Lisa, S.A. formally objects to documentary and report evidence submitted by Villamorey and Bosch as irrelevant, biased, and noncompliant with the Judicial Code.

Objections to Evidence from the Answer

Documentary evidence #2. Lisa objects as irrelevant and improper to the authenticated copy of a letter-rogatory notification request from the proceedings before the Eleventh Circuit Civil Court. Lisa maintains that, as its Counter-Evidence Brief already on the record demonstrates, this request was filed in compliance with a court order, not as a voluntary act by Lisa. The defendants presented the document in a biased and incomplete manner, omitting the evidence establishing the judicial context of the request.

Documentary evidence #3. Lisa objects as improper to the copy of the settlement agreement between BDT Investment, Inc. and Lisa, S.A., on the grounds that it fails to meet the requirements of Article 857 of the Judicial Code.

Documentary evidence #6. Lisa objects as irrelevant and improper to the authenticated copy of Order 1827-2020, a resolution issued by the Eleventh Circuit Civil Court in a context unrelated to the present proceeding, which bears no connection to the matters at issue in this case.

Objection to Evidentiary-Period Evidence

Lisa objects as irrelevant and ineffective to the report evidence request through which the defendants seek an order directing the Twelfth Circuit Civil Court to produce an authenticated copy of the settlement agreement between BDT Investment, Inc. and Lisa, S.A. Lisa argues that the agreement, standing alone, is not relevant to the present proceeding (Exp. 8853-24), and that the defendants persist in submitting biased, incomplete, and irrelevant evidence.

Signatories

• Lcda. María Luisa Villarreal Palacios, judicial representative of Lisa, S.A.