SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Defendants General Motors Corporation, Saab Cars USA, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Inc., Saturn Corporation and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, UNLIMITED JURISDICTION DaimlerChrysler Motors Co., LLC have now fi led for bankruptcy ) protection. Although Plaintiffs’ claims against these bankrupt COORDINATION PROCEEDING ) J.C.C.P. Nos. 4298 & 4303 defendants are stayed, all class members who purchased a new motor SPECIAL TITLE (RULE 1550(b)) ) vehicle from these bankrupt defendants are eligible to remain in the AUTOMOBILE ANTITRUST ) Hon. Richard A. Kramer class and to make claims in this case. CASES I AND II ) Coordination Trial Judge Defendants Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. (“Toyota”) have entered into a potential settlement in a NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION different case pending in federal court.1 As a result of the potential To: All persons and entities residing in California on November 15, Toyota settlement, Plaintiffs’ claims against the Toyota defendants 2010, who purchased or leased a new motor vehicle manufactured are currently stayed in this action. If approved, the federal court will or distributed by a defendant, from an authorized dealer located in decide how to address all pending claims against Toyota, including California, during the period January 1, 2001 through April 30, 2003, the claims pending in this California state court action. If the federal for their own use. settlement is not approved, the court presiding over this state court The defendants named in this action manufactured or distributed action will determine how to address the claims pending against the following brands of cars, sport utility vehicles, and light-duty Toyota in this state court action. Notwithstanding the stay against the trucks (“new motor vehicles”) in California between January 1, 2001 Toyota defendants, all class members who purchased a new motor and April 30, 2003: Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Plymouth, Ford, Jaguar, vehicle from the Toyota defendants can remain in the California class Land Rover, Lincoln, Mazda, Mercury, Volvo, Buick, Cadillac, and make claims in this action. For more information regarding the Chevrolet, GMC, Hummer, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn, Toyota settlement, please visit www.CanadianExportAntitrust.com. Acura, Honda, Toyota, Lexus, Infi niti and Nissan. ELECTION BY PLAINTIFF CLASS MEMBERS. If you fi t Specifi cally excluded from the class are the Defendants; the the above description of a Plaintiff Class member, you have a choice offi cers, directors or employees of any Defendant; any entity in whether or not to remain a member of the Plaintiff Class on whose which any Defendant has a controlling interest; the affi liates, legal behalf this lawsuit is being maintained. You should understand the representatives, attorneys, heirs or assigns of any Defendant; any consequences of this choice in making your decision. governmental entity; any judge, justice or judicial offi cer presiding 1. If you want to remain a member of the Plaintiff Class, you do over this matter, and the members of their immediate families and not have to do anything at this time. By remaining a class member, judicial staffs. any claims you may have for damages under California antitrust PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS or unfair competition laws arising from all Defendants’ conduct as ENTIRETY. YOU MAY BE A MEMBER OF THE PLAINTIFF alleged by the class representatives will be determined in this case. CLASS. IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE PLAINTIFF 2. If you want to be excluded from the Plaintiff Class, you must CLASS, IT WILL AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS. send notice in writing of your desire to be excluded to: California THIS NOTICE IS NOT AN EXPRESSION OF ANY Automobile Antitrust Cases Class Administrator, P.O. Box 6177, OPINION BY THE COURT AS TO THE MERITS OF ANY Novato, CA 94948-6177, by mail postmarked no later than January OF THE CLAIMS OR DEFENSES ASSERTED BY ANY 14, 2011. By making this election to be excluded: PARTY IN THIS LITIGATION. THE SOLE PURPOSE OF (a) you will not share in any recovery that might be paid to the THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU OF THE LAWSUIT SO Plaintiff Class as a result of trial or settlement of this lawsuit; THAT YOU CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION AS TO (b) you might not benefi t from any developments that may occur WHETHER YOU SHOULD REMAIN IN OR OPT OUT OF in favor of the Plaintiff Class in this case; THIS CLASS ACTION. (c) you will not be bound by any decision in this lawsuit BACKGROUND OF THE CASE. The defendants originally favorable to any Defendants; and named in this case included the following companies: General (d) you may present any claims you may have against the Motors Corporation, Saab Cars USA, Inc., Saturn Corporation, Defendants by fi ling your own lawsuit at your own expense. General Motors of Canada, Ltd., DaimlerChrysler Corporation, DaimlerChrysler Motors Co., LLC, Ford Motor Company, Ford RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PLAINTIFF CLASS Motor Company of Canada, Ltd., Volvo Cars of North America, MEMBERS. If you remain a member of the Plaintiff Class: LLC, American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Honda Canada, Inc., Toyota 1. Counsel for the Plaintiff Class will act as your counsel. If you Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., and Nissan North prefer, you may also have your own counsel appear in the case at America, Inc. (“Defendants”). your own expense. Plaintiffs are current California residents who purchased or leased 2. Your participation in any recovery that may be obtained from the named Defendants’ new motor vehicles for their own use from the defendants through trial or settlement will depend on the results authorized dealers located in California during the time period of this lawsuit. If no recovery is obtained for the Plaintiff Class, you between January 1, 2001 and April 30, 2003. Plaintiffs allege that will be bound by that result. the Defendants engaged in coordinated actions which restricted the 3. You may be required as a condition to participating in any export of lower-priced Canadian vehicles into the United States. As a recovery to present evidence to a claims administrator or court (by result, Plaintiffs allege that California consumers paid higher prices testimony, affi davit or documents) of your past new motor vehicle than they would have otherwise paid for the Defendants’ new motor purchase(s). You should, therefore, keep any records you have vehicles in the absence of the Defendants’ coordinated conduct. refl ecting those past purchases. Plaintiffs allege that this conduct violated California antitrust and unfair competition law, and they seek monetary damages, restitution 4. If ordered by the Court, you will be entitled to notice and an and other relief on behalf of themselves and everyone else who is opportunity to be heard concerning any proposed settlement of the similarly situated. The Defendants deny Plaintiffs’ allegations, and class claims. deny that any class member was injured by the alleged conduct. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Additional information about this case can be found at www.CAAutoAntitrustCases.com. The Court has ruled that this lawsuit may be maintained as a class action. The Plaintiff Class is defi ned as “all persons and entities Any questions concerning the matters contained in this notice should residing in California on November 15, 2010, who purchased be directed in writing to California Automobile Antitrust Cases or leased a new motor vehicle manufactured or distributed by a Class Administrator, P.O. Box 6177, Novato, CA 94948-6177. The defendant, from an authorized dealer located in California, during pleadings and other records in this litigation may also be examined the period January 1, 2001 through April 30, 2003, for their own at any time during regular offi ce hours at the Offi ce of the Clerk, San use.” Francisco Superior Court, 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102-4514. The Court’s ruling means that the fi nal outcome of this lawsuit – PLEASE DO NOT CALL OR WRITE TO THE COURT, whether favorable to the Plaintiff Class or to the Defendants – THE CLERK OF THE COURT OR THE JUDGE. ALL will apply in like manner to every class member who does not INQUIRIES ABOUT THIS CASE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED timely elect to be excluded from the Plaintiff Class (see “Election TO THE CLASS ADMINISTRATOR IDENTIFIED ABOVE. by Plaintiff Class Members” below). The Defendants have fi led a number of pending motions to dismiss or narrow the claims of the Dated: October 4, 2010 /s/ Richard A. Kramer Plaintiff Class. If the Court agrees with the Defendants and grants Honorable Richard A. Kramer these motions, that could eliminate or narrow the claims of any class Coordination Trial Judge member who does not timely elect to be excluded from the Plaintiff 1 Class. The Court will hold hearings on these motions, as well as a Settlement approval is the only matter left pending in the federal motion to exclude Plaintiffs’ proposed expert witness, shortly court case as all claims against the other defendants in that federal following completion of the notice process. action have either been stayed or dismissed.