wimbledon Fund, SPC (Class TT).
GENERAL OBJECTIONS AND OBJECTIONS
TO DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS
1.
King objects to each request for production to the extent it seeks documents
protected from disclosure by any privilege or other protective doctrine, including, but not limited
to, the attorney client privilege, the work product doctrine, the trial preparation materials
!
!
1
!
doctrine, documents prepared in anticipation of or in connection with litigation, documents

precluded from disclosure by protective agreements or orders in other litigation, and confidential
or proprietary business and/or personal information of persons and entities not parties to this
litigation. The production of any document or information for which it is later discovered a
claim of privilege or other protective doctrine applies shall not be deemed a waiver of such
privilege or protective doctrine. Privileged and/or otherwise protected documents will not be
produced. King is withholding attorney-client communications and trial preparation material
sent, received, or created by Swartzs attorneys.
2.
King objects to Wimbledons instructions to the extent they impose burdens or
obligations on King beyond those required or allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
3.
King objects to the time and place of the requested production. Documents will
be produced in response to this subpoena through Kings counsel, on or before May 31, 2016.
4.
Each of the foregoing General Objections and Objections to Definitions and
Instructions is incorporated into each of the subsequent responses set forth herein. No response
is intended to be a waiver of these objections. Additional specific objections made in response to
a particular request are not intended to, and do not, waive these General Objections and
Objections to Definitions.
5.
King objects to the form requested for the production of electronically stored
information as unduly burdensome. King does not have access to Relativity or Concordance.
Any electronically stored information produced by King will be produced in a reasonably usable
form.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES
1.
All documents and communications exchanged between you and Swartz concerning or
relating to Bergstein, Jam, Grunfeld, SIP, Swartz Management Company, the Fund, Weston,
!
!
2
!
GeoTag, Cascade, ClearSky, Integrated, and/or the Breach-of-Contract Lawsuit.

RESPONSE:
King will produce non-privileged responsive documents.
2.
All documents and communications exchanged between you and Bergstein concerning or
relating to Swartz, SIP, Swartz Management Company, the Fund, Weston, GeoTag, Cascade,
ClearSky, Integrated, and/or the Breach-of-Contract Lawsuit.
RESPONSE:
King will produce responsive documents.
3.
All documents and communications exchanged between you and Jam concerning or
RESPONSE:
4.
All documents and communications exchanged between you and Grunfeld concerning or
RESPONSE:
5.
All documents and communications exchanged between you and McArthur concerning or
RESPONSE:
Objection. The request is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and seeks documents that are
irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, to the
extent it seeks all documents and communications concerning or relating to Swartz. Subject to
the foregoing objections, King will produce non-privileged responsive documents relating to SIP,
Swartz Management Company, the Fund, Weston, GeoTag, Cascade, ClearSky, Integrated,
and/or the Breach-of-Contract Lawsuit.
6.
All agreements between: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) SIP.
!
!
3
!
RESPONSE:
None.
7.
All documents and communications concerning or relating to monetary transactions
involving: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) SIP.
RESPONSE:
None.
8.
All agreements between: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Swartz
Management Company.
RESPONSE:
None.
9.
involving: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Swartz Management Company.
RESPONSE:
None.
10.
All agreements between: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Bergstein.
RESPONSE:
11.
involving: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Bergstein.
RESPONSE:
12.
All agreements between: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Bergsteins
ventures, as used in paragraph 11 of Swartzs declaration filed as Doc. No. 55-3 in the Lawsuit.
RESPONSE:
!
!
4
!
13.
involving: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Bergsteins ventures, as used in
paragraph 11 of Swartzs declaration filed as Doc. No. 55-3 in the Lawsuit.
RESPONSE:
14.
All agreements between: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Cascade.
RESPONSE:
None.
15.
involving: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Cascade.
RESPONSE:
None.
16.
All agreements between: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Integrated.
RESPONSE:
17.
involving: (i) Swartz and/or The Swartz Foundation; and (ii) Cascade.
RESPONSE:
None.
18.
All non-privileged documents and communications concerning or relating to
investigations of Bergstein, Jam, and/or Grunfeld performed by individuals retained by Swartz
and/or Swartzs family members.
RESPONSE:
None.
19.
All non-privileged documents and communications between: (i) you; and (ii) Howard
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to Bergstein.
!
!
5
!
RESPONSE:
20.
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to SIP.
RESPONSE:
21.
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to Swartz
Management Company.
RESPONSE:
22.
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to Integrated.
RESPONSE:
23.
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to Cascade.
RESPONSE:
24.
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to Weston.
RESPONSE:
25.
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or Shanah Swartz-Gordon concerning or relating to the Fund.
RESPONSE:
!
!
6
!
26.
All engagement contracts and/or retainer agreements between: (i) you; and (ii) Howard
Gordon, David Hennes, and/or their respective law firms reflecting your agreement to
engagement either one or both of them as your legal counsel for any purpose.
RESPONSE:
None.
27.
All engagement contracts and/or retainer agreements between: (i) Swartz; and (ii)
Howard Gordon, David Hennes, and/or their respective law firms reflecting Swartzs agreement
to engage either one or both of them as his legal counsel for any purpose.
RESPONSE:
28.
All documents and communications concerning or relating to meetings between Swartz
and Eugene Scher.
RESPONSE:
29.
The most recent agreement between you and Swartz concerning or relating to the
accounting and/or advisory services provided by you to Swartz.
RESPONSE:
None.
30.
The most recent agreement between you and The Swartz Foundation concerning or
relating to the accounting and/or advisory services provided by you to The Swartz Foundation.
RESPONSE:
None.
31.
To the extent that they are not responsive to the preceding categories of documents to be
produced, any additional, non-privileged documents and communications concerning or relating
to SIP, Bergstein, Jam, Grunfeld, Swartz Management Company, the Fund, Weston, GeoTag,
Cascade, ClearSky, Integrated, and/or the Breach-of-Contract Lawsuit.
RESPONSE:
!
!
7
!
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Cynthia R. Levin Moulton_____________
Cynthia R. Levin Moulton
State Bar No. 12253450
800 Taft Street
Houston, Texas 77019
Telephone: (713) 353-6699
Telecopier: (713) 353-6698
Email: cmoulton@moultonwilsonarney.com
ATTORNEY-IN-CHARGE FOR
DEFENDANT JEROME SWARTZ
AND NON-PARTY JAMES P. KING
Of Counsel:
Moulton, Wilson & Arney, L.L.P.
Lance C. Arney
State Bar No. 00796137
800 Taft Street
Houston, Texas 77019
Telephone : (713) 353-6699
Telecopier: (713) 353-6698
Email: larney@moultonwilsonarney.com
!
!
8
!
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served
by email on the following counsel of record on April 18, 2016.
COLE SCHOTZ P.C.
James W. Walker
Justin S. Levy
2515 McKinney Ave., Suite 1350
Dallas, Texas 75201
jwalker@coleschotz.com
jlevy@coleschotz.com
LAW OFFICES OF HENRY N. JANNOL,

A PROFESSIONAL CORP.
Paul H. Levine
Henry N. Jannol
10850 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 825
Los Angeles, California 90024-4644
phl@smbgroup.com
hnj@smbgroup.com
COLE SCHOTZ P.C.

Leo V. Leyva
James T. Kim
900 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022-1906
lleyva@coleschotz.com
jkim@coleschotz.com
BECK REDDEN LLP

Michael E. Richardson
1221 McKinney Street, Suite 4500
Houston, Texas 77010-2010
mrichardson@beckredden.com
GLASER
WEIL
FINK
HOWARD
AVCHEN & SHAPIRO, LLP
G. Jill Basinger
Richard Buckner
10250 Constellation Blvd., 19th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90067
jbasinger@glaserweil.com
rbuckner@glaserweil.com
/s/ Cynthia R. Levin Moulton________________

Cynthia R. Levin Moulton
!
!
9
!

Non-Party James P. King, Accountant For Dr. Jerome Swartz, Memorandum in Opposition To Motion To Compel Discovery.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Non-Party James P. King, Accountant For Dr. Jerome Swartz, Memorandum in Opposition To Motion To Compel Discovery.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 2 of 6

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 3 of 6

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 4 of 6

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 5 of 6

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7 Filed 04/19/16 Page 6 of 6

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 5

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 2 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DAVID BERGSTEIN, JEROME SWARTZ,

AARON GRUNFELD, and KIARASH K. JAM,

Civil Action No. 4:15-cv-02193

DECLARATION OF JEROME JERRY SWARTZ

I am a Defendant in the above-captioned action. The statements in this

I do not do business in Texas.

I do not own, lease or control any real or personal property in Texas.

I have never paid real or personal property taxes in Texas.

I do not maintain bank accounts in Texas.

I do not employ any employees in Texas.

I earned a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Polytechnic University in

Brooklyn, New York.

One of my professors was Professor Leonard Bergstein; Professor

Bergstein and I became friends.

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 3 of 5

Among my professional achievements, I patented various technologies relating to

In 1994, I founded The Swartz Foundation, an organization dedicated to exploring

the application of physics, mathematics and computer engineering principles to neuroscience. I

Through my friendship with Professor Bergstein, I became acquainted with his

representatives (chiefly James King, my longtime accountant) about various business

retired from active business affairs following my stroke.

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 4 of 5

I was never an employee, officer, director or shareholder of SIP.

appointed me to its advisory board.

In April 2012, I received $80,000 by wire from a Bergstein company called

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-1 Filed 04/19/16 Page 5 of 5

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-2 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 15

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-2 Filed 04/19/16 Page 2 of 15

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DAVID BERGSTEIN, JEROME SWARTZ,

AARON GRUNFELD, and KIARASH K. JAM,

Case No. 2:16-CV-02287-CAS-AJW

DECLARATION OF LANCE C. ARNEY

I make this Declaration in support of Non-Party James P. Kings Memorandum in

Opposition to Motion To Compel Discovery (the Opposition).

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-2 Filed 04/19/16 Page 3 of 15

The Funds subpoena requests documents relating to Bergstein and other

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-2 Filed 04/19/16 Page 4 of 15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

The Wimbledon Fund, SC CLass TT v. Graybox LLC et al

Present: The Honorable

March 28, 2016

CHRISTINA A. SNYDER, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-2 Filed 04/19/16 Page 6 of 15

Case 1:16-mc-00140-P1 Document 7-2 Filed 04/19/16 Page 7 of 15

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DAVID BERGSTEIN, JEROME SWARTZ,

AARON GRUNFELD, and KIARASH K. JAM,

Case No. 2:16-CV-02287-CAS-AJW

JAMES P. KINGS AMENDED OBJECTIONS TO DOCUMENT