Simpson v. Greene

Filing 33

ORDER denying 15 Motion to Vacate ; denying 17 Motion to Vacate. For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Petitioners claim challenging his state court conviction is DENIED as outside the scope of Rules 60(b) and 60(d). Petitioner 's additional requests made on reply -- (1) that the Court order the DAO to produce a full copy of the trial records and (2) for an extension to reply to the OAG's opposition in further support of his COVID-19 claim -- are DENIED as moot . (As further set forth in this Order.) The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order and attachment to pro se Petitioner and to close the motions at Dkt. Nos. 15 and 17.. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/17/2021) (cf) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 1 of 40

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------------ X
:
:
THEODORE SIMPSON,
Petitioner, :
:
:
-against:
:
GARY GREENE,
Respondent. :
------------------------------------------------------------ X

03 Civ. 6323 (LGS)
ORDER

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge:
WHEREAS, Petitioner Theodore Simpson, serving an aggregate prison term of sixty-six
years to life in the Sullivan Correctional Facility, filed this action on June 26, 2003, seeking
federal habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 18, 2003, then-District
Judge Lynch denied the § 2254 habeas petition as untimely and otherwise lacking merit. On
April 20, 2020, and August 18, 2020, Petitioner filed two motions in this habeas action, styled as
motions to vacate judgment pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b) and 60(d),
respectively. See Dkt. Nos. 15 and 17. On December 15, 2020, this action was re-assigned to
me, and the Office of the Attorney General State of New York (“OAG”) and the Bronx County
District Attorney’s Office (“DAO”) were directed to respond to Petitioners’ pending April and
August motions. See Dkt. No. 18. Petitioner mailed a reply to the DAO’s response, which is
appended hereto. The motions are denied in part and construed in part as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254
petition.
Background
WHEREAS, on January 5, 1996, the Grand Jury of Bronx County indicted Petitioner on
various counts in connection with a June 1993 kidnapping, robbery and murder. On October 29,
1998, Petitioner was convicted in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Bronx County.
At Petitioner’s trial, the State presented eyewitness testimony and called a corroborating witness,

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 2 of 40

James Venson, who testified that Petitioner had confessed to the crimes. Cross-examination
revealed that Venson was in fact incarcerated at the time his alleged conversation with Petitioner
occurred. A stipulation was entered at trial that Venson was in prison on the relevant dates.
Petitioner moved to set aside the verdict, contending in part that Venson’s testimony should have
been stricken. This motion was denied. Petitioner was sentenced to twenty-five years to life, to
run concurrently on all counts and consecutively to his sentences for unrelated convictions.
WHEREAS, Petitioner has sought post-conviction relief multiple times since his 1998
sentencing. For example, Petitioner appealed his conviction and sentence in October 2000,
arguing that the eyewitness testimony was unreliable and that Venson’s testimony was incredible.
On June 21, 2001, the Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of conviction. See People v.
Simpson, 728 N.Y.S.2d 135 (1st Dep’t 2001). As stated above, in 2003, Petitioner sought habeas
relief in this Court. On June 25, 2019, the Second Circuit denied Petitioner’s application to file a
successive habeas petition.
The Instant Motions
WHEREAS, there are two pending motions here in Petitioner’s 2003 habeas action. The
August 2020 motion is styled as a Rule 60(d) motion and seeks reversal of his conviction and of
the judgment denying his 2003 habeas petition. Petitioner argues that his conviction was
premised on false and fraudulent testimony and attaches excerpts from the trial transcript. The
April 2020 motion is styled as a Rule 60(b) motion and primarily presents a new claim that
Petitioner is entitled to immediate release because the prison conditions during the COVID-19
pandemic and his underlying medical conditions make his incarceration unconstitutional. The
April 2020 motion does not address any aspect of the prior habeas proceeding except to describe
the initial petition as having sought relief from his conviction based on false testimony. Pursuant
2

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 3 of 40

to an agreement between the OAG and the DAO, the OAG responded to Petitioner’s COVID-19
arguments, and the DAO responded to Petitioner’s challenges regarding the state court
conviction.
Legal Standards
WHEREAS, Rule 60(b) provides six grounds for relief from a federal judgment or order. 1
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1)-(6). Rule 60(d) describes a court’s other powers to grant relief from
a judgment, including the power to “entertain an independent action,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(1),
“to prevent a grave miscarriage of justice,” see United States v. Beggerly, 524 U.S. 38, 47 (1998);
accord Pena v. United States, 859 F. Supp. 2d 693, 699 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), and to set aside a
judgment for fraud on the court, Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(3).
WHEREAS, this Court has held that the law governing Rule 60(b) motions made in
habeas proceedings also applies to Rule 60(d). See Erbo v. United States, No. 08 Civ. 02881,
2014 WL 6454002, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2014); accord Wright v. Poole, 81 F. Supp. 3d 280,
286 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (collecting cases). Accordingly, the following law also applies to
Petitioner’s motion styled as pursuant to Rule 60(d).
WHEREAS, “relief under Rule 60(b) is available with respect to a previous habeas
proceeding only when the Rule 60(b) motion attacks the integrity of the habeas proceeding and
not the underlying conviction.” Harris v. United States, 367 F.3d 74, 77 (2d Cir. 2004); accord

The six grounds are: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly
discovered evidence, which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for
a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud, misrepresentation or other misconduct of an adverse
party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged, or a
prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer
equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying
relief from the operation of the judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).
3
1

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 4 of 40

United States v. Lopez-Pena, No. 05 Cr. 191, 2018 WL 4006803, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2018).
A Rule 60(b) motion filed by a habeas petitioner attacks the underlying conviction -- and
advances in substance habeas claims -- when it adds “a new ground for relief” from the
conviction or “attacks the federal court’s previous resolution of a claim on the merits.” See
Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 531-32 (2005) (emphasis in original). In contrast, a habeas
petitioner is not “making a habeas corpus claim . . . when he merely asserts that a previous ruling
which precluded a merits determination was in error -- for example, a denial for such reasons as
failure to exhaust, procedural default, or statute-of-limitations bar.” Id. at 532 n.4.
WHEREAS, when a Rule 60(b) motion attacks the underlying conviction, it is in
substance an application for habeas relief subject to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). Id. at 530-32. In that
circumstance, a district court is “present[ed] . . . with two procedural options: (i) the court may
treat the Rule 60(b) motion as a second or successive habeas petition, in which case it should be
transferred to [the appropriate court of appeals] . . . for possible certification, or (ii) the court may
simply deny the portion of the motion attacking the underlying conviction as beyond the scope of
Rule 60(b).” Harris, 367 F.3d at 82 (internal quotation marks and emphasis omitted); accord
Lopez-Pena, 2018 WL 4006803, at *1.
WHEREAS, because Petitioner appears pro se, the Court has liberally interpreted his
submissions “to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest.” Williams v. Annucci, 895 F.3d
180, 187 (2d Cir. 2018). Nevertheless, a pro se litigant is not exempt “from compliance with
relevant rules of procedural and substantive law.” Traguth v. Zuck, 710 F.2d 90, 95 (2d Cir.
1983) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Bryant v. Capra, No. 18 Civ.
10198, 2021 WL 323263, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 1, 2021).

4

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 5 of 40

August 2020 Motion for Relief Based on Fraudulent Testimony and Collusion
WHEREAS, it is clear from the face of the August 2020 motion that Petitioner’s
arguments attack his underlying conviction and the Court’s previous resolution of Petitioner’s
habeas claim. 2 Accordingly, the motion is denied as “beyond the scope” of Rules 60(b) and
60(d). See Harris, 367 F.3d at 82; Erbo, 2014 WL 6454002, at *3.
WHEREAS, Petitioner argues that his conviction rested on fraudulent testimony, and
specifically, that the prosecutor and trial court colluded to mislead the jury into believing that
Venson’s corroborating testimony was credible. In support, Petitioner presents “newly
discovered evidence,” i.e., an excerpt of the trial transcript reflecting the stipulation stating that
Venson was incarcerated at the time of Petitioner’s alleged confession. Petitioner recharacterizes the stipulation as an agreement between the prosecutor and the Court to allow false
testimony. Even were Petitioner’s “new evidence” a new ground for relief, Petitioner’s
arguments are still in essence a habeas claim, as they seek reversal of his conviction. 3
WHEREAS, the appropriate remedy is to deny the August 2020 motion as beyond the
scope of Rule 60(b) and Rule 60(d), as the Second Circuit has cautioned district courts that
conversion of a Rule 60 motion into a successive habeas petition may subject a Petitioner to

This denial of the 2003 petition constitutes a decision on the merits, where the Court found that
the petition was untimely and that the “grounds for relief asserted in [Petitioner’s] petition,”
which “amount[ed] to nothing more than an attack on the credibility of the witnesses against
him,” “lack[ed] merit.” See Quezada v. Smith, 624 F.3d 514, 518 (2d Cir. 2010) (“Generally, a
petition dismissed as time-barred is considered a decision on the merits.”); accord Young v.
Artus, No. 08 Civ. 7734, 2017 WL 5468563, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2017).
3
Petitioner’s August 2020 motion also mentions that the Court should “relax” the previous denial
of the petition as time barred given the pandemic. This argument neither goes to the “integrity”
of the prior habeas proceeding nor asserts that the previous ruling was in error. Instead, as
Petitioner explains, this request is made because he would like the Court to exercise discretion
and review his arguments that his conviction was based on fraudulent testimony and collusion. In
other words, Petitioner seeks to challenge the Court’s previous determination.
5
2

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 6 of 40

prejudice. See Erbo, 2014 WL 6454002, at *3 (denying pro se petitioner’s Rule 60 motion as
beyond the scope of Rules 60(b) and (d), noting that “premature treatment” of the motion as a
successive habeas petition “‘risks subjecting the prisoner not only to summary denial of that
challenge but also to summary denial of any subsequent . . . challenge as an abuse of the writ’”
(quoting Gitten v. United States, 311 F.3d 529, 533 (2d Cir. 2002)).
April 2020 Motion for Relief Based on COVID-19
WHEREAS, in his April 2020 motion, Petitioner seeks release based on medical concerns
and circumstances presented by COVID-19. Petitioner’s request for release is in the nature of a
habeas claim. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973) (“[W]hen a state prisoner is
challenging the very fact or duration of his physical imprisonment, and the relief he seeks is a
determination that he is entitled to immediate release or a speedier release from that
imprisonment, his sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus.”); accord Slater v. Keyser, 20
Civ. 3012, 2020 WL 4016759, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 16, 2020).
WHEREAS, unlike the August motion, which is denied as outside the scope of Rules
60(b) and 60(d), the April application is construed as a claim for habeas corpus relief pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254 (the “COVID-19 claim”). The COVID-19 claim is not considered a successive
challenge as Petitioner’s initial habeas petition challenged his criminal judgment. See Order,
Sanchez v. Portuondo, No. 99 Civ. 1911, Dkt. No. 29 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2020) (Second Circuit
order denying Petitioner’s motion for leave for successive habeas petition as the “proposed §
2254 petition would not be successive because the prior petition appears to have directly
challenged Petitioner’s criminal judgment, while the present proposed petition challenges
Petitioner’s post-sentencing conditions of confinement”).

6

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 7 of 40

WHEREAS, the OAG argues that Petitioner’s COVID-19 claim would not be cognizable
under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 but is properly brought in a suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
“However, courts in this Circuit have considered and rejected the argument that § 1983 is the sole
remedy available to a petitioner in state custody who seeks release due to conditions of
confinement; instead, these courts have found that a petitioner may obtain such relief by bringing
a petition for writ of habeas corpus under § 2254.” Slater, 2020 WL 4016759, at *3 (collecting
cases). Here, Petitioner seeks immediate release from confinement, and a § 2254 habeas petition
is a cognizable vehicle for this claim. The OAG outlines several other reasons why this Court
should not construe the claim as a new habeas petition. 4 These arguments are mostly academic
because, as the OAG notes, Petitioner should be provided an opportunity to withdraw the
COVID-19 claim. See Cook v. N. Y. State Div. of Parole, 321 F.3d 274, 281-82 (2d Cir. 2003);
see also Adams v. United States, 155 F.3d 582, 584 (2d Cir. 1998) (per curiam). For the
foregoing reasons, it is hereby
ORDERED that Petitioner’s claim challenging his state court conviction is DENIED as
outside the scope of Rules 60(b) and 60(d). Petitioner’s additional requests made on reply -- (1)
that the Court order the DAO to produce a full copy of the trial records and (2) for an extension to
reply to the OAG’s opposition in further support of his COVID-19 claim -- are DENIED as moot.
As for Petitioner’s is COVID-19 claim, at this point, he may choose to withdraw it or
refile it as a claim for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court construes the

4

One reason is that Petitioner has already asserted the same claim in a matter pending before
Judge Nathan. See Simpson v. Keyser, No. 20 Civ. 6408, 2020 WL 5946944 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 7,
2020). In that action, Petitioner was afforded the opportunity to proceed with his claims for relief
under § 2254. See id. at *3. However, it appears that Petitioner did not timely file any amended
petition.
7

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 8 of 40

claim as seeking habeas corpus relief under § 2254. Petitioner is advised that if he refiles the
claim, the claim will be subject to the “second or successive” restrictions of § 2244.
If Petitioner does not wish to proceed with his COVID-19 claim under § 2254, Petitioner
should submit a letter stating that he is withdrawing the claim.
If Petitioner does wish to proceed with the COVID-19 claim under § 2254, Petitioner is
granted leave to file an amended petition, so that he can include all the necessary information,
including whether he has exhausted his state remedies. At the end of this Order is an Appendix,
which describes the information Petitioner should include in any amended petition. Also attached
is a form to file an Amended Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which Petitioner may fill out and
file as his amended petition. Petitioner is advised that if he files an amended petition, he must
provide all the necessary information, even if he has already put it before the Court. The Court
will understand the amended petition as Petitioner’s consent to proceed with his claim for relief
under § 2254, and the amended petition will completely replace his submissions filed in support
of his Rule 60 motions. This means the Court will review the information included in the
amended petition only, and Petitioner cannot rely on anything previously submitted.
By April 18, 2021 Petitioner shall either (1) submit a letter to this Court of withdrawal of
the COVID-19 claim or (2) submit an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus under § 2254.
If Petitioner fails to comply with this Order within the time allowed, and cannot show good cause
to excuse such failure, the Court will deny Petitioner’s COVID-19 claim for habeas corpus relief
without prejudice.
Because Petitioner has not at this time made a substantial showing of a denial of a
constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The Court
certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken
8

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 9 of 40

in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See
Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order and attachment to
pro se Petitioner and to close the motions at Dkt. Nos. 15 and 17.
Dated: February 17, 2021
New York, New York

9

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 10 of 40

Appendix
Any amended § 2254 petition must comply with the following directions:
1. Rule 2(c) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases
A state prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief under § 2254 must submit a petition that
conforms to the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Rule 2(c) of those rules requires a petition
to specify all the petitioner’s available grounds for relief, setting forth the facts supporting each
ground, and stating the relief requested.
If Petitioner files an amended petition, he should ensure that it includes his grounds for
relief and the underlying facts and legal theory supporting each ground so that the issues
presented may be adjudicated.
2. Exhaustion of State-Court Remedies
A state prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief under § 2254 must also show in his petition
that he exhausted all available state-court remedies before filing his petition, or that his failure to
exhaust those remedies was for a recognized reason. See § 2254(b)(1) (“An application for a writ
of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall
not be granted unless it appears that -- (A) the applicant has exhausted the remedies available in
the courts of the State; or (B)(i) there is an absence of available State corrective process; or (ii)
circumstances exist that render such process ineffective to protect the rights of the applicant.”).
This exhaustion requirement means that generally, the state courts must be given the first
opportunity to review constitutional errors associated with a petitioner’s confinement. O’Sullivan
v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 844 (1999). A petitioner may satisfy the exhaustion requirement by
fairly presenting his claims through a state’s established appellate review process. Id. at 845. “A
petitioner has ‘fairly presented’ his claim only if he has ‘informed the state court of both the
factual and legal premises of the claim he asserts in federal court.’” Dorsey v. Kelly, 112 F.3d 50,
52 (2d Cir. 1997) (quoting Daye v. Attorney General, 696 F.2d 186, 191 (2d Cir. 1982)).

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 11 of 40

If Petitioner files an amended petition, it should show that he has exhausted the available
state-court remedies with regard to his grounds for federal habeas corpus relief or why his failure
to exhaust those remedies should be excused. The Court understands from Petitioner’s action,
Simpson v. Keyser, No. 20 Civ. 6408, that he has sought relief from his immediate confinement in
a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the New York Supreme Court, Sullivan County,
under N.Y.C.P.L.R. Art. 70, and that the state court has converted that proceeding into one for
relief under N.Y.C.P.L.R. Art. 78. Petitioner should allege facts about the status of that
proceeding, whether the state court has issued decisions in that proceeding, or whether he has
appealed those decisions.

11

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 12 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 13 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 14 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 15 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 16 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 17 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 18 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 19 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 20 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 21 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 22 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 23 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 24 of 40

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 25 of 40

^_ace gif k lmn ÿ hsa u ÿvwyc zke ÿ{_ ac ÿ} k
`ÿdfhgj f g oÿpqr tÿ ÿ x ÿfc zfÿ | ÿfqÿ
ÿ
lÿ a
ÿ
e

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 26 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



YZ[\][]
 ÿ
 ÿ ÿÿ$%ÿ ÿ
ÿ ! #ÿ & %
"
'()( ÿ
! ÿ (ÿ ÿÿ(ÿ *
)*ÿ  
!
67979
8:;<
+-/ --1,-,- 5,.ÿ 0.ÿ 123ÿ 2
!4
= ÿ@A8ÿ 7CÿE?ÿ :ÿE@979A
>86 :BC; D B88; ;8 <
?
6EF9: 8ÿ

;8ÿ ÿ 8=E<
E G

8Eÿ @78 @ÿ
H;ÿI I@>89
GE
<

ÿ
83

7E8ÿ

:8@: <
=E

97@:7;?A898@ ÿ@A8ÿ 7CÿE?ÿ :ÿE@979A
87E8ÿ@H ÿCÿ >8? :BC; D B88; ;8
9 6

ÿ

9

78J@899E:KAÿ88@ÿ7ÿ?8EADÿIJ877@8
8EA@ÿ?C 78 J:E C9@ ; 9 Eÿ 99E :
6

LCÿ 9:8ÿ @:HICÿ99ÿI
819 @DM88ÿ ÿ8N8Eÿ
E
E9

YZ[\][]
 

5

3



4

W

6 >8AH;9@EÿE:ÿÿ@88ÿ8OA>89IE9;7@D?8;H@7ÿ
ÿ ÿ@ÿ 7 ÿI ?9C9 9:A9 ÿ  @ÿ ÿ @79 ÿEÿ:ÿCH @<
= E E ; 9 8 C ? E ; E
8

6 7 @HEF9:8@>P:7ÿEÿ@B
Pÿ >7ÿ ;8ÿ ÿ 8ÿ? 8ÿI ?FE <
G: A E ;
6D
6 9ÿICÿA>89IE9;7@6I Eÿ@B
ÿ 8Eÿ8O  @ÿ ÿ @79 ÿ ÿ ?FE <
6 9 ? E ; E 7D
6 9ÿI89@7ÿ
Pÿ 8Eÿ @8;@<
6 8
Q8CEÿ89@8
@9ÿI @8;<
8
Rÿ7ÿ8ÿ :ÿEÿE9;8ÿ@>E89ÿ@ÿE@ÿ: I :ÿÿ@ÿ:>8 U V8 U =Eÿ
@98;8S 8D?;@79AEÿ :ÿ @E8;?9 ÿ ÿ 89 @E8;7 T
C B8
C
E E >E C
8
ÿ
ÿ
R89DH:>8ÿI 7CD?B88;@79AA8@8;A7ÿ7ÿ8
A@7 ÿH;7 8Eÿ ;ÿEÿ :ÿE9;8ÿ@ÿ89@8ÿ 98;8<
I ÿ
BC
@C

6 ÿ 8D?ÿHÿ 8FE8
ÿ 9 ÿE: 8T6 ;ÿ@
XC B J GC
U 6 =Eÿ?H
5
9 7D
9
U 6 M?H
3ÿ 7D
9

U 6 =EE;@8A:ÿ E;@89

HÿE9@886 ÿE98
@
U 6 R8@9ÿH
4 @7 J8
D

568:< >@= B CDE ÿ ?J8 L ÿMNP: QB< ÿR6 8: ÿT B
7ÿ;=?>A = > FÿGHI Kÿ ÿ O ÿ=: Q=ÿ S ÿ:Hÿ
ÿ
Cÿ 8
ÿ
<

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 27 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
8

6 ÿ88ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!8ÿÿ8ÿÿ!8ÿ ÿ
ÿÿ 88ÿ 8  ÿ ÿÿÿÿ 8ÿ !  ÿ "  

 

 

#! 
8ÿÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿ$
ÿÿÿ #! 8 


 

)

/

2

6 ÿ ÿÿ#!ÿÿÿ8ÿ 8%8
ÿÿ #8" ÿÿÿ!9$6 ÿ
   ÿ %  
&!
' (ÿ ' (8

ÿ
*ÿÿ+ÿÿ8""ÿ8$
  ÿ 8ÿ ÿÿ+,ÿ 
8  !  ÿ
!
' -8ÿ ' .
+
*ÿÿ80ÿ81089 ÿ
ÿ  ÿ  ÿ ÿ  $
 ! 

' -8 ' .
+
ÿ
ÿÿÿ8+ !ÿ #
 "#8ÿ8  3

ÿ  
6 08ÿ3
ÿ ÿ 
.
6 %80ÿÿ#ÿ
ÿ 8ÿ ÿ +ÿ 8ÿ % 3
* 
6
6 +ÿ
ÿ 
78 3
6 ÿ8ÿÿ#ÿ
ÿ 8ÿ+6 % 3
*  ÿ 
6 ÿ8 86 ÿ#ÿ
8ÿ  ÿ  ÿ +ÿ ÿ % 3
&  ! 
6 +83
ÿ ÿ +
4 

6 +8ÿ !8#ÿ!8ÿÿ$
ÿ ÿÿ8% 8ÿ98 ÿÿ! 8 
*
 
+
ÿ8"#8ÿ8#
 +ÿ + !ÿ  3
   
6 08ÿ3
5ÿ ÿ 
.
6 %80ÿÿ#
3ÿ 8ÿ ÿ +ÿ 8ÿ % 3
* 
6
6 +
ÿ 
78 3
6 ÿ8ÿÿ#ÿ
4ÿ 8ÿ+6 % 3
*  ÿ 

' -8ÿ ' .
+ÿ
ÿ

78:<> @B? D EFG ÿ AL: N ÿOPR< SD> ÿT8 :< ÿV D
9ÿ=?A@C ? @ HÿIJK Mÿ ÿ Q ÿ?< S?ÿ U ÿ>Jÿ
ÿ
Eÿ :
ÿ
>

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 28 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
84

6 ÿ8ÿ ÿ 
ÿ  ÿ  ÿ86ÿ  !
   
6 #8!
ÿ $ÿ $
"# 

6 $&ÿÿ8ÿ #8##ÿÿ8($)8ÿ#*8#+
ÿ ÿÿ 8' ÿ #  ÿ  ÿ)'8 ÿ 
%        8
/ÿ80 8ÿ8& 
 ÿ  #ÿ & !
   
6 8ÿ#8*1#ÿÿ 
5ÿ  ÿ ÿ 8ÿ  !
%  
6
6 &ÿ
3ÿ 
78 !

, -8 , .


6 ÿ8ÿÿ ÿ
ÿ 8ÿ&6  !
% # ÿ 
6 ÿ8ÿ ÿ ÿ
4ÿ  ÿ  ÿ86ÿ  !
   
5
28ÿÿ8$#ÿ'8&ÿ8ÿ1908'8&ÿ&$# 8ÿ'&0# 

# ÿ8 '&$8ÿ 9ÿÿ#98ÿÿ8ÿ 0 '  ÿ ÿ  
   


'      *
8ÿÿ$*89ÿÿÿ#+
#2  ÿ ÿ  ÿ 8
    
, -8
 , .
5
/ÿ# 8ÿÿ 85ÿÿ-80ÿ88& # 
5  ÿ  #3 ÿ 4 49ÿ ÿ & ÿ * !
   
   
6 6 *8ÿ#!
 5ÿ ÿ 
. 
6 8ÿ#8*1#ÿÿ ÿ
3ÿ  ÿ ÿ 8ÿ  !
%  
6
6 ÿÿ ÿ ÿ
ÿ 8ÿ&6ÿ  !
%  
6 #ÿÿ#8
4ÿ 8ÿ8'8$!
. 
6 #8!
ÿ $ÿ $
"# 

6 $#8 #ÿ9$8 ÿ8ÿÿ80'&ÿ# 
ÿ ÿÿ 89ÿÿ8#ÿ 8888ÿ 9ÿ# ÿ '  0 ÿ  +
% 8
'      *
, -8 , .

6 &
5ÿ 
78 !
6 ÿ8ÿÿ 
6ÿ 8ÿ&6  !
% # ÿ 

12468 :<9 > ?@A ÿ ;F4 H ÿIJL6 M>8 ÿN2 46 ÿQ >
3ÿ79;:= 9 : BÿCDE Gÿ ÿ K ÿ96 M9ÿ O ÿPDÿ
ÿ
?ÿ 4
ÿ
8

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 29 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



6 ÿÿ8" ÿ# !ÿ8!8$8# !ÿ
ÿÿ 8ÿÿ8 !ÿ  ! " ÿ  " 9ÿ ÿ ÿ $ &
 
!     $  %  
6 $8ÿ#&
5ÿ ÿ !
' 
6 8ÿ#8$#ÿÿ*
3ÿ )! ÿ ÿ 8ÿ ) &
(  
6
6 !ÿÿ ÿ*
ÿ 8ÿ6ÿ ) &
(  
6 !#ÿ%ÿ#8
4ÿ 8ÿ8 8&
' !
6 #8&
ÿ ÿ 
+# 

6 #8%*%#ÿ98*ÿ8ÿÿ8" ÿ# !
ÿ ÿÿ 89ÿÿ8#ÿ 8888ÿ 9ÿ# !ÿ  ! " ÿ  ,
( 8
!     $
- .8 - '

6 
/ÿ !
78 &
6 !ÿ8!ÿÿ*
0ÿ 8ÿ6 ) &
( # ÿ 
6 ÿ! 8" ÿ# !ÿ8!8$8# !ÿ
ÿÿ 8ÿÿ #ÿ !ÿ  ! " ÿ  " 9ÿ ÿ ÿ $ &
  % !     $  %  
6 $8ÿ#&
5ÿ ÿ !
' 
6 8ÿ#8$#ÿÿ*ÿ
3ÿ )! ÿ ÿ 8ÿ ) &
(  
6
6 !ÿÿ ÿ*ÿ
ÿ 8ÿ6ÿ ) &
(  
6 !#ÿ%ÿ#8
4ÿ 8ÿ8 8&
' !
6 #8&
ÿ ÿ 
+# 

ÿ
8

abdfh jli n opq ÿ kvd x ÿyz|f }nh ÿ~b df ÿ€ n
cÿgikjm i j rÿstu wÿ ÿ { ÿif }iÿ  ÿntÿ
ÿ
oÿ d
ÿ
h

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 30 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
8

6 8ÿ98ÿ8ÿÿ8!"ÿ 
ÿ ÿÿ 89ÿÿ8ÿ 8888ÿ 9ÿ ÿ  ! ÿ $
 8
    #
% &8 % '

6 "
(ÿ )
78
6 8ÿ"6+ ÿ
*ÿ ÿ+8ÿ ÿ , )
  
6 ÿÿ88 ÿ8 ÿ-8ÿ8 8ÿÿ8!"ÿ
ÿ ÿÿ8"ÿ ÿ9ÿ ÿ9ÿÿ,ÿ ÿ  !


  
ÿ ÿ
 $
#
6.ÿ8) % &8 % '
5ÿ 
ÿ

6/ÿ8) % &8 % '
3ÿ8 
ÿ

60ÿ8) % &8 % '
ÿ  
ÿ

6+ ÿÿÿ8"ÿÿ8 ÿ-ÿ2"ÿ  )
8ÿÿ  ÿÿ88  ÿ9ÿ ! ÿÿÿ
1

8

5
. ! 888ÿÿÿ"  ÿÿÿ8ÿ8ÿ"ÿ84 ÿ
3 ÿÿ8 ÿ ÿ9ÿÿ #ÿ83"ÿ 9ÿ+ÿ  !


ÿ
 +
 ÿ

"ÿÿ858ÿ 8
1 "8ÿÿÿ8#8+ÿ
/8ÿ
 ! ÿ8 8ÿ+ÿ / ÿ ÿÿ 9ÿ ÿÿ  ÿ ÿ8+ ÿ
 8ÿ
ÿ

6789: ÿ ÿABCÿ ÿ CIDAK?AM?ÿ PÿAEJEÿAGQJPÿ Pÿ@ÿ?AJJKUC
;<= @?CDE G ÿ CJÿ LGNLOLG DFAKIPÿ HLGLCL S LÿTE K
9?
FH C B ÿ
? NE C R N
J
PJCBLGC DCÿFCBÿAL D?ÿ EHNLAY CG BEFUÿ CIDAK?AZ7K?ÿÿ?ÿ EGÿC
GGV?Aÿ OCEP?ÿJHW?F ÿFXHBÿ?ÿCLPÿ G?ÿNG ÿ CJÿ LGÿ PMI LI K?PG
A
J
H C B ÿ EN Jÿ
IAHJKHÿAL Dÿ ÿ EÿCEEFÿ?ÿ NUÿJADI? @CCGFÿD EEFKAL DÿG ÿGADGZ
?GÿKGCW?F PE G P@GG?M LOJÿCUACÿ OÿAPFEWJDG?Jÿ ?F PJÿK CÿJC
ÿ
FH
N
A
W
JJ
;<^=
[\;8<]ÿ
6 +6 ÿÿÿÿ
 ÿ8ÿ++ ÿÿ" 
ÿ  ÿ ÿ  8ÿ 8" ÿ  ÿ88ÿ ÿ ÿ#

/
 
 _

 )

6+ ÿÿÿ2ÿ 8#8ÿ ÿ 8ÿ2"ÿ 
3ÿÿ  8 ÿ ÿ 8ÿ`2! )
1
 8
8

OPRTV XZW \ ]^_ ÿ YdR f ÿghjT k\V ÿlP RT ÿo \
QÿUWYX[ W X `ÿabc eÿ ÿ i ÿWT kWÿ m ÿnbÿ
ÿ
]ÿ R
ÿ
V

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 31 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



6  ÿ! # %&$'

ÿ  ÿ $ ÿ 
 "
6) +ÿ-8./)+ 284/182)+965ÿ6ÿ+ÿ6826ÿ88
5ÿÿ ,-8ÿ 1ÿ ÿ  5ÿ ÿ 562 7 /*,08ÿ 86,9
(*
0 3 , + + /  3 8
6) +ÿ6ÿ+ÿ6826ÿ886ÿ+0 682-8.8-5>3?
3ÿÿ ,//528ÿ 86,ÿ *,ÿ0ÿ -7=.6ÿ *
(*
0 38 5 /  ÿ

ÿ
8

: ;8 : <+
8

6 AB $ $@E'
/ÿ C D ÿ %$A
@
6 /*,06826ÿ8820,3-8G+9651+65+ÿ86+ÿ 0 880,ÿÿÿ22ÿ6.+09
5ÿ ÿ+ÿ 8ÿ 86,ÿ +ÿÿ+2562 ÿ 2 ÿ0 265) ÿ Hÿ+-86882ÿ ,2
F6  3 8 3
+ + - 2 +3
5 0
: ;8 : <+
8
6) +05>8ÿÿ 82565ÿÿ;87ÿ22?
3ÿÿ ,ÿ 8 0+I,86 ÿ 68J 8J88ÿ
(*  2 + / 6
K*8+ÿ 25+ÿ86+?
-ÿ) 6 ÿ0 265
1++ - 2
< ÿ5ÿ25+ÿ8,2 88281+65+ÿ86+ÿ 8)./
18/. 6 ÿ)3ÿ+0ÿ 0ÿ ÿ 2 ÿ0 265>ÿ 8?
+ + 2 >3 3 + - 2 6
F+L20851H06ÿ+ÿ5>
8ÿ ÿ 8ÿ, 8ÿ) ,L+ ?
+
6*
F8+ÿ8,2ÿ8665ÿ
2ÿ)3ÿ+0M/8+?
2 8
78,22ÿÿ+*+ÿ8,2ÿ-5+ÿ0 087)96H8?
8.62 3-ÿ)3ÿ+0M+665+ÿ /06ÿ . .
ÿ
2 8
+ ÿ 
6 /*,06836+ÿ+0 25+ÿ86+9
ÿ ÿ+ÿ 89ÿÿ805ÿ5*,ÿ 6 ÿ0 265
F6 8
1++ - 2
: ;8 : <+
8
ÿ
6 /*,-ÿ+ 28/5ÿ) +0 25+ÿ86+9
4ÿ ÿ+ÿ-8.01ÿ ÿ86. ÿ ,ÿ 6 ÿ0 265
F6
) 3 + * 1++ - 2
: ;8 : <+
8
ÿ
6) +05>8ÿÿ 82564ÿÿ;87ÿ6ÿ+ÿ6826ÿ886ÿ8-9 : ;8 : <+
Nÿÿ ,ÿ 8 0+I,86 ÿ 68J 8J//*,08ÿ 86,ÿ 2 ÿ-8.
(*  2 + / 6
 3 8 53
8
ÿ
6) +05>8ÿÿ 82564ÿÿ;87ÿ22?
ÿÿ ,ÿ 8 0+I,86 ÿ 68J 8J88ÿ
(*  2 + / 6
< ÿ5ÿ25+ÿ8,2 8828-ÿ 8)./
18/. 6 ÿ)3ÿ+0ÿ 0ÿ ÿ-8. ÿ 8?
+ + 2 >3 3
> 6
F+L20851H06ÿ+ÿ5>
8ÿ ÿ 8ÿ, 8ÿ) ,L+ ?
+
6*
F8+ÿ8,2ÿ8665ÿ
2ÿ)3ÿ+0M/8+?
2 8
78,22ÿÿ+*+ÿ8,2ÿ-5+ÿ0 087)96H8?
8.62 3-ÿ)3ÿ+0M+665+ÿ /06ÿ . .
ÿ
2 8
+ ÿ 
6) +05>8ÿÿ 82564ÿ0 8256Nÿÿ<+J8-5>3ÿ+ÿ6ÿ+ÿ6826ÿ88
ÿÿ ,ÿ 8 0+I,86 ÿ 6 ÿ 86 ÿ 68J 7ÿ=.6ÿ **,//528ÿ 86,?
(*  2 + / + I, + / 6
0 38

YZ\^` bda f ghi ÿ cn\ p ÿqrt^ uf` ÿvZ \^ ÿx f
[ÿ_acbe a b jÿklm oÿ ÿ s ÿa^ uaÿ w ÿelÿ
ÿ
gÿ \
ÿ
`

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 32 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
8

6   8"$8'(*# #",#!6-*ÿ8!"#-., &!#)8#/8$!ÿ)
)ÿ(ÿ8
8ÿ ÿ ÿ !#%ÿ&ÿ)8ÿ (8-8ÿ "ÿ!*%ÿ(+!ÿ /$$)$ ÿ ,8. "*) -*9ÿ

+
!

98 8 ÿ '
-8ÿÿ0!ÿ(#))ÿ/8$!(ÿ (&ÿ 8ÿ
!,)8*-) -ÿ8# ,8ÿ&1#-,2&2
(
' ! 8
3456ÿ
78
6 -+#$:"!6(&)#-ÿ#$ÿ<
-)))ÿ8!8$$ÿ"!)ÿ-+#ÿ(#;$ 
ÿ +() ÿ )ÿ ÿ(ÿ8(ÿ); ÿ !ÿ8) ÿ+":": )ÿ ) +() -ÿ/

9 &
 "8 = ! *
 *! ' " 2

6: (ÿ$ÿ(ÿ0!ÿ(#))ÿ/8$!(ÿ (&ÿ .0;$ÿ 'ÿ
%ÿÿ -,,&) *-) -ÿ8# ,8ÿ&1#-,?<(ÿ +&<*2
>'
8 ' ! 8
8

6 6 BCÿF EH ÿ 
"
@ÿ D ÿ G 7IE
AB E 3
6: (ÿ+8;,:( )8J,/8):(9"$&ÿ$ÿ(ÿ$8)$ÿ!8
5ÿÿ -+8ÿ /ÿ ÿ  &ÿ ÿ &$) . ,'-#!ÿ !$-K
>'
# * - (" ( ,  * !
6: (ÿ$ÿ(ÿ$8)$ÿ!8$ÿ(# $8)+8;8+&<*2
3ÿÿ -,,&)!ÿ !$-ÿ '-ÿ#"ÿ +.0;$ÿ '
>'
# *! & ,  ÿ

L M8 L N(
!

6 OEQER@HO@S
,ÿ P HEÿ EH
6 $ÿ(ÿ$8)$ÿ!8)#-*+!T(9"$&/($&(ÿ8$(ÿ # 8!"#-ÿÿÿ))ÿ$;(#K
5ÿ ,'-#!ÿ !$-ÿ (ÿÿ()"&$) ÿ ) ÿ# )$&: ÿ %ÿ(+!$!8)ÿ -)
 *! *
( ( + ) (*
& #"
L M8 L N(
!
6: (#&<8ÿÿ 8)&65ÿÿM8.ÿ))2
3ÿÿ -ÿ ! #(U-!$ ÿ 6!V !V!8ÿ
>'  ) ( , $
?'8(ÿ )&(ÿ8$(2
+ÿ: $ ÿ# )$&
/(( + )
N ÿ&ÿ")&(ÿ8"-) 88)8/($&(ÿ8$(ÿ !:;,ÿ
/8,; $ ÿ:*ÿ(#ÿ #ÿ ÿ ) ÿ# )$&<ÿ 82
( ( ) <* * ( + ) $
(W)#8&/%#$ÿ(ÿ&<
"8ÿ ÿ !ÿ- 8ÿ: -W( 2
("
6'
8(ÿ8"-)ÿ8$$&ÿ
)ÿ:*ÿ(#X,"!(2
) !

KLNPR TVS X YZ[ ÿ U`N b ÿcdfP gXR ÿhL NP ÿk X
MÿQSUTW S T \ÿ]^_ aÿ ÿ e ÿSP gSÿ i ÿj^ÿ
ÿ
Yÿ N
ÿ
R

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 33 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
8

78ÿÿÿ8ÿ!ÿ 8#9 $8%
6 ÿÿ !ÿ " ÿ 
ÿ
 
 ÿ
& 8
' 
) *8 ) +

ÿ
6 " 9ÿÿ8!ÿ!ÿ !ÿ8!
ÿ ÿÿ 8 8 ÿ ÿ  (
6 "ÿ 8"!ÿ  !ÿ8!
4ÿ ÿÿ8'ÿ ÿ8  ÿ ÿ ÿ  (
&
    ' 
) *8 ) +

ÿ
6 !.8ÿÿ 8!64ÿÿ*8#ÿ"ÿ ÿÿ8( ) *8 ) +
,ÿÿ ÿ  /ÿ 60 0" ÿÿ 8 ÿ8! ÿ8
-  
"
 


ÿ
6 !.8ÿÿ 8!64ÿÿ*8#ÿ%
ÿÿ ÿ  /ÿ 60 08ÿ
-  
"
+ ÿ!ÿ!ÿ8 888ÿ "
'8" ÿÿÿ ÿ ÿ8 ÿ 8%

 . 
.
&18!'$  ÿ!.
8ÿ ÿ ÿ 8ÿ ÿ 1 %

6
&8ÿ8ÿ8 %
ÿÿ" !ÿ
 
78ÿÿÿ8ÿ!ÿ 8#9 $8%
6 ÿÿ !ÿ " ÿ 
ÿ
 
 ÿ
6 !.8ÿÿ 8!64ÿ 8!6,ÿÿ+08!.ÿÿ"!ÿ %
2ÿÿ ÿ  /ÿ 6 ÿ ÿ 60 #ÿ3 ÿ " ÿÿ 8 ÿ8
-  
"  / "
 

6 457ÿ ;7=>ÿ $ÿ!ÿ8ÿ"6ÿ8#" !8'8 8#
ÿÿ
8
68:7 <7?  8 88ÿ ÿ$ÿÿ ' 9ÿ " ÿ %
&8



8 8ÿ 
9ÿ"ÿ3ÿÿ'8 8ÿ!@"A.
88ÿ 8 ÿ8 " ÿ !ÿ

  8

B:4CDEÿ
FG:HH?
ÿ
6 !ÿ6 ÿÿÿ ÿ.
ÿ88 ÿÿ'

ÿ  ÿ ! 8ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ8 ÿ ÿ ÿ   ÿ 
I
 &    J  
    %

PQSUW Y[X ] ^_` ÿ ZeS g ÿhikU l]W ÿmQ SU ÿo ]
RÿVXZY\ X Y aÿbcd fÿ ÿ j ÿXU lXÿ n ÿ^cÿ
ÿ
^ÿ S
ÿ
W

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 34 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
85

6 ÿÿÿÿ ÿÿ!8ÿ ÿ 8$&ÿ 
ÿÿ    88 8ÿ" # 8ÿ %'(

8 
8

6 *+-/ 23ÿ6 59 ÿ ,)
,.ÿ -4 ÿ 8 :;<-=
12 5 7,
6 ÿ%8& 8>!89)ÿÿÿ8ÿ8
5ÿÿ %8ÿ !ÿ ÿ  ÿ ÿ  $  ÿ ?

  )  

6 ÿÿÿ8ÿ8ÿ ÿ8%8&8%'(
3ÿÿ ÿ ÿ   )ÿ %$&ÿ 

 
 ÿ

@ A8 @ B

6 C5/F5G.+9C,.-+H=
ÿ DE 9+/5ÿ 5-:9D
6  ÿÿ8 ÿÿ)!ÿ8ÿ ÿ8) %ÿÿÿ& 
5ÿ ÿÿ8ÿ %J9) ÿ  ÿ % ÿ ÿ 8ÿ  ?
I

   

)
@ A8ÿ @ B
ÿ
6  ÿ'8ÿÿ 865ÿÿA8$ÿ(
3ÿÿ   K ÿ 6L L8ÿ

  
#8ÿ ÿ8(
%ÿ  ÿ %ÿ
! 
B ÿÿ)ÿ8) 888!ÿ8ÿ &
!8&  ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ  ÿ %'ÿ 8(
   '    
IM ÿ8! ÿ ÿ'
)8ÿ )ÿ 86ÿ M (


I8ÿ8)ÿ8
ÿÿ N)(

78)ÿÿÿ8)ÿ%ÿ ÿ  $98(
&6 )%ÿÿ N  8ÿÿ & &
ÿ

 
6  889ÿÿ8 ÿ ÿ ÿ8?
ÿ ÿÿ)8ÿ ! ÿ %
I
 
@ A8 @ B

ÿ
6 %ÿ 8ÿ  ÿ ÿ8?
4ÿ ÿÿ%8& !ÿ ÿ8& ÿ  ! ÿ %
I
    
@ A8 @ B

6  ÿ'8ÿÿ 864ÿÿA8$ÿÿÿ8ÿ8ÿ8%? @ A8 @ B
Oÿÿ   K ÿ 6L L ÿ ÿ  ÿ%8&

  
  

6  ÿ'8ÿÿ 864ÿÿA8$ÿ(
ÿÿ   K ÿ 6L L8

  
B ÿÿ)ÿ8) 888%ÿ &
!8&  ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ%8& ÿ 8(
   ' 
' 
IM ÿ8! ÿ ÿ'
)8ÿ )ÿ 86ÿ M (


I8ÿ8)ÿ8
ÿÿ N)(

78)ÿÿÿ8)ÿ%ÿ ÿ  $98(
&6 )%ÿÿ N  8ÿÿ & &
ÿ

 

WXZ\^ `b_ d efg ÿ alZ n ÿopr\ sd^ ÿtX Z\ ÿw d
Yÿ]_a`c _ ` hÿijk mÿ ÿ q ÿ_\ s_ÿ u ÿvjÿ
ÿ
eÿ Z
ÿ
^

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 35 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ5
85

6 8ÿÿ 864ÿ 86!ÿÿ#"8&(ÿÿÿÿ8ÿ8
ÿÿ ÿ   ÿ 6 ÿ  ÿ 6" $ÿ%'ÿ  ÿ )
       
 (

6 *+-ÿ 1-34ÿ 8ÿÿ8ÿ7 8ÿ(ÿ87$ 9898ÿ
ÿ
8
,.0- 2-5 78( 8 6 7ÿ(8ÿ&ÿ  ÿ 8$ 7( 
68
&


98 8 ÿ 
(9ÿ ÿÿ%ÿÿ98ÿ ÿ 8
88 8( ÿ8 8ÿ: ;(8)

  8
<0*=>?ÿ
@*=05
6 &76 ÿÿÿÿ
ÿ88ÿ7ÿ&ÿ' 
ÿ & ÿ ÿ  8ÿ' ÿ ÿ8 ÿ&77 ÿ  & ÿ9

A   6  78 B  (
 (  7 )

6 ÿÿÿ%ÿÿ98ÿ ÿ8&()
8ÿÿ   ( ÿ8 8ÿ: C$%'ÿ 

8   8
ÿ

6 ?3-+ FGÿJ IL ÿ K5
7
.Dÿ -H ÿ K 2@I.
EF I <.
6 ÿ&8' ÿ 8M  ÿ97ÿÿÿ8ÿ8
5ÿÿ &8  9ÿ ÿ 98 ÿ  $ ÿ N

 (  7 
 (

 ( 
 ÿ
6 ÿÿÿ8ÿ8ÿ 8&8'8&()
3ÿÿ  ÿ ÿ ÿ7ÿ &$%'ÿ ÿ

O P8 O #


6 QI+SITD3LQ.D-3U)
ÿ 4R L3+Iÿ I-2L4
6 ÿÿ8ÿ8(&V979ÿ8ÿ  87ÿÿÿÿ'N
5ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ7 ÿ  ÿ  ÿ 8ÿ&8ÿ 
6  (  (
  &  (
 7
O P8 O #

6 8ÿÿ 865ÿÿP8$ÿ)
3ÿÿ ÿ   ÿ 6" "8
    
;8ÿ ÿ8)
&ÿ  ÿ 
9 & 

ABDFH JLI N OPQ ÿ KVD X ÿYZ\F ]NH ÿ^B DH ÿ` N
CÿGIKJM I J RÿSTU Wÿ ÿ [ ÿIF ]Iÿ _ ÿITÿ
ÿ
Oÿ D
ÿ
H

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 36 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ3
85

 ÿÿÿ8 ÿ8ÿ8ÿÿ
8  ÿÿÿ 88 ÿ  ÿ  "8#
  
  ! 
$%8&ÿÿ 
8ÿ ÿ "ÿ 8ÿ % #

6'
$8ÿ8ÿ8
ÿÿ("#
 "
78ÿÿ'ÿ8ÿ!ÿ 8)9&8#
"6 !ÿÿ(ÿ ÿ  
ÿ
 "
 ÿ 

6 '8ÿ ÿ8*
ÿ ÿÿ 89ÿÿ8ÿ'ÿ  ÿ 
$ 8
 ! 
+ ,8 + 
"
6 '!ÿ 8ÿ  ÿ8*
4ÿ ÿÿ!8ÿ ÿ8 ÿ ÿ  ÿ 
$
   '  ! 
+ ,8 + 
"
.'     
  " 
"
6  8ÿÿ 864ÿÿ,8)ÿÿÿ8ÿ"8ÿ8!* + ,8 + 
-ÿÿ ÿ " /" ÿ 6"0 "0'"ÿ "ÿ  ÿ!8
.'     
6  8ÿÿ 864ÿÿ,8)ÿ#
ÿÿ ÿ " /" ÿ 6"0 "0"8
 ÿÿÿ8 ÿ8!ÿÿ
8  ÿÿÿ 88 ÿ!8 "8#
  


$%8&ÿÿ 
8ÿ ÿ "ÿ 8ÿ % #

6'
$8ÿ8ÿ8
ÿÿ("#
 "
78ÿÿ'ÿ8ÿ!ÿ 8)9&8#
"6 !ÿÿ(ÿ ÿ  
ÿ
 "
 ÿ 

6  8ÿÿ 8 64ÿ 86-ÿÿ08! ÿÿÿÿ8ÿ"8ÿ
1ÿÿ ÿ " /" ÿ 6 ÿ " ÿ 6"0 )ÿ2ÿ ''"ÿ "#
.'      /   
 "

6 346ÿ :6<=ÿ "&ÿÿ8ÿ"6ÿ8") "88"ÿ
ÿ
8
5796 ;6> 8' 88ÿ ÿ"&ÿ!"ÿ  ÿ 8)  
$8
!
"

98 8 ÿ '
9ÿ"ÿ2"ÿÿ8"ÿ ÿ
88ÿ 8 ÿ8 8ÿ?@#

' " 8

3468: <>; @ ABC ÿ =H6 J ÿKLN8 O@: ÿP4 6: ÿR @
5ÿ9;=<? ; < DÿEFG Iÿ ÿ M ÿ;8 O;ÿ Q ÿ8Fÿ
ÿ
Aÿ 6
ÿ
:

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 37 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
85

5
8ÿ8ÿ88ÿÿ8 8ÿÿÿ
 8 ÿÿ 8 ÿ !8" #

  
 

6 $8ÿ 8"ÿ88ÿÿÿ8ÿ8 8ÿÿ88ÿ

9ÿ" ÿ ÿÿ 9ÿ  8ÿ 88 ÿÿ8%
ÿ
  8 !
  


9ÿ ( )8 ( *
& % '


+ÿ8ÿÿ*,8%ÿÿ88ÿ8ÿÿ8!ÿ6ÿÿ
" ÿ  , -ÿÿ 9ÿÿ 8ÿ 889ÿ8ÿ  
!  

 "
8
88 ÿ .#


6 +ÿ88!ÿÿÿ8ÿÿÿÿ8 8ÿÿ ÿÿ88ÿ'ÿÿÿ 
  ÿÿ    8ÿ 88.88ÿ ÿ" - %

    

" % + 
ÿ ÿ88 8-ÿÿ8ÿ  ÿ8
ÿ 9ÿÿ 8ÿ 88ÿ 8!ÿ" ÿ  88 ÿ .#



 


5
$8! 9!"! 8ÿ8- ÿ ÿÿÿ8%
4
9ÿÿ 8ÿ 8ÿÿ ÿ" ÿ   - ÿ  ÿ " 8ÿ 8ÿ ÿ9%
 !
  %   .  8 % 


ÿÿ8ÿÿ8' ( )8 ( *
 % ÿ  
! 8  

+ÿ)8-ÿÿ8.8ÿ%ÿ8%8%8ÿ8.8 8ÿ%8ÿ88
" ,8 ÿ ÿÿ ÿ"ÿ-ÿ/ ÿ ÿ 8-ÿ ÿ" 8-ÿ 
,

   ÿ
%
ÿ !


 
  8 ÿ 8   %   .  ÿ 
8-ÿ8ÿ8%ÿ8ÿÿ8" 8- ÿ "ÿ %ÿÿ!
ÿ8ÿ"ÿ0%-  ÿ ÿ %ÿ ÿ   - ÿ  ÿ 8
1 %
ÿÿÿ ÿ8-"98
" !% ÿ ÿ  



 ÿ 

5
2!9ÿÿ8ÿ 8 8ÿ88ÿ8!%88ÿÿ88-
1
ÿÿ8! ÿ ÿ ÿ 6 ÿÿÿ %!ÿÿÿ-  8ÿ"
  
"8


ÿ  " ÿ
 !
8

8&.8ÿÿ ( )8 ( *
ÿ  ÿ 8% '
+ÿ)8-ÿÿ8.8%ÿ8%8%8ÿ8.8 8ÿ%8ÿÿ88
" ,8 ÿ ÿÿ  ÿ"ÿ-ÿ/ ÿ ÿ 8-ÿ ÿ" 8-  ÿ 
,

   ÿ
%
ÿ !
 
8



WXZ\^ `b_ d efg ÿ alZ n ÿopr\ sd^ ÿtX Z^ ÿv d
Yÿ]_a`c _ ` hÿijk mÿ ÿ q ÿ_\ s_ÿ u ÿ^jÿ
ÿ
eÿ Z
ÿ
^

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 38 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ4
85

5
8888ÿÿÿ"8ÿ $88 ÿÿ8%"8ÿ

9ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ! ÿ ÿ #ÿ "ÿ 8ÿ  ÿ % ÿÿ8


8 
8
  

&8ÿÿ%
 ÿ 8#% '

8
6 ÿ% ÿ8'
ÿ $8 
1 
6 ÿ8ÿ%
(ÿ  ÿ $8'
1

6 ÿ%
#ÿ '
1 ÿ
6 ÿ8
ÿ 8#'
1
6 ÿ$8%
8ÿ $'
2
6$*9#$8'
ÿ ÿÿ# ÿ#8
)

6 ÿ$8%ÿÿ %ÿÿÿ#$8'
ÿ $ÿ   ÿÿ $*9# ÿ#8
2 

 

5
, ÿ8ÿ88ÿ89ÿ8ÿÿ %ÿ88#ÿ ÿ8ÿ
+
ÿ 9ÿÿ 88#ÿ 8 #$88 ÿ88 ÿ8&  ÿÿ 8




#%
% 8
. /8 . 0

6ÿ88%#ÿÿÿ 8ÿ888 ÿ %8ÿ8'
ÿÿ  9ÿ ÿÿ  ÿ $ ÿ8ÿ 8#ÿ "ÿ89ÿ  ÿ 8
) 
  #   
% 
6 9ÿ8ÿ888"ÿ 8'
(ÿ 8 ÿ8 ÿ8ÿ 8#ÿ  
   
$
6 9ÿ8%ÿÿ8ÿ88
#ÿ 8 ÿ ÿ8 8#'
  8  
6 9ÿÿ%ÿ  ÿ%ÿ%ÿ8ÿÿ%8ÿ8&888ÿ88ÿÿ8
ÿ 8 8 ÿ ÿ $ÿ 8ÿ $  %  ÿ  ÿ ÿ 8#ÿ (ÿ89
1   
    # 8 
 

8
. /8 . 0

5
3) 057 ÿ ÿ53) 20'  89#(#8%9 ÿ8ÿ ÿ9%
2
456) 728 3) ÿÿ ÿ  ÿ ÿ  ÿ8 ÿ ÿ 8ÿ 8ÿ ÿ   $
) &
# 
    8
 ÿ*8  8ÿ  ÿ8ÿ 3ÿ 7;
346 8ÿÿ  ÿ =

 % 

<
 ( $
"ÿ88ÿÿ ÿ#ÿ2:

ÿÿ34ÿÿ 8

>? ÿ ÿC BG ÿ>J J PQÿ >J ÿEE Sÿ? H
@B DEF HI KLMNLOOÿ RL>J PNIC ÿHB U V
C E
T

9:<>@ BDA F GHI ÿ CN< P ÿQRT> UF@ ÿV: <@ ÿY F
;ÿ?ACBE A B JÿKLM Oÿ ÿ S ÿA> UAÿ W ÿXLÿ
ÿ
Gÿ <
ÿ
@

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 39 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
85

ÿ 8  88"8ÿ8ÿ  ÿ%61" !ÿ'(

ÿÿ34ÿ9
ÿ 81ÿÿ ! ÿ # 1!ÿ 5%ÿ 1&ÿ ÿ8ÿ 3ÿ )*
346 8ÿ

9
$  &


+
, 
,ÿ

6 1ÿ.8 8ÿ#,#ÿÿ, ÿÿ ÿ8!1ÿ$,ÿÿ
5ÿ 8$ÿ ÿ #  ÿ#,$ÿ,#  ÿ  / 0ÿ,0ÿÿ8
,
  ÿ  !   ÿ

!$,1ÿÿ828 ÿÿÿ
ÿ,ÿ# ÿ8#ÿ ÿ
1 1 ÿ  ÿ )8!1ÿ 8#  ÿ8#1ÿ  ÿ 8 .
 1 
ÿ  
ÿ
 
6 ÿ 8ÿ/!ÿ8288 ÿ#$8!#ÿ ÿ88/ÿÿ3
1 ÿ8ÿ  ÿ  ÿ !8ÿ ÿ ÿ!1 !ÿ98 ÿ88, ÿ
1 0
0



ÿ8 ÿ 84ÿ198
 ÿ8ÿ 8!ÿ /5
 
8
6 ÿ 8ÿ/!ÿ8 8 ÿÿ#ÿ,#!80ÿÿ!ÿ#ÿ
6 ÿ8ÿ  ÿ 8 ÿ,  ÿ8ÿ$)8 ÿ 9 ÿ
 ,  
!
 
8*ÿ/ÿ8()8ÿÿ87 ÿ8, ,88 ÿ
ÿ 1 ÿ ÿ  ÿ  ÿ 9ÿ  ÿ,# ÿ ÿ98ÿ
 #  8
8   ! /
ÿ$!ÿÿ!
#0ÿ18 5


6 ÿ 8ÿ/!ÿ8!1#ÿ8/ÿ#ÿ!8ÿ$8),8 ÿ 1
* ÿ8ÿ  ÿ ÿ 8ÿ #  80ÿ ÿ18*7
   
 $ 8

ÿ
ÿ8ÿ8/#ÿ!8ÿ$8),8 ÿ 1ÿ ÿ!8$,#ÿÿ
 ÿ ÿ 08ÿ8 $ 80ÿ ÿ18*ÿ 8 #ÿ,# 08
 
8


8 9 ! 
  
!ÿ##8/5
8ÿ!# 8ÿ98 ÿ
6 ÿ 8ÿ/!ÿ8ÿ!ÿ ÿ8!ÿ# ÿ8ÿ#ÿ808ÿ
" ÿ8ÿ  ÿ!1# 88  ÿ# ÿ,88!19ÿ8

,

!
88ÿ1888!ÿ ÿ1ÿ8
!9 ÿ ÿ38 8#8!

 


?@BDF HJG L MNO ÿ ITB V ÿWXZD [LF ÿ\@ BF ÿ^ L
AÿEGIHK G H PÿQRS Uÿ ÿ Y ÿGD [Gÿ ] ÿLRÿ
ÿ
Mÿ B
ÿ
F

Case 1:03-cv-06323-LGS Document 33 Filed 02/17/21 Page 40 of 40

ÿ12ÿ4
ÿ 35
ÿ
6 9ÿ5
78



ÿ
85

6 ÿ8ÿ 8!"8ÿ " ÿÿ8ÿ8ÿ98 ÿ
3ÿ 8 ÿÿÿ ÿ  ÿ ÿ 8$%9 ÿ    ÿ 


 #

8 
$888 ÿ ÿÿ8ÿ ÿÿ8!ÿ" 
8ÿÿ ÿ8 ÿ8 ÿ  $  ÿ8ÿ ÿÿ8ÿ  ÿ
  &
 $
'


$$'8
8ÿÿ$



"(88ÿ$$ÿ8*ÿÿ8"  ÿ "
888ÿ  )ÿ ÿ  ÿ  8+
  
  
8
ÿÿ8ÿ "ÿ88ÿ !'ÿ8

 !88ÿÿ  ÿ88 

 
  

#8ÿ 8ÿ"
ÿ" !6ÿ !
1 
, 8 868!ÿ8!ÿ 8ÿ8ÿ" 8&ÿÿ8"ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ8ÿ 
ÿ  ÿ ÿ  ( "( ÿ8ÿ   !ÿ ! ÿ 8ÿ  88  $"
  " 9 $  
  
$
   
-" 'ÿ ÿ $8ÿÿ8ÿ ÿ!ÿ
ÿ 8$*$ÿ  ÿ$$$8 
ÿ .

ÿ ÿ8ÿ8

6 ( ( 
  !

/06ÿ
88ÿ 8
$ 

ÿ 8

6 


#8ÿ88
ÿ" 

,ÿ8ÿÿÿÿ88(ÿ ÿ88ÿÿ0 ÿ88ÿÿÿÿÿ8

"ÿ8$$ $8  $ÿ  8 ÿ !$ $

$  ÿ 8    
  $  
ÿ

1245
3

67 9;<=
8ÿ =
=

>9 9
<5