AMENDED ORDER APPOINTING COMMISSION TO REQUEST DEPOSITION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 17 OF THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 18 MARCH 1970 ON THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE ABROAD IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS

GEORGE W. FOLEY, JR., Magistrate Judge.

You have been duly appointed as commissioners and are hereby authorized, pursuant to Article 17 of the Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, to request that Dr. Hans-Peter Wild voluntarily appear for a deposition in Zug, Switzerland related to above-referenced matter. You are further authorized to administer Dr. Wild's deposition in accordance with the United States Federal Rules of alternative, in such manner as provided by local law for the taking of evidence.

EXHIBIT 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

AMENDED REQUEST FOR INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 18 MARCH 1970 ON THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE ABROAD IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS

The United States District Court, District of Nevada ("the Court"), presents its compliments to the High Court and the Cantonal Court of Zug under the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil of Commercial Matters ("Hague Evidence Convention")and, pursuant to Article 17 of the Hague Evidence Convention, requests international judicial assistance to obtain evidence to be used in a civil proceeding before this Court in the above-captioned matter. This Court respectfully requests that the High Court of Zug forward this request to the Cantonal Court of Zug, that the latter recognize this Amended Letter of Request from this Court and accompanying Commission, and that the Federal Department of Justice and Police authorizes the taking of evidence in the territory of Switzerland by the commissioners appointed for this purpose as developed below, in adherence to Article 17 of the Hague Evidence Convention and in the interest of comity.1

A. Sender

B. Central Authority of the Requested State

C. Person to Whom the Authorized Commission is to be Returned

D. Purpose of Evidence Sought and Requested Date of Receipt of the Response to the Amended Letter of Request

The requested commission will permit the collection of evidence to be used by the parties to support their claims and defenses in the above-captioned case. Dr. Hans-Peter Wild has indicated that he is willing to voluntarily appear for his deposition in Zug, Switzerland on March 20 and 21, 2019. Accordingly, the Court requests a prompt response to this Amended Letter of Request.

I. HAGUE EVIDENCE CONVENTION REQUIREMENTS

This Court requests the assistance more specifically described herein as necessary in the interests of justice. In conformity with Article 3 of the Hague Evidence Convention, the undersigned applicant has the honor to submit the following request:

A. Requesting Judicial Authority

B. Central Authority of the Requested State

C. Name of the Case and Identifying Number

D. Names and Addresses of the Parties and their Representatives

E. Nature of the Proceedings and Summary of the Case and Relevant Facts

The above-captioned case is a civil lawsuit brought by Plaintiff Casun Invest, A.G. ("Casun") against Defendants seeking money damages and equitable relief resulting from the alleged fraudulent conveyance of a piece of real property. The Plaintiff's Complaint alleges the following causes of action against the Defendants: (1) constructive trust; (2) equitable lien; (3) unjust enrichment; (4) breach of fiduciary duty; (5) aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty; (6) constructive fraud; and (6) civil conspiracy.

The Complaint alleges that in April of 2013, Defendant Michael H. Ponder ("Ponder"), a Direktor of Plaintiff, executed a Grant Deed that conveyed real property in Woodside, California ("Woodside Property") to Defendant NVWS Properties LLC ("NVWS") (an entity owned and controlled by Defendant Lezlie Gunn ("Gunn")) without obtaining the approval of Casun's Board of Directors. The Grant Deed contained information indicating that the Woodside Property was sold for $1,500,000 (an amount alleged by Plaintiff to be far below the property's fair market value). Plaintiff further alleges no sales proceeds were ever remitted by Mr. Ponder to Casun in connection with the purported sale.

The Defendants assert that Dr. Wild, as the 98% majority shareholder of Plaintiff, set the purchase price and authorized Mr. Ponder to sell the Woodside Property, and further that all monies were paid per the terms of the sale(Ms. Gunn alleges that she provided jewelry to Dr. Wild as consideration for the Woodside Property). Plaintiff points out that Dr. Wild was neither an officer nor Direktor of Casun.

Ms. Gunn has filed a Third-Party Complaint against Dr. Wild alleging that Dr. Wild is contractually obligated to indemnify Ms. Gunn, and more specifically that on April 22, 2015, Dr. Wild executed an Indemnification Agreement whereby he agreed to indemnify and hold Ms. Gunn harmless from any claims, actions, suits, and/or legal proceedings brought by any person, entity or government entity. Ms. Gunn alleges that Dr. Wild executed this Indemnification Agreement in anticipation of Ms. Gunn executing a Release and Settlement Agreement whereby she would execute a similar indemnification agreement in favor of Dr. Wild's two sons. Dr. Wild has been unable to locate any Indemnification Agreement executed by Ms. Gunn in favor of his sons.

Dr. Wild defends against the Third-Party Complaint by pointing out that the indemnity agreement relied upon by Ms. Gunn, by its plain terms, only applies to claims that relate to items that Ms. Gunn received or will receive from Dr. Wild and/or his estate and, under Nevada law, an indemnification agreement only indemnifies an indemnitee as to the legal consequences of his/her negligent or intentional acts if the indemnification agreement explicitly provides as such. Ms. Gunn disagrees with Dr. Wild's position.

The parties are currently engaged in discovery, where the parties exchange information concerning their claims and defenses. The Court accordingly has not addressed the merits of the allegations made in the case.

The parties contend that the information sought by this request is available to the High Court of Zug. This Court respectfully requests that the High Court of Zug act on this request expeditiously.

F. Evidence to be Obtained

Dr. Wild's testimony is relevant to the claims, defenses and third-party claims asserted in the above-captioned case. Accordingly, this Court respectfully requests that the High Court of Zug recognize the attached Amended Commission, so that the appointed commissioners may lawfully obtain testimony from Dr. Wild, who resides at Kirchenstrasse 4, CH-6300 Zug, on the following topics:

Dr. Wild has executed a declaration indicating a willingness, under certain conditions, to be deposed on March 20 and 21, 2019, in Zug, Switzerland. See Declaration of Voluntary Appearance dated December 20, 2019, attached hereto as Exhibit A (indicating a willingness to appear for a deposition in Switzerland to be held in the period between(and including) March 20-26, 2019). As set forth in the Declaration of Voluntary Appearance, Dr. Wild's conditions are:

Id.

As set forth in the Declaration of Voluntary Appearance, Dr. Wild is: (1)cooperating of his own accord; (2)knows that he cannot be subject to any coercive measures; (3)knows he cannot be forced to participate or to appear; and (4)knows that he has the right to invoke an exemption or a prohibition to give evidence provided for by either the laws of Switzerland or Nevada. Id. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Dr. Wild's deposition taking place in Switzerland is further permitted by this Court subject to the condition that Dr. Wild answers relevant questions asked by all counsel, including counsel for Ms. Gunn and Mr. Ponder. The Court has reserved the option to require Dr. Wild to appear for further deposition in Nevada if the conditions are not met.

G. Procedure for Obtaining Evidence

If authorized, Dr. Wild's testimony will be obtained by the commissioners at the offices of a law firm in Zug, Switzerland, and will be under oath and recorded by video and stenography. As requested by Dr. Wild, the deposition will either be conducted in German or a German interpreter will be present to translate the questions and answers during the deposition.

II. OTHER REQUIREMENTS

A. Information Regarding the Deposition (if permitted)

B. Fees and Costs

Plaintiff will advance the reasonable copy costs and charges associated with the processing and handling of this request by the High Court of Zug. Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff will reimburse Plaintiff for fifty percent (50%) of the costs and charges advanced. For the purpose of determining the court fees, the parties estimate the amount in dispute to be in excess of USD $3,000,000.

C. Reciprocity

This Court expresses its sincere willingness to provide similar assistance to the courts of the Swiss Confederation, if future circumstances so require.

III. CONCLUSION

This Court, in the spirit of comity and reciprocity, hereby requests international judicial assistance in the form of this Amended Letter of Request seeking the testimony described herein, from the High Court of Zug. This Court extends to all judicial and other authorities of the Swiss Confederation the assurances of its highest consideration.

EXHIBIT A

Dr. Hans-Peter Wild, Kirchenstrasse 4, 6300 Zug, Switzerland

Zug, Switzerland, 20 December 2018