Contract analysis

1. Introduction and Purpose of Retention This firm, Calderwood & Harkness LLP, represents Marguerite D. Fonseca, the surviving spouse and petitioner in the contested probate proceeding captioned In re Estate of Teodoro R. Fonseca, currently pending before the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Probate Division, under Case No. 22STPB09714. I am writing to you in my capacity as Lead Associate on this matter, under the

2. Background of the Matter To provide the necessary context for your examination, we set forth below a summary of the factual and procedural background of this matter. Teodoro R. Fonseca died on September 3, 2022, at the age of sixty-two (62), of cardiac arrest resulting from natural causes. At the time of his death, Mr. Fonseca was a resident of Los Angeles County, California. No will was located among the decedent

3. Scope of Engagement 3.1 Document to Be Examined The primary document to be examined is the photocopy of the alleged premarital agreement, consisting of two (2) pages, purportedly dated May 30, 2008. This photocopy was produced by Brennan, Ortega & Saldívar LLP in connection with the contestants' amended objection filed on January 9, 2023. The photocopy is described in further detail as follows: Page One: Contains

1. Authenticity of the Photocopy. Is the photocopy a faithful reproduction of a single, unified original document, or does it show evidence of being a composite or assemblage of pages derived from different source documents? Specifically, are there any indications that the two pages of the photocopy were not originally part of the same document or were not reproduced from a single, contiguous original?

2. Signs of Alteration. Does the photocopy exhibit any evidence of alteration, manipulation, erasure, overwriting, paste-up, cut-and-paste construction, digital manipulation, or other modification of any kind? This inquiry should encompass both analog and digital methods of alteration, including but not limited to the insertion or deletion of text, the repositioning of signature images, the modification of dates, and

3. Signature Analysis. To the extent possible from a photocopy examination — and acknowledging the inherent limitations of analyzing a reproduced image rather than an original ink signature — can any opinion be offered regarding the authenticity of the signature purporting to be that of Teodoro R. Fonseca? Specifically, is the questioned signature consistent with or inconsistent with the known exemplar signatures of

4. Missing Signature. What is the forensic significance, if any, of the absence of a second signature (that of Marguerite D. Fonseca) on page two of the document? Is the absence of this signature consistent with an incomplete, unexecuted, or draft document? Are there any observable characteristics of the signature block area (e.g., erased markings, evidence of a removed signature, or evidence that a signature was nev

5. Pagination and Formatting. Are the two pages of the photocopy consistent in formatting, font, typeface, point size, line spacing, margin alignment, paragraph indentation, header and footer characteristics, and other typographic attributes such that they appear to have been produced as a single document on a single occasion using the same equipment and settings? Are there any discrepancies in formatting or typograp

6. Copy Generation. Can the generation of the photocopy be determined? Specifically, is the photocopy a first-generation copy (i.e., a direct copy from the original), or is it a second-generation or later-generation copy (i.e., a copy of a copy)? What is the significance, if any, of the copy generation with respect to the reliability of any conclusions that can be drawn from the examination?

7. Paper and Toner Characteristics. To the extent discernible from the photocopy itself, are there any observable characteristics regarding the reproduction method (e.g., electrostatic photocopying, inkjet reproduction, laser reproduction), toner distribution patterns, copy artifacts, edge shadowing, skew, or other mechanical reproduction characteristics that bear on the authenticity or provenance of the document? We

4. Materials to Be Provided The following materials will be delivered to Brindoval Forensic under separate cover, via bonded courier, within ten (10) business days of the date of this letter or as soon thereafter as all materials have been compiled:

1. Questioned Document. The photocopy of the alleged premarital agreement (two pages), as produced by Brennan, Ortega & Saldívar LLP in connection with the contestants' amended objection filed on January 9, 2023. This photocopy will be transmitted in the condition in which it was received by this firm, in a protective document sleeve, and accompanied by a chain of custody memorandum.

2. Known Exemplar Signatures of Teodoro R. Fonseca. For purposes of signature comparison, we will provide authenticated exemplar signatures of the decedent, sourced from the following documents: (a) The operating agreement of Lumiére Canyon Studios LLC, dated March 18, 2009 (California Secretary of State Filing No. 200906410337), bearing the decedent's signature as Managing Member; (b) Account signature cards from Ve

3. Known Exemplar Signatures of Marguerite D. Fonseca. Although the questioned document does not bear our client's signature, we will provide exemplar signatures of Marguerite D. Fonseca for comparison purposes should such comparison be useful in any aspect of your examination.

4. Marriage Certificate. A certified copy of the marriage certificate for Teodoro R. Fonseca and Marguerite D. Fonseca, dated June 14, 2008, filed with the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk.

5. Additional Documents and Exemplars. Any additional documents, exemplars, or materials that Dr. Prescott may request upon review of the initial materials. We are prepared to respond promptly to any such requests and to make additional exemplars available as needed to support a thorough and complete examination. All materials will be accompanied by a detailed transmittal letter and an itemized inventory. We ask that

5. Deliverables 5.1 Preliminary Report We request that Brindoval Forensic prepare and deliver a written preliminary report setting forth initial findings and opinions within approximately six (6) weeks of receipt of all examination materials. The preliminary report should address each of the questions identified in Section 3.2 above to the extent that analysis has progressed at that stage. We understand that certain

6. Fee Arrangement Brindoval Forensic shall be compensated for the services described in this letter at its standard hourly rates for forensic document examination services, as previously discussed between Dr. Prescott and the undersigned. We understand the applicable rates to be as follows: • Dr. Elaine Prescott, Lead Examiner — Document Examination and Analysis: $____ per hour • Associate Examiners or Technical Sta

7. Confidentiality and Privilege All materials provided to Brindoval Forensic in connection with this engagement, including but not limited to the questioned document, exemplar signatures, pleadings, correspondence, and any other documents or information, are confidential and are provided subject to the protections of the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Brindoval Forensic shall not disclose t

8. Conflicts and Independence The integrity and credibility of expert analysis depend upon the independence and objectivity of the expert. Accordingly, we request that Dr. Prescott confirm, by execution of this letter, that Brindoval Forensic Document Services LLC has no prior or current relationship — whether professional, financial, personal, or otherwise — with any of the following parties, entities, or individual

9. Point of Contact The primary point of contact at Calderwood & Harkness LLP for all matters relating to this engagement is: Elliot Nguyen Lead Associate Calderwood & Harkness LLP 350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4800 Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 555-0174 Email: enguyen@calderwoodharkness.com The supervising attorney for this matter is: Howard Quinn Responsible Partner Calderwood & Harkness LLP 350 So

10. Acceptance and Countersignature If the terms set forth in this letter accurately reflect your understanding of the engagement and are acceptable to you, please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space provided below and returning a signed copy of this letter to the undersigned at your earliest convenience. A self-addressed return envelope is enclosed for your use. This letter constitutes the entire agreem

1. Photocopy of alleged premarital agreement (2 pages), as produced by Brennan, Ortega & Saldívar LLP

2. Exemplar signature documents (to be compiled and transmitted with detailed transmittal letter and inventory) cc: Howard Quinn, Esq. — Calderwood & Harkness LLP Marguerite D. Fonseca — via client file copy