of Points and Authorities in Opposition to 

Demurrer and Motion to Strike; and Declaration 

of Paul Kroeger]
Date: March 8, 2012
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Dept: J
Judge: Hon. Dan T. Oki
Action Filed: November 22,2011
Trial Date: None
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
Plaintiff Calmat Co. dba Vulcan Materials Company, Western Division ("Vulcan" or
"Plaintiff’), requests that the court take judicial notice of the following documents:
1. The August 22,2011 Memorandum Opinion and Order (the "Order") entered by the
Hon. Justin L. Quackenbush, Senior United States District Judge and presiding judge over Vulcan’s
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER & MOTION TO STRIKE

in Case No.

EDCV 08-1198-JLQ (the "Federal Court ActiQn"). A true and correct copy of the Order is attached
hereto as Exhibit 1.
2. The Docket in Case No. EDCV 08-1198-JLQ, printed on February 24,2012, a true
and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 2.
3. Plaintiffs operative Complaint in Vulcan’s Federal Complaint against Defendant San
Gabriel Valley Gun Club ("Defendant") in Case No. EDCV 08-1198-JLQ (the "Federal Court
Action") a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
Evidence Code section 452( d) provides that judicial notice may be taken of "[r]ecords of (1)
any court of this state or (2) any court of record of the United States or of any state of the United
States." Evidence Code section 453 provides that "[t]he trial court shall take judicial notice of any
matter specified in Section 452 if a party requests it and: (a) [g]ives each adverse party sufficient
notice of the request, through the pleadings or otherwise, to enable such adverse party to prepare to
meet the request; and (b) [fJurnishes the court with sufficient information to enable it to take
judicial notice ofthe matter."
The attached Order, Docket and Complaint are records of the United States District Court
for the Central District of California, and are therefore judicially noticeable under Evid. Code §
452(d). The Order is relevant to this action as Defendant’s Demurrer states that the entry ofthis
Order stopped the tolling period on the statute of limitations for the causes of action in this case.
The Docket is relevant to this action to demonstrate that no separate judgment has been entered in
the Federal Court Action as required by the Order. The Complaint is relevant to this action as
Defendant claims that the allegations contained in Plaintiffs current Complaint differ so greatly
from those in the federal Complaint that they do not relate back to the Federal Court Action and are
time-barred.
– 2 –
L1&~m§T FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER & MOTION TO STRIKE