*1

In the Fourth District Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

HECTOR GONZALEZ,

Appellant, FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS $03/13/2015$ 8:20:48 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, L.P., Appellee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE 57TH DISTRICT COURT BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. 2012-CI-13872

APPENDIX

George D. Durham, Esq. Attorney for Appellant State Bar No. 24082940 gsklawfirm@gmail.com 517 W. Nolana Ste. 6 McAllen, TX 78504 Telephone: (956) 900-4187 Facsimile: (956) 524-5153 Attorney for Appellant Hector Gonzalez

*2

CLERK'S RECORD (CR)

1. PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION ..... 00001
2. DEFENDANTS ORIGINAL ANSWER ..... 00008
3. ANTHONY MATULEWICZ AND GEROGE DURHAMS MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD ..... 00010
4. DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION ..... 00019
5. MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ ..... 00022
6. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS CAUSE OF ACTION ..... 00034
7. OBJECTION REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE ON HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS ..... 00045
8. JUDGES NOTES ..... 00046
9. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS ..... 00047
10. RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS ..... 00049
11. SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS ..... 00052
12. DEFENDANTS RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS ..... 00060
13. JUDGES NOTES ..... 00064
14. ORDER GRANTING SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS ..... 00065
15. THIRD MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALES HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS ..... 00069
16. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS ..... 00084
17. MOTION TO ENFORCE ORDERS AND SANCTIONS OF COURT

*3 | | AND TO DETERMINE DAMAGES | 00088 | | --- | --- | --- | | 18. | JUDGES NOTES | 00092 | | 19. | CONDITIONAL MOTION FOR SEVERANCE | 00093 | | 20. | RESPONSE TO MOTION TO RECONSIDER SANCTIONS | 00096 | | 21. | JUDGES NOTES | 00100 | | 22. | STIPULATED ORDER ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW | 00101 | | 23. | FINAL JUDGMENT | 00102 | | 24. | NOTICE OF NON SUIT | 00105 | | 25. | ORDER CONFIRMING NON SUIT | 00106 | | 26. | NOTICE OF APPEAL | 00108 | | 27. | DOCKET SHEET | 00110 | | 28. | BILL OF COST | 00116 | | 29. | CERTIFICATE | 00118 |

*4

CLERK'S RECORD

NO. 2012CI13872 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: 4th COURT OF APPEALS GEORGE DURHAM 517 W NOLANA AVE MCALLEN, TX 78504-2974 ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ONIO, TEXAS LANCE M GEPPERT 0/20/2014 9:54:01 AM 8000 WEST AVE 1 KEITH E. HOTTLE SAN ANTONIO, TX 78213 4444 HECTOR GONZALEZ APPELLANT

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP APPELLEE

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY ${57}^{\text{TH}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

APPLIED FOR BY GEORGE DURHAM ATTORNEY OF RECORD FOR APPELLANT, ON August 29, 2014 AND DELIVERED TO COURT OF APPEALS ON OCTOBER 17, 2014

Donna Kay MKinney CLERK, DISTRICT COURT, BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS By: CECILIA BARBOSA, DEPUTY

FILED IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AT SAN ANTONIO, THE $$ DAY OF $$ . $$ CLERK BY: $$ DEPUTY.

*5 INDEX

1. P1-PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION 00001 DATE FILED: AUGUST 23, 2012 PAGE 00007
2. P5-DEFENDANTS ORIGINAL ANSWER 00008 DATE FILED: FEBRUARY 25, 2013 PAGE 00009
3. P6-ANTHONY MATULEWICZ AND GEROGE DURHAMS MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD 00010 DATE FILED: APRIL 2, 2013 PAGE 00018
4. P7-DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION 00019 DATE FILED: APRIL 2, 2013 PAGE 00021
5. P12-MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ 00022 DTE FILED: SEPTEMBER 18, 2013 PAGE 00033
6. P13-DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS CAUSE OF ACTION 00034 DATE FILED: OCTOBER 1, 2013 PAGE 00044
7. P14-OBJECTION REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE ON HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS 00045 DATE FILED: OCTOBER 2, 2013
8. P15-JUDGES NOTES 00046 DATE FILED: OCTOBER 2, 2013
9. O1-ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 00047

*6 10.P19-RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS $$ 00049 DATE FILED: OCTOBER 16, 2013 PAGE 00051 11.P21-SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS $$ 00052 DATE FILED: NOVEMBER 8, 2013 PAGE 00059 12.P23-DEFENDANTS RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS $$ 00060 DATE FILED: NOVEMBER 21, 2013 PAGE 00063 13.P25-JUDGES NOTES $$ 00064 DATE FILED: NOVEMBER 21, 2013 14.O2-ORDER GRANTING SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS $$ 00065 15.P27-THIRD MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALES HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS $$ 00069 DATE FILED: DECEMBER 10, 2013 PAGE 00083 16.O3-ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS $$ 00084 17.P29-MOTION TO ENFORCE ORDERS AND SANCTIONS OF COURT AND TO DETERMINE DAMAGES $$ 00088 DATE FILED: MARCH 20, 2014 PAGE 00091 18.P32-JUDGES NOTES $$ 00092 DATE FILED: APRIL 24, 2014

*7 | 19.P36-CONDITIONAL MOTION FOR SEVERANCE | 00093 | | --- | --- | | DATE FILED: MAY 23, 2014 PAGE 00095 | | | 20.P37-RESPONSE TO MOTION TO RECONSIDER SANCTIONS | 00096 | | DATE FILED: MAY 26, 2014 PAGE 00099 | | | 21.P39-JUDGES NOTES | 00100 | | DATE FILED: MAY 27, 2014 | | | 22.O4-STIPULATED ORDER ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW | 00101 | | 23.O5-FINAL JUDGMENT | 00102 | | 24.P41-NOTICE OF NON SUIT | 00105 | | DATE FILED: AUGUST 1, 2014 | | | 25.O6-ORDER CONFIRMING NON SUIT | 00106 | | 26.P42-NOTICE OF APPEAL | 00108 | | DATE FILED: AUGUST 29, 2014 PAGE 00109 | | | 27.DOCKET SHEET | 00110 | | 28.BILL OF COST | 00116 | | 29.CERTIFICATE | 00118 |

*8

CAPTION

THE STATE OF TEXAS: COUNTY OF BEXAR:

IN THE ${57}^{\text{TH}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS, THE HONORABLE, JUDGE PRESIDING, THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AND THE FOLLOWING INSTRUMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS WERE FILED IN THIS CAUSE, TO WIT:

TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. 2012C113872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP $\S$ IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT VS. $\S {57}^{\text{TH}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT GONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC ET AL $\S$ BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS

*9

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, LP Plaintiff v. GONZALEZ & DUARTE LLC, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ Defendants

IS THE HONORABLE COURT:

Comes now Plaintiff Atenea Capital Market Fund, LP ("Plaintiff" or "Atenea" herein) and files this its Original Petition against the Defendants Gonzalez and Duarte LLC, Hector Gonzalez Hernandez (also known as Hector Gonzalez), and Hernan Duarte Mendez (also known as Hernan Duarte), and Aracely Duarte Mendez (also known as Aracely Duarte), Adrian Rubio Enriquez, Efrain Islas Hernandez, and Eduardo Dergal M. M. M. M. named herein as Defendants, and Plaintiff states as follows:

I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure.

II. PARTIES

Plaintiff is a foreign entity registered to do business in the State of Texas.

Defendant Gonzalez and Duarte LLC is a Texas limited liability corporation It may be served with a copy of the petition and citation through its registered agent as follows:

*10

Gonzalez and Duarte LLC By and through its registered agent: Jesse Mora 17655 Henderson Pass, #1014 San Antonio, Texas 78232

Citation for service is requested at this time

Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the state of Texas who may be served at the following address or anywhere else that he may be found:

Hector Gonzalez Hernandez 2604 Charleston Lane, Plantation, Texas 78517

Citation for service is requested at this time

Defendant $\widehat{\text{Hernan Duarte Mendez}}$ is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the state of Texas who may be served at the following address or anywhere else that he may be found:

Hernan Duarte Mendez 10308 Everest Street McAllen, Texas

Citation for service is requested at this time

Defendant Aracely Duarte Mendez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the state of Texas who may be served anywhere that she may be found. Plaintiff does not have an address for this Defenadant at this time.

Service is not requested on this Defendant at this time.

Defendant Adrain Rubio Enriquez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the state of Texas who may be served anywhere that he may be found.

Service is not requested on this Defendant at this time.

*11

Defendant Efrain Islas Hernandez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the state of Texas who may be served anywhere that he may be found. Plaintiff does not have an address for this Defandant at this time.

Service is not requested on this Defendant at this time.

Defendant Eduardo Dergal Meraz is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the state of Texas who may be served anywhere that he may be found, including the following address:

Eduardo Dergal Meraz Cam De Las Gaciotas 827 Col Colinas De San Jeronimo 64630 Monterrey, N.L. Service is not requested on this Defendant at this time.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

The Court has jurisdiction of this lawsuit under the Texas Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act and the amount in controversy is within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Venue is appropriate under the permissive venue statute because all or a substantial part of the events or conditions giving rise to this controversy occurred in Bexar County, Texas.

IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS

The Plaintiff is a company based in the sovereign nation of Canada. While the company was formed in Canada, it was never intended to do business in that situs. The Defendants formed the Plaintiff, a limited liability partnership, and named Defendant Aracely Duarte Mendez as the general partner. Later, when they began to seek investors, they approached Julian Mortera and requested that he serve and general partner in nominee and named him Director of the Fund, though he never had control over the Fund or its proceeds.

*12 The Defendants informed their investors that they were financial advisers to the Plaintiff and set out to recruit other investors to pay monies in exchange for a premium on the monies invested. The Defendants recruited the investors, set up Plaintiff's bank accounts, and placed monies invested into those accounts. Then the Defendants, acting as financial advisers to the Plaintiff, began to transfer investment funds into their own personal and business accounts, without investing the monies. Some funds apparently went straight into the pockets of the individual Defendants without ever being invested. Much of the investment monies were placed into Atenea accounts in Bexar County, Texas and then transferred to Defendants' accounts in Texas and abroad. In total, the Defendants received and/or controlled five million one hundred and sixty eight thousand dollars ($5,168,000.00) which has not been repaid or otherwise accounted for.

As part of the financial services the Defendants provided to the Plaintiff, the Defendants agreed to provide certificates to the investors acknowledging the investment of funds and promising a return on the investment, much like loan. By agreement, many of the investors became limited liability partners in the Plaintiff. However, the time has passed to pay the investors their dividends and principal on these certificate notes, and the Defendants have failed to pay, subjecting the Plaintiff to potential liability to the investors. Furthermore, the Plaintiff now may be financially obligated to repay the certificates, even though it never received a great portion of the income that was supposedly invested with it.

The Defendants further provided "portfolio" information to many investors detailing stocks and other investment vehicles in which the investors monies was allegedly contributed. However, it does not appear that the stocks and other items indicated in the portfolio were actually purchased, and the Defendants apparently have misrepresented how they have used the income.

*13

Even today, the Defendants are apparently attempting to get individuals to invest using the Plaintiff's name, and may be engaging in a "ponzi" type scheme in an effort to repay the Plaintiff and its investors. The Plaintiff, among other requests, would like the Court to prevent the Defendants from indicating that they are affiliated with the Plaintiff in any manner.

V. FRAUD AND WRONGFUL CONDUCT

Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs above and further states that the actions of the Defendants, individually and jointly constitute breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, misrepresentations and actionable negligence omissions and commissions. To wit, the Defendants were in a fiduciary relationship with the Plaintiff and investors as the financial advisers, particularly when taking control over the monies that were invested. The Defendants breached the fiduciary duties by failing to properly invest the funds.

To the extent that the Defendants did not invest the funds as indicated and promised, such actions constitute actionable fraud or negligent misrepresentations in that the Defendants obtained the funds by promising to invest them and achieve a return on investment, the Defendants failed to invest the funds as promised, the Defendants intentionally misrepresented how the investment funds were utilized, and the Plaintiff lost its investment income as a result. The total amount of principal income invested by investors is three million nine hundred thousand dollars.

VI. TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE AND BREACH OF CONTRACT

Without legal justification or cause, the Defendants interfered with the Plaintiff's business and its relations with investors, ultimately attempting to obtain monies earmarked for Plaintiff through improper activities. The Plaintiff had a valid relationship with its investors. The Defendants intentionally interfered with that relationship. The interference

*14

caused the Plaintiff to lose investment money and otherwise created potential liability to investors. Furthermore, the Defendants breached its agreement with the Plaintiff to supervise, advise, invest the funds, and pay the expected dividends and return of the investment money to the investors.

VII. CIVIL CONSPIRACY

Plaintiff incorporates the paragraphs above and would further state that the actions of the Defendants constitute a civil conspiracy in that the Defendants acted in concert to deprive the Plaintiff and, by association, its investors, from monies that were provided to it for the purpose of providing and implementing investment strategy. As a result of the civil conspiracy, the Plaintiff has been damaged and lost its investment income.

VIII. FAILURE TO PROVIDE ACCOUNTING

The Plaintiff made written demand to the Defendants for an accounting of the investment monies, interests and business records, and the Defendants failed to provide any such documentation. Under the Texas Revised Corporation Act, the Texas Limited Liability Company Act, as well as the Texas business organization codes, the Defendants are required to provide records and accounting upon request and have failed to do so despite having more than seven weeks to respond to the proper request.

IX. RELIEF REQUESTED UNDER the TEXAS UNIFORM DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT

A. JUSTICIABLE CONTROVERSEY

There exists a genuine controversy between the parties that would be resolved by a ruling under the Texas Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act concerning the validity and breadth of any interest or authority that the Defendants have with respect to the Plaintiff.

B. COURT OPINION CAN RESOLVE CONTROVERSEY

*15

The Court has the authority to make a determination whether there is an interest and it can make a determination to what extent, if any the purported documents are legal, what the effect of the documents are on the Plaintiff and whether the Plaintiff has any past, present, or future obligations with respect to the Defendants.

X. ATTORNEYS FEES

The Plaintiff requests attorneys fees under 37.009 under the Texas Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act which expressly provides that the Court may award attorneys fees to the prevailing party. Further, the Plaintiff seeks attorneys fees for breach of contract. Plaintiff requests that the Court award all of the Plaintiff's fees that are reasonable and necessary to the extent that the Court makes any finding in favor of the Plaintiff.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Atenea prays that the Court: order that the Defendants cease and desist all interference, order that the investment monies and all attendant property belongs to the Plaintiff, award damages, order and accounting, order the Defendants be required to pay attorneys fees, interest and court costs, and award such other and further relief as may be necessary to do justice in this matter.

*16

NO. 2012-CI-13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND LP Plaintiff, V.

GONZLAEZ &; DUARTE LLC HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ ADRIAN RUBIO ENRUQIEZ, EFRAIN ISALAS HERNANDEZ, and EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ Defendants.

NOW COMES Defendant, GONZLAEZ &; DUARTE LLC, HECTOR GONZALEZ

HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRUQIEZ, EFRAIN ISALAS HERNANDEZ, and EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ, named Defendants in the above-entitled and numbered cause, and files this Original Answer, and shows the Court:

GENERAL DENIAL

Defendants deny each and every allegation of Plaintiff's Original Petition, and demands strict proof thereof as required by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

PRAYER

Defendants pray the Court, after notice and hearing or trial, enters judgment in favor of Defendants, award Defendants the costs of court, attorney's fees, and such other and further relief as Defendants may be entitled to in law or in equity.

Respectfully submitted, MATULEWICZ &; ASSOCIATES, P.C. 521 S. Broadway St. McAllen, Texas 78501-4929 Tel: (956) 972-0330 Fax: (956) 972-0353 By: ANTHONY MATULEEZ Texas Bar No. 13234358 GEORGE DURHAM Texas Bar No. 24082940 Attorney for Defendant

*17

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on February 25, 2013 a true and correct copy of Defendant's Original Answer was served by facsimile transmission to:

Lance Geppart 1900 Tower Life Building 310 S. St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 855-9990

*18

77CAUSE NO. 2012-CI-13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET, L.P., $\S$ IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff $\S$ V. V.

GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, $\S$ HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, $\S$ HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ, $\S$ ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, $\S$ ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN $\S$ ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO $\S$ DERGAL MERAZ, $\S$ OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS

ANTHONY MATULEWICZ AND GEORGE DURHAM'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

NOW COMES ANTHONY MATULEICZ AND GEORGE DURHAM, of the Law Offices of Matulewicz &; Associates, P.C., Attorneys for Defendants, GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ, ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ, and respectfully moves the Court to grant said attorney permission to withdraw as attorneys of record for Defendants, GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ, ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ.

*19

A. INTRODUCTION

I.

Plaintiff is ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET, L.P. Certain Defendants have been served on or about January 8, 2013 and February 2, 2013 in the above entitled and numbered cause.

II.

Plaintiff sued these Defendants for fraud, wrongful conduct, tortuous interference, breach of contract civil conspiracy, and failure to provide accounting under the Texas Revised Corporation Act, the Texas Limited Liability Company Act, as well as the Texas business organization codes.

III.

Discovery in this suit is governed under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 190.3.

IV.

No trial date has been scheduled.

B. FACTS

V.

Attorneys, Anthony Matulewicz and George Durham, were only contracted to represent Defendant HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ. Defense counsel made a clerical error by representing all Defendants in case through Defendants' Original Answer to Plaintiff's Original Petition. Defense counsels have not been retained by these Defendants to represent them in this case.

*20

VI.

Defense attorney, George Durham, attaches his affidavit to this motion to establish facts not apparent from the record and incorporates them by reference.

C. ARGUMENT &; AUTHORITIES

VII.

There is good cause, as required by Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 10, for this court to grant the motion to withdraw because this Defendant made a clerical error in representing all Defendants in case through Defendants' Original Answer to Plaintiff's Original Petition.

VIII.

No other attorney will at present seek to appear as substitute counsel.

IX.

Defense counsels have delivered a copy of this motion to GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ,ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ, in writing by both certified and regular mail, of his right to object to the motion.

X.

Defense counsels are unable to state these Defendants' position on this motion.

*21

XI.

Defendants' last known address is as follows: Gonzalez &; Durate, LLC By and through its registered agent Jose Mora 17655 Henderson Pass, #1014 San Antonio, Texas 78232 Hernan Durate Mendez 10308 Everest Street McAllen, Texas 78504 Aracely Durante Mendez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the State of Texas who may be served anywhere that she may be found.

Said Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel shall be served or her employer: Gonzalez &; Durate, LLC By and through its registered agent Jose Mora 17655 Henderson Pass, #1014 San Antonio, Texas 78232 Adrian Rubio Enriquez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the State of Texas who may be served anywhere that he may be found.

Said Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel shall be served on his employer: Gonzalez &; Durate, LLC By and through its registered agent Jose Mora 17655 Henderson Pass, #1014 San Antonio, Texas 78232 Efrain Islas Hernandez is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the State of Texas who may be served anywhere that he may be found.

Said Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel shall be served on his employer: Gonzalez &; Durate, LLC By and through its registered agent Jose Mora 17655 Henderson Pass, #1014 San Antonio, Texas 78232

*22

Eduardo Dergal Meraz is a citizen of the sovereign nation of Mexico that may be residing in the State of Texas who may be served anywhere that he may be found.

Said Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel shall be served on his employer: Gonzalez &; Durate, LLC By and through its registered agent Jose Mora 17655 Henderson Pass, #1014 San Antonio, Texas 78232

XII.

Defense counsels request the Court, if he is allowed to withdraw as attorneys of record for these Defendants, to give Defendants thirty (30) days from the date of the order hereon in which to notify the Clerk in writing regarding arrangements for representation herein.

XIII.

There are no pending settings or deadline pending in this case.

D. CONCLUSION

XIV.

Defense counsels request that they be allowed to withdraw as attorneys of record for these Defendants due to a clerical error as they have not been retained to represent them in this case.

E. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, ANTHONY MATULEWICZ AND GEORGE DURHAM, respectfully request that this matter be set for hearing and after hearing hereof, the Court order that ANTHONY MATULEWICZ AND GEORGE DURHAM, attorneys for Defendants GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ,

*23 ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ, be given leave to withdraw as counsels of record for said Defendants; that said Defendants be given thirty (30) days from the date of the order hereon in which to obtain representation; and for such other and relief as is appropriate, either at law or in equity.

Respectfully submitted,

*24

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on 2 day of April, 2013, a true and correct copy of this motion was mailed certified mail and regular mail to the following:

CERTIFIED MAIL/RRR

Lance Geppert ATTORNEY AT LAW 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's Street, Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877 (210) 223-2714

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS

*25

AFFIDAVIT

THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF HIDALGO

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared GEORGE DURHAM, known to me to be the person whose signature appears below, who, after being duly sworn, deposes and says:

AMy name is GEORGE DURHAM. I am over twenty-one (21) years of age. I am competent to make this Affidavit and have personal knowledge of all facts set forth herein.

AI am one of the attorneys of record for Defendants GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ, ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ in Cause No. 2012-CI-13872; entitled Atenea Capital Markets v. Gonzalez & Durate, LLC, Hector Gonzalez Hernandez, Hernan Durate Mendez, Aracely Durate Mendez, Adrian Rubio Enriquez, Efrain Islas Hernandez, and Eduardo Dergal Meraz, in the ${57}^{\text{th}}$ Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas.

AOn February 26, 2013, Defendant, Hector Gonzalez Hernandez, retained our office to represent him in his individual capacity in the above referenced cause. On or about February 26, 2013, I inadvertently filed an answer for all Defendants. This was a clerical error as I have not been in contact or retained by these Defendants to represent them.

AThe factual statements set out in the foregoing motion are true and correct. AFurther Affiant sayeth not.@

*26 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME on this the $$ day of April , 2013.

*27

| | CAUSE NO. 2012-CI-13872 | Filed 13 April 2 P6:00 Donna Kay McKinney District Clerk Bexar District Accepted by: Deborah Garay | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET, L.P., | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | V. | § | ${57}^{\text{TH}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DURATE, LLC, | § | | | HERNAN DURATE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DURANTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN | § | | | ISLAS HERNANDEZ, AND EDUARDO | § | | | DERGAL MERAZ, | § | OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ' FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: NOW COMES, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANEE, one of the Defendants in the above and entitled cause of action, and files this First Amended Original Answer and Special Exceptions to Plaintiff's Original Petition, and would show the Court the following: I.

GENERAL DENIAL

Pursuant to Rule 92 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, this Defendant enters a general denial of all matters pled by the Plaintiff and requests that the Court require the Plaintiff to prove its charges and allegations by a preponderance of the evidence as required by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the Constitution of the State of Texas.

*28

II.

SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS

This Defendant specifically excepts to the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Original Petition as a whole as well as the prayer, because damages are not set out in specific definite amounts, pursuant to Rule 47 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and on the statutory ground that suit is not within the Court's jurisdiction. Pursuant to such statute, Plaintiff is required to inform the Court and this Defendant in writing of the maximum dollar amount claimed.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ,

prays that Plaintiff's suit be dismissed at Plaintiffs' costs and for such other and further relief to which he may be justly entitled, either at law or in equity.

Respectfully submitted,

*29

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on 2 day of April, 2013, a true and correct copy of this motion was mailed certified mail and regular mail to the following:

CERTIFIED MAIL/RRR

Lance Geppert ATTORNEY AT LAW 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's Street, Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877 (210) 223-2714

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

*30

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, LP

Plaintiff

v.

GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ Defendants

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ

Comes now Plaintiff Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP, and files this its Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and in support thereof, states as follows:

DISCOVERY SENT

On or about July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff sent written discovery, including interrogatories and requests for production to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez. A copy of the discovery is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein for all purposes. The discovery was received by Defendant (through counsel) and because it was served via certified mail, responses to the discovery were due no later than September 3, 2013. However, responses were never received, timely or otherwise.

On or about September 10, 2013, the undersigned sent a demand to opposing counsel to provide complete responses to the discovery no later than September 14, 2013. No response was ever received. Thus, the Plaintiff has no choice but to submit this matter to the Court to force the Defendant to respond to the discovery requests.

DOCUMENT SCANNED AS FILED

*31

OBJECTIONS WAIVED

Responses and objections to discovery were due no later than September 3, 2013. The Defendants failed to respond and all objections are waived and any responses provided must be provided without objection.

DISCOVERY RESPONSES NEEDED

The Plaintiff need the requested information to evaluate the case. Moreover, as this case concerns the location and use of certain funds that were and may still be in the possession custody and control of the Defendant, it is crucial that the responses be provided as soon as possible.

COURT SHOULD COMPEL AND POTENTIALLY SANCTION

This hearing will be scheduled on Monday September 23, 2013. If, by that time, the Defendant has not provided full responses, the Court should consider sanctioning the Defendant for failure to respond and subverting the discovery process. The Defendant has already had the discovery requests for well over fifty days and has failed to provide any response. Sanctions are warranted when, parties fail to respond to written discovery. See, e.g., Able Sup. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 766,771 (Tex. 1995) and Swain v. Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 731 (Tex. App.--Ft. Worth 1999, no pet.). Attorneys fees are among the explicitly authorized sanctions and in the present case, movant has already expended time and expense sending a reminder correspondence and drafting and filing this motion.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff prays that the Court enter an order confirming that all Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez' objections to discovery are waived, order Defendant Gonzalez to respond fully to discovery no later than October 7, 2013, award Plaintiff attorneys fees, and for such other relief may be necessary to do justice in this matter.

*32 Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*33

CAUSE 2012 CI 13872

PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF WRITTEN DISCOVERY TO DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ

To: HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, by and through hiss attorneys of record, Matulewicz

Pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure Plaintiff Atenea serves this its First Request for Written Discovery upon you and requests that you respond to the interrogatoriees and produce for inspection, photographing and/or copying the documents or other tangible things listed on the attached Exhibit "A" at such time as may be agreed upon by the parties or their attorneys of record; but failing such written agreement, no later than thirty (30) days from the date hereof.

The documents are to be produced at the offices of the undersigned attorneys, located at 1900 Tower Life Building, 310 S. St. Mary's St., Suite 1900, San Antonio, Texas 78205, unless other arrangements are made prior to the date said documents become due and is supported in writing and signed by all counsel.

*34

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served via facsimile transmission on counsel for Defendants on this the 31st of July, 2013

Matulewicz &; Associates

Lance Geppert

*35

DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

The following definitions are to be used in answering the discovery on the pages which follow:

1. "Plaintiff or "ATENEA refers to ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUNDS, LP the Plaintiff in this lawsuit, as well as its present employees, directors, officers, agents, attorneys, representatives and/or any other person or entity authorized to act on its behalf.
2. "Defendant," "Respondent," "you" or "yours" refers to HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ one of the named Defendants in this suit.
3. "GONZALEZ &; DUARTE" refers to GONZALEZ &; DUARTE, LLC and GONZALEZ &; DUARTE; S.C. as well as their present and former agents, attorneys, employees, representatives and/or any other person or entity authorized to act on its behalf.
4. "Or" means "and/or"
5. "Communicate" or "Communication" means any oral or written exchange or transmission of words, ideas, or information from one or more persons or entities to other persons or entitiestogether with all attachments or enclosures thereto.
6. "Documents" shall have the meaning intended by Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and is intended to be comprehensive in scope, to include, but expressly not limited to, all writings of every kind, source, and authorship, both originals and all nonidentical copies thereof, in your possession, custody, or control, or known by you to exist, irrespective of whether the writing is one intended for or transmitted internally by you, or intended for or transmitted to any other person or entity, including without limitation any government agency, department/ administrative entity, or personnel. The term shall necessarily include all correspondence, memoranda, minutes, stenographic or handwritten notes, work papers, studies, publications, books, pamphlets, invoices, billings, canceled cheeks, every piece of paper with a mark on it, sound recordings, video recordings, surveys, statistical data, computer printouts, ledgers, journals, logs, forms, telegrams, pictures, data discs and tapes and copies of such writings or records where the originals are not in Defendants' possession, custody or control, and every copy of such writing or record where such copy contains any additional commentary.
7. "Identify" as used in these Interrogatories means: a. When used with regard or respect to any person, individual or witness, requests the full and correct name, mailing address, residence or business location where such person may be reached for service of process for subpoena, and current telephone number. b. When used with respect to any document, writing, photograph or other tangible thing or item, means to describe the Title of the item, Date of such as reflected on the document, author or maker of such item, and the present location of such item; c. When used with respect to any bank account, savings account, trust account, or credit union account means to describe the name or names in which the account is held, the name, mailing address, physical address, and telephone number of the depository institution, association or organization, and the account number.

*36

INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Describe and detail every payment made by every investor into Atenea accounts or into Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC or Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. accounts by persons seeking ot invesnt in Atenea.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 2: State how many Atenea investment certificates were provided by Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC, Gonzaalez &; Duarte, S.C.,or any other entity or person, the names of the individuals to whom they were provided, and the total amount of those individuals' investments.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Describe and detail every amount of money that was invested on behalf of Atenea and/or its investors, including specifically, the amount of each investment, what the investment was, the current status of the investment, and, if the investment money was taken out, where the investment money subsequently went.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Describe and detail every amount of money ever received by you from or on behalf of Atenea or its investors, including specifically, the date of each payment received, the amount of each payment, what entity or person made the payment, and what the purpose of the payment was.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Identify all assets currently owned by Atenea, including specifically bank accounts and balances, stocks, real property, or any other property.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Identify all assets that you,Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC, or Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. are currently holding for or on behalf of Atenea.

RESPONSE:

*37

• INTERROGATORY NO. 7: State the reasons that Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC or Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. used funds intended for Atenan to obtain interest in real property in Mexico as an investment and such property was subsequently deeded to certain investors without any payment or reimbursement ever received by Atenea. Include specifically the loss to Atenea from this investment, as well as any commission or other benefit that you received.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Describe and detail every communication that you have had with Investors concerning Atenea, Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC or Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C., the investment strategy that you would be undertaking on their behalf, where their monies were being invested, when repayment to them was due under the certificates, the status of their investments, any profits or losses, and the current state of Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC, Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C., and Atenea.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Describe and detail your eduction, experience, and certification, and other qualifications to invest in stock markets, real estate, businesses, or any other investment.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Describe any licenses, bonds, investment advisor credentialling or other authority that you have to invest in money in the United States, Canada, or globally.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Describe your relationship to Atenea. Include the economic relationship and what authority Gonzalez and Duarte had to act on behalf of Atenea and what investment activities you performed on behald of Atenea

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Decribe Gonzalez &; Duarte's relationship to Atenea. Include the economic relationship and what authority Gonzalez and Duarte had to act on behalf of Atenea and what investment activities Gonzaelz and Duarte performed on behalf of Atenea

RESPONSE:

*38

• INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Identify all members and managers of Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC.

RESPONSE:

INTERROGATORY NO 14: Identify all stockholders, members, managers, or partners of Gonzalez & Duarte, S.C.

RESPONSE:

• REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION (EXHIBIT "A")

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.1: Please produce all documents relating to the negotiation, signing and/or performance of any and all contracts or agreements of any kind between Plaintiff and GONZALEZ & DUARTE in any way related to investing or investment advice.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: Produce any and all checks, bank statements, deposit slips, or other documents describing or detailing those items you have identified in response to Interrogatory 1.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: Produce copies of any and all certificates idenfitifed in response to Interrogatory 2.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: Produce any and all check, bank statements, deposit slips, accounting spreadsheets, or other documents describing or detailing those items you have identified in response to Interrogatory 3.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: Produce any and all documents of payment that you describe in response to Interrogatory 4.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: Produce any and all documents of current assets of Atenea, including stock certificates, investment reports, bank accounts, investment accounts or other documents.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.7: Produce all correspondence between You and any principal, representative, agent, servant or employee of GONZALEZ & DUARTE relating to transfers of funds into your or GONZALEZ & DUARTE accounts.

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: Produce any and all Documents in your possession which evidence, relate to. Or describe the financial condition, solvency or ability to timely pay investment debts of ATENEA during the four years preceding your filing for bankruptcy.

*39

• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: All documents evidencing, reflecting or in any way related to any and all. Payments made by or on behalf of GONZALEZ &; DUARTE to you.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: Produce any and all documents of communications that you have had with Investors concerning Atenea, Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC and/or Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: Produce any and all documents describing or detailing profits or losses of Atenea from 2008 to present, including profit and loss statements, balance information, bank accounts, or other documents.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: Produce any and all documents describing or detailing profits or losses of Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC, from 2008 to present, including profit and loss statements, balance information, bank accounts, or other documents.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: Produce any and all documents describing or detailing your profits or losses of from 2008 to present, including profit and loss statements, balance information, bank accounts, or other documents.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: Produce any and all documents describing or detailing your profits or losses of from 2008 to present, including profit and loss statements, balance information, bank accounts, or other documents.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: Copies of all Origina Pletitions or Complaint filed of record in any courthouse whatsoever in which you were a named party in which an allegation of breach of contract, fraud, securities violations, breach of a fiduciary duty or other complaint was raised.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: All documents evidencing or reflecting any and all any banking accounts maintained by You into which payments received by any Defendants or Atenea for investment were deposited. Such information will necessarily include all monthly bank statements, deposit receipts, canceled checks and related account records.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: Produce all correspondence from or by Atenea. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18: Produce all correspondence between yourself and any investor of Atenea.

*40

Lance Geppert
Attorney at Law
1900 Tower Life Building
310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900
San Antonio, Texas 78205
geppertlaw@grandecom.net
September 17, 2013

Bexar County District Clerk 101 W Nueva, Suite 217 San Antonio, TX 78205-3411 Re: Cause No. 2012 CI 13872; Atenea Capital Market, L.P. v. Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC, et al.; ${57}^{\text{th}}$ Judicial District, Bexar County, Texas

Dear Clerk: Enclosed for filing please find Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez. Please file the Document. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Telephone: (210) 316-0000 Alt. Phone: (210) 223-2641

Facsimile: (210) 855-9990 Alt. Fax: (210) 223-2714

*41

*42

NO. 2012 CI 13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND,
LP

Plaintiff, V.

HECTOR GONZALEZ

Defendant.

Filed 13 October 1 P5:28 Donna Kay McKinney District Clerk Bexar District Accepted by: Kimberley Kennedy

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS CAUSE OF ACTION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

NOW COMES Defendant, Hector Gonzalez, and requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Cause Number 2012 CI 13872 for the ground set forth herein. I. A. Defendant requests dismissal of Cause Number 2012 CI 13872 for the following reason:

1. Plaintiff, Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. has forfeited its status with the secretary of state as of August $2^{\text{nd}}$ , 2013. (See Exhibit A). Tex. Bus. Org. Code § 9.051 (b) imposes a separate registration requirement on foreign filing entities that wish to maintain a suit on a cause of action arising out of the transaction of business in Texas:

A foreign filing entity or the entity's legal representative may not maintain an action, suit, or proceeding in a court of this state, brought either directly by the entity or in the form of a derivative action in the entity's name, on a cause of action that arises out of the transaction of business in this state unless the foreign filing entity is registered in accordance with this chapter.

In addition, Tex. Tax Code Sec. 171.252. States:

If the corporate privileges of a corporation are forfeited under this subchapter:

*43 (1) the corporation shall be denied the right to sue or defend in a court of this state; and (2) each director or officer of the corporation is liable for a debt of the corporation as provided by Section 171.255 of this code.

Section 9.051 (b) requires registration by certain "foreign filing entit[ies]." A "foreign filing entity" is a "foreign entity," other than a foreign limited liability partnership, that registers or is required to register as a foreign entity under Tex.Bus.Org.Codech. 9.5 A "foreign entity" in turn is an organization formed under, and the internal affairs of which are governed by, the laws of a jurisdiction other than Texas. Atenea is a Canadian Corporation, and therefore a "foreign entity." It was not only required to register by $\S 9.051$ (b), which is part of ch. 9 , but it did in fact register; it is therefore a "foreign filing entity." Nothing in these statutes requires that the foreign entity be "ongoing" or that it be currently transacting business in Texas. B. This matter is currently set for a Motion to Compel Discovery on October $2^{\text{nd}}$ , 2013. The motion to compel accrues out of discovery due on August $3^{\text{rd}}$ , 2013. However, by that point Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. no longer had standing to sue in the State of Texas. Thus, since Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. no longer has standing this Court has no jurisdiction to hear the matter set before it and the cause must be dismissed with prejudice.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Cause Number 2012 CI 13872, with prejudice, for attorney fees, and for such other and further relief that may be awarded at law or in equity.

*44 Respectfully submitted,

521 S Broadway St MCALLEN, TX 78501 Tel. (956) 972-0330 Fax. (956) 972-0353 Attorney for Defendant Hector Gonzalez

*45

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on October 1, 2013 a true and correct copy of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss was served by facsimile transmission on Lance Geppert at 210-855-9990.

*46

Exhibit "A"

*47

Forfeiture pursuant to Section 171.309 of the Texas Tax Code of Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P.

File Number : 801043165 Certificate / Charter forfeited : August 02, 2013

The Secretary of State finds that:

1. The Secretary has received certification from the Comptroller of Public Accounts under Section 171.302 of the Texas Tax Code indicating that there are grounds for the forfeiture of the taxable entity's charter, certificate or registration; and
2. The Comptroller of Public Accounts has determined that the taxable entity has not revived its forfeited privileges within 120 days after the date that the privileges were forfeited.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 171.309 of the Texas Tax Code, the Secretary of State hereby forfeits the charter, certificate or registration of the taxable entity as of the date noted above and records this notice of forfeiture in the permanent files and records of the entity.

*48

TEXAS SECRETARY of STATE JOHN STEEN

UCC | Business Organizations | Trademarks | Notary | Account | Help/Fees | Briefcase | Logout BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS INQUIRY - VIEW ENTITY

| Filing Number: | 801043165 | Entity Type: | Foreign Limited Partnership | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | | Original Date of Filing: | October 22, 2008 | Entity Status: | Forfeited existence | | Formation Date: | N/A | | | | Tax ID: | 32038196815 | FEIN: | | | Name: | Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. | | | | Address: | No. 250 Nte. Calazada San Pedro, Colonia Mirav | | | | | Monterrey, NL 64680 MEX | | | | Fictitious Name: | N/A | | | | Jurisdiction: | , CAN | | | | Foreign Formation Date: | October 8, 2008 | | |

| REGISTERED AGENT. | | FILING HISTORY | NAMES | MANAGEMENT | ASSUMED NAMES | ASSOCIATED ENTITIES | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | View
Image | Document
Number | Filing Type | Filing Date | Effective Date | Eff.
Cond | Page
Count | | | 233988870003 | Application for Registration | October 22, 2008 | October 22, 2008 | No | 1 | | | 291613310002 | Application for Amended Registration | January 20, 2010 | January 20, 2010 | No | 2 | | | 493161566406 | Tax Forfeiture | August 2, 2013 | August 2, 2013 | No | 1 |

(Order) Return to Search

Instructions:

• To place an order for additional information about a filing press the 'Order' button.

*49

TEXAS SECRETARY of STATE JOHN STEEN

UCC | Business Organizations | Trademarks | Notary | Account | Help/Fees | Briefcase | Logout BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS INQUIRY - VIEW ENTITY

Filing Number: Original Date of Filing: Formation Date: Tax ID: Name: Address: Fictitious Name: Jurisdiction: Foreign Formation Date:

801043165 October 22, 2008 N/A

32038196815

Entity Type:

Entity Status: N/A

32038196815 F.EIN:

FEIN:

Fifing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

| REGISTERED AGENT | FILING HISTORY | NAMES | MANAGEMENT | ASSUMED NAMES | ASSOCIATED
ENTITIES | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | Name | | Address | | Inactive Date | | | M-Corp Consulting, Inc. | | 17655 Henderson Pass #1014
San Antonio, TX 78232 USA | | | |

Order Return to Search

Instructions:

• To place an order for additional information about a filing press the 'Order' button.

*50

NO. 2012 CI 13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, ..... § IN THE DISTRICT COURT LP Plaintiff, ..... § V. ..... § 57TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT HECTOR GONZALEZ Defendant. ..... § OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS ORDER SETTING HEARING The above and foregoing Defendant's Motion to Dismiss having been presented and duly considered, the Court is of the opinion that a hearing on same is necessary. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that said Motion is set for hearing on October $2^{\text{nd}}$ , 2013 at 8:00 A.M., in the 57TH Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas. SIGNED on $$ , 2013.

JUDGE PRESIDING

*51

NO. 2012 CI 13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND,
LP
Plaintiff,
V.
HECTOR GONZALEZ
Defendant.

## $\begin{aligned} & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \text { § } \ & \

*52 Lance Geppert Attorney for Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP Lance Geppert 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Tel. 210-316-0000 Fax. 210-855-9990

*53

OBJECTION REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE ON HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS

Plaintiff received a copy of the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss at 5:25 pm on October 1, 2013. There was no signed fiat. Pursuant to Local Rules, the Defendant is required to give three days notice of any hearing and the notice provided should be extended three more days in the event that service is by facsimile or mail, and one additional day if the notice is sent by facsimile.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays that the Court refuse to hear the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss as it does not comply with the Rules.

*54

45 m JUDGE'S NOTES

CAUSE NO.: 2012C113872 COURT: 057 DATE/TIME: 10/02/2013 08:30AM SETTING COURT: 109 STYLE: ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP VS. GONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC ET AL

DISCOVERY LEVEL: 4 ATTORNEY(S) FOR CASE: LANCE-GEPPERT'S ANTHONY MATULEWICZ

*55

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | 8 | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | 8 | | | | 8 | | | Plaintiff | 8 | | | | 8 | | | v. | 8 | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | 8 | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | 8 | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | 8 | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | 8 | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | 8 | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | 8 | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | 8 | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | 8 | | | Defendants | 8 | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

After considering the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Interrogatory Response and the Production of Documents, any response, the pleadings, the Exhibits and any other evidence and argument presented the Court is of the opinion that this Motion to Compel the Production of Documents should be granted.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES the following:

1. that the Defendant provide complete responses to interrogatories by October 16, 2013.
2. That Defendant Hernandez is required to provide documents responsive Plaintiff's

First Set of Written Discovery to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez within his possession custody, and control by October 16, 2013. So Ordered this $\frac{16}{10}$ of October, 2013

Document scanned as filed.

*56

Respectfully submitted and entry requested by,

Lance Geppert

Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax geppertlaw@grandecom.net

AGREED AS TO FORM:

George Durham State Bar 24582940 George Durham Matulewicz &; Associates 521 Broadway St. McAllen, Texas 78501 Tel. (956) 972-0330 Fax (956)

972-0353

*57

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS

Comes now Plaintiff, Atenea Capital Market Funds, LP and files this Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and in support thereof states as follows:

FORFEITURE DOES NOT PREVENT THIS LAWSUIT FROM PROCEEDING

Forfeiture does not prevent the lawsuit from going forward. In the latest amendments to the Code, the Legislature changed the definition of terminated entity. The current definition includes those entities that were terminated dues to tax forfeiture. See Tex. Bus. Org. 4. Furthermore, the termination of the entity does not prevent the bringing or pursuit of a lawsuit. Specifically, the law provides that terminated entities have until three years after their termination to bring lawsuits and can complete those lawsuits brought in those three years or prior to termination. See Tex. Bus. Org. 11.356. It is only if the claim is for something that occurred after forfeiture or if the lawsuit is not brought within the three year "survival" statute, that it is barred. In the present case, at the time the lawsuit was filed, Atenea was in good standing. Thus, the survival statute permits the conclusion of the lawsuit.

Document scanned as

filed.

*58

REINSTATMENT

Furthermore, pursuant to law, the entity was reinstated. The Plaintiff is currently in good standing. Thus, the entity has lost whatever deficiency it had under the statute. Once the entity is reinstated, the reinstatement relates back to the point of delinquency, curing same. See e.g., Manning v. Enbridge Pipelines, LP, 345 S.W.3d 718, 723 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 2011, pet. denied). Therefore, the cause continues as if there was never forfeiture/loss of charter.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays that the Court denies the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for the above reasons.

On this date, I submit this Response and certify that I have served same on counsel for Defendant via facsimile at (956) 972-0353.

*59

Corporations Section P.O.Box 13697

Austin, Texas 78711-3697

Office of the Secretary of State

CERTIFICATE OF FILING OF

Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. File Number: 801043165

The undersigned, as Secretary of State of Texas, hereby certifies that the application for reinstatement for the above named entity has been received in this office and has been found to conform to law. It is further certified that the entity has been reinstated to active status on the records of this office.

ACCORDINGLY the undersigned, as Secretary of State, and by virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary by law hereby issues this Certificate of Filing.

Dated: 10/07/2013 Effective: 10/07/2013

*60 ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, LP Plaintiff v.

GONZALEZ & DUARTE LLC, HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ Defendants

SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS

Comes now Plaintiff Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP, and files this its Second Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and For Sanctions and in support thereof, states as follows:

DISCOVERY SENT

On or about July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff sent written discovery, including interrogatories and requests for production to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez. A copy of the discovery is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein for all purposes. The discovery was received by Defendant (through counsel) and because it was served via certified mail, responses to the discovery were due no later than September 3, 2013. However, responses were never received, timely or otherwise.

On or about September 10, 2013, the undersigned sent a demand to opposing counsel to provide complete responses to the discovery no later than September 14, 2013. No response was ever received. Thus, the Plaintiff has no choice but to submit this matter to the Court to force the Defendant to respond to the discovery requests.

*61

OBJECTIONS WAIVED

Responses and objections to discovery were due no later than September 3, 2013. The Defendants failed to respond and all objections are waived and any responses provided must be provided without objection.

MOTION TO COMPEL GRANTED

On or about, the Court heard the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez, and ordered that the Defendant respond to discovery no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the hearing.

RESPONSES RECEIVED WHOLLY INADEQUATE

On or about, the Plaintiff received the attached "response" to the discovery requested. See Defendant's Response to Discovery, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein for all purposes. No effort was made to provide individual responses to the discovery requested, nor to provide any documents. The responses provided are contemptuous of the order of the Court.

DISCOVERY RESPONSES NEEDED

The Plaintiff need the requested information to evaluate the case. Moreover, as this case concerns the location and use of certain funds that were and may still be in the possession custody and control of the Defendant, it is crucial that the responses be provided as soon as possible. The Plaintiff incorporates its First Set of Written Discovery, attached to the Motion to Compel, and incorporates same herein by reference.

FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS REQUESTED

Defense counsel further indicated that he would provide a response to the request for financial authorizations of the client and the entities, because no documents have been provided. No response was received.

*62 COURT SHOULD COMPEL AND SANCTION

This hearing will be scheduled for November 15, 2013. If the Defendant has not provided full responses, the Court should sanction the Defendant for failure to respond and subverting the discovery process. The Defendant has already had the discovery requests for well over ninety days and has failed to provide any meaningful response. Sanctions are warranted when parties fail to respond to written discovery. See, e.g., Able Sup. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 766,771 (Tex. 1995) and Swain v. Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 731 (Tex. App.—Ft. Worth 1999, no pet.). In the present case, the Defendant failed to answer discovery. Attorneys fees are among the explicitly authorized sanctions and in the present case, movant has already expended time and expense sending a reminder correspondence and drafting and filing this motion and the previous motion to compel.

The Plaintiff requests that the Court award five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), which is the amount of attorneys Plaintiff claims it has expended towards discovery in this case, which includes the two hearings, in sanctions in this case. Furthermore, the Plaintiff desires to pursue greater sanctions for the Defendant's failure to follow the Court's orders and answer discovery. See Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835, 840-41 (Tex. 2004). (in the case of egregious discovery misconduct, court not required to consider lesser sanction before imposing "death penalty" sanctions). The Plaintiff requests that the Court consider imposing death penalty sanction or, at the least, that it admonish that any further failure to comply completely with the discovery requests will result in the Court striking the Defendant Gonzalez' answer and rendering judgment, for the reason that the Defendant's conduct justifies a presumption that the defenses lack merit. See Hamill v. Level, 917 S.W.2d 15, 16 (Tex. 1996).

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff prays that the Court enter an order confirming that all Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez' objections to discovery are

*63 waived, order that the Defendant is sanctioned in the amount of five thousand dollars ( $\$5,000.00$ ), strike the Defendant's answer, or order Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez to respond fully to discovery no later than November 22, 2013 and admonish Defendant that any further failure to respond will result in death penalty sanctions, and for such other relief may be necessary to do justice in this matter.

Respectfully submitted and certified served via facsimile on counsel for Hector Gonzalez Hernandez via facsimile on November 8, 2013 by:

*64

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, LP | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :-- | :-- | :-- | | Plaintiff, | § | | | V. | § | 57TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ | § | | | Defendant. | § | OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

DEFENDANTS' RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Pursuant to Rules 192 and 193 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Hector Gonzalez hereby responds to Plaintiff Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP's (Atenea) First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents as follows.

GENERAL OBJECTIONS

1. Defendants object to Plaintiff's "Instructions" and "Definitions" to the extent they purport to impose discovery obligations that differ from or exceed the discovery obligations imposed by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
2. Defendants object to the Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents to the extent that they seek information protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work-product privilege, or any other privilege, protection, or immunity applicable under the governing law.
3. Defendants object to the Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents to the extent that they are overly broad,

*65

unduly burdensome, oppressive, and/or seek information that is not relevant to the issues in this lawsuit or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 4. These General Objections are made, to the extent applicable, in response to each of the Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents as if the objections were fully set forth therein. 5. Defendant responds to each of the Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents based upon information and documentation available as of the date hereof and reserve the right to supplement and amend their responses.

INTERROGATORY NO's 1-14:

RESPONSE:

Defendant was not authorized to handle nor did Defendant have direct knowledge of the subject matter referred to in these interrogatories. Defendant was not privy to the information requested. To Defendant's best knowledge, Hernan Duarte was responsible for the negotiation and implementation of any actions accruing between Atenea and Gonzalez &; Duarte. His last known address is Paseo de las Selvas, 125 Colonia Le Rioja, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon. Due to the involuntary sequestration from other defendants named in this suit, Defendant cannot access the information requested.

Defendant's sole involvement in the enterprise with Atenea was to present potential clients with Atenea's investment amongst other available investments and put them in contact with Hernan Duarte. Defendant is no longer privy to the information gained by Mr. Duarte.

*66

Although defendant no longer has documents relating to his employment, when he initially went into business with Mr. Duarte in Gonzalez and Duarte, SC, he had a $35\%$ share of the enterprise. However, the current status of other members of the company, or whether the company itself is operating is unknown.

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION NO'S 1-18

RESPONSE: Defendant is unable to obtain any documents in connection with this action. It is believed that Hernan Duarte would have direct access to these documents. His last known address is Paseo de las Selvas, 125 Colonia Le Rioja, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing Defendants' Responses and Objections to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production was served, via electronic correspondence and via regular mail, upon Lance Geppert, attorney for Plaintiff, lgeppert@grandecom.net, 1900 Tower Life Building, 310 South St. Mary's Street, Suite 1900, this 16th day of October, 2013.

George Durham Attorney for Defendant Hector Gonzalez 521 S Broadway St MCALLEN, TX 78501 Tel. (956) 972-0330 Fax. (956) 972-0353

*67

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

FIAT SETTING HEARING

PLAINTIFF'S Second Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez is hereby set at 8:30 a.m. on November 15, 2013 at the Presiding District Court, Bexar County, Texas, 100 Dolorosa, Suite 1.09, 1st Floor, Bexar County Courthouse, San Antonio, Texas 78205.

NOV 08205

Hearing requested and notice of hearing will be served in accordance with the Rules of Texas Civil Procedure on November 8, 2013 by:

Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*68

APPROF 2

2012C113872 -P00023

NO. 2012 C1 13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, $$ IN THE DISTRICT COURT LP Plaintiff, V.

HECTOR GONZALEZ

Defendant.

DEPUTY DEPUTY

DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: NOW COMES Defendant, Hector Gonzalez, and responds to Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and for Sanctions and states as follows:

1. Plaintiff, Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. has previously filed a motion to compel discovery against Defendant, Hector Gonzalez. The court heard the matter On October $2^{\text{nd}}2013$ and set a deadline for response 14 days afterward. On October ${16}^{\text{th}}$ , Defendant submitted responses to discovery, as attached in Plaintiff's aforementioned motion.
2. Plaintiff complains that the responses and documents requested in discovery have not been responded to or are wholly inadequate. This is predicated on the assumption that Defendant is able to obtain these documents and must be lying. However, as noted in the discovery responses and correspondence with Plaintiff's attorney, the Defendant no longer has access to any documents needed to complete discovery because Defendant does not live in Mexico and is no longer associated with the co-defendants. The co-defendants have cut off communication with Defendant and have prevented him from being able to answer discovery.

*69 Moreover, Defendant Hector Gonzalez was not directly involved with the planning and execution of the investment packages with Atenea. Defendant's only contact was to alert investors of the investment vehicle along with other investment products, but his role did not extend to management control needed to complete the actions complained of by Plaintiff. He did not have the necessary access to the documents needed by Plaintiff. 3. To Defendant's knowledge, Plaintiff has been unable to obtain service on the codefendants. It would be premature to accuse Defendant of intentionally not responding to discovery when other necessary parties who have direct access to the necessary documents and accounts are not participating. Both Defendant, Hector Gonzalez, and Plaintiff, Atenea, have the same problem in that the true wrongdoer's are unreachable. 4. Plaintiff has submitted documents for authorization into unspecified accounts on November 20, 2013. Although Defendant is just as ignorant on the nature of the information sought as Plaintiff, Defendant will attempt to help Plaintiff obtain further information. Unfortunately, due to their receipt on the eve of court they have not been executed yet, however Defendant will attempt in good faith to furnish access to the relevant accounts.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Honorable Court to deny Plaintiff's motion and withhold judgment until the other Defendants are properly served, for attorney fees, and for such other and further relief that may be awarded at law or in equity.

Respectfully submitted,

By: $$ /u/ George Durham Texas Bar No. 24082940 521 S Broadway St

*70 MCALLEN, TX 78501 Tel. (956) 972-0330 Fax. (956) 972-0353 Attorney for Defendant Hector Gonzalez

*71

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on November 20, 2013 a true and correct copy of the forgoing was served via electronic mail on Lance Geppert.

*72

30 m JUDGE'S NOTES

CAUSE NO.: 2012C113872

COURT: 057 DATE/TIME: $11/21/201308:30\mathrm{A}\mathrm{M}$ SETTING COURT: 109 STYLE: ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP VS. GONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC ET AL

DISCOVERY LEVEL: 4 ATTORNEY(S) FOR CASE: LANCE GEPPERT ANTHONY MATULEWICZ

TYPE OF MOTION OR APPLICATION: NON-JURY RESET - 2KD AMENDED M/T COMPEL

CONFERRING $$ ESTIMATE HEARING TIME $$ AGREED ORDER $$ ASSIGNED COURT $$ DROP $$ RECORD TAKEN $$ INTERPRETER $$ RESET DATE $$ TIME $$

*73

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

After considering the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Interrogatory Response and the Production of Documents, any response, the pleadings, the Exhibits and any other evidence and argument presented the Court is of the opinion that this Motion to Compel the Production of Documents should be granted.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES the following:

1. That responses to the proffered discovery are untimely and all objections to the responses to the Plaintiff's First Set of Written Discovery are waived.
2. that the Defendant provide complete responses to all interrogatories, including the following, within ten (10) days of the entry of this order: a. All payment ever received by or on behalf of Hector Gonzalez Hernandez (Int 4) b. All information concerning stock purchases and sales made by Atenea or Gonzalez &; Duarte, including specifically purchases from the IFX global markets (Int 3)

Document scanned as filed. c. All payments made by investors into Atenea accounts (Int 1)

*74 d. All information pertaining to Atenea investor certificates (Int 2) e. All assets owned by Atenea (Int 5, 6) f. All assets Gonzalez and Duarte, LLC and Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. are holding for or on behalf of Atenea (Int 5,6) g. Communications with investors (Int 8) h. information requested concerning Hector Gonzalez Hernandez qualifications and relation to Atenea (Int 9, 10, and 11) I. Information concerning Gonzalez &; Duarte relations with Atenea (Int. 12) j. Information concerning persons involved with Gonzalez &; Duarte (Int. 13 and 14) 3. That Defendant Hernandez is required to provide ALL documents responsive

Plaintiff's First Set of Written Discovery to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez within his possession custody, and control watiny (cicted) days of the signing of this order, including specifically, personal and corporate banking records, communications, stock records, investment records, and other records. The Court finds, that unless the Defendant Hernandez objectively proves otherwise, that he has possession custody and control over all banking and financial records of Plaintiff Atenea, Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC (of which he is a named member) and Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. (of which he is a named member). 4. Furthermore, the Court finds that the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez has subverted the discovery process and the progression of this lawsuit by failing to timely submit discovery responses. The Court finds that discovery was sent on or about July 29, 2013. The Court finds that discovery was due on or about September 3, 2013. The Court Court finds that the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez has violated Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 215(3) (A) and (B) by failing to provide non evasive and complete answers to interrogatories that

*75 were propounded by the Plaintiff. The Court finds that the supposed answers to discovery that were provided were so inadequate as to constitute willful discovery abuses. 5. The Court finds that the sanction sought, attorneys fees, bears direct relation to the conduct of Defendant in failing to answer discovery, which has necessitate this hearing. The Court finds that the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez has been provided reasonable notice by the Plaintiff of its intent to seek discovery sanctions and an order compelling discovery. 6. Therefore, the Court sanctions the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez $ 500 , an amount that the Court determines is a just and necessary sanction based upon the repeated failure of the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez to respond to discovery requests and the inadequacy of discovery requests. The Court finds that payment must be paid to $$ and on betwitert

1. Furthermore, pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 215(d) the Court further will set a hearing for November 25, 2013 at 8:30 in the Presiding Court of Rexar County, Texas, to determine what the reasonable expenses of the Plaintiff were (including attorneys fees) in obtaining this order, unless the Court finds that the opposition to the motion to compel was substantially justified or unless other circumstances make the award unjust.
2. Further, the Court finds that the Defendant has abused the discovery process and cautions the Defendant that this order is a modest sanction meant to enforce compliance with the discovery rules and that any further abuse of the discovery process will create a presumption that the defenses of Hector Gonzalez Hernandez lack merit and result in death penalty sanctions.

*76

Respectfully submitted and entry requested this November 15, 2013 by,

AGREED AS TO FORM:

*77

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

THIRD MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM DEFENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS

Comes now Plaintiff Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP, and files this its Third Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and For Sanctions and in support thereof, states as follows:

DISCOVERY SENT

Document scanned as filed.

On or about July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff sent written discovery, including interrogatories and requests for production to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez. A copy of the discovery is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein for all purposes. The discovery was received by Defendant (through counsel) and because it was served via certified mail, responses to the discovery were due no later than September 3, 2013. However, responses were never received, timely or otherwise.

On or about October 2, 2013, the Court heard Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and Judge Pozza ordered that the Defendants must provide complete responses to discovery by October 16, 2013. On or about November 20, 2013, the Court heard Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel and Judge Littlejohn again ordered Defendant to provide complete responses, this

*78 time by December 2, 2013. The Defendant has continued to fail to respond to the Plaintiff's discovery request, and thus this matter is submitted again for Court intervention.

OBJECTIONS WAIVED

Responses and objections to discovery were due no later than September 3, 2013. The Defendants failed to respond and all objections are waived and any responses provided must be provided without objection.

RESPONSES RECEIVED WHOLLY INADEQUATE

On or about December 2, 2013, the Plaintiff received the attached documents from counsel for Defendant. See Defendant's Response to Discovery, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein for all purposes. No effort was made to provide individual responses to the discovery requested, nor to provide any other documents documents, despite the fact that the Court has correctly ordered that any objections are untimely and overruled. The responses provided are contemptuous of the order of the Court.

DISCOVERY RESPONSES NEEDED

The Plaintiff need the requested information to evaluate the case. Moreover, as this case concerns the location and use of certain funds that were and may still be in the possession custody and control of the Defendant, it is crucial that the responses be provided as soon as possible. The Plaintiff incorporates its First Set of Written Discovery, attached to the Motion to Compel, and incorporates same herein by reference.

FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS REQUESTED

Defense counsel further indicated that he would provide a response to the request for financial authorizations of the client and the entities, because no documents have been provided. Despite the failure to provide documents, no authorization has been signed.

SANCTION WARRANTED

This hearing will be scheduled for December 20, 2013. By the time of the hearing, the

*79 responses will have been overdue by over one hundred (100) days. If the Defendant has not provided full responses, the Court should sanction the Defendant for failure to respond and subverting the discovery process. Sanctions are warranted when parties fail to respond to written discovery. See, e.g., Able Sup. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 766,771 (Tex. 1995) and Swain v. Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 731 (Tex. App.--Ft. Worth 1999, no pet.). In the present case, the Defendant failed to answer discovery. Attorneys fees are among the explicitly authorized sanctions and in the present case, movant has already expended time and expense sending a reminder correspondence and drafting and filing this motion and the previous motions to compel.

The Plaintiff requests that the Court award five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), which is the amount of attorneys Plaintiff claims it has expended towards discovery in this case, which includes the three hearings, including the requests for sanctions in this case. In the present case, the Court has heard discovery motions in October, November, and, now, December, and the Defendant has failed to answer the discovery requests that were provided to his counsel. The Defendant apparently has access to at least some of the requested documents, and is selectively producing documents that he believes supports his case, despite the fact that he did not timely object to any requested discovery.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff desires to pursue greater sanctions for the Defendant's failure to follow the Court's orders and answer discovery. See Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835, 840-41 (Tex. 2004). (in the case of egregious discovery misconduct, court not required to consider lesser sanction before imposing "death penalty" sanctions). The Plaintiff requests that the Court consider imposing death penalty sanctions and strike the Defendant's pleading. The Court has previously admonished the Defendant that any further failure to comply completely with the discovery requests may result in the Court striking the Defendant Gonzalez' answer and rendering judgment, for the reason that the Defendant's conduct

*80 justifies a presumption that the defenses lack merit. See Hamill v. Level, 917 S.W.2d 15, 16 (Tex. 1996).

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff prays that the Court enter an order confirming that all Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez' objections to discovery are waived, order that the Defendant is sanctioned in the amount of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), strike the Defendant's answer, or order Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez to respond fully to discovery no later than December 30, 2013 and admonish Defendant that any further failure to respond will result in death penalty sanctions, and for such other relief may be necessary to do justice in this matter.

Respectfully submitted and certified served via facsimile on counsel for Hector Gonzalez Hernandez via facsimile on December 10, 2013 by:

Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*81

CHASE 6

Outsliet 30, 2010 Brough November 30, 2010 Accouni Number: 000000858128701

ELECTRONIC WITHDRAWALS

| Date | DEMONPTED | AMOUNT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 11/01 | 11/01 Ordine Wire Transfer VSc. Tlb Defles/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Alamos Capital Markets Fund Lp. Account Number 3634/Bnl/Fbc. Alamos Capital Markets Fund Lp., Account Number 3534 Imad: 1101910go08C003115 Tm: 108280030Ee | 230,000.00 | | 11/01 | 11/01 Online Wire Transfer VSc. Tlb Defies/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781/2nl/Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781 Imad: 1101910go08C005416 Tm: 101190000Ee | 15,000.00 | | 11/05 | 11/05 Online Wire Transfer Vsc. Lone Star Pram/114811887 A/C: Ha Bobs Estate Lla Texas TX 76832 USA Ref/10mla/17:11 Imad: 1108810go04C006831 Tm: 1888500312Ee | 75,000.00 | | 11/10 | 11/10 Online Wire Transfer Vsc. Tlb Defies/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781/2nl/Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781 Imad: 1110910go08C001723 Tm: 0148050314Ee | 80,000.00 | | 11/12 | 11/12 Online Wire Transfer VSc. Tlb Defies/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781/2nl/Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781 Imad: 1112810go04C002573 Tm: 0408800318Ee | 78,000.00 | | 11/12 | 11/12 Online Wire Transfer Vsc. Tlb Defies/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3634/Bnl/Fbc. Alamos Capital Fund, Account Number 3534 Imad: 1112810go07C004888 Tm: 0741090316Ee | 24,000.00 | | 11/18 | 11/18 Online Wire Transfer Vsc. Tlb Defies/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781/2nl/Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781 Imad: 1118810go07C005082 Tm: 0948500318Ee | 82,000.00 | | 11/18 | 11/18 Online Wire Transfer Vsc. Tlb Defies/111010170 A/C: Libertad Bank Sab Austin TX 78704 USA Ref: Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781/2nl/Fbc. Gonzales Duarte Lla, Account Number 3781 Imad: 1118810go07C005102 Tm: 0811100322Ee | 1,000.00 | | 11/30 | 11/30 Online Wire Transfer A/C: Banco Inbueas Se C.F. 14030 Mexico D.F Mexico Tm: 1202100334Ee | 80,000.00 | | Total Elastranie Withdrawals | | $488,000.00 |

FEES AND OTHER WITHDRAWALS

| Date | DEMONPTED | AMOUNT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 11/03 | Service Charges For The Month of October | $\$83.39$ | | Total Fees &; Other Withdrawals | | $\$83.39$ |

DAILY ENDING BALANCE

| Date | AMOUNT | | :--: | :--: | | 11/01 | 5337,003.11 | | 11/03 | 337,008.72 | | 11/06 | 382,008.72 | | 11/10 | 182,008.72 | | 11/12 | 83,008.72 | | 11/15 | 1,008.72 | | 11/18 | 8.72 | | 11/26 | 50,008.72 | | 11/30 | 2,657.01 |

*82

*83

| | Date $11/30/10$
Primary Account
Enclosures | Page | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | HV BELLA ESTATE LLC | | | | 2604 CHA | | | | PHARR TX 78577-0000 | | |

CHECKING ACCOUNTS

*84 | Daily Balance Information | | | | | | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | | | | | | | | Daily Balance Information | | | | | | | Date | Balance | Date | Balance | Date | Balance | | 11/01 | 55,000.00 | 11/08 | 128,468.72 | 11/18 | 90,000.00 | | 11/03 | 53,474.71 | 11/12 | 95,681.83 | 11/26 | 3,000.00 |

The current Non-Sufficient Funds Fee is $\$34.99$ . Your account will accrue interest on an overdraft at the rate of $17.50\%$ (calculated as an annual percentage rate) from the date of the overdraft until the balance is paid in full.

*85

| Date $12/03/10$ | Page 1 | | :-- | --: | | Primary Account | 3400012912 | | Enclosures | |

CHECKING ACCOUNTS

*86

*87 | Date 12/03/10
Primary Account
Enclosures | Page 3
3400012912 | | :--: | :--: |

| FREE Checking | 3400012912 (Continued) | | :--: | :--: | | Debits and Other Withdrawals | | | Date | Description Amount | | | 111000614 | | | 858125701 | | | 1777 NE LOOP 410 STE 600 | | | SAN ANTONIO TEXAS | | | JP MORGAN CHASE | | | MCALLEN TEKAS | | $11/26$ | Wire Transfer Debit | | | LIBERTAD BANK SSB | | | 111010170 | | | 1019447 | | | 512 RE RIVERSIDE OR STE 100 | | | AYSTIN TEXAS | | | INDEPENDENT BANKER | | | IRVING TX | | | FFC GONEALEZ &; DUARTE LLC $ 37 | | $11/26$ | Wire Transfer Fes | | $11/26$ | Wire Transfer Fes | | 12/03 | Debit/ATM Cd Handling Fee | | Daily Balance Information | | | Date | Balance Date Balance Date Balance | | $11/04$ | $\begin{array}{c}\hfill 812.972,766.991,766.99\end{array}\&11/18\&11/19\&11/26$ | $\begin{array}{c}\hfill 10,440.829,422.842,382.86\end{array}$ |

The current Non-Sufficient Funds Fes is $\$34.99$ . Your account will accrue interest on an overdraft at the rate of $17.50\%$ (calculated as an annual percentage rate) from the date of the overdraft until the balance is paid in full.

*88

CASA DE BOLSA ARKA SA DE CV facturacion@mail.cbarka.com.mx 0 1 de diciembre de 2010 3:07 p.m. Para: h.gonzalez@gdmm.com.mx Documento Electrónico

1 archivo adjunto, 58 KB

Para: HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ

Adjunto a este mensaje encontrará el Comprobante Fiscal Digital (representación gráfica) serle CBV folio 31013 emitido por CASA DE BOLSA ARKA S A DE C V para HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ con fecha de 2010-12-01T15:00:18.

Atentamente -

CASA DE BOLSA ARKA S A DE C V

Esa base se es complelele de pagr

ESTIMADO CLIENTE 0 PROVEEDOR, LE COMUNICAMOS QUE DURANTE EL MES DE NOVIEMBRE ESTAREMOS NUDANDO PARTE DE NUESTRO PERSONAL UBICADO EN LAS OFICINAS DE EMILIO CASTELAR 75 Y REFORMA 385 A NUESTRAS NUEVAS OFICINAS EN

*89

*90 | Date $3/03/11$ | Page 2 | | :-- | :-- | | Primary Account | 3400012912 | | Enclosures | |

| FREC Cheding | | 3400012912 | (Continued) | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | Daily Balance Information | | | | | Date | Balance | Date | Balance | | 2/04 | 1,771.80 | 2/25 | 1,486.82 | | 2/10 | 7,506.81 | 3/03 | 1,485.82 |

Customer Message: The current Non-Sufficient Funds Fee is $\$34.99$ . Your account will accrue interest on an overdraft at the rate of $17.50\%$ (calculated as an annual percentage rate) from the date of the overdraft until the balance is paid in full.

*91

Libertad Bank

Atn. Yesenta Foshee

Por medio de la presente solloito de la manera mas atenta sea realizado el siguiente traspaso:

| Citente | No. De Cuenta | | | | | | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | Atenea Capital Markets Fund, L.P. | 3634 | | | $ | 39,000.00 | |

Favor de retirar esta cantidad de la cuenta # 1019816 a nombre de Hector Gonzalez para la realización de este movimiento.

*92

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :-- | :-- | :-- | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL INTERROGATORY RESPONSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

After considering the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Interrogatory Response and the Production of Documents, any response, the pleadings, the Exhibits and any other evidence and argument presented the Court is of the opinion that this Motion to Compel the Production of Documents should be granted.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES the following:

1. That responses to the proffered discovery are untimely and all objections to the responses to the Plaintiff's First Set of Written Discovery are waived.
2. that the Defendant provide complete responses to all interrogatories, including the following, within ten (10) days of the entry of this order: a. All payment ever received by or on behalf of Hector Gonzalez Hernandez (Int 4) b. All information concerning stock purchases and sales made by Atenea or

Gonzalez &; Duarte, including specifically purchases from the IFX global markets (Int 3) c. All payments made by investors into Atenea accounts (Int 1)

*93 d. All information pertaining to Atenea investor certificates (Int 2) e. All assets owned by Atenea (Int 5, 6) f. All assets Gonzalez and Duarte, LLC and Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. are holding for or on behalf of Atenea (Int 5,6) g. Communications with investors (Int 8) h. information requested concerning Hector Gonzalez Hernandez qualifications and relation to Atenea (Int 9, 10, and 11) I. Information concerning Gonzalez &; Duarte relations with Atenea (Int. 12) j. Information concerning persons involved with Gonzalez &; Duarte (Int. 13 and 14) 3. That Defendant Hernandez is required to provide ALL documents responsive Plaintiff's First Set of Written Discovery to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez within his possession custody, and control within ten (10) days of the signing of this order, including specifically, personal and corporate banking records, communications, stock records, investment records, and other records. The Court finds, that unless the Defendant Hernandez objectively proves otherwise, that he has possession custody and control over all banking and financial records of Plaintiff Atenea, Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC (of which he is a named member) and Gonzalez &; Duarte, S.C. (of which he is a named member). 4. Furthermore, the Court finds that the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez has subverted the discovery process and the progression of this lawsuit by failing to timely submit discovery responses. The Court finds that discovery was sent on or about July 29, 2013. The Court finds that discovery was due on or about September 3, 2013. The Court Court finds that the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez has violated Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 215(3) (A) and (B) by failing to provide non evasive and complete answers to interrogatories that

*94 were propounded by the Plaintiff. The Court finds that the supposed answers to discovery that were provided after the two orders compelling interrogatories and requests for production were so inadequate as to constitute willful discovery abuses. 5. The Court finds that the sanctions sought, attorneys fees and striking of the defensive pleadings, bears direct relation to the conduct of Defendant in failing to answer discovery, which has necessitated this hearing. The Court finds that the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez has been provided reasonable notice by the Plaintiff of its intent to seek discovery sanctions and that previous attempts to enforce compliance with orders from the Court and the discovery requirements, have been unsuccessful. 6. Therefore, the Court sanctions the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez $ 2532 , 9 an amount that the Court determines is a just and necessary sanction based upon the repeated failure of the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez to respond to discovery requests and the inadequacy of discovery requests. The Court finds that payment must be paid to $$ Lance Gc ppert and on behalf of Menex, fes no later than December 31 , 2013. 7. Furthermore, due to Defendant's repeated failure to provide requested documentation and responsive answers, the Court grants the Plaintiff's request to order the production of financialuments in this cause and, therefore, the Court orders that the financial records of Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC and Gonzalez &; Duarte S.A. de C.V. are produced and not subject to any claim or privilege or confidentiality and also the Court orders that, due to the failure to comply with requests for production, and the need for the records, Hector Gonzalez Hernandez is ORDERED to sign authorizations permitting Atenea and its counsel to obtain these records from financial institutions without further approval of Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC or any other person or party. The Court finds that the authorizations are acceptable.

*95

1. Furthermore, the Court finds that the Defendant has abused the discovery process and has cautioned the Defendant that any further abuse of the discovery process will create a presumption that the defenses of Hector Gonzalez Hernandez lack merit and result in death penalty sanctions. As the modest sanctions have not resulted in compliance, the Court feels compelled to order death penalty sanctions in this case and strikes the Defendant's pleadings and finds liability in favor of the Plaintiffs. Court orders that the clemages as a result of liability can be submitted through presiding as other matters So Ordered this $$ of December 20, 2013

Respectfully submitted and entry requested this December 20, 2013 by,

Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax

GEPPERTLAW@GRANDECOM.NET

AGREED AS TO FORM:

*96

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

MOTION TO ENFORCE ORDERS AND SANCTIONS OF COURT AND TO DETERMINE DAMAGES

Comes now Plaintiff Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP, and files this its Third Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and For Sanctions and in support thereof, states as follows:

ORDERS NOT FOLLOWED

On or about October 2, 2013, the Court heard Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and Judge Pozza ordered that the Defendants must provide complete responses to discovery by October 16, 2013. On or about November 20, 2013, the Court heard Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel and Judge Littlejohn again ordered Defendant to provide complete responses, this time by December 2, 2013. On or about December 20, 2013, the Court heard the Plaintiff's Third Motion to Compel, awarded monetary sanctions and sanctioned the Defendant HECTOR GONZALEZ by finding liability against him. The Defendant has continued to fail to meet the obligations in the Court's Orders, and thus this matter is submitted again for Court intervention under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure .

*97 RESPONSES RECEIVED WHOLLY INADEQUATE

On or about December 2, 2013, the Plaintiff received the attached documents from counsel for Defendant. See Defendant’s Response to Discovery, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein for all purposes. No effort was made to provide individual responses to the discovery requested, nor to provide any other documents documents, despite the fact that the Court has correctly ordered that any objections are untimely and overruled. The responses provided are contemptuous of the orders of the Court.

DISCOVERY RESPONSES NEEDED

The Plaintiff need the requested information to evaluate the case. Moreover, as this case concerns the location and use of certain funds that were and may still be in the possession custody and control of the Defendant, it is crucial that the responses be provided as soon as possible. The Plaintiff incorporates its First Set of Written Discovery, attached to the Motion to Compel, and incorporates same herein by reference.

SANCTION WARRANTED

This hearing will be scheduled for March 28, 2014. By the time of the hearing, the responses will have been overdue by over two hundred (200) days. If the Defendant has not provided full responses, the Court should sanction the Defendant for failure to respond and subverting the discovery process. Sanctions are warranted when parties fail to respond to written discovery. See, e.g., Able Sup. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 766,771 (Tex. 1995) and Swain v. Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 731 (Tex. App.—Ft. Worth 1999, no pet.). In the present case, the Defendant failed to answer discovery. Attorneys fees are among the explicitly authorized sanctions and in the present case, movant has already expended time and expense sending a reminder correspondence and drafting and filing this motion and the previous motions to compel.

The Plaintiff pursued death penalty sanctions, and the Court approved same by

*98 entering an order determining liability against Defendant GONZALEZ. The Plaintiff desires to pursue greater sanctions for the Defendant's failure to follow the Court's orders and answer discovery. See Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835, 840-41 (Tex. 2004). (in the case of egregious discovery misconduct, court not required to consider lesser sanction before imposing "death penalty" sanctions). The Plaintiff requests that the Court determine the amount of damages to award against the Defendant as sanctions, and pursuant to the Court's earlier order. Defendant's conduct justifies a presumption that the defenses lack merit. See Hamill v. Level, 917 S.W.2d 15, 16 (Tex. 1996).

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff prays that the Court enter an order confirming the amount of damages to award against Defendant as sanctions, and in coordination with the finding of liability, otherwise award attorneys fees as a sanction in the amount of five thousand dollars ( $\$5,000.00$ ), and for such other relief may be necessary to do justice in this matter.

Respectfully submitted and certified served via facsimile on counsel for Hector Gonzalez Hernandez via facsimile on March 21, 2014 by:

Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*99

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

FIAT SETTING HEARING

PLAINTIFF'S Motion to Enforce Orders of Court and to Determine Damages, and continuance of Third Motion to Compel Discovery from Defendant Hector Gonzalez

Hernandez are hereby set at 9:00 a.m. on March 28, 2014, at the Presiding District Court, Bexar County, Texas, 100 Dolorosa, Suite 1.09, 1st Floor, Bexar County Courthouse, San Peter Sakat Antonio, Texas 78205. 3/20/2014 Presiding Judge 225th District Court Judge Presiding Bexar County, Texas

Hearing requested and notice of hearing will be served in accordance with the Rules of Texas Civil Procedure on March 20, 2014 by:

Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*100 CAUSE NO.: 2012C113872 COURT: 057 DATE/TIME: 04/24/2014 09:00AM SETTING COURT: 109 STYLE: ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP VS. GONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC ET AL

DISCOVERY LEVEL: 4 ATTORNEY(S) FOR CASE: LANCE GEPPERT —

ANTHONY MATULEVICZ

THIS CASE HAS 15 OR MORE ATTORNEYS TYPE OF MOTION OR APPLICATION: NON-JURY SETTING ON M/T ENFORCE ORDERS, TO DETERMINE DAMAGES, &; CONTINUANCE OF 3

CONFERRING ESTIMATE HEARING TIME AGREED ORDER ASSIGNED COURT $$ DROP $$ RECORD TAKEN $$ TIME $$

DATE OF NOTES $$ JUDGE INITIALS $$

*101

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

CONDITIONAL MOTION FOR SEVERANCE

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

The Plaintiffs are seeking judgment on this date, and the counsel for Defendant is seeking to withdraw his representation of all Defendants save and except Hector Gonzalez Hernandez. Plaintiff requests that in the event that a motion to withdraw is granted, that the Court sever Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC and Hector Gonzalez Hernandez from the remainder of the lawsuit.

The Court has discretion and authority to authorize a severance of parties from the Cause of action in the efficient administration of justice. See e.g., Castano v. Foremost Cty Mut. Ins., 31 S.W.3d 387 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 2000, no pet.). In the present case, in the event that the Court grants the withdrawal, the Plaintiff requests that judgment be made final for the represented and the defaulting party.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays that the Court grant this motion in the event that withdrawal is granted.

*102 Defendant via email on this the ${23}^{\text{rd}}$ of May, 2014.

Lance Geppert, Attorney At LAW
8000 West Ave., Suite 1
Castle Hills, Texas 78213
(210) 888-9836 Phone
(210) 855-9990Fax
lgeppert@grandecom.net

By: $◻$ Lance Geppert State Bar No. 24007234 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

*103

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

FIAT SETTING HEARING

PLAINTIFF'S Conditional Motion for Severance hereby set at 9:00 a.m. on May 27, 2014, at the Presiding District Court, Bexar County, Texas, 100 Dolorosa, Suite 1.09, 1st Floor, Bexar County Courthouse, San Antonio, Texas 78205.

$$5/23/2014\text{SOL CASSEB III}$$

Judge Presiding Hearing requested and notice of hearing will be served in accordance with the Rules of Texas Civil Procedure on May 27, 2014 by:

Lance Geppert Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 223-2877/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 223-2714/ (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*104

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO RECONSIDER SANCTIONS

Comes now Plaintiff Atenea Capital Markets Fund, LP, and files this its Response to Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez Motion to Reconsider Sanctions and in support thereof, states as follows:

ORDERS NOT FOLLOWED

On or about October 2, 2013, the Court heard Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and Judge Pozza ordered that the Defendants must provide complete responses to discovery by October 16, 2013. On or about November 20, 2013, the Court heard Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel and Judge Littlejohn again ordered Defendant to provide complete responses, this time by December 2, 2013 and sanctioned the Defendant a monetary amount. At this time, the Defendant produced approximately ten pages or emails and bank records that he believed were exculpatory, and no other documents. On or about December 20, 2013, the Court heard the Plaintiff's Third Motion to Compel, awarded monetary sanctions and sanctioned the Defendant HECTOR GONZALEZ by finding liability against him. At this time, the Defendant produced some personal bank records and a spreadsheet of some kind with no other

*105 documents or full responses to interrogatories. On April 24, 2014, the Court again heard the Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and this time for damages pursuant to the sanctions order, and again the Court found that the Defendant had not complied and ordered additional sanctions. As of the present time, the Defendant is $\$1,532.00$ in arrears on the payment of the very modest sanctions.

All the Courts were proven very correct. It was not until May 9, 2014 that the Defendant provided answers to each interrogatory and request for production, through, for many reasons, including the fact that the Defendant was sanctioned three times without providing responses, that the Plaintiff does not believe the responses are full and, regardless, the fact that responses were not provided until almost five (5) months after the answer was sricken proves that the sanctions were valid and that no lesser sanction would have resulted in compliance. The case ground to a halt as it took extreme efforts to force the Defendant to comply with a single set of written discovery served in the summer of 2013 and for which he had no objection.

The Defendant claims that since now he believes he has answered in good faith, he should be able to go back and argue the case as if the delinquencies had not occurred. That would subvert the purposes of the sanctions in the first place. There is no reasonable explanation or evidence provided to justify the conduct and the sanctions should remain.

The Defendant claims that the Plainitff could have obtained some of the information from other sources, but that is not relevant to the satisfaction of his own duties. The fact that significant documents were produced, whole categories of which were never produced previously, is ample evidence that the Defnednatn could have met his burden much, much earlier.

The Defenadnt further claims that the Plainitff is somehow obligated to serve the other Defnednats when the same counsel currently represents all Defendants.

*106

SANCTION WARRANTED

This hearing will be scheduled for March 28, 2014. By the time of the hearing, the responses will have been overdue by over two hundred (200) days. If the Defendant has not provided full responses, the Court should sanction the Defendant for failure to respond and subverting the discovery process. Sanctions are warranted when parties fail to respond to written discovery. See, e.g., Able Sup. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 766,771 (Tex. 1995) and Swain v. Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 731 (Tex. App.--Ft. Worth 1999, no pet.). In the present case, the Defendant failed to answer significant portions of the requested discovery.

The Plaintiff pursued death penalty sanctions, and the Court approved same by entering an order determining liability against Defendant GONZALEZ. The Plaintiff desires to pursue greater sanctions for the Defendant's failure to follow the Court's orders and answer discovery. See Cire v. Cummings, 134 S.W.3d 835, 840-41 (Tex. 2004). (in the case of egregious discovery misconduct, court not required to consider lesser sanction before imposing "death penalty" sanctions). Defendant's conduct justified a presumption that the defenses lack merit. See Hamill v. Level, 917 S.W.2d 15, 16 (Tex. 1996).

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff prays that the Court deny the request for consideration and for whatever and further relief may be necessary to do justice in this matter.

Respectfully submitted and certified served via facsimile on counsel for Hector Gonzalez Hernandez via email on May 26, 2014 by:

*107 Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 8000 West Ave., Suite 1 Castle Hills, Texas 78213 (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 855-9990 Fax lgeppert@grandecom.net

*108

*109

Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that George Durham and Anthony Matulewicz are hereby withdrawn from representation of all parties except Defendant, Hector Gonzalez.

Lance Geppert 1900 Tower Life Building 310 South St. Mary's St., Suite 1900 San Antonio, TX 78205 Tel. (210) 888-9836 Fax. (210) 855-9990 Attorney for Plaintif

George Durham 517 W. Netana McAllen, TX 78504 (505) 410-5286 gsklawfirm@gmail.com Attorney for Defendant

Document scanned as filed.

*110

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | FUND, LP | § | | | | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, | § | | | ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | § | | | EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and | § | | | EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

FINAL JUDGMENT

On May 27, 2014, came to be heard the above referenced cause for non jury trial on damages. The Plaintiff announced ready and the Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez was represented by counsel. After considering the previous order from Judge Antonia Arteaga finding liability against Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez in this cause, the pleadings on file, the evidence admitted and arguments of counsel, the Court ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES the following:

1. The Court reviewed the Order granting the judgment of liability against Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and reviewing the pleading, determines that such finding includes findings of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, tortious interference with a contract, breach of contract, civil conspiracy, and failure to provide an accounting.
2. The Court called the cause for trial on the issue of damages and the trial took place on May 27, 2014 and June 10, 2014 The Defendant Hector Gonzalez Hernandez was represented by counsel.

*111

1. Defendant Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC was served (citation served January 8, 2013, return filed January 10, 2013), was not represented by counsel during the bench trial, its answer on file was withdrawn pursuant to request by counsel and order of the Court and Defendant Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC had notice of the proceeding.
2. In conjunction with the previous finding that the defensive pleadings should be struck and resultant finding of liability on the part of Hector Hernandez Gonzalez, for those claims made in the petition, the Court hereby determines that the following judgment should be awarded, which, after considering the evidence offered, pleadings on file, and motions currently before the Court, the Court determines that the Plaintiff is entitled to damages against Defendants Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC, and the amount of damages that Defendants Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and Defendant Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC is responsible for, is four million two hundred and twenty four thousand four hundred and twenty-six dollars ($4,224,426.00), and judgment is granted against the Defendants Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC for this amount, which the Court determines is a just and appropriate amount and the amount of damages caused by these Defendants as determined by the evidence presented.
3. The judgment against these Defendants is joint and several through the claim of civil conspiracy and fraud. Accordingly, the Plaintiff has judgment against Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and Gonzalez & Duarte, LLC joint and severally in the amount of four million two hundred and twenty four thousand four hundred and twenty-six dollars ($4,224,426.00). Prejudgment interest has been waived by the Plaintiff in conjunction with this award. The judgment will carry post judgment interest at the rate of five percent per year. Costs of court are awarded to Plaintiff.
4. All other relief against Hector Gonzalez Hernandez and Gonzalez and Duarte, LLC are hereby denied and this is a final order against these Defendants.

*112

So Ordered this ${10}^{\circ }$ of June, 2014

Respectfully submitted and entry requested this June 19, 2014 by,

Attorney at Law State Bar No. 24007234 8000 West Ave., Suite San Antonio, Texas 78213 (210) 888-9836/ (210) 316-0000 Phone (210) 855-9990 Fax

GEPPERLLAW@GRANDECOM.NET

AGREED AS TO FORM:

George Durham Attorney for Defendant Hector Gonzalez 5015 Broadway 61517 U. H. Ann MCALLEN, TX 7850176504 Tel. (956) 972-0396 505-413-5282 Fax. (956) 972-0353 1-956-504-5153 SBN: 25087440

*113

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

| ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS | § | IN THE DISTRICT COURT | | :-- | :-- | :-- | | FUND, LP | § | | | Plaintiff | § | | | | § | | | v. | § | ${57}^{\text{th}}$ JUDICIAL DISTRICT | | | § | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, | § | | | HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, | § | | | Defendants | § | BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS |

NOTICE OF NON-SUIT

On this date, Plaintiff Non-Suits the following Defendants pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 162: Defendants Non-Suited: Hernan Duarte Mendez, Aracely Duarte Mendez, Adrian Rubio Enriquez, Efrain Islas Hernandez, and Eduardo Dergal Meraz.

The Plaintiff has an absolute right to non-suit these Defendants, that same is effective at the time of the request, and that the Plaintiff cannot be prevented from nonsuiting its affirmative claims. Accordingly, all Defendants are non-suited save and except Defednants Gonzalez &; Duarte LLC and Hector Gonzalez Hernandez.

This is without prejudice to the refiling of same. Respectfully Submitted, I certify service on counsel for Defendants Gonzales &; Duarte LLC and Hector Goznalez Hernandez on this the $1^{\text{st}}$ of Augst, 2014.

Lance Geppert, Attorney for Plaintiff 8000 West Ave., Suite 1 Castle Hills, Texas 78213 (210) 888-9836 Phone (210) 855-9990Fax

*114

CAUSE NO 2012-CI-13872

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND, LP Plaintiff v.

GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC, 8 HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, 8 HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ, 8 ARACELY DUARTE MENDEZ, 8 ADRIAN RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, 8 EFRAIN ISLAS HERNANDEZ, and 8 EDUARDO DERGAL MERAZ 8 Defendants

ORDER CONFIRMING NON-SUIT

On this date the Court reviewed the Plaintiff's Notice of Non-Suit of the Defendants Hernan Duarte Mendez, Adrian Rubio Enriquez, Efrain Islas Hernandez, and Eduardo Dergal Meraz. The Court notes that the Plaintiff has an absolute right to non-suit these Defendants, that same is effective at the time of the request, and that the Plaintiff cannot be prevented from non-suiting its affirmative claims. Accordingly, the Court signs this order confirming non-suit of all Defendants save and except Gonzalez &; Duarte LLC and Hector Gonzalez Hernandez.

This dismissal after non-suit is without prejudice to the refiling of same.

So ordered this $$ of August, 2014

*115

ENTRY REQUESTED:

Lance Geppert, Attorney At LAW 8000 West Ave., Suite 1 Castle Hills, Texas 78213 (210) 888-9836 Phone (210) 855-9990Fax (210) 316-0000 Cell lgeppert@grandecom.net By: Lance Geppert State Bar No. 24007234 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

*116

NO. 2012 CI 13872

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Defendant, Hector Gonzalez, party to this case, files this Notice of Appeal seeking to alter the trial court's judgment or other appealable order.

The trial court, trial court case number and style of this matter are shown in the above caption.

The judgment or order appealed from was signed on August 1st, 2014 when the Plaintiff nonsuited other co-defendants after obtaining a judgment against Hector Gonzalez and Gonzalez &; Duarte, LLC.

Hector Gonzalez desires to appeal the Court's jurisdiction over the matter, the Court's standard for death penalty sanctions against Defendant, and the Court's abuse of due process in light of Defendant's absence and inability to testify due to federal immigration preemption of Defendant's mobility within the United States.

This appeal is being taken to the 4th Court of Appeals. This notice is being filed by Hector Gonzalez.

*117

Respectfully submitted,

By: $$ /S/ George Durham $$ George Durham Texas Bar No. 24082940 Email: gsklawfirm@gmail.com 517 W. Nolana Brazos Suites # 6 MCALLEN, TX 78504 Tel. (505) 410-5286 Fax. (1-956) 524-5153 Attorney for Defendant Hector Gonzalez

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on August 29, 2014 a true and correct copy of Defendant's Notice of Appeal was served on all parties electronically through the electronic filing manager. $$ /S/ George Durham $$ George Durham

*118 RUN DATE: 16/17/2014 Besar County Centralized Deckat System Pg: 1 FOM: DKB4900F RUN TIME: 14:09:05 JOL: SPPROD

DOCKET INFORMATION

CAUSE NUM: 2012C113872 DATE FILED: 08/23/2012 COURT: 057 UNPAID BALANCE: 0.00 TYPE OF DOCKET: FRAUD/MISREPRESENTAT

• • • • • • • • N

ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP VS DONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC ET AL

ACCOUNT TYPE: ACCESS: 2 LIST TYPE: C

• LITISANT INFORMATION*

SEQ LAST /FIRST /MIDDLE NAME 00001 ATENEA CAPITAL MARKET FUND LP 00002 DONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC 00003 HERMANDEZ HECTOR DONZALEZ

00004 DONZALEZ HECTOR

00005 MENDEZ HERMAN DUARTE

00006 DUARTE HERMAN

00007 MENDEZ ARACELY DUARTE

00008 DUARTE ARACELY

00009 KNXIQUEZ ADRIAN RUSIO

00010 HERMANDEZ EFRAIN ISLAS 00011 MERAZ EDUARDO DERBAL

SERVICE S INFDRNATION

SEQ SERVICE TYPE / DATES 00001 CITATION ISS: 08/27/2012 BEC: 12/27/2012 $00001$ ATEME LIT. TYPE/ATTORNEY DATE PLAINTIFF 08/23/2012 00001 OEPPERT, LANCE M

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

DEPENDANT 08/23/2012 00002 MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY

INFORMATION DIST LITISANT NAME

4 EXE: 01/08/2013 BET: 01/10/2013

*119 | 00002 CITATION | 4 | HERNANDEZ | HECTOR D | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | ISS: 08/27/2012 | REC: $01/05/2013$ | EXE: 02/02/2013 | RET: 02/11/2013 | | 00003 CITATION | 4 | MENDEZ | HERNAN D | | ISS: 08/27/2012 | REC: | EXE: | RET: | | 00004 NOTICE OF ORDER RULE 304A | 152 | DEPPERT | LANCE M | | ISS: 07/08/2014 | REC: | EXE: | RET: | | 00005 NOTICE OF ORDER RULE 304A | 152 | MATULEWICZ | ANTHONY | | ISS: 07/08/2014 | REC: | EXE: | RET: 07/10/2014 | | * AT T O R N E Y | I N F O R M A T I O N * | | | | SEG DATE FILED | BAR NBR. NAME | | STATUS |

| 00001 08/23/2012 | 24007234 | DEPPERT, LANCE M | SELECTED | 08/24/2012 | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 00002 02/25/2013 | 15234358 | MATULEWICZ, ANTHONY | SELECTED | 02/25/2013 | | 00004 08/29/2014 | 24082940 | DURHAM, GEORGE | SELECTED | 08/29/2014 |

| | * PROCEDING | I N F O R M A T I O N * | | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | SEG | DATE FILED | REEL | IMAGE | | 00001 | 08/23/2012 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: PLAINTIPF'S ORIGINAL | PETITION | | | 00002 | 08/23/2012 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: CIVIL CASE INFORMATION | SHEET | | | 00003 | 08/23/2012 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: REGUEST FOR | | | | | 3 CITS PPS | | | | 00004 | 08/23/2012 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: SERVICE ASSIGNED TO | CLEAR 1 | | | 00005 | 02/25/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: ORIGINAL ANSWER OF | | | | | GONZALEZ &; DUARTE LLC HECTOR GONZALEZ | | | | | HERNANDEZ HERNAN DUARTE MENDEZ ARADELY | | | | | DUARTE MENDEZ ADRIAN RUBIO EHRUGIEZ | | | | | EFRAIN ISALAS HERNANDEZ AND EDUARDO | | | | | DERSAL MEXAZ | | | | 00006 | 04/02/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: MOTION TO | | | | | WITHORAM AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD OF | | | | | ANTHONY MATULEICZ AND GEORGE DURHAM OF | | | | | THE LAN OFFICE OF MATULEWICZ &; | | | | | ASSOCIATES PC | | | | 00007 | 04/02/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER | | | | | AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO ORIGINAL | | | | | PETITION OF HECTOR GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ | | | | 00012 | 09/10/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: MOTION TO COMPEL | | | | | DISCOVERY | | |

*120 | 00013 | 18/01/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | | DESC: MOTION TO DISMISS | | | | | | OF HECTOR GONZALEZ W/PROPOSED ORDER | | | | | | ATTNY CAME TO PRESIDING P/U ORDER TO | | | | | | PRESENT TO JUDGE | | | | | 00014 | 15/02/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: OBJECTIONS TO | | | | | | REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE ON HEARING ON | | | | | | MOTION TO DISMISS | | | | | 00015 | 15/02/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: JUDGES DOCKET NOTES | | | | | | (NO RECORD) | | | | | 00019 | 10/16/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: RESPONSE | | | | | | TO MOTION TO DISMISS | | | | | 00021 | 11/08/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: SECOND AMONOED | | | | | | MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY FROM | | | | | | DEPENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ HERMANDEZ FOR | | | | | | SANCTIONS | | | | | 00023 | 11/21/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: RESPONSE | | | | | | TO SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND FOR SANCTIONS | | | | | 00024 | 11/21/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: HEARING/TRIAL CRT REPORTER ASS | | | | | | VD VICTORIA GONZALEZ, 150TH DIST COURT | | | | | 00025 | 11/21/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: JUDGES DOCKET NOTES | | | | | 00027 | 12/10/2013 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: MOTION TO COMPEL | | | | | | DISCOVERY FROM DEPENDANT HECTOR GONZALEZ AND FOR SANCTIONS | | | | | 00029 | 03/20/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: MOTION | | | | | | TO EMPORCE ORDERS AND SANCTIONS OF COURT AND DETERMINE DAMAGES | | | | | 00032 | 04/24/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: JUDGES DOCKET NOTES | | | | | | (NO RECORD) | | | | | 00036 | 05/23/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: MOTION TO SEVER | | | | | 00037 | 05/26/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: RESPONSE | | | | | | OF AETENA CAPITAL MARKETS FUND LP TO MOTION TO RECONSIDER SANCTIONS | | | | | 00038 | 05/27/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: HEARING/TRIAL CRT REPORTER ASS | | | | | | TP TRACY PLUMMER, 407TH DISTRICT CRT | | | | | 00039 | 05/27/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: JUDGES DOCKET NOTES | | | | | | AND CONTINUED ON 06/10/14 | | | |

*121 | 00040 | 06/20/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | | DESC: CASE CLOSED FINAL JUD AFTER NO | | | | | 00041 | 08/01/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: NONSULT | | | | | 00042 | 08/29/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: NOTICE OF APPEAL | | | | | | EMALL SENT TO TRACY PLUMMER, 407TH DISTR | | | | | | OF HECTOR OONZALEZ | | | | | | ATTY GEORGE DURHAM | | | | | 00043 | 08/29/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: DATE DUE IN 4TH CCA | | | | | | $09/29/2014$ | | | | | 00044 | 09/03/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: CONFIRMATION PADE SENT SUCCESS | | | | | | 4TH CRT OF APPEALS (NOTICE OF APPEAL) | | | | | 00045 | 09/04/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: LETTER FROM 4TH COURT OF APPEA | | | | | 00046 | 09/10/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: LETTER/CLEXK'S RECORD FEE DUE | | | | | | GEORGE DURHAM | | | | | | S102.00 VIA E-MAIL | | | | | 00047 | 10/02/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: NOTIFICATION OF LATE RECORD SE | | | | | 00048 | 10/02/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: CONFIRMATION PADE SENT SUCCESS | | | | | | 4TH CRT OF APPEALS | | | | | 00049 | 10/07/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: LETTER FROM 4TH COURT OF APPEA | | | | | 00050 | 10/08/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: LETTER FROM 4TH COURT OF APPEA | | | | | 00051 | 10/10/2014 | 0000 | 0000 | 0000 | | | DESC: LETTER FROM 4TH COURT OF APPEA | | | | | | * TRIAL I NF ORMATION | | | | | 000 | DATE FILED | COURT | SETT. DATE TIME | ATTY | | 00008 | 04/02/2013 | 109 | 04/08/2013 08:30AM | 00 | | | DESC: NON-JURY TRIAL | | | | | | SETTING ON SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS | | | | | | DROP | | | | | 00009 | 04/02/2013 | 109 | 04/08/2013 08:30AM | | | | DESC: NON-JURY TRIAL | | | | | | SETTING ON M/T WITHORAW | | | | | | DROP | | | | | 00010 | 09/16/2013 | 109 | 09/23/2013 08:30AM | 10 | | | DESC: NON-JURY TRIAL | | | | | | SETTING ON MOTION TO COMPEL | | | | | | RESET TO 10/2/13 | | | | | 00011 | 09/03/2013 | 109 | 10/02/2013 08:30AM | | | | DESC: NON-JURY TRIAL | | | | | | RESET ON M/T COMPEL | | | | | | ASSIGNED TO POZZA | | | |

*122 RUN DATE: 10/17/2014 Bexar County Centralized Docket System Pg: 5 PGM: DEB4900P RUN TIME: 14:09:06 JCL: SPFROD

*123 | 00025 | 05/23/2014 | 109 | 05/27/2014 | 09:00AM | 10 | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | | DESC: | NON-JURY TRIAL | | | | | | SETTING ON | N/P | SEVERANCE | | | | | * O R D E R | I N F D R M A T I O N * | | | | | 000 | DATE FILED | JUDGE NAME | VOLUME | PADE | 000 | | 00001 | 10/15/2013 | RAREN H. POZZA | 4137 | 2410 | 0002 | | | DESC: | ORDER ON | | | | | | | MOTION TO COMPEL | INTER | | | | | AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMEN | | | | | | 00002 | 11/21/2013 | JANET LITTLEJOHN | 4136 | 3309 | 0004 | | | DESC: | ORDER | | | | | | | GRANTING SECOND | | | | | | INTERR | ORRON | | | | | 00003 | 12/20/2013 | ANTONIA ARTE | | | | | | DESC: | ORDER | | | | | | | GRANTING M/T COMPEL | | | | | | RESP | ONGES &; THE | | | | | | DOCUMEN | | | | | | 00004 | 05/27/2014 | RAREN H. POZZA | 4229 | 1015 | 0001 | | | DESC: | ORDER TO | | | | | | ATTY GEORGE | DURHAM &; ANTHONY | | | | | | FOR DONZALEZ &; | DURATE, LLE | | | | | | MENDEZ,AR | ALY DURANTE | | | | | | RUBIO ENRIQUEZ, | EFRAIN ISLAS | | | | | | EDUARDO DERSAL | MERAZ | | | | | 00005 | 06/20/2014 | RAREN H. POZZA | 4229 | 2505 | 0003 | | | DESC: | JUDGMENT | | | | | 00006 | 08/01/2014 | LARRY NOLL | 4251 | 2938 | 0002 | | | DESC: | ORDER FOR | | | | | | AGAINST DE | FTS HERMAN DUAR | | | | | | ADRIAN RUBIO | ENRIQUEZ,EF | | | | | | HERMANDEZ, &; EDUARDO | DERSAL MERAZ O | | | | | 00007 | 10/08/2014 | NO SISNATURE | | | | | | | | | | | | 00008 | 10/08/2014 | NO SISNATURE | | | | | | | | | | | | 00009 | 10/08/2014 | NO SISNATURE | | | | | | | | | | | | 0001 | | | | | |

• B O N D I N F D R M A T I O N * SEG DATE FILED PRINCIPAL

*124

BILL OF COST

Date: 09/22/2014 CAUSE NO. 2012C113872 Style: ATENA MARKET FUND LP VS. GONZALEZ AND DUARTE LLC ET AL ${57}^{\text{TH}}$ Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas TO: GEORGE DURHAM 517 W NOLANA AVE MCALLEN, TX 78504-2974 DISTRICT CLERKS FEE CIV LEG SV SECURITY DISPUTE RS LAW LIBRARY CLERKS RECORDS FEE RECORDS JUDICIAL FEE STENOGRAPH APP JUD SY DC RECORDS JSF2 CONSLD FEE DCTECH FEE CH-RENOVAT RECPRESERV E-FILE-SYS TOTAL: LESS PAYMENT RECEIVED: LANCE M GEPPERT LESS PAYMENT RECEIVED: GSK LAW

$\$74.00$ $10.00 $5.00 $15.00 $15.00 $122.00 $5.00 $40.00 $15.00 $5.00 $5.00 $42.00 $10.00 $5.00 $15.00 $5.00 $14.00 $402.00 $274.00 $6.00

I, Donna Kay M ^[6] Kinney, Clerk of the District Courts of and for Bexar County, Do Hereby Certify that the above and foregoing are true and correct bill of cost due in this cause.

Donna Kay M ^[6] Kinney, District Clerk Bexar County, Texas

*125 CERTIFIED COPY CERTIFICATE STATE OF TEXAS I, DONNA KAY MENINEY, BEXAR COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL RECORD NOW IN MY LAWFUL CUSTODY. WITNESS MY OFFICIAL HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE ON THIS:

October 17, 2014

DONNA KAY MENINEY BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS By: CECILIA BARBOSA, Deputy District Clerk (NOT VALID WITHOUT THE CLERKS'S ORIGINAL SIGNATURE.)

*126

CERTIFICATE

THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF BEXAR

I, Donna Kay MKinney, Clerk of the District Court of Bexar County, Texas do hereby certify that the documents contained in this record, Cause No. 2012CI13872, of which this certification is attached are all of the documents specified by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5 (a) and all other documents timely requested by a party to this proceeding under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5 (b). GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL of said Court at office in the City of San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas this 18th day of September, 2014.

Donna Kay MKinney
Clerk, 57TH Judicial District
Court of Bexar County, Texas

By: CECILIA BARBOSA, Deputy

Case Number: 2012CI13872 Document Type: CERTIFICATE Page 1 of 2

*127 CERTIFIED COPY CERTIFICATE STATE OF TEXAS I. DONNA KAY MAKINNEY, BEXAR COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL RECORD NOW IN MY LAWFUL CUSTODY. WITNESS MY OFFICIAL HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE ON THIS:

October 17, 2014

DONNA KAY MUKINNEY

(NOT VALID WITHOUT THE CLERKS'S ORIGINAL SIGNATURE)