LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C. et al v. LegalZoom.Com, Inc. et al
Filing
1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-11963026.). Filed byLegalForce, Inc., Raj Abhyanker, LegalForce RAPC Worldwide P.C.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits A-Z, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Abhyanker, Raj) (Filed on 12/19/2017)
<![CDATA[
EXHIBIT A
0 224 5
131 0
679 779
ÿ
7ÿ 7ÿ6
8
ÿ
7
ÿ
8
7
ÿ
#% 'ÿ' $)*,-*-ÿ$. /,0
$& $$&'' ++ ÿ +, ' $
%*
/,+$
+')
123,+, ' $ÿ& 2,-*5- ÿ6 ÿ - .8,'ÿ,' +, .9, ' $ÿ ;'< #:=+$),23 2 $4' -3+,ÿ
-* ÿÿ$. /,0, &- + ÿ + +'7*+ ÿ++)#+*ÿ* ÿ$. /,0:;- ÿ 9 ÿ,+ÿÿ ,ÿ %'.* ÿ6 +4% 6
'
4 78 ) ' &
)
3 >$' ÿ@7AA, ÿ -ÿ*, &-, +/,ÿ' $)*ÿ)2-ÿ6)23 2 $4' -3ÿ ÿ+% 3@$4//' .+,
% '* .? ÿ 8ÿ5AC62, ÿ& 2 *ÿ @$&'' +-';*+-ÿ ,ÿ %'.* D )$* 2ÿ'% * ÿ6 +
2 ÿ '
4
+ ÿ ' &
5'
;$-*, &-, +D* ÿ*ÿ& 2, +ÿ %,'E ;/-,ÿ +ÿ6 ÿ$. /,0, &-,-*&%')ÿ- ÿ*,+$'ÿ +
%'3 ÿ& 2 *)ÿ ., @, &- *)56 ÿ$ÿ*, 2$5- +'+, ' $ÿ& 2 + ÿ$4)D $ , ÿ+%* @54 ,
4
- 6
4%
6'
6
'& $-'-ÿ$. /,0/,+$ÿ%$&'' ++' , .&% -'23 2. -'ÿ
F'+ ÿ +, ' $ÿ +')+ÿ' $)*ÿ6 /ÿ* ÿ$>. ÿ ,ÿ >4A
)*
' ,
GHIÿÿ O QN Q OMOLSQT K VQV PVWPVQOXNIOÿHNZ[ ^_U` Vÿ
KMNPKQRÿIÿN NN ÿIUÿ ÿORN Oÿ QNÿ Y NQ ÿ \] ÿ HÿLV
L
Sÿ
L
QV PVWV KVK
ORN OÿMMa QISb
`
7* 'ÿ 8ÿ . $2' E,-*D6 ÿ*@-.>. ,)56 ÿ @$&'' +, ÿ& 2, +%ÿ' -+, +-ÿ$. /,0/,+$
. $7AA' ',ÿ 3 2+ )ÿ '% 2ÿ --E 2ÿ %/,ÿ' $)*ÿ*, &- *ÿ$$3)$*ÿ +, ' $ÿ +')
; $ % +
*
4
*
? ;$ÿ6 ÿ #:ÿ$c
'%'+'78 9 ,'
dEÿ ÿÿ +'ÿ > 2-3+'+, ' $ÿ% ÿ5*
% D*,/,+$- %>* ÿ6 ÿ$. /,0@ E% A
*
dE/,ÿ2ÿ*@ Eÿ5*? 6 2, .$&'' +@ E)2-ÿ*, &-,-*;$$3)$+ *%ÿÿ $ÿ6 +@ E
% ÿ @;'% ÿ% $% ÿ' ,; * ÿ' $)*ÿ% $';*, ÿ& 2 + ÿ ÿ' -+,- ÿ; /,0+,ÿ%
ÿ
ÿ
4% %
% ,
% A
5*
dE/,ÿ2ÿÿ$. /,0, &-,-*;$,+, ' $ÿ5* .? ÿÿ,+')-ÿ; -6@ E,',& $* $%
% ÿ @;',+, ' $ÿ& 2 + ÿ ÿÿ$. /,0% ' ÿ@,& $* $6&%ÿ 4ÿ% ÿ$ÿÿ,+'D $
4% %
56
ÿ
? ÿÿ%& $+ *ÿ/- .2?2@4/& *D $%6 $23 2ÿ $ .%3 *e+ *%ÿ -6@ E,', ÿ;-'
@,4$%,- D- + ÿ, -+ÿ% , @ÿ ÿ+'ÿ ,2; /' ÿ$, -,- ÿ; 4ÿ% ÿ$ÿ*%; $
%2 '- %
' @%
% 56
4
%ÿ6 ÿf -,' +, .564ÿ% ÿ$ÿE6 $' ÿ%$&'' +
$+'' E>2*ÿ* ÿ -6@ E,', +%- .+ÿ' $)*A
e
gÿ$ ,'+, ' $ÿ+%* @56 ÿÿ4*' ÿ ÿ6 ÿ - .8,'ÿ* ÿÿE6 $' ÿ%&,+'? ;$ÿ6
&- +ÿ$. /,0,+$'ÿ %-2' ).- +'7*+ ÿ++), .-, +%- .+ÿ$4- ÿ'%'+'
>
)- *
'
) e
4
78 9 ÿ
#:A
ÿ
h, , -*, ' +ÿ$,+$')56 ÿ$ÿE6 $' ÿ@+'78 9 +ÿ' $)*ÿ& 2, +ÿ 4+.-ÿ * . A
* ., ÿ3 *)%ÿ+%* @ÿ %,', +%- .? ÿ6 ÿ # :ÿ%$&'' +, &- *)2 ,' ÿ h, , ,
e
4 % *
h'+-ÿ$. /,0, ' +ÿ'% *e.+ÿ$4-'? ;$ÿ6 ÿ # :ÿ$ $+ÿ, E $ÿDk m
$,*+, ' $ÿ3 *)$43 -' ÿ%&,+ ÿ'%'+'78 9 &- ÿ%i* ,@jÿ l A
4
%
j
n 2@* ÿÿ $-*,+$'ÿ$%6 $-.>. ,ÿ %-ÿ%ÿE6 $' ÿ%&,+'? ;$ÿ6 ÿ # :ÿ%$&'' +@ E/&% -3,; '3 ÿ+%* @%ÿ+'ÿ --E 2 ÿ * +, +%- .+ÿ$4- ÿ'%'+'78 9 +ÿ' $)*ÿ% ÿ
%
*
56 )
e
4
*
4%
4* '+ *5- ÿ% $+, ' $ÿ& 2,-*/,c
% * 4- ÿ + @ Eÿ$. /,0, &- + ÿ @ÿ
% 6
ÿ
o',ÿ* ÿ$2* ÿ6 ÿ$. /,0, &-,-*', * + *&%')
2@, .&%% 3+'+, ' $ÿ& 2 + ÿF/-,- ÿ$4)A
4%
%
p, ÿ%+', , . * *ÿ; % $, &-,-*
'.+ÿ6 ÿ? * % /' +%ÿ Eÿ& 2 + A
@
4%
i% ,.eÿ6 ÿ,-- ÿ; *ÿ'E+ 3$3)$+ *ÿ
' & $-'+'>2 + %ÿ @$)2* ÿ' -+,- A
.@ ,
%
ÿ
n4&ÿ)* +., % 'ÿ VQ SN LV Y NrSÿQIO Tÿ TSIQMNY PÿSTIÿHNY a Srÿ`K ÿ),
F' +,ÿ%' ÿ? >D QIO TÿSRÿIOK VQ SN LPV ÿ ÿ OIO V ÿYQ ÿIa VQISL,ÿ
SISq
IsK
$&'' ++'%ÿ* +'ÿ')*-ÿ$. /,0/,+$ÿ'%'+'78 9
' $)*,- ÿ; %6 $& $% ÿ +, ' $ÿ +')? ;$ÿ6 ÿ # :c
> ,
*
ÿ
h% )2* ÿ +ÿ$3>* ÿ. -'+ÿ*, &-, +%ÿ' -+, +-ÿ% +/&,-*%ÿ23,+, ' $ÿ& 2,-*
*E+ 35- %ÿ--3, >4ÿ%, ÿ& 2 *ÿ$$3)$*ÿ 4*' 2+ ÿ;-* ÿÿ$. /,0, &- +
- 6
4
*
% ;4%
%ÿ& 2,-*$2+.. 4/' +
$, &- + t',' ÿ%E *A
4%
2 98
72
7
!
279 779
7 7
82 9
8
98
7
7
92
7
7
8
0"
2
0 224 5
131 0
679 779
ÿ
7ÿ 7ÿ6
8
ÿ
7
ÿ
8
7
ÿ
#% '(*,ÿ$-.0 *' ÿ& 1'()ÿ%& )%ÿ,0$*-$0 )4')% ' .ÿ,/ )2 $,6 $$105
$& $ ÿ$&,%/( ÿ)' &( 0 2 -, -2 -3% (0'( ÿ (0) )%5 .4% 0,ÿ0%ÿ%'%
)
)
.,$
&
,
ÿ
5 .4% 0
,/ )7
8* (*' ) 4% 0ÿ,' &('()2%& )%ÿ,9:(%'0 )2 %(, -0ÿ6 ÿ $.,2% / --0ÿ6 ) %
()) ÿ4% 5 )-0ÿ& 1 0 -ÿ -, --0ÿ : ÿ.( -ÿ 0()ÿ,0%;( 0$$< %0ÿ,.' *
., $
. , &0
% ÿ
0%.$%& ) % .ÿ5 $-2 $$< %0ÿ $%&%-' ' 5 ) )7
6 ÿ,$-, 5 )%' 5%-ÿ ÿ% / --: ÿ=$-ÿ> ) , 4% 0
,
,
?/6 $(*(-' .ÿ: =4(%Aÿ4% 5 )-' 5&($B'0 )7
0,() ÿ / )%,ÿ ' ) $ ' ) 4% 0ÿ) ÿ$ ( ÿ.( -ÿ
@ %
,0 , ÿ
D, 5 .(*' ÿ& %1 $' ÿ& ,(, 2' .10 )ÿ$.)/$)ÿ-ÿ$.% (*> :$ÿ6 ÿ$5 4'FE(1
) /0 ÿ)' & 'ÿ ÿ), & -0 )ÿ )%1 ( 2 ÿ, .$% 0/%&,%5) ÿ%,%0%E' % $ÿ$
)
,
( . ', ,
'
' 5?& %1 , $7
) ÿ & 'ÿ '5
G
E %/ ' 0,(% ÿ$.(%,ÿ$5 4'F1Hÿ%,%0%I8 E (ÿÿ%(/ÿ 0%ÿ) ÿ ÿ 10Fÿ& $&(0ÿ.()ÿ
6 ÿ) /6 $ 5&'0 ÿ: ' % $ÿ > :$ÿ6 ÿ # 9ÿ '-$ -4'0$' 5H%H(ÿ'%' &, $ %'0 -(
@
. 0
'
- ,
1
' , :
/ ' 0,(% ÿ$.(%(ÿ./$ *ÿ6 -ÿ.()ÿ B(./ %
) /6 $ 5&'0 ÿ ,.$( 7 %%'0 -4'ÿ 15 J
@
.- )E
,
)
K L.(*' &('()-> -()ÿ6 0H%%( $& $ ÿ() 5,ÿ/6 $% 7
%%0 ÿ& 1 0 ÿ/ 4(-, -0'ÿ $ÿ , %1-* % ÿ$' 0,( 5
) .,
4& B
@
M./ (*(5N5 '-' 5% 0(-:, '0 *'ÿ)'0$%2,$-, 5 )2() 0$2 $5 4%0
=15) ÿ ((/ 1ÿ) ÿ)(%ÿ 4ÿ.( ÿ-' ÿ0,) Bÿ $%& ) % 0-* ',Bÿ ÿ, -(
)
0 $ )
.
ÿ
,
.
$&%% 00%(ÿ10' % $ÿ 0%-> :$ÿ6 ÿ # 97
% $-)'( ÿ '1$5 4'F4'0$ÿ%,%0%I8 E
N) ÿ
O $(:$ 0 ), ÿ 'ÿ, ÿ6 /55 ÿÿ6 ÿ # 9ÿ'ÿ=15 50%& $B$&%% 0 *B /ÿ((PQQRU WÿV
,ÿ ,4'( ÿ)H6 0B /-, 1ÿ,(0%I8 E 6 -%./ % ÿ6 ÿ'0ÿ% $-)( ÿ, 2 -0 S VXU Z
) ,
:
) Nÿ T
[ ]SWU Wÿ Q^XV\ _`aTc ZÿUW\ÿ
\ X^VX[\ \\ WZÿ ÿbRZ\ d ^SX
ÿ
efhiÿÿ ngqÿ gkpuk vkwku hp ÿxÿg ÿxmsuk vkwk gkg
g klmkgp rst uÿsqp sÿuxs yu on y ÿsqp sÿrrn uxh
o
p
z
{61ÿÿ #9ÿ$5 4'F%' )) ÿ0,) BH(ÿ$ÿ,6 1ÿ, ÿ6, * ÿ6 ÿ=4('()&,%-%% ÿÿ, ÿ,) 06$
( 'I8 E 0' % $ÿ=4((*'0$%ÿ 10B0ÿ%&B /0$/ 60%%' ) 0 ÿ$.-ÿN)(B /5 ÿ,ÿ(
%
1
,
:
%
' ÿ0,) Bÿ/ÿ0,) Bÿ$ÿ,ÿ%4(% ÿ,*Nÿ, ÿ* 15 (%
)'0$%2 $'0$%-'%) 0& $ 0 50ÿ(%B /1 'ÿ N.7
,
0
% '
?ÿ$ '%0' % $ÿ0,) BH6 ÿÿ.)% ÿ ÿ6 ÿ ( 58'%ÿ) ÿÿ/6 $% ÿ,&'0%> :$ÿ6 ÿ # 9ÿ B
&( 0ÿ$5 4'F'0$%ÿ ,(1% -5( 0%I)0 ÿ00-' 5(' 0,( 50ÿ$.( ÿ%,%0%I8 E 4'J
N
-( )
%
- @
.
|%&B /',5:0$ÿ,0 ÿ* 1 $>% ÿB.) /0 *'.4&% % -Nÿ%$6,ÿ 5 $1% (0'()200
1ÿ, ÿN (ÿ /%.-11 'ÿ , 14-> ÿ, 5 .( ÿÿ, $6 )(%-'.ÿ:% %'ÿ *-$0 -ÿ'%
/
B% &
)
: $ , $*-$0 )2) ÿ.44, ÿH}/ $*-%% ÿ$5 4'Fÿ%,%B /:%B /ÿ& 1'()ÿ 4&% % -N
% (0'( -ÿ 5}, )1 ÿ)% (0$50' % $-> :$ÿ, ÿ1ÿ, $' &( 0 7 $6 )(%
, '
'
(
. , D,
-'.%ÿ$ÿ ,0)ÿ%' -ÿ0%ÿ$5 4'F, %-4'ÿ'%&,%051* 1(6-(ÿ$5 4'Fÿ( 1$
%$6 -'%( $' 0> ./%,6 $0' % $ÿH) $ÿ B6 Nÿ$0.% ÿ 'ÿ* 0ÿ 0' % $--4(
4&
% $ )
'
0ÿ, $ÿ6 0'%) 0:5 $1ÿ% (0$5ÿ6 $:$26 -ÿ$5 4'Fÿ 1) 0' & 'ÿ ÿ/ÿ^Z\ ^
,B /-0'ÿ$ÿ,ÿ %'1$*-%% 7 %%,%ÿ ,%0' % $-H(ÿ,ÿ& %$( , $~U U
% B
E
0
1
)
a\W Sÿ\^X\ 5 0> -2 /ÿ, 1ÿ01 14'%B&%% 0B /ÿ-ÿ: , $4'Fÿ
RT^VT UTÿ`Wÿ'' '%ÿ 0./5-(ÿ 0 01ÿ$N)ÿ, $/%,ÿ /ÿ $7
>
1/ (
B
ÿ
|%&B /5 $ *0%' &('()&,%-H( ÿ%%'ÿ6) -0'ÿ, 1ÿ%(/1ÿ '0B /ÿ$5 4'F$ 61ÿ, ÿ/( ÿ6 ÿ& 1 0 ÿ$.-ÿ 0 -N$1 (*ÿ6 0./5-$ -B( .ÿ, $0' % $ÿ( 02
)
.,
6
0
, 4&
*
-.ÿ-5 0$ )) ÿ6 ÿ%0H'ÿ,5 -$ %B /ÿ, 5ÿ) ÿ%N.-' 5&% '(*$-, --0ÿ%/'-0
/6'ÿ%%4((*0%> -ÿ B0ÿ%.( ÿ, $* , -' 5-$(%ÿ) ÿ$& $ ÿ%& )%ÿ,$:-1ÿ,
>
)
$*-%ÿ, $4'F0'ÿ6 ÿ #9ÿ=4((*'0$%ÿ B(-%
% (0$B /ÿ $ÿ6 00%I8 E %' )) ÿ0,) B4'ÿ / 7
?-(0B /'0$B /ÿ $ÿÿ% (0$5> ÿ1*$*-$0 )4')% ' .ÿ,/ )-' 5> ÿ'(*'0 )ÿ,
--ÿ, ÿ:%ÿ, $4'F($*-%% ÿB:( ÿ% (0'( ÿ (0) )%5 .4% 0ÿ) ÿB0F) ÿ.( -0
()
,
,
6 1ÿ, ÿ,(%' 5% :$%B /ÿ$5 4'F$ 6-ÿ (ÿ6 ÿ # 9ÿ% (0$ÿ$5 4'F2, 2-0%0' % $
%&B /& 1 ÿ) ÿ),.ÿ, $0' % $ÿ( 07 10%I8 E $*-%-0' % $-ÿ /ÿ ÿ6 ÿ$5 4'F
.
* {6%
B '
, %2$ÿ 1ÿ%& )(1ÿ $' B% :$% )ÿ: , $&('%0' % $ÿ(6H) $'%: 1$-, ->%: ÿ)ÿ),.4% 0,ÿ /ÿ$ 0ÿ$5 4'F$ 07
ÿ /B
,
B N
*
E %I8 E 6 -%0>(6 5'Hÿ., 1 ((ÿ$*' (ÿ (6& $(('(*1Hÿ., 1ÿ$N5 ÿ%ÿ* 1%N.-0
6 ÿ #9ÿ'ÿ-' 1 % ÿÿ' 86 ,ÿ ).&, $4ÿ H6.ÿ'0 & 0 ÿ -6 ,-&, (%: %1 'ÿ $(%ÿ,
D1
)
. )'
$ % 0' % $ÿ& 1' 0ÿ ÿ, ) .()H( ÿ$5 4'F' &('()ÿ%,%0%I8 E ÿ'6-6 ,ÿ ÿ6 ÿ$*' 6 -(
$5 4'F' &( )-( .) %0 ÿ 0 0' % $ÿ& 1 0 -> :$ÿ6 ÿ # 97M.ÿ., 1)0%&, $4ÿ'ÿ. )
, 6
.,
ÿ
(
0
, ÿ$%(ÿ $'.&(*.()-ÿÿ, ÿ$ÿ 0$-% 2, ÿ6 /5.)'0'& $(('(*-6 ,ÿ,(< ( ÿ> /
H).( $ : ÿ.% 0 ÿ1 07: /'%( %%05ÿ /-, 1ÿ, 0.ÿÿ'0 & 0 ÿ., 1 ÿ /$ ' , 0
0 ',
) %
B )
B
. )
0) %
> .4(*'.()7O $'10,ÿ'0('(*-6 ,-' 5' 50 ) 1),4'()' , 00%&, $42((ÿU ÿ SS
%, ) ÿÿ1 0ÿ,ÿÿ-ÿ: $(& 0 ÿ., 1ÿ) ÿ5 (, 'ÿ :$ 0 ÿ> /ÿ6 ÿ$*' ÿ-0ÿT R VT
%ÿ ( & . )
( (
,
N
R
\WTW ÿ^]^7
^SSUSVd U
O $4,%(:$ 0 ), ÿ) (*'< '(% ÿ$ '%'0$%ÿ,'--ÿ, 2((ÿ S]ÿ^Wÿ\ R \TXÿ
,ÿ $ÿ ,4'( ÿ): 5) ÿÿ/ 1(5&( 0ÿ0,) B0ÿ-(0B /ÿ-0XV dSU\]Uÿ ^S\7
) , (
: N
N
ÿ
2 98
72
7
!
279 779
7 7
82 9
8
98
7
7
92
7
7
8
1"
2
0 224 5
131 0
679 779
ÿ
7ÿ 7ÿ6
8
ÿ
7
ÿ
8
7
ÿ
$&'(*+-/'ÿ+0, +ÿ334(% ÿ'0ÿ-/5(, 0/5 ')
% ) ,ÿ )( 1(2( % )/'-( (- %)0ÿ *1, 5
679 ;=> @ÿ< =C> ÿ:@>EF H Cÿ: ? ;C?JC ÿÿL9 =KMK NCKC?:ÿ> C@KC?=<@B ÿC? 9B ÿ
7 :< ?AAB @ 9@ÿD ÿ G Iÿ ;? >@ ÿ @ K@K > LÿN 7 @ ÿLLOAL@ ÿ Aÿ>AO > ÿPK
ÿ
@
?
: D
;:
:
N: >ÿ>A?ÿ
LN LN L: Q
H >N: >ÿ>A?@ÿC?9 N ? A: ÿD ÿK<>:ÿD ÿ< =CA: Q LK?AB AC?ÿ PB ÿC? 9B ÿ?: >JC
D ÿLN LN L: ÿ:AO ÿ> > 9ÿ?@>? @LÿS >AB AC?ÿ @Cÿ< =CA: A=Kÿ>AO > ÿPK P ? ÿ @
@
T>
D
SAD ? ÿ? J79 >:ÿD ÿ ;AK 9K@KÿLC 79K @:C ÿ:K@: ÿ> KS SD ÿN 7K @JD7ÿ@>A=<@B
C@K 9M : > O ÿS >S @ÿ? ÿ;< 7 ÿ C ÿ<D LP@ÿ;ÿ?B D 7:ÿ >K NC ?U C :D Lÿ Aÿ>
L
@ K
: =N >
@
ÿ@ ; ÿ >
AO > ÿP@>K N C@9K@L>U LB ÿD ÿN 7K @C? ÿ@:? PCÿN :?> Q
C? 9B ÿD ÿN :?> ÿ@:? Pÿ ÿP@>K NC ?ÿÿ:K@L>ÿ K N C@9ÿ
:
; S
A
ÿ
67AO K<>ÿ Aÿ>N L: K7ÿ?>> ÿP@>C9V9 Kÿ>A?C> @C9KÿD ÿC? @LQH <U? @>ÿ>A?=K
7C? @LA=<@B ÿ>A? 7 > @L9B ÿD ÿ CC< 7 L: ÿ ?C> ÿA@>AO K:Pÿ D Aÿ :D LN L: ÿ P
ÿ
P
?
N 9 S
ÿ K
? @AO ÿD ÿK ÿS ?K@L>ÿL:D LK @:C> ÿC? LÿC? @LAXP@>;L:KC?ÿLXP@>S=YK>? @
:ÿC?@>? =>:ÿ ÿ@:? P:ÿ@>ÿ<D L 9AO >QFO K<>ÿB ÿD ÿ:N L@ Y:ÿB ÿD ÿL ÿLÿ:
K
W
ÿ
:
C
N L @> Q
>=C 9ÿ
@
Z /3,4ÿ% 0ÿ*\1%-/'-1( ÿ 4[/+3+ /'&ÿ],( %(% 3+ ,-ÿ [4( ) ) ÿ\(
13+ +[-&', - -% ÿ [0,( ÿ ÿ /4 ) ÿ334 )/'ÿ /5-^ ÿ 0ÿ/ÿ],( '0/'1, ÿ
5
1( ,
')/_
[ ÿ334(% ÿ'0ÿ [`/3(0%,) ÿ(% )ÿ_( ÿ,*4% +&%)(% ÿ_) ÿ fg 0,,1% -) )(
/*+( % )/'^ 1( ÿ + aÿ],b 4 [/ÿ'[+- )'&ÿ, -+)/'cZÿ],e$ hÿ )+ ',ÿ](ÿ
5 (
,
0%
ÿ
- -% %ÿ /3,4ÿ% 0^],- -% i%ÿ ÿ ÿ5, , ( ( ÿ+ ')^ b0, ,ÿ
*\1%-/'ÿ % +[-&', ÿ ÿ*\1%-/'ÿ 4'/)\,(53)0ÿ'0ÿ'[(&*1, -ÿ % '5^
-13+
)
4
,
/+
( '01, --)_ ) % ) ÿ*\1%-/'ÿ 4'/)\,5 % +0ÿ ÿ')+0c
1, ')ÿ,ÿ/+]ÿ ],- -% i%ÿ ÿ ÿ/'-0,, /+, ,, ÿ
'ÿ
4
ÿ
j,%%(% ÿ ÿ()
+_5)/'-/_k56ÿ>C;@ ?AO K<>Cÿ< =C> ÿ L@>N L:>:ÿ>CCOS;ACÿÿ:< ?ÿ?B D 7:ÿ?K NCK @
VLCKC ÿC? @Lÿ AB @ 9S ÿD ÿ<N AÿS LP? ÿ @ÿ K9 ;=> @: ÿ> KS S ÿN 7 ?Q
S :
A @ :
VS K ?
ÿK ; ÿ
H >AO K<>ÿ?@>S7 JCOAB AC?ÿLÿ: A9 L9@ÿ>VLCKC?AO K<>l
D ÿC? @LA: ÿD ÿ 7 ? ÿ< =CA: AK>;?C>> ÿ:B ÿ>C;@ ÿC? @LA
::
S :
HK > LÿN 7KC?Q
L9 =KMK NC @ A
;:
67O @ ?ÿS AQ
7 KC A:ÿ >
> : <
m n >@ÿ L>@?C?@ÿ7ÿÿ@@=> @:ÿAQ
> < AAS ÿo> A: ÿ:S>KAK> ?ÿS >
:
C
<
p>7L@ ?ÿ ÿ< N LÿS< AC @ÿN ;=> AK 9;K=A:ÿ;<L99AC;C> >A
;KKC AC AN :@:ÿ B@<>A>C ?ÿ? ÿ7C ÿS n C ÿC@ @ ? AQ
: ?
A @
K > ?V
q LCKC?AO K<>ÿ PB ÿC? 9B ÿ?ÿSD ÿ 7 JCOC9V9 KAÿ t ÿ>A?JC ÿO 7<D LP@ÿC9@>
>C;@ ÿC? @LA=Kÿ>AO > ÿPK P:ÿ >S 7 ? ÿ CC< 7lsÿN L: ÿ @ 7 Kÿ @:C ÿ:B? ÿD
S :
@ :: ?
rK
D> K @
K NCK @rt ÿ< 7C9K@L>ÿ> LA?CO@>K NCK @:ÿ t ÿ>A?JC ÿL@K 9M : > O ÿSD ÿ ;AK 9
N 7 ?uvÿn KC> ÿ@:? PLN>> @ ÿD ÿN 7 ?u Lr ÿN L: ÿ @ SAD ? ÿ? J79 >:ÿ >S @ÿ?
; ÿK S
?
; ÿ wK
DC
@ K
K@KÿLC 79K @:C ÿ:K@: ÿ> KS SD ÿN 7K @ÿ
;< 7 ÿ C ÿ<D LP@ÿ;ÿ?B D 7:ÿ >K NC ?Q
: =N >
@
ÿ@ ;
ÿ
x,3/'--ÿ '01, -ÿ '&,ÿ ÿ +- '5^ | ,-y\(
- ,^
y1, ')^
z]( -/_z/+,3/'0, ,ÿ 3+-ÿ '0/'1, -ÿ'0ÿ ],ÿ*\1%-/'{
')^ h) +$ -%
(
H >AO K<>Ln C => @ÿ LLA: AA@ÿ S>K@ ?u=> 9 ?A@ÿN 7KC?u> < AASLL;?C>KC?
D ÿC? @Lÿ> <L ?AS ÿ>N ?>ÿ:ISC ÿ;C Aÿ ? => @ÿ:K NC @ Aÿ n >@ÿ ÿ>: A9 L@ u
> :
; : K
;: L
:
:
Ln >@ÿ:9V9 u> < AA@ÿD ? >@>;L>N ? > ;ÿ9 LAu >C? @ ?ÿ? ÿ>:KC?ÿS : AC
> < AA@ÿCC>ÿ n >@ÿ:;K O ÿD ÿ:LA: 9 ?>K 9>Aÿ AO KC AK 9LV ;@ A:ÿ =>@
L
9
:
: 9 ;
LN>> @@>u? ÿ> < AASL>N>AK K 9 ? ?AK>=:>A>C;K : @JD ÿ AÿC?ÿ:ÿD Aÿ< =CA: Aÿ
> LA?KC Aÿ 9Ln >@ÿ ÿoLAÿB ? : => @ÿLÿ LÿN ;SÿB <ÿ :=<@AO Q L@>>AB AC?US
V K
:
C
}
C
@>K NCK @Cÿ> LA?> ÿPKn KC> ÿ@:? PÿD ÿ@:? P=<@AO Q
D ÿN 7 ?ÿ LN>> @9B ÿÿ< 7C9K@L>U >K@L>ÿ AÿC?
; A
S
@
~P <K>K ÿ 9V9 KÿN 7COSLLOAL@ ?:ÿÿL9 =KM@Kÿ: ÿJ?ÿ? ÿ: ÿLÿ:ÿ> LA?> ÿPKn KC>
S : ÿLÿ?C CC< 7 NP? ÿ ÿ> C@KC ÿS @K > LÿD @P <: U 9P <K>? @LN>> @9B ÿÿ< 7C9
ÿ
?
K
:
: K
K
S
K@L>UD ?P <=<@AO ÿD Aÿ< =CA: AÿC? @LAB ÿ?: >:D LP <K>O ? L7ÿ:ÿ;> @B>
@:? Pÿ > ÿ: ÿ AÿC?@>>AB AC?u O K<>ÿPK P ? ÿ@>ÿ: ÿLÿ> >K7? @K;NK 7Q
@
A
P
~@>K NCK @Cÿÿ L@ÿ?C ÿQQ? @K ÿ 9V9 Kÿ>A?ÿ? ÿÿ:ÿ> LA?> ÿPKn KC> ÿ@:? PÿD ?
SD ÿN 7 ?ÿ K CC> @Pr>U:ÿ?C CC< 7 L: t 9C? @LN>> @9B ÿÿ< 7C9K@L>U >
ÿ
; A < A; @ C ÿ ?
N K A
S
@
A=> ? ÿ @ÿO 7<D LP@ÿC9@>K NCK @=<@AO ÿD Aÿ< =CA: Aÿ D LSLUSD ÿN 7K @Cÿ
: : >JC 7 Kÿ @:C ÿ:B? ÿD ÿN 7 ?ÿ AÿC?@>>AB AC?QH >>:>ÿÿ >K NC ?ÿ K
D> K @
;
ÿ
C@ ; A
;L:KC?ÿÿ:N L@ÿSC>U<DKÿÿLA9 ?ÿLV;ÿLA9 ?UAN>< 9@ÿK>@>7O 7<D LP@ÿC9@>
:N L@ U ;L:K>:S LA;ÿAKN>C> @:ÿC>N>C> @CÿLA=> ÿ:D VÿD ÿ Kÿ @:C ÿ:B? ÿD
:K
;ÿ
ÿ
> K @
2 98
72
7
!
279 779
7 7
82 9
8
98
7
7
92
7
7
8
"#
2
0 224 5
131 0
679 779
ÿ
7ÿ 7ÿ6
8
ÿ
7
ÿ
8
7
ÿ
# $&# )ÿ&/ 12ÿ#)/ÿÿ315/ ÿ78 9ÿ8 ÿ$ 3$&)ÿ: %48 3;)ÿ&6# ÿ$ %# ))#ÿÿ3# &/ ÿ1
$ % (*-.0&/ÿ$ 3( 3&$/4 6)ÿ#/)/# $7 3 /% #ÿ )7& ÿ7<( ÿ(# $& (ÿ8 )&7: (=6#
' ÿ
#
1
# / # )
'
1
#$ 3( 38$ÿ ÿ8 ÿ)/ÿ# 6ÿ&( )3 1&/ )&6< ÿ/5&77 ;1'ÿ1@36 5#.# 5&&)#72@4&/1
ÿ#)/1&* )/78 38 ( 2 : #7& ÿ (&/ ÿ;)3 ( %: ÿ48#ÿ)# / 3ÿ6 (13)3ÿ< 1( 1
>(
1 /6 ?
A
5# # /2@0( 3ÿ/&( )6# / )ÿ315&3)%1#/$/4 6)ÿ/4 # )7&/ ÿ&( )3 1ÿ
( : 3ÿ7 /B6 1: #/ ÿ: (27ÿ& % ÿ&/ÿ3ÿ315/ ÿ7< ÿ( 48 3 61: #7& *
A 1
A #)
=
/
C( %2?8 3ÿÿ 3ÿ8 (7 /# $&# )# 6( ÿ4 %&6#)3/ÿ#ÿ/(# $ &)6ÿ8 (#%$ %# )ÿ 1ÿ&(
&#%ÿÿ //&57/)# ÿ( ÿ$ % (2( ÿ7D #&/ ÿ)7( ;8 1< / ÿ$ 7(/ 2 / ÿ%# $& (154)1:
;&) 1
' ÿ
?
) ÿ '
)//1< 1&(*
8 1ÿ4 5&17 1
2 98
72
7
!
279 779
7 7
82 9
8
98
7
7
92
7
7
8
""
2
EXHIBIT B
0 224 5
131 0
68
7ÿ 8 ÿ
ÿ6
79 8
7
ÿ
+( / .ÿ GG( 'ÿ J/
.B C(DFGHIJ/K/ I.
L^ÿ )JaÿMÿ UUN Yÿ XPÿL
MOP I/TUVWXPZP WM[TZ\
N QNRI
] _`( b./
^
c( H& ÿ(IK& '`Gÿ//
BGJdGe J& ./%f)
ÿ
F)gJ . ÿ Fÿi k
/( BHe i j l
(ÿ
h
%')m ki io m ÿ .Gÿr
&(*n ,n ,i ^p /G^
q
+)-/*^ ,s ,k opqHJk
&) ./s ^n ]o o ÿ I ÿr
,
&&
LN QNR UUN YZP WM U wyw
MOP MTUVWXP XPtuvWx z
+ /+( / .ÿ GG( 'ÿ J/ÿFKrGI/C(JGq &I'J/ÿ .()`IC/Gÿ& |G,H ÿ).ÿ&)} )
{ ÿ.B C(DFGHIJ/K/ I.p ÿÿ{ ÿ Hÿ` q .ÿ/ I.| ÿ)'G& .e.Cÿ.II |/GIÿ (
+ H
& ÿ
| H C/ H /
q&/G& (G( B/q . J/ ÿ.B C(D( qH( I~ ÿ( ÿJ/ÿ& . /I JÿJ(f. Iÿ|.B C(DIq'~
.|GHJ )ÿJ ÿg/H 'BI( / .ÿq ) JGÿ 'J( G .a `ÿ` GH G& ÿÿ(H a&ÿ( / .ÿ& HG
/
' /
&
/ I
5;:<ÿ ÿ5?
7:>86
/ /(ÿ |. I J( & I.}G/H}(I( / .
J .)J&C(H ÿ
`ÿ/ HI. ÿÿ.B C(D
H &
J
+( / .ÿI.I.ÿJ ÿ` )(HJ
.B C(D)/(`/( Bq
H I G
H
'&
q (/ÿJI/G(`ÿ|.B C(D( qH(HJÿJ ÿ/ HI(HJ
B IG& ÿ{ ÿIIG&ÿ( / .ÿq ) I G( B.}G.I G
I
'&
&
FJ/GIÿ(/G/H' /I Jÿ
`ÿJ( qH(HJ&ÿ/ HI(HJ
G .ÿ&'G,q '|ÿ` GH G( & I( ÿq ) I ÿ..}G.I
H &
'&
&
/qJ f} I }//I& Hÿ . ÿJ ÿaICG
)ÿ(H(H ÿ)'.J'| CG( BGG/
J
&
/q| BJ ÿ |. I J& ÿ`ÿ
H ÿ
`ÿ{ ÿ ( H}&ÿ.B C(DI. ÿJ ÿ& 'qGÿ& IÿI.ÿ{
)ÿJ H}H &C(H ÿJ& ./ GI ( & II/C/JJ ÿ| ( / .ÿ/CG( B'J/ Ie ÿ&G(II/
H J &
/
I
{
( qH(HJq&/Gÿq )(HJ( B.}G.I JI )/eJ ÿ .~
q ) I ÿ.'Ge qH I ÿJ ÿ/ HI(H ÿH H Gÿ BC&/
'&
( '&
& C/J (
3<;;5:937ÿ@< 9ÿ 8
ÿ7 ÿ ÿ 93ÿ 89 >@3
3 7 0 ;<
FB HH}( qH( IÿJq& /ÿ/q J/ÿ&b + |H/(I J
fGJ ÿq ) JG& ÿ.q ..G& GGIÿ ÿ | ÿ'H G
'
' &
K& B 'H}q/|H}G('/ÿ .q IJH)ÿ& |'H}I( / .G
J `I ÿ.,HJ ÿ/.{ G| ÿ&/ I )'J)I ÿ.B C(D
J )
&
(a H J
FJ )J ÿ.q/( q& H}B 'C/ Iÿ/&/|H}
(aH}&ÿ.,q .fJ ÿ&` JG
|.ÿ)
HJ
FB HH}( qH( IÿJG
IJH//( J I JHG/e`{(ÿ{ ÿ'/ I
)a&ÿq 'C/ G( B'(G|(HJ&
fGJ ÿq ) JG& ÿ` G( I ÿgCH(H ÿ ` Gÿ 'ÿGI/('q( HIÿ| /H JÿJ ÿ)GH'I ÿ|
'
f
&G G
H G
H&
} & G( BG.H/~
& BÿJ ÿ/f'G
=5>?
8
0 235ÿ89:;<
1 ÿ67887 3
=5>?ÿ;@ÿ5;:<ÿ 5? :5;
87 < 7:9 A79
;6
2 "#8 $ $
7$
728
7$
! 2 7!8 97 7
2
9 8 88 $
7
2
7
01
2
0 224 5
131 0
68
7ÿ 8 ÿ
ÿ6
79 8
7
ÿ
% '(*ÿ-./01
& ÿ+,--, (
7*0/1ÿ( (
,/10/4
2*34ÿ05ÿ*0/1ÿ *4 /*0
-, 1 ,/. 6,.
0+
89 ; =?A<BEG<IH9DKIHM
: <>@ =ÿF ÿH ÿ ÿÿH ÿ
; D
J
L
MNOPEG >D >T SUKA:T
9N@Pÿ GQ RS S ÿ J ÿV
> D
99
WXNY TZ ZS Y ÿ @[ÿV
9<EQ >Q >Z GU P[G
ÿ
K
\J@<A: NTY TZ ZS Y ÿ @[ÿV
:P: J <E>Q >Q >Z GU P[G
9 ÿ
K
] .
6,^
t *4 /*0ÿ 05*u
0+ 6,. u.
_a dae gga klc i` g prp
`bc `fghijc jcmnoiq s
89 ; =?A<BEG<IH9YKIHM
: <>@ =ÿF ÿH ÿ ÿÿH ÿ
; D
J
L
v9 Xw[ÿxN8< A9 ÿ<Jy A Az
:9 @PN PB ;[:L[ÿwN :
P ÿ
;
R G{w< =|@PB P< ;AB @AA
G ÿ N:ÿJPJ}N~: @ ÿ z:<
ÿ
<A
9< K AJ :ÿPP[@
ÿK 9:IP J: X[<=
ÿ ÿ4ÿ^ ( *0ÿ ( ( ÿ05ÿ(+ ^ 0
ÿ( 4^ . &
(,(1*-5ÿ u( 05-, / ÿ*^ +5(,ÿ 5, *u.
*^
P <ÿ =ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ8P @ N =ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ NI [{<
ÿP@ {<ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ I9Aÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿv9w wÿ =
[ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ <{< ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
8<J ÿw @: ÿ@[@ <ÿÿÿÿÿ: P P ; :P{<ÿÿÿÿÿÿ J@:ÿ =
@A WJPÿAzHÿA ; =ÿÿÿÿÿ ; K : P Xÿ =ÿÿÿÿÿPP< [{<
:
J ÿÿÿÿ\
ÿÿÿÿÿ
<: J:[@ <ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ< 9ÿ =ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ : [AAz{<ÿÿÿÿ
[Az9 ÿA ; =ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ @{<ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿM < zx: ÿ =ÿÿÿÿ
J ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿW
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
ÿÿÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ @J [{<
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿvAI<ÿ =
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ [
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
2 "#8 $ $
7$
728
7$
! 2 7!8 97 7
2
9 8 88 $
7
2
7
11
2
EXHIBIT C
0 223 4
101 0
57 9 6ÿ
9 95
66 ÿ 9 8 ÿ ÿ
68
7
ÿ 7ÿ 9 7ÿ ÿ 79ÿ 7ÿ "
!
9
0 ;
@
/0035079: ;<00=8 ?AB1D=>?5ÿ0ÿ 1ÿ0H=C
12ÿ6 ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 1ÿ >@ ÿ C ? ÿÿ830F80G 5?
8
8 8ÿ E 5
3
IH 0 1ÿ EF0 5K 0?=5M0 8H:
1G FH>J8; @ÿL EH?ÿ FL 11N
3I
OQQ Vÿÿ UZQ\ _`
PRQ WVYQV [Uÿ ^
STU S
]^ÿ
a3ÿ@?0b<0>ÿA
H58 = ÿÿ 03H 8
@
c0:=A = 8; @ÿ0=ÿÿ51e@ ÿd1ÿ8; @ÿ ÿ1E3ÿ00Hÿ0 Hf 8 5;6 3HE38 1ÿB
d1ÿ Hÿ EF0 55= H38:ÿ G00:G EF0 5<0L8036 1ÿ5aA =8 Fÿ8 E0ÿÿ;5F0g=0
0 G
3
H
3?
<H <6 5
L
G 8
ÿ :
?ÿÿ0:1Hÿ :ÿ 06 1?3HG EF0 55ÿ0L50 3H5H9 3@ 3e 15Eÿ@?0e 1L805501BF?C
@Hd1ÿ0= e 50ÿgÿÿ8; @ÿ86 =ÿ6 Fÿ51ÿÿ;?03ÿ 805H ÿ Hÿ ÿ15Eÿ6 ? H =
5 ÿ
ÿ
9
3
I Hgÿ :8 1J8; @ÿ1E383H03ÿ1?HC ÿ8 g73ÿ0:8 ÿ06 88 :ÿ;ÿ;ÿL EH?5
6 5 <6ÿ;ÿ EF0 5h8031ÿ1ÿ8E?E=i0G @5;51=ÿ@5E@ =A e 58 130?= 3
3
@ 83
E1B=ÿ0?<ÿH6G EF0 55ÿ@;0E38 1?B1 5 @?ÿ8 =5ÿ85Hÿ;ÿ;5F03H05;:
H0;=1d0 0Eÿ8; @ÿ80 31ÿ;5F0ÿ 8FH? ÿ EFL003ÿ6 58 1E38 1ÿ1ÿ1=
:
? G
G = 60 ÿ:50B Hÿ8; @ÿ6 :1E?0
0? 5G9 ÿ6 ÿ@ = EF0 550ÿ00dC
A
j;ÿ nop ÿupvxrÿ1ÿz1F0:G 5?8?@0 eH00EL?@ = 181H ?A3?3ÿH ÿ 0ÿ?6
1klm qrt mwv yH0050 =ÿ0H= 1 5Gÿ dÿz0 5 Hÿ 8 B0G@ ÿ>=e @F055 5
y
{0 6
8 L
=E
A
6 B 0 L
|3 ÿ 6
G H =0e@ ÿ 1ÿ 5ÿ?00 5=A = 1G E30EÿHC5ÿ=L 1ÿB 0L@ ÿ;ÿ;5F03H600501
0G? 3ÿ G<8><? GB 1@ÿ Hÿ 8 ;5ÿH6G :ÿgH= H58ÿ =?A8 1E38 1ÿE?dÿ6 ?
@ H
?
@
E @
D~C
G0F3ÿ63?ÿÿ0 8H:L 35 @9 3G?ÿ;ÿ 18H08B0ÿ ÿ 0 G =e
1H C ?ÿ H5FL 11ÿ8?8 ÿH0 ÿ 8 1D8L 15ÿB? 3? }=@ H0ÿ
I 3
wÿlnÿ
r xl
x
~3?5D;5F03<? ÿ
?0ÿ?ÿ00 6 @ ÿ ÿÿH=0 510 d1@ @ÿ@ 1dH0 ?1A 1?A
33ÿ 38 1ÿ 5 ? ;1 3dH5=L 8 0? HE=E@0ÿ@? F0 5H G8ÿ?ÿFH=0 HG@
6@ ?
@ ÿ
8
ÿ
E8
0
A d1F0 5H L?H?@1
? F0 5ÿ@ ÿ10ÿ553
8 0@ @ÿL = 5 ÿ0 ;1 @3H G8G 13H;C
h8??@=ÿ5?0E38 13L 85583ÿ:5F3H GL80 ;0ÿ8L8 ?0HE15e;6 1H?0H G
1B 0 5 ;?ÿ;5F0ÿ; L 1ÿ8 =e 30 ÿ@ ÿ1EG 135ÿ1dG ÿE;H0ÿ 58? 5 ÿ@
E : =
3
H 5d
5 =ÿ; L 1ÿ8;?@ÿ6 50E0 ÿ 38 10L EH?@C
? :3L 853=5 35Hÿz0GD;5F0ÿz055 3
F0
8
8
D8 330 5 ÿ0 @5H050H ?5ÿ80BE?0:6 @ =ÿ??;5E=ÿ@ ÿFH=C
@?5@=G F8 315ÿ6 ÿ9=:5ÿB05 =ÿH G0GBE= H=H G0 ?
:
?
d
B ÿ3
3
h0 H05H 0 1ÿ8; @38G 1G9 ÿ0 Hf 8 E38 1C
1L 1ÿ1G FH>G EF0 5ÿ100 ÿ:aA =8 Fÿ;5F03
5?0D;5F0ÿ 0 9 Eÿ@ ÿ1 18E10 E35ÿ 0 5:8 L 1; ?0ÿ8E@?; ;=ÿ 1dÿ6
?ÿ 38 1B G H>H GL? ÿE;1@0ÿ8? @?ÿL 85@5 35ÿ8 5 8 3:? 8 050
=
0
8
G B
?
@ FL
D;5F03ÿz0?@0H GG?00B?@:?ÿ6 ÿ0?0:8ÿ 1 {=3ÿ;5F0ÿ; L 1C
38 1g L 1 Eÿ@ ÿ1 ÿB?0 Eÿ 50G = 1ÿB = EH3E38 13L 85
0 0
d E @
d <8 G
c 31ÿL 15 @ =@ ÿ06 ?Hÿ30ÿ1ÿ8 @E5G5ÿ @ A F0 55H
@;08 0H? Hÿ G5E@E=3; 3H0EFF; ?H0 ÿ8FH H 0 @ÿ0FC
8 H
?
K L 858 0H?@ÿ:E835H@@ ÿ@1=5G79C
; L 1ÿL 15 39 ÿ13{1??A8 ÿ0H0 ÿ 3
8
8
I>ÿ? E?@B8 aH 3ÿ 33H 5H H 03H G8ÿ @ A 1ÿ31
? G
H0G1 5 ÿ Fÿ0Ge ?5@ÿ @ A 1ÿ@ 1H H 03Hÿ0 ;1 C
08 1
~3
0
nwvvwv
x mrlqy
cEL?@ = ?0 ÿ@ ÿ09 =8 @E5 @3?3
z0 5 Hÿ 5 @H Gd1Hÿ FF; ?H? ÿ>=C
8 <15
E
8 =
J0H=8?@0 ÿ@ ÿ0;5{1 0 C
5? 1 5GH G13= G? @
{0
3 d
~9=:5ÿ 1ÿ 5ÿ8 =ÿ@ ÿ; 53H G0E=@H6A {13;0ÿ 3{H0 ÿ@? @ @C
?5ÿ8<8><? A H3H G
8Hÿ@ ÿz0ÿ ÿÿ?6L031eH5L EG0 d1 F0 5
?
6
?
B
8
#2 '966 ( 2 )7 + ,7 9 6) ) 7
66)-0 + .
$%%%&6 &
2 "" * 9 * 2 8
7 8
9 9 )9 73 7 8
2
9
9
6
01
2
0 223 4
101 0
57 9 6ÿ
9 95
66 ÿ 9 8 ÿ ÿ
68
7
ÿ 7ÿ 9 7ÿ ÿ 79ÿ 7ÿ "
!
9
/0 246 8ÿ;0;= 58ÿ==3 62ÿ;== 3 >8= 5831 ; 73
1 3 57 9 0 <347 9 6ÿ7;9 ÿ>4 ?5ÿ;47 ÿ@35 >A
5 1
4
0
3
B05572C5 97 ÿD ÿEF26ÿ= 5Fÿ=5=3E 6 3 9D ÿ F C58= 15=57ÿ7 ÿ26?H
;< 3 >ÿ 6 ÿ 463= 56ÿ0;1427 G8 6ÿ3C37ÿ 3< F 7 ÿ1 F 6 H= 4HH3 I
>
D=
5
6 00
>0
J54 CHK 9 ÿ 6;3ÿ@F;;N6;3ÿ3;D3 87 Hÿ >P 58E 67 6F 646ÿ 0 Fÿ SD 0
7 0 ÿBÿ N 37 6O1039737 6H=>ÿ7 5397F47 ÿPÿ0ÿ?5 ÿ0Q0 83Rÿ= 0 9
LM 7
ÿ
5
53
L5;H<ÿ <3ÿ >P 58H;7 ÿUFÿ ÿ@39 ;90 ;079 TPF0
>006T<5 97F47 ÿ60 8H5H5 O>FJ04ÿ C3B 56Rÿ 6 U
>5
F7 ÿ B
ÿ 0
MFH=6;CD ÿ ;HC3F 6ÿ;C5 0 6H1 ;557
3< 6;3ÿ 0C0Uÿ FC5 0ÿ 6 PÿP 3GH0 A
V
ÿD D
W= 1=3ÿ 6ÿ@3F7ÿ0 7>6 7= 456;3H7 FUFA
3?ÿF2;C5 3>F 6>??P 5=5 ÿ7 ÿ 31 ;0 =ÿ 5H
D 3
0 7
HF
X35Fÿ7 ÿE36ÿ 7 8 ÿ F13=H8 ?3 6A
F@E3= 4= Fÿ0?= = 3?P6 FÿH57 7H
5
Y Y ÿ 83ÿ;<;3
Z[M\3 ;3133;4
]^2=H>H0 ;H1 0631 ; 735ÿÿ5DG F?3>7=6>7393 =ÿ;H;533 G;7 7A
Vÿ3;ÿP6?3ÿP 1 ;ÿ@35 >ÿ =D8 ÿ0P ÿ0 6>ÿ3 6;F8 F ÿ3G>ÿ75 ?3 6
3 7
ÿ 0
0
_8 F7 P62E >80 7 9@3573ÿ7 CF4 30ÿ 6;HA
3 =ÿ 4 H;ÿ=U ;P 4ÿ 1 ; >9 0 3 8 ÿ;5 336
5
3 3 U
7
O1 ; 73103H7 ÿ0 F@4 >?3 6ÿPD=ÿ = ÿ1 F=57A
@35 >ÿ;>H58>?13ÿ0P 7HH>ÿHF 7= 15 6 H
3
0
>0
_8 F0 ?ÿÿ7O P F 1 ;P 5 ÿ?10 39 3 5=3 ÿ04G;5 A
3 =` 0 5= ÿa =ÿ 0676 O F2;4 4>646ÿ53H6
H
T1
2
ÿ
2
B H3 ÿ=3ÿb4 2ÿ8
0644 6I ÿ=H= 0
^
c5CÿFdEÿ6XFF 7
3 =F0 H=ÿP<F 6
ÿ
5?3
#2 '966 ( 2 )7 + ,7 9 6) ) 7
66)-0 + .
$%%%&6 &
2 "" * 9 * 2 8
7 8
9 9 )9 73 7 8
2
9
9
6
11
2
EXHIBIT D
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA
Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au
Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
FILE DETAILS
Audio Length:
13 minutes
Audio Quality:
High
Number of Facilitators:
Low
One
Number of Interviewees:
Average
One
Difficult Interviewee Accents:
Yes
No
Other Comments:
START OF TRANSCRIPT
Operator:
Thank you for calling LegalZoom. Please remain on the line to be
connected to the next available representative. Need legal advice?
No problem. Although the LegalZoom customer care specialists can’t
provide legal advice, our network of independent attorneys can. Ask
us how. Calls may be recorded for quality assurance and training
purposes.
[Music plays]
Operator:
Thank you for holding.
[Music plays]
Operator:
Thank you for holding.
[Music plays]
Facilitator:
Thank you for calling LegalZoom. This is Will. How can I help you?
[Unclear] words are denoted in square brackets and time stamps may be used to indicate their location within the audio.
Distribution of this transcript requires client authority and is subject to the provisions of the Australian Privacy Principles.
Page 2 of 8
Recorded
Interviewee:
Yeah, hi, Will. I have a trademark that I’ve requested filing through
LegalZoom and they said that there’s a problem with it, so I’m trying to
just record and understand what I need to do so I can get this properly
filed and moving forward.
Facilitator:
Right. I understand this is the trademark review team, so we just
always discuss these types of matters, but let me go ahead and ask
you a few verification questions so I can secure your document. Can I
verify your first and last name?
Interviewee:
Sure. My name is Raj, R-A-J, and my last name is Abhyanker,
A-B-H-Y-A-N-K-E-R.
Facilitator:
What’s the…
Interviewee:
What’s your name again? Your name is - what’s…
Facilitator:
My name is Will.
Interviewee:
Will, okay.
Facilitator:
Yeah. Second verification question. Can you verify the email address
you use at LegalZoom?
Interviewee:
R-A-J @ L-E-G-A-L-F-O-R-C-E-L-A-W dot com.
Facilitator:
All right. Lastly, what is the name of the trademark that you’re
applying for?
Interviewee:
[Drawmarkia].
Facilitator:
Okay. Yeah, so we had some clarification required with the goods
and services description.
Interviewee:
Uh-huh.
Facilitator:
Your artist and drawing services website for animation and videos for
businesses. So basically the website’s just there - so I don’t know if
you’re trying to trademark the name for a software, like a software as
a service, or if you just provide artist and drawing services directly,
and you just use the website to promote those services so that you
can provide animations of videos for businesses.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 3 of 8
Recorded
Interviewee:
Yeah, so what I do is I want to allow customers that have small
businesses and they want to make an animation video for their small
business to explain what that business does, I want to make a stop
motion sketch on a whiteboard and then have them create an
animation for the video they can put on YouTube and on their website.
Facilitator:
Are you allowing users to create these videos, or you’re doing it
direct? Are you providing the tools so that users can create their own,
or are you doing it for them?
Interviewee:
We do it for them and we basically get a questionnaire, what they
want, then we write the storyboard, and then we do the artist’s work
and they can approve it. So we do all the artist stuff.
Facilitator:
All right. So this is - when you write artist and drawing services, this is
more like graphic illustration and drawing services. Right?
Interviewee:
Right.
Facilitator:
The reason I’m asking these questions is because we’re trying to - the
Trademark Office has a classification system and so if you were to,
say, do illustration services like the old-fashioned pen and paper
format, that’s class 41. But anything digital, digitally created services
are going to fall into class 42. So let me - because computer-related
sources falls under that class. So let me take a look and see what
pre-approved descriptions they have in their database. Then I’m
going to run it by you and see if you want to use that description.
Okay?
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
I’m just wondering, because I’m using one of the template descriptions
in their database, graphic illustration and drawing services mainly, and
then I was going to put - and then in brackets it’s - you make - you
write what you want to write to make it indigenous to the applicant. So
graphic illustration and drawing services, namely creating custom
design of graphics and animation for the purpose of creating
animation videos for businesses. But I’m just wondering if this should
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 4 of 8
Recorded
just end up being creating animation videos for businesses, just as
simple as that.
Interviewee:
What do you think is better?
Facilitator:
Well, so they come to you - I think the artist and drawing services are
implied within the confines of - so if I want to come to you, I come to
you because I want you to create a video for me, for my business, an
animation video.
Interviewee:
Right. Yeah. So I make…
Facilitator:
Okay. So whatever you do to create those animation videos is on
you, but as a consumer what I want you to give me is an animation
video. So I think that we don’t even have to indicate the illustration
and drawing unless you do those as stand-alone services outside of
creating the animation videos. But it’s all about what Drawmarkia is
going to brand identify. So if I think of LegalZoom, I think of them as a
document processing company. Right?
Interviewee:
Yes.
Facilitator:
If I think of Drawmarkia, I’m going to think of, oh, I need to contact
Drawmarkia so that they can create an animation video for me.
Interviewee:
Right. Yes.
Facilitator:
Would you agree with that? Does that make sense?
Interviewee:
Yeah, I think I’ll go with what you recommend.
Facilitator:
Okay. So I put - I’m just checking out one other thing to see if I can
incorporate this into the description. So they have a description in the
database that just reads animation design for others. So I was going
to kind of modify that so that it reads animation design for others,
namely creating animation videos for businesses.
Interviewee:
Okay. So is that the best description you think? Is that the best?
Okay, yeah, whatever you think.
Facilitator:
Yeah, I mean, as long - so these descriptions are not used for
advertisement purposes. Right? So they’re just there to steer your
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 5 of 8
Recorded
trademark in its right designation or right classification, so that it’s
clear to the Trademark Office that you’re looking to seek it - so in your
case you’re going to be either under class 42 or 35.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
Class 42, because animation design’s in class - is a computer-related
service and - but a simple description of animation design for others
falls under that class. Class 35 would be because any type of service
that you - one does that’s used for the promotion or marketing of
businesses, not that you’re providing it themselves, but you’re using
that, sometimes falls under class 35. So it’s not important to put the
class code. It’s more important to search those classes, so when we
conduct the search, which is the next step, we’re going to go ahead
and see if anyone’s using that name in either class 42 or 35, which
would be the obstacles for you to get the trademark.
Interviewee:
Okay. Cool. So, all right. Great.
Facilitator:
Great. So I’ll make the update to the document. I’ll send you an email
as a confirmation of the revision to your application.
Interviewee:
So what do you recommend? So which one do you recommend? Do
you recommend 32 or 45? Which one do you think is better?
Facilitator:
Well, I recommend just not putting a class code, which you don’t have
to do. So you can designate a class code if you want, but if the
Trademark Office feels that it should be the other class they’re just
going to send a correspondence that you have to reply back to. If you
overlook it - it’s not a problem, but if you overlook it, then it can be a
problem, because they give you a deadline to respond. So it’s best to
just leave it blank so that they can just inform you which classification
they’re going to designate your trademark in.
Interviewee:
Which one do you think fits better?
Facilitator:
I don’t know. I mean, animation design for others is 42, but it might be
class 35 just because they do have - when you think of logos, you
create logos as a digital. It’s a graphic design work. But they have
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 6 of 8
Recorded
marketing services, namely creating corporate logos for others.
Typically people want to use logos to brand identify something,
promote something. If I [take] up logos in class 42…
Interviewee:
But we’re not making logos. We’re making little two-minute
animations.
Facilitator:
I know.
Interviewee:
It’s like drawing.
Facilitator:
I absolutely understand that. I’m just using it as a correlative example.
So they don’t have anything animation in class 35, at least not that I
know of. Okay, so here, they have one in class 35. It says, providing
advertising services using 3D and animation designs. So who knows?
It’s not imperative to provide a classification upon submission of the
application. They have forms that allow you to not indicate class code
so they can simply do that for you.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
Even if you felt there was one class over the other, if they feel
differently, they’re just going to inform you of this and you have to
agree to it, or state a reason why you don’t want it to be that class.
But, like I said, if you don’t respond within a certain time, it will become
abandoned and you have to pay a petition to revive fee within a
certain amount of time. So let’s just push this through without a
classification code, unless you suggest otherwise, and I’ll send you a
confirmation email. Then we’ll go ahead and have a search
conducted.
Interviewee:
I’ll just do what you recommend, so whatever you recommend is good.
Let’s move it forward.
Facilitator:
Okay. We’ll go ahead and move it forward to the next step.
Interviewee:
Okay. Thank you.
Facilitator:
Do you have any other questions?
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 7 of 8
Recorded
Interviewee:
Can I start using my trademark now? Can I - what can I do with it?
Can I use it for my website to advertise the…
Facilitator:
Well, yeah, you can. You filed it under intent to use, meaning that
you’re not - you don’t have the service available to others, at least not
using this name to do that. But it won’t hurt you to start using it and
conversely, if you rather us just change the filing basis to use in
commerce, and so we can take the screen shots of the website and
we’ll submit the materials to support your using commerce filing basis,
we can do that. But if your interest is to try to get some form of
trademark pending protection as soon as possible, then leaving it
under the intent to use would be the best bet.
Interviewee:
Okay. Then if I give you my website, what do I need to show? Is
there - does the website - any website will work? Do I show my name
on it or…
Facilitator:
It doesn’t matter. Yeah, it doesn’t matter what the domain name is, so
even if it’s not drawmarkia.com. They’re going to want to see that
there’s a prominent display of the name Drawmarkia on there and
then there’s an explanation of the services you provide and that it’s
clear that one could be able to obtain those services from you now.
Interviewee:
Okay. So animation services and stuff for this. That would be
enough.
Facilitator:
Yeah.
Interviewee:
Okay. Cool. Thank you so much. Yeah, let’s move it forward. When
will it be filed?
Facilitator:
I don’t know. So the search is going to take one to two business days.
The sooner you reply back to that, the sooner we’ll send you an email
requesting your electronic signature.
Interviewee:
Okay. Thank you so much. I’m ready to move forward…
Facilitator:
Okay. Right.
Interviewee:
…and thanks.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 8 of 8
Recorded
[Over speaking]
Facilitator:
Sounds good, Raj. We’ll take care of you. Take care.
Interviewee:
Bye.
END OF TRANSCRIPT
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
EXHIBIT E
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA
Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au
Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
FILE DETAILS
Audio Length:
19 minutes
Audio Quality:
High
Number of Facilitators:
Low
One
Number of Interviewees:
Average
One
Difficult Interviewee Accents:
Yes
No
Other Comments:
START OF TRANSCRIPT
Interviewee:
LegalZoom. This is Alex. How can I help you?
Facilitator:
Yes. I ordered a trademark on LegalZoom and it says that I have
action required as my status, so I'm calling in to see what that is.
Interviewee:
I can definitely help you out with that but, first, for verification
purposes, can I have you provide me with your first and last name
please?
Facilitator:
Yes, it's Ryan Bethell. Last name is spelled B-E-T-H-E-L-L.
Interviewee:
Okay, and then also your login email address for your LegalZoom
account.
Facilitator:
It's ryanb@legalforcelaw.com.
Interviewee:
And also the name of your trademark.
Facilitator:
Piggiebank.
[Unclear] words are denoted in square brackets and time stamps may be used to indicate their location within the audio.
Distribution of this transcript requires client authority and is subject to the provisions of the Australian Privacy Principles.
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Interviewee:
Page 2 of 10
Okay. Let's see here. I do see that we do have some questions
regarding your goods and services description. I also see that you
paid for two classes. What it looks like is that your description does
indicate that you may fall under class 42 potentially. We were a little
unclear. So let's see here. To give you some background information,
the Trademark Office does separate different goods and services into
different classifications. Each of those classes does require a filing
fee, as you did pay for two. [Let me see here]. It does look like your
description indicates that you may be something along the lines of
software as a service. Is that appropriate?
Facilitator:
Not - yeah. I think we're a software and we're a service [laughs]. What
would you recommend? I can give you the website that we have. It's
just piggiebank.com.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
I want a little help selecting that. I wasn’t sure which class to pick.
Interviewee:
Okay, I see. When it comes to software the Trademark Office does
separate those into two different classes. The downloadable software
that you can actually download to either a computer, a mobile phone,
anything along those lines, that’s going to fall under class nine. If it's
something where you have to pay for access to your service - oh, I'm
sorry, to your software - that is hosted online and they don’t have to
directly download something, that’s considered software as a service,
and that will fall under class 42.
Facilitator:
Okay. We do have a subscription model. It's like a CRM. Does that
mean that I should file Piggiebank as a software as a service then?
Interviewee:
Let me see here. That’s going to be up to you, essentially, and on
what you determine your services fall under. All I can really tell you is
your options on what we're seeing it may fall under, and then it would
be up to you, ultimately, to decide what you do want to file it as. Given
that we are not attorneys, I cannot give you any direct legal advice.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Facilitator:
Page 3 of 10
Okay. What - so then we've got - we do two things. We have a
browser extension which you can download. Then we have the
subscription service which - does that mean that I should do both?
Interviewee:
Let me see what the extension may fall under. That is downloadable,
correct, that browser extension you [were saying].
Facilitator:
Yeah. It's just like a Google Chrome plugin. You download it and it
gives you access to our software. I guess it makes it easier to
navigate the non-downloadable portion, but I guess the core is nondownloadable.
Interviewee:
Right, okay, I see. That could be - if that software is actually
downloadable, then that would be under that class nine, and that
would be the - see what I can find in regards to that. I do have a
description that simply states computer - [I don’t like that one]. All
right. It simply states computer software for, and then you would
specify the function of the program, so you could include that
information regarding the fact that is a downloadable plugin.
Facilitator:
Okay. That would be - so those would be separate though, those
would be two classes, the downloadable part and the nondownloadable part.
Interviewee:
Correct, yes.
Facilitator:
Okay. Where's - I'm looking on the website. I can't find the description
that I wrote. Can you point me in that direction?
Interviewee:
When it comes to on the actual LegalZoom website for access to that I
don’t entirely know where that is on your end
Facilitator:
Okay.
Interviewee:
What I can tell you is I do have that description in front of me. What I
have is…
Facilitator:
Sure. Let's go through the description.
Interviewee:
Okay. It's Piggiebank CRM helps small businesses stay organised.
Piggiebank is a salesforce alternative. It's quick and easy to get set up
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Page 4 of 10
and easy to use, designed specifically for businesses using Enterprise
Gmail.
Facilitator:
Okay. Yeah, the Enterprise Gmail portion, is that - that’s the Google
Chrome plugin.
Interviewee:
Okay, all right.
Facilitator:
Does that description look okay?
Interviewee:
As a description, all that is is describing what your service does. It
doesn’t really describe what it is, and that’s what the Trademark Office
is looking for, is for that actual description. What I have is, with this
class nine, there's one that states computer software for, and then we
can specify the function of that program. Then under class 42 I have
software as a service, services featuring software for, and then we can
use that language to specify the function of the program as well, if that
sounds appropriate.
Facilitator:
Okay. Then I should, essentially, modify this to fit into one of those
templates.
Interviewee:
I can do that right now, if you would like me to help you out doing that.
Facilitator:
Sure.
Interviewee:
I have that description for computer software for, and then specify the
function of that program. How would you like that worded?
Facilitator:
So…
[Over speaking]
Interviewee:
[That’s going to be] the downloadable portion.
Facilitator:
The downloadable - what do you recommend?
Interviewee:
For - when it comes to the description, typically, they're just looking for
a basic description of the function. The examples they use is for use in
database management, for use as a spreadsheet, for use - for word
processing; just simple descriptions like that. If it is, for instance, a
downloadable plugin for an internet browser, you could state that.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Facilitator:
Page 5 of 10
Okay. That sounds good…
[Over speaking]
Interviewee:
…describe.
Facilitator:
That sounds good.
Interviewee:
Okay. So far I have that it is computer software for use as an internet
browser plugin. Then they're going to want you to also provide
information regarding what it does.
Facilitator:
Okay. I guess the browser plugin, essentially, connects it to our CRM
and integrates with Gmail.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
I don’t know. I guess I'm - what are you - based on what you see, let
me, I guess, describe the service and then [laughs] you can tell me, I
guess, what makes sense on this form. I can't see it. The - essentially,
it's like an email aggregator and a customer relations management
software. The extension - all it does - it's a downloadable - it's for UI
that is ease of access and - it's a UI extension, so it syncs with your
Gmail account and then causes everything that you email to get sent
to - essentially, copied and pasted into the CRM. Maybe read back the
- does that help?
Interviewee:
It does. I'm just trying to figure out the best way to see here. Okay, so
- can I have you describe that to me one more time so that I can use
some of that language?
Facilitator:
Sure. It's the - which piece? Just the Google Chrome extension, what
it does?
Interviewee:
Yeah, yeah.
Facilitator:
Or the whole business? Okay.
Interviewee:
You could give me all of it right now though. I'll…
[Over speaking]
Facilitator:
Perfect. I guess because we're going to draft up two of these.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Page 6 of 10
Interviewee:
Yes, [exactly].
Facilitator:
The - it's a customer relations management software. The Google
Chrome extension is a downloadable software that gives - essentially,
it's a UI interface that integrates with Google Chrome and syncs the
Gmail accounts with the CRM software.
Interviewee:
Okay. Using very basic language, what I have right now…
Facilitator:
Yeah, better to keep it simple, right.
Interviewee:
Yeah. Under class nine I have computer software for use as an
internet browser plugin in connection with customer relations
management software. Then, under class 42, I have software as a
service, services featuring software for customer relations
management.
Facilitator:
Okay.
Interviewee:
Does that sound…
Facilitator:
Yeah. Do you think that sounds good?
Interviewee:
It does at my end, but my only concern is I don’t have details
regarding - you did describe it - your services to me. I just want to
make sure that it sounds good on your end.
Facilitator:
Okay. I'll go with what you recommend.
Interviewee:
Okay. Then when it comes to your - I have updated that. You are
listed as filing what’s called intent to use, so that does mean that the
Trademark Office is going to ask you for your specimens in the future.
That’s going to be four to five months after your initial filing date.
When they do ask you for those specimens it is going to be per class.
They're going to look for you to provide them the information regarding
that actual downloadable software. That could just be screenshots of
your download page for that software itself. Then they're going to ask
for information regarding that software as a service, which will also
just be - honestly, what I'm seeing on your website may be sufficient
when it comes to that software as a service.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Facilitator:
Page 7 of 10
A quick question. Right now the software portion that’s, I guess, the
non-downloadable part is ready now. Should I file one of them as in
use and one of them as intent to use? Or is there a disadvantage to
just filing both intent to use?
Interviewee:
No. Actually, we can go ahead and do one and one. The way that it
works is that when you file for intent to use - as I say, the Trademark
Office will ask for that four to five months after that initial filing date.
They also require a $100 fee at the point of providing them that proof.
If you have the proof for that class 42 for software as a service, that
I'm seeing your website, that we could move forward with that one,
providing that to them, which would mean that they’ll just ask you for
the class nine proof, and it'll just be the $100 for the single class when
they ask you for it.
Facilitator:
Can you see the website?
Interviewee:
Yes. I do have it…
[Over speaking]
Facilitator:
Does that look like it would - that would work for proof of use?
Interviewee:
Let me go ahead and take a double check here. Yeah. I'm seeing yeah, absolutely, this would be…
Facilitator:
Okay, that’s perfect. Then let's do the - we'll do one that we're using
now with the proof of use looks good, and then we'll do the other one,
I guess, intent.
Interviewee:
Okay, absolutely. When we're doing that - when you do file for use in
commerce the Trademark Office asks for two dates from you. They're
going to ask for your date of first use anywhere and your date of first
use in commerce. That date of first use anywhere does need to come
before the date of first use in commerce, and they both have to be
current dates. They cannot be future dates. How would you like that
listed?
Facilitator:
What does use in commerce mean?
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Interviewee:
Page 8 of 10
That pretty much means the first time you were putting something out
in order to have it purchased.
Facilitator:
Okay.
Interviewee:
It could be a matter of - since it is out there and you are allowing
people to get started, you are already providing it as a service.
Facilitator:
Okay. We - a quick question. We were at, actually, TechCrunch a few
months ago - is, I guess, where we did our soft launch, but we actually
didn’t have our first sale until later. Which would recommend that we
use as a date of first use?
Interviewee:
They're looking for information in relation to this actual name. They
want you - just in case you have to provide proof - that you are, in fact,
using this name before somebody else. They want a date for you to
state that I was using it by this point. That’s what is best to think
about.
Facilitator:
Okay. They would never like - they're not going to ask for an invoice or
something to show for use in commerce. If we advertised it, that’s
good.
Interviewee:
When it comes to the application process they won't ask for that. If it's
anything to do with making sure you're protecting your name in
relation to somebody else trying to use it I don’t have direct
information for that, so I don’t know what they'd ask you for in terms of
that. Before the actual application itself they're not going to ask you for
that.
Facilitator:
Okay. Well, thanks. Let's do the software as a service one then. Just
to confirm, it's - we'll do that as in use, and then the other one is intent.
Interviewee:
Oh yes.
Facilitator:
All right. Thanks.
Interviewee:
Then when it comes to those dates I do need to put those in for you
before we can move forward.
Facilitator:
Okay.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Page 9 of 10
Interviewee:
How would you like those listed?
Facilitator:
[Sighs]. Can you - are you in front of the computer? I'm not. I'm sorry
[laughs]. Could you Google when TechCrunch was? Actually, hold on.
I can get it.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
Because that was our launch date. TechCrunch disrupt. It was 2017.
We were 18 September of this year.
Interviewee:
Okay. Is that your date of first use anywhere, or your date of first use
in commerce, or both?
Facilitator:
That’s first in commerce. I think we started development internally in let's call it 1 January of 2017.
Interviewee:
Of '17, okay. All right. What I'm going to do is I'm going to be sending
you an email that will contain both these goods and services
descriptions that you're moving forward with. I am - I have updated
your application so that we're moving forward with the website you
provided as your proof for that class 42 description. Then we're doing
intent to use for your class three description. That is everything that I
need from you right now.
I will go ahead and make sure all of that is updated. Then I'm going to
go out and move your order on through to our search team. They're
going to take the next three to five business days to get you your
search results. Those will be posted to your account. You'll get an
email regarding that. Once you do receive that just give it a look over.
If there's anything about your order you want to update or change,
give us a call. We can help you out with that. If not, just let them know,
as a reply, that you do want to move forward, and then we'll go ahead
and prepare your application at that point.
Facilitator:
All right. Thanks very much. Appreciate all the advice.
Interviewee:
Thank you very much. Have a great day.
Facilitator:
Bye.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
LegalZoom-PiggiebankMark-Recording2
Page 10 of 10
Saying I'll go with what you recommend doesn’t mean anything
because asking the question what do you recommend…
END OF TRANSCRIPT
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA
Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au
Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
FILE DETAILS
Audio Length:
12 minutes
Audio Quality:
High
Number of Facilitators:
Low
One
Number of Interviewees:
Average
One
Difficult Interviewee Accents:
Yes
No
Other Comments:
START OF TRANSCRIPT
Facilitator:
My name is Robert, how can I help you today?
Interviewee:
Hey Robert, I have a note saying there was action required on my
Trademark.
Facilitator:
Okay, I’ll just try to [get right at that], sir. Okay, said it was for your
Trademark?
Interviewee:
Correct.
Facilitator:
Okay, if I can ask who am I speaking with today?
Interviewee:
My name is Ryan Bethell.
Facilitator:
[Unclear] Mr Bethel. I have two show that you put the order number of
50921513 in the system?
Interviewee:
That’s correct.
[Unclear] words are denoted in square brackets and time stamps may be used to indicate their location within the audio.
Distribution of this transcript requires client authority and is subject to the provisions of the Australian Privacy Principles.
Page 2 of 7
Piggiebank-PostSearch
Facilitator:
Mr Bethell, can I also ask you what email address you use for your
order?
Interviewee:
RyanB@Legalforcelaw.com
Facilitator:
Alright, thank you, sir. Alright, let me take some quick notes and then I
can get access [unclear] and see if I can help you with this. [Pause]
Okay, Trademark, get that open. [Pause] Alright, it looks like we did
the [comprehensive] search for you and mailed that to you…
Interviewee:
I see the - you mailed or emailed? I saw the email. Then I’m actually
looking at search results right now.
Facilitator:
Oh yeah, let me check on that. Let me check on that and make sure. It
says it was mailed, so…
Interviewee:
Okay, well I’m looking at an email version, that’s fine.
Facilitator:
Okay, so they meant - [they may have meant] email note to say
[unclear]. So you did receive that then, okay. So have you had a
chance to…
Interviewee:
Yeah, I’ve gone through them briefly…
Facilitator:
…look over that…
Interviewee:
I was looking for a little bit of direction. Looks like there’s - there are
nine different searches that are done and so what - how [were they
significant]? Could you explain just a little bit to me about what they
are and why they’re [important]?
Facilitator:
Well, these search - I mean it’s just a more comprehensive search
[unclear]. [I can’t] It’s - well, the main search is more - [I said it] - it
search as much as the [comprehensive one] - it’s more
comprehensive so it just gives you more information.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
So basically it’s meant to give you as much information that you - it
can for the comprehensive, so it gives you more idea if there’s any could be any clash with your Trademark or if there could be any
possibly clash or conflict.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 3 of 7
Piggiebank-PostSearch
Interviewee:
I guess my problem is, you definitely gave me a lot of information,
perhaps too much because I’m looking at this…
Facilitator:
Oh, I see.
Interviewee:
…and I just see there’s a hundred and something pages of document
and there’s no direction [laughs] as to - it’s [unclear]. It’s just a blank
page with - here’s - there’s a [blank] page with hundreds of different
search results.
Facilitator:
Let me see - yeah and that’s why it’s comprehensive search. It’s really
comprehensive - there’s just a lot of information and…
Interviewee:
So - I mean, I see, I went through them all sort of briefly - what - my
goal here is I want to register a Trademark. So what should [really
matter]?
Facilitator:
[Pause] Well, look I mean they all matter, like the government ones
are the - I mean that’s [prescribed] to, it’s for government so that’s
[probably] the most part of this - there is some things that are done at
state level aren’t a real Trademark issue, but it’s depending on what
you want to do. You might come into conflict later on, so it’s - I mean
the government one’s definitely an important one. That’s depending
on what you want to do…
Interviewee:
So when you say the government one - what are you - I don’t - I see…
Facilitator:
Okay, well the federal [unclear] - federal search - the comprehensive
includes the federal and also state search. So state search will bring
up things that are state related that directly affect the Trademark on a
national level.
Interviewee:
Okay.
Facilitator:
Some states might have a - because it might be a name that’s in a
state that’s just like a business name or something that the state - it’s
already filed in state, so that might be…
Interviewee:
[Okay]…
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 4 of 7
Piggiebank-PostSearch
Facilitator:
…if somebody was trying to do something nationwide, it might be
going to different to states though that - it’s just a real - I mean,
depending on what you want to do and how…
Interviewee:
So…
Facilitator:
…[unclear] you’re doing, so…
Interviewee:
So if I - if there’s something that’s in a - shows up on the state search,
would that prevent me from going through - would that be a conflict
just for the Trademark registration?
Facilitator:
Well, it might be a conflict if you’re going to do something in that state.
If it’s - like there was - we had one [example] there was a - let me think
- I can’t - there was a company - national company and there was a
company that started in another state; I think it was Minnesota, so that
when they went into that Minnesota they had to change their name.
They couldn’t use the name that that company in Minnesota already
had. I can’t remember if it was [Papa John’s] or maybe it was…
Interviewee:
Oh, okay, so…
Facilitator:
…something like that, but then - so something like that that might
happen.
Interviewee:
But that was [kind of a one-off].
Facilitator:
But that’s an example.
Interviewee:
So but I could still - because there’s - if there was one that looked like
it’s pretty spot-on like in the state of Alabama, I don’t think we have
any plan to go and target Alabama specifically…
Facilitator:
Yeah, so that gives you some information…
Interviewee:
…but if there’s not - if that doesn’t pop up in the federal search, then
I’m okay? Just for the purpose of…
Facilitator:
Yeah, that should be okay…
Interviewee:
…[unclear].
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 5 of 7
Piggiebank-PostSearch
Facilitator:
… yeah, it’s up to you and what you’re going to do with your
Trademark in the future.
[Over speaking]
Interviewee:
The one in Alabama, if it’s not in the federal search, that wouldn’t
affect the ability for me to register, is that what I’m understanding? But
it could ultimately affect my rights to use the mark down the road in
that state?
Facilitator:
Yeah, in that certain state or something, yes.
Interviewee:
Okay, and I did - as I went through the federal thing - the federal one
is the one I went through most closely and it - I was just wondering
what weight is given to the - because I see a couple of things that are
[unclear] - our Trademark is for Piggiebank and it’s - but it’s treated it’s like a software service - it’s going to have a novel spelling. It’s GG-I-E instead of G-G-Y and I see some things that are like Piggiebank
Management which is for - it’s like a - books.
So is that going to be a problem? Would something like that pose a
big risk to filing for a Piggiebank Trademark and software service?
Facilitator:
Well, I mean we - I mean that’s - I guess that’s - it’s more for you to
decide. It’s hard to speak for you. We try to base [an application] on
what you have done and - but they could change and it’s very - it’s
hard to say what they are going to do for sure, but…
Interviewee:
I’m not asking for sure, I mean I imagine you guys have tens of
thousands of Trademarks. So I’m asking in your experience, is
something like - so the mark [unclear] [looking] at is Piggiebank
Management. If you went to the federal search report [number 14] and
I see this registration - the pending mark - it looks like it hasn’t been
registered - and I wonder would we be able to get a similar Trademark
there because the names are similar, but we’re a totally different
service.
Facilitator:
Okay, yeah, if it’s a different class that would make a difference.
Interviewee:
Okay.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Page 6 of 7
Piggiebank-PostSearch
Facilitator:
But if it’s a different class they wouldn’t compare it at all, so that’s…
Interviewee:
Oh, oh so then I just need to…
Facilitator:
…[unclear].
Interviewee:
That’s actually - that’s very helpful. So as I go through this then we’re
going to be in I think - I can’t remember the number, but it was like
non-downloadable software and - what’s that 41, maybe 42 - it was in
the 40s. But we wouldn’t then - so when I go through the - the only
ones I need to worry about then, are the ones in that class? That
actually makes…
Facilitator:
Yeah, that’s correct.
Interviewee:
Oh, perfect. That’s…
[Over speaking]
Interviewee:
…[unclear] easier to go through. Alright, now all of a sudden I can just
Control F and find the same class number. That actually makes it very
helpful.
Facilitator:
Yeah.
Interviewee:
Okay, so again, I think that what I’ll need to do is - do I just approve it
online? So I’m going to go through them and now I’m going to - based
on that, I’m just going to go through and look at all the class 42s and
then we can decide if we’re going to move forward from there.
Facilitator:
Yeah, yeah then you call us and let's help you out to see if you
[unclear] search or not, or if you want to update your application or
[unclear], so.
Interviewee:
Alright, well thanks. Thanks very much. I appreciate the advice.
Facilitator:
Oh you’re welcome Mr Bethell and is there anything else I can help
you with? Do you have any questions?
Interviewee:
No, I think that will be it for today. Thanks very much, appreciate it.
Facilitator:
You’re welcome Mr Bethell, thank you. Have a wonderful day and
thanks for choosing LegalZoom.
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
Piggiebank-PostSearch
Page 7 of 7
END OF TRANSCRIPT
PO Box 745 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 AUSTRALIA Ph 1300 662 173 or +61 7 3378 2668
Email enquiries@pacifictranscription.com.au Web www.pacifictranscription.com.au
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT G
N i(((&( % #P
h ! &&j
i
C=? 4 C=?0H72CA
01E Fÿ01ÿ /90ÿ8
4
G
IK L ,+ ,ÿ(ÿ N P
J 3 M ÿ %! ÿ
$O
Q Sÿ VXZ ÿR R ] _96
R T WY[\Q Sÿ3 ^3
UL
`367 3 \S6 48L
ÿ
ÿ 638
a O, a( *
ÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ
a ÿ!*
- ÿ
, ÿ
ÿ
bÿ ÿ
Zc ÿ *
M *
, ÿ
ÿ
db b *
e $ÿ" ÿ
ÿ
d ,
! ÿ
i
f ÿ !ÿ ÿ i !&#i km e $ÿ"P
(ÿ g N h & &jl d b b
ÿ19921ÿ 9450
ÿ 7?0ÿ8:2 57
o 9 8ÿ9
8
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
./1ÿ5/7901ÿ 9;17
024ÿ 18 ÿ8:2 /<:
6 7 8ÿ
e ÿ ÿ !ÿ
%, ÿ
W
./1ÿ5/7901ÿ 94=<28<
024ÿ 18 ÿ8:2 /19 9
6 7 8 ÿ 14
e ÿ ÿ !ÿ
%, ÿ
W
>4?@5721A2/7B0
060ÿ50ÿ<ÿ8B8/
49
Tÿ
ÿ4
9 87] 897
2
p !
ÿ
q!
ÿ
p " ÿ
ÿ $r ),
q
ÿ
S9287 3
ÿ
ÿ
9
p !
ÿ
q!
ÿ
p " ÿ
ÿ $r ),
C<B=2240ÿ8:2;17
1=10ÿ6D<1ÿ 9 /<:
8ÿ
d
!
C<B=2240ÿ8:24=<28<
1=10ÿ6D<1ÿ 9 /19 9
8 ÿ 14
d
!
ÿ 336 3ÿ
ÿ 4 97 ÿ7 ÿ7 ÿ
12 4ÿ7 89 8
7
3
2
4
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ #$# %ÿ ( * ÿ ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ! " ! ÿ & ) ÿ %)
' ÿ
+ ÿ,,, !ÿ% * ÿ ÿ, &
ÿ +ÿ ÿ!ÿ & ÿ#ÿ ÿ
%
ÿ ÿ
) -
0 231 0
10 24 5
6 8
ÿ 89ÿÿ
7 9
ÿ 9 ÿÿ
9
$ ÿ2 ÿ ÿ6 8
ÿ 89ÿÿ
7 ÿ%9
'7 ÿ2 7 9
ÿ 9 ÿÿ
&
9
()* ,-ÿ./
'+))ÿ 6
01 4 9ÿ; >?2ÿÿ 4Bÿ97
235667ÿ 3 <=99 3@Aÿ C>
:
3
(Dÿ
%+(E.ÿ
F.))+')ÿ ))ÿ$HHI 2 .(.J,E'.6 .H$,E)22
/+* G 2///
F,K2
3L
I,)H+%ÿ
%+F+K(+EÿN 4 Oÿ4O ÿ F)H
Mÿ 0 N 1.Kÿ
1 0
0910 ab31ÿ H 7 ÿ ab31 c
_ ` > ÿ 7 ÿ
> d
ÿ
ÿ
P U
QRST
ÿ
ÿ
6 8
99 & 7 ÿ WVÿ 7V
7 9
ÿ9ÿ
Vÿ7 9 7 ÿ ÿ
7
7
8 9ÿ997 ÿ
V
ÿ9 ÿ
ÿ77ÿ ÿ
7 W
(
7 9 V ÿ 77
X9 ÿ
ÿ Y7 V
ÿ
H ÿ7
8
ÿ 9 &9 V 9
7
ÿ 9ÿ
7
ÿ 7 ÿ
7 V
ÿ 9ÿ ÿÿÿ 9
N 9
H V & 9 9 ÿÿ ÿ
7
(7
6 8
ÿ7 9ÿ G 2
89
#29
7 9N7 8
7ÿ 2 7 7
7 Z
ÿ 6 -
8
Z #Z WZ Z7 Z 8
N ÿ9
7 2 9!
97Z
7 9
9Z Lÿ 76
7
7 9
) ÿ ! ÿ 2
89!77 #272789
Z Z #7Z
7&[97G 2 9
!
9
7
Z#9 24 1 4
Lÿ 76 . 77 ÿ
ZO O \ M
7N ÿ ÿ 8
( 7
9
J
29 7 9
27240O27252789
Z7ZZ9Z
Z9 9
2ÿ
9ÿ 2
1 V 4
! 9
7 ZL9 V
G
7D ÿ ÿ 2 & 7 #2727Z7279
89
9 7VZ Z&Z
ÿ # I 2 # Z7 Z
7 G
.ÿ 7
Z 8
ZZ\ 4 M Lÿ 7
9 7ÿ77
9Z 9 V05 0 M \ ÿ 7 ÿ
7
G 7
71 0 0 4 4 O0 26 8
Z Z9 -
2
27 2 24 O 1 5 4 057 27 9
Z . 6 Z
2
7
7
L
6 8
X7Fÿ
ÿ 7 9 ÿÿ ÿ
ÿ9 N 7
7 9
ÿ7ÿ 7 ÿ 98$ 9V ÿ
]ÿ 7ÿ X
7 W
ÿ V
8
ÿ ÿ 9ÿÿÿ
ÿ7 &ÿ&ÿ ÿ7ÿX77
7 79 ÿ
^ 9 7 V ÿ
8N9 79 V 7
9
(7 ÿ7 9ÿÿ9 ÿ ÿÿ Nÿ7ÿÿ 7 7
9
8
] 9 77 ÿ 9ÿ89 ^ ÿ9V ÿ
6
97
77
9 9
28
"9 " " #
"
2 9 9
27 27
9! " 8 9 "9
2
2
7
01
2
0 231 0
10 24 5
6 8
ÿ 89ÿÿ
7 9
ÿ 9 ÿÿ
9
'7 ÿ7 9* ÿ (%8 97ÿ
ÿ9ÿ ÿ 9
9
8
# ÿ ÿ79 ÿ * 7
7
6 ÿ
%
0 47
%7 8 ÿ97ÿ ÿ 7 7ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ) 9
+ ÿ
7 ÿ 9 8 -#,9 ) 9 9 )
,9
7
. 9)# * 97)() 9 ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 8%
/8ÿ ( ÿ
ÿ 9 ÿ9 ÿ
7 ÿ
(
7
9
0
1 ÿ
ÿ 7 8
ÿ (
1 ÿÿ7 7 ÿ%
7 9 ÿ ÿ ÿ7 9 %9 9 79 ÿ
ÿ ) )
ÿ
977 * ) ÿ ÿ 76 ÿ 7%397
ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ9 2 ÿ !
(
%9
7
4575 78=5 ?
689ÿ;<6>
&'&ÿ 9
@
A 9
9 979
2 7 " " 8 7 ) " "
97 "
2 9 9
2 8 ! 27) 7" " ##
7 " " 9 9 " 7
2
7 (
.
ÿ 97 (
7Bÿ 7 ÿ 7ÿ ÿ 87) ÿ
97
C ÿ #
7 ÿ ÿ D9 ÿ 7
7E
0
&'&@
9
A 9 9
28
" 7 " 797 " #9"
97 " B
2 9 9
27 27
9! 8 " #" " " 9 " 77
2
7
7 (
.7 9
ÿ7Fÿ ÿ ÿÿ
6 8
8 ÿ 7970
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
$ %ÿ4 5&
79 ÿ & ÿ
7
0 ÿ '9ÿ 9 ÿ8 ÿ77()
81
&
9 9
28
"9 " " #
"
2 9 9
27 27
9! " 8 9 "9
2
2
7
11
2
EXHIBIT H
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF THE
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
In the Matter of
)
)
Matthew H. Swyers,
)
)
)
Respondent
Proceeding No. D2016-20
~~~~~~~~~~~-l
FINAL ORDER
Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 11.27(b), the Director of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office ("USPTO" or "Office") received for review and approval from the
Director of the Office of Emollment and Discipline ("OED Director") an Affidavit For
Consent Exclusion pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 11.27, executed by Matthew H. Swyers
("Respondent") on December 20, 2016. Respondent submitted the twelve-page Affidavit
For Consent Exclusion to the USPTO for the purpose of being excluded on consent
pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 11.27.
For the reasons set forth herein, Respondent's Affidavit For Consent Exclusion
shall be approved, and Respondent shall be excluded on consent from practice before the
Office in trademark and non-patent matters commencing on the date of this Final Order.
Jurisdiction
Respondent, of Vienna, Virginia, is an attorney licensed to practice law in the
Commonwealth of Virginia and the District of Columbia and has practiced before the
USPTO in trademark matters. As such, he is subject to the USPTO Code of Professional
Responsibility, which is set forth at 37 C.F.R. § 10.20 et seq., and the USPTO Rules of
Professional Conduct, which are set forth at 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101through11.901.1
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 2(b)(2)(D) and 32 and 37 C.F.R. § 11.27, the USPTO
Director has the authority to approve Respondent's Affidavit for Consent Exclusion and
to exclude Respondent on consent from the practice of trademark and non-patent matters
before the Office.
Allegations of the Disciplinary Complaint
A disciplinary complaint is pending against Respondent (Proceeding No. 2016-20)
which alleges that:
a.
Respondent, an experienced trademark lawyer and former USPTO
Trademark Examining Attorney, established The Trademark
Company, PLLC, and through that business systematically
permitted non-attorneys to practice trademark law for him with little
or no supervision.
b.
Respondent, the sole attorney at the company, did not personally
review or sign thousands of trademark applications and related
documents (including statements of use, § 2(f) declarations, and
responses to Office actions) prepared by his non-lawyer employees
and filed with the USPTO, in violation of USPTO signature and
certification rules and despite assurances on the company website
that trademark applicants would be represented by a specialized
attorney.
c.
As a result of Respondent's failure to supervise his employees,
multiple fraudulent or digitally manipulated specimens of use were
filed with the Office, which potentially jeopardized the trademark
applications of his clients.
1
The USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility applies to conduct prior to May 3, 2013, and
the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct apply to conduct on or after May 3, 2013.
2
d.
Respondent failed to deposit client funds paid in advance into a
client trust account and improperly split legal fees with his nonpractitioner employees.
e.
Respondent failed to respond to lawful requests for information or
cooperate with the investigation conducted by the Office of
Enrollment and Discipline.
Respondent's Affidavit For Consent Exclusion
Respondent acknowledges in his December 20, 2016 Affidavit For Consent
Exclusion that:
1.
His consent is freely and voluntarily rendered, and he is not being subjected
to coercion or duress.
2.
He is aware that the disciplinary complaint filed against him (Proceeding
No. D2016-20) alleges that he violated the following Disciplinary Rules of the USPTO
Code of Professional Responsibility and/ or the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct:
a.
37 C.F.R. § 10.23(a) (engaging in disreputable or gross
misconduct by, inter alia: directing or allowing his employees
to prepare, sign, and file trademark applications, responses to
Office Actions, and other trademark documents; directing or
allowing his employees to provide legal advice and guidance
to trademark applicants; and/ or directing or allowing his
employees to communicate with his clients about trademark
search reports and opinions, without his involvement or
supervision; engaging in disreputable or gross misconduct
by, inter alia: failing to comply with the USPTO's electronic
signature rules by not personally electronically signing
trademark applications and trademark documents filed with
the USPTO and, instead, directing or allowing his employees
to sign or forge his electronic signature to the documents,
which resulted in the validity of registered trademarks being
jeopardized; engaging in disreputable or gross misconduct
by, inter alia: directing or allowing his employees to sign or
forge his name to § 2(£) declarations and file the § 2(f)
declarations with the Office, when (i) he knew that the
3
Trademark Examining Attorneys would rely on the
declarations when examining trademark applications and
issuing registrations and when he knew or reasonably should
have known that the validity of an applicants' applications
and registrations were jeopardized by the false and/ or forged
declarations; and/ or (ii) he knew or should have known his
employees did not have adequate knowledge to aver, "The
mark has become distinctive of the goods/ services through
the applicant's substantially exclusive and continuous use in
commerce that the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate for at
least the five years immediately before the date of this
statement;" engaging in disreputable or gross misconduct by,
inter alia: (i) failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, (ii) failing to inform his clients that
their trademark registrations or applications were potentially
invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial action on
their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to them,
and/ or (iii) failing to inform the USPTO of the potentially
invalid applications and/ or registrations that resulted from
the filing of false or fraudulent specimens or digitally altered
marks; engaging in disreputable or gross misconduct by, inter
alia: (i) not informing clients who purchased trademark legal
services from The Trademark Company that their
applications and other trademark documents were not
prepared or reviewed by an attorney prior to being filed with
the Office; and/ or (ii) collecting fees from clients for
trademark legal services that were supposed to be performed
by an attorney when their applications and other trademark
documents were not prepared or reviewed by an attorney
prior to being filed with the Office);
b.
37 C.F.R. § 10.23(b)(4) (engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation by, inter alia:
not informing clients who purchased trademark legal services
from The Trademark Company that their applications and
other trademark documents were not prepared or reviewed
4
by an attorney prior to being filed with the Office; engaging
in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation by, inter alia: (i) not personally
electronically signing trademark applications and trademark
documents filed with the USPTO and, instead, directing or
allowing his employees to sign or forge his electronic
signature to the documents, thereby misleading the USPTO,
his clients, and the public into believing that Respondent had
actually signed the trademark application or trademark
document; and/ or (ii) not affirmatively informing the
Trademark Examining Attorney that the actual signatory, the
employee, was not identified on the document; engaging in
conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud,
deceit,
or
misrepresentation by, inter alia: directing or allowing his
employees to sign or forge his name to § 2(f) declarations and
file the § 2(f) declarations with the Office, when (i) he knew
that the Trademark Examining Attorneys would rely on the
declarations when examining trademark applications and
issuing registrations, and/ or (ii) he knew or should have
known his employees did not have adequate knowledge to
aver, "The mark has become distinctive of the goods/ services
through the applicant's substantially exclusive and
continuous use in commerce that the U.S. Congress may
lawfully regulate for at least the five years immediately before
the date of this statement;" engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation by, inter alia:
(i) failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, (ii) failing to inform his clients that
their trademark registrations or applications were potentially
invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial action on
their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to them,
and/ or (iii) failing to inform the USPTO of the potentially
invalid applications and/ or registrations that resulted from
the filing of false or fraudulent specimens or digitally altered
marks; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation by, inter alia: (i) not informing
5
clients who purchased trademark legal services from The
Trademark Company that their applications and other
trademark documents were not prepared or reviewed by an
attorney prior to being filed with the Office; and/ or (ii)
collecting fees from clients for trademark legal services that
were supposed to be performed by an attorney when their
applications and other trademark documents were not
prepared or reviewed by an attorney prior to being filed with
the Office);
c.
37 C.F.R. § 10.23(b)(5) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice by, inter alia: (i) directing or allowing
his employees to prepare, sign, and file trademark
applications, responses to Office Actions, and other
trademark documents; directing or allowing his employees to
provide legal advice and guidance to trademark applicants;
and/ or directing or allowing his employees to communicate
with his clients about trademark search reports and opinions,
without his involvement or supervision; and/ or (ii) not
reviewing trademark applications and other trademark
documents (e.g., responses to Office Actions) prepared and
filed by his employees before they were filed with the Office;
engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of
justice by, inter alia: (i) failing to comply with the USPTO's
electronic signature rules by not personally electronically
signing trademark applications and trademark documents
filed with the USPTO and, instead, directing or allowing his
employees to sign or forge his electronic signature to the
documents, which resulted in the validity of registered
trademarks being jeopardized and/ or (ii) directing or
allowing his employees to sign or forge his electronic
signature to trademark applications and other trademark
documents knowing that the actual signatory, the employee,
was not identified on the documents contrary to
Respondent's certifications under § 11.18; engaging in
conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice by, inter
alia: directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge his
name to§ 2(f) declarations and file the § 2(f) declarations with
the Office, when (i) he knew that the Trademark Examining
Attorneys would rely on the declarations when examining
trademark applications and issuing registrations; and/ or (ii)
he knew or should have known his employees did not have
adequate knowledge to aver, "The mark has become
6
distinctive of the goods/ services through the applicant's
substantially exclusive and continuous use in commerce that
the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate for at least the five
years immediately before the date of this statement;" and/ or
(iii) he knew that (a) the actual signatory, the employee, was
not identified on the document and (b) the actual signatory,
the employee, did not have the knowledge to support the
factual contentions found in the declaration; engaging in
conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice by, inter
alia: (i) failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, and/ or (ii) failing to inform the
USPTO of the potentially invalid applications and/ or
registrations that resulted from the filing of false or
fraudulent specimens or digitally altered mark);
d.
37 C.F.R. § 10.23(b)(6) (engaging in any other conduct that
adverse! y reflects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count I of the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does
not otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Code of
Professional Responsibility; engaging in any other conduct
that adversely reflects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count II of the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does
not otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Code of
Professional Responsibility; engaging in any other conduct
that adversely reflects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count III of the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does
not otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Code of
Professional Responsibility; any other conduct that adversely
reflects on the practitioner's fitness to practice before the
Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in Count IV of
the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does not
otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Code of
Professional Responsibility);
7
e.
37 C.F.R. §§ 10.23(a) and (b) via 10.23(c)(2)(ii) (knowingly
giving false or misleading information or knowingly
participating in a material way in giving false or misleading
information to the USPTO or any employee of the USPTO by,
inter alia: directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge
his name to § 2(£) declarations and file the § 2(f) declarations
with the Office, when (i) he knew that the Trademark
Examining Attorneys would rely on the declarations when
examining trademark applications and issuing registrations,
and/ or (ii) he knew or should have known his employees did
not have adequate knowledge to aver, "The mark has become
distinctive of the goods/services through the applicant's
substantially exclusive and continuous use in commerce that
the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate for at least the five
years immediately before the date of this statement;" and/ or
(iii) he knew that (a) the actual signatory, the employee, was
not identified on the document and (b) the actual signatory,
the employee, did not have the knowledge to support the
factual contentions found in the declaration);
f.
37 C.F.R. §§ 10.23(a) and (b) via 10.23(c)(15) (violating the
certifications made to the USPTO under 37 C.F.R. § 11.18 by,
inter alia: directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge
his electronic signature to trademark applications and other
trademark documents knowing that the actual signatory, the
employee, was not identified on the documents; violating the
certifications made to the USPTO under 37 C.F.R. § 11.18 by,
inter alia: directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge
his name to § 2(f) declarations and file the § 2(f) declarations
with the Office, knowing that (i) the actual signatory, the
' employee, was not identified on the document and (ii) the
actual signatory, the employee, did not have the knowledge
to support the factual contentions found in the declaration;
violating the certifications made to the USPTO under 37
C.F.R. § 11.18 by, inter alia, failing to adequately supervise his
employees or adequately review their work, thus permitting
them to create false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally
altered images of marks that did not depict the actual mark as
used in commerce and file these specimens with the Office);
g.
37 C.F.R. § 10.31(a) (deceiving or misleading prospective
applicants or other persons having immediate or prospective
8
business before the Office by word, circular, letter, or
advertising with respect to prospective business before the
Office by, inter alia: advertising on The Trademark Company's
website that trademark applications would be prepared by an
attorney when Respondent knew that trademark applications
were not prepared or reviewed by an attorney prior to being
filed with the USPTO; engaging in any other conduct that
adversely reflects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count V of the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does
not otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Code of
Professional Responsibility);
h.
37 C.F.R. § 10.47(a) and (c) (aiding a non-practitioner in the
unauthorized practice of law before the Office by, inter alia: (i)
directing or allowing his employees to prepare, sign, and file
trademark applications, responses to Office Actions, and
other trademark documents; directing or allowing his
employees to provide legal advice and guidance to trademark
applicants; and/ or directing or allowing his employees to
communicate with his clients about trademark search reports
and opinions, without his involvement or supervision;
and/ or (ii) not reviewing trademark applications and other
trademark documents (e.g., responses to Office Actions)
prepared and filed by his employees before they were filed
with the Office);
i.
37 C.F.R. § 10.48 (sharing legal fees with a non-practitioner by
paying employees non-discretionary monthly bonuses tied to
the proceeds generated by the trademark legal services
provided to applicants with whom they interacted);
j.
37 C.F.R. § 10.77(b) (handling a legal matter without
preparation adequate under the circumstances by, inter alia:
failing to comply with the USPTO' s electronic signature rules
by not personally electronically signing trademark
applications and trademark documents filed with the USPTO
and, instead, directing or allowing his employees to sign or
forge his electronic signature to the documents, which
resulted in the validity of registered trademarks being
jeopardized);
9
k.
37 C.F.R. § 10.77(c) (neglecting client matters by, inter alia: not
reviewing trademark applications, responses to Office
Actions, and other trademark documents prepared and filed
by his employees before they were filed with· the Office;
neglecting client matters by, inter alia: (i) failing to adequately
supervise his employees or adequately review their work,
thus permitting them to create false or fraudulent specimens
and/ or digitally altered images of marks that did not depict
the actual mark as used in commerce and file these specimens
with the Office, and as a result, in some cases, the USPTO
issued trademark registrations based on the false or
fraudulent specimens or digitally altered marks, putting the
validity of the resulting trademarks in jeopardy, and/ or (ii)
failing to inform his clients that their trademark registrations
or applications were potentially invalid and/ or take timely
and effective remedial action on their behalf and/ or offer or
provide restitution to them);
1.
37 C.F.R. § 10.84(a)(l) (intentionally failing to seek the lawful
objectives of a client through reasonably available means
permitted by law by, inter alia: intentionally failing to inform
his clients that their trademark registrations or applications
were potentially invalid and/ or take timely and effective
remedial action on their behalf and/ or offer or provide
restitution to them);
m.
37 C.F.R. § 10.84(a)(3) (intentionally prejudicing or damaging
the client during the course of a professional relationship by,
inter alia: intentionally failing to inform his clients that their
trademark registrations or applications were potentially
invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial action on
their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to them);
n.
37 C.F.R. § 10.89(c)(6) (intentionally or habitually violating
any provision of the USPTO Code of Professional
Responsibility while appearing in a professional capacity
before a tribunal by, inter alia: (i) directing or allowing his
employees to prepare, sign, and file trademark applications,
responses to Office Actions, and other trademark documents;
directing or allowing his employees to provide legal advice
and guidance to trademark applicants; and/ or directing or
allowing his employees to communicate with his clients about
trademark search reports and opinions, without his
10
involvement or superv1s10n; and/ or (ii) not reviewing
trademark applications, responses to Office Actions, and
other trademark documents prepared and filed by his
employees before they were filed with the Office;
intentionally or habitually violating any provision of the
USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility while appearing
in a professional capacity before a tribunal by, inter alia: failing
to comply with the USPTO's electronic signature rules by not
personally electronically signing trademark applications and
trademark documents filed with the USPTO and, instead,
directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge his
electronic signature to the documents, which resulted in the
validity of registered trademarks being jeopardized;
intentionally or habitually violating any provision of the
USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility while appearing
in a professional capacity before a tribunal by, inter alia:
directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge his name
to § 2(f) declarations and file the § 2(f) declarations with the
Office, when (i) he knew that the Trademark Examining
Attorneys would rely on the declarations when examining
trademark applications and issuing registrations, and/ or (ii)
he knew or should have known his employees did not have
adequate knowledge to aver, "The mark has become
distinctive of the goods/services through the applicant's
substantially exclusive and continuous use in commerce that
the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate for at least the five
years immediately before the date of this statement;";
intentionally or habitually violating any provision of the
USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility while appearing
in a professional capacity before a tribunal by, inter alia: (i)
failing to adequately supervise his employees or adequately
review their work, thus permitting them to create false or
fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images of
marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, and/ or (ii) failing to inform the
USPTO of the potentially invalid applications and/ or
registrations that resulted from the filing of false or
fraudulent specimens or digitally altered marks);
11
o.
37 C.F.R. § 10.112(a) (failing to deposit legal fees paid in
advance into a separate client trust account by depositing
them instead into The Trademark Company's operating
account);
p.
37 C.F.R. § 11.101 (failing to provide competent
representation by, inter alia: not reviewing trademark
applications, responses to Office Actions, and other
trademark documents prepared and filed by his employees
before they were filed with the Office; failing to provide
competent representation by, inter alia: failing to comply with
the USPTO's electronic signature rules by not personally
electronically signing trademark applications and trademark
documents filed with the USPTO and, instead, directing or
allowing his employees to sign or forge his electronic
signature to the documents, which resulted in the validity of
registered trademarks being jeopardized; failing to provide
competent representation by, inter alia: directing or allowing
his employees to sign or forge his name to § 2(f) declarations
and file the § 2(£) declarations with the Office, when (i) he
knew that the Trademark Examining Attorneys would rely on
the declarations when examining trademark applications and
issuing registrations and when he knew or reasonably should
have known that the validity of the applicants' applications
and registrations were jeopardized by the false declarations;
failing to provide competent representation by, inter alia: (i)
failing to adequately supervise his employees or adequately
review their work, thus permitting them to create false or
fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images of
marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, and/ or (ii) failing to inform his
clients that their trademark registrations or applications were
potentially invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial
action on their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to
them);
q.
37 C.F.R. § 11.104(a) (failing to keep his client reasonably
informed by, inter alia: (i) not informing Ms. Teague of the
Office Action received on her behalf in U.S. Trademark
12
Application No. 86/287,301 and by not informing her that he
had filed substitute specimens without confirming with her
whether the substitute specimens depicted her mark as used
in commerce, and/ or (ii) failing to inform his clients that their
trademark registrations or applications were potentially
invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial action on
their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to them);
r.
37 C.F.R. § 11.115(a) (failing to hold property of a client or
third person that is in the lawyer's possession in connection
with a representation separate from the lawyer's own
property, by depositing fees paid in advance by clients for
trademark legal services and costs into his operating account);
s.
37 C.F.R. § ll.115(c) (failing to deposit into a client trust
account legal fees and expenses that have been paid in
advance, to be withdrawn by the practitioner only as fees are
earned or expenses incurred, by depositing fees paid in
advance by clients for trademark legal services and costs into
his operating account);
t.
37 C.F.R. § ll.303(a)(l) (knowingly making a false statement
of fact to a tribunal or failing to correct a false statement of
material fact previously made to the tribunal by the
practitioner by, inter alia: failing to inform the USPTO of the
potentially invalid applications and/ or registrations that
resulted from the filing of false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks);
u.
37 C.F.R. § ll.303(d) (failing, in an ex parte proceeding, to
inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the
practitioner that will enable the tribunal to make an informed
decision, even if the facts are adverse by, inter alia: directing
or allowing his employees to sign or forge his name to § 2(f)
declarations and file the § 2(f) declarations with the Office,
when (i) he knew that the Trademark Examining Attorneys
would rely on the declarations when examining trademark
applications and issuing registrations and/ or (ii) he knew or
should have known his employees did not have adequate
knowledge to aver, "The mark has become distinctive of the
goods/services through the applicant's substantially
exclusive and continuous use in commerce that the U.S.
Congress may lawfully regulate for at least the five years
13
immediately before the date of this statement;"; failing, in an
ex parte proceeding, to inform the tribunal of all material facts
known to the practitioner that will enable the tribunal to make
an informed decision, even if the facts are adverse, by, inter
alia, failing to inform the USPTO of the potentially invalid
applications and/ or registrations that resulted from the filing
of false or fraudulent specimens or digitally altered marks);
v.
37 C.F.R. § 11.503(a) (failing to make reasonable efforts to
ensure that The Trademark Company had in effect measures
giving reasonable assurance that its employees' conduct was
compatible with Respondent's professional obligations, as is
required by him as a partner or a person of comparable
managerial authority of The Trademark Company by, inter
alia: failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy);
w.
37 C.F.R. § 11.503(b) (failing to make reasonable efforts to
ensure that the conduct of The Trademark Company
employees over whom he had direct supervisory authority
was compatible with Respondent's professional obligations
by, inter alia: failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy);
x.
37 C.F.R. § 11.503(c) (ordering or ratifying the conduct of the
employees of The Trademark Company which would have
been a violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct
had it been committed by a practitioner, and/ or failing to take
remedial measures once he learned of the conduct by, inter
14
alia: (i) failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, (ii) failing to inform his clients that
their trademark registrations or applications were potentially
invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial action on
their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to them,
and/ or (iii) failing to inform the USPTO of the potentially
invalid applications and/ or registrations that resulted from
the filing of false or fraudulent specimens or digitally altered
marks);
y.
37 C.F.R. § 11.504(a) (sharing legal fees with a nonpractitioner by paying employees non-discretionary monthly
bonuses tied to the proceeds generated by the trademark legal
services provided to applicants with whom they interacted);
z.
37C.F.R.§11.505 (assisting other persons in the unauthorized
practice of law before the USPTO by, inter alia: (i) directing or
allowing his employees to prepare, sign, and file trademark
applications, responses to Office Actions, and other
trademark documents; directing or allowing his employees to
provide legal advice and guidance to trademark applicants;
and/ or directing or allowing his employees to communicate
with his clients about trademark search reports and opinions,
without his involvement or supervision; and/ or (ii) not
reviewing trademark applications and other trademark
documents (e.g., responses to Office Actions) prepared and
filed by his employees before they were filed with the Office);
aa.
37 C.F.R. § 11.701 (making false or misleading
communications about the practitioner or the practitioner's
services by, inter alia: advertising on The Trademark
Company's website that trademark applications would be
prepared by an attorney when Respondent knew that
trademark applications were not prepared or reviewed by an
attorney prior to being filed with the USPTO);
15
bb.
37 C.F.R. §11.SOl(b) (failing to respond to lawful requests for
information and failing to cooperate with OED by inter alia: (i)
telling a witness not to talk to OED; (ii) falsely telling potential
witnesses that talking to OED could affect their trademark
rights; (iii) withholding the names of former employees for
months; and/ or (iv) not providing OED with the documents
it sought (invoices, employment agreements, correspondence
about§ 2(£) declarations, and/ or a privilege log));
cc.
37 C.F.R. § ll.804(c) (engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation by, inter alia:
not informing clients who purchased trademark legal services
from The Trademark Company that their applications and
other trademark documents were not prepared or reviewed
by an attorney prior to being filed with the Office; engaging
in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation by, inter alia: (i) not personally
electronically signing trademark applications and trademark
documents filed with the USPTO and, instead, directing or
allowing his employees to sign or forge his electronic
signature to the documents, thereby misleading the USPTO,
his clients, and the public into believing that Respondent had
actually signed the trademark application or trademark
document; and/ or (ii) not affirmatively informing the
Trademark Examining Attorney that the actual signatory, the
employee, was not identified on the document; engaging in
conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud,
deceit,
or
misrepresentation by, inter alia: directing or allowing his
employees to sign or forge his name to § 2(£) declarations and
file the § 2(f) declarations with the Office, when (i) he knew
that the Trademark Examining Attorneys would rely on the
declarations when examining trademark applications and
issuing registrations, and/ or (ii) he knew or should have
known his employees did not have adequate knowledge to
aver, "The mark has become distinctive of the goods/ services
through the applicant's substantially exclusive and
continuous use in commerce that the U.S. Congress may
lawfully regulate for at least the five years immediately before
the date of this statement;" engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, by, inter alia:
(i) failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
16
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, (ii) failing to inform his clients that
their trademark registrations or applications were potentially
invalid and/ or take timely and effective remedial action on
their behalf and/ or offer or provide restitution to them,
and/ or (iii) failing to inform the USPTO of the potentially
invalid applications and/ or registrations that resulted from
the filing of false or fraudulent specimens or digitally altered
marks; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation by, inter alia: (i) not informing
clients who purchased trademark legal services from The
Trademark Company that their applications and other
trademark documents were not prepared or reviewed by an
attorney prior to being filed with the Office; and/ or (ii)
collecting fees from clients for trademark legal services that
were supposed to be performed by an attorney when their
applications and other trademark documents were not
prepared or reviewed by an attorney prior to being filed with
the Office; engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation by, inter alia, falsely telling
potential witnesses that talking to OED could affect their
trademark rights);
dd.
37 C.F.R. § 11.804(d) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice by, inter alia: (i) directing or allowing
his employees to prepare, sign, and file trademark
applications, responses to Office Actions, and other
trademark documents; directing or allowing his employees to
provide legal advice and guidance to trademark applicants;
and/ or directing or allowing his employees to communicate
with his clients about trademark search reports and opinions,
without his involvement or supervision; and/ or (ii) not
reviewing trademark applications and other trademark
documents (e.g., responses to Office Actions) prepared and
filed by his employees before they were filed with the Office;
engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of
justice by, inter alia: (i) failing to comply with the USPTO's
electronic signature rules by not personally electronically
signing trademark applications and trademark documents
17
filed with the USPTO and, instead, directing or allowing his
employees to sign or forge his electronic signature to the
documents, which resulted in the validity of registered
trademarks being jeopardized and/ or (ii) directing or
allowing his employees to sign or forge his electronic
signature to trademark applications and other trademark
documents knowing that the actual signatory, the employee,
was not identified on the documents contrary to
Respondent's certifications under § 11.18; engaging in
conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice by,
inter alia: directing or allowing his employees to sign or forge
his name to § 2(f) declarations and file the § 2(f) declarations
with the Office, when (i) he knew that the Trademark
Examining Attorneys would rely on the declarations when
examining trademark applications and issuing registrations,
and/ or (ii) he knew or should have known his employees did
not have adequate knowledge to aver, "The mark has become
distinctive of the goods/services through the applicant's
substantially exclusive and continuous use in commerce that
the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate for at least the five
years immediately before the date of this statement;" and/ or
(iii) he knew that (a) the actual signatory, the employee, was
not identified on the document and (b) the actual signatory,
the employee, did not have the knowledge to support the
factual contentions found in the declaration; engaging in
conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice by,
inter alia: (i) failing to adequately supervise his employees or
adequately review their work, thus permitting them to create
false or fraudulent specimens and/ or digitally altered images
of marks that did not depict the actual mark as used in
commerce and file these specimens with the Office, and as a
result, in some cases, the USPTO issued trademark
registrations based on the false or fraudulent specimens or
digitally altered marks, putting the validity of the resulting
trademarks in jeopardy, and/ or (ii) failing to inform the
USPTO of the potentially invalid applications and/ or
registrations that resulted from the filing of false or
fraudulent specimens or digitally altered marks; engaging in
conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice by, inter
aliri: (i) telling a witness not to talk to OED; (ii) falsely telling
potential witnesses that talking to OED could affect their
trademark rights; (iii) withholding the names of former
employees for months; and/ or (iv) not providing OED with
18
the documents it sought (invoices, employment agreements,
correspondence about § 2(f) declarations, and/ or a privilege
log));
ee.
3.
37 C.F.R. § 11.804(i) (engaging in any other conduct that
adversely re£1ects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count I of the Complaint, to the extent that the conduct does
not otherwise violate another provision of the USPTO Rules
of Professional Conduct; engaging in any other conduct that
adversely refiects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count II of the Complaint, to the extent that the conduct does
not otherwise violate another provision of the USPTO Rules
of Professional Conduct; engaging in any other conduct that
adversely refiects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count III of the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does
not otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Rules of
Professional Conduct; engaging in any other conduct that
adverse] y refiects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count IV of the Complaint to the extent that his conduct does
not otherwise violate a provision of the USPTO Code of
Professional Responsibility; engaging in any other conduct
that adversely refiects on the practitioner's fitness to practice
before the Office, by engaging in the conduct referenced in
Count V of the Complaint, to the extent that the conduct does
not otherwise violate another provision of the USPTO Rules
of Professional Conduct; other conduct that adversely refiects
on the practitioner's fitness to practice before the Office, by
engaging in the acts and omissions described in Count VIII
above).
Without admitting that he violated any of the Disciplinary Rules of the USPTO
Code of Professional Responsibility and/ or the Rules of Professional Conduct which are
the subject of the disciplinary complaint in Proceeding No. D2016-20, he acknowledges
that, if and when he applies for reinstatement to practice before the USPTO in trademark
or other non-patent matters under 37 C.F.R. § 11.60, the OED Director will conclusively
19
presume, for the limited purpose of determining the application for reinstatement, that
(a) the allegations regarding him in the complaint filed in Proceeding No. D2016-20 are
true and (b) he could not have successfully defended himself against such allegations.
4.
He has fully read and understands 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.5(b), 11.27, 11.58, 11.59, and
11.60, and is fully aware of the legal and factual consequences of consenting to exclusion
from practice before the USPTO in trademark and non-patent matters.
5.
He consents to being excluded from practice before the USPTO in trademark
and non-patent matters.
Exclusion on Consent
Based on the foregoing, the USPTO Director has determined that Respondent's
Affidavit For Consent Exclusion complies with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 11.27(a).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.
Respondent's Affidavit For Consent Exclusion shall be, and hereby is,
approved;
2.
Respondent shall be, and hereby is, excluded on consent from practice
before the Office in trademark and non-patent matters commencing on the date of this
Final Order;
3.
The OED Director shall electronically publish the Final Order at the Office
of Enrollment and Discipline's electronic FOIA Reading Room, which is publicly
accessible at http://e-foia.uspto.gov/Foia/ OEDReadingRoom.jsp;
4.
The OED Director shall publish a notice in the Official Gazette that is
materially consistent with the following:
20
Notice of Exclusion on Consent
This notice concerns Matthew H. Swyers of Vienna, Virginia, an
attorney licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia
and the District of Columbia and practicing before the United States
Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO" or "Office) in trademark
matters. The Director of the USPTO has accepted Mr. Swyers'
affidavit for consent exclusion and ordered his exclusion on consent
from practice before the Office in trademark and non-patent matters.
Mr. Swyers voluntarily submitted his affidavit at a time when a
disciplinary complaint was pending against him. The complaint
alleged that Mr. Swyers, an experienced trademark lawyer and
former USPTO Trademark Examining Attorney, established The
Trademark Company, PLLC, and through that business
systematically permitted non-attorneys to practice trademark law
for him with little or no supervision. The complaint alleged that Mr.
Swyers, the sole attorney at the company, did not personally review
or sign thousands of trademark applications and related documents
(including statements of use, § 2(f) declarations, and responses to
Office actions) prepared by his non-lawyer employees and filed with
the USPTO, in violation of USPTO signature and certification rules
and despite assurances on the company website that trademark
applicants would be represented by a specialized attorney. Further,
the complaint alleged that, as a result of Mr. Swyers' failure to
supervise his employees, multiple fraudulent or digitally
manipulated specimens of use were filed with the Office, which
potentially jeopardized the trademark applications of his clients. The
complaint also asserted that Mr. Swyers failed to deposit client funds
paid in advance into a client trust account and improperly split legal
fees with his non-practitioner employees. Finally, the complaint
alleged that Mr. Swyers failed to respond to lawful requests for
information or cooperate with the investigation conducted by the
Office of Enrollment and Discipline.
Mr. Swyers' affidavit acknowledged that the disciplinary complaint
filed against him alleged that his conduct violated the following
provisions of the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility, for
conduct prior to May 3, 2013: 37 C.F.R. §§ 10.23(a) (engaging in
disreputable or gross misconduct); 10.23(b)(4) (engaging in conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation);
21
10.23(b)(5) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of
justice); 10.23(a) and (b) via 10.23(c)(2)(ii) (knowingly giving false or
misleading information or knowingly participating in a material
way in giving false or misleading information to the USPTO or any
employee of the USPTO); 10.23(a) and (b) via 10.23(c)(15) (violating
the certifications made to the USPTO under 37 C.F.R. § 11.18);
10.31(a) (deceiving or misleading prospective applicants or other
persons having immediate or prospective business before the Office
by advertising with respect to prospective business before the
Office); 10.47(a) and (c) (aiding a non-practitioner in the
unauthorized practice of law before the Office); 10.48 (sharing legal
fees with a non-practitioner); 10.77(b) (handling a legal matter
without preparation adequate under the circumstances); 10.77(c)
(neglecting client matters); 10.84(a)(1) (intentionally failing to seek
the lawful objectives of a client); 10.84(a)(3) (intentionally
prejudicing or damaging the client during the course of a
professional relationship); 10.89(c)(6) (intentionally or habitually
violating any provision of the USPTO Code of Professional
Responsibility while appearing in a professional capacity before a
tribunal); 10.112(a) (failing to deposit legal fees paid in advance into
a separate client trust account); and 10.23(b)(6) (engaging in other
conduct that adversely reflects on the practitioner's fitness to
practice before the Office).
Mr. Swyers's affidavit also acknowledged that the disciplinary
complaint alleged that his conduct violated the following provisions
of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, for conduct on or after
May 3, 2013: 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 (failure to provide competent
representation); 11.104(a)(3) (failing to keep the clients reasonably
informed about the status of a matter); 11.115(a) (failing to hold
property of a client or third person that is in the lawyer's possession
in connection with a representation separate from the lawyer's own
property); 11.115(c) (failing to deposit into a client trust account legal
fees and expenses that have been paid in advance, to be withdrawn
by the practitioner only as fees are earned or expenses incurred);
11.303(a)(1)(knowingly making a false statement of fact to a tribunal
or failing to correct a false statement of material fact previously made
to the tribunal); 11.303( d) (failing, in an ex parte proceeding, to inform
the tribunal of all material facts known to the practitioner that will
enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, even if the facts
are adverse); 11.503(a) (failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure
that The Trademark Company had in effect measures giving
reasonable assurance that its employees' conduct was compatible
22
with Respondent's professional obligations); 11.503(b) (failing to
make reasonable efforts to ensure that the conduct of The Trademark
Company employees over whom he had direct supervisory
authority was compatible with Respondent's professional
obligations); 11.503(c) (ordering or ratifying the conduct of the
employees of The Trademark Company which would have been a
violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct had it been
committed by a practitioner, and/ or failing to take remedial
measures once he learned of the conduct); 11.504(a) (sharing legal
fees with a non-practitioner); 11.505 (aiding in the unauthorized
practice of law before the USPTO); 11.701 (making false or
misleading communications about the practitioner or the
practitioner's services); 11.801 (b) (failing to cooperate with the Office
of Emollment and Discipline in an investigation); 11.804(c)
(engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation); 11.804(d) (engaging in conduct that is prejudicial
to the administration of justice); and 11.804(i) (engaging in the acts
and omissions that adversely reflect on Respondent's fitness to
practice before the Office).
While Mr. Swyers did not admit to violating any of the Disciplinary
Rules of the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility or the
USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct as alleged in the pending
disciplinary complaint, he acknowledged that, if and when he
applies for reinstatement, the OED Director will conclusively
presume, for the limited purpose of determining the application for
reinstatement, that (i) the allegations set forth in the OED
investigation against him are true, and (ii) he could not have
successfully defended himself against such allegations.
This action is taken pursuant to the provisions of 35 U.S.C.
§§ 2(b)(2)(D) and 32, and 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.27 and 11.59. Disciplinary
decisions involving practitioners are posted for public reading at the
Office of Enrollment and Discipline Reading Room, available at:
http://go.usa.gov/x9rhg.
5.
Respondent shall comply fully with 37 C.F.R. § 11.58; and
23
6.
Respondent shall comply fully with 37 C.F.R. § 11.60 upon any request for
reinstatement.
~
'2~ 1~11
Date
David Shewchuk
Deputy General Counsel for General Law
United States Patent and Trademark Office
on behalf of
Michelle K. Lee
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
cc:
Director of the Office of Emollment and Discipline
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Danny M. Howell
Robert Jackson Martin IV
Anne M. Sterba
Law Office of Danny M. Howell, PLLC
2010 Corporate Ridge, Suite 700
Mclean, VA 22102
Counsel for Matthew H. Swyers
24
20\ l
EXHIBIT I
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE DIRECTOR
OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
In the Matter of
Tracy W. Druce,
Respondent
)
)
)
)
)
Proceeding No. D2014-13
)
FINAL ORDER
The Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline ("OED Director") for the United
States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO" or "Office") and Tracy W. Druce ("Respondent")
have submitted a Proposed Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") to the Under Secretary of
Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark
Office ("USPTO Director") for approval.
The Agreement, which resolves all disciplinary action by the USPTO arising from the
stipulated facts set forth below, is hereby approved. This Final Order sets forth the parties'
stipulated facts, legal conclusion, and agreed upon sanction.
Jurisdiction
1.
At all times relevant hereto, Respondent of Houston, Texas, was a registered
patent attorney (Registration No. 35,493) and was subject to the USPTO Code of Professional
Responsibility, which is setforth at 37 C.F.R. § 10.20 et seq]
2.
The USPTO Director has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
§§ 2(b)(2)(D) and 32 and37 C.F.R. §§ 11.19 and 11.26.
Stipulated Facts
3.
The USPTO registered Respondent as a patent attorney on March 24, 1992.
4.
Respondent's registration number is 35,493.
5.
In 2004, Respondent established a law firm, Novak Druce LLP.
6.
In 2005, Noval, Druce LLP became Novak, Druce & Quigg LLP.
1 The USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility applies to Respondent's alleged misconduct
that OCCUlTed prior to May 3, 2013. The USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, 37 C.F.R.
§ 11.101 et seq., apply to it practitioner's misconduct occufl'ing after May 2,2013.
7,
At all times relevant to this Agreement, anon-lawyer assistant,
worked for Respondent at Novak Druce LLP and Novak, Druce & Quigg LLP from 2004
through late 2006,
hereinafter referred to as "the non-lawyer assistant,")
8,
At all relevant times, Respondent was responsible for the supervision of the
non-lawyer assistant.
9,
From at least 2004 through 2006, the non-lawyer assistant submitted, with intent
to deceive, knowingly false statements to the Office in many patent applications that Respondent
was responsible for prosecuting on behalf of clients,
10,
The non-lawyer assistant submitted the following types offalse statements to the
Office in patent applications that Respondent was responsible for prosecuting:
a, fabricating email COnfilnlation messages and submitting the fabricated emails
to the Office as evidence that papers had been sent to the Office via facsimile
transmission when, in fact, the papers were never sent to the Office;
b, affixing USPTO receipt stamps to postcards and submitting the doctored
postcard receipts to the Office as evidence that the Office had received papers
when, in fact, the papers were never sent to the Office;
c, fabricating a United States Postal Service Express Mail label that falsely
represented a patent application had been mailed to the Office on a certain
date when, in fact, the application had never been sent to the Office; and
d, backdating certificates of mailing that falsely represented that papers had been
mailed to the Office weeks and/or months earlier than they actually had been
sent.
11.
Additionally, the non-lawyer assistant signed Respondent's signature to papers
filed with the Office in many patent applications that Respondent was responsible for
prosecuting on behalf of clients,
.
12,
Additionally, the non-lawyer assistant electronically "cut and pasted" a digital
version of Respondent's signature and affixed it to papers filed with the Office in many patent
applications that Respondent was responsible for prosecuting on behalf of clients,
13,
Additionally, the non-lawyer assistant prepared petitions; signed Respondent's
name to the petitions and/or affixed a digital version of Respondent's signature to the petitions;
and filed the petitions in the Office,
2
14.
Respondent knew that the non-lawyer assistant had signed Respondent's name to
application papers submitted to the Office in many patent applications that Respondent was
responsible for prosecuting on behalf of clients.
15.
The non-lawyer assistant represented in a declaration that he engaged in the'
misconduct described in paragraphs 9-12, above, without Respondent's lmowledge.
16.
Respondent represents that he did not know of the non-lawyer assistant's
misconduct described in paragraphs 9-12, above, and the non-lawyer assistant represents that he
acted alone and kept his misconduct secret from Respondent.
17.
Respondent acJmowledges he did not adequately supervise the non-lawyer
assistant's activities.
18.
Previously, Respondent completed and returned to the OED Director the USPTO
Mandatory Survey (Form PTO 107S) issued under 37 C.F.R. § 11.1 1(a)(2). Respondent
indicated on the survey that he did not wish to remain on the register of registered practitioners
(37 C.F.R. § 11.5), and the OED Director removed Respondent from the register. Accordingly,
ptlrsuant to 37 C.F.R. § 11.10(a), Respondent is not permitted to prosecute patent applications of
others before the Office or represent others in any proceedings before the Office unless and until
he is reinstated to the register.
Joint Legal Conclusion
19.
Respondent aclmowledgeS' that, based on the above stipulated facts, he violated
37 C.F.R. § 1O.77(c) (a practitioner shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to the practitioner)
by not adequately supervising his non-lawyer assistant.
Agreed Upon Sanction
20.
Respondent agrees, and it is hereby ORDERED that:
a. If Respondent seeks reinstatement to the Office's register of practitioners under
37 C.F.R. § 11.7, Respondent shall be suspended from practice before the Office
in patent, trademark, and other non-patent matters for twenty-four (24) months
commencing on the date that a request for Respondent's reinstatement to the
re gister is granted;
b. The 24-month suspension, which is contingent upon Respondent seeking and
being granted reinstatement, shall be stayed;
c. Respondent shall serve a twenty-four (24) month period of probation commencing
on the date that a request for Respondent's reinstatement to the register is granted;
3
d. Respondent shall be permitted to practice before the USPTO in patent, trademark,
and other non-patent matters during his probationary period unless his probation
is revoked and he is suspended by order of the USPTO Director or otherwise no
longer has the authority to practice;
e. When and if Respondent seeks reinstatement pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 11.7, the
present disciplinary proceeding will not be a basis for barring his reinstatement
provided that Respondent complies with the terms of the Final Order;
f.
Respondent shall provide certain information to certain present and former
client(s) as set forth in subparagraphs i. through aa., below;
g. Respondent shall use his best efforts to identifY each patent application that
Respondent prosecuted before the Office at any time between January 1,2004,
and December 31, 2006, that meet all of the following three conditions:
(1)
The Office received between January 1,2004, and December31,
2006, any of the following: (i) a petition to revive an abandoned application, (ii) a
petition to withdraw the holding of abandomnent; and/or (iii) a petition for
extension of time where the petition for extension of time was transmitted to the
Office by the non-lawyer assistant and where the petition for extension of time's
transmittal date preceded the Office's receipt date by more than thirty (30) days;
(2)
The non-lawyer assistant transmitted any paper in the application
to the Office at any time between January 1,2004, and December 31, 2006; and
(3)
The Office issued a patent on the application at any time;
h. For each patent application identified by Respondent pursuant to the preceding
subparagraph, Respondent shall identify the present client(s) and former client(s)
for whom patent legal services on the application were performed;
i. For each present and former client(s) identified by Respondent pursuant to the
preceding subparagraph, Respondent shall provide each such present and former
client(s) with the following documents:
(1)
A copy of the Apri110, 2014 declaration executed by the
non-lawyer assistant with the patent application serial numbers redacted; and
(2)
j.
A copy of the redacted Final Order;
Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
4
Application No _ _ of the specific false statements described in
~ 14 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;2
k. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent repres'ented in connection with
U.S. Patent Application No. _ o f the specific potentially false
statements described in ~ 15 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
0._
1. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
of the specific potentially false statements described
Application N
in ~ 15 of the April! 0,2014 declaration;
m. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application No._ofthe specific potentially false statements described
in ~ 15 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
n. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) ~dent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application N o . _ of the specific potentially false statements described
in ~ 15 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
o. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application No. _ o f the specific potentially false statements described
in ~ 15 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
p. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application No._ofthe specific potentially false statements described
in ~ 16 of the April 10, 2014 declaration and the potential backdating of
certificates of mailing described in ~ 17 of the Apri110, 2014 declaration;
q. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application No. _ o f the potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in ~ 17 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
,
r. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
2~application serial number identified in ~ 14~ 10,2014 declaration as
" _ " is incorrect. The correct serial number i s _
5
Application No, _ o f the potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
s, Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U,S, Patent
Application N o , _ o f t h e potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
t,
Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in counection with U, S, Patent
Application N o , _ o f t h e potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 of the Apri110, 2014 declaration;
u, Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
fornier client(s) ~dent represented in connection with ofU,S, Patent
Application N o , _ o f t h e potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 ofthe April 10, 2014 declaration;
v, Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U,S, Patent
Application No, _ o f the potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
w, Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) ~dent represented in counection with U,S, Patent
Application N o , _ of the potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 ofthe April 10, 2014 declaration;
x, Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with ofU,S, Patent
Application No, _ o f the potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
,
y. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application No. _ o f the potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in 'If 17 of the Apri110, 2014 declaration;
z. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) that Respondent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application N o . _ o f t h e potential backdating of certificates of mailing
,
described in 'If 17 of the Apri110, 2014 declaration;3
3 The patent application serial number identified in ~ 14 of the Apri110, 2014 declaration as
' _ ' is incorrect. The correct serial number i s _
6
aa. Respondent shall also provide unambiguous written notification to the present and
former client(s) ~dent represented in connection with U.S. Patent
Application N o . _ o f t h e potential backdating of certificates of mailing
described in ~ 17 of the April 10, 2014 declaration;
bb. Within 120 days of the day that the Final Order is signed, Respondent shall
submit the following to the OED Director: (1) an affidavit or declaration attesting
to his compliance with the terms of this Agreement and the Final Order for
notifying present and former client(s) as set forth in subparagraphs i. through aa.,
above, and (2) a copy of the correspondence to clients, including the written
notifications transmitted to the current and former client(s), evidencing his
compliance with the terms of this Agreement and the Final Order for notifying
present and former client(s); the client correspondence provided to the OED in
accordance with this subparagraph shall be marked "CONFIDENTIAL" by the
Respondent, and the OED shall keep the correspondence confidential;
cc. (1) lfthe OED Director is of the good faith opinion that Respondent, during
Respondent's probationary period, failed to comply with any provision of the
Agreement, this Final Order, or any provision of the USPTO Rules of
Professional Conduct, the OED Director shall:
.(A)
Issue to Respondent an Order to Show Cause why the USPTO
Director should not enter an order immediately suspending Respondent for up
to twenty-four (24) months for the violation set forth in paragraph 19, above;
Send the Order to Show Cause to Respondent at the last
(B)
address of record Respondent furnished to the OED Director pursuant to
. 37 C.F.R. § 11.11; and
(C)
Grant Respondent thirty (30) days to respond to the Order to
Show Cause; and
(2) In the event that after the 3 O-day period for response and consideration of the
response, if any, received from Respondent, the OED Director continues to be of
the opinion·that Respondent, during Respondent's probationary period, failed to
comply with any provision of the Agreement, this Final Order, or any provision of
the USPTO Rilles of Professional Conduct, the OED Director shall:
(A)
Deliver to the USPTO Director: (i) the Order to Show Cause;
(ii) Respondent's response to the Order to Show Cause, if any; and
(iii) argument and evidence causing the OED Director to be of the opinion that
Respondent, during Respondent's probationary period, failed to comply with
any provision of the Agreement, Final Order, or any provision of the USPTO
Rules of Professional Conduct; and
7
(B)
Request that the USPTO Director enter an order immediately
suspending Respondent for up to twenty-four (24) months for the violation set .
forth in paragraph 19, above;
dd. Nothing herein shall prevent the OED Director from seeking discipline for the
misconduct leading to Respondent's suspension pursuant to the preceding
subparagraph;
ee. In the event the USPTO Director suspends Respondent pursuant to subparagraph
cc., above, and Respondent seeks a review of the suspension, any such review of
the suspension shall not operate to postpone or otherwise hold in abeyance the
suspension;
ff. The OED Director shall comply with 37 C.F.R. § 11.59 exceptthat.
and all patent application serial numbers shall be redacted
from the Final Order.
gg. The OED Director shall electronically publish the Final Order at the Office of
Enrollment and Discipline's electronic ForA Reading Room, which is publicly
accessible at http://e-foia.uspto. govlFoialOEDReadingRoom.jsp;
hh. The OED Director shall publish a notice in the Official Gazette that is materially
consistent with the following:
Notice of Discipline
This notice concerns Tracy W. Druce of Houston, Texas (Registration No.
35,493), who previously left the United States Patent and Trademark Office
("USPTO" or "Office") register of practitioners. The USPTO Director has
ordered that, if Mr. Druce is reinstated to the register of practitioners, then he
shall be suspended from practice before the Office in patent, trademark, and
other non-patent matters for twenty-four (24) months, with the entirety of the
suspension stayed, for violating 37 C.F.R. § 10.77(c) (a practitioner shall not
neglect a legal matter entrusted to the practitioner), Mr . .Druce wi11 also be
required to serve a twenty-four (24) month period of probation upon being
reinstated to the register ..
Mr. Druce was responsible for the supervision of a non-lawyer
assistant who, from at least 2004 through 2006, submitted, with intent
to deceive, knowingly false statements to the Office in many patent
applications that Mr, Druce was responsible for prosecuting on behalf
of clients. The non-lawyer assistant did the following: (1) fabricated
email confirmation messages and submitted the fabricated emails to
the Office as evidence that papers had been sent to the Office via
facsimile transmission when, in fact, the papers were never sent to the
8
Office; (2) affixed USPTO receipt stamps to postcards and submitted
the doctored postcard receipts to the Office as evidence that the Office
had received papers when, in fact, the papers were never sent to the
Office; (3) fabricated a United States Postal Service Express Mail label
that falsely represented that a patent application had been mailed to the
Office on a certain date when, in fact, the application had never been
sent to the Office; and (4) backdated certificates of mailing that falsely
represented that papers had beep mailed to the Office weeks and/or
months earlier than they actually had been sent.
The violation of37 C.F.R. § 10.77(c) is predicated upon Mr. Druce
not adequately supervising a non-lawyer assistant.
Mr. Druce represents that he did not have actual knowledge of the
non-lawyer assistant's false submissions to the Office, and the nonlawyer assistant represents that he acted alone and kept his misconduct
secret from Mr. Druce.
In reaching a settlement with Mr. Druce, OED Director took into
consideration the following: (a) the non-lawyer assistarit's misconduct
occurred many years ago in 2004, 2005, and 2006; (b) Mr. Druce
cooperated with the investigation of the facts and circumstances
involved in this disciplinary proceeding; and (c) Mr. Druce will take
prompt action to notify present and former clients about the
misconduct committed in patent applications where patents were
granted.
This action is the result of a settlement agreement between Respondent
and the OED Director pursuant to the provisions of 35 U.S.C.
§§ 2(b)(2)(D) and 32 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.26 and 11.59. Disciplinary
decisions involving practitioners are posted for public reading at the
Office of Enrollment and Discipline Reading Room, available at:
http://e-foia.uspto.gov/Foia/OEDReadingRoom.jsp.
ii. Nothing in this Agreement or the Final Order approving this Agreement shall
prevent the Office from considering the record of this disciplinary proceeding (1)
when addressing any further complaint or evidence of the same or similar
misconduct concerning Respondent brought to the attention of the Office; andlor
(2) in any future disciplinary proceeding against Respondent (a) as an aggravating
factor to be taken into consideration in determining any discipline to be imposed
andlor (b) to rebut any statement or representation by or on Respondent's behalf;
jj. The OED Director shall file a motion with the administrative law judge requesting
the dismissal of the pending disciplinary proceeding within fourteen (14) days of
the date ofthe Final Order; and
9
Ide The OED Director and Respondent shall each bear their own costs incurred to date
and in carrying out the terms of this Agreement and the Final Order.
The foregoing is understood and agreed to by:
SEP - 5 20H
Wi
JAMES O. PAYNE
Deputy General Counsel for General Law
United States Patent and Trademark Office
on behalf of
Michelle K.. Lee
Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property
and Deputy Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
cc:
Director ofthe Office of Enrollment and Discipline
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Abbe David Lowell
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10112
Respondent's Counsel
Christopher Man
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
1200 New Hampshire Ave N.W., Washington, DC 20036
Respondent's Counsel
10
Date
EXHIBIT J
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF THE
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
In the Matter of:
Leonard Tachner,
Respondent
)
)
)
)
)
)
Proceeding No. D20l4-22
FINAL ORDER
Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § l1.27(b), the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark
Office ("USPTO" or "Office") received for review and approval from the Director of the
Office of Emollment and Discipline ("OED Director") an Affidavit of Resignation Pursuant to
37 C.F.R. § 11.27 executed by Leonard Tachner ("Respondent") on June 2, 2014. Respondent
submitted the affidavit to the USPTO for the purpose of being excluded on consent pursuant to
37 C.F.R. § 11.27.
For the reasons set forth herein, Respondent's Affidavit of Resignation shall be approved
and Respondent shall be excluded on consent from practice before the Office in patent,
trademark, and other non-patent matters commencing on the date of this Final Order.
Jurisdiction
Respondent of San Jose, California, is a registered patent attorney (Reg. No. 26,344) and
is subject to the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, 37 C.F.R. § 11.101, et seq.
See 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).!
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 2(b)(2)(D) and 32 and 37 C.F.R. § 11.27, the USPTO Director
has the authority to approve Respondent's Affidavit of Resignation and to exclude Respondent
1 The USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility applies to practitioner misconduct
that occurred prior to May 3, 2013, while the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct,
37 C.F.R. § 11.101 et seq., apply to a practitioner misconduct that occurred after May 2, 2013.
on consent from practice before the Office in patent, trademark, and other non-patent matters
before the Office.
Respondent's Affidavit of Resignation
Respondent acknowledges in his June 2, 2014 Affidavit of Resignation that:
I.
His consent is freely and voluntarily rendered, and he is not being subjected to
coercion or duress.
He is aware that the OED Director opened an investigation of allegations that
2.
that he violated the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, namely: OED File No. G2239. The
investigation concerned allegations, inter alia, that:
a. By Final Order dated April 12, 2013, Respondent was suspended for five years
from the practice of patent, trademark and other non-patent matters before the
USPTO for neglecting patent matters by allowing patents to expire for not timely
paying maintenance fees, fora failing to inform clients of important USPTO
correspondence and giving misleading information to clients about the status of
their patents. He also failed to conduct an inquiry reasonable under the
circumstances prior to signing and filing certain submissions with the USPTO;
b. By Final Order dated April 12,2013, Respondent was granted limited recognition
to practice before the USPTO commencing on the date the Final Order and
expiring thirty (30) days after the date the Final Order is signed, with such limited
recognition being granted for the sole purpose of facilitating Respondent's
compliance with the provisions of37 C.F.R. § 11.58(b).
c. Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice oflaw in the prosecution of U.S.
Trademark application nos. 85/906,074 and 85/906,085 by representing clients
before the USPTO while he was not authorized to do so; and
d. Respondent did not inform his clients or the trademark examiner in U.S.
Trademark application nos. 85/906,074 and 85/906,085 that he was not authorized
to represent the clients before the USPTO.
3.
He is aware that the disciplinary complaint pending against him alleges that he
violated the following provisions of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct:
a.
37 C.F.R. § l1.804(a) (proscribing engaging in conduct that is a violation ofthe
USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct);
2
b. 37 C.F.R. § 11.804(c) (proscribing engaging in conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation);
c. 37 C.F.R. § 11.804(d) (proscribing engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the
administration of justice); and
d. 37 C.F.R. § 11.505 (proscribing the unauthorized practice oflaw).
4.
Without admitting to any of the allegations at issue in the pending
disciplinary investigation or to violating any of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct,
Respondent acknowledges that, if and when he applies for reinstatement under 37 C.F.R. §
11.60, the OED Director will conclusively presume, for the purpose of determining the
application for reinstatement, that (a) the allegations set forth in OED File No. G2239 and
USPTO disciplinary proceeding D2014-22 are true and (b) he could not have successfully
defended himself against such allegations.
Respondent has fully read and understands 37 C.F.R. §§ I 1.5 (b), 11.27,
5.
11.58, 11.59, and 11.60, and is fully aware of the legal and factual consequences of
consenting to exclusion from practice before the USPTO in patent, trademark, and other
non-patent matters.
He consents to being excluded from practice before the USPTO in
6.
patent, trademark, and other non-patent matters.
Exclusion on Consent
Based on the foregoing, the USPTO Director has determined that Respondent's
Affidavit of Resignation complies with the requirements of37 C.F.R. § 11.27(a). Hence, it
is ORDERED that:
a.
Respondent's Affidavit of Resignation shall be, and hereby is, approved;
b.
Respondent shall be, and hereby is, excluded on consent from practice before
3
the Office in patent, trademark, and other non-patent matters commencing on the date of this
Final Order;
c.
The OED Director shall electronically publish this Final Order at the Office
of Emollment and Discipline's electronic ForA Reading Room, which is publicly accessible
at http://e-foia.uspto.govlFoialOEDReadingRoom.jsp;
d.
The OED Director shall publish the following notice in the Official
Gazette:
Notice of Exclusion on Consent
This notice concerns Leonard Tachner of San Jose California, a registered
patent attorney (Reg. No. 26,344). The Director of the United States Patent
and Trademark Office ("USPTO" or "Office") has accepted Mr. Tachner's
affidavit of resignation and ordered his exclusion on consent from practice
before the Office in patent, trademark, and other non-patent matters.
Mr. Tachner voluntarily submitted his affidavit at a time when a disciplinary
investigation was pending against him. The investigation concerned
allegations, inter alia, that;
a) By Final Order dated April 12,2013, Respondent was suspended for five
years from the practice of patent, trademark and other non-patent matters
before the USPTO for neglecting patent matters by allowing patents to expire
for not timely paying maintenance fees, for failing to inform clients of
important USPTO correspondence and giving misleading information to
clients about the status of their patents. He also failed to conduct an inquiry
reasonable under the circumstances prior to signing and filing certain
submissions with the USPTO;
b) By Final Order dated April 12, 2013, Respondent was granted limited
recognition to practice before the USPTO commencing on the date the Final
Order and expiring thirty (30) days after the date the Final Order is signed,
with such limited recognition being granted for the sole purpose offacilitating
Respondent's compliance with the provisions of37 C.F.R. § 11.58(b).
c) Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in the prosecution
of U.S. Trademark application nos. 85/906,074 and 85/906,085 by
representing clients before the USPTO while he was not authorized to do so;
and
d) Respondent did not inform his clients or the trademark examiner in U.S.
Trademark application nos. 85/906,074 and 85/906,085 that he was not
authorized to represent the clients before the USPTO.
4
The disciplinary investigation concerned allegations that Respondent violated
the following provisions of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct:
a. 37 C.F.R. § 11.804(a) (proscribing engaging in conduct that is a violation of
the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct);
b. 37 C.F.R. § 11.804(c) (proscribing engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation);
c. 37 C.F.R. § 1l.804(d) (proscribing engaging in conduct that is prejudicial
to the administration of justice); and
d. 37 C.F.R. § 11.505 (proscribing the unauthorized practice oflaw).
While Mr. Tachner did not admit to any ofthe allegations at issue in the
pending disciplinary investigation or to violating any of the Disciplinary Rules
of the USPTO Code of Professional Conduct, he acknowledged that, if and
when he applies for reinstatement, the OED Director will conclusively
presume, for the purpose of determining the application for reinstatement, that
(i) the allegations set forth in OED File No. G2239 and USPTO disciplinary
proceeding D2014-22 are true, and (ii) he could not have successfully
defended himself against such allegations.
This action is taken pursuant to the provisions of35 U.S.C. §§ 2(b)(2)(D)
and 32, and 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.27 and 11.59. Disciplinary decisions involving
practitioners are posted for public reading at the Office of Enrollment and
Discipline Reading Room, available at:
http://e-foia. uspto.gov/FoialOEDReadingRoom. j sp.
e.
Respondent shall comply with 37 C.F.R. § 11.58;
f.
The OED Director shall comply with 37 C.F.R. § 11.59;
g.
Respondent shall comply with 37 C.F.R. § 11.60 upon any request for
reinstatement;
h.
The OED Director and Respondent shall bear their own costs incurred to date;
and
in carrying out the terms of this agreement
i.
USPTO Disciplinary Proceeding No. D2014-22 is hereby dismissed.
(only signature page follows)
5
JUN 3 0 2014
Date
SO. PAYNE
epu y General Counsel for General Law
it States Patent and Trademark Office
'oJ
on behalf of
Michelle K. Lee
Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Deputy Director of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office
cc:
Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Cameron Weiffenbach
Miles & Stockbridge, P.C.
1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 500
McLean, Virginia 22102
Respondent's counsel
6
EXHIBIT K
12/12/2017
Avvo, LegalZoom, Rocket Lawyer Declared Off-Limits | Law.com
Menu
(/)
Search (/search/)
Publications (/publications)
Law Topics (/topics)
Surveys & Rankings (/rankings/)
Legal Dictionary (https://dictionary law com/)
Law Firms (/law rms/)
Events (/events/)
Sign In (https://store.law.com/Registration/Lo
promoCode=PAR&source=https://www.law.com/sites/almsta /2017/06/
legalzoom-rocket-lawyer-declared-o
SUBSCRIBE (HTTPS://STORE.LAW.COM/REGISTRA
PROMOCODE=PAR&SOURCE=HTTPS://WWW.LAW.COM/SITES/ALMST
LEGALZOOM-ROCKET-LAWYER-DEC
ALM Intelligence (/alm-intelligence/)
Lawjobs com (http://www lawjobs com)
Verdicts (http://verdictsearch.com)
Legal Recruiters (http://recruiters law com/)
stimiL- O
deralceD reywaL tekcoR ,mooZlageL ,ovvA
By David Gialanella | June 22, 2017 at 04:49 PM | Originally published on New Jersey Law Journal (/njlawjournal/)
(http://www.almreprints.com)
(http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/292/2017/06/Josh-King-Article201706211757.jpg) Josh King is a Vice President, Business Development and General Counsel at
Avvo, Inc. HANDOUT.
1
Avvo facilitates improper fee-splitting, while LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer operate
legal service plans that aren’t registered with the judiciary, according to the June 21
CORPORATE COUNSEL
(/CORPCOUNSEL/)
opinion, issued by the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, the Committee on
2
The opinion decrees that “New Jersey lawyers may not participate in the Avvo legal
service programs because the programs improperly require the lawyer to share a
legal fee with a nonlawyer in violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 5.4(a), and pay
an impermissible referral fee in violation of Rule of Professional Conduct 7.2(c) and
NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL
(/NATIONALLAWJOURNAL/)
7.3(d).”
operate legal service plans through their websites but New Jersey lawyers may not
3
participate in these plans because they are not registered with the Administrative
O ce of the Courts in accordance with Rule of Professional Conduct 7.3(e)(4)(vii).”
All three companies have defended their services.
THE AMERICAN LAWYER
(/AMERICANLAWYER/)
The New Jersey State Bar Association sent an inquiry to the ACPE, asking whether
lawyers may “participate in certain online, non-layer, corporately owned services,”
4
and named Avvo, LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer speci cally.
According to the opinion, Avvo o ers “Avvo Advisor”—through which customers buy
15-minute phone conversations with a lawyer for a $40 at rate, of which Avvo keeps
DAILY REPORT ONLINE
(/DAILYREPORTONLINE/)
a $10 marketing fee—and “Avvo Legal Services,” which allows customers to pay at
fees to Avvo for legal services provided by a liated lawyers, after which Avvo pays
the lawyer but keeps a marketing fee.
https://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/06/22/avvo-legalzoom-rocket-lawyer-declared-off-limits/
)/1-sdnepsus-esnecil-1-stpecca
-1-srabsid-truoc-emerpus
g/11/21/7102/enilnotroperyliad/setis/enilnotroperyliad/(
1 sdnepsuS
,esneciL 1 stpeccA ,1 srabsiD
truoC emerpuS aigroeG
It adds: “The Committees further nd that LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer appear to
)/sesunob-etaicossa
-htiw- o-dil-eht-wolb-ot-mia
ob/11/21/7102/reywalnacirema/setis/reywalnacirema/(
sesunoB
etaicossA htiW ' O diL
eht wolB' ot miA seuqituoB
Attorney Advertising and the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law.
)/skrelc
-wal-sutocs-gnoma-sgal
-llits-ytisrevid-elam-dna-etihw
/21/7102/lanruojwallanoitan/setis/lanruojwallanoitan/(
skrelC waL SUTOCS
gnomA sgaL llitS ytisreviD
:elaM dna etihW yltsoM
illicit fee-sharing and referral fees.
seirotS gnidnerT
web-based services that match litigants with attorneys because of concerns over
)/s-u-eht-ni-scg-elamef
-diap-tsehgih-net-eht-era
-ereh/50/21/7102/lesnuocproc/setis/lesnuocproc/(
.S.U ehT nI sCG elameF
diaP tsehgiH neT ehT erA ereH
A joint opinion by three New Jersey Supreme Court committees has blacklisted three
5
1/4
Avvo, LegalZoom, Rocket Lawyer Declared Off-Limits | Law.com
LegalZoom o ers a monthly subscription to legal services for a at fee, through
“Business Advantage Pro” and “Legal Advantage Plus,” through which customers get
30-minute phone consultations with lawyers of their choosing, or the “ rst available”
lawyer. Lawyers do not pay to participate in LegalZoom, and LegalZoom keeps its
subscription fees, the committees said.
)/nrolrof-gnikool-smr
-wal-emos-evael-seictpurknab
ne/80/21/7102/reywalnacirema/setis/reywalnacirema/(
gnildI smriF waL emoS
evaeL seictpurknaB ygrenE
12/12/2017
THE AMERICAN LAWYER
(/AMERICANLAWYER/)
Rocket Lawyer, which o ers “limited legal advice on document-related matters” and
a free 30-minute phone consultation, does not take payments from lawyers to join—
though the lawyers “agree to o er a discounted fee for additional services”—and
does not share its subscription fees with the lawyers, according to the opinion.
LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer’s services “appear to be legal service plans,” which are
permissible under RPC 7.3(e)(4), but “as of the date of this Joint Opinion … neither
organization has registered a legal service plan with the Administrative O ce of the
Courts,” the committees said.
The Avvo plans have a di erent problem, according to the opinion: They are “pay-forservice plans,” and the company’s business model violates RPC 5.4(a), which
prohibits fee-sharing.
“The participating lawyer receives the set price for the legal service provided, then
pays a portion of that amount to Avvo,” the committee said. “The label Avvo assigns
to this payment (“marketing fee”) does not determine the purpose of the fee. … Here,
lawyers pay a portion of the legal fee earned to a nonlawyer; this is impermissible
fee sharing.”
The committees found that the LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer models do not violate
the fee-sharing stricture.
The opinion also holds that marketing fees lawyers pay to Avvo are not for
advertising but amount to an “impermissible referral fee” by the de nition contained
in RPCs 7.2(c) and 7.3(d).
“When the lawyers pay a fee to the company based on the retention of the lawyer by
the client or the establishment of an attorney-client relationship, the answer to the
inquiry is simple: the company operates an impermissible referral service,” the
committees said.
On the bright side for Avvo, the committees did nd that its model does not “unduly
interfere with a lawyer’s professional judgment in violation of Rule of Professional
Conduct 5.4(c)” by limiting the scope of representation.
“Avvo does not insert itself into the legal consultation in a manner that would
interfere with the lawyer’s professional judgment,” they said. “As for LegalZoom and
Rocket Lawyer, Inquirer suggested that lawyers may be constricted in the service
they provide for clients in the limited phone consultations. Again, however, this is the
nature of legal service plans.”
The committees also found that Avvo’s practice of holding the lawyer’s fee until the
service is provided violates an attorney’s requirement to maintain a registered trust
account per Rule 1:28(a)-2.
Avvo submitted a response contending that it wasn’t giving referrals and its
marketing fee is a separate transaction—meaning that it doesn’t amount to feesharing. The company also “claimed to be serving a public purpose of improving
access to legal services,” according to the opinion.
“The Committees acknowledge that improving access to legal services is
commendable, but participating lawyers must still adhere to ethical standards,” they
said.
The opinion also dispensed with the notion that Avvo is engaged in commercial
speech that’s protected by the First Amendment.
The committees noted that Avvo’s business model has been found to violate ethics
standards in Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Ohio.
LegalZoom submitted a response emphasizing that its employees don’t o er legal
services, and has a contract with a New Jersey rm to which it pays a monthly fee
based on the number of participants in the service plan. The opinion does not
identify the name of the rm. Judiciary spokeswoman Winnie Comfort said any
documents identifying the rm are con dential.
Rocket Lawyer, too, submitted a response, stating that the actual legal services are
provided by independent lawyers, who are “paid an undisclosed sum by Rocket
Lawyer for participation in the ‘Q&A Service,’” according to the opinion.
https://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/06/22/avvo-legalzoom-rocket-lawyer-declared-off-limits/
2/4
12/12/2017
Avvo, LegalZoom, Rocket Lawyer Declared Off-Limits | Law.com
Avvo Chief Legal O cer Josh King said in a statement that the company is “happy the
Committees concluded that Avvo Legal Services doesn’t interfere with the
independent professional judgment of lawyers, but disappointed that the
Committees focused solely on mechanistic application of the rules rather than what
the law requires: consumer protection and respect for the First Amendment.”
He added: “Avvo is attempting to address the pressing need for greater consumer
access to justice, and we will continue to do so despite this advisory opinion.”
Rocket Lawyer, through a spokeswoman, declined to comment on the opinion.
A representative of LegalZoom, reached by email, did not provide comment by press
time.
NJSBA President Robert Hille issued a statement saying the association “has in recent
years frequently expressed concern about the growing number of organizations that
have sought to open the door to fee sharing, which could interfere with a lawyer’s
independent professional judgement.”
The NJSBA sent the inquiry “since many of our colleagues have taken advantage of
the services some companies o er, without a thorough vetting of how they comport
with the ethics rules,” added Hille, of McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter in
Morristown. “The association will continue to monitor developments as these issues
evolve and will provide guidance to its members.”
The opinion was accompanied by a notice to the bar, which included an appendix
listing 46 legal service plans that are registered in the state, including plans o ered
through labor unions, government entities and corporations.
Contact David Gialanella at dgialanella@alm.com.On Twitter: @dgialanellanjlj.
SHARE ON FACEBOOK
SHARE ON TWITTER
repeeD giD
Litigation (/topics/litigation/)
smriF derutaeF
enomolaS .E kraM fo sec
seirotS dednemmoceR
)/LANRUOJWALKROYWEN/( LANRUOJ WAL KROY WEN
O waL
2 OLIVER ST #608
BOSTON, MA 02109
857-444-6468www.marksalomone.com
.C.P setaicossA & syaH nitraM yraG
)/rac-deyek-ohw-tsirtaihcysp
-rof-noisnepsus-esnecil-sdlohpu
-lenap/11/21/7102/lanruojwalkroywen/setis/lanruojwalkroywen/(
raC deyeK ohW tsirtaihcysP rof
noisnepsuS esneciL sdlohpU lenaP
235 PEACHTREE ST NE #400
ATLANTA, GA 30303
800-898-4297www.garymartinhays.com
JASON GRANT
(/NEWYORKLAWJOURNAL/AUTHOR/PROFILE/JASON GRANT/) |
DECEMBER 11, 2017
A related penalty, that psychiatrist Zeinab Elbaz be evaluated by
a professional medical conduct committee to determine
whether she should undergo a psychiatric evaluation herself,
was also not disproportionate.
retieR .C nahtanoJ fO mriF waL ehT
350 5TH AVE
NEW YORK, NY 10118
212-736-0979www.jcreiterlaw.com
SPONSOR CONTENT
By Thomson Reuters Westlaw
Presented by BigVoodoo
)b7703d6e2d 9a1975c41520093517df=ivm
?evitan/moc.wal.www//:sptth(
snoitavonni
hcraeser lagel ’ees tsuM‘
(https://www.law.com/native?
mvi=fd71539002514c5791a9 d2e6d3077b)
While interviewing Erik Lindberg, Senior Director for Westlaw
Product Management, I got the scoop on the latest
enhancements to Westlaw.
)/TRUOCZIBLED/( REDISNI TRUOC SSENISUB ERAWALED
noitac issalceR
kcotS GRN detci noC
ot egnellahC sessoT drahcuoB
https://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/06/22/avvo-legalzoom-rocket-lawyer-declared-off-limits/
3/4
12/12/2017
Avvo, LegalZoom, Rocket Lawyer Declared Off-Limits | Law.com
)/noitac issalcer-kcots
-grn-detci noc-ot-egnellahc-sessot
-drahcuob/11/21/7102/truoczibled/setis/truoczibled/(
TOM MCPARLAND
(/THELEGALINTELLIGENCER/AUTHOR/PROFILE/TOM
MCPARLAND/) | DECEMBER 11, 2017
The Delaware Court of Chancery on Monday dismissed an
investor suit stemming from a con icted transaction that
extended power giant NRG Energy's control over a subsidiary,
nding that minority shareholders had overwhelmingly
approved the deal.
secruoseR
mgrp/66coht_w/eerf/moc.bupedart.lesnuocproc//:ptth(
tnemtrapeD waL labolG nredoM eht eganaM ot woH
FROM THOMSON REUTERS
Is your law department ready to go global? This article provides evaluations and solutions for management to e ectively
prepare their team to handle the challenges of a global law department.
Download Now › (http://corpcounsel.tradepub.com/free/w_thoc66/prgm.cgi)
srettelsweN noitacilbuP lageL MLA
Subscribe Now
(https://store.law.com/registration/login.aspx?
promoCode=PAR)
Privacy Policy (https://www.alm.com/privacypolicy-new/)
.yrotS rehtonA ssiM reveN dna yadoT pU ngiS
.yad yrevE .xobni ruoy nI .uoy rof tsuj deroliaT .ssim ot dro a
tonnac uoy sisylana lacitirc dna swen lagel ylemit eht teG .snoitceles ruoy ekam ot egap )RAP=edoComorp
?xpsa.nigol/noitartsiger/moc.wal.erots//:sptth( tnuoccA yM ruoy tisiV .srettelswen yratnemilpmoc
fo egnar ediw a fo rebmun detimilnu na rof pu ngis nac uoy ,pihsrebmem latigid ruoy fo trap sA
(/)
(https://twitter.com/lawdotcom)
(https://www.linkedin.com/company/25021727/)
scipoT waL
Litigation (/topics/litigation/)
snoitacilbuP
Corporate Counsel (/corpcounsel/)
Transactional Law
(/topics/transactional-law/)
National Law Journal
(/nationallawjournal/)
Law Firm Management (/topics/lawrm-management/)
New York Law Journal
(/newyorklawjournal/)
Legal Practice Management
(/topics/legal-practice-management/)
New Jersey Law Journal
(/njlawjournal/)
Cybersecurity (/topics/cybersecurity/)
The Recorder (/therecorder/)
Intellectual Property
(/topics/intellectual-property/)
More Publications › (/publications/)
More Law Topics › (/topics/)
sgniknaR
The American Lawyer
(/americanlawyer/)
(https://plus.google.com/105568464779205123032/posts)
(http://feeds.feedblitz.com/law/law-com-newswire)
eroM
(https://www.facebook.com/LawdotcomALM/)
AmLaw 100
(/americanlawyer/rankings/am-law100/)
AmLaw 200
(/americanlawyer/rankings/am-law200/)
Global 100
(/americanlawyer/rankings/global100/)
moc.waL
FOLLOW US
Events (/events/)
About Us (/static/about-us/)
ALM Intelligence (/alm-intelligence/)
Contact Us (/static/contact-us/)
Editorial Calendar (/editorial-calendar/)
Site Map (/sitemap/)
Resources (/resources/)
Advertise With Us
(http://mediakit.alm.com/)
Legal Dictionary
(https://dictionary.law.com/)
Jobs (http://lawjobs.com/)
Customer Support
(https://www.alm.com/contact-us/)
Terms of Service
Law Firms (/law- rms/)
(https://www.alm.com/terms-of-use/)
National Law Journal 500
Law Schools (/topics/legal-education/)
FAQ
(/nationallawjournal/rankings/the-nlj(/sites/almsta /2017/10/20/frequently500/)
asked-questions/)
Pro Bono Scorecard
Privacy Policy
(/americanlawyer/rankings/pro-bono/)
(https://www.alm.com/privacy-policyThe A-List
new/)
(/americanlawyer/rankings/a-list)
More Rankings › (/rankings/)
Copyright © 2017 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
https://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/06/22/avvo-legalzoom-rocket-lawyer-declared-off-limits/
4/4
0 201 0
1023 4
5 79ÿ 7ÿ6ÿ8 6 ÿ9
6878 6ÿ 95 8 ÿ ÿ7
# ÿ2 &8 7ÿ ÿ5 79ÿ 7ÿ6ÿ8 6 ÿ9
8 ÿ$% '8 7 ÿ2 6878 6ÿ 95 8 (
5 +'),-$
)*ÿ ,.
/02 1560ÿ81 <=0 ÿ 60>::?ÿ 3 Aÿ:;
13ÿ 5 9:;ÿ 3/2 5 @:82 B
2 7
6; =
:C1
DEÿ
'FD.'-ÿ
)GD'FH$
)IHIJ-ÿ3 KLG)H)$ $ 130K2N2
1 0 ÿ2 M.2JJI.2 3 O
/82Z [=02ÿ - 8 ÿ [=02 \ ]
Y " ; ÿ 8 7 ÿ
; ]
ÿ
ÿ
P U
QRST
ÿ
ÿ
$ÿ88 78 V 8 6 ÿ6ÿ 9ÿ
ÿ 69ÿ 9 8 ÿ 7
5
6 6 9
8 777998 7ÿ 77 ÿ
6
ÿ68ÿ8 W ÿ 9 ÿÿ ÿ 7
9
968 9 78 6 78 ÿ8
77ÿ ÿ6 ÿ ÿ 67 ÿ
6
7 7ÿÿ6 ÿ88 77ÿÿ
6 ÿ ÿ 6 7 8 ÿJ 7
D
,66ÿ ÿ6 8 ÿ6 ÿ ÿ
V
ÿ 7 8ÿ 8
6
8
ÿÿ 7
9V 8 6 ÿÿ 7 7
78ÿ 7ÿ 6 ÿ
6 95
9
9 7
7 ÿ
-ÿ 8 V 8 6 V
7 ÿ 76ÿ ÿ ÿ8 6 ÿ
5
8
9 8ÿ3 0ÿÿ97
8 6ÿ ÿ ÿ 1 3 V9 8 ÿ
9 ÿ6 8 ÿ 8 8ÿ8
9
6 7 7 ÿ6 ÿ 8ÿ
9
7
ÿ 9896 9 9 98 6
9 ÿ ÿ6 899ÿ 8
8
ÿ
)
98 8 ÿ7ÿ ÿ 8
9
7 6ÿX6 8 6 6ÿ 8V
ÿ
8 9
86 6 9ÿ0968ÿ ÿ 8&77
7 ÿ ÿ K ÿ7796 7 ÿ 9 ÿ
, ÿÿÿ 6 8 7ÿ 6
6ÿ W ÿ 6 ÿ ÿ
M 79
8
ÿ 96 98Vÿ
7 ÿ 7ÿ ÿ8
9ÿ 98
ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ 8ÿ 7ÿ
97 6ÿ
V 7
%8 8 6
ÿ ÿ ÿÿ 8
6 896 6 897 ÿ X
7 6 6867 279!8 6!7! 6!8 6 ! 9
7 2 6 6 6 2 28 87
9 8 !! 7
2
6
0"
2
0 201 0
1023 4
5 79ÿ 7ÿ6ÿ8 6 ÿ9
6878 6ÿ 95 8 ÿ ÿ7
C ÿ8 7ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
8ÿ 7 ÿ
D8 8 ÿ 87 8
E 87
#$ &(% + -%/
%ÿ )* ,$ .
0 1 . 3 &1 , 5.3 ,+/
7ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ 989
+ %23 )4ÿ+ +%ÿ 7 &. 686 87 87 ÿ 7
6
6 6
$ &$ .+ ÿ +9)ÿ5;: 7898ÿ 6ÿÿÿ 78 6ÿÿ878
%ÿ+* 8- ÿ5 *+%. ÿ8
97 7 8 7ÿ ÿ7 ÿ
$:
% %,-% 7-ÿ57 $ÿ> 6ÿ ÿ6Eÿ69G 9H6 8 76E
1 :&ÿ<&: =3 1 . &
= 6 ÿ 7 F9ÿ 6ÿ
&;5.--&ÿ 33=ÿ , 5 9 8
++%ÿ%+? -ÿ>A, + 8 6 Iÿ8 86ÿ 9
& @$
B:?
5J8 E8 6ÿ77ÿ 6ÿ 5
6 ÿ 999ÿ9K8 6 ÿ
8 8
H E ÿ ÿ 8ÿ 785
8ÿ 7ÿ 8G8 7 ÿ ÿ8 6
8 7
L9 6ÿ 6 ÿ6 M 9ÿ878 9 7ÿ
89 ÿ7 5 ÿ E6ÿÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ 6ÿ 89 ÿ
M7
ÿ 79 8
897ÿ 7 ÿ 8ÿ NL56 98 9 ÿ 9ÿ
7ÿ 9 ÿ 9ÿ 6 9 ÿ ÿ ÿ 76 ÿ ÿ ÿ87
7
7ÿ 8 7ÿ7ÿ 89
8 687 ÿ 87 789
7 ÿ
C 7ÿ8 ÿ ÿ8 6 E ÿ6 9 7896 FH ÿ69ÿO
D 9875 ÿ 87 ÿ6ÿ 7 ÿ77 Eÿ 89 8I8
7
7
8ÿ
C
7 ÿ 8 979 ÿ ÿIÿ ÿ ÿ86 ÿ66
ÿ ÿ ÿ6 ÿ 7896 9 7 ÿ8 ÿ ÿ 8
6
98
7
7ÿ 7 ÿ
9 ÿ 8 F
7
Pÿÿ Q38 % 0 <ÿ ;+ 67 E 86 R 5 ÿ ÿ 6
6J6ÿ 5$ )ÿ% (+:<ÿ8ÿ ÿ ÿ6 7ÿ S HE
H
88 8ÿ ÿ 8ÿ 785 89 E ÿ 6ÿ 8
T7 ÿ 7ÿ 8G8 7 ÿ ÿ8 6ÿ 9 ÿ 87 7 ÿ 6
8 7
L
6 7 8
6U79 677 7 8 ÿ
78 8ÿ
8ÿÿ ÿ ÿÿ 6ÿ6 96 ÿ ÿ 6 ÿ 6 99
8 7
6ÿ8 6 Vÿÿ8 6 8F78ÿ E78U99
95 ÿ 6 7ÿ8987 Eÿ 8ÿ ÿ8ÿ ÿ
C
7C
7 8 U ÿ 88
7 ÿ 786U7 76 7 7
ÿ ÿ 7 9ÿ 6 9 ÿ ÿ 8E ÿ 78ÿ9 ÿ8 6 ÿ
ÿ
8 9ÿ 6ÿ 8 Iÿ799688
87 7 ÿ 9887ÿÿ 7
7
F
WXYZ[ÿ ]^_`
XYÿ abc
O ÿ ÿ 7ÿ 9ÿ8 6 ÿÿÿ 89 ÿ 9
8 ÿ 6 96 6 7 7 ÿ8 8 8 7ÿ
5
9 7 R
7
8E ÿ 86ÿÿ
978 ÿ ÿ98 97E 789 8 7
9ÿ 7 ÿ 8ÿ ÿ ÿ 9 ÿ ÿ 9
7 7
d77 8
7ÿ 6 9 9E8 7676 8 E686ÿ ÿ 9ÿ78ÿ
ÿÿ 89ÿ 98ÿÿ 6Uÿ 8 7ÿÿ 6 6 89
8 87 69 89 ÿ 8 7 ÿ 8 8 7
8 6ÿ 8 9ÿ 9 ÿ ÿ 7897 ÿ6 ÿ ÿ E
e 8
7
67ÿ8 6 ÿ8 9
8 786 9 ÿ 98 ÿ 998
ÿ 5 8 8ÿ8ÿ ÿ 89 ÿ E 7
8
6 88 89
ÿ 7 9
M E ÿ 8f7ÿ 6M77ÿ 6 6 76ÿ 8888 9
8ÿ 7 ÿ G6 ÿ 68S6E 7ÿ 7 9ÿ 8 7ÿ
ÿ
7
6 ÿ ÿ8ÿ6 9ÿ8 6 ÿ 98 8 7
7
86
8 7 5 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8ÿ
8 E 6ÿ 6h 7
8 6ÿ
9g789ÿ ÿ9H ÿ 6 6
6 ÿ 9
i7 6 2 2E 6 ÿ 8 6 8 O 9ÿ 8
7 2 6 6 6 2 86 8 ! jÿ R ÿ 8dSdÿ5 ÿ6 UV
2
ÿ7
6 88 7 ÿ ÿ 5 ÿ E 7 ÿ 6 8 7ÿÿ
ÿ9 ÿ Gkgÿ 876 P 8 9ÿ 968 7
6
K
ÿ
876 ÿ6 ÿ ÿ ÿ7ÿI 9F
ÿ C 8 7876 89ÿ8
7
Pÿ3 l78f7ÿ 6 98 ÿ8 6 ÿÿ8 9R R8787O
1 3 ÿ ÿ G6 ÿ6ÿ 5 6686 99ÿ7 8
9
8ÿ
676 8ÿ 7ÿ G66 9 9ÿ ÿ 88ÿ9ÿ ÿÿ 8
7 ÿ ÿ96ÿ f7ÿ ÿ 89 7 E67 E
8
7
J6 6
7 ÿ 8NL598ÿ6 ÿ8 6 7
87ÿ
ÿ 8 7 ÿ ÿ E ÿ8m ÿ 6ÿ 8 ÿ
ÿ
9 9
8 8
7 ÿ8 6 Iÿ9ÿ 8 6 8ÿ 9
896 5 989 ÿ ÿ T 8 7
7 6 6867 279!8 6!7! 6!8 6 ! 9
7 2 6 6 6 2 28 87
9 8 !! 7
2
6
1"
2
0 201 0
1023 4
5 79ÿ 7ÿ6ÿ8 6 ÿ9
6878 6ÿ 95 8 ÿ ÿ7
$ ÿ 898 8& ÿ 7 ' 7ÿ 6
ÿ8 6
8 %ÿ6 78 ÿ ÿÿ8 ÿ (6 ÿ685
ÿ
6 8 ÿ ÿ 7
ÿ8 ÿ 7 868
7
) 78 9ÿÿ 6ÿ888 ÿÿ 8 ÿ ÿ
96878 &
7 ÿ ÿ ÿ 98 86 77 87 7ÿ ÿ 6
6
7
78 7 876ÿ8 6 *ÿ8ÿ ÿÿ 97ÿ 8 6 78
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 967 9+ 7 7 87 ÿ
5
7
678ÿ
ÿ6 ,
$ ÿ888 ÿ 68 ÿ 8 7 ÿ8 6 *ÿ7 ÿ ÿÿ8 8
88 7 ÿ 6ÿ 99 87 69
7 5
6
ÿ6 9 8ÿ 7 7 6
ÿ 77 ÿ5 9
7 96 ÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ8ÿ 9 8 6 *
6 +
9 ÿ96ÿ 8989 ÿ 89 6 978
7 867ÿ7 ÿ ÿ 7 7 ÿ ÿ 78ÿ ÿ8ÿ
6
7
7
9 ÿ 6ÿ 7
6 ÿ- ÿ9ÿ
ÿ 8
78* 6 ÿ8 7 867 6ÿÿ 8 ÿ7
9
& 79
9 $ ÿ7 ÿ 9 7 -86 8 7 97 ÿ
78 89 8 8ÿÿ 89ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ8 & 7
ÿ 6
8
868ÿ 76 ÿÿ 8989 6ÿÿ 8 * 6 ,
796 76 7 ÿ6 ÿ ÿ96. 8ÿ
6
6ÿ
/
9ÿ8 6 ÿ870/59ÿÿ 6ÿ 9 6 26 7
8 & 978 ÿ ÿ 7(6& 9 ÿ 9
5
9 1 ÿ
5 9ÿÿ 6 6 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ9ÿ 9 957ÿ 6ÿ 8
6 7) 66 3889 98 8ÿ (6 &
9
48
7
ÿ7 68ÿÿ 8ÿ % 6& 887867ÿÿ6
6 9ÿ 966 ÿ )6 99ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 6 7 7
8
8 9
6789:9;6<ÿ ?6@A?ÿ 769
8>ÿ 96BCD
E
6ÿ8 6 ÿ6ÿ6769ÿ 8 ÿ8ÿÿ6ÿ
8 ÿ95 9 78 ÿ ÿ 6 7 67 &7 98
8ÿ ÿ 8ÿ6 ÿ9 ÿ ÿ 8
96 96ÿ
97 676ÿ 67 ÿ 8 6 6ÿ 8ÿ ÿ 9 8
5
7
8 9
98 F 78ÿ 97ÿ88 ÿ86 6 8 ÿ797ÿ878
7ÿ 6ÿ
67 ÿ 8 7 98 ÿ ÿ ÿ 89
6
9
6
ÿ 886 9 8ÿ8
988
7 9ÿ ÿ8 98ÿ ÿ8 7
4 ÿ 8 99 ÿ 6 9ÿ 8
7 8 76ÿ 8ÿÿ 6 9 ÿ6 8ÿ 8ÿ 7 ÿ 6
G6
9
8
98ÿ 8&
ÿÿ 66 ÿ87,76ÿ 889 8
8
96%7 7 ÿ +998 ÿ 7 ÿ 9 ÿ88
ÿ 7
ÿ
786ÿ ÿÿ888
ÿ 8 8
9
+ ÿ *6% ÿÿ ÿ8 ÿ 8 &ÿ886 H 98 8ÿ
H 7 ÿ 7 6 987 ÿ7 ÿ- 9ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 996
ÿ
,
+
7 6 96 67 8 ÿ89 ÿ 8 89 69ÿ
8 ÿ ÿ 89ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 7 9ÿ78ÿ9 &
7 $
8
6
78998 7ÿ 8 9 ÿ 6ÿ 8ÿ 9ÿ ÿ ÿ78ÿ 8
ÿ7ÿ 97 ÿ7ÿ 7 ÿ87 /668 696 8 9
8
7
,
9 ÿ 86996 ÿ ÿ86 67ÿ
8 6ÿ 89 69ÿ
ÿ97 86 6
ÿ ÿ87ÿ 7 96
8
88ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ7 89
88ÿ ÿ -67 97 67
8
5 8 ÿ ÿ8ÿ88 9ÿ ÿ 9ÿ3 1ÿÿ6 ÿ8
8 6 ÿ8 7 9 9ÿ9
8 ÿ 7 0 &7 98
7
)9 ) 1
981 9 & ÿ ÿÿ98798 ÿ 7ÿ 80
ÿÿ ÿ 789ÿ 7 6 ÿÿ 7 ÿ '
6
7
'8 8ÿ ÿ 6 ÿ 9 ÿÿ6 ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ6ÿ
96 E- 8( 9 6
8ÿ 6 7
7
6
ÿ ÿ30ÿÿ ÿÿ88 9ÿ0 K 6 6ÿ 76%7ÿ
1 0&7 7
8ÿ # ÿ ÿ ÿ 9 ÿ ÿ
8 I
J
ÿ 9ÿ ÿ1 3 ÿ3 1ÿ676 &7 8 ÿ9I 679 ÿ1 3
87 J 3 ÿ ÿ 1 0 9ÿ 6ÿÿ ÿ ÿ8 J 3
5 L
7 /3ÿ 8
ÿM ÿ ÿ 8688 7ÿ /8
ÿ 8 77 7 ÿ 7ÿM ÿ
6
NB8;67;D ;P6ÿ 7
O@ÿ NQR?D
7 6 6867 279!8 6!7! 6!8 6 ! 9
7 2 6 6 6 2 28 87
9 8 !! 7
2
6
"#
2
0 201 0
1023 4
5 79ÿ 7ÿ6ÿ8 6 ÿ9
6878 6ÿ 95 8 ÿ ÿ7
'ÿ8 6 (ÿ6 98 6 6ÿ 778ÿ ÿ8 ÿ78ÿ 8ÿ
7 5 97 ÿ76 ÿ ÿ7 7)
6 9
ÿ 6
78 7ÿ 8 6 78 ÿ8 7ÿÿ 8ÿ886 76
ÿ 6ÿ 9) ÿ 67 ÿ8 68 ÿ
)
8 7
9
ÿ
9
6
* 8 9ÿ 6ÿ ÿ8 876ÿ 88 ÿ ÿÿ
ÿÿ
+ ÿ87 ÿ 7 ÿ 7 9ÿ8 68968 6, ÿ
6
9
7
8
)ÿ69% ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 97ÿ 5 ÿ 678
8 6ÿ 8-9ÿ 8 . ) 7ÿ 80 7 8 ÿ6 /
9
/8 6 8 7 7
+ ÿ ÿ
7 6ÿ ÿ 897ÿ6 1 * 6ÿ ÿ6 79
8 6 0 6 ÿ7 ,2
5 ÿ ' 7
1
ÿ 8 ÿÿ
9ÿ 7 ÿ 6 ÿ 6ÿ ÿÿ 8 ÿ ÿ8 7ÿ ÿÿ 7ÿ 7
89 6 7 7 ÿ 7 7 8 ÿ 66ÿ 6 8
7
8 '8
6
7ÿ 6ÿ 8ÿ9ÿ 6ÿ 8 ÿÿ78
8 68 7 ÿ7 7 ÿ 877
7 9
38 6 ÿ
9ÿ 8 6 8
7 ÿ 8 8ÿ
7 ) ÿ8 8) ÿ ÿ 6 ÿ 7 ÿ8 ÿ8 6
/8 6 8
98ÿ8 7 78 8779 ÿ 6 99ÿ9
8
9 ÿ 6 ÿ ÿ 6ÿ 6 ÿ 8 ÿ 8ÿ 6
8
86
5 ÿ+ ÿ ÿ ÿ8
ÿ 884 87 ÿ 7 ÿ 88
8 6 8889 87 9ÿ 9 97 ÿ8 6 ) ÿ
*
7
8 8 ÿ
7 (ÿ 8 ÿ 6
5
. .6,
ÿ97ÿ9ÿ786ÿ 2
ÿ ÿ
88) ÿ ) 968896ÿ 69%7.ÿ 8971
ÿ6
6
+
5 ) 9 ÿ 88 9ÿ 6ÿ 6 99ÿ95 68 8 8
6 ÿ 87 97 ÿ87 7 8ÿ 6ÿ8 6 ÿÿ8
4
8ÿ 8ÿ ÿ 9 7ÿ 8ÿ 8 8 9ÿ 8 8
86 9ÿ ÿ 8ÿ 8 6ÿ 89 ÿ 8 7 ÿ8 ÿ 8
7 6 7 8
7
. ÿÿ ÿ6867 7ÿ ÿ ÿ 6) ÿ 87 9
989ÿ ÿ 8 8
ÿ 9ÿ ÿ667 9 7 76 7 ÿ 8
*
9
7 ÿ
ÿ8
95 ÿ ÿ6 ÿ8 78 )ÿ89) 7 96
8ÿ8 6 ÿ 9676 ÿ 6 - ÿ69ÿ 8 ÿ7
9
8
9 8
88 ÿ8ÿ7
9
.6,
ÿ76ÿ6ÿ97 ÿ8 7 ÿÿÿÿ 9 6 8
ÿ 88ÿ 7 696 96ÿ 686 88 8
8 7
ÿ
6 ÿ
ÿ ÿ 9898ÿ 8 8 7ÿ ÿ8
978
ÿ 7 87 ÿ ÿ ÿ 96 98ÿ
8
7
6 7+ÿ 887 ÿ
8 9 7 7ÿ 7 7ÿ 9ÿ 8
7 ÿ68 7 8 ÿ6 ÿ 96 7 8 68 8ÿ 7 ÿ 6
ÿ
8
6 8 6 8
98ÿ 8)
.6,
ÿ ÿ8 6ÿ
8
96,7 88) ÿ 9 7 7ÿ 8 9
ÿ
ÿ
9 8ÿ 6ÿ 6 ÿ 6768
8 97 7 ÿ ÿ 7 9
8
9 8 9 78ÿ8 6 ÿ6ÿ8 78 9ÿ 9ÿ ÿ 7 7
ÿ ÿ6 ÿ6ÿ 8 5 998 ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 882/59 ÿ ÿ
6 7
9&
ÿ3 11:$ÿ ÿÿ8 ÿ 8 9ÿ 8 ÿ8 ÿ ÿ 8 '86 768
71 0 ÿ )7 77 ÿ 77 6 6 ÿ ÿ 7
9
6 9
*
76ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ87878ÿ 9ÿ9ÿÿ 87
7 ÿ 7 87 ÿ ÿ 7ÿ 77 ÿ 88 6
6 9
;<>@BDÿA =@DÿJ E AK=ÿ ELM MB O Q=>EFÿ ELSLÿF A@ÿ B
=ÿA=EF=H D @ J @E ÿ B ÿ G >ÿ P ÿ M ÿR< ÿ TMH D <
C G I
H<
N > B
U=
B=ÿE K=EÿX<ÿÿ =ÿ H[\=H ]^ B>ÿG D=BAÿ@ÿE @`F \
<>< @ D V IY;<>Z@ ÿ DG ÿ@EBE @ÿCFI< >^ G D F
HW >
=
D _
J =E ÿ AGF <b
F>KR ÿAUBa
F
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
$ ÿ3 4%86 ÿ %97 ÿ 998
7 0 ÿ &6ÿ 96 ÿ 7ÿ88
1
%
7 6 6867 279!8 6!7! 6!8 6 ! 9
7 2 6 6 6 2 28 87
9 8 !! 7
2
6
"#
2
EXHIBIT L
0 223 4
101 0
56 9
786
eQ
&' (*
Q% %) +
ÿ
iÿ
ni
$e~l
e
{ 3v|ÿ AC Et F
7 ÿÿ }/ÿDÿ v
C
eT$n n
iÿ
ÿ
= ?ÿ@ A2B-2 0623 ÿ/ C DF =HI 06K3 :2ÿK10-6J--N - ÿ ÿ- -7-12ÿ . 0;- 0ÿ 0
> /ÿ 78 8ÿ -6/ 6@ :ÿD EG ÿ-J/K LI7 M7 ÿ 4 1ÿ 0ÿ6K1 4 3 01ÿ 60 /1< 73:/7 7 :.
0
7
/
O - ÿ
$% %) +
&' (*
P('%ÿ ÿX (
+ QRTUVW &%*
lX (X ÿm f n 'Xÿ% jkh ipk* ()+ %j
+h *% Xj X ÿo' ) ÿ j h% q* ÿr k
(
%
kh
%j
F ;u
Cu ?
G ;C
vF ?
C ;=
vG ?
Y \^_a^ d]
Z[]^` ÿc \
efg X (X
)ÿ +h *
' (
ifk% ÿ h
jQ'k j
%
84 8/ :;/
- 7s / M :
> ;u
tG ?
vu
;
u ;v
uu ?
wN
/
= ;v
Cx ?
C>
;
y
y
F ;>
vD ?
y
1M N 2-6/N23 ;/
1B 63 66 81 6M :
/
v ;=
>G ?
C>
;
C ;x
Cu ?
> ;t
vx ?
u ;G
DG ?
x ;t
F= ?
17 - 0- 43 ;/
0K :7H3 2-M :
v ;G
=D ?
Cv
;
C ;x
CD ?
u ;=
>u ?
G ;>
>x ?
x ;>
>D ?
84 8O 07M :
- 79 -. ;/
6
v ;=
xF ?
xx
;
C ;C
Ct ?
x ;G
uu ?
> ;C
FD ?
x ;t
GD ?
17 - 0.N ;/
0K :7H 86M :
v ;G
t> ?
CG
;
v ;G
Gx ?
> ;G
v> ?
G ;=
C= ?
x ;t
Gx ?
17 - 0M- M :
0K :7H0J;/
zv ?
ÿt
=C
;
v ;D
>x ?
x ;x
CD ?
> ;v
vD ?
= ;F
tv ?
K0M2M 0/723M :
2 1 /. 01 ;/
-3
/
zv ?
ÿt
x>
;
v ;D
vv ?
C ;u
C> ?
v ;=
D= ?
= ;>
vC ?
,- /1 42ÿ/ÿ 792 ;
. 02 ÿ 3 1- 8 :36 0 1
< 73:/- 0ÿ 0
2 6 9
8 8
2
8 3 ! " 00 # ! # "
868 22
6 1 ! 00 1
93 ! 0 4 1 0
2
8
00
2
EXHIBIT M
0 224 5
131 0
68 ÿ
877 9
79
ÿ ÿ 9
7 ÿ
! ÿ& !)
"#%ÿ (*
'
+ÿ/01246 6 6 2 ÿ86ÿ 76;<<=ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ?ÿ>=ÿ ÿ0ÿ5<3 Aÿ A0<5C2@ =ÿ2DE 4
,ÿ 3501ÿ01ÿ7325 592 : > 0<56: @3 <36 65 02B ÿ ÿ 3<3 4 3>2
.
4 6
=6
C2@ =2 FA6 65 02B 01ÿ4@ =4<35=C:54620<564 55 2@ ÿ826 >2<34 3>2 ÿ ÿ0
3<3 1ÿ ÿ0ÿ5<3 Aÿ > ÿ<3 ÿ ÿ2 62 ÿ3ÿ ÿÿ/F4>/5ÿ<35 ÿ1DE ÿ ÿ2DE 4<@6
6 5
65 02, 5 3ÿ6 3C34 0507ÿ 4 :ÿ 5 4:76ÿ 52, 65 02 I: 053:5<04 Cÿ ÿ >> 72>
5<3 Aÿ 82Bÿ=ÿ2 2 2 > =A 2@> 8>ÿ : 53ÿ 5<3 AE> ÿ26> 8> <3C3D: ÿ
G6 .
0ÿ 2 =6 H<ÿ
2
2 4
E2 51ÿ 5 92 :
362 ?>8ÿ 76;<<=,
JÿL 8 8ÿ ÿN7ÿO ÿ ÿ7 Q 9ÿ797 M R7ÿ ÿ88997 R
,
ÿ 9M 8
Lÿ7 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ L ÿ7 ÿO Nÿ
Kÿ
K 7 P
7
9M
ÿ7 R7L 77
ÿ L77 ÿ 8 ÿ8
87Lÿ 87 ÿ ÿ ÿN7ÿ
7 ÿ L 97
ÿ
7L
ÿ ÿ
9
ÿ7
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 R
8
L R
8 8
R
K
M 8
ÿ ÿR ÿ Sÿ O ÿN ÿ R
ÿN7 ÿ 97 ÿ7 R
K
ÿ
Tÿ/01246 5 55 4 ÿ2=43V/>25 ÿ 2<@6F>35<0ÿ 6 > D1/6ÿ 445 34 D ÿ 4 2 B
,ÿ 3501ÿ86ÿ82 2U 3 ÿ2 3ÿ82/4 ÿ ÿ3 56> <0ÿ0ÿ > : >ÿ<ÿ2 <:21>C/54
.
01> F6
35 35 0ÿ A5>:ÿ ÿ:4 ÿE> B 01ÿ:<ÿ=>ÿ823=2 2 ÿD > F:ÿ<ÿ ÿ 5 ÿD 05<@61>C/5ÿ4
682ÿ86 W ÿ364<3E6 46 5<04ÿ 64 : 55 ÿ2 1>46 6: 25 =2> 822 2 ÿ ÿÿ 4 26
/3
6
>
6
0ÿ
12 E> 1ÿ 5 ÿ 76;<<=ÿ F>35<0ÿ 2 =2 B <05> 1ÿ Y66 6 + ÿ ÿ82 2U 3 ÿ ÿ 3>2
4 3F2 > 8292 : X3 56> X732 05ÿ 602 > 373C8ÿZ<@5 4 ÿ2=4<@[2DE ,
0ÿ
E
0ÿ
\ÿ]^_`a6 6cb 6c`ÿ`dbP a`gK eiÿ b^h`aÿ PfK 6 keflP
,ÿ
K
b^_ÿ 6ÿ P Qeefÿ `hÿ fjÿ
K K 6`_ÿeÿ `6`^`L
ÿ
l`P K ÿ ieaÿ
P^dL
b^_ÿ K
^6`a^bPke^K
ÿ 6`^kjÿ ^bf`L
eiÿ
ÿ
b__a``L 6c`ÿK ÿhKPa`b_ÿ
ÿ
b^_ÿ Pm`ÿ P ÿ 6c`
K
iK ÿ
^bP_ek]f`^6n ÿ
op`iea`ÿ d^K K b^_ÿ
K ^dÿ bda``ÿeÿ eP jÿ
6ÿ
6 p`ÿ `P a`le^K `ÿ 6c`ÿ ^bP
pP ieaÿ iK
_ek]f`^6n
o
qÿ E 6 A<@. <3 5<0ÿ01ÿ 3 Y65ÿ 2 , 7O
ÿ
ÿ R 7ÿ ÿ8R R8
, /3E ÿ ÿ =6> 6 U8>1I 3Ar<04 05ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ S 7 Lÿ7 7 ÿN7
XE
0@
6 9M
K
8 ÿ7 Q 9ÿ ÿ7 7 ÿ ÿ
8s R
89M R 8ÿ
9 ÿ P R ÿO R8 8M 7 ÿ7 N8 ÿ ÿ ÿ87
ÿR
7
ÿ
Zÿ 2 5<0>ÿ E 146 [> 5 2 ,ÿ7P 7
ÿ ÿ8
N7 8ÿ7 N8R
, E3 EG2 <3 ÿ01ÿ 706/34ÿÿ7 Q 9ÿ
ÿ ÿ
u9M77 ÿ 8ÿ 778s ÿ
t:
K
7
79MR 97 ÿ 7
RK M R 9M 7 7 ÿ ÿ N
ÿ ÿ MO 7 ÿRÿM
ÿ ÿ N
ÿN R 8 ÿ9ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ
L 8R R9MR 97 ÿ7 8 Rÿ7
7 L
K
ÿ
ÿ
7
O
ÿ7 Q 9ÿ
8k7ÿv 4ÿ5 v v
P kN97ÿ 8ÿ 4 o5 w4 v
n
xÿ t07: 8I 6 > r/4<=24ÿN R 8 ÿ ÿ7ÿ 8 ÿ 7P
L R ÿNÿ
,
H<0I > [C2 y07ÿ 5 3,ÿ 7
R 8 97
ÿ ÿ7 Q 9ÿ ÿN O
4
K
7
RÿN
8
ÿ N
ÿ
8 L ÿL 8ÿ MO7ÿ ÿ
7 ÿ s 7 L 97 L N
ÿ R
ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ `
9 7 R
zÿ =>6> <@9>F>5ÿ01ÿ =0>>6> ÿ
, 55<0ÿ ÿ 6 :A6 . @E 5<0,
9>
> 012
`{k`l6ÿ laecK 6`_ÿ P ÿhKPceP P Qeef
bÿ pK pjÿbhLÿ P ÿ _ÿ`dbP
K
b^_ÿ eiiK ÿ a`k6 ÿ ej``L bd`^6ÿ `ÿ b^jÿ a`k6ÿ 6K
K
6ÿ k`aL
_K eaL
`flP
ÿ
b^_ÿ
cbafP ieaÿ K
^_K L g`L
l]^K
l`kK L^kK bPÿ ke^`|]`^6K ÿ
bPÿ _`^6 L
K
eaÿ
bP_bfbd`L
ÿ
ceh`g`aÿ baK n^kP ^dÿ66
K `ÿK ]_K b ea^`j}
6ÿ
i``ÿ bP ÿ b ke6ÿ `{l`^`ÿ P6K 6K b^_ÿ 6ab e^L b 6aK ÿ e^
b^_ÿ Pa`P 6`_ÿ
b^_ÿ
eiÿK db e^ÿ bapK 6K ÿ 6ÿ bPeaÿ
eaÿ
bll`bPÿ b^jÿ
Liÿ L
K hc`6c`aÿ ^e6ÿK db e^ÿ bapK 6K K K 6]6`_oÿ
eaÿ P6K 6K eaÿ 6ab e^ÿ ^6K L
ÿ
hc`6c`aÿ b^
K
^ÿ
bk6K eiÿ
e^ÿ ke^6abk6ÿ K
L d`^k`L e6c`aÿea6K bk6K ÿ baK ^dÿ eiÿ K
^`dP
ÿ
eaÿ
6 e]ÿ e^L
eaÿ K e]6ÿ eaÿ
^
ke^^`k6K hK 6cK bda``f`^6ÿ ]_K hK
e^ÿ 6cÿ ÿ
L^kP ^dÿ 6ce]6ÿK 6 6K b^jÿ bK ieaÿ
K
PfKb e^ÿ kP fÿ l`ae^bP
K ]ajÿ lael`a6jÿ
^~ eaÿ
_bfbd`L K iaefÿ ÿ
ÿ ^dÿ 6cK bda``f`^6ÿ b^jÿ eP 6K pjÿ eiÿ
baK
b^_ÿ gK b e^ÿ f`ÿ b^j
i`_`abPÿ b ÿ P ÿbhL b
L 6`L ekbPP ÿ 6]6`L `L a`d]P 6K ÿ K P Qeefÿ
6 eaÿ
6
ÿ ÿ
a]P eaÿ b e^L iÿ`dbP cb
`g`^ÿ
p``^ÿ e]P b_gK eiÿ leK P6jÿ ]kcÿ
la`gK jÿ `_ÿ 6c`ÿ pKK eiÿ _bfbd`
ÿ
`{k`l6ÿ laecK 6`_ÿ P ÿ
bÿ pK pjÿbhLi
K
6c`a`ÿ PbpKK ie]^_ÿ 6c`ÿba6ÿ P QeefL6ÿ P ÿ PfK 6 6c`ÿ
K K P6jÿ
ÿ
e^ÿ l eiÿ`dbP ÿ hKPp`ÿK 6`_ÿeÿ bfe]^6ÿbK iea
K
l _ÿ
6c`ÿ
lae_]k6ÿ eaÿ k`ÿ ]^_`aÿ kK
b^_2 `agK b^_ÿ
^eÿ ak]f6
b^k`ÿ P ÿ p`ÿ
hKP6c`a`ÿ ke^`|]`^6K
bP
eaÿ 6K _bfbd` 6 6`ÿ ^e6ÿ P 6c`ÿ ]K eaÿK 6 6K eiÿ 6K
l]^K g`ÿ
ÿ
ef`ÿ b _eÿ bP ehÿ `{kP e^ÿ PfKb e^ÿ l]^K g`L
K _`^6 ÿ ke^`|]`^6K ÿ
^kK bPeaÿ
bP_bfbd`L 6c`ÿ eaÿK 6 6K eaÿ ]K fb ^e6ÿ j
ÿ
eÿ laK PfKb e^ÿ `{kP e^ÿ jÿ bllP
6 f` ÿbabdablcÿ ^e6ÿ jÿeÿ
eÿ ÿ l
6cK
_e`ÿ bllP 6 ^ea6cÿ K ke^]f`a
kbaeP^bÿ
ÿ2=4<@4 ,ÿ 7
Rÿ 7}ÿ7 7ÿ 8 ÿ
ÿ779
ÿ 7o
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7768 ÿ
, 3 ÿ ÿ 2ÿN R 8 ÿ ÿ
879
ÿ 7n ÿ68 ÿ
ÿ M
ÿ79
U
K
7
N
]
7ÿ ÿÿ7 ÿ 7768 ÿ
87ÿS 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ7 R R 87ÿ 768 ÿ
7
87 R 87 ÿ
ÿ79
ÿ Lÿ R 7 ÿ78 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ
ÿ79
ÿ L
7 K
K
]
ÿ8ÿ8 7 ÿ77 Oÿ777
7 8R 8ÿM8
8 7
+ , 5<06ÿ 76;<<=ÿ2=4ÿN R 8 ÿ ÿ ÿN79ÿ7
O7 R 79
R
ÿ > : : U 3 ,ÿ 7
R 8
ÿ MO ÿN ÿ ÿR ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ R
X11> 92
K
9M
K 7
Rÿ7 Q 9ÿ
77 ÿ 7 87L 8ÿN ÿ ÿ 7N 7 ÿ79
ÿ 87
8
ÿ R 8 ÿ a7 8Rb ÿ
ÿ 7
O7 ÿ 97 8 ÿ
ÿ
N
P
7
6
7
a7 8Rb ÿ 87L7 ÿ ÿ8ÿN ÿ ÿ 7P ÿ 8L 28 M R
7 87
77 ÿ 7
ÿ
7
O7 ÿ7 ÿ k R ÿ ÿ9 ÿ ÿ7 97
7
l
ÿ
7
77 ÿÿ 8
87ÿ ÿN
8 R ÿ7
7
O7 7N 7 ÿ79
8
RMNÿ7L R
O ÿ ÿ 8 8M
87ÿ8ÿN ÿ ÿ ÿ 97 8 ÿ
R
6
N
8 ÿ ÿ 8M7
ÿÿ Lÿ R 7ÿ ÿ7 R R 87ÿ 7
97
O
R68 lÿ 87
O7ÿS 7 ÿ ÿ78 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿN 7
R
K K
K
8 L 78 7 ÿ77 Oÿ777
79
ÿ ÿ8ÿ 8R 8ÿM8
8 7
+, 3 Y65ÿ 3>2 ,
ÿN7 ÿÿ8R ÿ ÿ7ÿ ÿÿ7
ÿN R 8 ÿ ÿ9ÿ7
+ÿ 1ÿ 3A[2DE 4ÿÿ 8
R N
8 8M
87Lÿ 7
R ÿ MO
U8>
KK
R
K
K
8s Rÿ7 R ÿ 8 ÿR ÿ 7 ÿÿ 7 ÿÿ M ÿM7 R
7 N8 ÿ ÿ R 79
7 ÿ ÿ 8 8M
ÿ ÿ 8 8M9ÿ ÿ Oÿ9 28
7
R
7 6 R
97
ÿ
7 ÿ
8 ÿ ÿ ÿ7
9MO
ÿ`dbP c`a`pjÿ kP fÿK P6jÿ b^j
ÿ N
ÿ
ÿ ÿ7 7 Qeefÿ
P
_K bK PbpKK ieaÿ
K
^ieafb e^L 6`aK L
6K ÿ bP ÿ
fb
lae_]k6ÿ `agK le6`_ÿ eii`a`_ÿ l eiÿ 6cK
eaÿ k`ÿ
eaÿ
bÿba6ÿ b^jÿ a_
l `agK ÿ`dbP K ^e6ÿK `ÿ b^jÿbK]a`ÿ lae_]k6ÿ `agK eii`a`_
ba6jÿ k` Qeefÿ PbpP ieaÿ i P eiÿ
P
ÿ
eaÿ k`ÿ
eaÿ
b_g`a6K b 6ce`ÿ 6` 6cK l fb cb bÿ g lePkjÿ ii`a`^6ÿ 6cb
`_ÿ6ÿ
K ÿ a_ÿba6jÿ jÿ g`ÿ laKbkjÿ K _K
bÿ
iaefÿ 6
eiÿ`dbP b^_ÿ 6cK l h`pK fb laegK P `k]aK 6cb^ÿ P Qeef
P Qeefÿ 6c`ÿ a_ÿba6jÿ 6`ÿ jÿ _`ÿ`ÿ
6jÿ 6c`ÿ`dbP
K
6`
+ , /3ÿ <1/E46 [2DE 4ÿÿ
ÿ ÿR ÿÿ8R ÿ8
87ÿ ÿ87ÿN
s 7 ÿ
Jÿ 2Y3 5ÿ01ÿ 3>2 ,
ÿ 7 R N ÿ7ÿ 9M R 8
O7 N ÿ ÿ
/5
KK
8
L
ÿ79
ÿ 87 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿR ÿ8R ÿ8
87 8
ÿ
7
N7ÿ 7768 ÿ
ÿ M R N ÿ7ÿN7ÿ
7
+ , 01<02 3 3, ÿN7
97ÿ879M ÿ N
ÿN R 8 ÿ L 7ÿ ÿ
Tÿ
XF6 1ÿ 124ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ 97 ÿ 7
R 8
fM
7 R
K
ÿ
8s ROÿ ÿ Lÿ ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ 8s 7 ÿ8
ÿ8 ÿ8ÿ8R ÿ
7 N8 ÿM O7 ÿ
7 ÿ 7L7 N
ÿ
ÿ7N R ÿO
77
8 M
7
K ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
N R 77 ÿ87ÿ
80 4R Mÿ77
R
7 8
ÿ7N
ÿ7 Q 9ÿÿ ÿ 9
7 8R R 8 ÿ1 ÿ
ÿ7 ÿ 9ÿ ÿN7R ÿ 7
P ÿ Nb ÿ
7
8
ÿ7
7ÿ8ÿ7 ÿ 8 7 7 77 ÿ87
7 87 ÿM7P
7
7R
MR
ÿ 7 ÿ Mÿ 8R R 8ÿ O ÿ 7 ROÿ ÿ7 Q 9ÿ
_7
ÿ
dN 8 7 ÿ
S 7 ÿ ÿ7 Q 9ÿÿNÿ
S ÿ ÿ M
8N R 87 S R
7ÿ 8 ÿ R 7 ÿ 7ÿ97 R9 7ÿ ÿ 7S ÿ ÿ 8ÿ
p 7
P
2 9 7 7 79
8
87
92 2 8 8 2 9
7
2 7
7 7
03
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 ÿ
877 9
79
ÿ ÿ 9
7 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 " 8# 7 ÿ87
ÿ7 ÿ$ 7 ÿ
7 ÿ ÿ 7
8 ÿ 7 " 977 ÿ87 " " " 8ÿ 8
" "" 9 7ÿ$
7 !
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ"ÿ7 & 9ÿ 88 87 ÿ
899 ÿ ÿ7ÿ ÿ87
9 ÿ %
ÿ79
97 ÿ ÿ
87
" 8
97
' ) - 012 )ÿ 7
"ÿ9ÿ7 7 7 ÿ
ÿ8" ÿ 8"
8 ÿ8" ÿ ÿ ÿ
(ÿ ./ 3ÿ " 8 ÿ ÿ !8$
ÿ ÿ5 7 ÿ 7 ÿÿ77 " 977
+,
4
4
87 ÿ87ÿ ÿ4" !ÿ
ÿ 8
7 8
ÿ87 ÿ 7 ÿ7 ÿ
ÿ ÿ
777
7 97 " 8 6 ÿ
ÿ 7ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ8 977
!
ÿ
ÿ 5
9!
6
7
ÿ7ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ8""ÿ ÿ7 & 9ÿ !7"
8 7 7 ÿ 7 ÿ87
8 88 8!
ÿ 77 ÿ 9!% # ÿ8 ÿ77 ÿ7 7 ÿ8 " 8
"
ÿ
7
ÿ
"787 ÿ87ÿ887 ÿ87ÿÿ ÿ " ÿ4" !ÿ
8
7 ÿ
ÿ ÿ7 97 " 8 7
ÿ7 97 " 8 977 ÿ 6 ÿ
ÿ 7ÿ 7
8
ÿÿ
ÿ
8
ÿ878 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ
777ÿ8 8 ÿ 9 ÿ77 "ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 8
7 ÿ7 ÿ7
!
ÿ
ÿ 5
ÿ7ÿ 8 8!
ÿ ÿ8" ÿ 9! 9
7
7
"
7
ÿ97 44 "
89! ÿ87ÿ!7:ÿ 7
"ÿ7 & 9ÿ 9ÿ ÿ 87
!
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ8 " 8 ÿ 7ÿ " 8 ÿ ÿ 7:
ÿ ÿ 7
ÿÿ
4
%
ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ "7
9 9! ÿ" 8
' ) >2 ?ÿ - 3ÿÿ7 & 9ÿ 7
77 ÿ
ÿÿ ÿ ÿ 7
;ÿ 0?2 @- A=0B
7 8ÿ" 7 ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 9!
<=3
4%
!
" 7 ÿ9"7 " 7ÿ ÿ ÿÿ7 ÿ
" ÿ 7 ÿÿ ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
7
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ
7 ÿ!
97 ÿ 8 " " ÿ ÿ
7 7
9!
4
: 7 ÿ ÿ7 & 97 ÿ 7"
8 ÿ ! 9 88!"
79! ÿ 88
" 7 ÿÿ
ÿ7 7 ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ7
7
%
9 7
ÿ
ÿÿ87ÿ ÿ
7ÿ ÿ 777 7 & 9ÿ
9! 7ÿ 7
"7 7
9 ÿ97 " 8 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ "
7ÿ ÿ 4 " 8 ÿ
ÿ
4
%
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ8 8ÿ877
8 ÿ ÿ ÿ8" "ÿ 7 7% ÿ "
7 ÿ " 8 ÿ 9 ÿ ÿ 7 7 ÿ ! ÿ
" ÿ7 & 97
ÿ
9!
ÿ
97 ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 7 7
ÿ " 7ÿ 7
"ÿ7 & 97 ÿ 7
ÿ8 ! 8 " ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 977ÿ ÿ " 8 ÿ ÿÿ
ÿ
#" !4
%
"
8 ÿ !" " ÿ ÿ ÿ7 " !" 97 ÿ
" ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ8
7 !
ÿ 97 ÿ
7 7 ÿ77
ÿ ÿ
7 ÿ 9! 97 ÿÿ ÿ "
9
! 897 7 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ "ÿ: 7 ÿ ÿ7 & 9ÿ 7 7
8 !
ÿ 7 ÿ 8!ÿ 9!
"
7 ÿ " 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
7
4
%
" !ÿ
" ÿ 77
" 7 8
7
7 ÿ!
ÿ 7ÿ ÿ8" 7
' ) <FGH+ÿ
Cÿ
DE I+<JKGHE MNÿ LDE @IME JL)
JLÿ ME LOÿ HI@HE
P78 ÿ ÿ7
! 88
7
ÿ7 "
8
ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ
!4 7
99!
8
Q
8 7 ÿ ÿ78
7 ÿ :! "ÿ 7
8ÿ
ÿ 8S
8S7
ÿ 97ÿ 8
ÿ7 "$ ÿ ÿ ÿ 97R
ÿ! ÿ ÿ 97ÿ 8
S7 8ÿT 4ÿ5 T Tÿ B ÿ W2Y2 2 ÿ./ÿ.2K2 V ]=3A\2ÿ ^ÿ 0B^Wÿ _VÿAÿ2 AV2
7ÿ 4 95 U4 T 0ÿ.2=0V VÿZ 0BB BB ÿ 1/[AA\ÿ B ^]/2]2 2ÿ =0/ 2B ^3 Z
8
E
X
3
Y ÿA\>VW ÿAÿA=^3 B3/ BA0ÿA^Wÿ 1/[AA\ÿ 30AB_2 0ÿ_VÿAÿ2 AV2/?W>=Bÿÿ 3bW.ÿA=
A=^- /0BB Y ÿ/W`-W a ÿ K2 V ./ ÿ ÿ 2 / 2B ^3 Z ÿÿ 3 2W./ ÿ B Y
`
B
/B^/B\>B01ÿAÿ 3 W A^ V cÿ ÿ/ .ÿ1^2B ^3 Z ÿ.A3 ÿ 3 2 ÿ.^ _W 01ÿ^ B/W A^
`2ÿB2 W B ?AÿAÿ \/V d 2 - / 2 ÿAÿ2 AV2B 2?W>=B3B A=1.ÿ 0?W /_W^BA0ÿ
0` Y b2
W 3 V-/\3- B^B ^B 0ÿ /- BA`12 ^V=^3 -W ÿ ÿ
ÿ 8
0ÿ\/V VW ÿA=^ÿ/.2ÿ./ W ÿA=^ÿ ÿ 02/ÿ W?WBA0) ÿ
9ÿ ÿÿ
ÿ
0ÿ
e
#8 8
7 ÿ
8
ÿ8 ÿ
7 " ÿÿ" 7 ÿ87
89 7 ""
7! ÿÿ 8
#8 ÿ 7ÿÿ7 8 8 ÿ
f ÿ8f !ÿ ÿ ÿ 8ÿ9 ÿ8ÿ
ÿ 8
8
7
" 77 ÿÿ 7 8ÿ9"87 ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ^ B/W =0?2ÿ.2 2H ^ ÿ VBX ÿ / 2A0ÿ0
ÿ "
fÿ ÿ7! ÿ7 ÿ! /_W^BA0ÿ ^B 3 ÿ2\3bWÿ/ 2>V- ÿ /
7
@0Y
V
W Z?=/ÿ 33ÿV3 ÿ^ B/W ÿ0?ÿV3 ÿ-W ÿ^ÿ ÿ ^ B2 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ
0?WW V Wg-/ 3/_W^BA03/ -/ 3/ BA03/20AB>2\WB?)
97 77
_/
h7
ÿÿ 9ÿ !77 ÿ 8
ÿ8
ÿÿ 87 ÿ ÿ 8
9ÿ ÿ
7 ÿ8 ÿ 9ÿ57 "
9 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ7
8 !
ÿ 7ÿ
8
ÿ
"
77 ÿ5 74 7 7 & 9ÿ ! ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ 8 77 ! ÿ !8887R
57 "i j4 4ÿ ÿÿ
ÿ 7 7 8ÿ8 ÿ 9ÿ7 7ÿ !
%
ÿ
8 Q ÿ 8
7ÿ % ÿ 7
977 ÿ89 7ÿ ÿ ÿÿ 8 7 ÿ !7
97
7
9ÿ7 & 9ÿ ÿ ÿ57 ÿ 8ÿ
! " 6 ÿ8 8
ÿ ÿ ÿ9
8
ÿ
8
ÿ
8 "ÿ ÿ ÿÿ 8
7 ÿ " !
k 7ÿ7ÿ 9
8
7 " 9ÿ7 & 9ÿ !! ÿ 8ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ8 R
" 88 8 7ÿÿ57 ÿ7 7 ÿÿ 9 7 ÿ9 ÿ 7 8
%
8
8ÿ ÿ !! 887ÿ !ÿÿ8 88 ÿ 87Rÿ 7ÿÿ 7 ÿ "ÿ ÿ
" " ÿÿ ÿ !8ÿ 9
ÿ7ÿ7
7 !
ÿ8 8 8
! ÿ9
7
8
7 8 ÿ ÿ7 & 9ÿ
8"! ÿ ÿ7ÿ 7"
87ÿ
7 ÿ
7 ÿ 7
%
7
l ÿ !
7 : ÿ" 7 7ÿ7 7
ÿ ÿ ÿ8 97 ! 8
9ÿ ÿ 7 7 " ÿ
8ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7ÿ
7
@^ B/W @1^2 0B
_W^BA0ÿ 2 \2 m
89% "! ÿ7 ÿ ÿ87/V 3 2 ÿ0?ÿVW ÿ7 7
8ÿÿ7 7
ÿ7 & 9ÿ ÿ 87 ÿV?W>=B3/ -/\3 7 ÿ ÿ7 7
ÿ8 86
8 ÿ
8 ÿ
ÿ
"9
7 87ÿ877 7 ÿ ÿ7 "!88"ÿÿ
ÿ
!7ÿ
7ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ8ÿ 7 " " ÿ8 ÿ 777 7
"
8
4 7
ÿ
7
9
9
88ÿ ÿ
7
ÿ7 7 ÿ
ÿ 7 8
ÿ8 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ! ÿ ÿ 78
ÿ7 7 7 7
"ÿ 8778 "ÿ
7 8
ÿ8 ! 8 !
7 ÿ 87
7ÿ 7 877 7 ÿ ÿ7ÿ ÿ 7 8t
ÿ ÿ
9
7
9
ÿ8
ÿ7 777 ÿ ÿ8 86 8 ÿ " 7 ÿ9"7
ÿ 7
8ÿ
ÿ8 ! ÿ79
8 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ9
7
8ÿ"7t
7 ÿ 8 9
9
ÿ8ÿ 87 ÿ 7
7
8 "
ÿ ! ÿ8ÿ
ÿ 7 8 ÿ fÿ ÿ 87 ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
!
97 7ÿ
ÿ7"
ÿ
ÿ 9 8 ÿ 87 ÿ
t "
9
ÿ !7878 ÿ 776 8
ÿ ÿ8 ÿ
ÿ ÿ 9 ÿ
ÿ79
9
7 7
n ÿ 7 8 7ÿ
#8 #7 97 8
8 7ÿ ÿ% oo 7ÿ ÿ
ÿ " ÿ 8
8 ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ 87 7777
o7 & 97ÿ! o "o o 7
8
ÿ
8
77
8
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ9 7
ÿ
ÿ7
ÿ8"
ÿ8
7
7 ÿ
" 7
77 7 7 !77 7
8 87 7 77
8ÿ 77
7 7
7
87 ÿ
7
7
7 ÿ8 7 ÿ
8ÿ8
8
ÿ7
ÿ "
ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 " ÿ 8 " 7
ÿ7 7 ÿ
87ÿ8
ÿ ÿ
7
7ÿ 7768 ÿ8 !8 87
7 ÿ
ÿ
8
" 7 8ÿ ÿ9"7
8" ÿ " 8
ÿ79
ÿ ÿ8 ÿ7 97 ÿ7 7 7 ÿ 7ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ
p7 7 7
7 97 ÿÿ 7ÿ " 97
ÿ " ÿ
7 ÿ
q
" ÿ 7
8 ÿ7ÿÿ ! ÿ"" ÿ ÿ9 ÿ 8
ÿ 7 7 8 8!9ÿ8 ÿ ÿ
9
6
7
ÿ
ÿ
87 ÿ
8 " ÿ 8 ÿ
7ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ " 8
7ÿ8
8 ÿ7 97 7ÿ ÿ 7 7! ÿ8
ÿ ÿ
7 777 ÿ
8
"
7
ÿ
7 7 ÿ
ÿÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ7 :8
ÿ
ÿ 8 ÿA=ÿ1^2B Bÿ
ÿ 7 7ÿ 7
ÿ 7 7ÿ7ÿ ÿ ! ÿ7
N / 2 ÿ./d
7
_Y
2 2W W Aÿ.2 2H ^ d A=ÿ0?ÿ 1/[AA\ÿ^ÿ/ .ÿ WW B ÿW ÿAÿÿ^/ÿ ÿ YA^B
0B^01ÿ B 3 ÿ2\3ÿ / K2 V /22 - b/Z01ÿ.2^1.BB /BWV e ÿ ÿA
0B
Y
_Y =^
>/B->/2W /-/ 3/ BA0) 7768 ÿ" 7
ÿ ÿ
ÿÿ8ÿ 87
^WW Bÿ ÿV3 ÿ-W ÿ
ÿ79
77 ÿÿ ÿ8 7
77
79977
0ÿ
6
8
7
"
7n7 7ÿ #ÿr##sÿ 7 ÿ 788 "7
87 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ " 8 ÿ n 9 8
ÿ 77 ÿ ÿ 97 ÿ ÿ8
#8 8 8
6
ÿ 878 ÿ 7768
8 ÿ8
ÿ
ÿ 9 ÿ
ÿ79
8
7
2 9 7 7 79
8
87
92 2 8 8 2 9
7
2 7
7 7
13
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 ÿ
877 9
79
ÿ ÿ 9
7 ÿ
!ÿ 8$ ÿ
ÿ7 &! 9'7 %ÿ$) ÿ7%9 8 * 7 ÿ
'7
"#ÿÿ 7 %ÿ
7ÿ8 ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ ( ÿ 87 ÿ ÿÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
8
!
( +
, 7"ÿ 7 8 8$ÿ * 7ÿ7 . 9ÿ '%! ÿ% 8
7 ÿ 7 ÿ
'7ÿ 8
* ,ÿ ÿ7ÿ ÿ -
ÿ7 %7
% ÿ ÿ
( 7
#ÿ
* + /7
0 7( 7 . 9 ÿ ( 4 ÿ 828 ÿ 0ÿ 8/ 7ÿ 3 1 7, 7
'
- 9( 0 0* ÿ %2%(03 ( 7 % ( 0 4 ÿ ÿ*
ÿ
1 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
0#ÿ
#% 8
, 7* 79'ÿ777 8ÿ ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ!ÿ7ÿ 87
%7
"ÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ "%
8 ÿ ÿ'7 %!
ÿ 79ÿ8%
'7 % "
ÿ
6
!
78
, 9 %"ÿÿ7 . 9ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 87 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 79
ÿ7ÿ ' ÿ+7 ,
%$'% ÿ ÿ ÿ7 97 8
7 ÿ
7
18
ÿ4% $ÿ
87* 7ÿ77%ÿ ÿ8- 9ÿ 7 ÿ8 7 %
ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ 87 ( ' ÿ7 . 9ÿ $997 ÿ ! ÿ87
7
$
8
+'7! ÿ 7 '
ÿ797
89 7!ÿ7 . 9ÿ8$'
ÿ7%
%
8 ÿ ÿ8 ( ÿ9 ÿ ÿ $
7 ÿ
ÿ % ÿ$- ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
8
7
ÿ !
ÿ 7! ÿ 87! ÿ7797ÿ 7 ' $ÿ ÿ $' ÿ7 . 9ÿÿ 7
ÿ8 8' ÿ
ÿ ÿ8 8% 8
ÿ9 (
( ÿ ÿ8- 7 %
8 7 8
ÿÿ
4 '9ÿ ÿ8ÿÿ 8 * 7
9 !
8 %
ÿ $% % ÿ $
9ÿ ÿ 9ÿ 2 928 9
8 2 7
8
4 '9ÿ ÿ8ÿÿ 8 ÿ7!
7###ÿ !ÿ
ÿ $% % ÿ $
9ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 9ÿ ÿ 7
8 8
7
%82 2 % #+86/9 0 ; 4ÿ6 8ÿÿÿ7 7
8
808ÿ77 (
2 8 5+36 7
2
4 : 1 77
8ÿ 9ÿ ÿ 8
%
ÿ!7 ÿ 7###<ÿ !ÿ %82 2 % #+86/9 0 ; 1"
ÿ ÿ
7
ÿ 2 8 5+36 7
7 2
4:1
ÿ 8- 87ÿ 7ÿ 7* 7#% 8
ÿ ÿ ÿ7997 %! ÿÿ
"#
ÿ7 . 9ÿ77
ÿ ÿ ÿ %7
' ÿ 7 ÿ8 (
7
$
8
ÿ79! 87$'
8$'ÿ97
ÿ
7ÿ 7
$'ÿ ÿ 89 7 ÿ5 (4
898 '
ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 $ ÿ ÿ 7
ÿ (
ÿ 89ÿ
ÿ 8ÿ = :4 4
$
7 '
0'8 ( ÿ
7
8 ' 87 ÿ8 ÿÿ1 4ÿ'ÿ ÿÿ' >ÿ ÿ 7!ÿ 7
87 ÿ 7
ÿ ÿ ÿ
97 %!
= 4 (
!7 ÿ$
$ 7
8
!
! 7
ÿ8ÿ !7ÿÿ ÿ 7ÿ7 . 9ÿ $%8ÿ
88 8
8 ÿ8% 81$'7' ÿ $
( ÿÿÿ ÿ77 ÿÿ 7
8
ÿÿ
7 7$ 7
8? 7 ÿ 7#% 8
ÿ 7! ÿ7 87 ÿ$70
97ÿ ! 8'7ÿ7,
7 '
ÿ ÿ 7* ÿ %7
"6 ÿ8 ÿ ! ÿ 7 %!ÿ ÿ ' 8#8 ÿ
ÿ###
8
8
8'7,ÿ
ÿ 8 ÿ ! #
7, "ÿ
9 7 ÿ$7768 ( ÿ !
" ÿ 7#97 #8 ÿ
ÿ ÿ###,( ÿ %
%!ÿ
ÿ79
ÿ % ÿ7
8
98%!ÿ 7### 7###ÿ
7!7 7ÿ 8 8ÿ8!ÿ7###ÿ 4
%
77 ÿ$ ÿ ÿ ÿ 8'7ÿ8ÿ ÿ ÿ % ÿ$ ÿ ÿ ÿ ; 4
6
0
5 ;5 5 4 '9ÿ!
8 ÿ8 7
%87 ÿ ÿ $8( %
5 ; 3ÿ ÿ $ ÿ 9 ÿ! 'ÿ 7! ÿ8
ÿ % 7
ÿ'
8
7
8 8% ÿ 7ÿ7 . 9( 9 !
8
9 ÿ! 'ÿ ÿ - ÿ ÿ 2 928 9 %
2 7
8 "
6 ÿ8 ÿÿ ÿ$7768 #
7ÿ8ÿ 87! ÿ ÿ77ÿ@7
'
8
7! 8! ' %!ÿ
ÿ79
ÿ
'
7
ÿ ÿ8 8 % % ( ÿ ÿ
7ÿ7
8
ÿÿ
8
7
ÿ 7
7ÿ ( ÿ88 ÿ 7! %7
7ÿ (
ÿ (
87 !$ÿ %77 ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ8
ÿ ÿ ÿ (
87 !$ÿ %
7
8
7
88 ÿ 8 ÿ
ÿ8ÿ 87' % % ) 7
- %$' 87 8
(
77 ÿ
8 "7
ÿ ÿ 8ÿ ÿ77ÿ
ÿ7 . 9ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ7 7ÿ $
ÿ
! ÿ &ÿÿÿ 7' ÿ ÿÿ
8 % 8
89ÿÿ 8
8 ÿ7 8
ÿ 77 ÿ $ 8 8 " ÿ 'ÿ ÿ %7
ÿÿ 'ÿ
8
$
1$
= 44 4 ÿ
( ÿ $
ÿ 7 87! ÿ7 '%
ÿ 7!
ÿ '
0 (4 ÿ8
ÿ '9ÿ 7 7ÿ ÿ8 ÿ ! ÿ % 7 ÿ 7$ ÿ ÿÿ
97
7 $
8
%
! %ÿ 7! ( $ ÿ7 8 ÿ8!ÿ 7
ÿ
%!ÿ 7###
' 97 ÿ ÿ8 8!ÿÿ 7 ( ÿ$ ÿ 8 ÿ7 8 ÿ
7! 7 ÿ$ ÿ
8 ÿ 7
8'7
ÿ 7ÿ87 ÿ7ÿÿ7
ÿ$ 7ÿ ÿ $
ÿ ÿ7 ÿ $!
ÿÿ '
ÿ 7 %7 8 8 ÿ8!ÿ 7 ( 9ÿ 7 8
% ÿ$
1$
7
7
7 ÿ' 9
89ÿ@7 %ÿ0 (4 ( ÿ 8'7ÿ % 8 ÿ 7 8$' ÿ
77 ÿ8
!
ÿÿ 'ÿ 77
= 44 4ÿ 7###ÿ
ÿ7797 7ÿ ÿ7
1$
8 ÿ ÿÿ7 8 ÿ 7 8
87ÿÿ ÿ8 ÿÿ ÿ89( 77ÿÿ 8ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ7 ÿ $! ÿ
%
'7 ÿ ÿ 8 8$ ÿ7$
6 7
8
7
ÿ
ÿ $ 8ÿ8
% ÿ
8
ÿ
9 7ÿ ÿ7ÿ8 ÿ
8'77
ÿ ÿ % ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ' ÿ ÿ % ÿ $ 8! ÿ
$
7
8
%
'7 ÿ ÿ - ÿÿ ÿ
8
ÿ8% %
8 8( 7 . 9ÿ
ÿ89ÿ ÿ7 . 9ÿ
8$ÿ 7 ÿ7 7 7 ÿ ÿ77 ÿ
A@
$
ÿ%
8 ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 7ÿ 8 $! 7 ÿÿ % 7 ÿ 7 7
ÿ###ÿ ( 9 ( %! 8
ÿ ÿ8 ÿ %8 ÿ ÿ
ÿ
8 7
8
8? 97 ÿ!
77( ÿ8 ÿ
ÿ7ÿ 7
! 7 ÿ 89ÿ878
7 '8
7ÿ( 87! 8
%ÿ 8 ÿ'
ÿ
'ÿ ÿ ÿ7
7
1ÿ
ÿ 8 7
$
7
' ÿÿ 7+7 ÿÿ
ÿ8' ÿ 8 ÿ 8 8 8 7 ÿ '7 ÿ$7
% 8
ÿ 9 %
'ÿ8! ÿ 7ÿ'
ÿ
97
8%!ÿ ÿ %ÿ7
8
9
8ÿ % 8 ÿ
7 '70 !"ÿ 7 ÿ 7 $ ÿ
ÿ 7ÿ ! ÿ 7 %!ÿ 7###
ÿ 37 7ÿ 7 ÿ 58% 8ÿ0 "( ÿ97 ÿ'
ÿ7 87 ÿ$ ÿ
8' 0 ÿ
ÿ 7
8'7
ÿ7ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ79! 87-
8 7ÿ8
$%
'
%!ÿÿ ÿ8
ÿ ÿ'
( ' 87 8 '
ÿ7 . 9ÿ ÿ9
7'ÿ! 87 ÿ$ 7
1
$
ÿ
8
ÿ 8 ÿÿ 7ÿ 7###ÿ
ÿ ÿ% (
ÿ7 ÿ8 ÿ $'
7 7$'ÿ! ÿ $' % 8 ÿ 8'7 % ÿÿ 'ÿ ! ÿ ÿ
1 $
8
7ÿ7
' %ÿ 8ÿ ÿ5 (4 ÿ7' 87Bÿ 7ÿ ÿ@7
( ÿ 97
ÿ 7
7 &8 ÿ 7 ÿ 7 = :4 4 @% ÿ $
%7 7"ÿ 7 $ ÿ ÿ 77
7
9
7
7
ÿ7 87 ÿ$7###ÿ'7
! ÿ 7 %!ÿ ÿ 8
%ÿ(
8
% ÿÿ 8
8ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 797ÿ
89( ÿ8 ÿ
7ÿ ÿ 8
"1ÿ ÿ $'ÿ ÿ $8
7 ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ 'ÿ ÿ 7! 8 '
$' ÿ %
7
$
8
ÿÿ87ÿ ÿ 77 ÿ7 . 9<ÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ797
89 7!
8ÿ ! ÿ
7 8 ÿ' ÿ
7 ÿ
ÿ % ÿ7 7 ÿ8 8
8 7
8
7 ( -
77%ÿ 7 ÿ7 . 9ÿ
$$'77ÿ 7 '
ÿ % ÿ14 4 , ÿ87 $ ,( 8
ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ9 ÿ ÿ 7 8ÿ8= (4 ÿ7 ÿ97 "ÿ 77ÿ
7
7 8ÿ
87H %
$$'ÿ 87(
( ÿ9 ÿ
87<ÿ 7( ÿ79! 87 $7 7
ÿ 8 $ÿÿ $ÿ 7 ' ÿ $
ÿ %8 '
ÿ ÿ@7
7
' 7 8ÿ 7
7ÿ ÿ "ÿ ÿ 887ÿ7
!$'
8
% ÿ@7
ÿ
%
( 'ÿ $8 ÿ87ÿ
7
$
ÿ8 8 ÿ ÿ'
$'ÿ ÿ8 7, 87<ÿ97 "
7 ( 7 ( % 8' ÿ 89ÿ ! ÿ ÿ $
$ ,
8
1- %% &ÿÿ 7 ÿ
8ÿ7ÿ 7%
'7!
8ÿ ! ÿ
7 ( ÿ ÿ 8
7 . 9ÿÿ ÿ 7 8
ÿ
7 ÿ ÿ7 7 ÿ8 8 ÿ77%ÿ ' %$'
ÿ
9
7
8
$
87ÿ ! ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ77ÿ 787 $ ÿ ÿ 787<ÿ 7(7 7$ÿÿ 7
$ ÿ77 % 87 ÿ ÿ97 % ÿ $
ÿ
7 (
7
7 8
! ÿ %ÿ ÿ ÿ7
797 7! ÿ $978ÿ ÿ7 ÿ
ÿ ÿ 7
8 8 8
$' $8 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ8 89ÿ &ÿ'
%8
7%
'7ÿ
8
7 6 8
$ ÿ ÿ79! 87 ÿ
7
ÿ@7
ÿ ÿ 787 $ ÿ ÿ 787<ÿ 7ÿ
97 %8 '
97 ÿ 7( 7( % ÿ ÿ97 % ÿ $
ÿ $
7
7
7
ÿ'7 7 % ÿ ÿ 8? 789ÿ7ÿÿ % ÿ ÿC% $ÿ
ÿ8 <ÿ'
% 8 ÿ ÿ87 %' ÿ7 '
ÿ 7 8 8$9 7 0 ÿ
ÿ 7! 8 8
97
8
ÿ 797
7ÿ 8ÿ ÿ' 7ÿ 87Bÿ 7ÿ87 7ÿÿ87ÿ ÿ 7
ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
7
ÿ 7 8 ÿ % %
$
ÿ@7
7 8
1
7
7 ÿ7 . 9Bÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ797
87! ÿ ' 7ÿÿ8 8' ÿ $
' ÿ
7 ÿ
( ÿ8 8
% ÿ
ÿ7ÿ
8 7 ÿ 8
ÿ
77 ÿ ÿ 87Bÿ 7ÿ87 7ÿ ÿ7
!$87 ÿÿ ÿ 7!
ÿ' ÿ
$ $
ÿ@7
$'8 ÿ '8% 7 ÿ ÿ8
7
8
7 % ÿ7 7-
7 ÿ
8
87 !
8ÿ7 . 9Bÿ797
7
7ÿ 78 ÿ ÿ 87<ÿ 7ÿ ÿ@7
%
'
%ÿ 8 ÿ%ÿ' 7
$8 ÿ ÿ 87<
"6 ÿ $
%7 7ÿ
7 ÿ 8 "
97 ÿ ÿ $
7
7ÿ ÿ@7
$'9ÿ7' % 8 ÿ '(
ÿ '%! ÿ 7 ÿ ÿÿ87ÿ9
7
%7 7ÿ ÿ $ ÿ 7ÿ !7 ÿ
ÿÿ ' ÿ77 % 8 '
6 $
' % 8 ÿ (
% 7ÿ ÿ8' 77! ÿ 8$'ÿ9
7ÿ !7 ÿ ÿ8
ÿ
7% ÿ ÿ8 8
9ÿ % ÿ ÿ '
8 8
D 8$'9ÿ ÿ7 7ÿ' 7 8
ÿ 87<ÿ 7ÿ8
ÿ ÿ 7ÿ ÿ
77( ÿ $ 8% ÿ %ÿ
$
ÿ ' ' % 8
97
ÿ
8
7
#
- 9ÿ78 ÿ ÿ 8ÿ
87<ÿ 7ÿ ÿ@7
7ÿÿ !
7 . 9ÿ $ ÿÿ ÿ % ÿ $
%7 7ÿÿÿ8 ÿ8
7
8
7 % ( 7 . 9ÿ 7 &
ÿ 8
87 ÿ ÿ ÿ 7ÿ' ÿ %
ÿ 7! ÿ $ 8ÿ> 78
$ÿ 8 ÿ 7%% ÿÿ7 & ÿ7
ÿ $ÿ 7
"6 ÿ8 89ÿ %' ÿ7ÿ ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ' 8$
78 ÿ % ÿ
8
7
7
7 ÿ77
8ÿ ÿ8% ÿ7
8 %!ÿ ÿ<ÿ%% ÿ ÿ #*+ÿA/#- #/8AA
@7
$ 78 ÿ 8 7 ÿ$ 8$
' 9
7
4E)ÿ - .EEFÿ
6D# A#0Dÿ 4ÿ */ÿ #1 #/#1 6DAÿ
6ÿ F# 281 0- Fÿ *6ÿ E6DA8ÿ 4ÿ 4E)8ÿ 1 1 G1
E*- 1
*ÿ E8ÿ *+1 +)#6ÿ
0#5 61 #*+ÿ #ÿ #1 33ÿ 0- FAF2A8ÿ #*4ÿ
#01 Aÿ *E6ÿ 5- *61 E8ÿ #ÿ
1 5)85E86A+ÿ #ÿ
*ÿ
0- E8
8A58AA*6 61 58E0AA+1 E8ÿ 6DAÿ #01 E3ÿ 581# # E8*A4ÿ
# GAÿ
*/ÿ 1 0#5 64ÿ #ÿ G 6Aÿ66
*ÿ
/A*A8#-ÿ 8 8
7(
3'
'
ÿ $' %- 87 8
( ÿ8 ÿ $
79 7 ÿ ÿ7
7
! ÿ ÿ ÿ7 . 9ÿ7 ÿ7 7ÿ 7! 89ÿ ÿ ÿ 8ÿ 7 8 <
8
%
2 9 7 7 79
8
87
92 2 8 8 2 9
7
2 7
7 7
3
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 ÿ
877 9
79
ÿ ÿ 9
7 ÿ
9
ÿ ÿ " 7 777 7ÿ ÿ 8 ÿÿ7 8
7 ÿ
ÿ87 ÿ 7#
!9ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ8
! ÿ8 "
9ÿ
877 ÿ8
7 ! ÿ8 8
6 8
9ÿ ! "8
ÿ 8ÿ ÿ !ÿÿ!! 7 ÿ ÿ 79 ÿ $!
ÿ7
" 8ÿ ÿ7ÿ ÿ $ $! 8ÿ
$ ! ÿ ÿ ! ÿ ÿ
8
7
7
8%77ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ "
7ÿ !! 7 ÿ7
$!
ÿ7ÿ$97
ÿ
$97
ÿ 8"$ 8 79ÿ7 & $ !8 ÿ ÿ ÿ
8
8'
ÿ
7 7
ÿÿ
$ 77ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ8$ 7ÿ 97
ÿ
8
ÿ
ÿ
8ÿ !
#7 7!
7
87 ÿ ÿ " ÿ ÿ 8 (ÿ9
ÿ
!
8$ÿ
88
7 ÿ ÿ ) ÿ "ÿ ÿ
ÿ7
8!
7# !9
89ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 9ÿ ! ÿ 9*9$ ÿ777 ÿ 9ÿ ÿ8 ÿ ÿ "
7
#
8 8
# ÿ8$ ÿÿ 8
7# $
)*'7 $ !
$777
, -4 4 ÿ7ÿÿ7 &ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ. 78
77ÿ
ÿÿ ÿ9 ÿÿ ÿ+7 !ÿ5 4 ÿ87 8 8"
7
"
9ÿ
$ ÿ7 ÿ 8 8"
7
9ÿ 7 ÿ !ÿÿ 87# ÿ 7ÿ!
77 ÿ"///ÿ" 8 7 ÿ 7
" ÿ 7 8ÿ 7 8 8 98!#ÿ #ÿÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
ÿ
8
")4ÿ
7! ÿ
8ÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ8 8 ÿ ! ÿ. 78
#
8 ÿ0 *! "ÿ 9ÿ ÿ7 ÿ " ÿ 7 8 # ÿ !ÿ 8ÿ
$ ÿ7ÿ 7
8
7 8
/
7
ÿ
7 ÿ$ "
ÿ 7 6 ÿ 9# 8ÿ
ÿ 87# ÿ 7ÿ # ÿ77!8ÿ
"!! 8 ÿ ÿ$ 797 7
ÿ 7 7 8 8 7
7 ÿ ! ÿ ///
ÿ
8
ÿ
8
ÿ 787# ÿ 7ÿ
7ÿ7 ÿ ÿ$ !7 ÿ ÿ ")1 *! "ÿ
ÿ7
$7 ÿ 7 8 8
$ ÿ
!
ÿ 7 8! ! ÿ0 4ÿ
ÿ 7!
6
8
ÿ
7
ÿ 7 8"
7 ÿ 7 6 ÿ7 ÿ 787# ÿ 7ÿ # ÿ ÿ!
ÿ 7 ÿ(ÿ ÿ
7!
ÿ
ÿ 7 8 8 7
ÿ !#
ÿ
8
ÿ
#7 "8 ÿ
$ 7 ÿ ÿ+
$ ! 871
$ .ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ!ÿ 7 ÿ 7ÿ ÿ//
. 8 7
)*%
! ÿ ÿ8
ÿÿ 7 ÿ79
ÿ 7 88ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ &ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ " ÿ #768 ÿ ÿ " 7 87
97 "
$7
7
$
ÿ ÿ ÿ8 )7ÿ ÿÿ 7ÿ ÿ 7 !7
ÿ #ÿ ÿ8 7
7
# ÿ8
ÿ 8 ÿ " ÿ! 8
7
& ÿ 7
8
7 7
9# 8 7 ÿ77 ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
7 ! 8 7 ÿ 7
$ 7ÿ8! ! 8* ÿ " "!
$7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
7
7! ÿ
ÿ 7ÿ 8 7 ÿÿ ÿ7 &ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ8 ÿ ÿ$8
ÿ7 ÿ 7 7 8 7
7ÿ 97
# ÿ8
"
ÿ 9
7
2
7
8
7
ÿ ÿ77
7$ ÿ7
ÿ ")4ÿ
8 8 7 ÿ$8 ÿ8! !ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ8 ÿ0 *! "ÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
ÿ 9 ÿ 7 ÿ "$
# 7
7
7
!
ÿ77
7ÿ ÿ
ÿ8
ÿ8 8ÿ 7! ÿ
79
ÿ ÿ
ÿ
!
$7ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 8
ÿ # 7
3 589;< 8:?<85
4ÿ :< ÿ ;
7 =>
)*@A;BB;B ÿ 7F '
ÿ ÿ7I ÿ Iÿÿ#7ÿÿ$7
ÿ < D :E85 ÿ7 G 9ÿ ) ÿ'
* ÿ
8
ÿ
C
6
97 H
97 H
88 F $ÿ87 ÿ 1 4 ÿ 8
ÿ7ÿ7 G 9ÿ8!
!ÿ 4 ÿ89 7
,
)*JBB ÿ ÿÿ 7'
ÿ ÿ 87 ÿ ÿ &ÿ ÿ97 7I
#ÿ <8K5 ÿ ÿ ' 9ÿ7 97 ÿ " ÿ ÿ'
< L" 97 H ÿ
)
'
ÿ " Iÿ !7" ' ÿ ÿ87ÿ8 ÿ ÿ97 ÿ 8#ÿ$ 87
97 * ÿ 7 ÿ79" ! 8 ÿ 79" " ÿ ÿ77 "
97 H
997
ÿ
'
F ÿ 879"7 8ÿ 8 ÿ! ÿ
ÿ 8+97"ÿ$ÿ ÿ7 7ÿ 7
7 G 9ÿ ÿ ÿ8!!
ÿ ! ÿ #
8 ÿ8
ÿ 97
#
!
ÿ 8
) ÿ'
ÿ ÿ Iÿ
ÿ ÿ
ÿ "
ÿ7 !9 ÿ 7
8 ÿ7 ÿ I M7* ÿ 7' 97 '9"
7
97 L
' 97 H ÿÿ
8
ÿ7ÿ 71 ÿ 8$ 0
ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ '
ÿ ÿ ÿ 89
ÿ 7
$7! ÿ ÿ ÿ3 ÿ0 " ÿ "9 ÿ M7
ÿ ÿ
8
!
97 L
7
! "ÿ
ÿ 7
ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ97 # ÿ
ÿ ÿ9 ÿ+7
ÿ
ÿ ÿ " ÿ 79 " ÿ 7 ÿ 7
97 $ 7ÿ ÿÿ 7
ÿ !
N
ÿ
8
ÿ87! 7ÿ ÿ777 ÿÿ 87 8
ÿ ÿ ÿ97 $ 7
$7 ÿ
! ÿ " 7 ÿ 9"
ÿ
" ÿ ! ÿ
!
97
ÿ
$ ÿ 7
!ÿ9ÿÿ ÿ$
! ÿ ÿ ÿ97 $8
$
! ÿ9
ÿ$ ! 8 ÿ ÿ " "9" # 7ÿ " ÿ $ÿ8
'
'
! 87
! ÿ
)*O>; :ÿÿ ÿ8!!ÿ77 ÿ 87ÿ7 G 9ÿ "97$ ÿ ÿÿ 9
ÿÿ
ÿ CA<5
7 8ÿ ! ! ' 7 ÿ 9ÿ &ÿ
7 ÿ #
'9" ÿ
ÿ F
7
8ÿ80 ÿÿ7!ÿÿ89 ÿ7 ÿ 7
ÿ97 7 ÿ 7 ÿ97
! 7ÿ
! 7ÿÿ4! " 8
ÿ7 ÿ !
$ ÿ7 ! " ÿ ÿ 8 " ÿÿ$ '
''
ÿ
!
7F ÿ 87# ÿ 7
ÿ ÿ ÿ97 9
ÿ ÿ8!!ÿÿ 87
$ 8 ÿ7 G 9ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ! !8 " ÿ $ ÿ 9"7 8
7
!
ÿ '
9
ÿ 879"8ÿ8ÿ $
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ7
$ ÿ$ ! 8 ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ!7$
7
$ÿ !9"$ 789 ÿ ! ' 7
!
7
#
ÿ
F 9ÿ7 9 ÿ ÿ ÿ8! $7 $ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ97 ÿ
7
7 G 9ÿ "8 8ÿ
8 ÿ# $ÿ $ 7 # 8
! 7 "
9
!
9"
ÿ
"
ÿ ÿ7ÿ7 ÿ "# ÿ77 ÿÿ ÿ8!7 ' 7
!ÿ7 G 9ÿ "8
8
97 ! 8!
$9ÿ78
!9"7 8 8ÿ ! 8 ÿ 9ÿ7
7
ÿ ÿ$
F
9" ÿ ÿ$7 8F $ÿÿ ! P 7 " " ÿ 7
!
ÿ#" 8
ÿ7ÿ7 G 9ÿ8!
' 9ÿ7 $ ÿ ÿ ÿ97 ' ! 8 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ$
F 9ÿ &ÿ
8
ÿ ÿÿ7P 7 97 ' 7
!ÿÿ# ÿ7 G 9ÿ
7 G 9ÿ "977
ÿ ! $ ÿ " ÿ ! 8 ÿ
ÿ7 7F
7
ÿ$
' 7
8 87 ÿ8ÿ
8 ÿÿ
97ÿ7 7 ÿ9ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿ
8Q7
7 ! $7 9 ÿ $ 88 8 ÿ "' "7F Q$97ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
Q7 8ÿR 4ÿ5 R R !F ÿ
7798' 7
!ÿ7 G 9ÿ "
7ÿ 4 *5 04 R ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ! 8 ÿ 9
)
7 ÿ$
F
ÿÿ8 897 ÿ
7
"
ÿ7ÿ ÿÿ ÿ8 88
87
7 7 ÿ ÿ "
ÿ ÿ97 ÿ
!
ÿ7ÿ7
ÿ
8 7 I $I
7 ! 87
ÿ " ÿ
8
$ ! 87768 ÿ
87
97 $ÿ9 ÿ ÿ
ÿ ÿ 7ÿ
ÿ79
ÿ
7
)*S: >UTVB5ÿ 7
!ÿÿ ÿÿ7 G 9ÿ8ÿ8!7 $
8ÿ8! #
!ÿ ETÿ > :ÿ$ ! 8 ÿ
ÿ7F
77 ÿ ÿ9 ÿ ÿ ÿ 77 ÿ7
'
'
ÿ
! ! 7 ÿ 9"$77#
8ÿ
ÿ97 9
7$7 77
7 $!
9ÿ ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ8 ÿ7 7 " ÿ $ ÿ8ÿ!ÿ 8ÿ8!
8
97
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ 7, 4 ÿ 9$ 8
ÿ87 8 $'' ÿ ÿ ÿÿ8ÿ8!
$ !8
ÿ $ ÿ1 49 9ÿ$7 ÿ7ÿ8!
ÿ "
77
7 ÿ
ÿÿ
ÿ
7
9"7 8 ÿÿ 7'
ÿ ÿ9ÿ
ÿ" ÿ 7F Q$97ÿ 8ÿ 7ÿR 4
ÿ ÿ ' "! ÿ #ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿ
8Q7Q7 8ÿ 4 *
97 97 H ÿ
)
5 04 R
5 R R
)*WE:D ÿ ÿ E=;Bÿ <8K5 7 G 9ÿ "
ÿÿ7 7ÿ9 77 !7
ÿ7 !
8
7ÿ B>ECXA: :DJBB ÿ 9ÿ7 !89! 87 ÿ ÿ9! 8
ÿ
8ÿ
< F
ÿ ÿ
8
9"$ 7 79"'
ÿ ÿ
ÿ& 7 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ 7ÿ8! !ÿ
ÿ ÿ
8ÿ ÿ M7ÿ ! 7 ! 87
ÿ 7 ÿ
#
97 L
'
$
ÿ "ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿÿ ÿ#7 ÿ88P !ÿ8! ÿ$ 7ÿ& 7 ÿ ÿ7
87" !F ! ÿ7 $8 ÿ 7
ÿ ÿ ! 7 ! 87
7
'
ÿ9"
8ÿ ÿ7 !ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ77 ÿ8)7
8ÿ
7 G 9ÿ ÿ7 !77 ! 7
* ÿ 7 8 )*9" #" 87 ÿ* ÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ ÿ9
)ÿ $
ÿ $ F
ÿ
87 "#" ÿ 7 8ÿ
7 G 9ÿ8 " ÿ7ÿ8! 8
ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 8"
87 7
F
!
)*OBYA:Vÿ T 9ÿ$ ! 8 ÿ ÿÿ!
$7 ÿ ÿ ÿ8!!ÿ
ÿ ÿ7 G 9
ÿ 9 > UZ;K> 5ÿ 7
!
ÿ ÿÿ 87 9"7 8 ' $!7F
'
'
ÿ ÿ
ÿ
Q$97ÿ 8ÿ 7ÿ !7"ÿR 4ÿ5 R R !F ÿ
7798
8Q7Q7 8 ÿ 4 *5 04 R ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
997
)
7
)*XD EA8:7 ET :E85ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿ !7" ÿ ÿ 7ÿ ÿ ÿ8!! 9# 8
ÿ D ÿ =;B ÿ 87 "F ÿ
"
9"7 8ÿ$ 7
8C
'
997
ÿ
ÿ+ ! ÿ 289"# ÿ! 8
ÿ89"7 8ÿ+
ÿÿ !
8 "8
78 ÿ7 ! ÿ ÿ !7
ÿÿ ÿ8!!78 ÿ8 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ7
ÿ
ÿ
7
7
'
$ ! 8 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ 8ÿ ÿ8! ÿ7 G 9ÿ ÿ$7ÿ ÿ ÿ$8 ÿ
8 8
ÿ
7
!
7 7F 8 977 !87 9 ÿ7$
9"$
! P 7 97 ÿ7 G 9ÿ "8
8 ÿ#"ÿ$7 8F $ÿ7
7 $ ÿ "
F 9ÿ7ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ7ÿ7 G 9ÿ8!
8 8
9"
8
! P 7 ÿ ÿ8! $7 $ ÿ 28 8$ ÿ 8 8 7
8
9 ÿ# $ÿ ÿ7 $ " 7 # 8
! ÿ$
7
7ÿ ÿ
ÿ
$
7
)*SA[9 TY:E8ÿ EVAD9ÿ 8
# $ÿ
8 7'
ÿ ÿ7 G 9ÿ77
7
ÿ DB B ?T :5 ÿ$
8 ÿ8!
ÿ ÿ F 8
87ÿ
1
7 97 H
8 ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ7
ÿ$
8 #
0 ÿ
89
!
ÿ97
97
ÿ
# ÿ7 7ÿ0! "ÿ
ÿÿ
7 ÿ "
7
7
97
3 5 < ]> 9ÿ ÿ
8
ÿ 7 ÿ !88
7ÿ "$ 7 " ÿ ÿ ! 8
\ÿ B > 5 7 ÿ7 7 !
ÿ ÿ7 ! ÿ
9ÿ ! ÿ9 ! 8ÿ8 #7
7
]B8Kÿ N+
7
ÿ
7
7ÿ " !!
87
7 ÿ ÿ77
7 ÿÿ7 ÿ$ 7 ÿ
$ ÿ ÿ ÿ 9 ÿ
978
8 ÿ
8
# ÿ
7
7 8
7 ÿ 7+
7 ÿ+7 ÿ 7 ÿ7!ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ 8 8
7ÿ ÿ7ÿ
7
7
ÿ ÿ
7 !
87 ÿ "
&
$ ÿ
! 8 ÿ 7
8
7
77
7
7
77
8
87 ÿ "$ÿ7
"F
$8! ÿ 8# #ÿ7 G 9
ÿ
3 5 TV> Tÿ < ]> a6 ÿ 7 ÿ
7
8 7 8
8 7
, 1 ÿ ÿ 4 8
ÿ ! 8
^ÿ ; =;`]B8Kÿ >ÿ 7 897 ÿ ÿ ÿ ! 9&ÿ ÿ ÿ 9ÿ1 - , 4 ÿ7ÿ
'ÿ87
_
B
7 8
8
ÿ
ÿ7
8b "ÿ7 G 9ÿ
$77ÿ 76N/ÿ
7 ÿ 76N/ÿ $ÿ"9/9
ÿ$97
ÿ 7 F
7ÿ
ÿ 8 ÿ c1ÿ"9ÿ8 ÿ H
7 ÿ
9
ÿ
2 9 7 7 79
8
87
92 2 8 8 2 9
7
2 7
7 7
3
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 ÿ
877 9
79
ÿ ÿ 9
7 ÿ
8 ÿ 778! ÿ8 99" ÿ ÿ ÿ7 7ÿ ÿ 7$%6 ÿ 7
7'"
7
7ÿ
ÿ7 "8 77 ÿ
#8
ÿ &6 ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ 9
7
ÿ 7
8
( ÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ ,-ÿ8
7 ÿ1 ÿÿ 7
880 %
ÿ'9ÿ
7 ) 9ÿ
ÿ 7 897
6*+ÿ 77 ÿ ÿ ÿ
5
ÿ7ÿ6*+ÿ "0
7
7 . /
1 ÿ
#
8'"ÿ ÿ7 ) 9ÿ "7ÿ'9 76*+ÿ "ÿ'9ÿ7 97ÿ 7$ ÿ ÿ
7"7 ÿ ÿ 8 ( ÿ
ÿ
7 ÿ ÿ %
7
8
ÿ 7 #
6
%
6 7 8ÿ
73 &487 7
#
7ÿ
7 ÿ1 ÿ"ÿ7 "8
# 7 ) 9
8# 92&
ÿ$%6 ÿ7 ÿ8
ÿ ÿÿÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
1 1 ! ÿ# ÿ
7 .
8 7 (
1 8ÿ8
ÿ8ÿ17ÿ
ÿ 76*+ÿ "ÿ'9ÿ 8'"ÿ ÿ7 ) 9ÿ
ÿ 87. 5 ÿ
ÿ 7
ÿÿ 7 ÿ "7 ÿ %
7
ÿ 8 ( ÿ ÿ1
/ 7
ÿ1 ÿ7#ÿ 7$%6
7 #. 4ÿÿ7 ) 9ÿ8
7ÿ 8
7
. 1 ÿ 1 ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ &ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ( 7
ÿ 77ÿ ÿ'9
7
7 5
"7 ÿÿ ÿ8# # ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 7$%6 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
# '"7ÿ77 "# ÿ ÿ 99" 7 ÿ &ÿÿ9'"# ÿ ÿ
7
'
8
## 97 ÿ8 ÿ ÿ 7$%6 ÿ87$%6 # 8
ÿ ÿ 7
7 7ÿ ÿ "
77 ÿ & ÿÿ ÿ &ÿ7797ÿ "# ÿ ÿ
'
'
ÿ
ÿ #7 8! 97 ÿ 7$%6 9ÿ 87'" ÿ68ÿ0 7
ÿ 7 8
17
ÿ ÿ69 ÿ7 "8
ÿ &ÿ ' ÿ ÿ 7. 1 ÿ8
ÿ7ÿ
7
7
6
7ÿÿ ÿ 1 ÿ
7
##8ÿ'7$%6 ÿ 7 ) 9ÿ ÿÿ '"ÿ7
ÿ ' ÿ7
7 ÿ 1ÿ ÿ &( ÿ ÿ ' ÿ 81
7
7'
ÿ
7 9 ;=> ;A ;HIJÿK=ÿ JKJMNO?GJ=ÿ J;<9 ÿ
# 8
88 7 8 ÿ ' ÿ
8ÿ < ?<@ÿ G A L<> ÿ J> P<>GQ+
8ÿ ÿ ÿ87ÿ ÿ7ÿ # 928 #
:
CDEF <
ÿ
8
ÿ8#
ÿ9ÿ78! #ÿ" 9ÿ7 ) 9ÿ 8 ÿÿ"ÿ 97
ÿ8 ÿ87ÿ
7 " / '1 ÿ7 "8 ÿ
1 ( 97
R
ÿ
7 #
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
7 ÿ
9'
2Rÿ87ÿ 8ÿ ÿ ÿ87ÿ ÿ" 99'# 97
ÿ ÿ 78 ÿ 7 ÿ
8ÿÿ # 8
ÿÿ 9779' # 8 #
1 ÿ " 34 ÿ77 897
7
ÿ
-"79 7ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ '8ÿ
ÿ ÿ" 9
ÿ7 ) 9ÿ
7
8 8 8 / 7
# 9ÿ7 #ÿ 7ÿ
1
( # 7ÿ ÿ
ÿ
7
9'
8
'ÿ
ÿ ÿ" 9
# ÿ ÿ7" 797ÿ ÿ
8 ÿ ÿ7 ) 9
7ÿ
1
ÿ ÿ 8ÿ
ÿ 8
97ÿ ÿ 'ÿ 7
9'
8
+ 9 (
# 7ÿ ÿ" 9ÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ7
8ÿ7 7
1 897
7ÿ
8ÿ ÿ ÿ 1 ÿ7"7'#
8'#
ÿ
9'
7 9 ID;JÿDÿ Qÿ;=> ;A ;HIJÿK=ÿ JKJTEEQ <G 9
Sÿ GFJ UG :< ?<@ÿ G A L<> ÿ G JDKW
TNJ
>
CDEF <
V
34:< ?<@< L<> 9 ÿ ÿ ÿ87 ÿÿ7 ) 9ÿ 777
ÿ ÿÿ
ÿ;=> ;ÿK=ÿ JKJÿ 9' # 8/ 7( ÿ68
ÿ" 8'
79'
X'
ÿ
ÿ 7$%6 ÿ 89' # 8( 9ÿ7 #9797 87 ÿ
ÿ ÿ & 7ÿ ÿ ÿ87 ÿ7 ) 9ÿ '
ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ8
+
97
8
8 8 89' # 8/ÿ7ÿ7ÿÿ# ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ7 ) 9ÿ ÿÿ
ÿÿ '
ÿ ÿ 9 ÿ7 # ÿ ÿ87 7 8
/
# ( 5# ' 9
ÿ
ÿ 8
79' ÿÿ# 'ÿ 7
#ÿ9ÿ7 #1ÿ 7$%6
8 8
ÿ ÿ ÿ #
ÿ7
ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ '1 ÿ 7 ÿ' ÿ &ÿ ÿ7
/
/
8 89'
1 7 ÿ#
9 ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿÿ7
7
7
34:< ?<@:YTMÿ > JDKGÿ Q < CD??NKG<G 9 7 ) 9ÿ ' 77$%6 ÿ
1ÿ;=> ;ÿ YQV; VUGKHÿK=ÿ
G
V JDKWÿ 9ÿ" 8 ÿ ÿ &
(
9'1 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ9# 8
ÿ ÿ8# #ÿ ÿ87ÿ7 ÿ ÿ" 9# 97 ÿ
ÿ7
ÿ 77 #7
/ 7 7 ÿ 9' # 8/ 87
1 "
#
97
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ
99" ÿ8 ÿ
ÿ 7$%6 6*+ÿ'9ÿ 7
#ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ 77
77 " ÿ &ÿ
7 ÿ" # 8 ÿ
ÿ 9'
'
/
/ÿ
8! 97 ÿ 7$%6 9ÿ 8797 ÿ# ÿ0 7
ÿ 7 8
#ÿ7 ) 9
7 "8
ÿ &ÿ ' ÿ ÿ # 1 ÿ8
ÿ7ÿ
ÿ ÿ
7
.
7
(
ÿ ÿÿÿ 9'1
' ÿ ÿ7
34CDEFG 9 ÿ ÿ ÿ87 ÿÿ7 ) 9ÿ 777
ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ 7
ÿ ;HIJÿ 9' # 8/ 7( ÿ68
ÿ" 8'
79' ÿ
X'
ÿ
$ ÿ 8 ÿ
7ÿ 89' # 8( 9ÿ7 #9797 87 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8
' 7ÿ ÿ ÿ87 ÿ7 ) 9ÿ '
ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ8
Z &
+
97
8 8 89' # 8/ÿ7ÿ7ÿÿ# ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ7 ) 9ÿ ÿ4# ' ÿÿ '
79'
9 ÿ7 # ÿ ÿ87 7 8
/
# ( [ ÿ
9ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ 8
ÿÿ# 'ÿ 7
#ÿ9ÿ7 #1ÿ 7$ ÿ 8 ÿ
7
8 8
ÿ #
ÿ7
ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ '1 ÿ 7 ÿ' ÿ ' ÿ ÿ7
/
/
Z &
8 89'
1 7 ÿ#
9 ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿÿ7
7
7
7 9 H<]DD?ÿ;=> ;ÿ <V
7ÿ Q :< ?<@M> ;I9
\>
*( 7 8ÿ7 8" 7ÿ
8 7ÿ # 88# 92ÿ 7#
' ÿ
ÿ7 ) 9ÿ # 92
ÿ #
9 ÿ1 "ÿ 0
7ÿ 7 8
37 ÿ
ÿ
8
0 7
"ÿ
(^*00 _a00 _aÿÿ 6/ / 00 _aÿÿ+*`ÿ *c+d/ 00 / -&,
ÿ / ÿ%*_`/ ÿ%*_`/ / +()*` ÿ%*_`/ %
0
_/
Xbÿ _*, ÿ%$X(e*`ÿ
&%%&/ &_00 ( / 6 $*00 _aÿÿ
6/ ÿ+( &5*`ÿÿ
_6*_6ÿ&ÿ ÿ%*_`/ $%*_`*`0 ÿ,*a/
ÿ80 6*,*`0ÿ
17ÿ 7
4ÿ ÿ
$ ÿ ÿ ÿ8# 92&
ÿ$%6 ÿ 1ÿ 7ÿ 7 ÿ 7
ÿÿ # 7 (
7 #6 7 8ÿ
73 &4 7
# 1
ÿ ÿ97 ÿ7 8 "#ÿ 7 ) 9
%
7
+ÿ
7 8ÿ7 8# 7ÿ ÿ" 7
8 7ÿ 7 8
37 ÿ 7#
' ÿÿ
ÿ`*+`0
8# 92
ÿ
# ÿ 9 ÿ1 "ÿ 0 # 92ÿ
ÿ
"ÿ
0 8
0
0
+X+_`&_*`00
ÿ+X+_`&_*`ÿÿ +/ *,/ ÿ
d/ a_*`ÿ +(_$dX*,00
ÿ+X+_`&_*`ÿÿ 6 6*d*_6ÿ $*0
_&ÿ +
&-ÿ
0
+X+_`&_*`ÿÿ $_6 00
^&( +,b ÿZ+_Z*( *`00
( ÿZ+_Z*( *`ÿÿ ÿ 00
( *Z ÿZ+_Z*( *`ÿÿ ÿf0 ÿ*c%/ 4
f
( *Z ÿ80 ,*`0
0
ÿ 8
ÿ 77
"7ÿ ÿÿ7ÿ" 7 ÿ
ÿ 78
81' ÿ 892 # ÿ 8
" 92ÿ
ÿ
8 8 9
ÿ7 ÿ
"ÿ 8ÿ 28'"
7
'
ÿ ÿ
ÿÿÿ 87ÿ 7 7 8
7 777ÿ"8 ÿ7 # ÿ88
77 ÿ ÿ8
97 ÿ
1' "7997 ÿ # 92ÿ8ÿ
ÿ 887 ÿ7 8# #7" #"
+ 8
'
# ÿ ÿ 7$%6 ÿ ÿ ÿ7"7 ÿ
1 8ÿÿ7 7 8ÿ7 ÿ 8 ÿ792ÿ 7
7 ÿ & # 1 ÿ
#ÿÿÿ ÿ # 928
8 7 ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
8
a7 '
1
"7 ÿ ÿÿÿ7 7 8ÿ7 ÿ ÿ # # 1 ÿ77 ÿ 7ÿ7
# 1 8 ÿ # 928
8 " ÿ1 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ78#" # 88
8
8" 7 8 7 ÿ ## ÿ '9ÿ ÿ
1 "7 ÿ
997ÿ
ÿ
ÿ 7 8
9
ÿ 7 8 ÿ " ÿ 99 ÿ 8 ÿ7
ÿ
ÿ 8 7 ÿ # 92
d
9
" 8
5 ÿ7 ) 9ÿ7 ÿ 8
1' ÿ ÿ 8 ' ÿ7
"ÿ9 (
ÿ7 ÿ81'
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ' ÿ ÿ8
9
8
8 ÿ899 ÿ ÿ
ÿ ' ÿ '"ÿ7 ÿ 7 8
7 ÿ "7 9ÿ7 ÿ 88
8 ÿ8 # 92
8
(
87ÿ ÿ8# ÿ"97
ÿ 79 8" #" # ÿ7 88
ÿ 8" 71
7 ) 9ÿ
7
8ÿ ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
ÿ7" ÿ ÿ7
17 ÿ ÿ #
ÿ 8'ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿÿ 2
7
17
7
ÿ ' # 7 ÿ7 8
7
ÿ # / 7
# 7ÿ8 ÿÿ
7
8
+
ÿ
ÿ
7
8ÿ ÿ 78ÿ ÿ
ÿ
7 8
ÿ 71
ÿ
17"ÿ7 87 ÿ" 7
"7 ÿ"' #977 7
ÿ 7ÿ ÿ7
ÿ
ÿ
8
"
# ÿ6
# 1
# 8 - ÿ" ÿ 7 8 7 ÿ 7 8ÿ"97
ÿ ÿ6977
7ÿ ÿ7
7 8# 7#7 ÿ"
# 92
8ÿ "# 8" '7 ÿ ÿ7 8
ÿ
8
8 8ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ "7ÿ 7ÿ8ÿ
' #8ÿ7 79 '#
8 878
7 #87 7
8ÿ '7
8ÿ ÿ"71
8ÿ 2 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ7 # ÿ
7 834
8# 92
7 9 Q >Fÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ7 ) 9ÿ
8 ÿ
ÿ77ÿ
7 ÿ8#
ÿ 8 "
gÿ G ;9ÿ 7
# "7ÿÿ' ÿ #ÿ # 8
# " ÿ8#
h> i /
(
7 97
-
# 77 ÿÿ
ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ7 ) 9ÿ
8 ÿ
8 8ÿ 87 ÿ #
7 8# 'ÿ 97 / 7
# "7ÿÿ' ÿ 8
ÿ
ÿ ÿ
ÿ
(
7 7
ÿ 7# 7'97 #
87
ÿ # #7
/ 7
ÿ77 8ÿ77' ÿ
ÿÿ7 8ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ# 8
ÿ#
7ÿÿ
ÿ 7 8ÿ8 # '
ÿ
//
#
# 7'ÿ 87ÿ7 ) 9ÿ '"78 ÿ8" #
ÿ
'ÿ7ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
7 8 / 7 ÿ 9ÿ
ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ77
8ÿ 9
97
ÿ (
ÿ
9'
# ÿ 7
ÿ 7### 7ÿ ÿ77
8'877 ÿ" 9 ÿ#1
897 ÿ97
97ÿ ÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ
ÿ7 8
ÿ 7ÿ " ÿ'
8 6
7
( ÿ 788 7 ÿ 87# 7' ÿ ÿ87 '" 7ÿÿ# ÿ ÿ 7
7ÿ#ÿ 788
7 ) 9ÿ ÿ8 ÿ
ÿ ÿ7 8ÿ
# 8/9ÿ # # ÿ
ÿ ÿ8
7
9' ÿÿ 7
7
( ÿ ÿÿ # # 7
ÿ 7 8 "ÿ777 ÿ8 ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ
7 ) 9ÿ88 8' ÿ ÿ8
ÿ ÿ8#
# 8#77 / 7
# ÿ
#
7 -
'ÿ
/
1 ÿ 7 ÿÿ9 7 ÿ ÿ8# ÿÿ ÿ ÿ17
8# #ÿ" # 8 ÿ ÿ9ÿ7
9'
7 #7 9' "
977 # ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
# ÿ '
ÿ
ÿ
/
/
" ' ÿ ÿ ÿ "
8# ÿ ÿ ÿ d'+
1
7 9 i> 9 8'"ÿ"7ÿ ÿ '87 ÿ9"'8! 789ÿ7 ) 9 ÿ '
ÿ ÿ
jÿ GlWÿ 7ÿ 8 8
'"9ÿ77ÿ 7
87ÿ7 "
ÿ ( ÿ "9ÿ 87
k> +
ÿ
b
87 ÿ 7
ÿ ÿ 7
87ÿ8
1 ÿ7 ÿ 8 ÿ '1 ÿ #ÿÿ 7 ÿÿ
7 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ "977 ÿ"' ÿ" 987 '"ÿ
9ÿ7
7 ÿ8 8ÿ
7 /'
ÿ
7ÿ8"7 ÿÿ 87976 ÿ7 ÿ '1 ÿ #1ÿ9#7 ' ÿ
8 ÿ"
ÿ ÿ
#92 ÿ 8 787 9ÿ79 7 ÿ' ÿ 9
ÿ
7
ÿ
7#
'"ÿ8 ÿ ÿ
ÿÿ 7 " ÿ"7 ÿ 8 7 ÿÿ 28
7ÿ ÿ ÿ
8
ÿ 97 # ÿ8# ÿ " 8
# '"ÿ7 # 8 # ÿ # 78 7
'
'
7 9 V W ÿDÿ Q nG ÿ Oop >K>ÿ QF 9 "7(
87 ÿ9" 1
ÿ ÿ 75
mÿ > WJ nD;=ÿ =>n> ÿ ; Jh>< Wÿ ÿ
ÿ7 ) 9ÿ7
/
ÿ ÿ7
ÿ 8
TV
KJ
6
ÿ
#
5757 ÿ7ÿ ÿ88" #
ÿ7
7 7 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ7ÿ 7ÿ
#
# ÿ 1 7 8#8 ÿ ÿ77ÿ
ÿ 11
# 7 # ' '
87
7
7'
7
ÿ"
ÿ9ÿ7 ÿ 8 ! 97 77
8ÿ ÿ 2ÿ" 7 ÿ 75 ÿ #
ÿ7
ÿ 8
17
ÿ8# ÿ7 " ÿ
' 97
ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 57
/
ÿ
#
57 ÿ" 9 8 #/87ÿ7
ÿ
ÿ ÿ7ÿ7 ) 9ÿ7
9ÿ7 # ÿ77
1 # ÿÿ "7ÿ ÿ 7
7
8 (
87ÿ '1 ÿ9 ÿ8# '#
+
7
2 9 7 7 79
8
87
92 2 8 8 2 9
7
2 7
7 7
3
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 ÿ
877 9
79
ÿ ÿ 9
7 ÿ
7 ÿ 9
8 ÿÿ 7"7 ÿ 87ÿ ÿ8 99" ÿ 7
!ÿ7 % 9ÿÿ
! ÿ8 7 ÿ 77 ÿ
ÿ
7 !77 ÿ
ÿ" ! 8 ÿ
#
#
$
8
ÿ 8! &' 77&
8
ÿ8 8! 9 78
ÿ
ÿ8 9
7 7
ÿ7
ÿ 8ÿ 7' ÿ7ÿ ÿ7"
9ÿ" 7
! "
8
( * / ÿ 34.* 7 % 9ÿ 7 77 ÿÿ8 ÿ8!
" 7ÿ 7768 ÿ
87 ÿ
)ÿ 0120 0ÿ
ÿ ÿ
! 8! 7 ÿ
ÿ7 " ! 8
ÿ79
ÿ ÿ8 &
,-.
$
ÿ
ÿ
7
8ÿ ÿ ' ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 &
ÿ8" ÿ8! &ÿ 7 8 9 ÿ
97ÿ !
ÿ ÿ 7 97
ÿ ÿ7
' 78 ' ÿ7ÿ ÿ7
8 7 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ77 7ÿ&8 ÿ
5 7ÿ !ÿ8'8 ÿ ÿ8" ' !7ÿ"8 7ÿ& '
8" ! 8 ÿ7
ÿ 8 " 6' ' ÿ 9' '
' 8 ' 7
7
7
! ÿ !
ÿ 8 ÿ"ÿ8
! ÿ 7 ÿ 9&ÿ! 9' ÿ8 " ' ÿÿ 8ÿ8
& ' ! ' 8
7' ÿ ÿ ÿ8 ÿ" 7 7 ' 7 ÿ 97 ÿ 7ÿ ÿ
"
! ÿ 7
7
ÿ" 8&ÿ 7ÿ ' 8
' 88 9' 8 ! ÿ7ÿ ÿ 877
" ' ÿ ÿ ÿ '788 ÿ 97 ÿ
' 8
8 ' 6"' & 8
9 ÿ
7
ÿ
ÿ
6 ÿ ÿ
7 ! 88 ÿ ' 7 8
8
7 ÿ8"
8
7 ÿ7 ÿÿ; ÿ ="7> :
ÿ 87<7 8
& ÿ"ÿ7
7 8 7ÿ 77 ÿ 77 9: 87<7 8ÿ 7 ?ÿÿ ; ÿ ="7
ÿ
#
> ÿ "
89 7 ÿ4! &ÿÿ 7 7 7ÿ7 % 9ÿ & !7&8 ÿ 7768 ÿ
7 7ÿ ÿ 8ÿ ÿ
ÿ 8 ' 9ÿ ÿ 97
ÿ79
$
997
7
7ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ
8
ÿ ÿ"8
87 !
7 ÿ & 97
ÿ8ÿÿ7"
&
ÿ 9
ÿ
ÿ
7
( * CDEE .F 0ÿ6 7 ÿ ÿ7 % 9ÿ77
78 ÿ ÿ7"7
87ÿ 7
@ÿ ÿ-ÿ04G *ÿ ! 7 8
87ÿ ÿ 8
ÿ7ÿ &
AB
#
$
( *ÿ ! 7ÿ7 % 9ÿÿ ÿÿ7 8! ÿ ! ! " ÿ
ÿ 7ÿ J"7
Hÿ6 7 ÿ 8
77 ÿ8 7 ÿ ÿ 97
! 8I8ÿ
#
$
7 !
"
!K8
I 7ÿ7 ÿL 47ÿ7 $ 9'
!ÿ3 4 89ÿ 7ÿ
'7
ÿ 7
ÿ ! '
4 ÿ 5ÿ 7 % 9 ÿ ÿÿ 7 ÿ 4 ÿ 7" M8 ' ÿ 8
ÿ
#
3
N" 6
555
O0
( *ÿ ! 7ÿ ÿ ÿ 7 8" ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 97ÿ
7 % 9ÿ "
!9ÿ
Pÿ6 7 ÿ ÿ7 ! ÿ 7
97
ÿ ! 97 ÿ ÿ &
#
#
&
7
$
$ I"97ÿ 8ÿO 45 Q4 O ÿ ÿ"
ÿ8
8
ÿ
9797
7 % 9ÿ
8I7ÿ 4 ?5 O O 5 7
ÿ ÿ
7 ÿ ÿ
9
7
R *ÿ 7
!ÿ 778 ÿ
ÿ ÿ
!
ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ&
Sÿ" ! 8 ÿ
ÿ 9
ÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿÿ! ÿ ÿ 87 ÿ " ! ÿ ÿ 77
#
7 7 9&7 8
##
ÿ
8 'ÿ
ÿ ÿ7 ÿ87 ÿ ÿ"7ÿ 87ÿ 7768 ÿ
87
79
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
87ÿ 7 ! ÿ 9& 8
'ÿ7 ÿ
ÿ79
ÿ
# "
J&
#
7
T 7 ÿ250
! !51 25
77ÿ7"ÿÿ ÿ
ÿ 8
78
!
9ÿ"ÿ7 U
8
7
VXÿ\]_` Ya
W Y[ ^] `[a
ÿ
b[ W YdY[ faX g
^cÿXÿXYeÿa[g
^ g
hi1j
klm
nojjiAp
qrkAlÿ
1iAr
ÿ
2 9 7 7 79
8
87
92 2 8 8 2 9
7
2 7
7 7
ÿ
ÿ
3
2
12/14/2017
How LegalZoom Provides Businesses With Affordable Legal Assistance
/ Tech / #CuttingEdge
OCT 9, 2017 @ 12:30 PM
1,240
How LegalZoom Provides Businesses With
Affordable Legal Assistance
Amit Chowdhry , CONTRIBUTOR
I cover noteworthy technology, startups and gadgets FULL BIO
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
When you are running a business, it can be a challenge to handle some of the nitty
gritty details such as filing trademarks and handling copyright protections.
LegalZoom simplifies those processes by providing legal help and services for only
$300 per year, depending on your legal plan.
By providing substantial value at a low cost, LegalZoom CEO John Suh told me that
nearly 4 million small businesses and families have trusted the company since it
launched in 1999. And LegalZoom is the largest former of small businesses, the
largest filer of trademarks at 250,000+ and the company’s network of independent
attorneys can provide advice in all 50 states. Plus LegalZoom owns a law firm in the
U.K. with over 200 employees.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amitchowdhry/2017/10/09/how-legalzoom-provides-businesses-with-affordable-legal-assistance/#2a33959432de
1/4
12/14/2017
How LegalZoom Provides Businesses With Affordable Legal Assistance
LegalZoom
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amitchowdhry/2017/10/09/how-legalzoom-provides-businesses-with-affordable-legal-assistance/#2a33959432de
2/4
12/14/2017
How LegalZoom Provides Businesses With Affordable Legal Assistance
LegalZoom CEO John Suh
Suh said that LegalZoom was founded on the principle that access to quality legal
help is a basic fundamental right. Suh told me that the majority of Americans “have
a doctor they can turn to when life throws them a curve ball.” However, only the top
5% of small business owners or families have a law firm that they can reach out to at
a moment’s notice. “We believe in a world where everyone has a trusted lawyer,
someone who can not only handle the unexpected but proactively help to protect the
things people value the most,” said Suh in an interview.
LegalZoom started with only $1 million in angel funding. “I’m most proud of the
human potential we’ve been able to unlock within our team of Zoomers. We’ve
created a team focused on continuous learning, and we execute with a creative,
strategic mindset. Realizing that evolution is a collaborative effort and minimizing
fear of failure has allowed us to be nimble in an industry known for stagnancy,”
added Suh in the interview.
Suh described himself as a “supply chain geek,” who has been fascinated by how
technology would transform manufacturing and distribution across many
industries. Over the last 20 years, Suh has run Internet companies that had
interesting supply chain approaches to the fashion, consumer electronics, and legal
industries. Prior to heading up LegalZoom, Suh was the CEO of the Internet division
of Li and Fung called StudioDirect. And before that, he co-founded and worked as
CEO of Castling Group.
Recommended by Forbes
Top 5 Digital Transformation Trends In Legal
Three Things To Consider Before Using
Legal Templat...
LegalZoom Customers
I asked Suh if he could share any interesting stories about LegalZoom customers. A
couple of customers that came to mind included GORUCK and Chi’Lantro.
GORUCK is a rugged backpack brand and Chi’Lantro Korean Mexican fusion mobile
truck company.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amitchowdhry/2017/10/09/how-legalzoom-provides-businesses-with-affordable-legal-assistance/#2a33959432de
3/4
12/14/2017
How LegalZoom Provides Businesses With Affordable Legal Assistance
GORUCK was started by a former 10th Special Forces staff sergeant named Jason
McCarthy. McCarthy was unemployed, nearly broke, recently divorced and was
having a hard time adapting to civilian life. McCarthy said that the only thing
keeping him going was Java, his chocolate Labrador dog. When McCarthy thought
about the heavy-duty survival packs that his fellow soldiers carried around in Iraq as
an exercise called “rucking,” a lightbulb in his head turned on. McCarthy founded
GORUCK and turned to LegalZoom for legal help. GORUCK pulled in total revenues
of $15 million in equipment sales and live events last year. And McCarthy now gives
back to the military community by hiring veterans at GORUCK and his nonprofit
Java Forever in memory of his first chocolate lab dog.
Chi’Lantro was founded by Jae Kim, who immigrated from Seoul to the U.S. at age
12. As of seven years ago, Jim had $30,000 in savings and a maxed out credit card.
With his savings, he decided to purchase a food truck and established a Korean
Mexican fusion mobile truck company called Chi'Lantro. As the son of a single
mother, Kim often spent time cooking while he mom was at work. To launch his
company, Kim turned to LegalZoom to help set up an LLC. Even though Chi'Lantro
had a slow start in Austin, Texas, he was able to raise $600,000 from Barbara
Corcoran on the TV show Shark Tank. Now Chi’Lantro has 4 locations in Austin,
Texas and there are plans to expand in Dallas, Houston and San Antonio.
“We literally have millions of conversations each year with small business owners.
Drive and passion are recurring themes. Business owners want to take care of legal
matters quickly and efficiently so they can get back to the all-consuming job of
running their business,” explained Suh.
What are your thoughts about LegalZoom? Have you utilized their services before?
Please leave a comment!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amitchowdhry/2017/10/09/how-legalzoom-provides-businesses-with-affordable-legal-assistance/#2a33959432de
4/4
EXHIBIT N
0 223 4
101 0
57 9 6ÿ7569ÿÿ ÿ 7
68
7
ÿ5 99 6
57 9 6ÿ7569
68
7
ÿ5
yw \=
w W> ] 3 KE
a K LT
T > L= > f3=
ON =
F3
<
] 5LT M 3>
=5 > 3 ?
E
] c] ND ÿE
N= = <a3
12 4ÿ8: ;; ;<> ? ÿ AC>D E >ÿ
3 5 9; 9; ÿ 45 @ B ÿ=3 F G
7
= >;
I K < EK?W3XD=A3OY ÿ 5<=ÿS4 <LTU 4ÿ >E >ÿ >5ÿ
J=LEDFMN = < 153E QR NFE ÿ3 < L=>1>=>
= = ÿ<FD ÿ
ONP
ÿ
V4
1F WWWAN N
ZNLTÿ = < LN Dÿ3ÿ Wÿ OK E=A N?<F] ?5 E A<=Z3 > ? 5 E
< 9 Nÿ F E =[ < Z3 N L>ÿ L = ÿ34L >ÿ =ÿ E 45 L A
E Z? S4
\=
M3
3 [
N3
M L<F^ T ? 34LE ÿ[=ÿ 3 =Z3 > ? 5 E_ <3 N ?ÿ `<c>LE ?
N? = ÿ= Nÿ ?5 >_<=`a E ÿ E 45 L ÿ`=> E 2=bÿ 3=>3 N
3
] 3 ÿ
N3 ÿ
V4 L=>^ W
>E >ÿN
[Nÿ=ÿ 3=5
?5 =`<dD>
[
e4ÿ >LE
< >3
fL
Z3 5Dÿ
EN 5
g>
MNWWWA<L153< =3OY ?N=QR< D Oÿ
<F ON?NO>R< DÿWL3<O>hOA3
= WLÿ 5 OAQR15LE >ÿ
P hE ÿ 5
?
1F
?
V3 5 4 ÿL [ D >FeEZLL^ WA<=Z3 > ? 5 Eÿ ?g>M F Q
4L =[< 3 4 = ÿ ÿ j?N ÿ =ÿ E 45 L A ? ÿ3 Nk
i Oÿ
ÿ [
N 3 ZNÿ
S<Nÿ > ? ÿ5 3 Z3 5ÿ = 5=^ T ? 34LE ÿZ3 E] E =] ?5 E
= 5 45 Nÿ Wÿ >ÿZ<NL ÿ= Nÿ ?5 >_ OO3 ÿ= >ÿ34L >
l= > ^
_ j ] 3 ÿ
3
] <L=m Nÿ>N=^ Wÿ >ÿ K== 55 Eÿ E 54 5 E^ Wÿ >ÿ K== 55 EA
=jD>ÿ ? 55ÿN ZN=l= <>ENL 9 ><DL ÿN ZN=l= <>ENL A
l= I
3 Z3 3
3A
Z3 ><DLE^ WQ<ÿ153E Q`<h=ÿl= ?>N=^ WQ<ÿZ3 5Dÿ ÿ[=ÿ E 455 E
E 54 5 ÿN =>_ 5<=ÿ 3 ?>_ Nÿ 55ÿN =>_ EN 5 _<=Z3 > ? L
3
ÿ
ÿ I
ÿ g>ÿ
N3
^ T ?3=TN?33OA3OY<F=ON<G53<=QONPmB qrS3 s[ =ÿ
= Nn?Oÿ L? N2 LPYR <Fÿ <>ÿ q ÿÿ j5 =>
3 @ Nÿ >5 ÿ5 N = p
eXD o= =Nÿ E
M
ÿ
1F WWWA t D 5
uwÿ3 < zv|voL ÿa ÿ ?ÿ ÿ ÿ F K E = 5
|y}~ A
v U 4ÿ w }~ ÿ 5 M ==Kec = = F Eÿ | x ÿ }x
x yz {
a
1E E
^ T ? 3=5 E_ = <a]OL< <F ONPÿMN = <ÿ E5< T_ 5 5<= ÿ W
= Nÿ 5DL ÿ] ND ÿL ? ÿ N = <>_ <F ONPf3 L L ÿS=ÿ N5F\3
`< 3 ÿ
NM
ÿ
3E ÿ ]
MNWWWANP153=ON<R3OY ÿ[N>ÿ=@<;G=qRPD Oÿ
<F ON5ÿ5NFE QA B5<?Q[ M;F <; 3
= <c=< <=ÿD RE=5= :NÿONqA
5 Pÿ 153
p ÿ
1F
=
| x ÿ= <abÿ zv|vÿS35 =A 3=5 3 < N F\N k
|] ND ÿ yz w }~ A jÿ =ÿ 5Dÿ 4ÿ E ÿ O=
{ r [ `< U V<
MN = <ÿ 5<=ÿg]MN = <ÿ T><5 E] <L=ÿ ?=
<F ONP153E QR ÿ<F ONPl= L5NL ÿ=jD>eEL
ÿ
3
E
a5>YWWWA=2 EN D OY
5K m T <= ?WA3
Y
| x ÿ }~ ÿQM KlN PF}| x ÿ}~ m?5 =>R ]ÿ
|>ND ÿE
|x v}|v2ÿ3 R E= ÿ
||}xÿNÿ =ÿgAA | x ÿ= <aN F
[ [ ÿ
}| x ÿK ?NLED OK== ÿÿjÿ4 L=>F QÿQS=2 E^ WÿL ÿ| x ÿ}~
|N KL 5 ÿ3 ?5FLh=2 >E >ÿN>2ÿ <= ÿN [< }
||}x
D3
E
O9
><L=A
=jD>
M F ONP] ND ÿÿ <L=ÿÿ > LT3 ÿ _ EN 5
ÿN = <ÿ= <a_ =jD>_ NaE 5EZÿÿ3 5Dÿ
<
ÿ
]
ÿ
o
ÿ g>
Z
3 = ÿÿ<F ONP153E Qÿg] e
ÿ\=FNMN = <ÿ 5<= `M
ÿ
ÿ
a5>YWWWA> 5A3Y<F ONPR=5 T>N5FAY3L =F5N = <R53E Q
5K m 4 K3T j5N = <>T 5L R5<= YAF RE = R<F ONPN5<=
Y
E
A R
eDÿ7ÿ; ;R 5 ?N KLFc<
|ÿ T>=9E ÿ vc=ÿ<ÿ3ÿ cE N ?9jEL5=
5 9 7 ÿ\3ÿ?K ? R3ÿ| x < L5<N Fw ÿ >N=E 5=4 F 2=ÿ = ÿÿ
C C ÿ Nÿ = }
= ÿ =
<
= ca
g] eÿ3 >E 5 ?ON=QL> =Q4N}~ ÿ <3 < <A =a < 3 ÿ?ON=QK3 =F3
`M F =ÿ3ÿ5 5?ÿ 4 ÿ3 ÿÿx v}|vc ÿ 4ÿ Pÿ 5=ÿ 445 5?ÿ<D= ÿE
4L >
3 Q ON oa Q L
Q4ÿWE2 a ?3ÿÿ| x ÿ}~ <K== 5ÿ3 9?> 2 5EL=N FK3 = 4Nÿ i L O= 5ÿc
3 < ÿ= Nc < }
||}xÿ <>E>Q4ÿ?4 >N 5 ÿE ÿ<DF <?= 4< E>3
3
ÿ N
=
Nÿ
j
< =
5=| x ÿA
a ÿ
|A
A
MN = <ÿ 5<=ÿ eEL=gAA <F ONPl= L5NLE] <L=
<F ONP153E Qÿ ? ÿ ]ÿ N = <ÿ T><5 ÿ=jD
E M
3
a5>Y3 ?=<F ONP53E QA3
5K m EL 5N = <N5<=>D OY
Y E
gAA
||}xÿ| x ÿx v}|v><L=ÿ<jF F3 ?=ÿNQ}| x ÿ v5<4 a
]ÿ| x ÿ}~ }
|}~ ÿ=jD>K3L= ÿEL A >ÿ
|w ÿ 3 T
}
EI
a
5=ÿWQ<A ]ÿ| x ÿK ?NLEON =>OK=
Nÿ =? =>ÿ A
|N KL 5 ÿ F ÿL ?A
c N gA }
D3
p q ÿ?5 =ÿ<F ONP^ WQ<a ÿ<F ONP[< : C B
B[Nÿ =MN = <ÿN =ÿ =MN = <ÿL Rq R 7
[
5
Oÿ
a5>Y5=<F ONP< D OY
5K m a 5N = <hOA3
Y
ÿ4ÿ| x ÿ}~ ÿ3 F Dÿ4ÿ Bh= ÿ =D OK= = >jÿ| x ÿ= <aN FQ4ÿ <
c <
||}xD E 4 5 < q ÿJFc ÿ3 <a E L=}
|>ND ÿE ÿ3 < P
3}
3p
=
ON
<DL=ÿÿ j<2=}| x ÿ T>=N L5ÿKE3 9a E3 <
|?WQ<ÿ<K <ÿE ÿ xN
==j>Nc 3N ?ÿ
|< L5<2?Q3 LLEÿ = ÿ4ÿ| x ÿ =>K= N=N Fwÿ
N
=
L
5 }
N
cF <?
|N KLNLEc<
|}~ 9EN>E ?ÿ?>9lI ÿ 3 >E 5E ?F ÿ =
= =Nÿ| x ÿK ? 5 ÿ ÿ| x ÿx v}|vÿÿÿLT=DN>ÿ I@ =ÿ3ÿD4 =5
}
D 3 3}
L
[ F
L a
g] eÿ vc=A
`M w ÿ ÿA
=A
3U 4\=FN^ WQ<3[?ÿÿ<F ONPÿ^ T ?3 O
ÿ3 ÿ = ÿÿN =ÿ ÿL NMN = <= Nn 3
5 =
ÿ
a5>YWWWAT ?3 OA3 N5 ?>F R3 R=FN?WQ<5R?RR<F ONP
5K m ? Nt 3 D OY<L=Y3Q4E = RR =R h=N5N = <
Y =
D
N 3
[E ÿ4ÿÿ3 ÿ=FNw5ÿ xN}| x A LF3 5 3 N ÿ}~ D Ea ?ÿ3 ÿE ÿ Nÿ3
LF3 5c 4E = ÿÿ xÿ wÿÿ
|ÿE ÿ4ÿ WÿE|}xÿN ÿ=KQ4N FWa 5 4
LQ
| 3
[ a
Q
D EF ÿEQ4ÿWEWa EN KQE ÿ < ÿ| x A
N ÿ33 ÿ3 < ÿ = ÿK ?LTc ÿ}
|
3
3N
`= K=N> ÿ>
3 ?ÿ?3NP
3Q4E = ÿÿWQ<3h=N5N = <
ÿ3 ÿ=FN? =ÿ ÿ?ÿÿ F ONP
N 5 <
3 O4 aF =ÿÿ3 53a<ÿÿN = <ÿ53E Q
Wÿ D ÿ3 >LD >ÿ ÿL N5 F ONPN5<=
5 5 = <
oa 5>N5N =ONPN5<=
Nÿÿÿ F ÿ <ÿ53E Q
L <
3 D E K ?ÿ < ÿN = <
WÿN ÿN KQc ÿ5 F ONP
ÿ 3 N<
[=2 D
=F NP
52 7 79 759 #$ &$ 1 68
7
7569! 68
7
7569!- ./ 01
5 9
29 6
!9 " % '()* 8 +!$ 57 9 6, , 5 $ 57 9 6, , 5 7 0 2
2
0 223 4
101 0
57 9 6ÿ5 69ÿ7ÿ67
99 6
68
7 75 79 ÿÿ
ÿ 7
57 9 6ÿ5 69ÿ7ÿ67
68
7 75 79
j uF 9 q8
]
X9 p 0 ]@
^ ] KE
a E 9 u08
HF 8
7
p 2KE N 09
82 9 0 :
@
./ 1ÿ5 65 ÿ 9 : ÿ <>9? @ 9ÿ
0 2 55 57 12 ; = ÿ80 A B
4
8 95
D E :08EF:00H<0HZ7A8HF7B2078[HFOP4 RST0 VW 8ÿ
8 FG:Hÿ K: F/ KOZM 7Aÿ 79ÿ R ÿÿ U2 89
0 ; Fÿ 92 ÿ2 F 8 Q
IJ? L8 8Fÿ @
N
ÿ
.A XXX< Y ? 2
W:ÿ0 7 ]KFK@LK ÿ^ ÿ :ÿ ÿ ÿ A ] @ 8 2bd f cÿ kcfo
K \ 1ÿ : 2 ÿ 2 N 8_8]I` a 8 8 A @ÿce gdhjklm n<
8 .] ? 0 ^
.@ @
T8ÿ278 ÿ XÿL8W:ÿ0 7 ] 7 7ÿqF ÿ F:/:[t^ ?ÿs8 ?ÿ ÿ @ ÿ U8
2 F2Aq0 r ÿK \ 1ÿ 8X0Or H8.UK K2ÿ 8Or F 8I` Av8KX
p
ÿ 8 sF
ÿ
FK
ÿ
uK
w ÿ 2@Exyÿ 287z19K899ÿ 7F1
.SvFK ÿ z82 ÿ @ z18
NF 8 7ÿ E972 @
7A HFOv8 K2FK
0
s7 KE{ÿ89
K@ ÿ W 8
?
p F? ÿK :7 7A HFO
8 7^pHK ÿ F 8 79
FN
aA ] @ 8 2 2789
@ 8 8 A @ÿ 0@ [
.2
NFXXX<FOFX00@<[Mÿ]F J?<0
7A HF]: 2780HZF :X0 8? Hÿ
8 @7ÿ J?8?ÿ@
.2 ÿ
.A
s72?KE\ 1ÿ 9@ 9ÿ 92< A? 2Ap 7K8ÿ78t0 9 :
082 ÿ0 7 K89.989ÿ KF8 ÿ8U?< 8ÿ @ 12
@ z1
|8
W
<
.?89/8F Av8] @ K8r 70 F :ÿ s7`9K@ :ÿ78s^ @ ÿ @ 122 @
?9K:ÿ@ ÿ 9 0 9Uÿs89 @ /8{ÿ 0890 FÿW8ÿ 0 8t0 9 : K
ÿ
r
F0
a2:?1 : 0 82ÿz1 K89D XÿI1ÿ 9K@r :2 8ÿ 082ÿN 9K @F9r @F 2
@8: 2Fÿ ] 7[r 9@ 9ÿF r 7 90 ÿWFÿ 8s7}?9r82 K:ÿt0 2?ÿ
8 s7 ÿ
ÿ uK ÿ W
ÿ H0 ÿ ~9
a2XXX< FFH9M] 7[D.207XKKH9ÿ55?5
@8:?XKKs77 ?0ÿF2M8[: ;5B M0
: 2:: 0 H< HZXÿ@ :F M7 Hÿ
8 1:ÿ 82 ÿ 9ÿ H<
.A
z0 2 1 ÿK W ? 9AI@tKK <78t0 9 : 2 @ÿ :~9N A [
1K 8W7 0 1 8 ÿ ÿ U:d ÿ 8ÿ @ 12 K < : ÿ0 F
Hÿ
ÿ W
F 0 tFÿ
.20@ [s78ÿt0 97?K@D X[7ÿz1 K89D X[7ÿa2:?1 : 0 82ÿF r @F 2
278ÿ 0 :9r @ 21 2 ÿF 89r 9@ 9ÿF 89r@8: 2Fÿ ] 7[D Xÿt0 2?ÿ
ÿ
0
ÿ
ÿ 8 s7
ÿ ~9
NFXXX<FO.208HF7M0HZ ÿWF9ÿ8;75B8RMO? Hÿ
7A HF2ÿ2FA@ [< 427:[W N5A 75 0
8 7`87 78ÿ? M@828 =FÿHFR<
2 Oÿ .20
Q ÿ
.A
8
bd f cÿ8 7^{ÿ ]KFK@ÿT02 8< 082 0 7 F AqF
ce gdhp F? ÿ .] : 2 < Uÿ 8ÿ 2?ÿ 1ÿ @ ÿ H8
? 0 S W s7 \ z7
_0 7 ÿ
19
t^ F 7ÿ 2789ÿ 2@67A HFO{ÿKE 2 @
^ /F .20@ [P 8 2NF 8 7ÿ D2 FK
sF ÿ
K 0
=
<
L a
zpN
|a tNIqp
v a
L a
zpN
|a tNIqp
v a
L a
zpN
|a tNIqp
v a
a2:?1 : 0 82ÿF T71 6D
@8: 2Fÿ ] 7[D Xÿ 0 ]ÿ s
8 s7
D
45
<
IH@ÿ7A HFOM F ÿ7@ K?
K F 8 7ÿp @WF ?90
N
ÿ
u08]F 8
7ÿ:?9
z82 7A HFO:X[7@p @WF ?90ÿ M 8]
9ÿ F 8 7ÿ 8ÿÿF ÿ7@ K? 6 ÿ :
N
F K
t.ÿ\
^29ZXXX<8]? HZ8 7^ AA 97A HFO :X[7 @ 0 F <t.
2] P [:<0 9F? @ 8? 2F 8 7SF 8{ A:? p @<
Z
<
v8KX90 ÿce gdhncKÿF ÿ7@ K? 6 M 7U7 1 :ÿF s7?K8ÿ ÿ 0 9 @D X6
U8 ÿ@bd f cÿ fÿ p @WF ?90ÿ ÿ 80ÿ A8D Xÿ F 2 6 |79HF ÿF
d @
t.ÿN tF
? st6
z8 AD Xÿ 0 ]ÿF O0 ÿF T71 6< 608D X6 K8ÿF ÿ D Xÿ 0 ]ÿF/ 2 F W7
@ ÿF T71 6 ?9 @D Xÿ 0 ]ÿt<G 7ÿF ÿ @ 7 X6 F T71 6 :0ÿ XÿK
s ÿ
I: D .vtÿ
N D H6
t7FK8KK@D E :|FKÿ 70 ÿ8 F<
8 2 ÿ 90 ÿ8 F6 UA_8Y ED E :
U
ÿ
N ]4 0ÿ7A HFOD X[7ÿÿF ÿ7@ K? 6 :0@F t0 @ 8
0 ÿÿ` F 8 7ÿF 89Kp @WF ?90ÿ K 7Kÿ~] 1 9:
N
@
tF` ÿ
^29ZXXX<] 0 @ 8<0 : 2789{ÿ] ?F2 9 7A HFO :0@F
2] P 1 ? 1 9: Hÿ.:.20@ [ÿ p 8K:8ÿNF 8 7ÿtFK 7K
Z
? ÿÿ
K ÿ
ÿ `
ÿ 2 Eÿÿÿ5 >7U8
vFK P M 6 ÿ KX9
@ 4ÿ 8
fÿ7A HFOD X[70ÿF ÿ7@ K? 6 ÿd mu0 78 ANF 8 7ÿF 8ÿ 7 F
ÿ cNF 8 7ÿF 8ÿ 7 @WF ?90ÿ m ÿ 0^ F ÿ7A HFOD X[70ÿ @
m
`p
t.<
`p
WF ?90ÿ ÿ0 @ m ÿ7A HFOD X[70ÿF ÿ7@ K? 6 ÿ fÿd k 7A HFOD X[7
7@ K? 6 ^ ÿd fNF 8 7ÿF 8ÿ 7 @WF ?90ÿ jo nb lÿ F 8 7ÿF 8
t.<
l
`p
t.<
N
52
7
"3 $%&
'() 57 9 6* 5 69* 7* 67 ) 57 9 6* 5 69* 7* 67 7 - 0,
5
9
29 6 9 !6 #6 6
68
7 75 79 (
68
7 75 79 (+ , 2
2
EXHIBIT O
0 223 4
101 0
57 9 6ÿ6 99 6
68
7
9ÿÿ
ÿ 7
7
57 9 6ÿ6
68
7
9
7
n;
K< rG < b 2 eB
e
o e Na
c a < r2;
HG ;
:
b 4Na F 2<
;4 < 2 =
B
b qb GA ÿB
G; ; :o2
01 3ÿ79 78 ÿ < = ÿ ?@<A B <ÿ
2 4 8 88 8: 34 > 8 ÿ;2 C D
6
; <6
FGKKK?:NJ KL:2HP=H<ÿ:>8QDR88MR8R
:C HG=GH<M:;Aÿ JGKL:M H?2 Q
; KNÿGOH?M =G;<O QAÿ
I ÿKNN
Hÿ
0C
=
S2 4 3 ÿN U A <CVBWNNY [?:;W2 < = 4 Bÿ =\<F C L
3N ;U: 2 3 ; ÿ ÿ X=Z ÿ ;ÿ B 34 N ? = ÿ2 G]
T Hÿ
ÿ U
G 2 WGÿ
^:Gÿ < = ÿ4 2 W2 4ÿ ; 4;J a = 23NB ÿW2 Bb B ;b =4 B
; 4 34 Gÿ Kÿ <ÿW:GN ÿ; Gÿ =4 <` HH2 ÿ; <ÿ23N <
_; < J
` X b 2 ÿ
2
c4=A3 = 2 ;4ÿG
B;= 4Gÿ e :LJ K
; d:
W2 <:ANBJ KL:
B 43 4 ÿG ;<
2
042B Ld:O;
4:;ÿ 2 =<
_; =<G;J KL:
Gÿ 44ÿG ;<
f
f e : Be=K2iA;?2HP ÿGj8Dk@Rÿ8Qm:Nah 3ÿ <B <ÿ <4ÿ
g;NBACFG ; : J>KL:M GCB ÿ2 : N;<0<;<
; ; ÿ:CA ÿ @ ;ÿ^3
HGI ÿ M
S3
0C KKK?G G
l
WGNaÿ ; : NG Aÿ2ÿ Kÿ He B;? G=:Cb =4 B ?:;W2 < = 4 B
: 7 Gÿ C B ;U : W2 G N<ÿ N ; ÿ23N <ÿ ;ÿ B 34 N ?
B W= ^3
n;
F2
2 U
G2
0A;<1;G C_;e B N;`:;do B ÿ B 344 B` :2 G =ÿ d:q<NB =
A<N=ÿB ÿ < 2 <XÿU;ÿ 2 ;W2 < = N ÿd;< B 1;pÿ 2;<2 G
ÿ
G2 ÿ
c4=A3 = 2 ;4ÿF <N BG<` <B <ÿG ` BG 4 ÿV3ÿ <NB` =4 ;ÿ 2;4
B;= 4Gÿ e :L`;4 N=ÿS3 N;<J KÿW2 4Aÿ ` : <2 ÿUGÿ ;d:sA<
; d: ÿ H2 ÿ
ÿ \<ÿ rN ÿ U
n;KKK?;aG=2<;ÿ FGC;HG:PI2M;Lÿ W=Gÿÿ4ed:A<ÿ
; ÿ2_; NH?2HP:C HGG4ÿc<0ÿ ; : b; ÿ 2 ;<
CF= v24A0ÿ: ; I:t:4ÿ
ÿ a : 4G 4 ÿu
k
0C
B
w;x;eS3 N;<VKB :ÿN;h 3d:4Aÿo NS:B ÿ H;72 2 ÿ b2 G <
ÿ =ÿ <B <ÿ ;<JIÿ2 ÿ 2;4 ;: G CnG <ÿ a <pÿ=a B ]
F ÿ
J
y ÿ 4Ba{|ÿ 4;:S3<N;<<ÿ :G3
0z_GN ÿ S;4 ÿ B S3;
}3 <NB G:ÿd:4Aÿ2 : G C` GLFG ; :ÿ; :o` NNapÿ;<` :C HGIU
;4 B N ` 2;4 3ÿ B ÿf <ÿ:C HGIb GA ÿd: B ÿ U ;ÿFG ; :ÿ0}<
2 ;ÿ h S: ÿ
ÿA
ÿ
UGKKK?FqC:HGII?2HP:ÿ2 ÿ B; ÿ:C HGIU: R 6 ÿ
=4 ;~G4;;4GC;HG:G ;ÿF e_G ICFG ; :ÿN 8 @
ÿ ; : ; :ÿAKLÿ M
U ÿG
J
Hÿ
0C
w;bHeN ÿo ÿ Z0e =GNBd:A<? m jb GA ÿ U=az^2 uU ;
ÿN =LF ;Z ÿ eN 4 ÿ 2 ;<ÿ Q ÿ; :opÿNB ÿÿ X4 ;?
q
A2
N
ÿ
x2 : ÿ
3<
J B HGIc4=A3 = 2 ;4ÿG ÿ
G C :ÿ ;= 4Gÿ e :LJ K7
B ; d:
dW
wf cf
SbF
c WFVnb
_f c
wf cf
SbF
c WFVnb
_f c
wf cf
SbF
c WFVnb
_f c
Wo G :ÿ 4:;<ÿ 4B7:C HGIpÿNa 4 B
o 1G 042B L ; 4FG ; :ÿ J4 GN
dG ÿ
N 2
ml
?
c4=A3 = 2 ;4ÿG ^:3 7J
B;= 4Gÿ e :LJ Kÿ 2 eÿ d
; d:
J
j8
?
r2;eG ;
:ÿ=A<
FG ; :ÿ 4:;7=4 ;ÿ:C HGI_; N4GNB042B L
:C HGI042B LÿGÿ ;FG ; :ÿ a<:4 ÿ 4:;<
U U
2
o4<PKKK?;1 BG A HP;XAML;4G ; :M42B L
4e a :; =K?2 <:N;4e P:C HGIG4:;P
P
ÿ 4 aÿ?ÿÿ ÿ X;
_GN 9M R: NK<
Bm ÿ ;
6
J G NaZ ÿ ÿq;NaUGÿ;ÿG ; :ÿ; :oÿe =GNBpÿ a<:4 B<:N;?
; CB ÿ ZZ2q: ÿ=4 ;4 C HGI<GA 7 eN 4 ÿ : N4GN ÿ;XA<
B U :
G A2 ; 2
b ; IKN ÿÿ :; ÿG U: ÿ J Z ÿ 4C L
e Gÿ 4 G^;1 BJ KÿN dJ Wÿ ZZÿ G?
o
H7
2
FG ; :ÿ 4:;ÿ\bFG ; :ÿ a<:4 Bb :N;ÿ =;
:C HGI042B LM ÿ:C HGI_; N4GN ÿ;XA<VBN
ÿ
2
B
o4<PKKK?;1 BG A HP
4e a :; =K?2
P
FG ; :ÿ a<:4 B1ÿ2 M B; ÿZ ÿ =4 ;<M bÿ:C HGI<GA ÿB
:C HGI_; N4GN ÿLF e_G IC ZZÿGÿ ;ÿ\?? G ; :ÿ; :oG C
2
U U ÿ F
4G ; :ÿe =GNBA He;; ÿÿXÿ3 N;<C LÿL^;1 BJ KÿN ÿZ ÿ
:C HGIG eN 4 ÿ2 =4CNO;1 <B <ÿG<1ÿ :; ÿG U: ZZ
A2
B
H7
<:N;?
;XA<
52
779 759 9 ! #$&$'( # 57 9 6*7 9 68
7
6+ '!
3, - ! 0!
5 9
29 6 6 "# % 68
7
6 # 57 9 6*7 9
7 0 , . !/ 2
2
)
3
0 223 4
101 0
57 9 6ÿ6
68
7
9ÿÿ
7
/1 3 0ÿ890
02 4157 3
1
:;
;
@
ÿ
<
7 9
=9
8
00 33 3$9C5
B+ B3 ÿ
>7
Dÿ
9
5
?9
@
A
>(
ÿ79
?9 6*C 95 ÿ E* 9
7ÿ 6 B ÿ 7
*Dÿ
vEÿog;gnÿi~wyÿÿ1 _G3I4
wxy w nj H V^ Q
G
^ z^{}~
I
gÿ
h
7/2K1I3
313 ÿ30« K
D99!ÿ (ÿ 69ÿ 95 6$ÿ 9 ÿ C5
ÿ $9 9@9( 5ÿ Cÿ 5 9*
O6 W
,6
FGÿ/IJKL7ÿ "9ÿ 87
H1/
ÿ
*7
7 M" N
?7 5 ÿ
XTD5 6KÿHÿ (9ÿ8ÿ 8
0YQKG
ÿ Q
MCÿ 5 Z D 7 9
6 9 9
PK
4G8Q797
3/ H1K
Q
R 7ÿ ÿ R
#C 5D O6"
\
897
ÿ97
* C9
TQ3K]_
KH Kÿ^
` 9 9L ÿ
$9 C ÿ ,69O ÿ C55
95 9 ÿ 9*
Dÿ
7
@9 ÿ 6ÿ ÿ 6*
$9
9> 9M" ÿ 5ÿ (9
MC 9
S 57ÿ C6UG9/95
H37IT 7 0 3 D
/3/1ÿ V 09
O6 95 W ÿ ÿ
C
$9 C ÿ 6,69< *
5
95 Cÿ 9 ÿ C5
W
Oÿ 7
3
[9 ÿ ÿ9L"ÿ 9 5
W CL(ÿ * "
9 8
N68@ C
aN 8
7
9 ÿ
5 ÿ
ÿ 7
*7ÿ
bC5bC0ÿIÿ 6955
7/ 3ÿ G3/
1ÿ 3U c K
N 9 ÿ L $9 9 7
6 8 9 7
d9L ÿ 6 6ÿ @9( ÿ
ÿ , 78N ÿ 6W C
bÿÿÿ3ifiognj{]_w3 H^ I4
7/b3v^ z^ ÿ^ yÿÿ 03 ]_
G
1 ÿwxy w
gE
h
eg jgkg iÿ 9 ÿ+ÿ ÿ 7ÿ 9eg jgk@9 6!ÿ
fhi fÿ p f$7 8 ÿ a@ 5 ÿfhi fÿ 7ÿ ,
,
,9
*7
6Dÿ 9E+ * 6 E?7
EN 0
, ÿ #C 5ÿÿ3 ÿ C 5 ÿÿ 5 7ÿ ÿÿ ÿ3
ÿ
9 ?9
s t ÿfhi fÿ 7ÿ ,
' 3eg jgk@9 6!ÿ
,69eg jgk*
5
9 ÿfhi fÿ C5
7
eg jgk, =9
fhi fÿD#ÿ 8
dÿ 6ÿÿfhi fÿ m oi q
[ 7eg jgk:mnf p
9
M(6+3 3eg jgk ÿ
8
9ÿB3 ÿfhi fu,
9
,9 568ÿ rC
7C9 ÿ DDÿ 67
ÿmghijgÿ;wxyiefghijgfkÿÿwxy wVT
G
Q/01v^ z^{K ~^ z^{ 7KI4
ÿ3 K3 kÿ wÿ19gup
g E f f u nj ;
hÿ
M(60 W 7%99ÿ ÿ D" 67
9ÿÿfhi f 8 6?
9ÿt ÿ9 6ÿ 6 !ÿ " 8 9ÿ 567eg jgkÿ 9ÿ
9 %7 $9
M6
0 3 , @ÿ) )E@7 ÿ , ÿÿ 9 ND89
3 `ÿÿ
ÿ 90 ) ÿÿ
97ÿ
E=ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
¡i¢ uÿ68
7 $9 57ÿ
9 9 (ÿ 7B 65ÿ" 68
7
fi 7 9 6ÿ 65 B 6 9@9 6ÿ 579 ÿ 7 9 6
N
*
*9 " N
57 9 6C ÿ79 ÿ
68
7
ÿ 658
ÿ00 36(9 ¤
£B) ÿ9
eg jgk@9 6EN 7Eeg jgk$9 57E* 5ÿ
fhi fÿ 7ÿÿ95
ÿÿfhi fÿ 65 ÿÿ 75
a
vÿÿxygmifu¥i§g;nf§H ÿÿ1/0G ¦^
0
w z^{ G 0\1 2V /3KHy
^ wÿ Tÿ0
G
gE
h m no;
Dÿ
7
9
C
6 6;ÿ6 8 8585ÿ9 ÿ
7
C9
5
57ÿ 95ÿ "
ÿ9 79 ÿ
9
ÿ 9
g
ÿ
¨ÿ 73T/ÿ 0/1 3 0ÿ890H 1ÿ V 0QGÿ 7G
G1ÿ K7 ÿ02 4157 3ÿ30FT 3/ © Q ª
I7 KG
0
1
H F1
L
57 9 6ÿ6hg;u
68
7
9ÿ ;
7
g
; gÿ7 9 6ÿ6
n ;68
7
9
5
7
gi ÿ6
mom
9
7
57 9 6ÿmnf p
68
7 gm oi
57 9 6ÿ6 m
68
7
9ÿnu
7
57 9 6ÿ6ÿ
68
7
9op
7
57 9 6ÿ6u ;f
68
7
9ÿggp
7
57 9 6ÿ6g;omÿ
68
7
9ÿmg g§g
7
v^ z^{]_wÿ
wxy wÿ^ y¬
UÿÿKHÿ®0F1gÿif8
0 3 /¥Tÿ°3G
3 G K
g Ei ; m ¯ p
h ;§gjg nj
,8* B fhi fB 5ÿ
ÿ 6 5eg jgkÿ 9 5B 8
ÿ
O7 7
6<5
C
95ÿ p f
59ÿ 9
57ÿ 6g iu
9 O6
K3ÿÿwxy w
ÿ3 Q/01v^ z^{
Pÿ2 9~^ fkfinj8
G
Gÿwxy wI3ghi.4
1ÿ z^{0f I
g E mg jg
h ÿ fhi
e
O6"
fhi fÿ 6 ÿ "6
9 7ÿ g jgk, D
ÿ
e
eg jgk?7 ÿÿÿ 5ÿ 8 6?
fhi fÿ
9t>C9 9ÿ
M6
¨ 7G 4ÿ Q7 Q ´
3 1± G ² Q1ÿ K/
XI ³3 3
i§g;nnj4 mghijgfk.
ÿÿ¦^µG Injf
y G ¶ G
4
gÿ ;
hE
,ÿ 6D
7dÿ 9[9M"
W Cÿ 5 ÿ 5 N ÿ
ÿ ÿ
9
D
<8 9 5 fhi fÿ m oi u 5 Cÿ8
9 9 8 ÿ g jgk:mnf pD Cÿ 67
e
b1ÿ3ÿwxy w
7/b3v^ z^{
·V 71QHV 0 H3
VQ / ÿÿ¸3Q I2
IG
3
vÿÿxyum{}~nj
wg wÿgfjy
^ z^®n; ~w
gE
h
O65ÿ 67 8ÿ
7mg jgk
95 Cÿ6 ÿ" ÿÿfhi f
7 7ÿ
5
*7ÿ
N7 9 6A "L ÿ 6 N
68
7 ÿ,75 " 7 , ÿ 9
ÿ ÿ
ÿ
d 87 8ÿ7 9
L 6
K3ÿG 0v^ z^{
3 Q/0¥Tÿwxy w
XHQ3XH9 ¨2ÿQ
7 ÿÿ 7ÿ¹ ÿÿ/
43
H
P
Uÿÿ4Gfghijgfknj
0QH g
G /
G
gE m
h
L 69ÿ
7 6
7
½ÿ3 4[%$%
10ÿ
0
1
+
P1 3 0ÿ7H
02 415S1 2
K
ÿÿ96(9
0W
ÿ9
0 1 ÿ 9D
9 7@5ÿ3 B rÿÿ- &
' tN ÿ 7 8 ÿ 9t &ÿ ÿ 9E£3 ¤
@7
1 10 )
) - -
d9 5
9
d9 5
9
@9 ÿ 67 ÿ99º
9Cÿ8 6ÿ
65
9
0 ) 3@77 7D(ÿ 91ÿ 65 ÿÿ- &
1 + ÿ 65 ÿ 9@5ÿ B 7 7E£3 ¤
@7
4 41 3
4 ) 1
ÿfhi fÿ 6991 0 ÿ
0eg jgk@9(ÿÿ3 3ÿ 5
,7 !
M"7 ÿ
9ÿ 5 ÿ
"
,M ÿ D Cÿ >
ÿ
t
65
9
»Q/ÿ ÿ1 0T ÿ¨
K1S ¨8ÿ G V¨U
U
G 1 KI13
V 0¼·KGQ/K
52 7 68
7 1
6
5
29 6 57 9 6 37 9! !"6 #$%! 0 57 9 6 1
6 &0 ! (8 ) *3 & *. 0+
2
! 68
7 37 9! ' ! *%0 %+ ,,2
EXHIBIT P
EXHIBIT Q
0 224 5
131 0
68 6 79 7 877
7 9
ÿ 9ÿÿ 6ÿ 9
68 6 79 7
7 9
ÿ 9
¨ 7
P8 q D 8 U - O?
HE 7
n O JD
hE 8 h-7
O
6
U ZU E> ÿ?
E7 7 6n-
U /JD G -8
7/ 8 - 9
?
+, .ÿ24 25 ÿ 8 9 ÿ ;=8> ? 8ÿ
- / 3 55 56 ./ : < ÿ7- @ A
1
7 85
C D 9-6@7HE6J;-HRJKÿUJ7ÿ 6V33A3WÿWX117 6ÿE 78
7 EF/>ÿ6I7> 6 E JL N7J? 7 4L6@ HEIC PQ6ÿ
67GE EHEI E9M/O 7 >ÿ@GE
@ ST> ÿ :
+@ PPP;E
L
ÿ / DZ66@ HEIE> H[;ÿ1 V6\7
YEJ ÿ ÿE 7 6J;- ÿ XL 3 ÿ JP8
? -/
4 ÿ 7
]1^` b _ÿ7\>ÿJ>ÿ5 5ÿE/ ST>E; Jÿ 97Jÿ - / ÿ ?
ÿ_a c`dU 6J78? 7e 1 f 8ÿ J9F9S?J ÿ +, .ÿhJ;
F gÿ ÿ 7 ? ? X
C>? 7 ÿhÿ /678i hÿÿ5 jk- ?6 8i EQS?J7+O 9EJ?i 8 .7Y7-.J?
J7 8@G +/-? QÿG J1 5 ÿ . /J ÿM 8ÿ 9 ÿ OJ / ÿlJO /ÿ 8 9/
ÿ ?
7ÿ
? >-ÿ
mnÿ - 8ÿ6@ HEIE
Qkn - 7GE 7 6Jo
pE7 / 7 6n
/?ÿ E>
U
q/6EJ? 9 hÿJ?
?7? / Eÿ F9D
- G J
F7ÿ6@ HEIU E>
67GE 7 6ÿ7 6n
U E> ÿDDt--H;@G/E@7HE6I7ÿ8/6Jÿ 89ÿ ? J/ÿC D 9 - > Hÿ
7 6nY79 /6>-ÿ6@ HER8L7-@k- / k- r>8L 7 Es- H;J 77 HRE 7 I6DJ ÿ
8
6 ÿ
+\
Q
ÿ
+@ PPP; E
9
7
6
m7k- @ >ÿ- 6 HO7 7 8\ÿ7 6ngÿ 7 E7u .ÿ O 6;7ÿ ÿ 9ÿ- f
ÿ ? . / .ÿ 6n ? J7U E> ÿ p6O 6ÿ- 6 -/C / w7Ou .
u kY7 ÿ v8
k7 8ÿ l7J/ 7/6ÿ pG F9Di 7\>ÿ 95UE7ÿM7/- JÿJ? ÿx7ÿ Eÿ- ÿ 867
E7gÿ 88ÿ /7ÿvU SÿJ? ÿU 6J7+9X ÿ//8i 9>6?>F9Di / / .l77\
C i
J ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
J ÿ mn u
y ÿ /?Dz{ÿ /76|.8J788ÿ 6E.
+jYEJ ÿ |7/ ÿ ? |.7
M 8ÿ6@ HEIU E> ÿp6 JDgÿ78i ÿ/Op6>8ÿGE 7 6ÿ ?/6 Di 6@ HEIF
EQGE 7 6ÿ7 6ni J? ÿ F 7ÿ=U7 ÿ - 78i 6@ HEIh- J J ÿGE 7 6ÿ+}8
ÿ>
ÿ
ÿ
-? ÿ
GE 7 68~7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 PJ7
6@ HEIÿC D 9->ÿ m-9 @
ÿ
@
PPP;D 9 67E > HR6@ HEIR
9 EZ >9P;- /E 7 68
7 -
C 8ÿ E ÿÿZ` b _ÿ ` ÿ9@,ÿ7 EF 67Y+pkÿ6ÿ\6 ? 9ÿ Z8@ÿ 9PE >
78/ ?1 -ÿ a c`d` 7 ÿQC D 9->ÿ E777ÿ E96 . 7 ; - ? 7
n
_
Q7 +9
6/8Z6 7 EF 67Y+pkÿ6ÿJ? E /ÿ7/6n ?9Pÿ6 ÿZ .ÿJ7-ÿ9DPJ ÿ 7^
E7ÿ ÿ D 9->ÿ E78D J> ?9, /7ÿ E ÿ H8-ÿ 6 tÿ6 J ÿ / / ÿ
-C
Q / E
- 8 ? n n
@6>9;
J/
7Q
C D 9->ÿ m-9PJ7~7 Eÿ7\>ÿ 6 - Eÿ ? \/ ?
7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 @ ÿC D 9 6J7Z ÿ , 9? -EJ
@ ÿ U - x9 q PPP;D 9 67E > HR
9 EZ >9P;7 -
U 7O -7ÿn /8
¶¡ £¡
·¢
U 7- /J7
7ÿ.8@
¸£¡ ¢¤¥
¹º£
e=
;
<x- D76\7
ÿ - 9ÿ JP8
7
pE7 / /-? QJÿ . /Jÿ 7
/?ÿ /67ÿ h- ?E?JP2
E
?
kEJ 6J
9-?E
Z
¨a _© X 5mÿ9 HJ-Y7 9 4
abÿ V ÿ Mÿ ? ÿ Eÿ 2
1
kE
]1
h- ?E?JP2 W 5 5
. /Jÿ 7 ÿ 4 4
k+ÿ
ª _© b ÿ a
«ÿ a `ÿ
¬
® ©< 5ÿ< L3 1
bÿ X A XV =
: W
U D 7/ ?7 J
. D 8ÿ ÿ@/
E
wJÿ6>J7Jÿ 7]16?7 ÿ` b _ÿPÿ6 Jÿ 7v;;E > 6JD/ÿ >?ÿ/@7ÿQ^` b _
8OE / ÿ / ÿ ÿ I@ a c`d9 Hÿ / ÿ U2>-@? ÿ 6 7 / . J8,ÿ_a c`d
> 8n E _
E ?n ÿ
-7 8
q8@ 6 ? ÿ 6 ÿ_a c`dY7JP; 8@\67>J?77n 8J>. 7 ÿ- 7 8-ÿHE9. J788E @
? J7ÿ @m-9^` b _ÿ \7 ÿ ÿJ78ÿ9 /9ÿEÿ 9@ @@ t? ÿZ 9, 8? 87ÿ?
E @
wJ
7
?
8 ÿ
\?.7, >7 ÿ/6. 8Eÿ 9Eÿ67> 6-EJ? ÿ. nEÿ O7ÿ|E2 - 7ÿ? ÿ7E
7 /6LE I@8E/O ÿ8P7989 D ÿ-O 6/ 88 > ÿ8+O 92 Qÿ , 2 @G N8
ÿE
7 +@ E
q86H7 /;
? /. ?8
S G +hÿÿ ?E /ÿ 678i - /
ÿvYÿM i - />ÿÿE76ÿÿ, .
ÿ i
k
k ÿ
+
¯ °ÿ ÿ
±
`b
®
²³7ÿ&
ÿ& "³
" 7
+|SvG~7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 PJ7
ÿC D 9->ÿ m-9 @
ÿ
@
7/ ?
. 8J
-
PPP;D 9 67E > HR, .R
9 EZ >9P;- E - /
7 -
+HEJDQÿ7 6ÿÿZ 9a` b _ÿ ` ÿ6ÿ9@,ÿ7 EF 67Y+pk
t? 92 E9= -ÿ9 b ÿ `bÿ a c`d` E77 ÿQC D 9->ÿ
? Q Eÿ
_
m-9PJ7ÿ 6 6>J7Jÿ 6 PJ7ÿEJDE887 ÿ9?8Jÿ 7JD-ÿE 7 68JÿVk- ?6 8
6 @ ; ÿ E / ÿ P-9 @ 2 \? ÿ8J/@>J /ÿ / ÿ9 ÿZ6@ HEIÿ V ÿ . /J
@ S. O > 8 @ n
7 ?n ? /
?
7
E- ? ÿ 7P-9ÿJ>ÿ5 WE- DPJ ÿ 6J?> . 89- ?7O 68ÿ;
6. @/ ÿ 6 8? 7e 5 ÿ9? ÿ / Z 7D ÿ- ? 7ÿ . /6E/;
n @
n>
e
GO ÿ-ÿ -7/ Du .ÿ6@ HEI~7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 PJ7
J8F 6 />J ÿ- 6 E 7 6ÿC D 9->ÿ m-9 @
p6 ? G
ÿ
@
PPP;D 9 67E > Hÿ|9D
9 EZ >9P;- 7 ÿ
9<ÿ5 eLHJ / ?HEÿ7/78? 77/-HÿZ E/62.ÿ-ÿ 7 ÿÿZJD 8- ÿ- 6_a c`d
.ÿ 2 1 ÿq / J ÿ Q, ÿ ÿJ>68ÿ 6 -ÿ /7Qÿ / / ?JJ 6 7ÿ?Q.ÿ` b _
1 e ÿ En
Z r , ? Pn /? ?
E @. @ 6 ? 8Q.ÿ. J78ÿ- ÿ7- ÿ? P?Z6 - 6_a c`dJÿ 7HEI/9>2-Q.
? ÿ? 7HJ7ÿ- 6 8? 8; ., > H7I- ÿ ÿ .ÿ` b _ÿ / ÿ 67OE 7ÿ ÿ,
u
-Q
?n
8
8HOQn \ÿ ÿ6/>ÿ Eÿ\8H7 /mJ - /- 6_a c`dÿ- ÿ .@n \ÿ ÿ/6ÿ\6Pn> ÿE
J 9ÿE7/ O-7/n /?7/ ?; / .ÿ .ÿ` b _2 .P- 9ÿE7/ 8E/ 72 Jn> ?
/ J
ÿn Q
Q
- - ÿ
, ÿE D 6. 9ÿ;
7@ ? 7- 8Q;
;
8JEG HÿC D 9->ÿ m-9PJ7
78> ÿE ~7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 @
ÿ
@
}.7ÿ6//8gÿ? P78ÿÿ ¢¤¥
7/ ?EIE 8 6 ¡ £
8J ÿ
|7/ 8ÿ ÿ8ÿ
ÿ
n - E
b aÿ _ b
ÿ «ÿ®
Y7JP8 ¶¹£¡ÿÿ¡½£¾
\7 ¢ ¹ ¡
¦¡
¥§
§§ÿÿ ¤
»¼¤¢
´n ?ÿ- ÿ-;ÿ 8ÿ 8 9 ;
G E IQ./ Q;Z /7./ ;
6 ;E 6 8;
µ \@c b;´
E7 ÿ ;
;
ÿ
´ÿ> .@D\ÿ7-8E8q .@´
qq- 9ÿJ7t6ÿ/6ÿP- 9;
Zÿ
JPÿ9x- D76\7
7 E9 - 9ÿ JP8
ÿ 7
PPP;D 9 67E > HR78> LE
9 EZ >9P;- 8JE/HR
7 -
p7 O7E8 ÿ7 6nZ6 JPÿXj
- 9ÿ9-8E> ÿ 7 1
-
w7 /7ÿ ÿE O~7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 PJ7
En 6 U O ÿC D 9->ÿ m-9 @
+; ÿ
@
C D 9-> xJ8 ?
7 EF 67 , mJ 6 ;
9 wE;
H7 ;
x7 7E
? 69
Y+pk
l. ?g
?ÿ
>
pE7 / /67 k6/n 6; p6-/7
/?ÿ -? Q .> 7; +/>?7
+/
; E6JQ
/
8JEG Hÿ8 ; 78> 9D 9 67E > H; /67; 78> ÿE Jÿ?E/67ÿÿ 7h- ?E?
78> ÿE M ÿ 8JE 7 EZ >9P;- ÿ -? Qÿ 8JEG Hÿ E ÿ/-? QJ/ ÿ . /J
+/
8
?n
JPÿT>ÿZ b ` _bY+pk; n ÿO >EJ7ÿÿ` b _ÿ- QJn8ÿ? ÿ/9>. 96O 6Q
7 - 7-ÿ
ÿ ÿ 78 7J9 8J a c`d2 O6 /2 @J 79 /Eÿ - 7/
U
t ?_
> D E ? 7 O
97 8? ÿ? ÿJO /8ÿ J6-JJD
ÿ ÿ ;E P-I@Eÿ 7mJJ @EF . @ / ?
J ? JDE @@8 .7; -ÿ ÿ ?? ÿb ` _bY+pk2 ÿ Hÿ 67 ÿ/n ÿ IH7 Jÿ- ? EJ
>
p6 / h8G
/
n ? 9D;
E @J ÿ;
?;
PPP;D 9 67E > HR7 /7LE O
9 EZ >9P;- n En 68O R
7 -
w7 /7ÿ ÿE OM ÿ En 6 7 EZ67E > H; 7 J6 _a c`d+/-? QGE?? ÿ
En 6 U O ÿ8 ; /79D 9 >9P;- ÿ ?-ÿ ` b _ÿ /67R6JJDg
+;
w7
U ^
k- ?> / ? ÿ ? D 6w7 /7ÿ ÿE OJÿ?E/67ÿE7 ÿÿ 7G HO 2 ÿT>ÿZ
HH. JEJ 8hE E 7; En 6 U O ÿ E ÿ/-? Q, 8@J/ ÿ7 7ÿ - 7-ÿb ` _b
ÿ
+; 8
?n
+s
Y+pkÿ 6 PJ7ÿn ÿÿÿn 67-ÿ77- JDE @HE E JDE/67ÿE?? ÿ? ÿ- ?> / ?
m-9 @ ; 7JJ> ED ÿZ \9O? ÿ? ÿ ? D? ÿ/-? Q/ JJDE @> HH. JEJ 8
@ U 8?
@
6
Z6 b ` _bY+pkÿ;
-ÿ
ÿ ;
;
+/-? Q
/67
F7, >
7@ EI
hE/7 S7 9ÿ7 EF 67Y+pkÿ 6 PJ7
/n Pÿ EÿC D 9->ÿ m-9 @
~
@
PPP;D 9 67E > HR /n PL? ER
9 EZ >9P;- HE/7 - 7 9
7 -
hE/7 E888>J?8PJ ÿ7/ D/76` b _6D877 ; J6-JJD
ÿ
/n Pÿ8J/ÿ9 /ÿ / D /J ÿ J _a c`dÿ J/6@ÿ -ÿ ÿ ?? ÿb `ÿ _bY+pk2
7 n ?nÿ
7
p6 /
hE/7 > HO77 ÿ?J/68 Jÿ /ÿ 7v?/@UE7ÿ /678ST>; /n Pÿ6@ E7 ÿ/n Pÿ- 9/@E ÿ 7? nOPJ / ÿ J ÿ//8+/-? Qÿ 7ÿ /7 DE . /@Z H
?
nn 7
hE
6
+6 - EUE7v?\6Jÿ /ÿÿ > 7-8-ÿ>7 >ÿÿ. / 7U. J8Eÿ 9Eÿÿ > 7-8J ? ÿ//ÿ J78/PJ E|E n 96ÿZ J? 7J 8J ÿ/@7ÿ8P798E|E n 96ÿZ
t
Q n
U ? >
ÿ
U J? 7Jÿ 9JEÿ>7 >;
>7 >ÿ p-J> 9 J? 7
? / U
GE 7 6Jÿ w- l-u . 8J ÿn /ÿ
6@ HEIEÿ Pÿ ÿ- ÿ. /QG Eo~
Z
n/8R77Qn? /E 7 68> HR5 =1 R5/E 7 6JR
/O [ \6/JD6@ HEI;- e 1 R1e R6@ HEIE
R
2 8 6 9
7 9
7 9 7 7 9
7 9 7 9
73# $1 44% &
" " *
87
27 68 6
9 68 6
9 "541 0 $$ 7
7 7 '()
2
!
01
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 6 79 7 877
7 9
ÿ 9ÿÿ 6ÿ 9
\6ÿ[ÿ[ S` .bÿd,_ÿ= ? <ÿ46e fbÿ4h d1ÿ 16 .ÿ /e3ÿ6 45- ÿ.b3ÿe01
^R _ Z ÿa6. c .:ÿ; > @=A-4.,ÿ +g6 b_ 1 db. , 4 i 1, ÿe-4 ,6 ÿb
R ÿ 1 -<
e ÿ ab _, f
/
j6 ÿ4l dc- , .m46e f/ 9no0 4ÿbÿ 6 .ÿ6ÿ ÿ 6 .ÿe ÿ6ÿ,,1.ffdÿ 6 .q
37-ÿ 6 ..5 9-: 4.,g6 ÿ -p01k dne 4 k dn- 5e 4 /1-bÿ6 .l dn
k
4 1 l
9f l
e
3 k
.i .b76 ÿbÿ ],b er 4ÿ ,t M DCG ÿ.5 9-:-o.c- , .bnÿ, .0, 7e g 0
, 64 ÿe01k i . 4ÿ 04 ÿ? =ÿ <?c- , .bÿ ÿ .5 9-:-q -/ ÿe b,ÿ ,
e
, 9, sb 0
u
6k
1
c
71ÿ b-g
b4 8 ÿg
vÿÿ g
c- , .ÿ, .08. .,y 71,ÿÿ.5 9-:{eb,
.5 9-:+ -/ ÿ ÿ ,ÿz, b4. c- , .ÿ 3
6x ÿ
e
041}sssg- , .bg6
4i | 4 5 9-:-/ 9}
} .
c- , .bÿÿ ,3.,4<> @=A1-/ ÿe b,- 5-1 ÿ,i ÿ6 ÿ3ÿe ÿ 71,ÿ= ? <J4
.5 9-:-b4 ÿ 7 1ÿ= ? <ÿ, .0, 7e ÿe ÿ360 31fd~,- 5. b4.<> @=Aÿ
10 - ;
, ;
6
i6,46 . d b,1e 9,6ÿ.5 /ÿ- g
.4/ÿ dÿ 1e 1ÿ- ÿ. 6 d 4 9,
f j
i e
h 7 36/ÿ.5 9-:-z,bs1y - ÿ 16 . ,^/ÿ ^, ÿg
, -x .,c- , .bÿ ^, ÿz, 5d 49,ÿ .b,z,bs1g
ÿ
+
g
041}sssgd 4b4 6 47 . 1 0 .ÿb, 1ÿ 6 d e-be
4i | 4 1i3 g 9ÿ-, 6b ÿ{4,ÿh/e ,ÿ / 9, 44
} . 6/ ÿ
,ÿ
6
ÿ 4 7ÿg}[` S ÿ ^,
z-b | TZ ÿÿ W. bs1
eX ÿ ,
V
c- , .bpÿbb7i6 ,1s-ÿ-fÿ ,ÿ.^5 ÿ e0fd 5 416 ÿ= ? <ÿ ,4_e ÿ ,
.5 9-:-1j3e ÿ./1ÿ 1, 1_0 fi6b,96 43ÿi -,ÿe; > @=A. d 11ÿ 54 f
3
4
<
, - 0
s,,- 4,bÿe db74-ÿ ÿ= ? <ÿ ,4 4 34,e /1-f/b . g s,,_0 f5556
.ÿ/b ÿ , 1 . ÿ 4 ; > @=A. d 1ÿ ÿ30 ÿ,,1.ÿ.,bÿ ^.4,ÿbÿ.i
^ e e 0 9f <
, ~ -ÿ
4 -6 ÿ
6 ,6ÿ ÿ= ? <ÿ ,4g :ÿd,4ÿ 3s`isb ÿ , bfdÿ= ? <ÿÿ6ÿ ^e ÿ3e
e ÿ8 ; > @=A. d 11ÿ ,1 .ÿ 8 3 d ÿ 4 4 9ÿÿ6 .<> @=Abe 4 b7-6 7
9f <
,
a6 66
00 8 ;
1 96
4,i6 15g
0 ÿ.9b, ÿg
g
+ -/ ,ÿ 3454ÿ7 3 .,4- , .1
, .0 1. -, ÿ 3 -8 /ÿ 5 9-:
, 6, 6 .
37 3 .,;= ? <B
, -8 /ÿ > @=A=
6 <
BD=<F
C;ÿ= G
37 3 .,;@F
, -8 /ÿ ?
6 ?
37 3 .,HI
, -8 /ÿ J
6 C
37 3 .,<K?
, -8 /ÿ?BLJ
6
37 3 .,<F ÿ <> > ÿDI D
, -8 /ÿ GLCDLB?MC =
6 =
<H=? ;
=F ;N
DM DCG ÿP ? B
? =ÿ <?F C NQ
O
R S T U V W X YZ
[
\,4
]
d ,4 6ÿ 36e-` .9ÿ6 .e,e 4 5 .1ÿ1ÿ./1ÿ/ 4 e` , .ÿ .
i .b _ b .bÿx6 fdÿ 4.,ÿ 5,1` ,i,b,3 -b ÿh -e96,
e -8 ÿ
ÿ
6 6ÿ
,i + e ÿ , j / .- f c .
3 , 58 5 - : b / ,91
,
^
2 8 6 9
7 9
7 9 7 7 9
7 9 7 9
73# $1 44% &
" " *
87
27 68 6
9 68 6
9 "541 0 $$ 7
7 7 '()
2
!
11
2
0 224 5
131 0
68 6 79 7 877
7 9
ÿ 9ÿÿ 6ÿ 9
68 6 79 7
7 9
ÿ 9
± @
XA y L A ] 6 WG
PM @
v W RL
mM A m6@
W
?
] ] MF ÿG
M@ @ ?v6
] 8RL O 6A
@8 A 6 B
G
45 7ÿ;= ;> ÿ A B ÿ DEAF G Aÿ
6 8 < >> >? 78 C = ÿ@6 H I
:
@ A>
K L B6?H@PM?RD6PZRSÿ]R@ÿ ?^<<I<_ÿ_`::@ ?ÿM @A
@ MN8Fÿ?Q@F ? M RT V@RG @ =T?H PMQK XY?ÿ
?@OM MPMQ MBU8W @ FÿHOM
H [\F ÿ C
4H XXXDM
T
a:bd f cÿ@iFÿRFÿ> >ÿM8 [\FMD Rÿ B@Rÿ 6 8 ÿ G
ÿce gdh] ?R@AG @j : k Aÿ RBNB[GR ÿ 45 7ÿmRD
N lÿ ÿ @ G G `
O Rÿ> no6 G? Ap MY[GR@4W BMRGp A 7@r@67RGpR@ AHO 486G Y
mÿ : > ÿ 7 8R ÿU Aÿ B ÿ WR 8 ÿqRW 8ÿ A B8 ÿKFG @ ÿmÿ 8?@A
G
@ÿ
G F6ÿ
6ÿ
4nrM@ ÿ F@ R Hs7 R@Atÿ 8@ÿ AG Aÿ ?M S
ÿ 8H4F?H8 ÿ AG Aÿ s@8? R@As7@ 7
@
s7
uvÿ 6 Aÿ?H PMQM
Yov 6 @OM @ ?Rw
xM@ 8 @ ?v
8Gÿ MF
]
N@ÿ?H PMQ] MF
?@OM @ ?ÿ@ ?v
y8?MRG B mÿRG
G@G 8 Mÿ NBL
6 O R
] MF ÿLL|66PDHO8MH@PM?Q@ÿA8?Rÿ ABÿ G R8ÿK L B 6 F Pÿ
@ ?vr@B 8?F6ÿ?H PMZAT@6Ho6 8 o6 zFAT @ M{6 PD6
R @@ PZM @ Q?LR ÿ
A
? ÿ
4i
Y
ÿ
4H XXXD M
B
@
?
u@o6 H Fÿ6 ? PW@ @ Aiÿ@ ?vlÿ @ M@} 7ÿ W ?D@ÿ ÿ Bÿ6 k
ÿ G 7 8 7ÿ ?v G R@] MF ÿ x?W ?ÿ6 ? 68K 8 @W} 7
} o6
r@ ÿ ~A
u@NBÿ6 ? W ? ?ÿU@86 RÿRG ÿ@ÿ Mÿ6 ÿ A?@p M@lÿ AAÿ@8?
ÿR } 7ÿ @X6Qp BF?GFNBLp 8 8 7q@@iÿo@ Aÿ q@R8 8@
@ xM
ÿ
R ÿ uv }
ÿ
K
ÿ 8GLtÿ 8@?s7AR@AAÿ ?M7
4nrMR ÿ s@8 ÿ G s7@
U Aÿ?H PMQ] MF ÿx? RLlÿ@Ap ÿ8Wx?FAÿOM @ ?ÿ4Ap ?H PMQm6 R ? L
MYOM @ ?ÿ@ ?vp RG ÿ N @ÿ]@ ÿ 6 @Ap ?H PMQN ÿOM @ ?ÿ G8 R
ÿF
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
6G
OM @ ?A
@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? XR@
?H PMQÿK L B6Fÿ u6B H
ÿ
H
XXXDL B ?@M F PZ?H PMQZ
B M FBXD6 8M @ ?A
@ 6
K Aÿ M ÿÿd f cÿ d ÿBH5ÿ@ MN ?@r4xoÿ?ÿi? G Bÿ AHÿ BXM F
@A8 G: 6ÿ e gdhd @ ÿYK L B6Fÿ M@@@ÿ MB? 7 @ D 6 G @
v
c
Y@ 4B
?8A? @ MN ?@r4xoÿ?ÿRG M 8ÿ@8?v GBXÿ? ÿ 7ÿR@6ÿBLXR ÿ @b
M@ÿ ÿ L B6Fÿ M@AL RF GB5 8@ÿ M ÿ PA6ÿ ? |ÿ? R ÿ 8 8 ÿ
6K
Y 8 M
6 A G v v
H?FBD
R8
@Y
K L B6Fÿ u6BXR@
@ Mÿ@iFÿ ? 6 Mÿ G i8 G
@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? H ÿK L B ?R@ ÿ 5 BG 6MR
H ÿ ] 6 B y 6
XXXDL B ?@M F PZ
B M FBXD6
@ 6
] @W 66
@ÿv 8A
¾ª ¬ª
¿¤«
] @6 8R@
@ÿ7AH
À¬ª «®¤
Á¬
j
D
E6 L@?i@
ÿ 6 Bÿ RXA
@
xM@ 8 86G YRÿ 7 8Rÿ @
8Gÿ 8?@ÿ m6 GMGRX;
M
G
oMR ?R
B6GM
±e c² ` >uÿB PR6r@ B =
efÿ ^ ÿ Uÿ G ÿ Mÿ ;
:
oM
a:
m6 GMGRX; _ > >
7 8Rÿ @ ÿ = =
o4ÿ
³ c² f ÿ e ¶
´ÿ e dÿ
µ
· ²E >ÿE T< :
fÿ ` I `^
C _
] L @8 G@ R
7 L Aÿ ÿH8
M
Rÿ?FR@Rÿ @a:?G@ ÿd f cÿXÿ? Rÿ @~DDM F ?RL8ÿ FGÿ8H@ÿYbd f c
AWM 8 ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ QH e gdhB Pÿ 8 ÿ ];F6HG ÿ ? @ 8 7 RA5ÿce gdh
F Av M c
M Gv ÿ
6@ A
yAH ? G ÿ ? ÿce gdhr@RXD AHi?@FRG@@v ARF7 @ ÿ6 @ A6ÿPMB7 R@AAM H
G R@ÿ Hu6Bbd f cÿ i@ ÿ ÿR@AÿB 8BÿMÿ BH HH |G ÿ B5 AG A@ÿG
M H
R
@
G
A ÿ
iG7@5 F@ ÿ8?7 AMÿ BMÿ?@F ?6MRG ÿ7 vMÿ W@ÿsM; 6 @ÿG ÿ@M
@ 8?TM QHAM8W ÿAX@BAB L ÿ6W ?8 AA F ÿA4W B; Yÿ 5 ; HO VA
ÿM
6
@ 4H M
yA?P@ 8D
G 87 GA
[ O 4mÿÿ GM 8ÿ ?@Ap 6 8
ÿ~rÿU p 6 8FÿÿM@?ÿÿ5 7
ÿ p
o
o ÿ
4
¸ ¹ÿ ÿ º
df
·
,»7ÿ"
ÿ" »
- - 7
4s[~O
@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? XR@
ÿK L B6Fÿ u6B H
ÿ
H
@8 G
7 AR
6
XXXDL B ?@M F PZ5 7Z
B M FBXD6 M 6 8
@ 6
4PMRLYÿ@ ?ÿÿ Bed f cÿ d ÿ?ÿBH5ÿ@ MN ?@r4xo
|G B; MB 6ÿB f ÿ dfÿ e gdhd M@@ ÿYK L B6Fÿ
G Y Mÿ
c
u6BXR@ÿ ? ?FR@Rÿ ? XR@ÿMRLMAA@ ÿBGARÿ @RL6ÿM @ ?ARÿ^o6 G? A
? H D ÿ M 8 ÿ X6B H ; iG ÿAR8HFR 8ÿ 8 ÿB ÿ?H PMQÿ ^ ÿ 7 8R
H [7 W F A H v
@ Gv G 8
G
@
M6 G ÿ @X6BÿRFÿ> _M6 LXR ÿ ?RGF 7 AB6 G@W ?AÿD
?7 H8 ÿ ? AG @j > ÿBG ÿ 8 @L ÿ6 G @ÿ 7 8?M8D
v H
v6
F
j
OW ÿ6ÿ 6@8 L} 7ÿ?H PMQ
@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? XR@
RAN ? 8FR ÿ6 ? M @ ?ÿK L B6Fÿ u6B H
x? G O
ÿ
H
XXXDL B ?@M F PÿsBL
B M FBXD6 6
@ 6
ÿ
BEÿ> jTPR 8 GPMÿ@8@AG @@86Pÿ M8?;7ÿ6ÿ @ ÿÿRL A6 ÿ6 ?ce gdh
7ÿ ; : ÿy 8 R ÿ Y5 ÿ ÿRF?Aÿ ? 6ÿ 8@Yÿ 8 8 GRR ? @ÿGY7ÿd f c
: j ÿ M6
v
z 5 G Xv 8G G
M H7 H ? G AY7ÿ7 R@Aÿ6 ÿ@6 ÿG XG? 6 ?ce gdhRÿ @PMQ8BF;6Y7
G ÿG @PR@ÿ6 ? AG AD 75 F P@Q6 ÿ ÿ 7ÿd f cÿ 8 ÿ ?@WM @ÿ ÿ6
5
}
6Y
Gv
A
APWYv iÿ ÿ?8Fÿ MÿiAP@ 8uR 6 86 ?ce gdhÿ6 ÿ 7Hv iÿ ÿ8?ÿi?XvF ÿM
R BÿM@8 W6@8v 8G@8 GD 8 7ÿ 7ÿd f c; 7X6 BÿM@8 AM8 @; RvF G
6
8 R
ÿv Y
Y
6 6 ÿ
5 ÿM L ?7 BÿD
@H G @6 AYD
D
ARMO PÿK L B6Fÿ u6BXR@
@AF ÿM
@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? H
ÿ
H
7@ÿ?88AlÿG X@A¥ÿÿ ¤«®
@8 GMQM A ? §¨©ª ¬
AR ÿ
6
£¤
s@8 Aÿ ÿAÿ
ÿ
v 6 M
f eÿ c f
ÿ ¶ ´ÿ·
r@RXA ¾Á¬ªÿÿªÅ¬Æ
i@ « §Á ª
¯ª
®°
£°°ÿÿ
§ÃÄ«
¼v Gÿ6 ÿ6Dÿ Aÿ A B D
O M QY78 YD 8@78 D
? DM ? AD
½ iHg fD¼
M@ ÿ ¶D
D
ÿ
¼ÿF 7HLiÿ@6AMAy 7H¼
yy6 BÿR@|?ÿ8?ÿX6 BD
ÿ
RXÿB6 L@?i@
@ MB 6 Bÿ RXA
ÿ @
XXXDL B ?@M F PZ@AF TM
B M FBXD6 ARM8PZ
@ 6
x@ W@MA ÿ@ ?v? RXÿ`n
6 BÿB6AMF ÿ @ :
6
@ 8@ÿ ÿM W
@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? XR@
Mv ? ] W ÿK L B6Fÿ u6B H
4D ÿ
H
K L B6F RA G
@ MN ?@ 5 6
uR ? D
B MD
P@ D
@ @M
G ?B
r4xo
q7 Gl
Gÿ
F
xM@ 8 8?@ o?8v ?D x?68@
8Gÿ 6G Y 7F @D 48FG@
48
D M?RY
8
ARMO PÿA D @AF BL B ?@M F PD 8?@D @AF ÿM RÿGM8?@ÿÿ @m6 GMG
@AF ÿM U ÿ ARM @ M FBXD6 ÿ 6G Yÿ ARMO Pÿ M ÿ86G YR8 ÿ 7 8R
6
48
A
Gv
RXÿ\Fÿ f d cfr4xoD v ÿW FMR@ÿÿd f cÿ6 YRvAÿG ÿ8BF7 B?W ?Y
@ 6 @6ÿ ÿ ÿ @A @RB AR e gdh; W? 8; HR @B 8Mÿ 6 @8
]
| Gc
F L M G @ W
B@ AG ÿG ÿRW 8Aÿ R?6RRL ÿ ÿ DM X6QHMÿ @uRR HMN 7 H 8 G
R G RLM HHA 7@D 6ÿ ÿ GG ÿf d cfr4xo; ÿ Pÿ ?@ ÿ8v ÿ QP@ Rÿ6 G MR
F
x? 8 6
mAO
8
6
v G BLD
M HR ÿD
GD
XXXDL B ?@M F PZ@ 8@TM W
B M FBXD6 v Mv ?AW Z
@ 6
@ 8@ÿ ÿM WU ÿ Mv ? @ M?@M F PD @ R? ce gdh486G YOMGG ÿ
Mv ? ] W ÿA D 8@BL B FBXD6 ÿ G6ÿ d f cÿ 8?@Z?RRLl
4D
@
6
] b
o6 GF 8 G ÿ G L ?@ 8@ÿ ÿM WRÿGM8?@ÿM@ ÿÿ @O PW ; ÿ\Fÿ
PP7 RMR AmM M @D Mv ? ] W ÿ M ÿ86G Y5 AHR8 ÿ@ @ÿ 6 @6ÿf d cf
6
ÿ
4D A
Gv
4{
r4xoÿ ? XR@ÿv ÿÿÿv ?@6ÿ@@6 RLM HPM M RLM8?@ÿMGG ÿG ÿ6 GF 8 G
u6B H D @RRF ML ÿ iBWG ÿG ÿ G LG ÿ86G Y8 RRLM HF PP7 RMR A
H ] AG
H
?
6
? f d cfr4xoÿD
6ÿ ÿ D
D
486G Y
8?@
N@5 F
@H MQ
mM8@ [@ Bÿ@ MN ?@r4xoÿ ? XR@
8v Xÿ MÿK L B6Fÿ u6B H
H
XXXDL B ?@M F PZ 8v XTG MZ
B M FBXD6 PM8@ 6 @ B
@ 6
mM8@ MAAAFRGAXR ÿ@8 L8@?d f c?LA@@ D R?6RRL ÿ
8v XÿAR8ÿB 8ÿ 8 L 8R ÿ R ce gdhÿ R8?Hÿ 6ÿ ÿ GG ÿf dÿ cfr4xo;
@ v Gvÿ
@
x? 8 6
mM8@ F PW@@ ÿGR8?A Rÿ 8ÿ @~G8H]M@ÿ 8?@A[\FD 8v Xÿ?H M@ ÿ6
8v Xÿ6 B8HM ÿ @G vWXR 8 ÿ R ÿ88A486G Yÿ @ÿ 8@ LM 7 8H P
G
vv @
mM
?
4? 6 M]M@~Gi?Rÿ 8ÿÿ F @6A6ÿF@ Fÿÿ7 8 @]7 RAMÿ BMÿÿ F @6A6
R G ÿ88ÿ R@A8XR MsM v B?ÿ RG @R AR ÿ8H@ÿAX@BAMsM v B?ÿ
|
Y v
] G F
ÿ
] RG @Rÿ BRMÿF@ FD
F@ Fÿ x6RF B RG @
G 8 ]
OM @ ?Rÿ 6 q6} 7 AR ÿv 8ÿ
?H PMQM¡ÿ Xÿ ÿ6 ÿ7 8YO Mw
v8AZ@@YvG 8M @ ?AF PZ> : Z>8M @ ?RZ
8W ¢ i?8RL?H PMQD6 j : Z:j Z?H PMQM
Z
2 8 6 9
97 97 7 4 # &(* - 68 6 7 9 7 7 9
7 9 7 8/ 12 1 01
87
27
!" $% ' )+, 7 9
. 9 - 68 6
. 9 609 1 3 2
2
4
0 224 5
131 0
68 6 79 7 877
7 9
ÿ 9ÿÿ 6ÿ 9
e?ÿdÿd \i 7kÿm5hÿF H Eÿ=?n okÿ=q m:ÿ :? 7ÿ 8n<ÿ? =>6 ÿ7k<ÿn9:
g[ h c ÿj?7 l 7CÿD G IFJ6=75ÿ 4p? kh : mk7 5 = r :5 ÿn6= 5? ÿk
[ ÿ : 6E
n ÿ jk h5 o
8
s? ÿ=u ml6 5 7v=?n o8 Bwx9 =ÿkÿ ? 7ÿ?ÿ ÿ ? 7ÿn ÿ?ÿ55:7oomÿ ? 7z
<@6ÿ ? 77> B6C =75p? ÿ 6y9:t mwn = t mw6 >n = 8:6kÿ? 7u mw
t
= : u
Bo u
n
< t
7r 7k@? ÿkÿ f5k n{ =ÿ 5} V MLP ÿ7> B6C6x7l6 5 7kwÿ5 795 @n p 9
5 ?= ÿn9:t r 7 =ÿ 9= ÿH Fÿ EHl6 5 7kÿ ÿ 7> B6C6z 68 ÿn k5ÿ 5
n
5 B5 |k 9
~
?t
:
l
@:ÿ k6p
k= A ÿp
ÿÿ p
l6 5 7ÿ5 79A7 75 @:5ÿÿ7> B6Cnk5
7> B6C4 68 ÿ ÿ 5ÿ5 k=7 l6 5 7ÿ <
? ÿ
6
n
9=:|||p6 5 7kp?
=r
= > B6C68 B
7
l6 5 7kÿÿ 5<75=EG IFJ:68 ÿn k56 >6: ÿ5r ÿ? ÿ<ÿn ÿ @:5ÿF H ES=
7> B6C6k= ÿ @ :ÿF H Eÿ5 795 @n ÿn ÿ<?9 <:om56 >7 k=7EG IFJÿ
:9 6 D
5 D
?
r?5=? 7 m k5:n B5?ÿ7> 8ÿ6 p
7=8ÿ mÿ :n :ÿ6 ÿ7 ? m = B5
o s
r n
q @ <?8ÿ7> B6C65k|: 6 ÿ :? 7 5g8ÿ g5 ÿp
5 6 75l6 5 7kÿ g5 ÿ5 >m =B5ÿ 7k55k|:p
ÿ
4
p
9=:|||pm =k= ? =@ 7 : 9 7ÿk5 :ÿ ? m n6kn
=r
= :r< p Bÿ65 ?k ÿ=5ÿq8n 5ÿ 8 B5 ==
7 ?8 ÿ
5ÿ
?
ÿ = @ÿpdi \ ÿ g5
6k
]c ÿÿ `7 k|:
na ÿ 5
_
l6 5 7kyÿkk@r? 5:|6ÿ6oÿ 5ÿ7g> ÿ n9om > =:? ÿF H Eÿ 5=hn ÿ 5
7> B6C6:s<n ÿ78:ÿ :5 :h9 or?k5B? =<ÿr 65ÿnD G IFJ7 m ::ÿ >= o
<
=
E
5 6 9
|556 =5kÿn mk@=6ÿ ÿF H Eÿ 5= = <=5n 8:6o8k 7 p |55h9 o>>>?
7ÿ8k ÿ 5 : 7 ÿ = D G IFJ7 m :ÿ ÿ<9 ÿ55:7ÿ75kÿ g7=5ÿkÿ7r
g n n 9 Bo E
5 6ÿ
= 6? ÿ
? 5?ÿ ÿF H Eÿ 5=p Cÿm5=ÿ <|ir|k ÿ 5 komÿF H Eÿÿ?ÿ gn ÿ<n
n ÿA D G IFJ7 m ::ÿ 5: 7ÿ A < m ÿ = = Bÿÿ? 7EG IFJkn = k@6? @
Bo E
5
j6
? ??
99 A D
: B?
=5r? :>p
9 ÿ7Bk5 ÿp
p
4 68 5ÿ <=>=ÿ@ < 75=6 5 7:
5 79 :7 65 ÿ < 6A 8ÿ > B6C
5 ?5 ? 7
<@ < 75DF H EK
5 6A 8ÿ G IFJF
? E
KMFEO
LDÿF P
<@ < 75DIO
5 6A 8ÿ H
? H
<@ < 75QR
5 6A 8ÿ S
? L
<@ < 75ETH
5 6A 8ÿHKUS
?
<@ < 75EO ÿ EG G ÿMR M
5 6A 8ÿ PULMUKHVL F
? F
EQFH D
FO DW
MV MLP ÿY H K
H Fÿ EHO L WZ
X
[ \ ] ^ _ ` a bc
d
e5=
f
m 5= ?ÿ <?n6i 7Bÿ? 7n5n = > 7:ÿ:ÿ78:ÿ8 = ni 5 7ÿ 7
r 7k h k 7kÿ? omÿ =75ÿ >5:i 5r5k5< 6k ÿq 6nB?5
n 6A ÿ
6
ÿ
? ?ÿ
5r 4 n ÿ 5 s 8 76 o l 7
< 5 >A > 6 C k 8 5B:
5
g
2 8 6 9
97 97 7 4 # &(* - 68 6 7 9 7 7 9
7 9 7 8/ 12 1 11
87
27
!" $% ' )+, 7 9
. 9 - 68 6
. 9 609 1 3 2
2
4
0 224 5
131 0
68
ÿ7 6ÿÿ ÿ 7
7ÿ 7 6 7 6
7
6
68
ÿ7 6
7ÿ 7 6 7
7
6
f;
V< } J < cG < rK; < c2;
MG ;
[
C2
:
F 4KJ L 2<
;4 < 2 =
B
F hF GA ÿB
G; ; :H2
01 3ÿ79 7:< = ÿ ?9<A B <ÿ
2 4 87 ÿ 34 > @ ÿ;2 C D
6 ; <7
F GA ÿJJW22M?CL4GC;MG:N;ÿ<4:Kÿ <=ÿ B K4ÿT J = 2 A Mÿ
; :HI;= 4:A2ÿ:C MGX<O;2CQ2 4 Q2 SA<O ; GU2 M?2
K ;; MXG ; N:JK ÿ
<
: ÿ
0P
R
ÿ
0C VVV? G
=
;
:
Y;Q2 C Aÿ2 : M[; ; <Pÿ; :H\ÿ ; G;Z 3ÿ [ :?;ÿ ÿ =ÿ2 `
ÿ B 3 4 3ÿ :H B K;F GA ÿ ]:[ :ÿ2 : 24T 4 _;[Z 3
Z Q2
I; ÿ ^<
a ÿ Bd3 <KB G:ÿfG ÿ G=1=RQH Aÿ]; Aÿ ÿ B ÿ P; e ;PAÿ =7FG;
bcKÿ ;4 B K e M;0PK K4ÿ ;Ne G ;gh CI;KVÿF :K;0=b ÿ44<
2 ;ÿ
GK
ÿ
cK
ÿ
ÿ
i ÿ 4BJklÿ 4;:m3<K;<<ÿ :G3
0jIGK ÿ m;4 ÿ B m3;
n <ÿ:C MGNF GA
GRLG ; :ÿ; :H
oF; ÿ 2 ;<
ÿ4[]:A<
]: KJ\ÿ;<
KB ÿ p ;
A
LG ; :ÿ0d<
:C MGNp
F ;:< = ÿ1 3
;ÿ 34 G 2 4
; <
T J =2Aÿ > 4Bÿ
; Gp :;I0]Qÿ ; 4
]G G
a ÿ nÿ MK2I; = 9
b 7Yÿ= B ÿ Gÿ 8
QG
a
c2 BGBrKV8 7 7
3 4Kÿ ; ÿ 9 9
Q0ÿ
to
?
@:P;
ÿ KV<
;
IGÿ? HG N:ÿ; Gp :;I0]Qÿ : VK;
q ÿ RB;ÿT J =2Aÿ Y2= C
r01
s
C
VVV?J = :;G A MXGOO1 RB;OX
= Gh A=V?2 :q G HG N:o
; 2
P
]G4tp B 4 B =RG CVHÿw y v8 RB 4 G; 4ÿ3 AKB =RA BC?BMR[;K3 ÿ:K=8
:Oÿ3 AK GKÿB ÿ Ru x zw{ÿ ÿ2ÿ 4B|p B 4 GKÿ2 4?}ÿ ÿ:P2 <G4 ;ÿ
2 4
v
VH [
2 4
ÿ
A}
C<3 <CH Vÿÿ :X22X; 4:ÿG B 4 4GBGuw y vÿ J<:4 BK4;A =:hG3;Kÿ ;
KA <; ÿ2 GMGNA =:hG3;A B 2ÿ 4Kÿÿ x zw{: K4GK ÿÿ ÿ22X; 4:ÿ 4
G v
; 2 hH
<H
;<BK==M; 4 hH ÿ:C AÿB ÿÿ =:~ K ÿ4;ÿ B hA3;<2ÿK =: :C A<4ÿ[ B
<; 4 ÿ; Bÿ ÿ ;[2 3 4 CKVKÿ 3: 2H : 3G 4::ÿh MK ÿ 2 3 4ÿ < ; C
G; 2 4
G 4 =; ; MG
< G[
2
M2;M2 ;ÿ ÿ;ÿ ;?
:ÿ B R4 J 4H ÿ?
2 4 ?
T J =2Aÿ Y2=VK;s; Gÿ;PAÿ : 2 Gÿ B P4 B
; Gp :;I0]Qÿ : C ÿT J = :K;h ÿ 1 =B 2GK
C ÿ F 2 = } 2
VVV?J = :;G A MX
= Gh A=V?2
; 2
p 3 CB ÿG4;ÿ
w { vKÿBK4=A3 =:[ :RG4:;ÿ 2< ;K=;ÿÿG; 4
2 B KJ[ :B : ÿ yÿ G ÿ ;= 4Gÿ 2 ;4ÿ42B RVH ÿ[ AGK <K[ 4B
w
< B ; [
W B
[2 ;3KBG C=KGKB< [ 24_Kÿ:AK;Kÿ ;a:B; ÿw y vÿVÿ: Kÿ ;^??
:<A 4 ÿB ÿ4 4 ÿ3 [ :? <[G 4 ÿ 4 ÿ ÿ NCu x zw{= Mÿ 4 ÿ F8
2 KJ 2
ÿ
A <H G v
G BH
G A :KJ4ÿ ABÿ4C;ÿRw y vÿ <C : B ÿ : ÿvx zw{I;KV? <CP:;AKB;;
A2CB ÿ : ; 4 3 K<1ÿvx zw{} K;ÿ CY2=w y vÿ P; ÿ ÿK;<ÿ= 4=
2; <
B G C
_K
;
H <KA3 ; ÿ2 ; <2ÿMG=?
Gÿ =C CC WB ÿh =?
B
< ÿ?
_2 [ 4BÿVR: q HG N: ;;2 ; ÿÿb 1 2 ÿh?
VÿG; 4G ;ÿ ÿ RB;ÿ P=[ CG ?cÿ2 N2ÿ?
= IG01
C
?
VVV?1 q3B =2 ; Gÿ 1 =
G G2 :G? MÿT J = ;<
A ÿ I;
F [t 87 oO
w { vo 8<:< 2 <1;h:H ÿw y vÿ; :H; JB ÿ:C MGNGÿ KH4K
; ÿ9ÿ a ÿ y8ÿÿ [ B K=ÿ ÿ ;u x zw{<GA ÿB K;LG ; :K8 A ÿ <
t ÿ
ÿ K;
24 v
VH H
RGÿ <:1G C CK4ÿKÿVÿ: T J =2A? H ÿ: H <2 ;ÿÿ 3 4Kÿ ; ÿ =?G C
; : ÿ :B ; ÿ 2H<= Mÿ; Gÿ :;ÿ ;MÿGÿA<Kc2 BGBrKV8 K8B
VG ;
B G
p L
B
QGhÿ
]H ; K8<V;=<T B 2 8 KB ÿB ÿ B G2;ÿ CGÿH :ÿ=2G]G20= 8 =?<2;:Bÿ[ B
2 Bÿ ÿ =Gÿ2 C Bÿ qJG CmG J =:8B K? ;;<G< ÿÿ =ÿ 4 ÿ K84:h2 4 ;
G ÿ
m;K
} L
2QGhÿ
2
<PBC Rÿÿ?
;; ÿG<G?
?
IGÿ HG N:ÿ 2;<2 Gÿ 2 =ÿTB; }
q RB;ÿ]:h<KB = ;O KNCB
01
s
]: ÿ
H4<XVVV?B; K?2 KX< G; 442B R
4[ =NCBA MXB3 [ 4BG4:;
X K
rKVÿ
w { vÿ:;2 ÿKNCBÿ ;V2=ÿ:;4 :h<KB =2 B4??F ;4;
; wÿ y[2 =ÿBTB; }8H ÿ : <= J <ÿ 2;<2 Gÿ MM3 K ÿ? ;ÿ
4 CG [
A
R?ÿ H
A M[;;[2 =ÿBTB; }ÿB ÿKA P: qÿ2 B AKB ÿB ÿ1 ÿ4 K =: 2 G K<ÿ? q<G
2 =4ÿ:;2 ÿKNCBG CC<2;ÿ A B ;4 <G Cq <GÿMK ÿ M[ B;??IGÿÿ
IG<
2
2 < GA
?ÿ K
M; ;ÿhH ÿ44ÿ : h =2BGG CKÿÿAB ; ÿG; 4 42B R1 h:ÿ ;^B4CFG;ÿ 4Bÿ
M1 : ÿ ;FG;mGÿ ÿ K :KÿB ÿ G=; <C[ 4Bÿ 4:;ÿ;2;4 ÿ K ÿ44<]G; 4
24
2 QGh
<K
G
H ;
\
w y vÿA?
vx zw{2 ;
LG ; :Kÿ _2 2Z 3 <K ÿH 4ÿ
:C MGNGÿ Vÿ ÿ2 ÿ3 4RL G|s
h
H4<X;;RHB 4G ; :<A MX7 oa X74G ; :KX
4[ P:4KJ:C MGN?2 t a Xat X:C MGNG
X
f2ÿ7ÿ7 oO} B ;<G C4GÿÿC AC ÿ ÿ=ÿÿw y vÿ[ =GKBKÿ ;^B4CFG;8ÿ =1
Pt 8 a ÿÿ C :4B ÿ 4hÿ;K;4 ;Gu x zw{G [K 4 ÿ 4 ÿ K ÿ44<ÿVKÿ;
t ÿ3
H K}
2 v
A 2 BH ;
}=
:[;; 4C< ==ÿR^??K; <CG4:;<Gÿ ;=Vÿ: 2ÿ
w { v]Q?h;ÿÿ3 A<h=
; :<B; ÿ2;R1ÿ FÿAB ; ÿ42B Rÿ4H ÿ Mÿhwÿ yÿ? ÿ 4: < A;<3
=
4 G
G G
A B K4 H A?0B ÿ;;<4;NA;} B ;<G C4GÿBR2 ;=Vÿ: KÿP4C4ÿC;4 ;2
2 SAÿ ;N CH :ÿ ÿKN:ÿ C :4B ÿ 4 =ÿB ÿ Mÿ K K ÿ G P:K ÿB
A ÿ
H
ÿ3
H2
G <B ; 2 <
LG ; :K?2 Kÿ?
:C MGNGA Mÿ ?
B?
T Vÿ:C4GCHB:ÿ:;V?2MX Kÿ;hKG<[ÿJ~A6o4ÿ;K;;7<17@;?;<Pÿ?
G V2Mÿ;MG LPC MGN2 4ÿ A <2 ÿ@GK6Gÿ;9;O J :<K;?
= 1 KC: G ; : GX G? |B 3 =RO 4 R ÿ J? ?
2 23
<ÿ G
VVV? : : ; N;K A m=JC 4 = 9 a G AO A ?
cGÿaÿ7 6O 2M; ÿRG4:;ÿ y8; Gp :;I0]Qÿh;<=Vÿ2 4vx zw{
Ro 8 a ÿp : C1ÿ42B Rwÿ
w { vT J =2Aÿ 2h:ÿ A <ÿw y v
t ÿ
rÿ
ÿ
2 u
:J<:4 B ÿ ÿCPC G<G C1 <B <;ÿA2 <4;V2=? A :KJ4ÿ<V; <484 3:B=ÿG
; K4GK <4 K KK3 =ÿB ÿ3 K;<<G :<ÿ ÿ : ÿ 2CB ÿ K ÿ 1 K ÿÿ :; 4 H <
2 2B
H C 0A
24
;KA R
9 87 ÿ=B<V2=VK;G C2;ÿ ;RG<H <1 A M;Guw y vÿ:<A 4 B1 H M2Hlÿÿ ;
7 7AK 4ÿ : C ÿB ÿP:H ÿ; :ÿGÿ;2 ÿÿ x zw{[2 ;3K ÿ; ; 4ÿ K4
;
C
4
v
2
BH
^Fÿÿh =KJ ÿ?
8 2ÿ== <?
o Gÿ B ?
K[ 4=1G4MG::P;V?gÿB2ÿC;4:G<[:J71:CG;OGbO=b1Ot7<?m=J?
<V2 ÿ: V;B^F 2 G CA BKP <GÿG7MGN: B ?ÿ 2 ÿ?
3; ;; ; ÿ ]L m= X 42;|K= b ; :ÿ;ÿ C ÿ ?
2 ? 4
; O
VVV? : 4 C N;K A MX J G= b o b 9 G @ ?
C
p 1t 87 6OB:ABÿ; :8H ÿvx zw{Q2 G R:A;; ÿ[4;=4 hH ÿ <ÿ:=A;<G
; ÿaÿ a ÿ}ÿ ; 4 G<ÿ ;w y vÿ M[ Bÿ N4C3 ÿ ÿ<ÿ ÿ ;M2 4 2K ÿ=:ÿ4
t ÿ; R L
2
H K 24
[
4;^F g?G4; : ÿ [ :; ÿ Gÿ Kÿ<Gÿ; : 7 bOH ÿ2 G R:B; ÿ;2 CKÿ : ÿh
H ÿ ]L ÿ <ÿ Gÿ : 24C4 4 B A = Gÿ a ÿ4;A M[ Bÿ NC<A B ÿ 4 M<2
T R V; ;
H lÿ R t ÿ
G
B;
:[;; 44;;<Gÿ ;2 ;ÿG=J2 =ÿ
w { v2ÿ:C MGNGÿ Gÿ ;4
; :<BGK ÿ=:ÿ4H ÿA8:KB ÿBRwÿ yÿh G ; :K? 4H ÿ
P
4
4K
L
YH 4 V2
2J B<4 B ÿG;Kÿ?
:G KGK <H Pÿ ?
2
B?
LG ; :Kÿ P; s H ÿ:4ÿ 2 4 ;H : :C MGNGKÿÿA M
:C MGNGI;KVÿL ;L3H01 3ÿ 4;ÿ G ; :Kÿ GF G
ÿ
YH L
<
VVV?2 ::C MGN42B RA MX:C MGNG:P; <G
R34G ; :G4:;?2 4G ; :KO;KVOA MX
0[ÿ9ÿ7 oO} B ;<G C4GÿÿC AC ÿ ÿ=ÿÿw y vÿ[ =GKBKÿ ;^B4CFG;8ÿ =1
: 8 a ÿÿ C :4B ÿ 4hÿ;K;4 ;Gu x zw{G [K 4 ÿ 4 ÿ K ÿ44<ÿVKÿ;
t t ÿ3
H K}
2 v
A 2 BH ;
}=
:[;; 4C< ==ÿR^??K; <CG4:;<Gÿ ;=Vÿ: 2ÿ
w { v]Q?ÿ2VH 4 K;|
; :<B; ÿ2;R1ÿ FÿAB ; ÿ42B Rÿ4H ÿ Mÿhwÿ yÿ? F ÿ GÿP<
=
4 G
?
J
n <BK=8:C MGNGKÿ :=ÿÿG ÿ; ;GKBV; <4ÿ<C4ÿ2KK42 <B <2ÿw y v
<; 4 =ÿ G ; :Kÿ M;;RG= CJ B :4 ÿ 1 K 3 ; ÿ < = 4H 3 G C ÿhu x zw{
GRL
<
;
2
; 2 Aÿ
v
G [KGKB ÿ :?
[ = 4 <h ÿ?
A 2 2?
IGÿ HG N:ÿ gÿ ]KJ; BÿQ:B H G;
q RB;ÿQn ÿ J KmG Ns 3 A 1 <
01
O
ÿ
2 7 7 7 "%&' 8 " % + $, 687 7 67 6$ !7-
-6 7 / 01
2 6 ! " $! &()8 * !7-
-6 7 , 687 7 67 6$.! 2
2
#
0 224 5
131 0
68
ÿ7 6ÿÿ ÿ 7
7ÿ 7 6 7 6
7
6
>=@BCCCDFH > J;E LB;@ HFMI OH;
=? A EG E I @DK ? FK BJN >J PF
B
J
Q ÿHT=F;ÿHF?; ; F H ÿ=KH Oÿ; MOI TTWW; = ; =TW XHUYF;@ J ;DÿJ;
R J ÿ ;H = =; FH Gÿ UJ=F;DÿHKÿGVH ÿFJÿ Cÿ H @ÿÿT;@ÿ? E@ÿ> Y
L H ;
J
Q
U
H > T
Q
E; =UJH LI F ZH;H = I T D
FJ; ÿÿG ;ÿ ÿ =F;ÿ @= D
K Q C; ;D
`ÿ;=F G ;F?ÿbc
I =;ÿ @=J aN b
LK
ÿ
[ _
\]^
>=@BCCCD@WK JDK EE VI V? ZB f =;gK @hJ DU
=? A EE VI V LB@WK JBU@dec`e;=F G ; F?? Z
B
E
Iÿ c =ÿÿT UIÿ2N ;J; ÿFTV@
O`ÿLT N = ÿO8 ÿÿ V=UJ= ;
>ÿ ;
b
ÿ
i
E
0 8 ÿÿ> ÿkm olpbK J OÿHJ ; Eÿ G U UIÿ F Fqc sÿ<LTTWJ=F;@C>
9 9Th ;jl n kÿ L? HX ÿW H OZ H ; ÿOZ L;D rh ;J HH ÿ=KH Oÿ K
@
J
K
K ÿ
VK ; ÿ= K YHTH VVW?J = ;ÿÿ ;; Fÿ9 9 ÿH ÿ F; ÿGÿK =ÿGVÿÿ;=F
K PUJÿ H; = JÿT ÿFET @T= ÿJV0 9 @J UCKPUK = Cÿ I T JI =;
E K tH E H > O
> K U
LK @=J D YHLK;J=H@ TWOÿ w {l p kÿ9J=F;ÿFCÿK L; ÿJ= 9tTW@JCJ=
G ;F?ÿ ; ÿ Fÿ@K T>H VX ÿ |} n~0 N=KH OE; K U? @ÿ ÿV ÿ=V F@
u
vlyz
7 H
=ÿJ =Fÿ ;=?@ KXD
KE ?G;= ÿ ÿ? =D
> K ÿD
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 78
9
:;=
<
bG ;= Kÿ VKHJN FLÿK FH;H = U F@ÿq@ÿFE@ÿE = HN ; Fÿ F
? FT X T FTÿK OGÿ =F;ÿ U;@N ;?;T;V JT ÿ JHLK;
H bJZ ÿ
Q J
ÿ
K Kÿ
;? c H ÿ ; I E rFJ O h F
V ; UZ U J P T E ;L@
;
Y
2 7 7 7 "%&' 8 " % + $, 687 7 67 6$ !7-
-6 7 / 11
2 6 ! " $! &()8 * !7-
-6 7 , 687 7 67 6$.! 2
2
#
EXHIBIT R
EXHIBIT S
12/1/2017
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration - Register a Trademark and File Your Trademark Application Online | LegalZoom
Customer Care: (855) 525-3087
Log Out
Starting Your Business
Running Your Business
Wills & Trusts
My Account
Help
Personal & Family
Home ▸ Business ▸ Intellectual Property
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration
For your mark. Get set
with an attorney. Go.
Enlist an experienced attorney so that you have the freedom to run your
business.
Start my trademark application
No hourly rates. Just one flat fee.
*
**
$799 + government filing fee
See details
Here's why
It's about a proven record
It's about a united effort
It's about your rights
With an attorney's legal knowledge and about a
quarter-million trademark applications under our belt,
you have experience on your side.
We're in this together. Your trademark team will be
there for you during the trademark search, filing, and
monitoring phases.
You owe it to yourself. With a registered trademark,
you'll have rights to use and protect it across the U.S.
Why do I need a comprehensive search?
Why do I need an attorney to analyze my search
results?
If you're currently using or planning to use a trademark, it's always a good idea to see if
there are similar marks that could be confused with yours, or might affect your ability to
register, use or protect your trademark. Similar marks don't have to be registered with
the USPTO to affect your ability to use your trademark, making it important to conduct a
comprehensive search that includes common law marks that are being used by
businesses across the country. Our dedicated Comprehensive Search team leverages
their experience to uncover potential federal and common law conflicts and set you up
for success.
Your search results can be hundreds of pages long, and determining whether a conflict
exists requires a multi-factor analysis that isn't always straightforward. It can be vital to
have an experienced trademark attorney carefully analyze your search results and
advise you on the strength of your mark, to help guide your application and steer you
clear of infringement lawsuits.
Here's how
Tell us about your goals
Review your application
Get the support you need
We'll contact you to learn more about your product or
service and then begin a comprehensive trademark
search of other U.S. marks that might pose a conflict.
Once an attorney has reviewed your information and
prepared your trademark application, he/she will send
it to you to approve.
Your team will be there to answer your questions,
monitor the progress of your application, and take
action when necessary.
Get started today
Save 30%
Attorney-Led
Trademark Registration
799*
$
+ government filing fee**
Regular price $1,145
Package Details:
Trademark consultation
Comprehensive Search - Federal and
common law
($299 value)
Analysis of your trademark search results
($299 value)
Preparation and filing of your application
($299 value)
Monitoring of your application status
($49 value)
Response to a basic Office action
($199 value)
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview-a.html?gclid=CIr1w9_u7s4CFVRwvAodJXsEHQ
1/2
12/1/2017
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration - Register a Trademark and File Your Trademark Application Online | LegalZoom
Start my trademark application
Have questions? We have answers.
Common questions
A specialist is here to help
What if I don't have a registered trademark? What can happen?
(855) 525-3087
Why choose a federal over a state trademark?
What is an Office action and how does it affect an application?
We're available Mon-Fri 8am to 5pm PT
Our agents are based in the United States.
What are trademark classes and why are they important?
Register your trademark now
Start my trademark application
*
Price includes one class. Search fees for additional classes will apply. Your attorney can advise whether additional classes are recommended.
**
Consists of the government discounted TEAS RF electronic filing fee of $275. If the stricter "TEAS Plus" system can be used for your application, you will be refunded $50 to account for
the lower filing fee of $225. The USPTO may later charge a $125 fee should you choose not to communicate with them electronically or otherwise do not meet the requirements of the
discounted TEAS RF or TEAS Plus filing requirements.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT: This portion of the LegalZoom website is an advertisement for legal services. LegalZoom does not endorse or recommend any lawyer or law firm who
advertises on our site. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. is authorized and regulated by the Solicitors
Regulation Authority. SRA ID 617803. LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. is a subsidiary of LegalZoom.com, Inc.
Get helpful tips and info from our newsletter!
your email address
COMPANY
SUPPORT
LEARN MORE
About
Order Status
Knowledge Center
Contact
Customer Care
Legal Help Articles
Careers
Speak with an Attorney
Business Resources
Press
Join our Attorney Network
Additional Resources
Affiliates
See all services
view our current issue...
Legal Forms
Blog
An offer of membership in our legal plan is not an endorsement or advertisement for any individual attorney. The legal plan is available in most states.
© LegalZoom.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Disclaimer: Communications between you and LegalZoom are protected by our Privacy Policy but not by the attorney-client privilege or as work product.
LegalZoom provides access to independent attorneys and self-help services at your specific direction. We are not a law firm or a substitute for an attorney or law
firm. We cannot provide any kind of advice, explanation, opinion, or recommendation about possible legal rights, remedies, defenses, options, selection of forms
or strategies. Your access to the website is subject to our Terms of Use.
A B O U T SSL CE R T I F I CA T E S
View Site Directory
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview-a.html?gclid=CIr1w9_u7s4CFVRwvAodJXsEHQ
2/2
12/12/2017
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration - Register a Trademark and File Your Trademark Application Online | LegalZoom
Home ▸ Business ▸ Intellectual Property
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration
For your mark. Get
set with an
attorney. Go.
Enlist an experienced attorney so that you have the freedom to
run your business.
Start my trademark application
No hourly rates. Just one flat fee.
*
**
$599 + government filing fee
See details
Here's why
It's about a proven record
It's about a united effort
It's about your rights
With an attorney's legal knowledge and about
a quarter-million trademark applications under
our belt, you have experience on your side.
We're in this together. Your trademark team will
be there for you during the trademark search,
filing, and monitoring phases.
You owe it to yourself. With a registered
trademark, you'll have rights to use and protect
it across the U.S.
Why do I need a comprehensive search?
If you're currently using or planning to use a trademark, it's always a good
idea to see if there are similar marks that could be confused with yours, or
might affect your ability to register, use or protect your trademark. Similar
marks don't have to be registered with the USPTO to affect your ability to
use your trademark, making it important to conduct a comprehensive search
that includes state databases and common law marks that are being used by
businesses across the country. Our dedicated Comprehensive Search team
leverages their experience to uncover potential federal, state, and common
law conflicts and set you up for success.
Why do I need an attorney to analyze my
search results?
Your search results can be hundreds of pages long, and determining whether
a conflict exists requires a multi-factor analysis that isn't always
straightforward. It can be vital to have an experienced trademark attorney
carefully analyze your search results and advise you on the strength of your
mark, to help guide you application and steer you clear of infringement
lawsuits.
Here's how
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview-c.html?utm_source=abandoner&utm_medium=email&utm_c…
1/4
12/12/2017
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration - Register a Trademark and File Your Trademark Application Online | LegalZoom
Tell us about your goals
Review your application
Get the support you need
We'll contact you to learn more about your
product or service and then begin a
comprehensive trademark search of other U.S.
marks that might pose a conflict.
Once an attorney has reviewed your
information and prepared your trademark
application, he/she will send it to you to
approve.
Your team will be there to answer your
questions, monitor the progress of your
application, and take action when necessary.
Get started today
Save 48%
Attorney-Led
Trademark Registration
599*
$
+ government filing fee**
Regular price $1,145
Package Details:
Trademark consultation
Comprehensive Search - Federal, state
and common law
($299 value)
Analysis of your trademark search results
($299 value)
Preparation and filing of your application
($299 value)
Monitoring of your application status
($49 value)
Response to a basic Office action
($199 value)
Start my trademark application
Have questions? We have answers.
Common questions
A specialist is here to help
What if I don't have a registered trademark? What can happen?
Why choose a federal over a state trademark?
What is an Office action and how does it affect an application?
(855) 525-3087
We're available Mon-Fri 8am to 5pm PT
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview-c.html?utm_source=abandoner&utm_medium=email&utm_c…
2/4
12/12/2017
Attorney-Led Trademark Registration - Register a Trademark and File Your Trademark Application Online | LegalZoom
Our agents are based in the United States.
What are trademark classes and why are they important?
Register your trademark now
Start my trademark application
*
Price includes one class. Search fees for additional classes will apply. Your attorney can advise whether additional classes are recommended.
**
Consists of the government discounted TEAS RF electronic filing fee of $275. If the stricter "TEAS Plus" system can be used for your application, you will be
refunded $50 to account for the lower filing fee of $225. The USPTO may later charge a $125 fee should you choose not to communicate with them electronically or
otherwise do not meet the requirements of the discounted TEAS RF or TEAS Plus filing requirements.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT: This portion of the LegalZoom website is an advertisement for legal services. LegalZoom does not endorse or recommend any
lawyer or law firm who advertises on our site. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. is
authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. SRA ID 617803. LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. is a subsidiary of LegalZoom.com, Inc.
Get helpful tips and info from our newsletter!
your email address
COMPANY
SUPPORT
LEARN MORE
About
Order Status
Knowledge Center
Contact
Customer Care
Legal Help Articles
Careers
Speak with an Attorney
Business Resources
Press
Join our Attorney Network
Additional Resources
Affiliates
See all services
view our current issue...
Legal Forms
Blog
An offer of membership in our legal plan is not an endorsement or advertisement for any individual attorney. The legal plan is available in
most states.
© LegalZoom.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview-c.html?utm_source=abandoner&utm_medium=email&utm_c…
3/4
EXHIBIT T
12/1/2017
Do You Need a Lawyer to File a Trademark? | LegalZoom
Do You Need a Lawyer to File a Trademark?
by Jane Haskins, Esq.
Freelance writer
You can search for existing trademarks and prepare and file a trademark application using
online tools on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) website or through another
online trademark service—without the assistance of a lawyer.
While the application process can be done on your own, there are certain procedures and
formatting requirements that you must follow, and you must choose the correct filing basis
and description for your products or services. If your application is not prepared properly, it
may be refused or delayed.
When You Need a Lawyer
In some instances, it is a good idea to consult with a lawyer, either before, during or after the
trademark registration process. Reasons to contact a lawyer include:
You have conducted a trademark search and are concerned that there might be a
likelihood of confusion between your mark and another mark that is already registered or
for which there is a pending registration application. A trademark lawyer can advise you
on the chances that your trademark application will be refused due to confusion with the
competing mark or can help you revise your application so it will be more likely to gain
approval.
You have questions about trademarks or trademark registration that are not answered by
the USPTO website or other online resources.
You anticipate filing foreign trademarks as well as a U.S. trademark and you want
assistance from someone with expertise in foreign trademark laws.
You need to respond to a refusal to register or an Office action.
You believe that someone else is using your trademark without your permission.
Trademark owners are responsible for enforcing their trademarks. Failure to protect your
trademark can lead to assumptions that the owner has abandoned the mark or consented,
even informally, to its misuse. A lawyer can explain your rights and advise you on how to
respond to a possible infringement and, if necessary, file a lawsuit on your behalf.
Wantare accused of trademark infringement. Often, anshow you best in the form of
You to protect your big idea? We can accusation will come practices.
a cease and desist letter asking you to stop using the mark and threatening legal action if
you do not. A lawyer can evaluate the letter and advise you on how to respond.
EMAIL ADDRESS
Finding a Trademark Lawyer
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/do-you-need-a-lawyer-to-file-a-trademark
1/4
12/1/2017
Do You Need a Lawyer to File a Trademark? | LegalZoom
If you do decide to hire a lawyer, you should look for someone who has experience
conducting and evaluating trademark searches, filing applications with the USPTO, and
enforcing trademark rights. Finding an attorney who has worked on trademarks in your
particular industry may also be important, as there may be industry-specific knowledge that
will help your application get accepted more easily. You will also want to make sure that the
attorney will be the one handling your application, and that they won’t be passing it off to a
paralegal.
In searching for a trademark attorney, you may come across businesses that offer services
for trademark applications that are less expensive. However, it is highly advised that you hire
a licensed attorney, as she will be more knowledgeable regarding trademark laws.
The USPTO does not recommend attorneys or provide lists of attorneys. Your local bar
association may have a directory of attorneys or a lawyer referral service that can help you
find a lawyer with expertise in trademark matters.
Ready to register a trademark? LegalZoom can help. LegalZoom's attorney-led trademark
registration services allow you to register a trademark with the help of an attorney. With
attorney-led trademark services, an attorney will contact you to learn more about your
product or service and begin a comprehensive trademark search. Once an attorney has
reviewed your information and prepared your trademark application, he/she will send it to
you to approve. Your team of attorneys will be there to answer your questions, monitor the
progress of your application, and take action when necessary.
Make sure your work is protected
START MY REGISTRATION
Related Articles
Jury Dodgers: What Really Happens if You
Ignore Your Jury Summons?
by Mariah Wojdacz
Sep 2009
You know you've been tempted to do it - to toss your jury
summons in the garbage and pretend it got lost in the mail.
Besides, what's the worst that can happen? It's not like missing
jury duty is a...
GO
read more
Want to protect your big idea? We can show you best practices.
Types of Lawyers
by Belle Wong, J.D.
EMAIL ADDRESS
Jun 2015
Need a lawyer? There are many types of lawyers—whatever
your legal problem, there’s very likely a lawyer out there who
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/do-you-need-a-lawyer-to-file-a-trademark
2/4
12/1/2017
Do You Need a Lawyer to File a Trademark? | LegalZoom
specializes in dealing specifically with that particular legal
issue. Find out...
read more
Should You Trademark Your Name?
by Stephanie Morrow
Jun 2009
In the always evolving electronic age, many famous celebrities
are using trademark law to protect the use of their name over
the Internet. Should you?
read more
Let's Get Ready to Rumble: Trademarking Your
Catch Phrase
by Donald R. Simon
Dec 2009
How to get the maximum mileage out of your catch phrase?
Develop a distinctive one, use it in interstate commerce, and
register it with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Following these three...
read more
How Much Does It Cost to Trademark a Business
Name?
by Jane Haskins, Esq.
Apr 2015
Trademarking a business name can help ensure that your name
won’t be used by competitors. Here’s what you can expect to
pay for state business name registration or federal trademark
registration.
read more
Employee vs. Independent Contractor: What
Employers Need to Know
by Michelle Fabio, Esq.
Jun 2010
As an employer, it is crucial that you understand the
distinctions between an independent contractor and an
employee so that you can be sure you are abiding by federal
and state tax laws.
read more
Want to protect your big idea? We can show you best practices.
Get helpful tips and info from our newsletter!
EMAIL ADDRESS
your email address
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/do-you-need-a-lawyer-to-file-a-trademark
3/4
12/1/2017
Do You Need a Lawyer to File a Trademark? | LegalZoom
view our current issue...
COMPANY
SUPPORT
LEARN MORE
An offer of membership in our legal plan is not an endorsement or advertisement for any individual attorney. The
legal plan is available in most states.
© LegalZoom.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Disclaimer: Communications between you and LegalZoom are protected by our Privacy Policy but not by the
attorney-client privilege or as work product. LegalZoom provides access to independent attorneys and self-help
services at your specific direction. We are not a law firm or a substitute for an attorney or law firm. We cannot
provide any kind of advice, explanation, opinion, or recommendation about possible legal rights, remedies,
defenses, options, selection of forms or strategies. Your access to the website is subject to our Terms of Use.
View Site Directory
A B O U T SSL CE R T I F I CA T E S
Want to protect your big idea? We can show you best practices.
EMAIL ADDRESS
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/do-you-need-a-lawyer-to-file-a-trademark
4/4
EXHIBIT U
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
Trademark Registration
You've worked hard to build a name for your business.
Protect it.
A registered trademark greatly expands the legal protections available to your brand.
Most people complete our questionnaire in under 15 minutes.
Call to get started
Start my Trademark Registration
Or contact us
Pricing starts at $199 + Federal filing fees
See pricing options View sample
What customers are saying about our
Read Customer Reviews
Let’s join forces in protecting your brand
We know the ropes
We've done this a thousand times (about 220,000 times, actually), and have crafted a questionnaire to
help make the application process easier for you.
We look out for you
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
1/7
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
Before we submit your application, we do a basic trademark search and inform you of any direct
conflicts so your brand has a better chance of succeeding.
We know where to go
Once your application is done, we’ll get it into the right hands at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, so
all you have to do is wait for their response.
What is a trademark?
A trademark typically protects names, words, slogans and symbols that identify a business or brand and distinguishes it
from others. Trademarks include brand names such as "Coca-Cola" and symbols such as Nike's famous "swoosh."
Learn more
What are the benefits of registering a trademark?
Federal registration provides several advantages, including giving you a legal presumption of ownership and exclusive
rights to use the mark nationwide in connection with your goods or services. It also gives you the right to bring a federal suit
against anyone who may be infringing on your mark, and allows you to use the coveted ® symbol.
Learn more
What can you trademark?
A name, such as your company's name or a line of products.
A logo or other symbol or design used to create brand recognition.
A slogan or other phrase used in connection with your brand.
What can't you trademark?
A creative work such as a book, film, song, or theatrical performance is generally protected by a copyright.
An invention, mechanical device, business method, or process is generally protected by a utility patent.
An idea itself can't be protected, though it may be eligible for a copyright or patent once it's manifest in tangible form.
Copyright, trademark and patent: what's the difference?
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
2/7
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
How it works
For a more detailed view of the trademark process, and details on government processing times, click here.
1. Complete our trademark registration questionnaire.
2. We search the federal trademark database for direct conflicts.
3. Once documents are signed, we file your application with the USPTO.
Get started today
Basic
199
$
Filing
We file your trademark application with the U.S. Patent and T
(USPTO)
rademark Office
Basic trademark search
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
3/7
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
We perform a basic federal direct-hit search of the federal trademark database for direct conflicts with
your trademark
Discount on comprehensive trademark search
If you need a more thorough search for similar, competing marks.
Peace of Mind Review™
Digitalization, color adjustment and compilation of your trademark specimens and designs
Email delivery of your trademark application
View More
Start my Trademark Registration
Best Value
Complete
219
$
Includes everything from the Basic package, plus:
Cease and Desist Letter Package
(a $14.95 value)
Trademark Assignment Agreement
Enables the trademark owner to transfer trademark rights or ownership to another individual or entity.
Electronic copy of your trademark application, available to download in your
account.
Business Advisory Plan – 30-day trial*
View More
Start my Trademark Registration
Ask away. We have answers.
Common questions
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
4/7
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
What's the difference between a copyright and a trademark?
What's included in a trademark search?
How long does it take for a trademark to be registered?
A specialist is here to help
(866) 679-2319
We're available Mon-Fri 5am-7pm PT,
Weekends 7am-4pm PT
Our agents are based in the United States.
Speak with an attorney
Get legal advice from an independent
attorney at a price you can afford.
Find out more
Questions and answers
This public forum is not intended to provide legal advice and is not a substitute for professional legal
advice. Unless specifically indicated, the content is not drafted, supported, or vetted by LegalZoom.
It is simply a place for customers to help customers. If you need legal advice, LegalZoom can
connect you to a licensed and independent attorney. If you are providing answers, please do not
provide legal advice if you are not qualified or licensed to do so.
Protect your trademark now
Don’t leave your brand at risk.
Start my Trademark Registration
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
5/7
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
Apply for T rademark Registration with LegalZoom
A federally registered trademark can protect your brand nationwide. By trademarking a business name , logo,
company phrase or other slogan with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), you establish a legal
presumption of ownership and an exclusive right to use the trademark nationwide. Federal trademark
registration lists your trademark in the USPTO’s online databases and allows you to use the ® symbol, which
essentially notifies the public that you own the trademark. Trademark registration also allows the trademark
owner to bring action against infringers in federal court. In just a few simple steps, LegalZoom can help you create
and file a trademark application with the USPTO. The process begins by answering a few questions and
providing a sample of your mark. We perform a trademark search , create your trademark application , and file
the application with the USPTO. The USPTO will review your application and make a decision whether to approve
it or not and you will be notified of their decision. Start protecting your brand by applying to register a trademark
through LegalZoom today.
*Telephone consultations with a participating firm, during normal business hours, of up to one half (1/2) hour each, limited to
one consultation for each new legal matter. After the 30-day trial period, benefits to the Business Legal Plan (also Business
Advantage Pro or Business Advisory Plan) continue automatically at the plan rate (currently $39.99 per month). Cancel by
calling (877) 818-8787. For full details, see the Legal Plan Contract and Subscription Terms.
Get helpful tips and info from our newsletter!
your email address
view our current issue...
COMPANY
SUPPORT
LEARN MORE
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
6/7
12/1/2017
LegalZoom | Trademark Registration & Trademark Search Services
An offer of membership in our legal plan is not an endorsement or advertisement for any
individual attorney. The legal plan is available in most states.
© LegalZoom.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Disclaimer: Communications between you and LegalZoom are protected by our Privacy
Policy but not by the attorney-client privilege or as work product. LegalZoom provides
access to independent attorneys and self-help services at your specific direction. We are
not a law firm or a substitute for an attorney or law firm. We cannot provide any kind of
advice, explanation, opinion, or recommendation about possible legal rights, remedies,
defenses, options, selection of forms or strategies. Your access to the website is subject
to our Terms of Use.
View Site Directory
A B O U T SSL CE R T I F I CA T E S
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-overview.html
7/7
EXHIBIT V
11/30/2017
Trademark Pricing Packages - Trademark Application Fees and Costs | LegalZoom
Customer Care: (866) 679-2106
Log Out
Starting Your Business
Running Your Business
Wills & Trusts
My Account
Help
Personal & Family
Home ▸ Business ▸ Intellectual Property ▸ Trademark
Trademark Registration pricing
Unlike simple do-it-yourself forms, LegalZoom provides a personal review of your work for completeness and
You get lifetime customer support and our
®
100% satisfaction guarantee consistency after you create your document through the LegalZip system.* Along with a series of automated
.
Best V alue
Compare our
Trademark Registration
packages and pricing
checks, our document scriveners personally review the answers you provide for the following**:
Complete
Complete missing information.
Basic information. We'll contact you by phone and email regarding anyCoverage
Our most economical package
All-inclusive
Spelling and punctuation. We do not rely solely on software spell checkers. package
199
$
Correct capitalization and lowercasing where required.
1
+ Federal Filing Fee
Proper pagination and blank space elimination.
219
$
+ Federal Filing Fee1
Complete words. We spell out abbreviations or symbols in English where appropriate.
Get Started
Get Started
Correct residency information. Indicating the proper state is critical to ensure the document conforms to
your state's requirements.
Full names. We verify that full names are given (first and last) and that all names appear consistently
throughout the document.
Filing of trademark application with the United
States Patent and T rademark Office (USPT O)
* Not available in Missouri
A basic federal direct-hit search of the federal
trademark database for direct conflicts with
your trademark 2 (a $75.00 value) or a discount
on our Comprehensive T rademark Search
Package
** Not all products are checked for all elements. Trademark art, for example, often includes different spelling,
capitalization, abbreviations, etc. that are intentional. So for this product, these elements would not be reviewed.
LegalZoom Peace of Mind Review™
Digitalization, color adjustment and
compilation of your trademark specimens and
designs
Email delivery of your trademark application
Electronic copy of your trademark application,
available to download in your account.
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-pricing.html
1/4
12/1/2017
Trademark Pricing Packages - Trademark Application Fees and Costs | LegalZoom
Customer Care: (855) 525-3087
Log Out
Starting Your Business
Running Your Business
Wills & Trusts
My Account
Help
Personal & Family
Home | Business | Intellectual Property | Trademark
Trademark Registration Pricing
Trademark with Attorney Help
Trademark
Flat fee
No matter which option you choose,
you'll always have our support:
Starts at
$599
$199
+ federal filing fee1
+ federal filing fee2
Comprehensive search
($299 value)
Basic search
($75 value)
Before filing
Trademark Search
Your search will look for possible conflicts that affect your
ability to register your trademark
Trademark Application & Filing
Based on the information you provide, your application and
supporting materials will be filed with the U.S. Patent &
Trademark Office (USPTO)
Trademark Paperwork
You’ll get a digital copy of your application for your records
Trademark Consultations
You'll speak with a trademark specialist and independent
trademark attorney who will discuss your trademark with you
before completing and filing your application with the USPTO
($299 value)
Trademark Search Analysis
Your trademark attorney will review and analyze your search
results to advise if any pre-existing trademark could cause
($299 value)
your application to be denied or lead to other legal issues.
Additional T rademark Search
If the trademark attorney discovers any direct conflicts,
another search on a new or different mark is included.
After filing
Trademark Application T racking
A trademark attorney will track the progress of your
application with the USPTO
Basic Office Action Response
A trademark attorney will respond to a basic Office action if
the USPTO rejects your application and needs more
information
($199 value)
START WITH AN ATTORNEY
START MY APPLICATION
How it works
1
2
3
4
APPLICATION PREPARATION
TRADEMARK SEARCH
FILING
TRACKING & RESPONDING
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-pricing-a.html
1/2
12/1/2017
Trademark Pricing Packages - Trademark Application Fees and Costs | LegalZoom
We’ll perform a trademark search
Need more help?
Searching for marks that may be similar to yours is important.
Knowing how to interpret the results is even more so. We have
basic and comprehensive search options so you can see if there
are any pre-existing marks that could lead to the denial of your
application or other legal issues.
When you select our trademark service with attorney help, you
get a comprehensive search and your trademark attorney will
analyze the results and advise on what to do next. If the attorney
discovers any direct conflicts, another search on a new or
different mark is included.
Have questions? We have answers.
Here are some commonly asked questions
A specialist is here to help
What can happen if I don't have a registered trademark?
(855) 525-3087
What are trademark classes and why are they important?
How long does it take for a trademark to be registered?
We're available Mon-Fri 8am-5pm PT
Our agents are based in the United States.
What is an Office action and how does it affect an application?
1
Consists of the government discounted TEAS RF electronic filing fee of $275. If the stricter "TEAS Plus" system can be used for your application, you will be refunded $50 to account for the lower
filing fee of $225. The USPTO may later charge a $125 fee should you choose not to communicate with them electronically or otherwise do not meet the requirements of the discounted TEAS RF or
TEAS Plus filing requirements.
2
Consists of the government discounted TEAS RF electronic filing fee of $275. If the stricter "TEAS Plus" system can be used for your application, LegalZoom will use this system. The TEAS Plus system streamlines
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) review process and has a lower filing fee of $225, but requires additional LegalZoom labor to process. If the TEAS Plus system can be used for your application,
LegalZoom will still charge $275, of which $225 will be allocated to the USPTO fee and $50 to a LegalZoom processing fee. The USPTO may later charge a $125 fee should you choose not to communicate with them
electronically or otherwise meet the requirements of the discounted TEAS RF or TEAS Plus filing fees.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT: This portion of the LegalZoom website is an advertisement for legal services. LegalZoom does not endorse or recommend any lawyer or law firm who advertises on our site. The law
firms responsible for this advertisement are LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. and Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC. LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. is authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. SRA ID
617803. LegalZoom Legal Services Ltd. is a subsidiary of LegalZoom.com, Inc.
Get helpful tips and info from our newsletter!
your email address
COMPANY
SUPPORT
LEARN MORE
About
Order Status
Knowledge Center
Contact
Customer Care
Legal Help Articles
Careers
Speak with an Attorney
Business Resources
Press
Join our Attorney Network
Additional Resources
Affiliates
See all services
view our current issue...
Legal Forms
Blog
An offer of membership in our legal plan is not an endorsement or advertisement for any individual attorney. The legal plan is available in most states.
© LegalZoom.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Disclaimer: Communications between you and LegalZoom are protected by our Privacy Policy but not by the attorney-client privilege or as work product.
LegalZoom provides access to independent attorneys and self-help services at your specific direction. We are not a law firm or a substitute for an attorney or law
firm. We cannot provide any kind of advice, explanation, opinion, or recommendation about possible legal rights, remedies, defenses, options, selection of forms
or strategies. Your access to the website is subject to our Terms of Use.
A B O U T SSL CE R T I F I CA T E S
View Site Directory
https://www.legalzoom.com/business/intellectual-property/trademark-registration-pricing-a.html
2/2
EXHIBIT W
12/12/2017
Trademark/Service Mark Application, Principal Register
United States Patent and Tr ademar k Office
Tr ademar k Electronic Application System - TEAS Application
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
PTO Form 1478 (Rev 09/2006)
OMB No. 0651-0009 (Exp. 02/28/2018)
Tr ademar k/Ser vice Ma r k Application, Pr incipal Register
Ver sion 5.10 - Validation Page
On Tue Dec 12 15:31:07 EST 2017 You completed all mandator y fields and successfully validated the for m. It has NOT been filed to the USPTO at this
point. Please complete all steps below to submit the application.
NOTE:For an instr uctional video on the Validation Page, click here.
STEP 1: Review the application data in various formats, by clicking on the phrases under Application Data. Use the print function within your browser to print
these pages for your own records. If the Mark and Specimens appear huge, click here.
Note: It is important that you review this information for accuracy and completeness now. Corrections after submission may not be permissible, thereby possibly
affecting your legal rights.
Note: If you are using the e-signature approach or the handwritten pen-and-ink signature approach, you must click on the final link to access the specific "text form"
for that purpose.
Application Data
Input
Mark
XML File
Text Form for E-Signature
STEP 2: If there are no errors and you are ready to file this application electronically, confirm the e-mail address for acknowledgment. Once you submit the form
electronically, we will send an electronic acknowledgment of receipt to the e-mail address entered below. If no e-mail address appears, you must enter one. If we
should send the acknowledgment to a different e-mail address, or to an additional address(es), please enter the proper address or additional address(es). For multiple
addresses/receipts, please separate e-mail addresses by either a semicolon or a comma.
This e-mail address is only for the purpose of receiving the acknowledgment that the transmission reached the USPTO, and is not related to the e-mail that will be used for correspondence purposes
(although it could be the same address. The official e-mail address that the USPTO will use for any future communication is whatever appears in the specific correspondence section of the form.)
:ETON
* E-mail for acknowledgment
To ensure we can deliver your e-mail confirmation successfully, please re-enter your e-mail address(es) here:
* E-mail for acknowledgment
STEP 3: Read and check the following:
Impor tant Notice:
(1) Once you submit this application, we will not cancel the filing or refund your fee. The fee is a processing fee, which we do not refund even if we cannot
issue a registration after our substantive review. This is true regardless of how soon after submission you might attempt to request cancellation of the filing.
Therefore, please review ALL information carefully prior to transmission.
(2) All information you submit to the USPTO at any point in the application and/or registration process will become public record, including your name, phone
number, e-mail address, and street address. By filing this application, you acknowledge that YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO CONFIDENTIALITY in the
information disclosed. The public will be able to view this information in the USPTO's on-line databases and through internet search engines and other on-line
databases. This information will remain public even if the application is later abandoned or any resulting registration is surrendered, cancelled, or expired. To
maintain confidentiality of banking or credit card information, only enter payment information in the secure portion of the site after validating your form. For any
information that may be subject to copyright protection, by submitting it to the USPTO, the filer is representing that he or she has the authority to grant, and is
granting, the USPTO permission to make the information available in its on-line database and in copies of the application or registration record.
(3) Be aware that private companies not associated with the USPTO often use trademark application and registration information from the USPTO's
databases to mail or e-mail trademark-related solicitations (samples of non-USPTO solicitations included).
If you have read and understand the above notice, please check the box before you click on the Pay/Submit button.
STEP 4: If you are ready to file electronically:
Click on the Pay/Submit button below, to access the site where you will select one of three possible payment methods. After successful entry of payment
information, you can complete the submission to the USPTO. A valid transaction will result in a screen that says SUCCESS! Also, we will send an e-mail
acknowledgment within 24 hours.
WARNING: Click on the Pay/Submit button ONLY if you are now entirely prepared to complete the Pay/Submit process. After clicking the button, you can NOT
return to the form, since you will have left the TEAS site entirely. Once in the separate payment site, you must complete the Pay/Submit process within 30 minutes.
WARNING: Fee payments by credit card may not be made from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. Sunday, Eastern Standard Time. If you are attempting to file during that specific
period, you must use either the deposit account or electronic funds transfer payment method.
Pay/Submit
Burden/Privacy Statement | TEAS Form Burden Statement
Help Desk | Bug Report | Feedback | TEAS Home | Trademark Home | USPTO
https://teas.uspto.gov/forms/teas.service?form.action=SIGNRES&formId=bas&id=USPTO/BAS-24.5.91.150-20171209150659049380-New/Application-… 1/2
EXHIBIT X
12/12/2017
Applicants and registrants represented by excluded parties | USPTO
Applicants and registrants represented by excluded
parties
If the USPTO suspects that a party, whether an individual or a firm, is engaging in unauthorized practice of trademark law or otherwise improper activities
before the USPTO, the Commissioner for Trademarks may issue a show-cause order. A show-cause order requires the party to establish the legitimacy of
their activities and to explain why they should not be excluded from acting on behalf of others before the USPTO. Depending on the party’s response, a
show-cause order may be followed by an exclusion order, which formally excludes the party from serving as an attorney, correspondent, domestic
representative, and/or signatory in trademark matters before the USPTO.
Review copies o f show-cause or ders and exclusion or ders issued by the Commissioner for T rademarks
Get information on unauthorized practice o f trademark law and who may practice befor e the USPTO in trademark matt ers
Once a party has been excluded, the USPTO will change the correspondence address for each affected application or registration file record to that of the
applicant, registrant, or domestic representative, as appropriate, and will notify the affected applicant or registrant that:
The excluded party is not entitled to practice before the USPTO in trademark matters and, therefore, may not represent the applicant or
registrant.
Any power of attorney granted to the excluded party is void ab initio, meaning it was invalid from the start of any action taken by the excluded
party.
The excluded party may not sign responses to Office actions, authorize examiner’s amendments or priority actions, conduct interviews with
USPTO employees, or otherwise represent an applicant, registrant, or party to a proceeding before the Office.
All correspondence concerning the application or registration will be sent to the domestic representative if one has been appointed, or,
alternatively, and in most circumstances, to the applicant or r egistrant at its addr ess of r ecor d.
What t o do if the USPT O excluded the p ar ty r epresenting y ou
(1) R eview y our application/r egistration r ecor d
Go to the Trademark S tatus & Document R etrieval (TSDR) system and enter your serial number or registration number to retrieve the record for
your application or registration.
(2) Review y our contact infor mation
Once you have retrieved your application/registration record in TSDR, select the “Status” tab and review the Attorney/Correspondence Information
to confirm that the correspondence information is correct.
If the correspondence information is incorrect, correct it by filing a Change of Correspondence Addr ess form. If necessary, you may also change the
owner’s address information, using the Change of Owner ’s Address form. Both forms are available at Correspondence and A ttorney/Domestic
Representativ e Forms.
(3) Det ermine if y ou ar e requir ed to file any thing
Select the “Documents” tab in TSDR and view the outgoing correspondence from the USPTO in the record to determine if you are required to file
anything in connection with your application or registration, such as a response to an Office action, a statement of use, or a registration maintenance
document.
If your application is still pending and you fail to file a required document before the deadline, your application will be abandoned. If your mark is
already registered, and you fail to submit the required registration maintenance documents on time, your registration will expire or be cancelled. All
required documents may be filed electronically by using the appropriate electronic form in the Trademark Electr onic Application S ystem (TE AS).
After your initial review of your application or registration record, continue t o monit or the status of your application or registration, using the
“Status” tab in TSDR.
For applications, you should check the status ever y six months between the filing date of the application and issuance of a registration.
If your mark is already registered and you have filed an affidavit of use or excusable nonuse under §8 or §71 of the Trademark Act, or a
renewal application under §9 of the Act, you should check the status of the registration ever y six months until you receive notice that the
affidavit or renewal application has been accepted.
https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/applicants-and-registrants-represented-excluded
1/3
12/12/2017
Applicants and registrants represented by excluded parties | USPTO
Questions?
For pending applications, contact the assigned examining attorney, whose contact information is provided in Office actions sent in
connection with your application. In TSDR, Office actions are identified as “Offc Action Outgoing” in the “Documents” tab. For registrations,
contact the assigned Post Registration specialist, whose contact information will be provided in any Office action sent in connection with
registration maintenance filings, or the Office of Petitions at 571-272-8950.
For general questions about the trademark process, guidance on the type of information required in a particular electronic form, or
information about which USPTO offices or employees to contact for particular issues, contact the Trademark Assistance Center at
571-272-9250, or toll-free at 1-800-786-9199. You can also email TrademarkAssistanceCent er@uspto.gov.
(4) Review all documents pr eviously submitt ed on y our behalf
If your application is still pending, and a registration has not yet issued, you should review any documents submitted on your behalf to confirm that
it was signed by the appropriate party and that all the information in the document is correct. If you believe that any submitted document was
improperly signed or contains incorrect information, you should contact the assigned examining attorney, who can answer questions about the
process for resubmitting documents.
If your mark is already registered and registration maintenance documents have been submitted on your behalf, you should review the documents to
confirm that they contain accurate information and are properly signed. If you have any questions about a registration maintenance document
submitted on your behalf, you may contact the assigned Post Registration specialist whose contact information will be provided in any Office action
sent in connection with registration maintenance filings, or the Office of Petitions at 571-272-8950.
For additional information on who may sign documents submitted to the USPTO in connection with trademark applications and registrations, see
Proper Representation in T rademark Matt ers and TMEP §§611.03–611.04
.
(5) Consider hir ing a qualified att orney t o represent y ou
Consider hiring a qualified attorney with expertise in trademark matters to represent you in the application process. While a USPTO trademark
examining attorney will try to help you through the examination process even if you do not hire an attorney, USPTO attorneys are not permitted to
give you legal advice.
A private trademark attorney who is licensed in the United States and is authorized to practice before the USPTO may:
Help you avoid future costly legal problems by conducting a comprehensive search of federal registrations, state registrations, and
"common law" unregistered trademarks before you file your application. Comprehensive searches are important because other trademark
owners may have protected legal rights in trademarks similar to yours that are not federally registered. Therefore, those trademarks will not
appear in our Trademark Electr onic Sear ch System database, but they could still ultimately prevent your use of your mark.
Help you during the application process with several things that could seriously impact your trademark rights, such as determining the best
way to describe your goods and services and preparing responses to refusals to register your mark that we may issue.
Assist you after your mark is registered by filing registration maintenance documents and by taking actions to help you police and enforce
your trademark rights. While the USPTO registers trademarks, you, as the trademark owner, are fully responsible for any enforcement of
your private trademark rights.
If you decide to hire an attorney, you should be aware that, under U.S. federal regulations, the only individuals who may represent an applicant or
registrant in trademark matters before the USPTO, other than certain previously authorized trademark agents, are (1) attorneys who are licensed to
practice in the United States and (2) Canadian agents or attorneys who are authorized by the USPTO to represent applicants located in Canada.
Employing a foreign attorney or other individual who is not authorized to practice before the USPTO to represent you in connection with your
trademark application may delay and prolong the trademark application examination process and could jeopardize the validity of any resulting
registration.
The USPTO has established a Law School Clinic program in which participating law schools provide free legal services to trademark applicants in
connection with trademark applications before the USPTO. Each school in the program has its own criteria for accepting clients. If you are interested,
you should contact a participating school to inquire about becoming a client. For a list of schools participating in this program and additional
information about the program, visit Law School Clinic Cer tification Pr ogram.
For more information on finding a qualified private attorney to assist you, visit Using Priv ate Legal Ser vices.
For more information on the unauthorized practice of trademark law and who may practice before the USPTO in trademark matters, visit Proper
Representation in T rademark Matt ers.
What t o do when y our application is ab andoned
https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/applicants-and-registrants-represented-excluded
2/3
12/12/2017
Applicants and registrants represented by excluded parties | USPTO
When an application is abandoned, it means that the application is no longer pending and, thus, a registration will not be issued. The USPTO may deem
your application abandoned if you fail to submit a response to an Office action or fail to respond completely to an Office action; if you fail to respond to a
suspension inquiry; or if you fail to file a statement of use. In addition, an application may be “expressly abandoned,” meaning that the applicant has
requested that application be abandoned and that no further prosecution of the application will occur.
In some cases, you may file a petition to revive an abandoned application or request that an abandoned application be reinstated. More information about
abandonment and the process of reviving or reinstating an abandoned application may be found at Abandoned Applications .
What t o do if y our r egistration expir es or is cancelled
Once your mark is registered, you, as the registration owner, must file specific documents and pay the required fees at regular intervals to keep the
registration "alive" or valid. Failure to file these documents or pay the required fees will result in the cancellation or expiration of your registration.
If you failed t o timely r espond t o an Office action refusing to accept a §8 affidavit, §71 affidavit, or §9 renewal application due to an extraordinary
situation, you may file a formal petition under 37 C.F.R. §§2.146(a)(5) and 2.148 to accept a late response. You may file the petition electronically using the
Petition to the Director under Trademark Rule 2.146 form, available at Petition Forms . You must file the petition within two months of the issue date of the
cancellation notice. If you did not receive the cancellation notice, or no cancellation notice was issued, you must file the petition must within two months
of the date the Trademark database was updated to indicate that the registration expired or was cancelled.
If your registration expires or is cancelled, but you have proof that a USPT O err or led t o the cancellation or expiration , you may file a request to
reinstate a cancelled or expired registration. You may file the request electronically using the Petition to the Director under Trademark Rule 2.146 form,
available at Petition Forms . Although a petition fee is required in order to file the form, it will be refunded if USPTO error is found. For a list of examples of
situations where the USPTO may reinstate a cancelled or expired registration, please see TMEP §1712.02(a).
For additional information about maintaining your trademark registration, visit Keeping Your Registration Aliv e.
https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/applicants-and-registrants-represented-excluded
3/3
EXHIBIT Y
12/12/2017
ABA ethics opinion sparks renewed debate over nonlawyer ownership of law firms
Home / In-Depth Reporting / ABA ethics opinion sparks renewed debate…
ETHICS
ABA ethics opinion sparks renewed debate over nonlawyer ownership of law firms
BY JAMES PODGERS (HTTP://WWW.ABAJOURNAL.COM/AUTHORS/13/)
DECEMBER 2013 (/MAGAZINE/ISSUE/2013/12/)
Like 18
Share
Tweet
Share
14
submit
An opinion issued recently by the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility
could ignite a debate over the concept of nonlawyer ownership of law firms only months after the
association’s House of Delegates sidestepped the issue while considering recommendations of the
Commission on Ethics 20/20.
Illustration by Tim Marrs
The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct—which are the direct basis for professional conduct rules
in every state except California—do not permit nonlawyer ownership. And ABA Formal Opinion 464
(http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/formal_opinion_464.pdf) (PDF), issued Aug. 19,
does not deal with the issue of nonlawyer ownership. Rather, the opinion addresses the narrow question
of whether the Model Rules permit a lawyer to divide a legal fee with a lawyer in a jurisdiction that would
allow the other lawyer to eventually distribute some portion of the fee to a nonlawyer.
“Interfirm division of legal fees is clearly contemplated by the Model Rules,” specifically Rules 1.5 and 5.4,
the committee states in its opinion. “A division of a legal fee by a lawyer or law firm in a Model Rules jurisdiction with a lawyer or law firm
in another jurisdiction that permits the sharing of legal fees with nonlawyers does not violate Model Rule 5.4(a) simply because a
nonlawyer could ultimately receive some portion of the fee under the applicable laws of the other jurisdiction.”
The committee bases its analysis largely on the distinction made by the Model Rules on dividing fees with lawyers and sharing fees with
nonlawyers. Rule 1.5(e) authorizes “a division of a fee between lawyers who are not in the same firm” under certain limited circumstances.
Meanwhile Rule 5.4(a) states, “A lawyer or law firm shall not share legal fees with a nonlawyer,” except under another set of limited
circumstances.
Accordingly, a division of fees between lawyers under Model Rule 1.5 does not trigger the prohibitions in Model Rule 5.4 against fee
sharing with nonlawyers, states the opinion. “As explained in Comment [1] to Model Rule 5.4: ‘These limitations are to protect the lawyer’s
independence of professional judgment.’ The rule protects a lawyer’s independent professional judgment by limiting the influence of
nonlawyers on the client-lawyer relationship.”
SOUND THE ALARM
But despite its seemingly narrow scope, Opinion 464 has set off alarms among some segments of the legal profession. Their concern is
that any step in the direction of giving nonlawyers some form of ownership involvement in law firms threatens the professional
independence that is one of the core principles of lawyering.
“The whole idea of Model Rule 5.4 is that a law firm won’t be in-dependent if it’s splitting fees with a firm with nonlawyer owners,” says
Lawrence J. Fox, a past chair of the ethics committee and a member of the ABA Commission on the Evaluation of the Model Rules of
Professional Conduct, known as Ethics 2000. “In one simple, unsupported opinion, we’ve destroyed a principle we’ve fought so hard to
protect,” says Fox, a partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath in Philadelphia.
Another critic of Opinion 464 is John E. Thies, the immediate-past president of the Illinois State Bar Association and the National Caucus
of State Bar Associations. “It’s difficult to reconcile the opinion with ABA policy,” says Thies, a shareholder at Webber & Thies in Urbana.
In 2000, for instance, the House of Delegates rejected a proposal to allow multidisciplinary practice at law firms. That policy is known as
the MacCrate resolution for Robert MacCrate of New York City, senior counsel with Sullivan & Cromwell. He led the charge against a
proposal by the Commission on Multidisciplinary Practice, which had pushed for relaxation of professional conduct rules to allow lawyers
and professionals in other disciplines to join together in single businesses. “The sharing of legal fees with nonlawyers and the ownership
or control of the practice of law by nonlawyers are inconsistent with the core values of the legal profession,” states the resolution, which
passed by a wide majority in the House. “The law governing lawyers that prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with nonlawyers and
from directly or indirectly trans-ferring to nonlawyers ownership or control over entities practicing law should not be revised.”
Thies and Fox also suggest that the ethics committee may have overstepped its jurisdictional bounds in issuing Opinion 464. “The
committee is supposed to interpret the rules, not change them,” Fox says. “It was just an end run.”
On Oct. 18, the ISBA Board of Governors adopted a resolution objecting to ABA Ethics Opinion 464 on grounds that it “creates new policy
bypassing the ABA House of Delegates,” is “a violation of existing ABA policy” and is inconsistent with ISBA policy. This is not a new
gambit for the ISBA, whose board adopted a similar resolution in 2012 when it was concerned that the Ethics 20/20 Commission was
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/aba_ethics_opinion_sparks_renewed_debate_over_nonlawyer_ownership_of_law_fi/
1/2
12/12/2017
ABA ethics opinion sparks renewed debate over nonlawyer ownership of law firms
considering the possibility of proposing that the ABA Model Rules be revised to permit some form of limited nonlawyer ownership of law
firms.
Despite criticisms, the ethics committee is comfortable with its opinion, says chair Paula J. Frederick. “We took this on to provide helpful
guidance to lawyers confronted with this issue,” says Frederick, who is general counsel to the State Bar of Georgia in Atlanta. “The
opinion does not make any statement, pro or con, about nonlawyer ownership of law firms. It simply answers the question of whether the
Model Rules allow a lawyer practicing in a Model Rules state to divide a legal fee with a lawyer who practices in a firm that shares fees
with nonlawyers. The opinion is limited to an interpretation of Rules 1.5 and 5.4, is squarely within the committee’s jurisdiction, and thus is
entirely appropriate.”
The core value at stake in Opinion 464 “is whether dividing a fee in this way is likely to compromise the lawyer’s independence of
professional judgment,” Frederick says. “If you presume that you are dealing with the typical lawyer—that is, one who tries to be ethical
and who is reasonably aware of her obligations under the rules of professional conduct—I see little likelihood that this type of fee sharing
by co-counsel would have any impact on the lawyer in the Model Rules state or her client.”
Despite the growing heat over Opinion 464, issues relating to nonlawyer ownership of law firms in the United States still are largely
prospective. So far, the District of Columbia is the only U.S. jurisdiction that permits a limited form of nonlawyer ownership. But nonlawyer
ownership is becoming more common in foreign jurisdictions, notably Australia, Canada, England and Wales. American law firms doing
business overseas are in a quandary over how to balance the more permissive rules on business structures in other countries and the
more restrictive regulations in U.S. jurisdictions.
HAVE WE BEEN HERE BEFORE?
Nonlawyer ownership turned out to be one of the toughest issues for the ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 to deal with, even though it
never developed recommendations in that area. By the time the commis-sion completed its work early this year, it had drafted a wide
range of proposals to revise the Model Rules of Professional Conduct in response to the growing impact of technology and globalization
on the legal profession. The commission’s recommendations, submitted in two separate batches, breezed through the association’s
policymaking House of Delegates in August 2012 and again in February.
But in April 2012, at the close of one of the commission’s many drafting meetings, co-chairs Jamie S. Gorelick and Michael Traynor
announced that the commission had decided not to develop a proposal on whether nonlawyers should be allowed to have some form of
limited ownership interest in U.S. law firms. Gorelick is a partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr in Washington, D.C. Traynor of
Berkeley, Calif., is a past president of the American Law Institute.
“Since its creation in 2009, the commission has undertaken a careful study of alternative law practice structures,” said Gorelick and
Traynor in their statement. “Based on the commission’s extensive outreach, research, consultation and the response of the profession,
there does not appear to be a sufficient basis for recommending a change to ABA policy on nonlawyer ownership of law firms.”
Nevertheless, the commission still had to contend with a resolution co-sponsored by the Illinois State Bar Association and the ABA Senior
Lawyers Division that called for the House of Delegates to reaffirm its MDP policy from 2000 and to affirm that the law governing lawyers
relating to nonlawyer ownership and fee sharing should not be changed.
After a heated debate, the House voted to postpone the resolution indefinitely, which cleared the way for the Ethics 20/20 Commission to
prepare its final recommendations for House consideration in February. But the commission declined to submit a resolution on the fee
division issue, instead referring it to the ethics committee. And now that the committee has issued Opinion 464, the merry-go-round of
debate over the issue is starting up all over again.
The question is how productive those efforts might be. “Whatever one thinks about the merits of nonlawyer ownership of law firms, the
discussion needs to continue in the U.S., especially as we learn more about experiences abroad,” says Andrew Perlman, a law professor
at Suffolk University in Boston who served as chief reporter for the Ethics 20/20 Commission. “But I don’t think we’ll see movement on the
ABA level. The ABA is reluctant to even discuss the issue at a policy level.”
This article originally appeared in the December 2013 issue of the ABA Journal with this headline: “Second Time Around: An ABA ethics
opinion sparks renewed debate over nonlawyer ownership of law firms.”
Copyright 2017 American Bar Association. All rights reserved.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/aba_ethics_opinion_sparks_renewed_debate_over_nonlawyer_ownership_of_law_fi/
2/2
EXHIBIT Z
12/13/2017
Bars Can’t Handle The Regulation of Non-Lawyer Providers, So Let Us Solos/Smalls Compete – My Shingle
Bars Can’t Handle The Regulation of Non-Lawyer Providers,
So Let Us Solos/Smalls Compete
April 29, 2016 | 1 Comment
To the Commission on the Future of Legal Services,
These comments respond to the Commission’s
issues paper seeking feedback on whether state bar
associations ought to consider regulation of nonlegal service providers – ranging from online how-to
publications and websites to human-supported or
technology-enabled form-filling services. The short
answer – don’t. Because just as Tom Cruise’s
character couldn’t handle the truth, the state bars
can’t handle the regulation of non-lawyer service
providers. Moreover, there’s no need to, because
they are already subject to three higher and more
effective forces of regulation: the Federal Trade
Commission, market forces and e-shaming .
I’m not suggesting that non-legal service providers
are perfect, or that they expand access to justice the
way many claim. Some day they may – but they’re
not there yet, and in this regard, the arrogant proclamations that tech has solved the problem seem premature at best.
The reality is different. Like any emerging technology, non-legal service providers are enduring serious growing pains. A quick search on the web shows
hundreds of complaints about Legal Zoom (here), Rocket Lawyer (here, here and here) and Avvo (here). Most state bars can scarcely keep pace with the
several dozens of complaints lodged against lawyers. How could they ever effectively address consumer complaints about, and oversee compliance with
non-legal service providers?
The fact is that state bars aren’t well suited to address the problems that consumers have about these services. If you look through the complaints, many
common gripes emerge: abysmal customer support, deceptive billing practices and sluggish service and response times. Most consumers simply want the
money back – a remedy that state bars can’t provide anyway. And even if one state bar were to shut down a service, it would simply re-emerge elsewhere.
More effective mechanisms exist to address deception by non-lawyer providers. Consumers can file complaints at the Federal Trade Commission and
the Better Business Bureau or air their gripes online. There’s no need for the state bars to attempt to replicate existing regulation, when at best, they could
only serve as a pallid shadow of these systems.
Does that mean that there’s no role for state bars in dealing with non-legal service providers? Absolutely not. Foremost, state bars should start by fulfilling
their job of educating consumers about legal services. For example, state bars can educate consumers about how services like Legal Zoom and Rocket
Lawyer compare to hiring a lawyer (on the one hand) and relying on entirely free tools (like Court self-help programs or using resources at state secretary
offices to incorporate). But more importantly, they ought to stand out of the way and let solo and small firms compete with non-legal service providers
instead of imposing more and more regulation that deters members of the public from using lawyers to begin with.
Here’s a list of what needs to change. I’ve covered many of these topics at MyShingle, a blog that the Commission should be reading:
Abolish T rust Accounts – They don’t keep client money safe and have made it difficult for lawyers to accept credit card payments (like non-lawyer
providers) and deposit the money directly into operating funds to facilitate cash flow. Likewise, make it easier, not harder to accept flat fees.
Eliminate Unfair and Ridiculous Advertising Regulations –
Lawyers are subject to a completely ludicrous maze of regulations governing advertising
–which don’t apply to non-lawyer providers . Compliance adds cost and puts attorneys at a substantial disadvantage at a time when many consumers
are turning to the internet to find lawyers. One rule ought to apply: is the communication deceptive, and leave it at that.
Create A Safe Harbor for Innovation – Many solos and smalls won’t dare innovate because the consequences can be draconian . Let’s give solos and
smalls a safe harbor to innovate – and if firms can demonstrate a good faith effort for undertaking an action, give them a pass if it infringes on ethics
and doesn’t substantially harm consumers.
The bars have enough work to do in helping to make lawyers relevant again. They shouldn’t waste their resources trying to stop a train that’s already left the
gate. Moreover, regulating non-legal service providers won’t make lawyers relevant – or bar associations either. Isn’t that what this proposal is all about
anyway?
https://myshingle.com/2016/04/articles/future-trends/bars-cant-handle-regulation-non-lawyer-providers-let-us-solossmalls-compete/
1/1
12/13/2017
If We Can’t Beat Them, Let’s Compete With Them! – My Shingle
Inspiring, Celebrating & Empowering
Solo & Small Law Firms
(https://myshingle.com/)
If We Can’t Beat Them, Let’s Compete With Them!
February 22, 2005 | 29 Comments (https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/#disqus_thread)
(http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/)
(https://plus.google.com/share?url=https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/)
(http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/)
(https://twitter.com/share?url=https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-withthem/&text=If+We+Can%E2%80%99t+Beat+Them%2C+Let%E2%80%99s+Compete+With+Them%21+&hashtags=)
(mailto:?Subject=If We Can%26#8217;t Beat
Them, Let%26#8217;s Compete With Them!&Body=%20https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/)
I’m never more morti ed than when I see lawyers trying to shut down legal document preparation services like We the People which purportedly compete with
lawyers – as the Illinois Bar is doing. See Lawyers Protest Expanding Legal Document Preparers (http://www.suntimes.com/output/herman/cst- n-law21.html),
Chicago Sun times (2/21/05). I can’t understand why attorneys, who offer a valuable service, feel the need to put glori ed typing services like We the People out of
business.
First, to say that document prep services even compete with what lawyers provide gives those services credibility that they don’t deserve. Document prep services
don’t offer clients a lawyer’s expertise and legal knowlege. Instead, they simply take information from a form (completed by a client), generate a document – a living
trust, a bankruptcy petition or uncontested divorce – and le it. And for that, clients pay $199 (for bankruptcy) or $399 (for a living trust). Agreed, these services
generally charge less than attorneys – but not always. However, they certainly cost more than if clients did the work themselves.
So why are lawyers threatened? The bars (like ISBA) won’t admit that they’re trying to help lawyers preserve our own monopoly on legal service. So the bars claim
instead that document prep companies do a disservice to clients with shoddy work or improper advice. Granted, that’s a signi cant problem. But rather than try to
shut these companies down, it’s our job as attorneys to persuade clients that the value that attorneys can add to living wills and bankruptcy petitions and uncontested
divorces justify the added cost. Moreover, client welfare can be preserved through less onerous means such as education or consumer protection claims. Clients
who believe that their cases were mishandled have sued We the People and the FTC has ned the company for deceptive advertising practices. Those efforts should
be su cient to protect clients from the inadequacies of document prep services.
Moreover, in our haste to run non-legal professionals out of town, we lawyers forget that many of the clients who use these document service providers constitute
business that we are never going to capture anyway because of cost considerations. In the absence of these non-legal document services, many of these clients
would probably handle their matters pro se. Yet, according to this article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A113-2004May29.html) in the
Washington Post, a company like We the People generates $50 million in fees from 200,000 customers a year. That’s a lot of lost business for lawyers. We ought to
try to capture it for ourselves by competing with companies like We the People.
And how might we do that? Lawyers can try to come up with ways to provide simple, routine services inexpensively. Perhaps there’s a way to automate the process
– or to quickly review a form already prepared by a client. Perhaps a lawyer could run a seminar on ling your own bankruptcy petition and charge $35.00 to a
roomful of people who would then ll out the forms on the spot and have the option of ling them on their own – or paying an additional fee for a private
consultation. With podcasting now the rage, maybe a lawyer could put together a little MP3 on how to ll in a bankruptcy form that clients could download and listen
to. Clearly, there’s a demand for cheaper service – $50 million worth – and it just bugs me to let it go to providers who’ve not gone to law school. But getting rid of
those people won’t direct that $50 million pot towards attorneys – it will just result in fewer available options for lawyers who can’t hire attorneys.
Finally, those of you who’ve visited my website (http://www.his.com/israel/loce) may wonder what gives me, an energy regulatory practitioner, the credibility to
comment on competition with non-legal providers. Well, in my industry, the competition betweeen lawyers and non-legal providers is even more rampant. The
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (www.ferc.gov), one of the major regulatory fora where I practice permits non-lawyers to represent clients in agency
proceedings. And many times, non-lawyer economists or consultants initially negotiate the terms of power supply contracts and tariffs and handle uncontested
project permitting without ever bringing a lawyer in the door. I’ve had to mold my practice in such a way that I can provide added value that my non-legal competitors
can’t. I did this partly by educating clients on the mess that can result by failing to use an attorney so as to adequately preserve one’s rights (e.g., to protest a
contract or seek rehearing) – and partly by offering services like appellate work or representation at hearings – that non-attorneys either can’t provide or are
uncomfortable providing. In short, if I’ve found ways to make my legal services vital in the energy regulatory eld, surely my colleagues can do the same in the
general practice area.
If you have any ideas on how to compete with non-legal document preparation providers or any success stories to share, we welcome your comments below – or
cross posts at your web log.
Share this:
Facebook (https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/?share=facebook&nb=1)
Twitter (https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/?share=twitter&nb=1)
Related
https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/
LinkedIn (https://myshingle.com/2005/02/articles/client-relations/if-we-cant-beat-them-lets-compete-with-them/?share=linkedin&nb=1)
More
Contact us
1/8
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
Home / In-Depth Reporting / These venture capitalists skip law firms…
FEATURES
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal
services startups
BY SUSANNA RAY
MAY 2014 (/MAGAZINE/ISSUE/2014/05/)
Like 42
Share
Tweet
Share
312
submit
Venture capitalist Jason Mendelson
(http://www.abajournal.com/legalrebels/article/jason_mendelson/),
in
a speech he gave last year, was not venturing
much oral capital into the concept of investing in
legal services.
A corporate and securities-law attorney before he
co-founded the Foundry Group, his venture
capital firm, Mendelson told a conference he
found it difficult to invest in companies serving
law firms because, unlike regular enterprise
customers, they don’t always act rationally when
it comes to economics. He warned that most
legal startups would fail due to the industry’s
complications and barriers.
Jason Mendelson is the
Foundry Group co-founder
and one of four managing
directors. He hails from
Next up to speak was Colin Rule, the founder
and chief operating officer at Modria, which bills
itself online as “the world’s leading online dispute
resolution experts.” And things changed.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
1/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
Boulder, Colo., and his JD is
from the University of
Michigan. Photo by Matt
Nager.
Mendelson says he was so impressed by Rule
and by Modria’s emphasis in targeting an area of
the law that wasn’t regulated by the ABA Model
Rules of Professional Conduct or serviced by
traditional law firms that he immediately agreed
to a meeting and made an investment shortly afterward.
“We made a love connection at that conference,” Mendelson says.
Rule is just as starry-eyed.
“We’ve spent a lot of time talking to VCs, and a lot of the time they don’t
understand the law profession,” Rule says. “That’s a big challenge. Occasionally
around the table at a VC meeting there’s a lawyer, and when you talk about the
challenges the legal profession is facing, they get it. Jason got it.”
CASH FOR LAW, NOT FIRMS
It’s no secret that investment money is flowing into
law. In February, an article on the website of Tech
Cocktail, a media company covering startups, crowed
that “roughly $458 million was invested into legal
startups in the last year by investors. This is a
remarkable increase from the $66 million invested in
2012. And 2014 began with a strong January, seeing
almost $12 million done in four deals. Awareness and
confidence in the legal startup arena is growing.”
But that money is not going to law firms. Venture
capitalists are skeptical of the upheaval underway in
BigLaw, with uncertainty around changes in pricing
and ownership rules as well as concern about
efficiency and access to justice. So instead, VCs are
investing in the legal technology vendors that are
filling in some of those holes.
Lex Machina, Modria, Ravel, Rocket Lawyer,
LegalZoom, SIPX (the Stanford Intellectual Property
Exchange) and more—all have been the beneficiaries
of this new outreach from venture capital as they seek
to compete with or complement major law firms.
Editor’s Note: Three
years ago, the ABA
Journal began a
series of reports on
the paradigm shift in
how law is being
practiced. Noting the
changes brought on
by a maturing market,
disruptive technology,
economic recession
and the rise of legal
services competing
with law firms for parts
of the legal dollar, this
series has looked at
how the legal
business is
responding—and the
legal profession often
not responding—to
pressures never
before placed on
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
2/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
The fact that VCs are interested in this budding
segment of the legal industry—and that they only
invest in enterprises they expect will make money for
them—suggests a trend is taking shape that’s here to
stay and likely to lead to good results.
“These people don’t invest money to lose,” Mendelson
says of his fellow venture capitalists. The flow of funds
was slow to get started, however, in part because of
an aversion to the law. “There are very few lawyers
who become startup investors, and those who do
typically shun legal startups,” says VC Clint Korver,
who founded Ulu Ventures in 2009 in Palo Alto, Calif.,
with his wife, Miriam Rivera, former vice president and
deputy general counsel at Google.
That’s why Rule says he tries to keep the law out of
his pitches to investors. Since Modria is an online
dispute resolution and mediation platform based in
San Jose, Calif., Rule talks instead about the problem
and about the value disputes that aren’t currently
addressed in the legal model.
lawyers and law firms.
This article is the fifth
in our magazine
series. It is a look at
the venture capitalists
who are financing
legal services, but not
law firms, to both
increase access to
justice and make
money—lots of it.
They are redefining
what lawyers do, and
helping shift the
paradigm of law
practice today. There
is also online-only
content for the series,
available here
(http://www.abajournal.com/lawb
“Where there’s a huge unmet need, a company can
emerge with a solution and grow quickly,” Rule says.
“That’s what gets investors excited.”
ythenumbers/#tabs-1).
But the separation between law and venture
capitalists is melting away. The current chair of the
National Venture Capital Association is Josh Green, a
former Silicon Valley attorney. And Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal, has a law degree from Stanford
and has helped fund a few legal tech companies,
including the legal research startup Judicata.
October 2013
In fact, this new investment interest has been led
largely by venture capitalists with legal backgrounds.
Another investor with a law degree is Ron Dolin, who
worked at CERN, the European Council for Nuclear
Research in Geneva, before getting a PhD in
computer science and becoming one of the first 100
The Pedigree
Problem: Are law
school ties choking
the profession?
Paradigm Shift
Feature Stories
Who’s eating law
firms’ lunch?
(http://www.abajournal.com/mag
azine/article/whos_eating_law_fi
rms_lunch/)
July 2012
(http://www.abajournal.com/mag
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
3/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
employees at Google. He left after six years to pursue
a JD and now teaches legal technology and
informatics at Stanford Law School.
azine/article/the_pedigree_probl
He’s also an angel investor with a focus on legal
technology startups and says he wants to start a
whole pipeline of them to whittle away at the
inefficiencies in the industry.
January 2012
ANGEL OR VC?
The difference between angel investors like Dolin and
big-money venture capitalists like Mendelson isn’t
clear-cut anymore, Dolin says. “It’s now kind of a
continuum,” he says. “Typically, angels put in $10,000
to $100,000. But VCs are putting in seed money
because they want to gain early entry into a company.
And angels are putting in half a million now, so it’s
getting a little more mushy.”
The basic need, regardless of the stated motivation, is
to take tens of millions of dollars and turn that into
hundreds of millions. And venture capitalists are
hungry for more ideas that will get them there.
“When you’re working on something like legal aid,
that’s not likely to lead to for-profit startups,” Dolin
says. “But in consumer law, there’s plenty of room for
startups there. And when you start talking about
consumer law, now you’re looking at interest among
VC people. You’re going from Saks Fifth Avenue to
something like Wal-Mart or Sears.”
em_are_law_school_ties_choki
ng_the_profession/)
The Law School
Bubble: How long will
it last if law grads can’t
pay bills?
(http://www.abajournal.com/mag
azine/article/the_law_school_bu
bble_how_long_will_it_last_if_la
w_grads_cant_pay_bills/)
July 2011
Paradigm Shift: Law
job stagnation may
have started before
the recession—and it
may be a sign of
lasting change
(http://www.abajournal.com/mag
azine/article/paradigm_shift/)
March 2011
What America’s
Lawyers Earn
(http://www.abajournal.com/mag
azine/article/what_americas_law
yers_earn/)
The
latent
market
for the
legal
needs
of the
middle
class is
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
4/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
Pictured from left to right, Venture Capitalists Robert Siegel, Jeff
Thermond, Miriam Rivera, Clint Korver, Ron Dolin, and Josh Becker.
Photo by Norbert von der Groeben.
a year, Dolin says, as long as the right services
and the right pricing structure are developed.
tens of
billions
of
dollars
“It’s like H&R Block—where’s the legal
equivalent of that?” Dolin says. “When you start
talking consumer law, you get that increase in
scale and ramp-up of a startup. If they hit the
market right, that’s what a VC is looking for,” he
says. “The ones that don’t fail have to pay for
the ones that do fail, so they’re looking for high- Ron Dolin is an Angel investor
and Stanford Law School
end growth.”
research fellow from Stanford,
But returns aren’t all that drive VCs.
Calif., with a JD from the
University of California’s
“Yes, there’s making money, but a lot of it is
Hastings College of the Law.
enabling dreams and pursuing causes,” says
Photo by Norbert von der
Dolin. “I’m wanting to invest in legal tech
because I want legal technology to succeed. It’s Groeben.
incredibly important with consumer law. “The
latent market is a signal of inefficiency—of people not getting the help they need
because the infrastructure is broken. The fact that someone’s making money is
indicative of an inefficiency being fixed. “It’s not selling Pet Rocks,” he says. “I
don’t want to sell Pet Rocks. I want to have an impact in a field that is really
important for humanity. And the fact there are such inefficiencies also means
there’s a lot of money to be made.”
Dolin says he often co-invests with Ulu Ventures’ Rivera, whom he knows from
their time together at Google.
“Miriam will contact me when she has a legal tech company because she likes
having me onboard, and she feels it helps them be more successful because of
my engineering and law background,” Dolin says.
Rivera shares Dolin’s drive, he says.
“Miriam cares about women in law, minorities, access to legal justice, making
money. All these various interests align, and where you see such huge
inefficiencies as you do in the legal industry, you can simultaneously help people
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
5/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
and make money—and that’s the best,” Dolin says. “You don’t have to decide
between making money and helping people.”
Korver, Rivera’s husband and now chief operating officer of NovoEd—an online,
college-level education provider—agrees with Dolin’s assessment: “We have
financial criteria for our investments, but we’re also looking to make the world a
better place,” he says.
HER STORY
Miriam Rivera is Ulu
Ventures’ co-founder and
managing partner in Palo
Alto, Calif., who received her
JD/MBA from Stanford
University. Photo by Norbert
von der Groeben.
Rivera, one of the most influential women in
Silicon Valley, got her start as a venture
capitalist “half by accident and half intentionally,”
given her background with the law and Google,
Korver says. Rivera says she’s “one of the crazy
people who actually loved practicing —a glutton
for punishment—the intellectual challenge of law
tied to core values of justice and fairness.”
That’s what also makes the legal industry
attractive to her as an investor, she says,
although she knows all too well that the
complexity and inefficiency can be barriers to
entry for investors.
“Perhaps a knowledge of the law makes you
aware of how conservative a profession it is and how slow to adapt, so it makes
you more cautious,” Rivera says. “But at some level there are new and interesting
opportunities.”
Rivera’s business background enhanced her value as an attorney, she says,
helping her bring a more quantitative and data-driven approach to the practice
and operation of law. But as Google’s vice president and deputy general counsel,
she found herself looking at metrics and running law departments in a way that
was novel in the field of law, where most participants don’t have backgrounds in
business or operations.
Google was going through a high-growth phase, and she had a hard time figuring
out how to resolve matters in compliance with the law while still meeting metrics
such as closing advertising partnerships in three days. Going too slowly could
have stalled revenue growth and hurt the company’s future.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
6/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
So Rivera looked to find “ways people could do legal tasks with as little legal
intervention as possible.” That started the company on the hunt for technology
that could automate some of these legal solutions.
In addition, since Google was a very data-driven company, the founders and
then-CEO Eric Schmidt wanted to understand the tradeoffs between legal
protections and business needs in financial terms. It was difficult for Rivera to
provide the executives with data on risks of commercial litigation or contract work.
“It was so frustrating trying to be a data-driven legal department when the whole
profession doesn’t even support the use of data—because it’s fine to reinvent the
wheel if you get paid every time you re-create the wheel,” Rivera says.
And that’s why Lex Machina, a legal analytics company based in Menlo Park,
Calif., sparked her interest.
Lex Machina offers the tools to assess and compare law firms’ and lawyers’ work
and outcomes, assuaging the frustration Rivera still carried from when she was
building Google’s legal department from two to 150 attorneys, but had no way of
evaluating the counsel she paid, says Josh Becker, Lex Machina’s CEO.
For Korver, who has a PhD in management science and engineering from
Stanford, what resonated was the company’s focus on making better decisions
through legal analytics, Becker says.
Korver was the first to see that Lex Machina wasn’t competing against traditional
legal providers, but instead was providing a new capability—combining a lawyer’s
intuition with hard data to make the best decisions, Becker says.
“There is a cool factor,” Rivera says. “It’s a lot of fun to be a part of. When I look
at a company and imagine the future of law and how it will be different, I can see
the impact.”
Ulu Ventures has gone on to help fund such legal startups as Hire an Esquire
(flexible law-firm staffing); Ravel (legal research); SIPX (copyright management);
and EasyESI (document storage and review).
“Once you make an investment in an area, particularly in one that’s somewhat
tricky for general VCs to understand, you become someone people know to go
to,” Rivera says. “You understand what they are trying to do and that there really
is a market potential here. People not familiar with law often underestimate how
big an industry it really is.”
POSTER CHILD
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
7/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
Lex Machina is one poster child for this new
investing development.
“When I started in 2011—we raised our first
round in the beginning of 2012—you had very
few venture capitalists that had ever invested in
the legal space,” says Becker, who was once a
venture capitalist himself. “It was very much an
area that wasn’t on the radar screen with VCs.
Lex Machina CEO, Josh
There was a lot of skepticism.”
Becker, hails from Menlo
Becker says he used his relationships and
Park, Calif., and has a
credibility with investors to get venture
JD/MBA from Stanford
capitalists to take a look at the merits of Lex
University. Photo by Norbert
Machina and not just dismiss it out of hand
von der Groeben.
because it was law-related. “Once we did that,
we were able to attract investment,” Becker
says. “And we helped pave the way for a lot of companies because once one VC
goes into a space, others look at it.”
Indeed, the number of legal companies seeking funds through AngelList, a
website that helps connect startups with investors, has surged from only a few
three years ago to 461 as of press time. A venture-capitalist firm’s entry into one
company in an industry not only attracts others; it also can make that firm
comfortable enough for further forays in that field. One of Lex Machina’s
investors, XSeed Capital, went on to help fund SIPX.
XSeed, based in Portola Valley, Calif., was founded in 2006 to invest in
companies that have tech as a key differentiator, says Robert Siegel, a general
partner at the firm. The partnership makes its initial investments at the seed stage
and works with management when a startup is raw but has “the ability to become
humongous,” Siegel says.
“We are backed by institutional investors looking for high risk and high reward,”
he says. “We’re looking to fund the next Google.”
XSeed is small, managing just $110 million, making it part of a new wave of micro
venture capitalists who focus on the seed stage of a startup, Siegel says. That
often requires a close relationship with universities, which is where the core of
money for technology gets invested, he says.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
8/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
XSeed looks closely at risks in a startup’s
technology, execution and market, Siegel says.
The company likes technology risk because, if
technology is a differentiator, good engineers
can solve most problems. If there’s execution
risk, then XSeed considers whether it can help
the firm hire the right skill set, Siegel says,
similar to being the coach of a sports team.
Robert Siegel, from Portola
Valley, Calif., is a general
partner at XSeed Capital with
an MBA from Stanford
University. Photo by Norbert
von der Groeben.
Market risk—“Will the dogs eat the dog food?”—
is the variable that’s hated by most VCs, who
don’t like the uncertainty of knowing whether
customers are going to buy a product or not, he
says.
“We look at the law profession as but one
potential vertical that has the ability to be
reinvented,” Siegel says. “I’d be lying if I said
that we looked at 20 verticals and law was the only one we chose. But when we
looked, there were attributes that made us believe there would be certain
opportunities here. It’s a large market with slow incumbents, old technology and
new technology being developed that can deliver better solutions that are
available today.”
Hence XSeed’s investment in Lex Machina, which came out of Siegel’s alma
mater, Stanford, where he’s now on the faculty. He had known Becker at Lex
Machina for the last 15 years, and when Becker was looking to raise money for
his startup, “people advised Josh to go talk to Rob, because the guys at XSeed
like funding companies with deep tech breakthroughs out of universities,” Siegel
says.
THE STANFORD INCUBATOR
Stanford Law has been an incubator for legal
startups, being situated in the heart of Silicon
Valley and hosting its swarm of entrepreneurial
activity.
In fact, Korver and Rivera, whose JD/MBA is
from Stanford and who recently served on its
board of trustees, say Ulu Ventures focuses on
tech coming out of the school. Korver teaches
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
9/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
entrepreneurship there, too, and the pair cofounded a group called Stanford Angels &
Entrepreneurs to connect alumni seeking startup
assistance with those offering funds.
Clint Korver is NovoEd’s COO
and Ulu Ventures’ co-founder.
His PhD is in management
science and engineering from
Stanford University, and he
The VC firm subleases space from a law firm on
now resides in Palo Alto,
Stanford land in a building whose red-tile roofs
Calif. Photo by Norbert von
match the university’s.
der Groeben.
“We’ll take a meeting with any company coming
through CodeX,” the Stanford Center for Legal
Informatics, Korver said in an interview before stepping back from Ulu Ventures
to join one of its companies.
Silicon Valley has the right ingredients for the new developments in the legal
industry, with the confluence of a law school, design school, startup mentality,
venture capitalists, banks and law firms. And most have made sure they’re close
enough to be within biking distance of Stanford, since so many entrepreneurs
don’t have cars, Rivera says.
“The machinery, the culture, the mindset is such that when it gets going, it’s going
to kick ass,” Dolin says of the valley. “So all of a sudden we realized, ‘Hey, we
could apply this innovative machinery to the legal system, so let’s do that.’ “
And the ecosystem does make a difference. Many of the entrepreneurs already
knew the investors they ended up working with through friends or their kids’
sports teams.
“It’s a small valley,” Becker says.
But Silicon Valley isn’t the only hotbed for legal startups.
“Relatively speaking, there’s been quite a lot that has come out of Stanford, but if
you go to these legal tech dinners, it’s not like the majority of them are from
Stanford,” Dolin says. “Legal tech is coming from all over the place.”
Still, Lex Machina’s Stanford connection was what got the company its first
meeting with XSeed, which is closely associated with the school. One of XSeed’s
investment theses is that technology is enabling the analysis of data better than
at any other time in history, says Jeff Thermond, a venture partner with the firm.
And Lex Machina fit with that. It just happened to be in the legal space.
“I don’t think we went out and said, ‘Let’s go light up the legal services space
because we think it’s the natural area for VC investing,’ ” Thermond says. “From
the outside, people think venture capitalists tend to invest in categories. In reality,
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
10/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
the investments are about companies, and they’re very specific.”
Thermond worked in information technology and computer networking for 30
years before joining XSeed as a venture partner. He doesn’t have legal training,
but when he was an executive at Broadcom, the company “got involved in a
bunch of lawsuits, and he got involved, so he had personal experience,” Becker
says. So when XSeed invested in Lex Machina, Thermond “just got it right away
and joined the board to be a mentor to me.”
Venture capitalists rarely have time to get out and search for something in a
certain space, Thermond says. Mostly they just evaluate the pitches coming in
and decide whether one fits their view of the world, whether they like the team,
whether the market is big enough to produce a venture-size return and whether
the technology is there.
“The law is a very appealing space to us because whereas retailers for 20 years
have been doing things with fancy databases to analyze consumers, the law has
been a laggard in adopting technology like this,” Thermond says. “We think
there’ll be a very high payoff.”
And the herd mentality is strong.
“If someone is really successful in a given area, everyone will jump on the
bandwagon,” says Rivera.
GROWING CLOSER
Venture capitalists’ partnership with legal
companies is maturing. Becker says that for his
first round of funding, he had to run around and
pitch to a lot of firms. But for a recent round, last
May, “they really sought us out and found us,”
he says. The company raised $4.8 million in a
Series A funding round led by Cue Ball Capital
Colin Rule is the founder and
in Boston. (Series A is the first major venture
COO at Modria based in San
funding round after the seed capital.)
Jose, Calif. Photo by Norbert
Cue Ball has a more traditional venture-capitalist von der Groeben.
approach and didn’t invest in Lex Machina out of
a love for law, Thermond says. Instead, the
company sees “a large market that’s missing something, a lot of technology out
here, a proven team—and it doesn’t look like a firm that will require a ton of
money put into it, so it should be a good return,” Thermond says.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
11/12
12/14/2017
These venture capitalists skip law firms for legal services startups
That’s a big change from two or three years ago, when most VCs weren’t open to
even contemplating a company in the legal industry, Becker says.
“It still has to be a solid plan, but at least now VCs are open to looking at you,” he
says. “It’s pretty hot. There’s a lot going on. It’s really exciting.”
And all of the newly available financial backing is in turn inspiring new startups.
“There are a lot of very entrepreneurial lawyers. And once they see there’s capital
out there, if they’ve got ideas—that’s spurring interest,” Becker says.
To be sure, one foray into the field doesn’t necessarily lead to an entire
settlement. And the industry’s growth path is still bumpy, with only a handful of
companies—such as online document and legal advice suppliers LegalZoom and
Rocket Lawyer—getting broad attention.
“I know the disruption is happening” in law, Mendelson says, “but I’m frustrated
trying to find entities that can command VC-type returns. There have been some
nice, but no massive, wins in legal tech. But as for the billion-dollar exits, I haven’t
seen anything like that.”
In the meantime, there are more and more investors—law-minded or not—
jumping into legal technology startups to get a piece of the legal system’s
evolution.
“Venture capitalists are all looking for whatever new thing is going to get them
going, and they don’t mind if it’s consumer law,” Dolin says. “They’re just like,
‘Let’s make it happen.’ So we are.”
This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of the ABA Journal with this
headline: “They’re After Legal Gold: But these venture capitalists skip law firms
for legal services startups.”
Susanna Ray is a freelance writer based in Seattle.
Copyright 2017 American Bar Association. All rights reserved.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/these_venture_capitalists_skip_law_firms_for_legal_services_startups
12/12
12/14/2017
Ethics opinions have to reflect the present and future—not the past
Home / In-Depth Reporting / Ethics opinions have to reflect the present…
BUILDING THE 21ST-CENTURY LAW FIRM
Ethics opinions have to reflect the present and
future—not the past
BY CAROLYN ELEFANT
DECEMBER 2017 (/MAGAZINE/ISSUE/2017/12/)
Like 61
Share
Tweet
Share
82
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/legal_ethics_opinion_relevance
submit
1/5
12/14/2017
Ethics opinions have to reflect the present and future—not the past
Shutterstock
One of the most enduring purposes behind the ABA Model Rules of Professional
Conduct and corresponding state ethics standards is to protect clients and the
public from “overreaching, overcharging, underrepresentation and
misrepresentation.” (See Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar, 1978.)
More than a century after the 1908 adoption of the association’s first set of
guidelines, the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics, the clients whom ethics
standards protect and the lawyers governed by them have changed drastically.
Yet in substance and form, ethics standards remain stagnant—and the same lofty
principles that once inspired the best in lawyers will soon render us irrelevant.
ARCHAIC RULES
In substance, today’s legal ethics standards are so utterly out of sync with the
lifestyle, social conventions and technology savvy of today’s consumers that they
actually breed mistrust.
Imagine an encounter with an alien that hails from a planet where placing one’s
hands around a new acquaintance’s throat is intended as a sign of respect. Yet
without this background, you’d understandably feel distrustful and threatened if
greeted by a stranger who has a firm vise around your neck. The same is true of
ethics standards in the modern world: They require lawyers to act in a manner
that is so alien in today’s society as to arouse suspicion. Consider the two
following scenarios.
Case 1: Penny Prospect, a mom seeking a divorce, arrives at your office for a
consult. You think the meeting went well, but you never hear back. It turns out
your instincts weren’t wrong—Penny was leaning toward retaining you—until she
viewed your profile on LinkedIn and saw a disclaimer that states: “This profile is
attorney advertising.”
In a decade of using LinkedIn (including as recently as that morning when she
updated her profile in anticipation of searching for a higher-paying job), she has
never seen a disclaimer like this. She knows LinkedIn’s user agreement
(https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement) prohibits advertising. Doesn’t this lawyer
understand terms of service?
Penny’s concerns aren’t allayed when she clicks a link to the lawyer’s blog and
once again sees “This blog is attorney advertising” underneath the blog caption.
Penny doesn’t bother to read the posts; she assumes that if they’re advertising,
they won’t be very valuable.
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/legal_ethics_opinion_relevance
2/5
12/14/2017
Ethics opinions have to reflect the present and future—not the past
Penny wonders what’s wrong with this dude. He’s so caught up in promoting
himself online that he won’t have time to handle her case. Ultimately, Penny
heads to LegalZoom, which doesn’t have the same advertising disclaimers, and
signs up for the do-it-yourself divorce package that includes attorney review.
Case 2: Noah Newbie is a recent business school graduate seeking to
incorporate an online business. After the meeting, you hand him a 15-page
retainer agreement and ask him to sign it and send it back with a check.
Noah leaves the office and tosses the retainer agreement into the trash can. He
doesn’t understand a word of it. Plus, he’s always paid bills by credit card. He’s
not sure that he still has a checkbook.
He decides to search his lawyer’s ratings online, but there’s not a client review or
testimonial to be found. Because Noah always checks ratings before making a
purchase, he’s disconcerted about why he can’t find any for his lawyer: Were they
so bad she paid to have them removed?
Then Noah discovers a site called Avvo Answers, where he can ask questions
about incorporating a business for $39. Noah searches for a New York lawyer.
When he can’t find one, he discovers that several bars, including New York, have
banned lawyers from doing business on Avvo. Apparently, it’s unethical for the
site to take a cut of the $39 fee you pay to talk to a lawyer.
Noah doesn’t get it. Isn’t it a common online business model for the platform
providing goods or services to take a cut of the sale? That’s how Etsy and Airbnb
work—heck, Uber is killing it. Noah can’t believe this rule is really intended to
protect clients. It’s probably a way to force clients to have to trek to a stuffy, old
lawyer’s office and fork over $1,000.
It looks like his mentor, who heads a successful startup, was right after all: Noah
is going to have to start his corporation at Rocket Lawyer by himself. Noah sighs,
thinking it was easier to find his fiancée online through a dating site than it is to
hire a lawyer.
REAL RULINGS, FALSE FEARS
These aren’t fantasy scenarios; they are based on actual ethics opinions. New
York County Lawyers Association Formal Opinion 748
(http://www.nycla.org/siteFiles/Publications/Publications1748_0.pdf) (2015) requires disclaimers in
LinkedIn profiles. State Bar of California Formal Opinion 2016-196
(http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/ethics/Opinions/CAL%202016-196%20[12-0006]%20Blogging.pdf)
treats a blog as advertising that’s subject to advertising rules if the attorney
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/legal_ethics_opinion_relevance
3/5
12/14/2017
Ethics opinions have to reflect the present and future—not the past
makes known their availability for service. And New York State Bar Association
Ethics Opinion 1132 (http://www.nysba.org/EthicsOpinion1132/) (2017) finds Avvo Answers
and similar sites to constitute unethical fee splitting, as did a 2016 advisory
opinion (https://www.scbar.org/lawyers/legal-resources-info/ethics-advisory-opinions/eao/ethics-advisory-opinion16-06/) from the South Carolina Bar.
As these examples bear out, the parade of horribles that regulators envision—fee
splitting with nonlawyers injecting their interest into the attorney-client
relationship, testimonials and reviews that might dupe clients into hiring an
unqualified lawyer, making objective and useful information online available
through a LinkedIn profile or a blog without prominently labeling it as advertising
(I’m stumped to figure out what kind of harm that could ever cause)—doesn’t
intimidate today’s clients at all.
Most of today’s clients have seamlessly, thoroughly integrated social media and
“sharing-economy” platforms, as well as online payments and content-based
marketing, as part of their daily lives. They’ve acclimated to the cultures of each
online universe they inhabit and grown adept at distinguishing between causal
informational websites and biographical profiles, and chatty personal exchanges
and paid advertising. So when lawyers can’t conform their conduct to these
mores, they’re first viewed with suspicion or annoyance and, ultimately, ignored.
Read more ... (http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/legal_ethics_opinion_relevance/P1)
1
2
Next Page
Carolyn Elefant is an energy and eminent domain attorney based in Washington,
D.C. She says blogging at MyShingle “has given me a bird’s-eye view of the
changes that have been roaring through the legal profession and an opportunity
to chronicle and speak on these trends.”
This article was published in the December 2017 issue of the ABA Journal with
the title "Change the Rules! Ethics opinions have to reflect the present and future
—not the past."
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/legal_ethics_opinion_relevance
4/5
0 231 0
10 24 5
67 9
7 ÿ ÿ
ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ
8
ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
8 7
7
$7 ÿ2 ÿ ÿ67 9
7 ÿ ÿ
ÿ7 &
ÿ%
6 ÿ2 8
ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
8 7
' *+(,-. 0(6(1/0/6()ÿ ,/ÿ
23457 :ÿ ;>? 68=? ABÿ6 =
689 ;384:= @ÿ ÿ 76 3C:
7 4ÿ 38ÿ
D; ÿ3ÿ>;F
?C=E E ?:
GHÿ ,- 'ÿ$--*2 (G(LJ+6(' (-$J+M25NO52
I. J+ÿ. 2)))
K
,J02
1 P
*JM-/%ÿ
(1M-ÿ4ÿ4 Rÿ4*0ÿ
0 Q 0 Q # ÿ ,%1 0
^?:0 `>7:ÿ - ÿ `>7: a
_ R ; ÿ ÿ
; a
ÿ
ÿ
S X
TUVW
ÿ
ÿ
)
ÿ Y ÿ8 8
ÿ 7ÿ7 9
7 ÿ 7 ÿ
8 7ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ Z ÿ
8 7 8
8YMÿ ÿ
ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ Q
8
ÿ ÿ ÿ Y ÿ
ÿ
ÿ ÿ
7
7 ÿ
ÿ
Y ÿ 8 ÿ Y
8
- ÿ ÿ ÿ 1 0ÿ
7ÿ ÿ Y8 ÿÿ40
K 8
7 8
2" 7 7
2 7 2 2 ! 8 ! Y
2
! ! ! ! ! !
! 8 ! Z !7 8
Z
Y Y Z! 7 !
"
!P 87
Z
ÿ ÿ
8ÿ ÿ ÿ
8 ÿ
ÿ 7 7
8 Z7 7 7
7 Y8 ÿ ÿ Y ÿ Q
ÿ
8
7Y8 ÿ ÿ8
ÿÿ (
Z ÿ- ÿ 8
7
8
'
K 7 4 R4 21 9 999 9 9
9 8 Z7 \
2
2 2
1 0 2O4 2[8
8 89 "
9 9 2
2
2
8
] 4 R 5 303 4
8 1 0 4 4 00 3 P
8
7 8
27
7 ! !8 !
!7 ! !7
2 7 2 28 8 ! 8
! "
!
2
7
0#
2
0 231 0
10 24 5
67 9
7 ÿ ÿ
ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ
8
ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
8 7
7
$ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ7 9
7 % '7%
ÿ ÿ ÿ
8 8
ÿ 8 ÿ & ÿ
8 7 7
8
7
8 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ78 ) 7 8% 7)8 ÿ ÿ
ÿ( ))&7 ÿ ÿ8 ÿ ) &
8
ÿ
7
7ÿ )+ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ &8 ÿÿÿÿ
( ÿ * ÿ
ÿ ÿ & ÿ
, 8 8
8 )0 ÿÿ 7 ÿÿÿ7&ÿ
8
ÿ8 ÿ4 ÿÿ)) ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ
8 8
ÿÿ4 1ÿ ÿ4 #ÿ '7ÿ . )/ ÿ 7
1 0 81 0 % & ÿ
ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ
8 - 8
7
&ÿ ÿ ,ÿ "87 % 7)
& ÿ 7 8ÿ
)8 ÿ
ÿ
* 8ÿ ÿ7 ÿÿ )
8
& ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ )
8 ÿ* '7 ÿ
% ÿ
7
7 ÿ
+
ÿ 0+0ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ ) ÿ ) 8ÿ )
ÿ ) ÿ 1 8
ÿ ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ
7
7
7
ÿ7 8 ÿ7
ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 , & ÿÿ
8 8ÿ )8 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ 8 ÿ 8
2
8
% ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ 88 ÿÿ ÿ ÿ.
. ÿÿ )7 7 8 &
ÿ 7 & ÿ8
7
8 ÿ ) 8
ÿ + ÿ ) 8
ÿ ÿ
8 %
ÿ % 8 ÿ ÿ7
7 3
2
7 ÿ & ÿ
ÿÿ ÿ 7ÿ
78 ÿ8 8 + ÿ 4ÿ. 8 ÿ "
3
7
8 7& 8 ) ÿ 8 % ÿ % 8
%
)
7 & ÿ ÿÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ & ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ
7
ÿ
7"8 ÿÿÿ 2
) 8 3 ) ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ & 8 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ8 ÿ
8
8 ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ
) ) 2 ÿÿ ÿ
3
7
5 8 % 8 ÿ %
ÿ 7ÿ ÿ 78 ÿ
818 ÿ
ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ %7 " ÿ7ÿ & ÿ ÿ
6
&
-
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
)7 ÿ 7 8 7 ÿ 7"8( 8 ÿ8 ÿ )
ÿ ÿ ÿ8 ÿ7 ) 8' ÿ & % )
ÿ 7
9 :8ÿ ÿ
ÿ &ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ . )/
3 ÿ
7 ÿ ÿ
7
ÿ ÿ ÿ
8 8 8 8
7)% ÿ ( ÿ7
ÿ ÿ7
ÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ)7
8%7 8ÿ 4ÿ
ÿ 8
ÿ
1
%
8 ÿ % &ÿ ÿÿ
ÿ ÿ7
ÿ ÿ8 7 8 ) ) ÿÿ ÿ
) ) 8%
6
ÿ 8
ÿ ) ÿ08+ )ÿÿ ) ÿÿ4
ÿ 0ÿ
7 ÿ ÿ7 8 7ÿ8 ÿ7) 0 ÿ 8
8
ÿ
8 ÿ 8
8
0 7)8 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8% ÿ $ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ) 8ÿ ÿ
& ;7 ÿ 8 ÿ '7 ) ÿ 7
7
+7
$7
7
7
'7ÿÿ % ÿ (
0 %4 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ % ÿ: ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ 7
ÿ44 4
ÿ ÿ 7 47
8 7
8 3
8 ÿ ÿ-ÿ
8 ÿ 3
ÿÿ
8 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ
)
%ÿ
2ÿ
+7 ÿ< 8 ÿ ) ÿ8 ÿ ÿ8
8 + =
8 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ &7 7
2 ÿ
8
ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 77 &
ÿÿ7& ÿ
ÿ
8 )8
) ÿ ÿ 7
"8 ÿ
7
7
7 & ÿ ÿÿ "
8 77 ÿ
8
3
+7 8 ÿ
ÿ ÿ "ÿ 0+'% 78&7
8ÿ7ÿ
ÿ 8. ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ
7
8
ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8 & ÿÿ ÿ
) ÿ
8ÿ ÿ 7
7
) 7 ÿ
7 7
8 7 ) ÿ ) ÿ
8
2
8 ÿ ÿ
ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ
7 ÿ 7 ÿ 7
$ ÿ & ÿ )7 7 8
ÿ 8 )8
8ÿ
8 7
&ÿ ÿ
8ÿ& 8 & &
ÿ 8
8 8 8 % "%ÿ 8ÿ ÿ "8 ÿ %+7
8
ÿ
7 7
3
577 8>ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ
. ÿÿ 87 ÿ
ÿ ÿ &
ÿ ÿ8 %
2
)
ÿ ÿ
ÿ"
ÿ ÿ 87 ÿ 7
)ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿ 3
7
7
8
8
7 8
27
7 ! !8 !
!7 ! !7
2 7 2 28 8 ! 8
! "
!
2
7
1#
2
0 231 0
10 24 5
67 9
7 ÿ ÿ
ÿ7 ÿ ÿ ÿ
8
ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
8 7
7
'7
ÿ ÿ 8 8 ÿ ÿ 7
8ÿ ÿ ÿ7 ÿ ÿÿ8 ÿ ÿ ÿ
7 &')ÿ
7
+ 8ÿ ÿ ÿ7 7 ÿ7
ÿ (
ÿ ÿ 8 ( 8 ( ÿÿ
*7 ÿ 7
7
8
8
ÿ ÿ
7
,ÿÿ ÿ ÿ7ÿ (8 % ÿ
"8 ÿÿ8 87
- ( 8 (
7
ÿ7ÿ ÿ ( ( ÿ % 7 ÿ
7
88 7
88 ÿ ÿ7 ÿ8 ÿ8
ÿ +ÿ 8
ÿ ÿ
7 ÿ
( 7 ÿ .'7
7
8
- 78 ÿ ÿ
7 % ÿ8
8 (ÿ
ÿÿ ÿ7ÿ &')ÿ8 ÿ 8
ÿ 77 ÿ ( 7
,(
8
ÿ( ÿ 7 8ÿ ÿÿ 8ÿ7 7 7 ÿ
7
7 ÿ7 ÿ 8 ( 8 ÿ 7 ÿ 8 ÿ
77
ÿ
7
ÿ 8 (
ÿ
8 ÿ ÿ ÿ 8
( ÿ ( ÿ
ÿ
( 8 ÿ
(
ÿ ÿ+ 7 ÿ 7ÿ 7 ÿ ÿ .
ÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ8&')ÿ (8
8
' ÿ
(& 8ÿ ÿ 07( 8ÿ12&. ÿ (
ÿ % ÿ
ÿ )
/ÿ 7 ÿ , ÿ
ÿ 7
ÿÿ7ÿ 8 ÿ
%
8
7 ÿ ÿ7(
8 8 8 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ( 3ÿ ÿ ÿ
7
4
7
5 8
7 8
2
( % 7 !7
! 7 ! ! " % % !7
2 7 2 2 ! 8 ! 7( 8 ( ! 8 ! ! 7 !
!
2
8
8
0
7
ÿ1
8 67ÿÿ7 ÿ
8(
ÿ 5 47 67ÿ 7 (
7ÿ4 8 (
! !ÿ
8& ÿ7
5 3 ÿ
8ÿ ÿ 8 ÿ 0 ÿ8
ÿ ( ÿÿ 9 45: 88ÿ %(
8
&7 3 ÿ7 # ÿ
7 6 8 8 ÿ
8
5 8
7 8
2
% 7 ! "( ! ! ( ! 7 % 7" 7
2 7 2 2 ! 7( 8 !
8 7 ! ! ! ! 8!
2
8
4
7
8
(ÿ ÿ
8 ÿ ÿ ÿ
(ÿ
ÿ8 ÿ ÿ ÿ8
! 6 ÿ ( ÿ ( ÿ ÿ 7 7 7 ÿ ÿ (
ÿ7% ÿ %7
"8 ÿ ÿ
7
8
'
ÿÿ7ÿ7 8 ( ÿ ÿ 8 (ÿ ÿ 07( 8 7
ÿ ÿ 8 8 ÿ ÿ )
/ÿ 7 ÿ (
7
ÿ ÿ ÿ$ ÿ"8 ÿ ÿ ; +ÿ
8 8% ÿ
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ . ÿ
7
,
7
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
$7
ÿ4 5& ÿ &78ÿ
0 ÿ 8' ÿ ÿ% ÿ(
%1
7 &
8
7 8
27
7 ! !8 !
!7 ! !7
2 7 2 28 8 ! 8
! "
!
2
7
##
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
