Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 557

ANSWER to Complaint with JURY DEMAND. Document filed by Gregory Bowes.(Baird, Bruce)

Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Doc. 557

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------x ANWAR, et al.,

:: :: :: Plaintiffs, :: :: v. :: ELECTRONICALLY FILED :: :: MASTER FILE NO. 09-CV-0118 (VM)(THK) FAIRFIELD GREENWICH LIMITED, et al., :: :: Defendants. :: :: This Document Relates To: All Consolidated Actions :: :: -----------------------------------------------------------------x GREGORY BOWES'S ANSWER TO THE SECOND CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant Gregory Bowes ("Bowes"), through his undersigned counsel, hereby answers

or otherwise responds to the Second Consolidated Amended Complaint ("SCAC"). Bowes reserves the right to supplement and amend this Answer and reserves the right to add additional defenses of which he becomes aware through discovery or other investigation. All allegations not specifically admitted are denied. To the extent that the contents of Plaintiffs' "Glossary of Defined Terms" are intended to allege a basis for liability on the part of Bowes, Bowes denies those allegations. To the extent that Plaintiffs utilize group pleading as a basis to impose liability on Bowes, Bowes denies those allegations. With respect to the numbered paragraphs of the SCAC, Bowes responds as follows:1

1

Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the SCAC.

Dockets.Justia.com

NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 1, except avers that Fairfield Greenwich Group ("FGG") is a marketing name used for certain businesses of a group of related entities and denies that FGG marketed and operated the referenced funds.2 2. The allegations in Paragraph 2 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 2. 3. The allegations in Paragraph 3 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 3. 4. The allegations in Paragraph 4 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. The allegations in Paragraph 5 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 5, except lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations regarding whether at least one Plaintiff is a citizen of a foreign state, and avers, on information and belief, that at least one Defendant is a citizen of New York. 6. The allegation in Paragraph 6 states a legal conclusion to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 6.

The SCAC characterizes Bowes and certain other individuals as "partners" of FGG and refers to them collectively as the "FGG partners." Bowes avers that the term "partner" was sometimes used, but Bowes and the other referenced individuals were not partners in the legal sense, but, rather, Bowes and others were shareholders in Fairfield Greenwich Limited or its predecessor entities. 2

2

7.

The allegations in Paragraph 7 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 7, except avers, on information and belief, that one or more of the Defendants resides in this District and the principal place of business of one or more Defendants is in this District. PARTIES 8. The allegations in Paragraph 8 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 8. A. Plaintiffs 1. 1. Fairfield Sentry Limited Investors

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 1.3 2. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 2. 3. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 3. 4. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 4. 5. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 5. 6. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 6.

The SCAC contains two sets of allegations numbered 1 through 8. For the purposes of this Answer, Bowes conforms his responses to the numbering system adopted by Plaintiffs in the SCAC. 3

3

7.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 7. 8. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 8. 9. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 9. 10. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 10. 11. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 11. 12. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 12. 13. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 13. 14. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 14. 15. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 15. 16. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 16. 17. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 17. 18. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 18. 4

19.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 19. 20. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 20. 21. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 21. 22. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 22. 23. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 23. 24. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 24. 25. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 25. 26. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 26. 27. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 27. 28. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 28. 29. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 29. 30. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 30. 5

31.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 31. 32. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 32. 33. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 33. 34. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 34. 35. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 35. 36. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 36. 37. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 37. 38. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 38. 39. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 39. 40. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 40. 41. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 41. 42. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 42. 6

43.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 43. 44. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 44. 45. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 45. 46. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 46. 47. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 47. 48. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 48. 49. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 49. 50. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 50. 51. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 51. 52. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 52. 53. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 53. 54. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 54. 7

55.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 55. 56. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 56. 57. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 57. 58. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 58. 59. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 59. 60. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 60. 61. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 61. 62. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 62. 63. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 63. 64. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 64. 65. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 65. 66. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 66. 8

67.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 67. 68. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 68. 69. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 69. 70. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in paragraph 70. 71. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 71. 72. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 72. 73. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 73. 74. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 74. 75. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 75. 76. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 76. 77. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 77. 78. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 78. 9

2. 79.

Fairfield Sigma Limited Investors

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 79. 80. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 80. 81. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 81. 82. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 82. 83. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 83. 84. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 84. 85. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 85. 86. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 86. 87. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 87. 88. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 88. 89. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 89.

10

90.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 90. 91. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 91. 92. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 92. 93. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 93. 94. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 94. 95. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 95. 96. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegation in Paragraph 96. 97. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 97. 98. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 98. 99. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 99. 100. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 100. 101. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 101. 11

102.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 102. 103. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 103. 104. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 104. 105. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 105. 106. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 106. 107. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 107. 108. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 108. 3. 109. Greenwich Sentry, L.P. Investors

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 109. 110. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 110. 111. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 111. 112. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 112.

12

113.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 113. 114. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 114. 115. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 115. 4. 116. Greenwich Sentry Partners, L.P. Investors

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 116.4 B. Defendants 1. 117. Fairfield Greenwich Defendants

The allegations in Paragraph 117 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations in Paragraph 117. 118. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 118, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers, on information and belief, that (i) FGL was a company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands; and (ii) FGL served as the Investment Manager for Fairfield Sentry Limited for a period of time.

On October 1, 2010, the Plaintiffs filed with the Court a Notice and Order Adding Additional Named Plaintiffs ("Notice"), which seeks to add 24 additional named plaintiffs as parties to this Action to the same extent as if they had been named as plaintiffs in the SCAC. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 24 of the Notice.

4

13

119.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 119, except, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG. 120. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 120, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers, on information and belief, that FGA was a Delaware limited liability company. 121. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 121, except, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG. 122. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 122, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that FHC was registered with the SEC as a broker-dealer and was a member of the National Association of Securities Dealers. 123. Defendant Lion Fairfield Capital Management Ltd. was dismissed from this

action on March 22, 2010. No additional response is required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 123, except, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG. 124. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 124, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Walter M. Noel, Jr. was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group.

14

125.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 125, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Jeffrey H. Tucker was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 126. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 126, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Andres Piedrahita was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 127. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 127, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Amit Vijayvergiya was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 128. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 128, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Daniel E. Lipton was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 129. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 129, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Mark McKeefry was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 130. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 130, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Richard Landsberger was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 15

131.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 131, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers, on information and belief, that Maria Teresa Pulido Mendoza was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 132. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 132, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers, on information and belief, that David Horn was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 133. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 133, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Andrew Smith was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 134. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 134, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Charles Murphy was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 135. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 135, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Yanko Della Schiava was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 136. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 136, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the

16

allegations regarding FGG and avers that Philip Toub was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 137. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 137, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Lourdes Barreneche was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 138. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 138, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Cornelis Boele was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 139. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 139, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers, on information and belief, that Vianney d'Hendecourt was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 140. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 140, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Jacqueline Harary was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 141. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 141, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Santiago Reyes was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 142. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 142, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the 17

allegations regarding FGG and avers that Julia Luongo was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 143. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 143, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Harold Greisman was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 144. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 144, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Corina Noel Piedrahita was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 145. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 145, except as follows: Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations regarding FGG and avers that Robert Blum was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group. 146. Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, denies the allegations in Paragraph 146, except as

follows: Bowes avers that (i) he holds a B.A. in economics and history from Bowdoin College; (ii) as of 2003 he had at least 18 years of experience in capital markets; and (iii) he was associated with certain entities that used the marketing name Fairfield Greenwich Group from June 2000 until November 2003; and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced information from the Massachusetts Proceeding for the true and complete contents thereof. 147. Bowes admits that Paragraph 147 refers to the persons identified in Paragraphs

124 through 146 collectively as the "Individual Defendants."

18

148.

Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 148, except respectfully refers the

Court to the referenced exhibit from the Massachusetts Proceeding for the true and complete contents thereof. 149. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 149. 150. Bowes states that Paragraph 150 is a description of Plaintiffs' claims to which no

response is required or otherwise state legal conclusions as to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 150, except admits that Paragraph 150 refers to the persons and entities identified in Paragraph 150 collectively as the "Fairfield Defendants" and Plaintiffs have asserted claims against them for alleged negligent misrepresentation, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract. 151. Bowes states that Paragraph 151 is a description of Plaintiffs' claims to which no

response is required or otherwise state legal conclusions as to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 151, except admits that Paragraph 151 refers to the persons identified in Paragraph 151 collectively as the "Fairfield Fraud Claim Defendants" and Plaintiffs have asserted alleged fraud claims against them. 152. Bowes states that Paragraph 152 is a description of Plaintiffs' claims to which no

response is required or otherwise state legal conclusions as to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 152, except admits that Paragraph 152 refers to the persons identified in Paragraph 152 collectively as the "Fairfield Fee Claim Defendants" and Plaintiffs have asserted only alleged fee-related claims against them. 2. PricewaterhouseCoopers Defendants 19

153.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 153. 154. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 154. 155. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 155. 3. 156. Citco Defendants

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 156. 157. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 157, except avers, on information and belief, that: (i) Citco Fund Services served as the administrator, registrar, and transfer agent for Fairfield Sentry Limited and Fairfield Sigma Limited for some period beginning in at least 2003; and (ii) Citco Fund Services had certain responsibilities to the Funds and respectfully refers the Court to the operative documents and agreements concerning Citco Fund Services for the true and complete contents thereof. 158. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegation in Paragraph 158. 159. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 159, except avers, on information and belief, that: (i) Citco Global served as the Custodian for Fairfield Sentry Limited for some period beginning in at least 2003; (ii) Citco Global served as the Custodian for Fairfield Sigma Limited for some period beginning in at least 2003; and (iii) Citco Fund Services had certain responsibilities to Fairfield Sentry Limited and Fairfield Sigma Limited and respectfully refers the Court to the operative 20

documents and agreements concerning Citco Fund Services for the true and complete contents thereof. 160. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 160 except avers, on information and belief, that: (i) Citco Bank served as the Bank for Fairfield Sentry Limited for some period beginning in at least 2003; and (ii) Citco Bank had certain responsibilities to Fairfield Sentry Limited and Fairfield Sigma Limited and respectfully refers the Court to the operative documents and agreements concerning Citco Bank for the true and complete contents thereof. 161. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 161. 162. Bowes admits that paragraph 162 refers to the entities identified in paragraph 162

collectively as "Citco." 163. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 163. 164. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 164. 4. 165. GlobeOp Defendant

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 165. ALLEGATIONS OF FACT A. 166. Bernard Madoff's Massive Ponzi Scheme Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 166, except avers, on information and belief, that BMIS and Bernard

21

L. Madoff (collectively with BMIS, "Madoff") perpetrated a fraudulent scheme and that Bowes had no knowledge of the fraud prior to December 11, 2008. 167. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 167, except avers, on information and belief, that Madoff was arrested, charged and is currently serving a prison sentence, and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced criminal complaint and relevant sentencing documents for the true and complete contents thereof. B. 168. Fairfield Greenwich Group's Relationship with Madoff Bowes, subject to Footnote 2, lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 168. 169. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 169, except avers, on information and belief, that Madoff purported to execute a split-strike conversion strategy on behalf of certain of the Funds and that Madoff purported to serve as a custodian or sub-custodian for a substantial portion of certain of the Funds' assets. 170. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegation in Paragraph 170. 171. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 171, except as follows: Bowes avers, on information and belief, that (i) Fairfield Sigma Limited was a company organized under the laws of the BVI; (ii) Fairfield Sigma invested in Fairfield Sentry Limited and, during the period of such investment, Madoff purportedly served as sub-custodian for a substantial portion of Fairfield Sentry Limited's assets; (iii) Fairfield Sigma was for foreign investors; and (iv) on July 21, 2009, the BVI Court ordered

22

the Fairfield Sigma Limited fund to be liquidated, and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Private Placement Memorandum ("PPM") for the true and complete terms thereof. 172. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 172. 173. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 173. 174. Bowes admits that Paragraph 174 refers to the funds identified in Paragraphs 169

through 173 collectively as the "Funds." 175. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 175, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced SEC complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. C. 176. Nature and Structure of the Fairfield Greenwich Group The allegations in Paragraph 176 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies, subject to Footnote 2, the allegations in Paragraph 176. 177. The allegations in Paragraph 177 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies, subject to Footnote 2, the allegations in Paragraph 177. 178. The allegations in Paragraph 178 state legal conclusions to which no response is

required. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies, subject to Footnote 2, the allegations in Paragraph 178. 179. Bowes denies, subject to Footnote 2, the allegations in Paragraph 179, except

respectfully refers the Court to the referenced brochure for the true and complete contents thereof. 23

180.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 180, except denies the allegations as they relate to "FGG." D. 181. Fairfield Defendants' False Representations and Omissions in Marketing the Funds and Their Breaches of Fiduciary Duties to Investors The allegations in Paragraph 181 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except avers, on information and belief, that during Bowes's employment certain investors or their nominees were provided with certain PPMs and Confidential Offering Memoranda ("COM") and that certain website information was available to certain investors, and respectfully refers the Court to the relevant documents and website information for the true and complete contents thereof. 182. The allegations in Paragraph 182 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 183. The allegations in Paragraph 183 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced documents and marketing materials for the true and complete contents thereof. 1. 184. Defendants' False Representations and Omissions Regarding the SplitStrike Conversion Strategy

The allegations in Paragraph 184 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except as follows: Bowes avers that the strategy of the Funds was described as including a "split-strike conversion" 24

strategy and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs and COMs for the true and complete terms thereof. 185. The allegations in Paragraph 185 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except avers, on information and belief, that Madoff perpetrated a fraud and avers that Bowes had no knowledge of the fraudulent scheme prior to December 11, 2008. 186. The allegations in Paragraph 186 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 2. 187. Defendants' False Representations and Omissions Regarding the Funds' Track Record of Profitability

The allegations in Paragraph 187 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs and "update reports" for the true and complete contents thereof. 188. The allegations in Paragraph 188 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except avers, on information and belief, that information Madoff reported on returns was false. 189. The allegations in Paragraph 189 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations.

25

3. 190.

Defendants' False Representations and Omissions in Fund Reports to Investors

The allegations in Paragraph 190 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced reports for the true and complete contents thereof. 191. The allegations in Paragraph 191 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Semi-Annual Reports and Monthly Strategy Reviews for the true and complete contents thereof. 192. The allegations in Paragraph 192 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 4. 193. Defendants' False Representations and Omissions Concerning Due Diligence and Oversight of Madoff

The allegations in Paragraph 193 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 194. The allegations in Paragraph 194 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs for the true and complete terms thereof. 195. The allegations in Paragraph 195 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or 26

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs for the true and complete terms thereof. 196. The allegations in Paragraph 196 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced documents for the true and complete terms thereof. 197. The allegations in Paragraph 197 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete terms thereof. 198. The allegations in Paragraph 198 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete contents thereof. 199. The allegations in Paragraph 199 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete contents thereof. 200. The allegations in Paragraph 200 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced documents for the true and complete contents thereof. 201. The allegations in Paragraph 201 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or 27

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete contents thereof. 202. The allegations in Paragraph 202 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced documents for the true and complete contents thereof. 203. The allegations in Paragraph 203 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete contents thereof. 204. The allegations in Paragraph 204 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete contents thereof. 205. The allegations in Paragraph 205 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 206. The allegations in Paragraph 206 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 207. The allegations in Paragraph 207 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations.

28

208.

The allegations in Paragraph 208 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced email for the true and complete contents thereof. 209. The allegations in Paragraph 209 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced email for the true and complete contents thereof. 210. The allegations in Paragraph 210 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 211. The allegations in Paragraph 211 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 212. The allegations in Paragraph 212 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 213. The allegations in Paragraph 213 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 214. The allegations in Paragraph 214 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Consent Order for the true and complete contents thereof. 29

215.

The allegations in Paragraph 215 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 216. The allegations in Paragraph 216 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. E. 217. The Fairfield Defendants Ignored Red Flags of Madoff `s Fraud The allegations in Paragraph 217 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 1. 218. Madoff s Secretive Operations

The allegations in Paragraph 218 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced memorandum for the true and complete contents thereof. 219. The allegations in Paragraph 219 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 2. 220. Key Positions Held by Madoff Family Members

The allegations in Paragraph 220 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 3. Madoff's Custody of Assets

30

221.

The allegations in Paragraph 221 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except avers that Madoff purported to serve as a custodian or sub-custodian for a substantial portion of certain of the Funds' assets. 4. 222. Madoff's Unknown Auditing Firm

The allegations in Paragraph 222 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 5. 223. Madoff's Paper Trading Records

The allegations in Paragraph 223 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 6. Madoff s Consistent Investment Returns

224(a). The allegations in Paragraph 224(a) are not directed to Bowes5, who, accordingly, has no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes denies those allegations, except Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to Madoff's full reporting of his results and claims, and the results that others were able to achieve. 224. The allegations in Paragraph 224 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. F.
5

The Fairfield Defendants Falsely Reassured Investors Who Made Inquiries

Bowes numbers this paragraph 224(a) since Plaintiffs did not provide a number for the allegations between paragraphs 223 and 224 of the SCAC. 31

225.

The allegations in Paragraph 225 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced emails for the true and complete contents thereof. 226. The allegations in Paragraph 226 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced email for the true and complete contents thereof. 227. The allegations in Paragraph 227 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced document for the true and complete contents thereof. 228. The allegations in Paragraph 228 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced email for the true and complete contents thereof. 229. The allegations in Paragraph 229 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced emails for the true and complete contents thereof. 230. The allegations in Paragraph 230 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations.

32

231.

The allegations in Paragraph 231 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced email for the true and complete contents thereof. 232. The allegations in Paragraph 232 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. 233. The allegations in Paragraph 233 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced email and documents for the true and complete contents thereof. G. 234. The Fairfield Defendants Assisted Madoff in Thwarting an SEC Investigation The allegations in Paragraph 234 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. H. 235. The Fairfield Defendants Attempted to Raise Money to Keep Madoff Afloat in Late 2008 The allegations in Paragraph 235 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except avers that Madoff's fraud was not revealed until December 11, 2008. I. The Fairfield Defendants and Fairfield Fee Claim Defendants Earned Massive Fees from Funneling Plaintiffs' Assets into the Madoff Fraud

33

236.

Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 236, except avers, on information and

belief, that profits and asset values reported by Madoff were false, and avers that certain fees were based on reported asset values. 237. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 237, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs for the full and complete terms thereof. 238. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 238, except as follows: Bowes avers that FGL and FGBL were entitled to and did receive certain fees and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs and to audited financial statements for the true and complete contents thereof. 239. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 239, except as follows: Bowes avers that FGL and FGBL were entitled to and did receive certain fees and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPMs and to audited financial statements for the true and complete contents thereof. 240. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 240, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced PPM and Investment Management Agreement for the true and complete contents thereof. 241. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 241, except avers, on information and belief, that financial information reported by Madoff has, after Madoff's arrest in December 2008, been found to be fraudulent. 242. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegation in Paragraph 242.

34

243.

Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 243, except avers, on information and belief, that data reported by Madoff has, after Madoff's arrest in December 2008, been found to be fraudulent, and avers that Fairfield Sigma Limited earned fees, and respectfully refers the Court to the referenced financial statements for the true and complete terms thereof. 244. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 244, except avers, on information and belief, that financial information reported by Madoff has, after Madoff's arrest in December 2008, been found to be fraudulent. 245. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 245, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced COMs for the true and complete terms thereof. 246. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 246, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced COMs and to audited financial statements for the true and complete contents thereof. 247. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 247, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced COMs for the true and complete contents thereof. 248. Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations in Paragraph 248, except avers, on information and belief, that financial information reported by Madoff has, after Madoff's arrest in December 2008, been found to be fraudulent. 249. Bowes denies the allegations in Paragraph 249, except avers that Bowes had no

knowledge of Madoff's fraud prior to December 11, 2008. 35

J. 250.

Fairfield Defendants Agreed to Provide Full Restitution to Massachusetts Investors in the Funds The allegations in Paragraph 250 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Administrative Complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. 251. The allegations in Paragraph 251 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Administrative Complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. 252. The allegations in Paragraph 252 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Administrative Complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. 253. The allegations in Paragraph 253 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Administrative Complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. 254. The allegations in Paragraph 254 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or

36

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Administrative Complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. 255. The allegations in Paragraph 255 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced Administrative Complaint for the true and complete contents thereof. 256. The allegations in Paragraph 256 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the Pre-Hearing Memorandum for the true and complete contents thereof. 257. The allegations in Paragraph 257 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced order for the true and complete contents thereof. 258. The allegations in Paragraph 258 are not directed to Bowes, who, accordingly, has

no obligation to respond. To the extent that a response is required, Bowes lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations, except respectfully refers the Court to the referenced order for the true and complete terms thereof. K.