Miller v. Weinmann
Opinion
1 RNOevBa Ld.a P BHaILr LNIPoS. 8225 Rob.phillips@fisherbroyles.com 5670 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800 3 Los Angeles, California 90036 Telephone: (702) 518-1239 4 Counsel for Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 Dennis R. Miller, an individual, and Case No.: 2:19-CV-02213-JCM- 8 DJA Omni Block, a Nevada Corporation, 9 Plaintiff, 10 v. JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER 11 Edward M. Weinmann, an individual, 12 and Advanced Masonry Consulting 13 Inc., a Florida Corporation,
14 Defendants.
Edward M. Weinmann, an individual, 16
17 Counterclaimant,
18 v.
20 Dennis R. Miller, an individual, and Omni Block, a Nevada Corporation, 21 Counter- 22 Defendants. 23 24 25
27 1 Dennis Miller (“Miller”) and Omni Block (“Omni Block”) (collectively 2 “Plaintiffs”) and Edward M. Weinmann (“Weinmann”) and Advanced Masonry 3 Consulting, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”), by and through their respective counsel 4 of record, hereby submit this Joint Pretrial Order. 5 I. 7 A. Plaintiffs’ Contentions 8 This is a trademark infringement and unfair competition action arising from 9 10 an Independent Contractor Agreement (“ICA”) between Miller and Weinmann. 11 Plaintiffs allege that Weinmann has used Plaintiffs’ trademark for the name Omni 12 Block to secure agreements to supply insulated cement blocks on various 13 construction projects. 14 Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants were seeking to usurp projects for 15 16 their own benefit at the detriment of Plaintiffs. Even after the ICA was purportedly 17 terminated, Weinmann continued to pose as a representative of Omni Block while 18 interacting with Plaintiffs’ Licensees. Weinmann’s actions were orchestrated to 19 determine the nature of confidential projects so that he and his company Advanced 20 21 Masonry could bid on jobs against Plaintiffs and its Licensees requiring cement 22 blocks and insulating inserts. 23 Weinmann and Advanced Masonry have improperly used Plaintiffs’ 24 trademark to interfere with at least two major projects, namely the (i) Orlando 25 International Airport (“Airport Project”) and (ii) a building to be built at 640 26 27 Columbia Avenue in Brooklyn, New York (“640 Columbia Project”). Plaintiffs’ 1 Licensees bid on both projects and were considered the front runners to secure the 2 same. That is, until Defendants began interfering with the projects for their own 3 benefit by using Plaintiffs’ trademark and otherwise unfairly competing with 4 Plaintiffs’ by purporting to remain associated with Plaintiffs’ business and passing 5 off their insulated cement blocks as the Omni Block manufactured/supplied by 6 Plaintiffs. 7 8 B. Defendants’ Contentions 9 Defendants contend that this is a spite case, and that Plaintiffs are aware that 10 their claims against Defendants are baseless. This Court has already entered 11 summary judgment against Plaintiffs on six of their eight claims, and thus Plaintiffs 12 have two remaining claims: (1) trademark infringement and (2) unfair competition 13 14 under the Lanham Act. Those remaining claims also lack merit, and at trial Plaintiffs 15 will be unable to establish any evidence of customer confusion. Further, the 16 evidence will establish that any use by Defendants of the Omni mark was protected 17 by the doctrine of fair use. 18 19 Defendants have asserted counterclaims for (1) breach of contract, (2) 20 contractual breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) 21 intentional interference with contractual relations1 and (4) fraud. Defendants allege 22 that Plaintiffs failed to pay Weinmann all commissions owed pursuant to the ICA. 23 Additionally, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs knowingly made fraudulent 24 25 representations regarding the Omni Block product’s R value. The evidence will 26 show that even though the Omni Block’s Thermal Tables and Calculations contain 27
1 1 the signature and stamp of an architect, in reality the calculations were simply 2 calculated by Miller and have no basis in fact. Had Weinmann known the falsity of 3 the Omni Block R values, he never would have associated himself with the company 4 or Miller. 5 II. 7 This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this controversary 8 under 28 U.S.C. §1332 as the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in 9 10 controversary exceeds $75,000.
13 The following facts are admitted by the parties and require no proof: 14 1. Omni Block Inc. is a corporation formed in 1993 under the laws of the 15 state of Nevada. 16 17 2. Dennis Miller is the founder and President of Omni Block, Inc. 18 3. Omni Block Inc. is a business focused on concrete building blocks and 19 compatible insulating inserts. 20 4. Edward Weinmann is a resident of the state of Florida. 21 5. Advanced Masonry Consulting, Inc. is a corporation formed in 2018 22 23 under the laws of the state of Florida. 24 6. Edward Weinmann is the founder and President of Advanced Masonry 25 Consulting, Inc. 26 7. In 2006, Edward Weinmann first learned of Omni Block, Inc. and 27 contacted Dennis Miller regarding the Omni Block Inc. business. 1 8. On or about August 24, 2012, Dennis Miller and Edward Weinmann 2 entered into an Independent Contractor Agreement under which Edward Weinmann 3 was to provide services to Omni Block Inc. 4 9. On or about February 18, 2019, Dennis Miller and Edward Weinmann 5 executed a Termination Agreement of the Independent Contractor Agreement. 6 10. Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit by filing their Complaint on December 7 8 23, 2019. 9 11. Edward Weinmann filed his Counterclaims against Plaintiffs on 10 September 22, 2020. 11 IV. 12 STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS 13 14 At this time, the Parties are not aware of any facts, though not admitted, that 15 will not be contested at trial by evidence to the contrary. 16 V.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 RNOevBa Ld.a P BHaILr LNIPoS. 8225 Rob.phillips@fisherbroyles.com 5670 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800 3 Los Angeles, California 90036 Telephone: (702) 518-1239 4 Counsel for Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 Dennis R. Miller, an individual, and Case No.: 2:19-CV-02213-JCM- 8 DJA Omni Block, a Nevada Corporation, 9 Plaintiff, 10 v. JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER 11 Edward M. Weinmann, an individual, 12 and Advanced Masonry Consulting 13 Inc., a Florida Corporation,
14 Defendants.
Edward M. Weinmann, an individual, 16
17 Counterclaimant,
18 v.
20 Dennis R. Miller, an individual, and Omni Block, a Nevada Corporation, 21 Counter- 22 Defendants. 23 24 25
27 1 Dennis Miller (“Miller”) and Omni Block (“Omni Block”) (collectively 2 “Plaintiffs”) and Edward M. Weinmann (“Weinmann”) and Advanced Masonry 3 Consulting, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”), by and through their respective counsel 4 of record, hereby submit this Joint Pretrial Order. 5 I. 7 A. Plaintiffs’ Contentions 8 This is a trademark infringement and unfair competition action arising from 9 10 an Independent Contractor Agreement (“ICA”) between Miller and Weinmann. 11 Plaintiffs allege that Weinmann has used Plaintiffs’ trademark for the name Omni 12 Block to secure agreements to supply insulated cement blocks on various 13 construction projects. 14 Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants were seeking to usurp projects for 15 16 their own benefit at the detriment of Plaintiffs. Even after the ICA was purportedly 17 terminated, Weinmann continued to pose as a representative of Omni Block while 18 interacting with Plaintiffs’ Licensees. Weinmann’s actions were orchestrated to 19 determine the nature of confidential projects so that he and his company Advanced 20 21 Masonry could bid on jobs against Plaintiffs and its Licensees requiring cement 22 blocks and insulating inserts. 23 Weinmann and Advanced Masonry have improperly used Plaintiffs’ 24 trademark to interfere with at least two major projects, namely the (i) Orlando 25 International Airport (“Airport Project”) and (ii) a building to be built at 640 26 27 Columbia Avenue in Brooklyn, New York (“640 Columbia Project”). Plaintiffs’ 1 Licensees bid on both projects and were considered the front runners to secure the 2 same. That is, until Defendants began interfering with the projects for their own 3 benefit by using Plaintiffs’ trademark and otherwise unfairly competing with 4 Plaintiffs’ by purporting to remain associated with Plaintiffs’ business and passing 5 off their insulated cement blocks as the Omni Block manufactured/supplied by 6 Plaintiffs. 7 8 B. Defendants’ Contentions 9 Defendants contend that this is a spite case, and that Plaintiffs are aware that 10 their claims against Defendants are baseless. This Court has already entered 11 summary judgment against Plaintiffs on six of their eight claims, and thus Plaintiffs 12 have two remaining claims: (1) trademark infringement and (2) unfair competition 13 14 under the Lanham Act. Those remaining claims also lack merit, and at trial Plaintiffs 15 will be unable to establish any evidence of customer confusion. Further, the 16 evidence will establish that any use by Defendants of the Omni mark was protected 17 by the doctrine of fair use. 18 19 Defendants have asserted counterclaims for (1) breach of contract, (2) 20 contractual breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) 21 intentional interference with contractual relations1 and (4) fraud. Defendants allege 22 that Plaintiffs failed to pay Weinmann all commissions owed pursuant to the ICA. 23 Additionally, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs knowingly made fraudulent 24 25 representations regarding the Omni Block product’s R value. The evidence will 26 show that even though the Omni Block’s Thermal Tables and Calculations contain 27
1 1 the signature and stamp of an architect, in reality the calculations were simply 2 calculated by Miller and have no basis in fact. Had Weinmann known the falsity of 3 the Omni Block R values, he never would have associated himself with the company 4 or Miller. 5 II. 7 This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this controversary 8 under 28 U.S.C. §1332 as the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in 9 10 controversary exceeds $75,000.
13 The following facts are admitted by the parties and require no proof: 14 1. Omni Block Inc. is a corporation formed in 1993 under the laws of the 15 state of Nevada. 16 17 2. Dennis Miller is the founder and President of Omni Block, Inc. 18 3. Omni Block Inc. is a business focused on concrete building blocks and 19 compatible insulating inserts. 20 4. Edward Weinmann is a resident of the state of Florida. 21 5. Advanced Masonry Consulting, Inc. is a corporation formed in 2018 22 23 under the laws of the state of Florida. 24 6. Edward Weinmann is the founder and President of Advanced Masonry 25 Consulting, Inc. 26 7. In 2006, Edward Weinmann first learned of Omni Block, Inc. and 27 contacted Dennis Miller regarding the Omni Block Inc. business. 1 8. On or about August 24, 2012, Dennis Miller and Edward Weinmann 2 entered into an Independent Contractor Agreement under which Edward Weinmann 3 was to provide services to Omni Block Inc. 4 9. On or about February 18, 2019, Dennis Miller and Edward Weinmann 5 executed a Termination Agreement of the Independent Contractor Agreement. 6 10. Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit by filing their Complaint on December 7 8 23, 2019. 9 11. Edward Weinmann filed his Counterclaims against Plaintiffs on 10 September 22, 2020. 11 IV. 12 STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS 13 14 At this time, the Parties are not aware of any facts, though not admitted, that 15 will not be contested at trial by evidence to the contrary. 16 V.
18 The following are the issues of fact to be tried and determined at trial: 19 20 1. Do Plaintiffs own a valid, protectable mark? 21 2. Did Defendants use Plaintiffs’ Omni Block trademark or confusingly 22 similar mark without authorization with respect to the Airport Project and/or the 640 23 Columbia Project? 24 25 3. Did Defendants use of Plaintiffs’ Omni Block trademark without 26 authorization likely cause confusion? 27 4. Did Defendants use of Plaintiffs’ Omni Block trademark constitute fair 1 use? 2 5. Did Defendants pass off their cement blocks and/or insulation inserts 3 as those of Omni Block with respect to the Airport Project and/or the 640 Columbia 4 Project? 5 6. Did Plaintiffs perform under the terms of the ICA? 6 7. To the extent Plaintiffs did not perform under the terms of the ICA , 7 8 was that nonperformance excused? 9 8. Did Plaintiffs perform in a manner that was in violation of or unfaithful 10 to the spirit of the ICA (the terms of the contract are complied with in a literal sense, 11 but the spirit of the contract is breached)? 12 9. Did Plaintiffs make false and misleading statements to Edward 13 14 Weinmann regarding the R value of the Omni Block product with the intent that 15 Edward Weinmann would rely upon those false statements? 16 10. Did Edward Weinmann justifiably rely upon Plaintiffs’ false 17 representations regarding the R value of the Omni Block product? 18 19 11. Was Edward Weinmann damaged as a result of his reliance upon 20 Plaintiffs’ false representations regarding the R value of the Omni Block product? 21 14. Are Plaintiffs entitled to damages and, if yes, what damages will 22 compensate Plaintiffs? 23 15. Is Weinmann entitled to damages and, if yes, what damages will 24 25 compensate Weinmann? 26 27 1 VI. STATEMENT OF ISSUES OF LAW 2 A. Trademark Infringement 3 4 1. Do Plaintiffs own a valid protectable mark? 5 2. Did Plaintiffs establish common law trademark rights? 6 3. Did Defendants use the same or a similar mark in commerce without 7 Plaintiffs’ consent? 8 4. To the extent Defendants used a same or similar mark, did the use of 9 10 the mark by Defendants likely cause confusion as to the affiliation, connection or 11 association of Defendants with Plaintiffs, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or 12 approval of Defendants’ goods, services or commercial activities by another person? 13 5. To the extent that Defendants used a same or similar mark, did the use 14 15 of the mark by Defendants likely cause confusion as based on the factors set forth in 16 In re E.I. DuPont du Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 U.S.P.Q. 563 (C.C.P.A. 17 1973). 18 19 6. In the event it is determined that Defendants used the same or a similar 20 mark, did that use constitute fair use? 21 7. If it is determined that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of damages, 22 have Plaintiffs established the amount of his damages with reasonable certainty? 23 24 8. If it is determined that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of damages, 25 were the established amount of damages reasonable and foreseeable? 26 27 1 B. Unfair Competition 2 1. Did Defendants, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any 3 container of goods, use in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or 4 any combination thereof, or any false or misleading representation of fact, which is 5 likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake or to deceive as to the affiliation, 6 connection, or association of such persons with another person, or as to the origin, 7 8 sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by 9 another person. 10 2. In the event it is determined that Defendants used the same or a similar 11 mark, did that use constitute fair use? 12 13 3. If it is determined that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of damages, 14 have Plaintiffs established the amount of his damages with reasonable certainty? 15 4. If it is determined that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of damages, 16 were the established amount of damages reasonable and foreseeable? 17 18 C. Defendants’ Counterclaims 19 1. Did Plaintiffs breach the ICA? 20 2. Did Plaintiffs breach the implied covenant of good faith and fair 21 dealing? 22 3. Did Plaintiffs' breach of the ICA cause Weinmann harm? 23 24 4. Did Plaintiffs knowingly make false representations to Weinmann 25 regarding the R value of the Omni Block product? 26 5. Was Weinmann’s reliance upon Plaintiffs’ false statements reasonable? 27 6. If it is determined that Weinmann is entitled to an award of damages, is 1 Weinmann able to establish the amount of his damages with reasonable certainty? 2 7. If it is determined that Weinmann is entitled to an award of damages, 3 were Weinmann’s claimed damages reasonable and foreseeable? 4 8. If it is determined that Weinmann is entitled to an award of damages, 5 did Weinmann mitigate his damages? 6 VII. 7 TRIAL EXHIBITS 8 A. EXHIBITS 9 10 Exhibits 1 and 2 hereto list Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ trial exhibit lists and 11 objections thereto. 12 B. DEPOSITIONS 13 1. Plaintiffs will offer the following depositions: 14 Edward Weinmann. 62:1-12; 64:22-65:7; 65:1-66-5; 98:11-99-8; 15 16 113:5-115:16; 117:3-118:5; 117:3-118:5; 121:5-122:5; 146:14-147:1, 151:2- 17 10; 158:3-159:3; 161:1-17; 164:15-25; 166:1-167:2; 186:11-188:5; 198:23- 18 199:10. 19 20 2. Defendants will offer the following depositions:
21 Dennis Miller. 12:8-13:7; 15:15-17:10; 18:25-31:13; 32:22-36:9; 22 36:18-37:16; 39:2-40:13; 47:12-50:1; 52:18-57:14; 119:3-18; 206:19-221:22. 23 24 C. OBJECTIONS TO DEPOSITIONS:
25 1. Defendants Object to Plaintiffs’ Depositions as Follows: 26 Edward Weinmann: 27 1 62:1-12. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 62:13-63:2.
2 113:5-115:16. Hearsay (FRE 801). Lack of Personal Knowledge (FRE 602). Relevance (FRE 402). 3
4 117:3-118:5. Relevance (FRE 402).
5 121:5-122:5. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 119:4- 6 121:4.
7 146:14-147:1. Hearsay (FRE 801). Incomplete (FRE 106), counter 8 designation 147:6-16.
9 158:3-159:3. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 158:1-2, 10 159:4-19, 161:18-22.
11 164:15-25. Lack of Personal Knowledge (FRE 602); Incomplete 12 (FRE 106), counter designation 165:1-4.
13 166:1-167:2. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 167:3- 14 168:25.
15 2. Plaintiffs Object to Defendants’ Depositions as Follows: 16 17 Dennis Miller:
18 12:8-13:7. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 11:9-14:2 and 19 relevance (FRE 402).
20 15:15-17:10. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 15:6-18:8 21 and relevance (FRE 402).
22 18:25-31:13. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 18:21-31:13 23 relevance (FRE 402).
24 32:22-36:9. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 13:16-36:10 25 relevance (FRE 402).
26 36:18-37:16. Relevance (FRE 402). 27 1 39:2-40:13. Incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 38:23-40:13 and relevance (FRE 402). 2 47:12-50:1. Relevance (FRE 402). 3
4 52:18-57:14. Hearsay (FRE 801), incomplete (FRE 106), counter designation 50:2-57:14 and relevance (FRE 402). 5
6 119:3-18. Relevance (FRE 402).
7 206:19-221:22. Hearsay (FRE 801), incomplete (FRE 106), counter 8 designation 206:2-222:5 and relevance (FRE 402).
9 VIII.
11 Plaintiffs and Defendants each intend to use electronic evidence for purposes 12 of jury deliberations.
13 IV.
15 The following witnesses may be called by the parties at trial: 16
18 1. Dennis R. Miller 19 702-518-1239 7465 W. Lake Mead Blvd. 20 Las Vegas, NV 21 2. Robert Carmody 22 336-275-9114 23 333 N. Greene Street, Suite 201 Greensboro, NC 27401 24 25 3. John Orsina 860-399-6201 26 Westbrook Block 27 439 Spencer Plains Rd. Westbrook, CT 06498 1 4. John Maher 2 860-399-6201 Westbrook Block 3 439 Spencer Plains Rd. 4 Westbrook, CT 06498
5 5. James Smits 6 616-931-3535 10694 Chicago Dr. 7 Zeeland, MI 49464 8 6. Sean Delaney 9 860-399-6201 10 Westbrook Block 439 Spencer Plains Rd. 11 Westbrook, CT 06498 12 7. Virna Reynoso - owner of Reyco Contracting Solutions 13 850-466-2761 14 96 E. Nine Mile Road, Suite F Pensacola, FL 32584 15
16 8. Eric Long – CEO EP Henry 17 800-44HENRY EP Henry 18 201 Park Avenue 19 Woodbury, NJ 08096
20 9. Edward Weinmann 21 c/o Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC Wells Fargo Tower, Suite 1000 22 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway 23 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5980 (702) 257-1483 24 25 10. Joe Dudley – VP Sales & Operations Florida Silica Sand Company 26 1705 Sammonds Rd. 27 Plant City, FL 33563 1 11. Jett Miller 702-518-1239 2 7465 W. Lake Mead Blvd. Las Vegas, NV 3
4 B. DEFENDANTS’ WITNESSES 5
6 1. Edward Weinmann c/o Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC 7 Wells Fargo Tower, Suite 1000 8 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5980 9 (702) 257-1483 10 2. Dennis Miller 11 c/o FisherBroyles, LLP 12 5670 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800 Los Angeles, California 90036 13
14 3. Person With Most Knowledge Omni Block Inc. 15 c/o FisherBroyles, LLP 16 5670 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800 17 Los Angeles, California 90036
18 4. John Reedy 19 1200 Governors Ln. Zionsville, IN, 46077 20 Jpreedy49@att.net 21 5. Brian Budnick 22 Besser Company 23 801 Johnson St. Alpena, MI 49707 24 (O) 989-354-1012 25 bbudnik@besser.com
26 6. Virna Reynoso 27 Besser Co. 801 Johnson St. 1 Alpena, MI 49707
2 7. Tom Norris Norris Architects, AIA 3 475 Washington Blvd 4 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 (O) 424-387-1500 5 tom@norrisarchitects.com 6 8. Matthew Buonocore 7 Chief Financial Officer 8 Oakcrest School 1619 Crowell Road 9 Vienna, VA 22182 10 (O) 571-459-2776 mbuonocore@oakcrest.org 11
12 9. Jean-Yves Milette Facilities Manager 13 Oakcrest School 14 1619 Crowell Road Vienna, VA 22182 15 703 395 1601 16 jmilette@oakcrest.org 17 10. Barry Diller 18 Vice President of Sales, Nitterhouse Masonry Products, LLC 19 859 Cleveland Ave. Chambersburg, PA 17201 20 717-860-0578 21 bdiller@nitterhouse.com
22 11. Jeff Miller 23 Sales Representative, EP Henry 201 Park Ave. 24 Woodbury, NJ 08096 25 215-356-0793 jmiller@ephenry.com 26 27 1 X. TRIAL DATES 2 The attorneys for the Parties have met and jointly offer the following re: trial 3 4 dates: 5 September 30, 2024; 6 October 7, 2024; 7 October 14, 2024 and 8 October 28, 2024. 9 10 It is expressly understood by the undersigned that the Court will set the trial 11 of this matter on one of the agreed-upon dates if possible; if not, the trial will be set 12 at the convenience of the Court’s calendar. 13 XI. 15 16 It is estimated that the trial will take a total of 4-5 days. 17 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT: 18
19 Dated: May 21, 2024 Dated: May 21, 2024 20
21 /s/ Robert W. Hernquist /s/ Rob L. Phillips 22 ROBERT W. HERNQUIST ROB L. PHILLIPS Attorneys for Defendants and Attorneys for Plaintiffs and 24 Counterclaimants Counter-Defendants
27 I XII. ACTION BY THE COURT This case 1s set for Jury trial on the fixed stacked calendar on October 7, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. Calendar call will be held on October 2, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.. IT IS SO ORDERED. Lins ©. Mallar. 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 DATE: May 23, 2024 9 10 11 12 2 14
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 16
EXHIBIT 1 Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 501 Independent Contractor Agreement (DEF 00097- 00106) 502 Termination Agreement (DEF 00119) 503 Email from Ed Weinmann to Hearsay Jeff Miller dated 8/23/2018 (FRE 801, (DEFT 00127-00129) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 504 Email chain b/w Ed Weinmann and Denny Miller dated 2/15/2019 (DEFT 00041-00043) 505 Email from Ed Weinmann to Hearsay John Reedy dated 2/24/2019 (FRE 801, (DEFT 00080-00082) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 506 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 2/27/2019 (DEFT 00203) 507 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 3/1/2019 (DEFT 00201) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted
508 Email from Ted Kelly to Ed Hearsay Weinmann dated 3/7/2019 (FRE 801, (DEFT 00328-330) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 509 Attachment to 3/7/2019 email Hearsay from Kelly, infrared photo of (FRE 801, Oakcrest in February (DEFT 802, 805), 00107) Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 510 Email from Denny Miller dated 4/19/2019 (DEFT 00001-00003)
511 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 4/19/2019 (DEFT 00229-233)
512 Email from Denny Miller to Ed Weinmann dated 4/22/2017 (DEFT 0058)
513 Email chain b/w Ed Weinmann and Denny Miller dated 5/30/2018 (DEFT 0045- 00052) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 514 Email chain b/w Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 6/4/2019 (DEFT 00117- 00118) 515 Email from Virna Reynoso to Hearsay Ed Weinmann dated 6/6/2019 (FRE 801, (DEFT 00169) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 516 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 6/7/2019 (DEFT 00010-00011) 517 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 6/7/2019 (DEFT 00193) 518 Email from Ed Weinmann to Denny Miller dated 6/7/2019 (DEFT 00113-00114) 519 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann 6/8/2019 (DEFT 00195) 520 Invoice to Omni for Unpaid Commissions (DEFT 00306) 521 Email from Ed Weinmann to Hearsay John Maher dated 7/9/2019 (FRE 801, (DEFT 00079) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Relevance (FRE 402) 522 Email chain between Denny Miller and Ed Weinmann dated 7/29/2019 (DEFT 00199-200) 523 Email from Denny Miller to Ed Weinmann dated 9/19/2019 (DEFT 00053) 524 8 inch Insulblock Stretcher Relevance Schematic (DEFT 0004) (FRE 402) 525 12 inch Insulblock Stretcher Relevance Schematic (DEFT 0005) (FRE 402) 526 Archived pages from Omni Relevance Block website (DEFT 00006- (FRE 402) 00009) 527 Omni Block website screen Relevance captures (DEFT 00120-124) (FRE 402) 528 Omni Block 8 inch slide Relevance (DEFT 00125) (FRE 402) 529 Omni 8 inch slide with labels Relevance (DEFT 00339) (FRE 402) 530 Omni Block Brochure (DEFT Relevance 00340) (FRE 402) 531 Omni Block EX 7-1 (DEFT Relevance 00346) (FRE 402) 532 Omni Block Flyer for Mexico Relevance (DEFT 00423) (FRE 402) 533 R-Values 10 (DEFT 00440) Relevance (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 534 R-Values Seismic 12 (DEFT Relevance 00441) (FRE 402) 535 Signed Omni Block Contract Relevance Westrbook (DEFT 00442) (FRE 402) 536 Test Data Summary Brochure Relevance 7 15 2013 (DEFT 00463) (FRE 402) 537 Test_Data_Summary 8in and Relevance 12in only (DEFT 00471) (FRE 402) 538 Thermal Calculations 3 9 Relevance 2013 (DEFT 00479) (FRE 402) 539 Thermal Calculations 8 x 8 x Relevance 16 May 2017 (DEFT 00514) (FRE 402) 540 Thermal Calculations 12 x 8 x Relevance 16 2017 (DEFT 00526) (FRE 402) 541 Thermal Calculations (DEFT Relevance 00541) (FRE 402) 542 Thermal Table 8 and 12 Half Relevance w-b (DEFT 00580) (FRE 402) 543 Thermal Table 8 and 12 ver 2 Relevance (DEFT 00581) (FRE 402) 544 Omni Web Site Landing page Relevance with false and misleading info (FRE 402) (DEFT 00428) 545 Omni Web Site landing page Relevance with false and misleading (FRE 402) information (DEFT 00429) 546 Omni Block Landing Page Relevance Aug 3 2021 (DEFT 02681) (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 547 Wayback Machine Internet Relevance Archive Omni Block Landing (FRE 402) Page Jan 8, 2019 (DEFT 02682) 548 Calculation Review (DEFT Hearsay 03116) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 549 Omni Block Calculation Hearsay Review and analysis (DEFT (FRE 801, 03117) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 550 ASTM C 236 (DEFT 00182) Hearsay (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 551 ASTM Testing Invoice (DEFT Hearsay 00015-00016) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 552 Intertek Hot Box Final Report Relevance (DEFT 00292) (FRE 402) 553 ATI Intertek ASTM 1363 Hearsay Final Report R Factor 12 in (FRE 801, Block June 13 2019 (2) 802, 805), (DEFT 02634) Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 554 USPTO information re Omni Relevance Block (DEFT 00136-00146) (FRE 402) 555 US Patent No. 6,513,293 Relevance (DEFT 00159-00168) (FRE 402) 556 Amundson Patent (DEFT Relevance 02633) (FRE 402) 557 Endura Wall Blocks (DEFT Relevance 02670) (FRE 402) 558 ICC Eval IMSI (DEFT Relevance 02674) (FRE 402) 559 Johnson Patent (DEFT Relevance 02680) (FRE 402) 560 Patent application (DEFT Relevance 02689) (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 561 ODSY 6S1-0053 RFI 0834 PCO TBD 20190114 -262019 (DEFT 00331) 562 Omni Invoice to AMC (DEFT 00130) 563 Deposited check from AMC to Omni for inserts (DEFT 00044) 564 Photo of paid invoice to Omni from AMC and Check (DEFT 00438) 565 Invoice to DMPS 8.9.19 from Relevance Cellofoam for balance on (FRE 402) molds (DEFT 00307) 566 Invoice to DMPS SM001010 Relevance from Cellofoam for molds (FRE 402) July 2019 (DEFT 00308) 567 Invoice to Westbrook for inserts June 2019 Advanced Masonry (DEFT 00309) 568 Invoice To Westbrook Jan 2019 (DEFT 00311) 569 Letter from Brendan to Titan Hearsay (DEFT 00312) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 570 Paragraph in B Quinns Hearsay Contract allowing free use of (FRE 801, the molds know how etc. 802, 805), (DEFT 00436) Lack of Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 571 CELLOFOAM PURCHASE Relevance ORDER 640COL-1 (FRE 402) STAIRWELL 5 (DEFT 01066) 572 Copy of Advanced Masonry Consultants- NY INSUL BLOCK – QUOTE (DEFT 01067) 573 Copy of Advanced Masonry Consultants- NY INSUL BLOCK Comparison Quote (DEFT 01068) 574 Copy of JEM Contracting - 640 Columbia St - Insulated CMU- QUOTE (DEFT 01070) 575 Copy of JEM Contracting Corp- Terminal Logistics JFK- GF InsulBlock Quote (DEFT 01071) 576 Copy of JEM Contracting without Pricing - 640 Columbia St - Insulated CMU- QUOTE (DEFT 01072) 577 Copy of JJ Matthews Inc-640 Columbia Street - GF InsulBlock Quote (DEFT 01073) 578 Deposit Invoice for EPH 640 Lack of Columbia Amazon Phase 2 Foundation WHSE Nov 20 2020 (DEFT or Personal 01074) Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Relevance (FRE 402) 579 Deposit Invoice for EPH 640 Lack of Columbia Amazon Phase 2 Foundation WHSE Nov 24 2020 (DEFT or Personal 01075) Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 580 Deposit Invoice to EPH Lack of 640Col-2 11 20 20 (DEFT Foundation 01076) or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 581 Deposit Invoice to EPH Lack of 640Col-3 February 12 2021 Foundation Block Royalty Commission or Personal (DEFT 01078) Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 582 Deposit Invoice to EPH Lack of 640Col-3 February 12 2021 Foundation Inserts Only.pdf (DEFT or Personal 01080) Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 583 Deposit Invoice to EPH Lack of 640Col-3 February 12 2021 Foundation (DEFT 01082) or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 584 InsulBlock Quote Aug 17 Lack of 2020 For EPH Amazon 640 Foundation Columbia (DEFT 01091) or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 585 Internal Quote for Genest JJ Hearsay Matthews 05 26 2020 640 (FRE 801, Columbia- Insulated Block 802, 805), CMU and Insert Quantities Lack of (DEFT 01093) Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 586 Invoice Insulating Inserts EPH Hearsay to JEM Co 640 Columbia (FRE 801, (DEFT 01095) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 587 Invoice Insulating Inserts EPH Hearsay to JJMathews 640 Columbia (FRE 801, (DEFT 01096) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 588 JEM 640 Columbia 5-29-20 Hearsay (DEFT 01098) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 589 JEM Contracting - 640 Hearsay Columbia St- CERT Letter (FRE 801, (DEFT 01106) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 590 Long Insert InsulBlock Quote Hearsay Gradient April 14 2021 For (FRE 801, EPH Amazon 640 Columbia 802, 805), (DEFT 01111) Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 591 Copy of JEM Contracting Hearsay without Pricing - 640 (FRE 801, Columbia St - Insulated 802, 805), CMU- QUOTE.XLS (DEFT Lack of 01115) Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Relevance (FRE 402) 592 Pg 26 640 Columbia (DEFT Hearsay 01158) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 593 PO Invoice to EPH 640Col-1 Hearsay Stairwell 5 (DEFT 01161) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 594 Profile Masonry- Product Hearsay Data.doc (2) (DEFT 01163) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 595 Quote 640 Columbia Jem Relevance Contracting 5 27 20 (DEFT (FRE 402) 011640) 596 Quote 640 Columbia JJM -4 5 Relevance 28 20 (DEFT 01165) (FRE 402) 597 Quote 640 Columbia JJM-3 Relevance Inc 5 28 20 (DEFT 01167) (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 598 Quote for EPH 640 Columbia Relevance Amazon Distribution Center (FRE 402) Stairwell 5 - Job 20-4059 (DEFT 01168) 599 Quote for EPH 640 Columbia Relevance Amazon Phase 3 WHSE DEC (FRE 402) 17 2020 (DEFT 01169) 600 Quote for EPH 640 Columbia Relevance Amazon Phase 3 WHSE Jan (FRE 402) 25 2021 (DEFT 01170) 601 Quote for EPH 640 Columbia Relevance Amazon Phase 3 WHSE Jan (FRE 402) 27 2021 (DEFT 01171) 602 Quote for EPH 640 Columbia Relevance Amazon Stair 5 Phase 1 Aug (FRE 402) 17 2020 (DEFT 01172) 603 Quote for JEM 640 Columbia Relevance Phase 1 Aug 10 2020 (DEFT (FRE 402) 01173) 604 Rad and DAprile NY Hearsay WAREHOUSE (FRE 801, INSULBLOCK Quote 802, 805), (DEFT 01175) Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 605 Short Inserts InsulBlock Hearsay Quote Gradient April 14 2021 (FRE 801, For EPH Amazon 640 802, 805), Columbia (DEFT 01181) Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 606 640 Columbia - Combined Drawing Set - Parking Deck Revisions - 1.10.20 (DEFT 01381) 607 640 Columbia Quote 1 to JEM Relevance Contracting 5 29 20 (DEFT (FRE 402) 01630) 608 640 Columbia Quote 2 by Relevance truckload to JEM Contracting (FRE 402) 5 27 20 (DEFT 01631) 609 640 Columbia Quote 2 by Relevance truckload to JEM Contracting (FRE 402) 5 29 20 (DEFT 01632) 610 AMC_10102_125pcf_ANSYS Hearsay EPH (DEFT 01633) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 611 Block configurations for Amazon (DEFT 01641) 612 Block Pricing and Colors Hearsay (DEFT 01643) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 613 Block Pricing (DEFT 01644) Hearsay (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 614 Deposit Invoice to EPH Hearsay 640Col-3 February 12 2021 (FRE 801, (DEFT 01645) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 615 InsulBlock Quote Aug 17 Hearsay 2020 For EPH Amazon 640 (FRE 801, Columbia (DEFT 01654) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 616 Internal Quote for Genest JJ Hearsay Matthews 05 26 2020 640 (FRE 801, Columbia- Insulated Block 802, 805), CMU and Insert Quantities Lack of (DEFT 01656) Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 617 Internal Quote- JJ Matthews Hearsay 05 26 2020 640 Columbia- (FRE 801, Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Insulated Block CMU and 802, 805), Insert Quantities.XLSX Lack of (DEFT 01657) Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 618 Invoice Insulating Inserts EPH Hearsay to JEM Co 640 Columbia (FRE 801, (DEFT 01658) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 619 Invoice Insulating Inserts EPH Hearsay to JJMathews 640 Columbia (FRE 801, (DEFT 01659) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 620 Invoice W0908370251 Hearsay Thermal Testing Amazon 640 (FRE 801, Columbia (DEFT 01660) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted 621 JEM 640 Columbia 5-29-20 Hearsay (DEFT 01661) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 622 JEM Contracting - 640 Hearsay Columbia St- CERT Letter (FRE 801, (DEFT 01669) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 623 Long Insert InsulBlock Quote Hearsay Gradient April 14 2021 For (FRE 801, EPH Amazon 640 Columbia 802, 805), (DEFT 01674) Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) Email chain dated 7/22/2019 Hearsay 624 re Itinerary for Ed’s visit (FRE 801, (DEFT 00067-00068) 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Defendants’ Description Objections Date Date Trial Exhibit Offered Admitted Relevance (FRE 402) Weinmann itinerary for NJ Hearsay 625 trip (DEFT 00133) (FRE 801, 802, 805), Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 626 Weinmann Am Ex statement Relevance 7/12/2019 (DEFT -00135) (FRE 402) 627 Weinmann Cell Phone Relevance Records Oct. 15, 2018-Feb. (FRE 402) 15, 2020 (DEFT 02745-3114) 628 Omni Block Answers to First Set of Interrogatories from AMC 629 Omni Block Answers to First Set of Interrogatories from Weinmann EXHIBIT 2 (Plaintiffs’ Trial Objection Date Date Exhibits) Description and Reasons Identified Admitted 1. Independent Contractor Agreement [PLAINTIFF 000001- PLAINTIFF 000010] 2. Declaration of Robert Hearsay (FRE Carmody in support of 801, 802, Plaintiffs’ Motion for 805), Lack of Temporary Restraining Foundation or Order and Preliminary Personal Injunction Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Relevance (FRE 402) 3. Advanced Masonry Consulting, Inc. invoice to Reyco [PLAINTIFF 000588] 4. Email between Denny Miller Hearsay (FRE and Virna L. Reynoso dated 801, 802, July 21, 2021 805), Lack of [PLAINTIFF 000606- Foundation or PLAINTIFF 000607] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 5. Declaration of Sean Delaney Hearsay (FRE in support of Plaintiffs’ 801, 802, Motion for Temporary 805);Lack of Restraining Order and Foundation or Preliminary Injunction Personal [PLAINTIFF 000635- Knowledge PLAINTIFF 000637] (FRE 602, 901) 6. Declaration of John Maher in Hearsay (FRE support of Plaintiffs’ Motion 801, 802, for Temporary Restraining 805); Lack of Order and Preliminary Foundation or Injunction Personal [PLAINTIFF 000638- Knowledge PLAINTIFF 000639] (FRE 602, 901) 7. Florida Silica Sand Company quotes [PLAINTIFF 000769- PLAINTIFF 000772] 8. Email between Ed Weinmann and Kurt Trump dated February 22, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001111 – PLAINTIFF 001118] 9. AMC PO to Titan America dated February 28, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001127] 10. Email between Ed Weinmann and Kurt Trump dated March 19, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001140 – PLAINTIFF 001142] 11. Titan block quotation to Ed Lack of Weinmann Foundation or [PLAINTIFF 001169] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901), Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 12. Email between Ed Incomplete Weinmann and Kurt Trump (FRE 106 & dated April 9, 2019 403); Hearsay [PLAINTIFF 001229] (FRE 801, 802, 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 13. Titan block Special Order & Hearsay (FRE Quote Form 801, 802, [PLAINTIFF 001243] 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 14. Email between Don Zuhr and Hearsay (FRE Ed Weinmann dated April 801, 802, 24, 2019 805); Lack of [PLAINTIFF 001249 – Foundation or PLAINTIFF 001250] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 15. Email between Ed Incomplete Weinmann and Don Zuhr (FRE 106 & dated June 12, 2019 403); Hearsay [PLAINTIFF 001325 – (FRE 801, PLAINTIFF 001326] 802, 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 16. Email between Ed Weinmann and Mike Acevedo dated October 3, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001442] 17. Titan invoice Lack of [PLAINTIFF 001446] Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 18. Emails between Virna Hearsay (FRE Reynoso and Ed Weinmann 801, 802, dated October 3, 2019 to 805); Lack of October 9, 2019 Foundation or [PLAINTIFF 001463 – Personal PLAINTIFF 001465] Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 19. Email between Ed Weinmann and Don Zuhr dated April 1, 2020 [PLAINTIFF 001484 – PLAINTIFF 001490] 20. Emails between Ed Incomplete Weinmann and Joe Dudley (FRE 106 & of Florida Silicon Sand 403); Hearsay Company dated December (FRE 801, 26, 2018 and December 27, 802, 805); 2018 Lack of [PLAINTIFF 001560- Foundation or PLAINTIFF 001562] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 21. Email between Ed Weinmann and Joe Dudley of Florida Silicon Sand Company dated January 2, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001568] 22. Email between Ed Weinmann and Joe Dudley of Florida Silicon Sand Company dated January 4, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001591] 23. Email between Ed Weinmann and Joe Dudley of Florida Silicon Sand Company dated January 16, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001619] 24. Email between Ed Weinmann and Joe Dudley of Florida Silicon Sand Company dated February 4, 2019 [PLAINTIFF 001628] 25. Proposed License Agreement between Advanced Masonry Consulting and Florida Silica Sand Company [PLAINTIFF 001629- PLAINTIFF 001647] 26. Email between Ed Weinmann and Denny Miller dated February 27, 2019 [DEFT 00203] 27. Email between Ed Weinmann and Denny Miller dated March 1, 2019 [DEFT 00201] 28. Northwest Testing Laboratories, Inc.’s test results [DEFT 00182 – DEFT 00183] 29. Cellfoam Mold Invoice dated Lack of July 2, 2019 Foundation or [DEFT 00308] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 30. Omni Block with labels [DEFT 00339] 31. Omni Block brochure [DEFT 00340 – DEFT 00345] 32. Reyco Invoice from Advanced Masonry Consulting [DEFT 00439] 33. Termination agreement [DEFT 00462] 34. Westbrook Licensing Agreement [DEFT 01034 – DEFT 01053] 35. Copy of AMC Quote [DEFT 01067] 36. Copy of AMC Quote [DEFT 01068] 37. Copy of Block Quantities Lack of [DEFT 01069] Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901) 38. Copy of JEM Contracting Lack of [DEFT 01070] Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901) 39. Copy of JEM Contracting [DEFT 01071] 40. Deposit Invoice EP Henry [DEFT 01075] 41. Deposit Invoice EP Henry [DEFT 01082 – DEFT 01083] 42. Energy Drawings Lack of [DEFT 01084 – DEFT Foundation or 01090] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 43. Quote EP Henry [DEFT 01169] 44. Energy Report Hearsay (FRE [DEFT 01184 – DEFT 801, 802, 01378] 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901) 45. AMC Insul-block [DEFT 01633 – DEFT 01640] 46. Block Configuration Hearsay (FRE [DEFT 01641] 801, 802, 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901) 47. Block Count [DEFT 01642] 48. EP Henry quote [DEFT 02209] 49. Thermal Performance Test Report [DEFT 02634 – DEFT 02647] 50. Titan Consulting Agreement [DEFT 02666 – DEFT 02667] 51. Weinmann Cash Disbursements Journal [PLAINTIFF 000642 – PLAINTIFF 000690] 52. Social Media Post by JJ Hearsay (FRE Matthews, Inc. 801, 802, [PLAINTIFF 000586] 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 53. Odyssey Global Letter [PLAINTIFF 000603 – PLAINTIFF 000605] 54. Hensel Phelps Proposal Hearsay (FRE [PLAINTIFF 000613 – 801, 802, PLAINTIFF 000635] 805); Lack of Foundation or Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 55. Weinmann email to Jett Negotiations Miller dated August 20, 2019 relating to [PLAINTIFF 000612] settlement or compromise (FRE 408) 56. Miller, Weinmann and Matt Hearsay (FRE Krstolic emails dated 2018- 801, 802, 2021 805); Lack of [PLAINTIFF 000596 – Foundation or PLAINTIFF 000599] Personal Knowledge (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 57. Photos of Omni Block Lack of delivered to Orlando Foundation or International Airport Personal [PLAINTIFF 000588- Knowledge PLAINTIFF 000593] (FRE 602, 901); Requires Authentication (FRE 901) 58. Emails between Weinmann Hearsay (FRE and Arteaga dated October 801, 802, 805) 15, 2018 [PLAIHTIFF 000600 – PLAINTIFF 000602] 59. Omni Block Inc.’s certificate of trademark registration for Omni Block – Registration No. 6063248 [Judicial Notice] 60. Edward Weinmann’s Responses to Plaintiffs’ Request for Production of Documents (set one) 61. Edward Weinmann’s Responses to Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories (set one)
Miller v. Weinmann (Miller v. Weinmann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.