Case Document 131-4 Filed 05/25/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID 3200 EXHIBIT 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: FEF186B7-BA9F-4C63-9031-8890CCA61CD7 Case 8:14-cv-02096-VMC-EAJ Document 131-4 Filed 05/25/15 Page 2 of 7 PageID 3201 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION ROCA LABS, INC., Case No: 8:14-cv-02096-VMC-EAJ Plaintiff, v. CONSUMER OPINION CORP. and OPINION CORP., Defendants. / DECLARATION OF THOMAS PARISI IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS I, DR. THOMAS PARISI, being over 18 years of age and competent to testify about the matters contained in this declaration, hereby state as follows: 1. I have been retained by Defendants as an expert witness in this matter. 2. As with the majority of expert witnesses, I charge a different billable rate for research and preparation of written reports than I do for in-person testimony. 3. Part of the reason I charge a higher rate for in-person testimony is that when I am doing research and drafting reports, I can do that in the comfort of my home, during down-time, when I would otherwise not be working or spending time with my family. Therefore, for reports, I only charge $300 per hour. 4. For in-person testimony, I charge a minimum of $3,000 for a half day. This is because I must take my practice offline for that much time, if I am going to report to a court or a court reporter’s office. In addition, it requires me to shut down my clinic for a large portion of a given day, as I am the only doctor working at my clinic. Further, I find in person testimony to 1 DocuSign Envelope ID: FEF186B7-BA9F-4C63-9031-8890CCA61CD7 Case 8:14-cv-02096-VMC-EAJ Document 131-4 Filed 05/25/15 Page 3 of 7 PageID 3202 be unpleasant and undesirable, and while I am willing to do it for the right pay, I can think of no other activity that would be as unpleasant as being deposed. 5. Because I have not been an expert witness before, I negotiated my billing rate telephonically prior to entering into a retainer agreement with Defendants. During this conversation I asked that Defendants’ counsel provide with an example of an expert retainer agreement, since I did not have one of my own, and I did not wish to charge the party for having my own lawyer draw one up. 6. Mr. Randazza provided me with a template that integrated the terms I dictated to Mr. Randazza, but it contained a number of blanks for me to fill in as well. Mr. Randazza did not dictate the terms to me, but vice versa. 7. Mr. Randazza did express that he found my rates to be high, but within a reasonable range, and that he would ask his client if his client approved. He has never told me that his client did not approve, and his client promptly paid my first bill. 8. On May 22, 2015, counsel for Plaintiff Roca Labs, Paul Berger, contacted me by 9. During our phone conversation, I told him what my expert witness billing rates phone. are and explained why I charge different rates for written reports and in-person testimony. 10. After I explained my billing rates to him, Mr. Berger accused me of engaging in illegal, criminal conduct, and stated that I would need to retain legal counsel to defend myself from criminal prosecution. 11. I was extremely upset and agitated by this phone conversation. I do not wish to become involved in criminal proceedings, regardless of how meritless they are. 12. Due to Mr. Berger’s threats, I am questioning whether I wish to continue to be involved in this case. 13. I have reviewed the email that Mr. Berger sent to Marc Randazza following my conversation with Mr. Berger, attached as Exhibit A to this declaration. 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: FEF186B7-BA9F-4C63-9031-8890CCA61CD7 Case 8:14-cv-02096-VMC-EAJ Document 131-4 Filed 05/25/15 Page 4 of 7 PageID 3203 14. It is my sworn testimony that Mr. Berger is lying in this email to Mr. Randazza, and that his statements regarding the contents of our phone conversation are not true. Mr. Berger’s statements are completely false, and seem calculated to try and create a rift between the defendants and myself. 15. If I am to give full and accurate testimony in this case, I would like the court to assure me that I will be protected from Mr. Berger’s continued threats of criminal prosecution, and from civil prosecution for my testimony. I understand that anything I say in testimony is privileged, but I also understand that some attorneys have no qualms about filing lawsuits despite having no basis to do so. For example, Mr. Randazza made me aware of the fact that Roca Labs sued him personally for statements made in his legal arguments defending his client, and that the courts in Florida have not taken any action to protect an attorney from a lawsuit based on defending his client, therefore I am very concerned that I would be subject to the same retaliation if I do not tailor my testimony to please Roca Labs and Mr. Berger. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Thomas Parisi, M.D. Executed on May 25, 2015 in Las Vegas, Nevada. 3 Case Document 131-4 Filed 05/25/15 Page 5 of 7 PageID 3204 EXHIBIT A 5/25/2015 Case Randazza Legal Group MailFiled - Call from Dr. Parisi Page 6 of 7 PageID 3205 8:14-cv-02096-VMC-EAJ Document 131-4 05/25/15 Marc Randazza  Call from Dr. Parisi Paul Berger Esq.  To: Marc Randazza  Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:59 PM Actually Marc, I believe that you owe me an explanation.  Dr. Parisi explained to me that you were the person that advised him on what he should bill Roca Labs.  Apparently it was you who told him to charge us the inflated price of $3,000.  I told him that we would be challenging his intentionally inflated price in court (not that it was illegal, but that it would not be upheld).   You have made numerous false statements to me about Dr. Parisi. In a previous email you stated "Again, I don't know how many times I can repeat this, but the fees are his ­­ not mine."  While the fees may be his, you clearly coached him on his rates.   In addition you wrote "He clearly bills a different rate for preparation of reports than for in person testimony.  When we call him at trial, he's going to be charging us the same thing ­­ $3,000 per half day.  I'm not pleased about it either.  But, his justification was that he could do reports at home, at night, when he does not have to shut down his clinic to be present.  On the other hand, depositions and trial testimony requires his presence, and thus shutting down his practice.   So, he is not charging you a different rate than he charges us.  He is charging a different rate for testimony vs. report writing."  This was apparently a fabrication as you informed him what to bill Roca.  We will clearly question him on your representation about his pricing.  He informed me that YOU told him what to bill Roca and to bill Roca a different amount.  He has never been a witness so how does he have a different rate for testimony as opposed research?  Moreover he is not shutting down his practice as he closes his office every Friday at noon.  In the same email you also wrote "You are free to call him and to negotiate a different rate with him than he has charged me.  If you can convince him to take less, then go right ahead.  In fact, I encourage you to do so.  If you get him to charge less, I'll call him and demand the same discount." This was a knowingly false statement as you worked with him to establish his fees.   Please immediately send me all copies of all communications between you, your firm, Defendants or anyone representing Defendants and Dr. Parisi.  I am preparing a motion to challenge his fee rate in Court on Tuesday.  We will pay him the rate that he is entitled to based upon his qualifications.  He is not shutting down his practice and this is additional income for him. The average salary for a vein surgeon in Las Vegas is $350,000, which equates to approx. $175 per hour.  This is a more than fair rate for his work. Paul    [Quoted text hidden] ­­  Paul Berger, Esq. Independent General Counsel Roca Labs, Inc. Direct 305­998­6150 ATTENTION!  NOTICE: This E­mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510­2521, is confidential or a matter subject to a confidentiality agreement, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=ad5b9d82c5&view=pt&q=explanation&qs=true&search=query&msg=14d7e7ed6838028a&siml=14d7e7ed6838028a 1/2 5/25/2015 Case Randazza Legal Group MailFiled - Call from Dr. Parisi Page 7 of 7 PageID 3206 8:14-cv-02096-VMC-EAJ Document 131-4 05/25/15 hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it. This e­mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. Thank you.   Circular 230 disclosure: to ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, unless we have specifically stated otherwise in writing, any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=ad5b9d82c5&view=pt&q=explanation&qs=true&search=query&msg=14d7e7ed6838028a&siml=14d7e7ed6838028a 2/2