Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 1 of 74 PageID #: 1101

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 2 of 74 PageID #: 1102

U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Eastern District of New York
271 Cadman Plaza East-7th Floor
Brooklyn, New York 11201
October 15, 2015
By Email and First-Class Certified Mail
Louis Flores
34-21 77th Street, Apt. #406
Jackson Heights, New York 11372
Re:

Louis Flores v. United States Department of Justice

No. 15-CV-2627 (Gleeson, J.) (Mann, M.J.)

Dear Mr. Flores:

On behalf of Defendant United States Department of Justice (DOJ or Defendant), we
write to follow-up on our correspondence to you dated October 13, 2015, regarding the voluntary
search for any written guidelines for prosecution of activists located in the Office of the
Assistant Attorney General (OAAG), Criminal Division of DOJ Main Justice. (See Dkt. No.
14).
The OAAG is responsible for formulating and implementing DOJs criminal enforcement
policy. A voluntary search was conducted in the OAAG for guidelines relating to the
prosecution of activists and references to targeted prosecution of activists. Please be advised that
no documents were located. We hope that this addresses any remaining issues you raised during
the September 16, 2015 conference with the Court.
As previously set forth in our October 13, 2015 letter, Defendant expressly reserves any
arguments that: (a) this search was not requested in, or made pursuant to, your April 30, 2013
FOIA request; (b) your FOIA request was directed solely to EOUSA; (c) EOUSA properly
searched for records responsive to your request in the files of USAO-DC; and (d) any discovery
or expansion of the scope of the April 2013 FOIA request is not proper in this action.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
KELLY T. CURRIE
Acting United States Attorney
By:

s/Rukhsanah L. Singh
RUKHSANAH L. SINGH
Assistant U.S. Attorney
(718) 254-6498
rukhsanah.singh@usdoj.gov

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 3 of 74 PageID #: 1103

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 4 of 74 PageID #: 1104

Louis&Flores&
3421&77th&Street,&No.&406&
Jackson&Heights,&New&York&&11372&
louisflores@louisflores.com&&
1&(646)&400F1168&
&
&
&
&

26&October&2015&
&
&
&
&

[By$e&mail$only$:$$rukhsanah.singh@usdoj.gov]$
&

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney,&
& U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York,&
& & 271&Cadman&Plaza&East,&7th&Floor,&
& & & Brooklyn,&NY&&11201.&
&
&

Dear&Ms.&Singh&:&&
&
&

Re$:$
$

Louis$Flores$v.$United$States$Department$of$Justice$
No.$15&CV&2627$(JG)$(RLM)$$
$
$
$

$$

&
&

Last&Monday,&I&received&the&package&of&attachments&to&your&letter&of&13&October&2015.&&It&
took&me&several&days&to&review&the&attachments,&and&I&bring&the&following&issues&to&your&
attention,&so&that&we&can&have&one&document&that&addresses&what&I&believe&to&be&all&open&
issues&with&respect&to&DOJ&records&about&the&prosecution&of&activists&:&
&
1.
Declaration$of$Karin$Kelly.&&&
a).
Is&Ms.&Kelly&a&temp&employee&at&the&DOJ,&like&Princina&Stone&?&&Can&DOJ&
management,&senior&supervisors,&or&section&chiefs&provide&the&Declaration&?&
b).
I&note&that&some&of&the&Declarations&being&made&appear&incomplete.&&
During&our&Telephone&Conference&on&16&October&2015,&you&said&that&the&Declarations&
would&show&that&the&searches&were&made&for&guidelines,&protocols,&procedures.&&But&
thats&not&what&is&showing&up&in&the&Declarations.&
c).
What&is&more,&some&of&the&searches&appear&not&to&match&what&was&
requested&in&the&FOIA&Request.&&For&example,&Paragraph&11&stated&FOIA&request&
seeking&information&concerning&the$number&of&activists&that&have&been&targeted&for&
prosecution&(emphasis&added).&&&On&item&I.1.A.&of&the&FOIA&Request,&it&stated&what&
kind&of&activists&may&be&targeted&for&prosecution,&how&many&activists&have&been&
targeted&for&prosecution,&what$are$the$names$of$such$activists,&and&which&Department&
of&Justice&officials&approved&of&such&prosecution&of&activists&;&(emphasis&added).&&
Besides&Lt.&Daniel&Choi,&the&FOIA&Request&provided&several&examples&of&activists,&
which&have&been&prosecuted&by&federal&prosecutors&for&their&activism.&&These&activists&
were&again&identified&in&Plaintiffs$Index$of$References$to$Records$Requested$
under$FOIA$Request,&provided&to&you&in&person&on&the&date&of&the&Initial&Conference&
with&the&Hon.&Magistrate&Judge&Roanne&Mann.&&Why&were&limits&placed&on&the&search&?&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 5 of 74 PageID #: 1105

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 2
&

d).
If&the&search,&as&described,&produced&no&results&for&records&of&guidelines&
for&activists&having&been&prosecuted,&why&were&the&names,&which&I&provided&for&
context&in&the&FOIA&Request,&not&searched&?&
e).
Further,&according&to&Paragraph&11,&Ms.&Kelly&quoted&the&relevant&
portion&of&the&FOIA&Request&to&the&IT&specialist.&&How&is&relevant&portion&being&
defined&?&&Why&was&not&the&entire&FOIA&Request&provided&?&&Was&the&DOJ&trying&to&strip&
out&the&context&of&the&FOIA&Request&?&&&
f).
Why&were&only&IT&specialists&contacted&to&conduct&the&searches&at&the&
DOJ&?&&What&happened&to&the&prosecutors&in&the&Criminal&Division,&including&Assistant&
U.S.&Attorney&Angela&George&or&the&officials&in&the&Office&of&the&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
General,&the&latter,&where&you&said,&formulation&of&policy&is&decided&?&&Why&did&they&not&
conduct&the&search&?&
g).
In&Paragraph&12,&it&stated&that&the&search&string&for&the&records&
pertained&to&the&union&of&activists&and&targeted.&&The&search&string&in&Paragraph&12&
does&not&match&what&is&written&in&Paragraph&6.&&Moreover,&the&term&targeted&is&one&
of&perspective.&&I&find&it&hardly&believable&that&the&DOJ&would&label&its&own&internal&
records&with&loaded&words&like,&targeted,&given&that&the&DOJ&would&not&be&willing&to&
make&such&a&voluntary&classification&in&its&internal&records&that&would&reflect&on&its&
own&misconduct.&&Given&the&repeated&references&to&records&pertaining&to&First&
Amendment,&other&Constitutional&rights,&civil&liberties,&and&other&civil&rights&of&
activists,&why&werent&any&of&the&laws&that&apply&to&activists&used&in&search&strings&?&&
As&mentioned&to&you&many&times,&I&have&concerns&the&DOJ&has&been&and&is&treating&this&
FOIA&Request&in&a&manner&to&deliberately&create&obfuscation.&
h).
In&Paragraphs&21F24,&the&issue&of&costs&are&addressed.&&If&the&DOJ&cannot&
provide&the&share&of&the&costs&of&the&prosecution&for&only&Lt.&Daniel&Choi,&the&easiest&
thing&to&doso$that$the$DOJ$can$produce$some$responsive$recordswould&be&to&
provide&the&costs&of&the&prosecution&of&the&group&of&activists&arrested&in&that&
demonstration,&with&the&understanding&that&there&is&no&way&to&isolate&those&costs&
solely&attributable&to&Lt.&Daniel&Choi.&&There&should&be&no&calculation&involved&;&rather,&
solely&simple&reports&from&the&accounting&office&that&tracked&all$the$costs$for&the&
arrests&and&prosecutions&of&that&group&of&activists,&who&were&arrested&with&Lt.&Daniel&
Choi&on&Monday,&November&15,&2010,&following&their&demonstration&at&the&White&
House&fence.&&&
i).
The&Declaration&mentions&FOIA&Request&item&I.1.C.&in&Paragraph&18,&
item&I.2.B.&in&Paragraph&19,&item&I.3&in&Paragraph&20,&and&item&I.4.&in&Paragraph&21.&&
However,&none&of&the&other&items&are&individually&addressed.&&I&request&a&full&
clarification&on&an&itemFbyFitem&basis&of&the&search&results.&
j).
Paragraph&26&stated&that&most&of&the&publiclyFavailable&documents&in&
USAOFDC&are&also&available&on&PACER.&&You&have&in&the&past&wrongly&referred&me&to&
PACER&to&collect&(at&my&time&and&expense)&the&publiclyFavailable&documents&missing&
from&the&discretionary&release,&and&I&will&address&that&issue&further&below.&&However,&
Paragraph&26&seems&to&indicate&that&some&publiclyFavailable&documents&would&not&be&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 6 of 74 PageID #: 1106

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 3
&

available&on&PACER.&&How&was&I&to&obtain&the&missing&documents&from&PACER&if&not&all&
of&the&publiclyFavailable&documents&at&the&USAOFDC&are&available&on&PACER&?&&&
k).
Based&on&the&aboveFreferenced&issues,&I&cannot&accept&the&Declaration&
of&Ms.&Kelly&in&its&current&form.&
2.

Declaration$of$Princina$Stone.&&&

a).
In&Paragraph&1,&Ms.&Stone&identifies&that&she&has&only&been&with&the&DOJ&
since&April&2015.&&Is&she&a&temp&employee&at&the&DOJ&?&&&
b).
In&Paragraph&2,&Ms.&Stone&stated&that&she&is&familiar&with&the&
procedures&followed&by&this&office,&even&though&Ms.&Stone&has&not&yet&been&employed&
at&the&DOJ&for&six&months.&&If&she&has&been&there&for&such&a&limited&amount&of&time,&cant&
Ms.&Stones&supervisor&provide&the&Declaration&in&Ms.&Stones&stead&?&
c).
Why&is&the&DOJ&selecting&temp&staff&to&prepare&and&sign&these&
Declarations&?&&This&doesnt&inspire&confidence,&that&the&DOJ&management&dont&stand&
behind&the&search&results.&&Can&DOJ&management,&senior&supervisors,&or&section&chiefs&
provide&an&umbrella&Declaration&?&
d).
There&are&no&indications&in&the&Declarations&of&guidelines,&protocols,&
procedures&having&been&searched,&using&your&words&from&our&Telephone&Conference&
of&16&October&2015.&
e).
In&Paragraphs&4F6,&its&the&DOJs&contention&that&the&original&FOIA&
Request&went&missing.&&It&should&be&noted&that&from&June&2013&through&October&2013,&
I&engaged&in&multiple&discussions&with&Sanjay&Sola,&a&paralegal&at&the&DOJ.&&These&
telephone&conversations&were&described,&in&sum&and&substance,&in&the&Paragraphs&44F
48&of&the&Amended&Complaint&(See&Dkt.&No.&15).&&At&no&time&during&those&phone&
conversations&did&Mr.&Sola&ever&inform&me&that&the&FOIA&Request&was&missing.&&Can&
the&DOJ&please&provide&clarification&as&to&when&the&FOIA&Request&went&missing&?&&Since&
I&made&factual&representations&about&these&telephone&conversations&with&the&Court&
when&I&filed&the&pleadings&in&this&case,&I&want&to&know&if&the&DOJ&is&questioning&my&
presentation&of&the&facts&in&respect&of&my&conversations&with&Mr.&Sola&about&the&FOIA&
Request,&or&if&the&DOJ&is&asserting&that&the&FOIA&Request&went&missing&at&some&point&
after&I&concluding&having&any&more&telephone&conversations&with&Mr.&Sola&?&&Can&the&
DOJ&add&its&representations&about&the&Sola&conversations&to&the&Declaration&?&
f).
Furthermore,&after&I&ceased&my&communication&with&Mr.&Sola,&my&
elected&representative&to&Congress,&U.S.&Representative&Joseph&Crowley&wrote&a&letter&
to&the&DOJ,&asking&that&the&DOJ&answer&my&FOIA&Request.&&Did&the&DOJ&ever&respond&to&
U.S.&Representative&Crowleys&letter,&informing&him&that&my&FOIA&Request&had&gone&
missing&?&&Can&the&DOJ&add&its&representations&about&U.S.&Representative&Crowleys&
letter&to&the&Declaration&?&
g).
What&is&more,&after&U.S.&Representative&Crowley&transmitted&his&letter&
to&the&DOJ,&my&former&counsel&communicated&with&the&Office&of&Information&Policy.&&To&
my&knowledge,&during&none&of&the&telephone&conversations&my&former&counsel&had&
with&the&DOJ&ever&include&any&communication&that&the&FOIA&Request&had&gone&missing.&&
Indeed,&by&letter&dated&May&20,&2014over&one&year&after&the&FOIA&Request&had&been&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 7 of 74 PageID #: 1107

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 4
&

originally&submittedthe&Office&of&Information&Policy&was&remanding&the&FOIA&
Request&for&responsive&records.&&Can&you&provide&clarification&in&the&Declaration&as&to&
whether&the&FOIA&Request&went&missing&after&the&Office&of&Information&Policy&
remanded&the&FOIA&Request&for&responsive&records&?&&To&whom&would&the&remand&
have&been&addressed&?&&As&stated&above,&since&I&have&presented&facts&relating&these&
events&in&my&Amended&Complaint&before&this&Court,&I&would&like&clarification&in&the&
Declaration&as&to&whether&the&DOJ&is&making&an&alternate&recounting&of&facts.&&Can&the&
DOJ&add&its&representations&about&the&OIP&appeal&to&the&Declaration&?&
h).
Notwithstanding&your&clarification&about&when&the&FOIA&Request&would&
actually&go&missing,&it&must&be&noted&that&during&our&Telephone&Conference&on&16&
October&2015,&you&stated&that&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&Angela&George&always&had&a&copy&
of&the&FOIA&Request.&&It&appears&that&the&DOJ&is&hiding&behind&the&semantics&that&since&
she&is&employed&by&the&U.S.&Attorneys&Office&and&not&by&the&DOJ,&that&means&that&
Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&Georges&possession&of&the&FOIA&Request&is&not&the&same&as&the&
DOJ&having&possession&of&the&FOIA&Request.&&This&is&a&horrible&excuse&and&poor&
reasoning.&&I&bring&to&your&attention&former&Attorney&General&Eric&Holders&FOIA&
memorandum.&&See&Eric&Holder,&Memorandum$for$Heads$of$Executive$Departments$and$
Agencies,&Office&of&the&Attorney&General&(Mar.&19,&2009),&http://www.justice.gov/&
sites/default/files/ag/legacy/2009/&06/24/foiaFmemoFmarch2009.pdf&(noting&under&
FOIA&is&Everyones&Responsibility&that&I&would&like&to&emphasize&that&responsibility&
for&effective&FOIA&administration&belongs&to&all&of&usit&is&not&merely&a&task&assigned&
to&an&agencys&FOIA&staff.&&We$all$must$do$our$part$to$ensure$open$government.)&
(emphasis&added).&&At&best,&by&ignoring&the&FOIA&Request,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
George&was&violating&the&instruction&provided&in&former&Attorney&General&Holders&
memorandum.&&At&worst,&by&ignoring&the&FOIA&Request,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&George&
was&interfering&with&government&administration,&in&violation&of&Penal&Law&195.05,&
SecondFDegree&Obstruction&of&Government&Administration.&&That&being&said,&other&
individuals&either&at&the&U.S.&Attorneys&Office&or&the&DOJ&received&an&electronic&copy&of&
the&FOIA&Request,&including&the&AskDOJ@usdoj.gov&eFmail&inbox.&&What&will&the&DOJ&
and&the&U.S.&Attorneys&Office&do&about&employees&that&did&not&adhere&to&former&
Attorney&General&Holders&memorandum&?&
i).
Did&the&DOJ&select&Ms.&Stone&to&provide&this&Declaration,&so&that&she&
would&not&know&the&history&of&this&FOIA&Request&?&
j).
Paragraphs&8&and&9&do&not&address&the&nonpublic&records&that&the&
EOUSA&acknowledged&to&exist&in&its&cover&letter&of&19&August&2015&but&which&were&
withheld&from&the&discretionary&release.&&In&your&letter&of&13&October&2015,&you&wrote&
that,&EOUSA&has&not&withheld&any&records&that&are&responsive&to&your&request.&&
However,&both&the&Declaration&and&your&letter&ignore&the&request&made&in&my&letter&to&
you&of&26&August&2015,&in&which&I&address&the&withheld&records.&&I&wrote&at&that&time&
then,&Can&you&describe&the&privacyFencumbered&records&and&produce&an&index&of&the&
descriptions&?&&&This&has&not&been&addressed&in&the&Declaration,&even&though&it&needs&
to&be&addressed.&&I&will&more&fully&address&the&discretionary&release&further&below.&
k).
For&the&aboveFreferenced&reasons,&I&cannot&accept&the&Declaration&of&
Ms.&Stone&in&its&current&form.&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 8 of 74 PageID #: 1108

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 5
&

3.

Voluntary$search$of$Main$Justice.&
a).

Will&there&be&a&Declaration&provided&for&this&search&?&

b).
When&asked&by&me&during&our&Telephone&Conference&of&16&October&
2015,&to&confirm&that&no&other&component&at&the&DOJ&contained&a&criminal&division,&
you&said&that&there&was&no&other.&&I&will&discuss&this&further&in&detail&below.&
4.

Plaintiffs$Index$of$References$to$Records$Requested$under$FOIA$Request&:&&
a).

Your$letter$of$13$October$2015$(generally).&

(i).
When&you&wrote&in&your&letter&of&13&October&2015,&that&the&
search&was&conducted&in&a&manner&to&construe&your&requests&(some&of&which&
are&ambiguous)&as&broadly&as&possible,&can&you&provide&clarification&as&to&what&
that&means&for&each&search&conducted&?&
(ii).
How&is&it&that&the&DOJ&could&not&find&general&guidelines&for&the&
prosecution&of&activists&under&the&FOIA&Request,&but&the&DOJ&could&after&
processing&Plaintiffs$Index$of$References$to$Records$Requested$under$the$
FOIA$Request.&&See,$e.g.,&the&Kelly&Declaration&at&Paragraphs&12&and&15&and&the&
Stone&Declaration&at&Paragraph&6.&
(iii). In&Footnote&2&in&your&letter&of&13&October&2015,&you&wrote&that&
the&DOJ&cannot&respond&to&FOIA&requests&or&provide&information&as&to&local&
law&enforcement&entities.&&I&will&address&that&further&below.&
(iv). Of&the&items&on&Plaintiffs$Index$of$References$to$Records$
Requested$under$the$FOIA$Request&that&the&DOJ&answered,&the&DOJ&did&not&
fully&answer&all&the&questions&for&those&items.&&I&reserve&the&right&to&bring&up&
those&unanswered&questions&based&on&the&DOJs&response&to&this&letter.&&
b).

Reference$Nos.$5$&$6$(the$Myers$memo$(email)).&&&

(i).
Your&letter&stated&that&the&document&was&from&an&individual&at&
the&Solicitors&Office&of&the&U.S.&Department&of&the&Interior&and&was,&thus,&not&
responsive&to&your&FOIA&request.&&This&contradicts&item&I.1.F.&in&the&FOIA&
Request,&which&requested&whether&agencies&other&than&the&Department&of&
Justice&may&target&activists&for&prosecution,&and,&if&so,&under&what&
circumstances,&under&what&conditions,&and&subject&to&what&restrictions&;&and&
which&agency&officials&approve&of&such&prosecution&of&activists.&&Can&you&
provide&clarification&as&to&what&you&meant&when&you&wrote&that&this&document&
(and&presumably&any&other&such&documents&or&other&applicable&records&in&the&
possession&of&DOJ)&are&not&responsive&to&the&FOIA&Request&?&
(ii).
Is&there&any&information&that&was&redacted&?&&There&is&an&empty&
space&near&the&bcc:&field&in&the&eFmail.&&Please&provide&clarification&if&this&
document&was&redacted,&and&whether&any&other&documents&were&redacted.&
(iii). If&other&law&enforcement&agencies,&be&they&at&whatever&
jurisdiction,&undertake&to&prosecute&activists&for&their&activism,&does&the&DOJ&do&
nothing&to&address&the&First&Amendment,&other&Constitutional&rights,&civil&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 9 of 74 PageID #: 1109

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 6
&

liberties,&and&other&civil&rights&of&activists&?&&Is&the&DOJ&completely&passive&to&
activists&federal&rights&?&&Im&asking,&so&that&I&can&understand&the&DOJs&role.&
(iv). Your&Footnote&2&states&that&the&DOJ&cannot&respond&to&FOIA&
requests&or&provide&information&as&to&local&law&enforcement&entities.&&Yet,&in&
the&instances&of&Reference&Nos.&5&&&6,&these&were&federal&law&enforcement&
entities.&&The&DOJ&did&not&produce&these&documents&until&the&Magistrate&Judge&
entered&her&omnibus&order&after&our&Initial&Conference.&&That&being&said,&the&
DOJ&has&not&directly&answered&whether&the&DOJ&has&any&other&records&
responsive&to&item&I.1.F.&in&the&FOIA&Request.&&Please&provide&clarification.&
c).

Reference$Nos.$5$&$6$(Capt.$Guddemis$November$22$email).&&

(i).
Your&letter&stated&that&the&document&was&from&individuals&at&the&
NPS,&the&U.S.&Park&Police,&the&U.S.&Secret&Service,&and&the&U.S.&Capitol&Police&and&
was,&thus,&not&responsive&to&your&FOIA&request.&&This&contradicts&item&I.1.F.&in&
the&FOIA&Request,&which&requested&whether&agencies&other&than&the&
Department&of&Justice&may&target&activists&for&prosecution,&and,&if&so,&under&
what&circumstances,&under&what&conditions,&and&subject&to&what&restrictions&;&
and&which&agency&officials&approve&of&such&prosecution&of&activists.&&Can&you&
provide&clarification&as&to&what&you&meant&when&you&wrote&that&this&document&
(and&presumably&any&other&such&documents&or&other&applicable&records&in&the&
possession&of&DOJ)&are&not&responsive&to&the&FOIA&Request&?&&If&the&DOJ&
acknowledges&that&its&prosecutors&take&legal&instruction&to&prosecute&activists&
from&other&law&enforcement&agencies,&then&the&DOJ&should&be&compelled&to&
answer&item&I.1.F.&in&the&FOIA&Request.&&Please&produce&these&records.&
(ii).
Is&there&any&information&that&was&redacted&?&&There&is&an&empty&
space&near&the&bcc:&field&in&the&eFmail.&&Please&provide&clarification&if&this&
document&was&redacted,&and&whether&any&other&documents&were&redacted.&
(iii). As&stated&during&our&Telephone&Conference&of&16&October&2015,&
the&identification&of&the&missing&exhibits&noted&in&my&letter&of&26&August&2015&
were&incomplete.&&During&our&Telephone&Conference&on&01&September&2015&
(following&the&production&of&the&discretionary&release),&I&repeatedly&stated&that&
I&had&not&yet&completed&my&review&of&the&discretionary&release&and&was,&
therefore,&unable&to&provide&to&you&the&complete&list&of&missing&documents.&&My&
mention&of&Tab&J&and&the&other&missing&exhibits&was&meant&to&be&an&
representative&example&of&how&the&DOJs&release&was&blatantly&incomplete.&&
Nevertheless,&ever&since&that&26&August&2015,&letter&and&that&01&September&
2015&Telephone&Conference,&you&have&been&wrongly&asserting&that&if&the&DOJ&
had&produced&the&few&missing&exhibits&noted&on&the&26&August&2015,&letter,&
then&that&somehow&would&have&satisfied&all&of&the&DOJs&obligations&under&FOIA&
in&respect&of&the&subject&FOIA&Request.&&And&ever&since&that&26&August&2015,&
letter&and&that&01&September&2015&Telephone&Conference,&I&have&been&
repeating&to&you&that&that&was&obviously&not&the&case.&&At&that&time&then,&I&did&
not&know&the&entire&universe&of&documents&missing&from&the&discretionary&
release.&&Indeed,&it&was&not&until&I&wrote&to&the&Magistrate&Judge&on&03&
September&2015,&pressing&for&the&conduct&of&Discovery,&that&Plaintiffs$Index$

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 10 of 74 PageID #: 1110

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 7
&

to$the$FOIA$Response&was&finalised.&&Plaintiffs$Index$to$the$FOIA$Response$
was&attached&to&that&03&September&2015,&letter,&a&copy&of&which&you&received.&&
Furthermore,&your&focus&on&those&few&exhibits&known&to&be&missing&as&of&01&
September&2015&blatantly&sidesteps&all&of&the&other&missing&documents&
identified&:&&(x)&two&days&later&on&Plaintiffs$Index$to$the$FOIA$Response$and&
(y)&fifteen&days&later&on&Plaintiffs$Index$of$References$to$Records$
Requested$under$the$FOIA$Request,&neither&of&which&have&been&fully&
addressed&or&produced.&&Notwithstanding,&as&previously&stated,&I&will&more&
fully&address&the&discretionary&release&further&below.&
d).

Reference$No.$5$(the$Amicus$Curaie$Brief).&

(i).
If&the&DOJ&has&no&complete&copy,&then&I&will&accept&that&there&is&
no&more&the&DOJ&can&do&about&the&missing&pages&for&this&document.&
e).

Reference$Nos.$10$&$11.&&&

(i).
It&is&a&sign&of&bad$faith$that&the&DOJ&would&produce&these&
documents&only&after&the&Magistrate&Judge&entered&her&omnibus&order,&
particularly&since&Sections&9F65.880,&9F65.881,&and&9F65.882&pertain&to&
demonstrations.&&I&dont&know&how&you&can&state&in&your&letter&of&13&October&
2015,&that&these&documents&are&not&responsive&to&the&FOIA&Request.&&Were&it&
not&for&Magistrate&Judges&omnibus&order,&the&DOJ&would&not&have&produced&
these&records.&&What&other&records&is&the&DOJ&withholding&?&
(ii).
In&furtherance&to&Section&9F65.880,&can&the&DOJ&provide&
clarification&or&give&examples&of&what&Federal&interest&means&in&context&of&
Section&9F65.880&?&
(iii). In&furtherance&to&Section&9F65.881,&can&the&DOJ&provide&
clarification&or&give&examples&of&what&Federal&interest&means&in&context&of&
Section&9F65.881&?&
(iv). In&furtherance&to&Section&9F65.882,&can&the&DOJ&give&examples&of&
what&where&Federal&action&is&otherwise&deemed&necessary&means&in&context&
of&Section&9F65.882&?&
f).

Reference$Nos.$13$&$29.&&&

(i).
The&documents&produced&at&Tab&E&generally&are&not&specific&to&
the&request&at&Reference&No.&13&(how&the&activities&of&protesters&are&protected&
by&the&First&Amendment),&with&the&exception&of&perhaps&Sections&1089&and&
1625&of&the&U.S.&Attorneys&Manual,&and&I&again&object&to&your&letter&of&13&
October&2015,&wherein&you&wrote&that&these&documents&are&not&responsive&to&
the&FOIA&Request.&&Were&it&not&for&Magistrate&Judges&omnibus&order,&the&DOJ&
would&not&have&produced&these&records.&&What&other&records&is&the&DOJ&
withholding&?&
(ii).
As&discussed&during&our&Telephone&Conference&of&16&October&
2015,&it&might&be&helpful,&particularly&within&the&context&of&Reference&Nos.&13&
and&29,&to&know&whether&the&DOJ&can&stipulate&whether&records&exist&in&respect&
of&guidelines&for&activists&that&are&similar&or&equivalent&to&the&guidelines&that&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 11 of 74 PageID #: 1111

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 8
&

the&DOJ&has&for&journalists,&since&the&activities&of&each&are&protected&by&the&First&
Amendment.&
(iii). Except&for&perhaps&Sections&1089&and&1625&of&the&U.S.&
Attorneys&Manual,&I&dont&know&how&the&documents&under&Tab&E&answer&
Reference&No.&29.&&Can&the&DOJ&provide&clarification&?&
(iv). Are&there&no&equivalent&documents&to&the&Myers&memo&
(email)&or&the&Capt.&Guddemnis&November&22&email,&in&other&words,&
documents&that&answer&item&I.1.F.&of&the&FOIA&Request,&that&either&were&
created&within&or&without&the&DOJ&that&show&how&the&DOJ&targets&activists&in&
real&life&and&which&apply&to&Reference&No.&29&?&&&
g).

Reference$No.$17.&

(i).
I&dont&know&how&the&documents&under&Tab&F&answer&Reference&
No.&17.&&Can&the&DOJ&provide&clarification&?&&&
(ii).
Are&there&no&equivalent&documents&to&the&Myers&memo&
(email)&or&the&Capt.&Guddemnis&November&22&email,&in&other&words,&
documents&that&answer&item&I.1.F.&of&the&FOIA&Request,&that&either&were&
created&within&or&without&the&DOJ&that&show&how&the&DOJ&targets&activists&in&
real&life&and&which&apply&to&Reference&No.&17&?&&&
h).

Reference$No.$19.&

(i).
I&dont&know&how&the&documents&under&Tab&G&answer&Reference&
No.&19.&&Can&the&DOJ&provide&clarification&?&&&
(ii).
Are&there&no&equivalent&documents&to&the&Myers&memo&
(email)&or&the&Capt.&Guddemnis&November&22&email,&in&other&words,&
documents&that&answer&item&I.1.F.&of&the&FOIA&Request,&that&either&were&
created&within&or&without&the&DOJ&that&show&how&the&DOJ&targets&activists&in&
real&life&and&which&apply&to&Reference&No.&19&?&
i).

Reference$No.$21.&

(i).
I&dont&know&how&the&link&to&the&referenced&Web&site&answers&
Reference&No.&21.&&Can&the&DOJ&provide&clarification&?&&&
(ii).
Are&there&no&equivalent&documents&to&the&Myers&memo&(email)&
or&the&Capt.&Guddemnis&November&22&email,&in&other&words,&documents&that&
answer&item&I.1.F.&of&the&FOIA&Request,&that&either&were&created&within&or&without&
the&DOJ&that&show&how&the&DOJ&targets&activists&in&real&life&and&which&apply&to&
Reference&No.&21&?&
j).

Reference$No.$23$(and$the$discretionary$release).&

(i).
The&Declarations&do&not&address&the&privacyFencumbered&
documents&that&were&withheld&from&the&DOJs&first&FOIA&Response,&even&
though&I&requested&a&description&and&an&index&of&these&withheld&documents&in&
my&letter&of&26&August&2015.&&Please&address&the&privacyFencumbered&records,&
which&were&withheld,&in&the&Declarations.&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 12 of 74 PageID #: 1112

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 9
&

(ii).
Please&provide&a&Vaugh&index&of&these&withheld&records&
pursuant&to&Vaughn$v.$Rosen,&484&F.2d&820&(D.C.&Cir.&1973),&cert.&denied,&415&
U.S.&977&(1974).&
(iii). The&Kelly&Declaration&stated&that&most&of&the&publiclyF
available&documents&in&USAOFDC&are&also&available&on&PACER.&&You&have&in&
the&past&wrongly&referred&me&to&PACER&to&collect&(at&my&time&and&expense)&the&
publiclyFavailable&documents&missing&from&the&discretionary&release,&and&I&will&
address&that&issue&further&below.&&However,&the&Kelly&Declaration&seems&to&
indicate&that&some&publiclyFavailable&documents&would&not&be&available&on&
PACER.&&Can&those&nonFPACER&documents&be&produced&?&&&
(iv). As&stated&during&our&Telephone&Conference&of&16&October&2015,&
I&will&be&asking&the&Magistrate&Judge&to&rule&on&my&request,&first&made&at&the&
Initial&Conference,&to&make&a&determination&about&the&DOJs&obligation&and&
responsibility&to&produce&records&duly&requested&under&FOIA,&regardless&of&
whether&the&records&are&publicly&available&or&not.&&Notwithstanding&the&Red&
Herring&that&the&discretionary&release&created,&as&I&stated&during&our&Telephone&
Conference&of&16&October&2015,&the&DOJs&obligations&under&FOIA&are&not&
discretionary.&&&
(v).
Given&the&DOJs&creation&of&the&Red&Herring&in&the&discretionary&
release,&the&DOJs&descriptions&in&the&Declarations&of&how&it&restricted&the&
search&for&records&responsive&to&the&FOIA&Request,&and&how&the&DOJ&was&
nonetheless&able&to&locate&some&records&responsive&to&Plaintiffs$Index$of$
References$to$Records$Requested$under$the$FOIA$Request,&there&is&no&way&
of&knowing&if&the&records&identified&as&missing&in&Plaintiffs$Index$to$the$FOIA$
Response&constitute&the&entire&universe&of&known,&but&missing,&records&in&Lt.&
Chois&case.&&There&is&also&no&way&of&knowing&if&any&of&the&guidelines&provided&
by&the&DOJ&are&whole&and&complete,&because&you&denied&during&our&Telephone&
Conference&of&16&October&2015,&my&request&to&stipulate&whether&the&searches&
reach&the&conclusion&that&no&records&exist&(instead&of&no&records&being&found).&&
Without&the&DOJ&properly&certifying&its&accountability&for&the&search&results&
and&its&compliance&with&FOIA,&theres&little&credibility&to&attach&to&the&DOJs&
word.&&I&reiterate&my&requests&made&above&:&&Can&DOJ&management,&senior&
supervisors,&or&section&chiefs&provide&the&Declarations&?&
(vi). Every&chance&Ive&had,&Ive&reminded&the&Court&that&for&over&two&
years,&the&DOJ&was&flagrantly&defying&FOIA,&violating&with$impunity&the&
treatment&entitled&to&Plaintiff&under&FOIA.&&Ive&noted&time&and&again&that&it&is&
the&pattern&and&practise&of&the&DOJ&to&violate&FOIA&until&requesters&file&a&
lawsuit&and&seek&compliance&in&a&court&of&law.&&See,$e.g.,&Hadas&Gold,&NYT,$Vice,$
Mother$Jones$top$FOIA$suits,&Politico&(Dec.&23,&2014),&
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/12/nytFviceFmotherFjonesFtopF
foiaFsuitsF200325.html&(noting&that&the&top&defendant&was&the&DOJ).&&&&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 13 of 74 PageID #: 1113

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 10
&

k).

Reference$No.$28.&

(i).
I&dont&know&how&the&documents&under&Tab&H&answer&Reference&
No.&28.&&Can&the&DOJ&provide&clarification&?&&&
(ii).
Are&there&no&equivalent&documents&to&the&Myers&memo&
(email)&or&the&Capt.&Guddemnis&November&22&email,&in&other&words,&
documents&that&answer&item&I.1.F.&of&the&FOIA&Request,&that&either&were&
created&within&or&without&the&DOJ&that&apply&to&Reference&No.&28&?&
l).

Reference$Nos.$1&4,$7&9,$12,$14&16,$18,$22,$24&27.&

(i).
Numbers&?&&

Can&the&DOJ&explain&why&it&sidestepped&these&Reference&

(ii).
In&the&body&of&the&FOIA&Request&and&in&Plaintiffs$Index$of$
References$to$Records$Requested$under$the$FOIA$Request,&the&DOJ&has&
continued&to&overlook&the&many&other&examples&of&activists,&some&mentioned&
by&name&and&some&identified&with&links&to&news&reports,&which&may&provide&
names.&&These&activists&have&been&prosecuted&for&their&activism,&and&the&DOJ&
appears&to&be&ignoring&that&in&these&cases&the&DOJ&would&have&made&
determinations&to&prosecute&these&activists&in&spite&of&the&First&Amendment,&
other&Constitutional&rights,&civil&liberties,&and&other&civil&rights&of&activists.&&
(x)&&Can&you&provide&clarification&about&why&the&DOJ&is&skipping&over&these&
examples&?&&How&is&this&in&keeping&with&former&U.S.&Attorney&General&Holders&
memorandum&?&&(y)&&Since&the&DOJ&turned&up&no&records&responsive&to&the&FOIA&
Request,&can&the&DOJ&answer&Reference&Nos.&1F4,&7F9,&12,&14F16,&18,&22,&24F27&?&
m).

The$Civil$Rights$Division.&

(i).
During&our&Telephone&Conference&of&16&October&2015,&you&said&
that&the&Office&of&the&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&General&determined&criminal&
policy&for&the&DOJ.&&I&asked&you&to&confirm&whether&there&was&no&other&
component&at&the&DOJ&that&contained&a&criminal&division.&&You&replied&that&
there&was&none.&&However,&when&I&searched&the&DOJs&Web&site,&I&discovered&
that&the&Civil&Rights&Division&(CRT)&contains&a&Criminal&Division.&&&
(ii).
In&Footnote&2&in&your&letter&of&13&October&2015,&you&wrote&that&
the&DOJ&cannot&respond&to&FOIA&requests&or&provide&information&as&to&local&
law&enforcement&entities.&&However,&the&purpose&of&the&CRT&includes&taking&
action&to&uphold&the&civil&and&constitutional&rights&of&all&Americans,&
particularly&some&of&the&most&vulnerable&members&of&our&society.&&The&Division&
enforces&federal&statutes&prohibiting&discrimination&on&the&basis&of&race,&color,&
sex,&disability,&religion,&familial&status&and&national&origin.&&See&Civil&Rights&
Division,&About$the$Division,&U.S.&Department&of&Justice&(Sept.&22,&2015),&
http://www.justice.gov/crt/aboutFdivision.&&&
(iii). On&the&CRTs&Web&site,&it&is&noted&that&the&CRT&becomes&involved&
in&cases&where&activists&are&persecuted&for&federally&protected&activities.&&See&
the&subsections&U.S.$v.$Johnson&(where&the&Defendant&was&sending&threatening&
eFmails&to&Puerto&Rican&activists)&and&U.S.$v.$Munsen&(where&the&Defendant&was&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 14 of 74 PageID #: 1114

Rukhsanah&L.&Singh,&Assistant&U.S.&Attorney&
U.S.&Attorneys&Office&F&Eastern&District&of&New&York&
26&October&2015&
Page 11
&

harassing&AfricanFAmerican&civil&rights&activists)&under&the&Hate&Crimes&
section&at&Civil&Rights&Division,&Criminal$Section$Selected$Case$Summaries,&U.S.&
Department&of&Justice&(Aug.&6,&2015),&http://www.justice.gov/crt/criminalF
sectionFselectedFcaseFsummaries.&
(iv). Does&the&CRT&ever&provide&guidance&to&local,&state,&or&federal&
law&enforcement&entities&or&agencies&about&how&to&protect&the&federally&
protected&activities&of&activists&?&&&
(v).
To&close&the&loop&on&all&the&many&ways&that&the&DOJ&treats&the&
First&Amendment,&other&Constitutional&rights,&civil&liberties,&and&other&civil&
rights&of&activists,&can&you&please&provide&clarification&about&whether&the&CRT&
has&ever&interceded&in&the&prosecutions&of&activists&in&order&to&protect&the&
federally&protected&activities&of&activists&?&&
(vi). Given&that&the&DOJ&did&not&produce&any&guidelines&applicable&to&
the&prosecution&of&activists&(for&example,&the&sections&to&the&U.S.&Attorneys&
Manual&that&apply&to&demonstrations)&until&after&the&Magistrate&Judge&entered&
her&omnibus&order,&even&though&these&guidelines&were&requested&in&the&FOIA&
Request&but&the&DOJ&said&no&records&were&found&in&its&production&of&the&
discretionary&release,&the&DOJ&has&little&credibility&in&this&action.&&Generally,&in&
matters&of&FOIA,&it&has&long&been&established&by&the&media&that&the&DOJ&violates&
its&obligations&under&FOIA&until&requesters&seek&the&intervention&of&the&courts&
to&compel&the&DOJ&to&comply&with&FOIA.&&As&a&consequence&of&the&DOJs&opinion&
that&it&can&disclose&documents&subject&to&FOIA&at&its&discretion,&the&assertion&of&
which&Plaintiff&objects,&Plaintiff&was&moved&to&filed&a&FOIA&Request&with&the&
CRT&over&documents&showing&how&the&CRT&defends&the&rights&of&activists.&&Not&
specified&in&the&FOIA&Request,&but&at&the&heart&of&this&request,&is&to&determine&if&
the&CRT&takes&any&action&to&defend&the&rights&of&activists&against&prosecution&of&
activists&by&the&DOJ.&&This&FOIA&Request&will&close&the&loop&on&the&documents&
applicable&to&the&prosecution&of&activists,&and&the&DOJ&should&be&willing&to&
make&a&Declaration&about&the&outcome&of&this&FOIA&Request.&&Copies&of&this&
FOIA&Request,&the&eFmail&transmittal,&and&the&eFmail&read&receipt&are&attached.&
I&look&forward&to&receiving&swift&cooperation&from&the&DOJ&to&resolve&these&open&issues&before&
we&have&to&make&a&joint&reportFback&to&the&Magistrate&Judge&on&or&before&05&November&2015.&&
If&we&are&unable&to&resolve&these&open&issues&in&time&before&we&must&file&our&joint&reportFback,&
I&hope&the&DOJ&will&agree&to&an&extension&of&time,&so&that&we&can&resolve&as&many&of&the&major&
open&issues&as&possible,&before&we&can&agree&to&propose&a&briefing&schedule.&
&

Thank&you&kindly.&
&

Yours&sincerely,&

Louis&Flores&&
&
Attachments&(as&stated)&

&

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 15 of 74 PageID #: 1115

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 16 of 74 PageID #: 1116

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 17 of 74 PageID #: 1117

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 18 of 74 PageID #: 1118

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 19 of 74 PageID #: 1119

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 20 of 74 PageID #: 1120

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 21 of 74 PageID #: 1121

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 22 of 74 PageID #: 1122

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 23 of 74 PageID #: 1123

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 24 of 74 PageID #: 1124

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 25 of 74 PageID #: 1125

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 26 of 74 PageID #: 1126

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 27 of 74 PageID #: 1127

10/22/15
Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 28 of 74 PageID #:
112811:04 AM

From:
Subject:
Sent date:
To:

"Louis Flores" <louis.flores@progressqueens.com>

Fwd: Read: FOIA Request - Courtesy Electronic Copy
10/22/2015 11:01:44 AM
"louisflores"<louisflores@louisflores.com>, "Louis Flores"<lflores22@gmail.com>,
"Louis Flores"<louis.flores@progressqueens.com>

---------- Original Message ---------From: "FOIArequests, CRT (CRT)" <CRT.FOIArequests@usdoj.gov>

To: Louis Flores <louis.flores@progressqueens.com>
Date: October 22, 2015 at 9:02 AM
Subject: Read: FOIA Request - Courtesy Electronic Copy
Your message
To: FOIArequests, CRT (CRT)
Subject: FOIA Request - Courtesy Electronic Copy
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 2:56:02 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
was read on Thursday, October 22, 2015 9:02:10 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

https://hostingmail.earthlink.net/mail/message.php?index=78513&mailbox=bWJveA%3D%3D&window=true

Page 1 of 1

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 29 of 74 PageID #: 1129

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 30 of 74 PageID #: 1130

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 31 of 74 PageID #: 1131

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 32 of 74 PageID #: 1132

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 33 of 74 PageID #: 1133

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 34 of 74 PageID #: 1134

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 35 of 74 PageID #: 1135

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 36 of 74 PageID #: 1136

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 37 of 74 PageID #: 1137

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 38 of 74 PageID #: 1138

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 39 of 74 PageID #: 1139

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 40 of 74 PageID #: 1140

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 41 of 74 PageID #: 1141

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 42 of 74 PageID #: 1142

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 43 of 74 PageID #: 1143

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 44 of 74 PageID #: 1144

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 45 of 74 PageID #: 1145

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 46 of 74 PageID #: 1146

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 47 of 74 PageID #: 1147

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 48 of 74 PageID #: 1148

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 49 of 74 PageID #: 1149

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 50 of 74 PageID #: 1150

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 51 of 74 PageID #: 1151

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 52 of 74 PageID #: 1152

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 53 of 74 PageID #: 1153

Reserved

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 54 of 74 PageID #: 1154

Reserved

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 55 of 74 PageID #: 1155

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 56 of 74 PageID #: 1156

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 57 of 74 PageID #: 1157

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 58 of 74 PageID #: 1158

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 59 of 74 PageID #: 1159

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 60 of 74 PageID #: 1160

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 61 of 74 PageID #: 1161

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 62 of 74 PageID #: 1162

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 63 of 74 PageID #: 1163

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 64 of 74 PageID #: 1164

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 65 of 74 PageID #: 1165

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 66 of 74 PageID #: 1166

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 67 of 74 PageID #: 1167

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 68 of 74 PageID #: 1168

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 69 of 74 PageID #: 1169

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 70 of 74 PageID #: 1170

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 71 of 74 PageID #: 1171

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 72 of 74 PageID #: 1172

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 73 of 74 PageID #: 1173

Case 1:15-cv-02627-JG-RLM Document 26-11 Filed 01/05/16 Page 74 of 74 PageID #: 1174