State Bar Court of California
Hearing Department
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER
APPROVING
REPROVAL
Case Number(s): 12-O-14918-RAH
In the Matter of: GREGORY KWOCK CHEONG APO, Bar # 200288, A
Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Adriana M. Burger, Bar #92534,
Counsel for Respondent: Gregory Kwock Cheong Apo, Bar #200288,
Submitted to: Settlement Judge.
Filed: August 27, 2013.
<<not>> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION
REJECTED
Note: All information required by this form and any
additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, must be
set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings, e.g.,
"Facts," "Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law,"
"Supporting Authority," etc.
A. Parties' Acknowledgments:
1.
Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted December
30, 1998.
2.
The parties agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained
herein even if conclusions of law or disposition are rejected or changed by the
Supreme Court.
3.
All investigations or proceedings listed by case number in the caption
of this stipulation are entirely resolved by this stipulation and are deemed
consolidated. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under "Dismissals."
The stipulation consists of 11 pages, not including the order.
4.
A statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or
causes for discipline is included under "Facts."
5.
Conclusions of law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts
are also included under "Conclusions of Law".
6.
The parties must include supporting authority for the recommended level
of discipline under the heading "Supporting Authority."
7.
No more than 30 days prior to the filing of this stipulation, Respondent
has been advised in writing of any pending investigation/proceeding not
resolved by this stipulation, except for criminal investigations.
8.
Payment of Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges the provisions of
Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7. (Check one option only):
checked. Costs are added to membership
fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (public reproval).
<<not>> checked. Case
ineligible for costs (private reproval).
<<not>> checked. Costs are
to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership
years: . (Hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule 5.132,
Rules of Procedure.) If Respondent fails to pay any installment as described
above, or as may be modified by the State Bar Court, the remaining balance is
due and payable immediately.
<<not>> checked. Costs are
waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment entitled "Partial
Waiver of Costs".
<<not>> checked. Costs are
entirely waived.
9.
The parties understand that:
<<not>> checked. (a) A private reproval
imposed on a respondent as a result of a stipulation approved by the Court
prior to initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s
official State Bar membership records, but is not disclosed in response to
public inquiries and is not reported on the State Bar’s web page. The record of
the proceeding in which such a private reproval was imposed is not available to
the public except as part of the record of any subsequent proceeding in which
it is introduced as evidence of a prior record of discipline under the Rules of
Procedure of the State Bar.
<<not>> checked. (b) A private reproval
imposed on a respondent after initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is
part of the respondent’s official State Bar Membership records, is disclosed in
response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline
on the State Bar’s web page.
checked. (c) A public reproval imposed on a respondent
is publicly available as part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership
records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a
record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.
B. Aggravating Circumstances [for definition, see Standards for
Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts
supporting aggravating circumstances are required.
<<not>> checked. (1) Prior
record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)].
<<not>> checked. (a) State Bar Court case # of prior case .
<<not>> checked. (b) Date prior discipline effective .
<<not>> checked. (c) Rules of Professional Conduct/ State
Bar Act violations:
<<not>> checked. (d) Degree of prior discipline
<<not>> checked. (e) If Respondent has two or more incidents
of prior discipline, use space provided below or a separate attachment entitled
“Prior Discipline. .
<<not>> checked. (2) Dishonesty:
Respondent's misconduct was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty,
concealment, overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of
Professional Conduct.
<<not>> checked. (3) Trust
Violation: Trust funds or property were involved and Respondent refused or was
unable to account to the client or person who was the object of the misconduct
for improper conduct toward said funds or property.
checked. (4) Harm: Respondent's
misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of
justice. Please see page 9.
<<not>> checked. (5) Indifference:
Respondent demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for
the consequences of his or her misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (6) Lack of
Cooperation: Respondent displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims
of his/her misconduct or to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or
proceedings.
checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of
Misconduct: Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of
wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct. Please see page 9.
<<not>> checked. (8) No
aggravating circumstances are involved.
Additional aggravating circumstances: .
C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts supporting
mitigating circumstances are required.
<<not>> checked. (1) No Prior
Discipline: Respondent has no prior record of discipline over many years of
practice coupled with present misconduct which is not deemed serious.
<<not>> checked. (2) No Harm:
Respondent did not harm the client or person who was the object of the
misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (3) Candor/Cooperation:
Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation with the victims of
his/her misconduct and to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation and
proceedings.
<<not>> checked. (4) Remorse:
Respondent promptly took objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse
and recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone
for any consequences of his/her misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (5) Restitution:
Respondent paid $ on in restitution to without the threat or force of
disciplinary, civil or criminal proceedings.
<<not>> checked. (6) Delay:
These disciplinary proceedings were excessively delayed. The delay is not
attributable to Respondent and the delay prejudiced him/her.
<<not>> checked. (7) Good
Faith: Respondent acted in good faith.
<<not>> checked. (8) Emotional/Physical
Difficulties: At the time of the stipulated act or acts of professional
misconduct Respondent suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical
disabilities which expert testimony would establish was directly responsible
for the misconduct. The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of
any illegal conduct by the member, such as illegal drug or substance abuse, and
Respondent no longer suffers from such difficulties or disabilities.
<<not>> checked. (9) Severe
Financial Stress: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered from
severe financial stress which resulted from circumstances not reasonably
foreseeable or which were beyond his/her control and which were directly
responsible for the misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (10) Family
Problems: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered extreme
difficulties in his/her personal life which were other than emotional or
physical in nature.
<<not>> checked. (11) Good
Character: Respondent's good character is attested to by a wide range of
references in the legal and general communities who are aware of the full extent
of his/her misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (12) Rehabilitation:
Considerable time has passed since the acts of professional misconduct occurred
followed by convincing proof of subsequent rehabilitation.
<<not>> checked. (13) No
mitigating circumstances are involved.
Additional mitigating circumstances: No
Prior Discipline; Pretrial Stipulation
Please see attachment page 9.
D. Discipline:
<<not>> checked. (1) Private reproval (check applicable
conditions, if any, below):
<<not>> checked. (a) Approved by the Court prior to initiation
of the State Bar Court proceedings (no public disclosure).
<<not>> checked. (b)Approved by the Court after initiation of
the State Bar Court proceedings (public disclosure).
Or
checked. (2) Public reproval (Check applicable conditions,
if any below)
E. Additional Conditions of Reproval:
checked. (1) Respondent must
comply with the conditions attached to the reproval for a period of one (1)
year.
checked. (2) During the condition
period attached to the reproval, Respondent must comply with the provisions of
the State Bar Act and Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked. (3) Within ten (10) days
of any change, Respondent must report to the Membership Records Office of the
State Bar and to the Office of Probation of the State Bar of California
("Office of Probation"), all changes of information, including
current office address and telephone number, or other address for State Bar
purposes, as prescribed by section 6002.1 of the Business and Professions Code.
checked. (4) Within thirty (30)
days from the effective date of discipline, Respondent must contact the Office
of Probation and schedule a meeting with Respondent's assigned probation deputy
to discuss these terms and conditions of probation. Upon the direction of the
Office of Probation, Respondent must meet with the probation deputy either
in-person or by telephone. During the period of probation, Respondent must
promptly meet with the probation deputy as directed and upon request.
checked. (5) Respondent must
submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10
of the period of probation. Under penalty
of perjury, Respondent must state whether Respondent has complied with the
State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all conditions of
probation during the preceding calendar quarter. Respondent must also state
whether there are any proceedings pending against him or her in the State Bar
Court and if so, the case number and current status of that proceeding. If the
first report would cover less than 30 days, that report must be submitted on
the next quarter date, and cover the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a final report, containing the same
information, is due no earlier than twenty (20) days before the last day of the
period of probation and no later than the last day of the condition period.
<<not>> checked. (6) Respondent
must be assigned a probation monitor. Respondent must promptly review the terms
and conditions of probation with the probation monitor to establish a manner
and schedule of compliance. During the period of probation, Respondent must
furnish such reports as may be requested, in addition to the quarterly reports
required to be submitted to the Office of Probation. Respondent must cooperate
fully with the monitor.
checked. (7) Subject to assertion
of applicable privileges, Respondent must answer fully, promptly and truthfully
any inquiries of the Office of Probation and any probation monitor assigned
under these conditions which are directed to Respondent personally or in
writing relating to whether Respondent is complying or has complied with the
conditions attached to the reproval.
checked. (8) Within one (1) year
of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must provide to the
Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of the State
Bar Ethics School, and passage of the test given at the end of that session.
<<not>> checked. No Ethics School recommended. Reason: .
<<not>> checked. (9) Respondent
must comply with all conditions of probation imposed in the underlying criminal
matter and must so declare under penalty of perjury in conjunction with any
quarterly report to be filed with the Office of Probation.
checked. (10) Respondent must provide proof
of passage of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination
("MPRE"), administered by the National Conference of Bar Examiners,
to the Office of Probation within one year of the effective date of the
reproval.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended. Reason: .
<<not>> checked. (11) The
following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
<<not>> checked. Substance Abuse
Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Law Office Management
Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Medical Conditions.
checked. Financial Conditions.
F. Other Conditions Negotiated by the
Parties:
Attachment language (if any):.
FINANCIAL CONDITIONS
Case Number(s): 12-O-14918-RAH
In the Matter of: GREGORY KWOCK CHEONG
APO
a. Restitution
checked. Respondent must pay restitution
(including the principal amount, plus interest of 10% per annum) to the
payee(s) listed below. If the Client Security Fund (“CSF”) has reimbursed one
or more of the payee(s) for all or any portion of the principal amount(s)
listed below, Respondent must also pay restitution to CSF in the amount(s)
paid, plus applicable interest and costs.
1. Payee: Hiroaki Morise
Principal Amount: $2,000
Interest Accrues From: April 1, 2011
2. Payee:
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From:
3. Payee:
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From:
4. Payee:
Principal Amount:
Interest Accrues From:
<<not>> checked. Respondent
must pay above-referenced restitution and provide satisfactory proof of payment
to the Office of Probation not later than ninety (90) days from the effective
date of this Reproval.
b. Installment Restitution Payments
<<not>> checked. Respondent
must pay the above-referenced restitution on the payment schedule set forth
below. Respondent must provide satisfactory proof of payment to the Office of
Probation with each quarterly probation report, or as otherwise directed by the
Office of Probation. No later than 30 days prior to the expiration of the
period of probation (or period of reproval), Respondent must make any necessary
final payment(s) in order to complete the payment of restitution, including
interest, in full.
1. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
2. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
3. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
4. Payee/CSF (as applicable)
Minimum Payment Amount
Payment Frequency
<<not>> checked. If Respondent
fails to pay any installment as described above, or as may be modified by the
State Bar Court, the remaining balance is due and payable immediately.
c. Client Funds Certificate
<<not>> checked.
1. If Respondent possesses client funds at
any time during the period covered by a required quarterly report, Respondent
must file with each required report a certificate from Respondent and/or a
certified public accountant or other financial professional approved by the
Office of Probation, certifying that:
a. Respondent has maintained a bank
account in a bank authorized to do business in the State of California, at a
branch located within the State of California, and that such account is
designated as a “Trust Account” or “Clients’ Funds Account”;
b. Respondent has kept and maintained the
following:
i. A written ledger for each client on
whose behalf funds are held that sets forth:
1. the name of such client;
2. the date, amount and source of all
funds received on behalf of such client;
3. the date, amount, payee and purpose of
each disbursement made on behalf of such client; and,
4. the current balance for such client.
ii. a written journal for each client
trust fund account that sets forth:
1. the name of such account;
2. the date, amount and client affected by
each debit and credit; and,
3. the current balance in such account.
iii. all bank statements and cancelled
checks for each client trust account; and,
iv. each monthly reconciliation
(balancing) of (i), (ii), and (iii), above, and if there are any differences
between the monthly total balances reflected in (i), (ii), and (iii), above,
the reasons for the differences.
c. Respondent has maintained a written
journal of securities or other properties held for clients that specifies:
i. each item of security and property
held;
ii. the person on whose behalf the
security or property is held;
iii. the date of receipt of the security
or property;
iv. the date of distribution of the
security or property; and,
v. the person to whom the security or
property was distributed.
2. If Respondent does not possess any
client funds, property or securities during the entire period covered by a
report, Respondent must so state under penalty of perjury in the report filed
with the Office of Probation for that reporting period. In this circumstance,
Respondent need not file the accountant’s certificate described above.
3. The requirements of this condition are
in addition to those set forth in rule 4-100, Rules of Professional Conduct.
d. Client Trust Accounting School
<<not>> checked. Within one
(1) year of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must supply
to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of the
Ethics School Client Trust Accounting School, within the same period of time,
and passage of the test given at the end of that session.
ATTACHMENT TO
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER OF: GREGORY KWOCK CHEONG
APO, State Bar No. 200288
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 12-O-14918
FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
Respondent admits that the following facts
are true and that he is culpable of violations of the specified statutes and/or
Rules of Professional Conduct.
Case No. 12-O-14918 (Complainant: Hiroaki
Morise)
FACTS:
1. On April 4, 2011, Hiroaki Morise
employed Respondent to prepare and file an E-2 investor visa application
renewal ("application") with the United States Embassy in Tokyo,
Japan. Morise paid Respondent $2,000 in advanced fees for his legal services.
2. Soon after employing Respondent, Morise
completed all the required forms for filing the application that Respondent
gave to him and gave the completed forms to Respondent.
3. In January 2012, after not hearing from
Respondent regarding his application, Morise telephoned Respondent numerous
times and left voice mail messages asking about the status of his application.
Respondent received the messages but did not call or communicate with Morise.
4. At no time did Respondent file an
application or otherwise perform any legal services of value on behalf of
Morise.
5. In March 2012, Morise terminated
Respondent and employed a new attorney to file an application on his behalf.
6. Respondent did not earn any portion of
the advanced fee that Morise paid to him. In March 2012, Morise requested that
Respondent refund the $2,000 that he paid in advanced attorney’s fees. At no
time did Respondent refund to Morise any portion of the unearned advanced fees.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
7. By failing to file an application on
behalf of Morise, Respondent intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failed to
perform legal services with competence in willful violation of Rules of
Professional Conduct, rule 3-110(A).
8. By failing to respond to Morise’s calls
regarding the status of his application, Respondent failed to respond promptly
to reasonable status inquiries of a client in a matter in which Respondent had
agreed to provide legal services in willful violation of Business and
Professions Code, section 6068(m).
9. By failing to refund promptly any part
of the fee paid in advance by Morise that had not been earned, Respondent
failed to refund promptly an advanced fee that had not been earned in willful
violation of Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-700(D)(2).
ADDITIONAL FACTS RE AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCES.
Multiple Acts of Misconduct (Standard
1.2(b)(ii)): Respondent engaged in multiple acts of misconduct by failing to
perform in Morise’s matter, failing to respond to multiple status inquiries
from Morise regarding his legal matter, and failing to refund unearned fees.
Harm (Standard 1.2(b)(iv)): Respondent
significantly harmed Morise by having received advanced fees and not providing
the contracted services; causing Morise eleven months of aggravation by not
performing; having use of Morise’s money for an eleven month period; and
causing Morise to have to hire and pay additional fees to the new attorney to
file an application with the United States Embassy in Japan. [See In the Matter
of Casey (Review Department 2008) 5 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 117, 126].
Respondent will be required to refund the unearned fees to Morise.
ADDITIONAL FACTS RE MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCES.
No Prior Record of Discipline: At the time
of the misconduct, Respondent had practiced law for approximately 13 years
without prior discipline. Although the current misconduct cannot be deemed not
serious, Respondent is entitled to mitigation for his 13 years of
discipline-free practice. (Hawes v. State Bar (1990) 51 Cal. 3d 587, 596.)
Pre-trial Stipulation: Respondent admitted
to the misconduct and entered into this stipulation fully resolving this matter
without the necessity of a trial, thereby saving the State Bar significant
resources and time. Respondent’s cooperation in this regard is a mitigating
factor in this resolution. (Silva-Vidor v. State Bar (1989) 49 Cal.3d 1071,
1079 [where mitigation credit was given for entering into a stipulation as to
facts and culpability].)
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.
The Standards for Attorney Sanctions for
Professional Misconduct provide a "process of fixing discipline"
pursuant to a set of written principles to "better discharge the purposes
of attorney discipline as announced by the Supreme Court." (Rules Proc. of
State Bar, tit. IV, Stds. for Atty. Sanctions for Prof. Misconduct,
Introduction (all further references to standards are to this source).) The primary
purposes of disciplinary proceedings and of the sanctions imposed are "the
protection of the public, the courts and the legal profession; the maintenance
of high professional standards by attorneys and the preservation of public
confidence in the legal profession." (ln re Morse (1995) 11 Cal.4th 184,
205; std. 1.3.)
Although not binding, the standards are
entitled to "great weight" and should be followed "whenever
possible" in determining level of discipline. (ln re Silverton (2005) 36
Cal.4th 81, 92, quoting In re Brown (1995) 12 Cal.4th 205, 220 and In re Young
(1989) 49 Cal.3d 257, 267, fn. 11.) Adherence to the standards in the great
majority of cases serves the valuable purpose of eliminating disparity and
assuring consistency, that is, the imposition of similar attorney discipline
for instances of similar attorney misconduct. (In re Naney (1990) 51 Cal.3d
186, 190.)
Respondent admits to committing three
separate violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and the Business and
Professions Code. Standard 1.6 requires that where a respondent acknowledges
two or more acts of misconduct, and different sanctions are prescribed by the
standards that apply to those acts, the sanction imposed shall be the more or
most severe prescribed in the applicable standards. Standard 2.4(b) applies to
Respondent’s failure to perform competently, and failure to communicate with
Morise, while standard 2.10 applies to Respondent’s failure to refund unearned
fees. Both standards 2.4(b) and 2.10 provide for a range of discipline from
reproval to suspension.
Standard 2.4(b) provides, in relevant
part, that culpability of an attorney who fails to perform services and/or
communicate in an individual matter shall result in reproval or suspension
depending upon the extent of the misconduct and the degree of harm to the
client. Standard 2.10 provides, in relevant part, that culpability of an
attorney who fails to refund unearned fees shall result in reproval or
suspension depending upon the gravity of the extent of the harm to the victim.
Respondent harmed Morise by having received advanced fees and not providing the
contracted services for the eleven month period of time. Respondent’s inaction
on Morise’s matter caused Morise eleven months of aggravation by not knowing
the status of his matter and not having use of his money. Morise had to hire a
new attorney and pay additional fees for the new attorney to file his
application.
Standard 1.3 provides that the primary
purpose of discipline is to protect the public, courts and the legal
profession; maintain high professional standards by attorneys, and preserve
public confidence in the legal profession. Based upon this standard and the
range of discipline available for the misconduct in this matter, a Reproval
will provide the means for carrying out the purpose of discipline. Respondent
was admitted in December 1998 and has practiced law for 13 years prior to the
misconduct committed herein. Accordingly, there is reason to believe that the
misconduct is aberrational and not likely to be repeated. Through this
stipulation, Respondent has also demonstrated a willingness to entirely resolve
this matter prior to trial and make restitution to his former client.
Therefore, based on the facts, the
standards, and the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, a public reproval
is warranted in order to protect the public and satisfy the other purposes of
attorney discipline as described in standard 1.3.
EXCLUSION FROM MCLE CREDIT
Pursuant to rule 3201, Respondent may not
receive MCLE credit for completion of State Bar Ethics School, to be ordered as
a condition of reproval or suspension. (Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 3201.)
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): 12-O-14918-RAH
In the Matter of: GREGORY KWOCK CHEONG APO
By their signatures below, the parties and
their counsel, as applicable, signify their agreement with each of the
recitation and each of the terms and conditions of this Stipulation Re Facts,
Conclusions of Law and Disposition.
Signed by:
Respondent: Gregory Kwock Cheong Apo
Date: 8/20/2013
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Adriana M. Burger
Date: 8/20/2013
REPROVAL ORDER
Case Number(s): 12-O-14918-RAH
In the Matter of: GREGORY KWOCK CHEONG APO
Finding the stipulation to be fair to the
parties and that it adequately protects the public, IT IS ORDERED that the
requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any, is GRANTED without prejudice,
and:
checked. The stipulated facts and
disposition are APPROVED AND THE REPROVAL IMPOSED.
<<not>> checked. The stipulated
facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the
REPROVAL IMPOSED.
<<not>> checked. All court
dates in the Hearing Department are vacated.
The parties are bound by the stipulation
as approved unless: 1) a motion to withdraw or modify the stipulation, filed
within 15 days after service of this order, is granted; or 2) this court
modifies or further modifies the approved stipulation. (See rule 5.58 (E) &
(F), Rules of Procedure.) Otherwise the stipulation shall be effective 15 days
after service of this order.
Failure to comply with any conditions
attached to this reproval man constitute cause for a separate proceeding for
willful breach of rule 1-110, Rules of Professional Conduct.
Signed by:
Judge of the State Bar Court: Richard A.
Honn
Date: 8/26/13
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
[Rules Proc. of State Bar; Rule 5.27(B);
Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar
Court of California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the
within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and County
of Los Angeles, on August 27, 2013, I deposited a true copy of the following
document(s):
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING
in a sealed envelope for collection and
mailing on that date as follows:
checked. by first-class mail, with postage
thereon fully prepaid, through the United States Postal Service at Los Angeles,
California, addressed as follows:
GREGORY K. C. APO
401 S BURNSIDE AVE APT. 1H
LOS ANGELES, CA 90036
<not>> checked. by certified
mail, No. , with return receipt requested, through the United States Postal
Service at , California, addressed as follows:
<<not>> checked. by overnight
mail at , California, addressed as follows:
<<not>> checked. by fax
transmission, at fax number . No error was reported by the fax machine that I
used.
<<not>> checked. By personal
service by leaving the documents in a sealed envelope or package clearly
labeled to identify the attorney being served with a receptionist or a person
having charge of the attorney’s office, addressed as follows:
checked. by interoffice mail through a
facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as
follows:
ADRIANA BURGER, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is
true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on August 27, 2013.
Signed by:
Angela Carpenter
Case Administrator
State Bar Court