In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001
Court Docket Sheet

Southern District of New York

1:2003-md-01570 (nysd)

ORDER: terminating {{3486}} Motion for Attorney Fees; terminating {{3727}} Letter Motion for Conference. As discussed at the conference held on October 5, 2017, the following deadlines have been modified. Defendant World Assembly of Muslim Youth's ("WAMY's") document production shall be completed by November 30, 2017. Because WAMY has been given substantial time to produce documents, no further extensions of this deadline will be granted. The Plaintiffs' Executive Committees ("PECs") shall file a status letter discussing WAMY's document production and whether it intends to file any discovery motions by January 5, 2018. The PECs shall file any discovery motion against Defendant Yassin Abdullah Al Kadi no later than December 1, 2017, by motion not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. Defendant Kadi shall oppose such motion no later than January 5, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. The PECs may file a reply no later than January 26, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 10 double-spaced pages. The PECs shall file any discovery motion against Defendants Muslim World League ("MWL") and International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO") no later than December 1, 2017, by motion not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. Defendants MWL and IIRO shall oppose such discovery motion no later than January 5, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. The PECs may file a reply no later than January 26, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 10 double-spaced pages. All other deadlines remain in effect. In addition, in light of Defendant Perouz Sedaghaty's ongoing bankruptcy proceedings, Plaintiffs' application for attorney fees and expenses, ECF No. 3486, is DENIED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 3486 and 3727. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 10/12/2017)

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3754 Filed 10/12/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK-----------------------------------------------------------------X 10/12/2017 In re: 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 ORDER-----------------------------------------------------------------X SARAH NETBURN, United States Magistrate Judge: As discussed at the conference held on October 5, 2017, the following deadlines have been modified. Defendant World Assembly of Muslim Youth’s ("WAMY’s") document production shall be completed by November 30, 2017. Because WAMY has been given substantial time to produce documents, no further extensions of this deadline will be granted. The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees ("PECs") shall file a status letter discussing WAMY’s document production and whether it intends to file any discovery motions by January 5, 2018. The PECs shall file any discovery motion against Defendant Yassin Abdullah Al Kadi no later than December 1, 2017, by motion not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. Defendant Kadi shall oppose such motion no later than January 5, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. The PECs may file a reply no later than January 26, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 10 double-spaced pages. The PECs shall file any discovery motion against Defendants Muslim World League ("MWL") and International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO") no later than December 1, 2017, by motion not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages. Defendants MWL and IIRO shall oppose such discovery motion no later than January 5, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 20 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3754 Filed 10/12/17 Page 2 of 2 double-spaced pages. The PECs may file a reply no later than January 26, 2018, by memorandum of law not to exceed 10 double-spaced pages. All other deadlines remain in effect. In addition, in light of Defendant Perouz Sedaghaty’s ongoing bankruptcy proceedings, Plaintiffs’ application for attorney fees and expenses, ECF No. 3486, is DENIED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 3486 and 3727. SO ORDERED. DATED: October 12, 2017 New York, New York 2

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. This Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Judgment should be entered against the Sovereign Defendants for (1) economic damages totaling $394,277,884 as broken down in Appendix 1 of this Opinion; (2) damages for pain and suffering of $2,000,000 per decedent totaling $94,000,000; (3) punitive damages totaling $4,686,235,921; and (4) damages for solatium totaling $874,000,000. The Non-Sovereign Defendants are joint and severally liable for these damages. Plaintiffs' additional claims for costs are denied without prejudice. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 10/3/2012) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM, 1:03-cv-09848-GBD(rjm) Modified on 10/3/2012 (laq). (Main Document 2623 replaced on 10/3/2012)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: | | DATE FILED: / 0 - 3: 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001: . . . MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X This Document Relates to Havlish v. bin Laden, 03 Civ. 9848 (GBD) (FM) GEORGE B. DANIELS, District Judge: The plaintiffs in this multi - district litigation ("MDL") seek monetary damages from defendants who are liable for the physical destruction, death, and injuries suffered as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 ("September 11th Attacks") . On December 22, 2011, default judgment was entered on behalf of the plaintiffs in the Havlish action ("Plaintiffs"), ds against (a) certain sovereign defendants, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Hoseini Khamenei, Hezbollah, and other Iranian individuals and entities ("Sovereign Defendants"); and (b) certain non - sovereign defendants, including Osama bin laden, the Taliban, and al Qaeda ("Non - Sovereign Defendants") (collectively, the " Defendants") . See Docket Entry No. 2516. This Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Frank Maas for an inquest on damages. Magistrate Judge Maas issued a Report and Recommendation ("Report") recommending that Plaintiffs collectively be awarded damages in the amount of $ 6, 048, 513, 805, plus prejudgment interest. The Court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations set forth within the Report. 28U.S. C. $ 636 (b) (1) . When there are objections to the Report, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which objections are made. Id .; see also Rivera v. Barnhart, 432 F. Supp. 2d 271, 273 (S. D. N. Y. 2006) . The district judge may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 (b); 28U.S. C. § 636 (b) (1) (c) . It is not required, however, that the Court conduct a de novo hearing on the matter. See United States v. Raddatz, 447U.S. 667, 676 (1980) . Rather, it is sufficient that the Court " arrive at its own, independent conclusions " regarding those portions to which objections were made. Nelson v. Smith, 618 F. Supp. 1186, 1189 - 90 (S. D. N. Y. 1985) (quoting Hernandez v. Estelle, 711 F. 2d 619, 620 (5th Cir. 1983)) . When no objections to a Report are made, the Court may adopt the Report if " there is no clear error on the face of the record. " Adee Motor Cars, LLC v. Amato, 388 F. Supp. 2d 250, 253 (S. D. N. Y. 2005) (citation omitted) . In his report, Magistrate Judge Maas advised the parties that failure to file timely objections to the Report would constitute a waiver of those objections. See 28U.S. C. $ 636 (b) (1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 (b) . No party objected to the Report. As there is no clear error on the face of the record, this Court adopts the Report in its entirety. Sovereign Defendants Magistrate Judge Maas properly determined that Plaintiffs may recover for " economic eco NO damages, solatium, pain and suffering, and punitive damages " in an action under Section 1605A. 28U.S. C. § 1605A (C) (4) . In such an action, the " estates of those who [ died ] can recover economic losses stemming from the wrongful death of the decedent; family members can recover solatium for their emotional injury; and all plaintiffs can recover punitive damages. " Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52, 83 (D. D. C. 2010) . Magistrate Judge Maas properly determined that economic damages totaling $ 394, 277, 884, as broken down in Appendix 1 of this opinion, are appropriate. Plaintiffs submitted extensive analyses from a forensic economist with detailed calculations for two decedents, as well as damage calculations for the remaining forty - five decedents done in the same manner. These analyses yield proposed economic damages comparable to those in other cases. See, e. g ., Dammarell v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 404 F. Supp. 2d 261, 310 - 24 (D. D. C. 2005); Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba, 996 F. Supp. 2d 261, 310 - 24 (D. D. C. 2005) . Plaintiffs have thus provided a sufficient basis to determine damages and are entitled to economic damages as outlined in the Report. See Transatl. Marine Claims Agency, Inc. v. ACE Shipping Corp ., 109 F. 3d 105, 111 (2d Cir. 1997) (noting that the Court " should take the necessary steps to establish damages with reasonable certainty ') . Magistrate Judge Maas also properly determined that $ 2, 000, 000 per decedent, for a total of $ 94, 000, 000, is an appropriate measure of damages which meets the standard of reasonableness for pain and suffering awards. See Mastrantuono v. United States, 163 F. Supp. 2d 244, 258 (S. D. N. Y. 2001) . Calculating a precise award for each decedent's individual pain and suffering would be impossible because the decedents in this case may have experienced different levels of pain and suffering dependent on their precise locations at the time of the September 11th attacks. However, Plaintiff's expert report confirms that many, if not all of the decedents in this case experienced horrific pain and suffering on September 11, 2001. Awards in other FSIA cases, particularly those determined by Judge Baer in Smith ex rel. Smith v. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, suggest that $ 2 million per decedent is a reasonable figure. See Smith ex rel. Smith v. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, 262 F. Supp. 2d 217, 233 (S. D. N. Y. 2003), amended, 2003 WL 23324214 (S. D. N. Y. May 19, 2003); see also Pugh v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 530 F. Supp. 2d 216 (D. D. C. 2008); Stethem v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 201 F. Supp. 2d 87, 89 (D. D. C. 2002) . Magistrate Judge Maas properly determined that the following solatium ' awards are appropriate ?, as an upward departure from the framework in Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 466 F. Supp. 2d 229 (D. D. C. 2006): Relationship to Decedent Solatium Award Spouse $ 12, 500, 000 Parent $ 8, 500, 000 Child $ 8, 500, 000 Sibling $ 4, 250, 000 A review of Plaintiff's submissions makes clear that all of the Individual Plaintiffs have suffered profound agony and grief as a result of the tragic events of September 11th. Considering the extraordinarily tragic circumstances surrounding the September 11th attacks, the indelible impact on the lives of the victims ' families, and the frequent reminders that each of the individual Plaintiffs face daily, upward departures from the Heiser framework are warranted. T " A claim for solatium refers to the mental anguish, bereavement, and grief that those with a close relationship to the decedent experience as a result of the decedent's death, as well as the harm caused by the loss of decedent's society and comfort. " Dammarell v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 281 F. Supp. 2d 105, 196 (D. D. C. 2003), vacated on other grounds, 404 F. Supp. 2d 261 (D. D. C. 2005) . 2 Magistrate Judge Maas properly determined that one individual Plaintiff is not entitled to a solatium award because he is not a spouse, child, parent, or sibling of a decedent. Although that plaintiff is the niece of one of the decedents, she has not demonstrated that she is entitled to a solatium award because she does not serve functionally as an immediate family member. See Smith, 262 F. Supp. 2d at 234. Magistrate Judge Maas also properly determined that Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages pursuant to the FSIA in an amount of 3. 44 multiplied by their compensatory damages, for a total of $ 4, 686, 235, 921. See Section 1605 (c) (4); Estate of Bland v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 831 F. Supp. 2d 150, 158 (D. D. C. 2011) . The 3. 44 ratio has been used as the standard ratio applicable to a number of cases arising out of terrorist attacks. See id .; Valore, 700 F. Supp. 2d at 52; Murphy v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 740 F. Supp. 2d 51, 76 (D. D. C. 2011) . Magistrate Judge Maas also properly determined that prejudgment interest is appropriate on Plaintiffs ' damages for solatium and pain and suffering. The decision to award prejudgment interest, as well as how to compute that interest, rests within the discretion of the court, subject to equitable considerations. Baker v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahirya, 775 F. Supp. 2d 48, 86 (D. D. C. 2011) . Courts " have awarded prejudgment interest in cases where plaintiffs were delayed in recovering compensation for their injuries — including, specifically, where such injuries were the result of targeted attacks perpetrated by foreign defendants. " Id. (internal quotations omitted) . An appropriate measure of what rate to use when calculating prejudgment interest is the prime rate. Id. Magistrate Judge Maas properly accepted testimony from Plaintiffs ' expert that the average prime rate from September 11, 2001 through the date of his report was 4. 96 % . Thus, Plaintiffs should be awarded prejudgment interest at the rate of 4. 96 % per annum on their damages of solatium and pain and suffering damages, which total $ 968, 000, 000, from the period from September 11, 2001, through the date that judgment is entered. Non - Sovereign Defendants Magistrate Judge Maas properly determined that the Non - Sovereign Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the damages against the Sovereign Defendants. The Non Sovereign Defendants are liable for the same damages as the Sovereign Defendants under traditional tort principles. See Valore, 700 F. Supp. 2d at 76 - 80. Costs Magistrate Judge Maas properly determined that Plaintiffs are not entitled to the $ 2 million they seek in costs. Plaintiffs ' requested costs are primarily for expenses that are not recoverable pursuant to 28U.S. C. § 1920 and Local Rule 54. 1 (c) . For expenses that are recoverable, Plaintiffs have not provided sufficient evidence to establish these amounts with reas reasonable certainty. Transatl. Marine Claims Agency, Inc. v. ACE Shipping Corp ., 109 F. 3d 105, 111 (2d Cir. 1997; See N. Y. State Ass ' n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey, 711 F. 2d 1136, 1148 (2d Cir. 1983) . Thus Plaintiffs ' application for costs is denied without prejudice. Conclusion This Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Judgment should be conom entered against the Sovereign Defendants for (1) economic damages totaling $ 394, 277, 884 as broken down in Appendix 1 of this Opinion; (2) damages for pain and suffering of $ 2, 000, 000 per decedent totaling $ 94, 000, 000; (3) punitive damages totaling $ 4, 686, 235, 921; and (4) damages for solatium totaling $ 874, 000, 000. The Non - Sovereign Defendants are joint and severally liable for these damages. Plaintiffs ' additional claims for costs are denied without prejudice. Dated: New York, New York October 3, 2012 SO ORDERED: George B. Denise GEORG B. DANIELS United States District Judge 7

ORDER GRANTING PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION: (3699) Motion for Reuben J. Sequeira to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN (67 in case 16cv7853; 48 in case 16cv9663; 47 in case 16cv9937; 47 in case 17cv117; 47 in case 17cv450; 37 in case 17cv2651; 24 in case 17cv3887; 40 in case 17cv3908; 10 in case 17cv6123) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 8/22/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al. (ap) Modified on 9/26/2017 (ap). Modified on 9/26/2017 (ap). Modified on 9/26/2017

Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3699-3 3704 Filed Filed08/22/17 08/21/17 Page Page11ofof22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 08/22/2017 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re TERRORIST ATTACKS ON Case No. 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 This document relates to: The Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 2, et al. v. Al Rajhi Bank, et al., No. 16-cv-7853; Aguilar, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 16-cv-09663; Addesso, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 16-cv-09937; Hodges, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-0117; Aiken, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-00450; Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Rajhi Bank, et al., No. 17-cv-02651; Abarca, et al., v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-03887; Arrowood Indemnity Co., et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-03908; and Abedhajajreh, et al., v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-06123 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION The Motion of Reuben J. Sequeira for admission to practice Pro Hac Vice before this Court in the above-captioned cases is GRANTED. Reuben J. Sequeira has declared that he is a member in good standing of the bar of the State of New York and the bar of District of Columbia; and that his contact information is as follows: Reuben J. Sequeira White & Case, LLP 701 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: +1 202 626 3600 Facsimile: +1 202 639 9355 rsequeira@whitecase.com Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3699-3 3704 Filed Filed08/22/17 08/21/17 Page Page22ofof22 Reuben J. Sequeira having requested admission Pro Hac Vice to appear for all purposes as counsel for Al Rajhi Bank in the above-captioned actions; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Reuben J. Sequeira is admitted to practice Pro Hac Vice in the above-captioned case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. All attorneys appearing before this Court are subject to the Local Rules of this Court, including the Rules governing discipline of attorneys. Counsel shall immediately forward the Pro Hac Vice fee to the Clerk of Court. Sarah Netburn United States Magistrate Judge August 22, 2017 New York, New York 2

ORDER GRANTING PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION: (3698) Motion for Matthew S. Leddicotte to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 8/22/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al. (ap) Modified on 9/26/2017 (ap). Modified on 9/26/2017

Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3698-3 3705 Filed Filed08/22/17 08/21/17 Page Page11ofof22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 08/22/2017 In re TERRORIST ATTACKS ON Case No. 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 This document relates to: The Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 2, et al. v. Al Rajhi Bank, et al., No. 16-cv-7853; Aguilar, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 16-cv-09663; Addesso, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 16-cv-09937; Hodges, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-0117; Aiken, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-00450; Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Rajhi Bank, et al., No. 17-cv-02651; Abarca, et al., v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-03887; Arrowood Indemnity Co., et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-03908; and Abedhajajreh, et al., v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 17-cv-06123. [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION The Motion of Matthew S. Leddicotte for admission to practice Pro Hac Vice before this Court in the above-captioned cases is GRANTED. Matthew S. Leddicotte has declared that he is a member in good standing of the bar of the District of Columbia; and that his contact information is as follows: Matthew S. Leddicotte White & Case LLP 701 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: +1 202 626 3600 Facsimile: +1 202 639 9355 mleddicotte@whitecase.com Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3698-3 3705 Filed Filed08/22/17 08/21/17 Page Page22ofof22 Matthew S. Leddicotte having requested admission Pro Hac Vice to appear for all purposes as counsel for Al Rajhi Bank in the above-captioned actions; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Matthew S. Leddicotte is admitted to practice Pro Hac Vice in the above-captioned case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. All attorneys appearing before this Court are subject to the Local Rules of this Court, including the Rules governing discipline of attorneys. Counsel shall immediately forward the Pro Hac Vice fee to the Clerk of Court. Sarah Netburn United States Magistrate Judge August 22, 2017 New York, New York 2

Only as to claimant Elisabeth Scott, Vacated as per Judge's Order dated 7/16/2018, Doc. # 4052 FINAL ORDER OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT: Upon consideration of the evidence and arguments submitted by the Ashton wrongful death Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action and the Judgment by Default Against the Islamic Republic of Iran entered on 08/26/2015, together with the entire record in this case, it is hereby; ORDERED that final judgment is entered on behalf of those Plaintiffs in Ashton et al. v, Al Qaeda Islamic Army et al., 02-CV-6977 (GBD)(FM) identified in the attached Exhibit A against the Islamic Republic of Iran (the "Ashton III Plaintiffs"); and it is ORDERED that the Ashton III Plaintiffs identified in the attached Exhibit A are awarded solatium damages as set forth in Exhibit A; ORDERED that prejudgment interest is awarded to be calculated at a rate of 4.96% per annum; all interest compounded annually over the same period; and ORDERED that the Ashton Plaintiffs not appearing on Exhibit A and who were not previously awarded damages may submit in later stages applications for solatium and/or economic damages awards that will be approved on the same basis as currently approved for those Plaintiffs appearing on Exhibit A. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 8/17/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN(jwh) Modified on 7/16/2018

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 1 of 22. ·-···. ":"l"?.'"'~· ·-.• r•c·•"',•,.,,,, ·;~ •• I~..case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3687-2 Filed 08/16/17 Page 2 of 3 (, ~ " ' '-1\1:rrn-·z01t... "......... ~....-~ ···~,~ ~ "'":...~-·....................--.~~~~_,:..:.-..·,,...... \/,, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NF:W YORK \r:; J crrod st Attacks on Septc rnbcr 1 I, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) ECF Case This document relates to: Ashron et ar v. al Qaeda falwnic Army, et al., 02-CV-6977 (GBD)(FM) IPROPOSED\ FINAL ORDER OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT Upon consideration of the evidence and arguments submitted by the Ashton ·wrongful death Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action and the Judgment by Default Against the Islamic Republic of Iran entered on 08/26/2015, together with the entire record in this case. it is hereby; ORDERED that final judgment is entered on behalf of those Plaintiffs in Ashton et al. v, Al Qaeda Islamic Army et al., 02-CV-6977 (GBD) (fM) identified in the attached Exhibit A against the Islamic Republic of Iran (the '"Ashton lll Plaintiffs"); and it is ORDERED that the Ashton Ill Plaintiffs identified in the attached Exhibit A are awarded solatium damages as set forth in Exhibit A; ORDERED that prejudgment interest is awarded to be calculated at a rate of 4.96% per annum; all interest compounded annually over the same period; and ORDERED that the Ashton Plaintiffs not appearing on Exhibit A and who were not previously awarded damages may submit in later stages applications for solatium and/or economic damages a\vards that will be approved on the same basis as currently approved for thos:e Plaintiffs appearing on Exhibit/\. · Dated: SO ORDERED:. DANIELS STA TES DISTRICT JUDGE 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 3 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK l In re Terrorist;;t~~~:-0~-~~:~t-~:~~1-~--:~-~~~ 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) I _ __ ___ ~-JECF Case This document relates to: Ashton el al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, er al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(FM) The Ashton Wrongful Death Plaintiffs' Motion for Final Judgments For the reasons set forth below, and the statements contained in the declaration of James P. Kreindler, Esq. ("Kreindler Declaration"), the Ashton plaintiffs, by and through their counsel, Krcindler & Kreindler LLP, respectfully move this Court to award in the cases set forth in Exhibit A to the Kreindler Deel. solatium damages for the losses suffered by the relatives of the decedents in the same amounts previously awarded by this Court to other Ashton plaintiffs as well as to the!Iavlish plaintiffs against the Islamic Republic of Iran ("Iran''); and award prejudgment interest on those damages as set forth below. This motion is made on behalf of the Ashton claimants listed in Exhibit A attached to the Kreindlcr Declaration ("Ashton III"), in light of this Court's previous order granting permission to allow remaining Ashton plaintiffs to move for this relief. See 03-md-1570 (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD) (FM), Doc. No. 3300, Filed 06/16/2016. As the awards set forth in the attached proposed order represent the only direct recovery against Iran on behalf of the Ashton Ill claimants listed in Exhibit A, any award issued to those individuals will constitute final awards and judgments against the Islamic Republic of Iran in for those solatium claimants listed in Exhibit A to the Kreindler Declaration. I. Procedural Background Based on evidence and arguments submitted by various plaintiffs in this consolidated multi-district litigation arising out of the September 11, 2001 tenor attacks, this Court previously Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 4 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 2 of 8 issued a default judgment on liability against Iran to all Ashton plaintiffs for claims arising out of the deaths of the plaintiffs' decedents (the ''Ashton wrongful death plaintiffs.") See 03-md-1570 (02-cv-6977) (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD) (FM), Doc. No. 3008, Entered 08/26/2015. Thereafter, all Ashton wrongful death plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment for the conscious pain and suffering that their decedents suffered before death, which this Court granted, and certain Ashton wrongful death plaintiffs moved for default judgments on economic damages, as well. This Court granted those motions. See, e.g., 03-md-1570 (02-cv-6977) (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD) (FM), Doc. Nos. 3229, Entered 03/09/2016 (adopting December 28, 2015 Report and Recommendation awarding damages for conscious pain and suffering) and 3356, Entered 10/11/2016 (awarding damages for economic loss). In addition, certain Ashton plaintiffs previously moved for solatium damages suffered by those family members eligible to recover such damages under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A. See 03-md-1570 (02-cv-6977), Doc. Nos. 3295, Entered 06/08/2016 (Motion for Final Judgment for Ashton I claimants including claims for solatium damages) and 3356, Entered 10/11/2016 (Motion for Final Judgment for Ashton II claimants including claims for solatium damages.) This Court granted both of those motions, finding that an award to the immediate family members of each decedent was proper and that prejudgment interest on the solatium loss amounts was warranted. See 03-md-1570 (02-cv-6977) (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD) (FM), Doc. Nos. 3300, Entered 06/16/16 and 3387, Entered 10/31/2016. On the issue of prejudgment interest, a December 28, 2015 Report and Recommendation, adopted by this Court, concluded that to the extent the Ashton wrongful death plaintiffs' claims arose out of injuries in New York State the rate of prejudgment interest was 9 percent per annum from September 11, 2001 until the date judgment was entered and to the extent the injuries arose 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 5 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 3 of 8 elsewhere 4. 96 percent interest per annum compounded annually was appropriate. See 03-md-1570 (02-cv-6977) (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD) (FM), Doc. No. 3175, Entered 12/28/2015, pp. 1-2. A subsequent Report and Recommendation issued in October 2016, also adopted by this Court, however, concluded that the rate of prejudgment interest of 4.96 percent for all pain and suffering and solatium claims was more appropriate. See 03-md-1570 (l l-cv-7550). Accordingly, both the Ashton I and Ashton II plaintiffs were awarded prejudgment interest at the rate of 4.96 percent per annum. For the reasons below as well as those set forth in the prior motions for summary judgment on liability and prior motions for judgment for solatium damages made on behalf of other Ashton wrongful death plaintiffs, the Ashton plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A to the Kreindler Deel. ('"Ashton Ill Plaintiffs") now move this Court to grant the attached proposed Order awarding them the same amount of compensatory damages for their solatium losses as awarded to other plaintiffs, including the Ashton I and Ashton II plaintiffs, and directing that pre-judgment interest be assessed at 4.96 percent per annum, which is the rate that this Comi previously approved in connection with the Ashton I and Ashton II plaintiffs' prior motion for partial judgment on solatium damages. All Ashton plaintiffs also ask for permission to continue to submit applications in subsequent stages on behalf of those claimants not included in the attached exhibit, should any other applications be warranted. II. Damages Under 28 U.S.C. § l 605A ("Section l 605A "), which applies to the claims against Iran, damages arc available under the federal law and include money damages "for personal injury or death.'" See 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(a)(1) and (c)(4). The damages available to plaintiffs in a Section l 605A action include "economic damages, solatium, pain and suffering, and punitive damages." 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 6 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 4 of 8 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c)(4). That is, the "estates of those who [died] can recover economic losses stemming from wrongful death of the decedent; family members can recover solatium for their emotional injury; and all plaintiffs can recover punitive damages." Va/ore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F.Supp.2d 52, 83 (D.D.C. 2010). As this Court has previously held, All Ashton plaintiffs are therefore entitled to compensation under Section 1605A for the solatium and economic losses suffered as a result of the wrongful death of each of their decedents. A. Solatium Damages Section l 605A specifically provides for solatium damages. Under that provision, family members of the decedents may recover for "the mental anguish, bereavement, and grief that those with a close relationship to the decedent experience as a result of the decedent's death, as well as the harm caused by the loss of decedent's society and comfort." Dammarell v. Islamic Republic oliran, 281 F. Supp. 2d 105, 196 (D.D.C. 2003), vacated on other grounds, 404 F. Supp. 2cl 261 (D.D.C. 2005). Other courts have previously noted that "[a]cts of terrorism are by their very definition extreme and outrageous and intended to cause the highest degree of emotional distress." Belkin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 667 F. Supp. 2d 8, 22 (D.D.C. 2009). Given that, in FSIA cases solatium claims have been treated as comparable to claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, in which the immediate family members of the decedent are treated as direct victims. See, e.g Salazar v. Islamic Republic oflran, 370 F. Supp. 2d 105, 115 n.12 (D.D.C. 2005)("[c]ourts have uniformly held that a terrorist attack-by its nature----is directed not only at the victims but also at the victims' families.");.Surette v. Islamic Republic of!ran, 231 F. Supp. 2d 260, 267 n.5 (D.D.C. 2002) (treating solatium claim as '"indistinguishable' from the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress.") (quoting 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 7 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 5 of 8 Wagner v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 172 F. Supp. 2d 128, 135 n.11 (D.D.C. 2001)). Thus, this Court has previously awarded solatium damages to "immediate family members" who, though not physically present at the site of the terrorist attacks, were nevertheless intended victims of the terrorist activities. See In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, No. 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(FM) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 12, 2016) (ECF No. 3358) (''Hoglan Report"); Jn re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, No. 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(FM), 2015 WL 9468813 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2015) ("Ashton Report"); In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, No. 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(FM), 2012 WL 4711407 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 3, 2012) ("Havlish Report"). In defining those family members eligible to make a claim for solatium damages, this Court previously determined that spouses, parents, children and siblings who survived the 9111 decedent were entitled to recover for their losses, and set forth a framework for other family relationships that fell outside of those four categories, such as intimate partners, aunts and uncles and step-relationships. See 03-mdOl 570 (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD)(SN), Doc. No. 3363, Entered 10/14/2016. The four established categories of family relationships-spouses, parents, children and siblings-do not require any additional showing of the nature of the underlying relationship. To fashion a solatium award adequately compensating the surviving family members in the litigation against Iran, this Court previously looked to the analysis undertaken by District Court Judge Royce Lambert in the case of Estate of Heiser v. lslamic Republic (~f'Jran, 466 F. Supp. 2d 229 (D.D.C. 2006). There, Judge Lamberth concluded that solatium damages should he awarded to each spouse of a deceased victim in the amount of $8 million, to each parent in the amount of $5 million, and to each sibling in the amount of $2.5 million. ld. 1 1 This formula may be adjusted upward or downward when circumstances warrant. See, e.g.,]<,'state o.lBland v. Islamic Republic of/ran, 831 F. Supp. 2d 150, 156 (D.D.C. 2011): Va/ore, 700 F. Supp. 2d at 85. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 8 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 6 of 8 Magistrate Judge Frank Maas previously recognized that the immediate family members of those killed in the September 11 terrorist attacks suffered and continue to suffer "profound agony and grief and, "[w]orse yet,... arc faced with frequent reminders of the events of that day. See 03-md-1570 (02-cv-6977) (S.D.N.Y.) (GBD) (FM), Doc. No. 2618, Entered 07/30112, pp. 10-12. Given the "extraordinarily tragic circumstances surrounding the September 11th attacks, and their indelible impact on the lives of the victims' families," the Havlish Report and Recommendation concluded that an upward departure was appropriate and recommended solatium damages in the following amounts:--------~--· ··-----ship to Decedent Solatium Award Spouse $12,500,000 Parent $8,500,000----·----Child $8,500,000----Sibling $4,250,000 Subsequently, Magistrate Judge Maas and then Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued orders awarding solatium damages in the amounts set forth above to various groups of plaintiffs. The losses claimed in this motion are legally and factually comparable to those suffered by the Ashton I and Ashton II claimants, and the other claimants involved in this litigation. Each of the deaths in this case were sudden and unexpected and were the result of the terrorism defendants' extreme acts of malice. The decedents were civilians whose deaths were intended to create an environment of fear and terror. The claimants here were not attenuated victims but the immediate family members of the decedents and were directly and irrevocably harmed by the terrorist acts and consequences. Many family members can visit no private cemetery plot or 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 9 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 7 of 8 gravestone to visit their loved ones but are instead resigned to never have the closure that might otherwise be expected after the death of un immediute family member. The amount of solatium damages previously adopted by the District Court in the other Ashton cases as well as the other claimants involved in this litigation should apply equally to the Ashton III Plaintiffs. The relationships between the decedent and the Ashton III Plaintiffs are set forth in the accompanying Krcindler Declaration. As described in the Kreindler Declaration, all of the Ashton llJ Plaintiffs have direct relationships previously recognized as being presumptively qualified for solarium damages; the relationships between the Ashton III Plaintiffs and the September 11 111 decedents have hecn verified; all of the Ashton III Plaintiffs survived the deaths of their loved ones on September 11th; and none of the Ashton III Plaintiffs has another claim pending before this Court for compensation against Iran. The Ashton plaintiffs therefore respectfully request that this Court issue a final judgment ordering payment of solatium damages to the Ashton III Plaintiffs, listed in Exhibit A, in the same amounts set forth above, based on their relationship with their decedents and as described in the Kreindler Declaration. B. Prejudgment Interest Additionally, the Ashton III Plaintiffs ask that this Court direct that prejudgment interest of 4.96% on the solatium awards running from September 11, 2001 until the date of judgment to the extent that their injuries arose in New York be assessed, as was done previously in the Ashton I and Ashton II cases, as well as for other plaintiffs in this consolidated litigation. III. Conclusion For all of the reasons herein, as well as those set forth in the previous submissions of the Ashton plaintiffs and other plaintiffs, the Ashton III Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court grant the proposed order attached to the Kreindler Delcaration as Exhibit Band (1) award them 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 10 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3686 Filed 08/16/17 Page 8 of 8 solatium damages as set forth in the attached Exhibit A, (2) direct that prejudgment interest of 4.96% un thl.::solatium <1war<l::; running Crom Scpkmbcr 11, 2001 u11til the date of'judgmcnt be assessed; and (3) permit remaining Ashton claimants to submit motions for final judgment in future stages. Dated: New York, New York Respectfully submitted, August 16, 2017 KREfNDLER & KREINDLER LLP BY:/s/James P. Kreindler James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney III, Esq. 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, New York 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Attorneys/or Ashton Plaintiff.-~ 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 11 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3687 Filed 08/16/17 Page 1of2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ·····-·····-······------------·------··----··················-··-···--···--··-···-··-----~ In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) ECF Case ·-·-···----···--·-·------·--·-·-----·--·--·--·--~------------------' This document relates to: Ashton et al v. al Qaeda Islamic Arm}', et al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(FM) JAMES P. KREINDLER, Esq., hereby states under penalty of perjury that: 1. I am an attorney representing the Ashton plaintiffs in the above-captioned litigation and I submit this declaration in support of the motion for final judgment on behalf of the individual plaintiffs attached hereto as Exhibit A, and for permission to allow any remaining Ashton plaintiffs to move for the same relief in separate stages. 2. The source of my information and the basis for my belief in my statements contained herein are my personal involvement in this matter for the past 15 years; my firm's representation of the Ashton plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A in connection with the September 11 111 litigation against airline defendants; communications directly from family members of the individuals killed in the attacks on September 11th and the plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A; and other court records relating to the multi-district litigation to which the Ashton plaintiffs arc parties. Any matters about which I lack personal knowledge are asserted herein upon information and belief. 3. All of the decedents listed in Exhibit A died in the September 1ph terrorist attacks and are survived by the family members whose relationships to the decedents are described in Exhibit A. These relationships have been verified by the personal representatives and/or family members of the September 11th decedents. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 12 of 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3687 Filed 08/16/17 Page 2 of 2 4. The family members listed in Exhibit A were not eligible to receive or opted not to seek compensation through the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund ("VCF"). Based on the VCF files in our possession and our communications with the September 11th decedents' personal representatives and family members, no VCF award was issued to any of the plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A 5. We have been retained individually by the plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A to pursue recovery for their solatium losses arising out of the deaths of their loved ones on September 11, 2001. We have verified that all of the plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A survived the deceased September 11th victims and have not recovered for their solatium damages previously, nor do they have any pending motion before this Court for compensation arising out of the September 11th attacks. 6. Accordingly, I respectfully request that this Court grant the proposed order attached hereto as Exhibit B. Dated: August 16, 2017 New York, NY Isl James P. Kreindler James P. Kreindlcr 2 Exhibit A Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 14 of 22 c ase 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN ·1 d 08 I 16I 17 Paae 2 of 9 Document 3687-1 Fie 1• • • nr.1iTi nm rr..~111•11 IPn!tfh 1111."411T1 ID••• 1111•-ilM ·~......... " Aranyos, Patrick Aranyos, Jr., Alexander Paul Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Barbella, James W. BarbelJa, Frank Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Barbella, James W. Barbella, Frank J. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Barbella, James W. Barbella, Louis Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Barbella, James W. Barbella, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Barbella, James W. Barbella, Ruth Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Barbella, James W. Barbella, Ruth A. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Barbella, James W. Barbella, Thomas Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Basin, Inna Kogan, Y efim Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Battaglia, Paul Leinung, Eric J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Battaglia, Paul Leinung, Kristen M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Beaven, Alan Budde, Margaret Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bell, Nina P. Bell, Lowell F. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bell, Nina P. Harrison, Deborah Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Berger, Steven H. Berger, Phyllis Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Biegeleisen, Shimmy D. Berger, Rochelle Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Biegeleisen, Shimmy D. Biegeleisen, Alan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Biegeleisen, Shimmy D. Biegeleisen, Jacob S. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Biegeleisen, Shimmy D. Biegeleisen, Regina Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Bosco, Richard E. Bosco, III., William J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bosco, Richard E. Bosco, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Boyarsky, Gennady Boyarsky, Beata Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Brady, David B. Brady, Alice Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Brady, David B. Brady, Jr., Richard W. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Brady, David B. Brady, Michael J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Brady, David B. Brady, Richard Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Brady, David B. Brady, Scott T. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Brady, David B. Zaremba, Mary Christine Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bravo, Lydia E. Bravo, Albert Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bravo, Lydia E. Bravo, Nonna Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bravo, Lydia E. Muszel, Leticia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bruce, Mark Bruce, David Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bruce, Mark Bruce, Diane Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Bruce, Mark Bruce, Stephen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Bruehert, Richard Bruehert, John Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Buhse, Patrick Buhse, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Buhse, Patrick Buhse, Thomas Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Buhse, Patrick Buhse, William Sibling $ 4,250,000.00-·-L, _ ••••• Buhse, Patrick Kazanecki, Suanne Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Burns, Donald J. Bums Reed, Kathleen Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Burns, Donald J. Burns, Michael F. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Butler, Thomas M. Cristiano, Eileen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Cahill, Thomas J. Cahill, Christopher Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Cahill, Thomas J. Cahill, Jr, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Cahill, Thomas J. Kerin, Kerry Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Cahill, Thomas J. Psirogianes, Kathleen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 15 of 22 case 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN Dacumen t 3687-1 Flre d 081617 I I Paae 3 of 9 llElnTiil"'11 IUliTITI t n;iHHlll "'4m1 11i-r•• 11u•Jv... •11.u~-.&• I 111 Calderon, Edward Bruno, Ida Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Calderon, Edward Calderon, Anthony Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Calderon, Edward Calderon, Cathy Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Calderon, Edward Calderon, Jr., Vincent Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Calderon, Edward Calderon, Mariza Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Calderon, Edward Calderon, Vicente Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Calderon, Edward Otero, Caroline Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Calia, Dominick E. Calia-Costa, Christine Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Calia, Dominick E. Calia-Kuhn, Jeanann Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Carroll, Michael T. Amigron, Nancy Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Carroll, Michael T. Carroll, Eleanor Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Carroll, Michael T. Nix, Eileen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Chin, Robert Chin, Suk Tan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ciafardini, Christopher Ciafardini, Dominic Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Clyne, Susan M. Creamer, Linda G. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Clyne, Susan M. Dietrich, Grace Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Clyne, Susan M. Dietrich, Kurt H. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Crawford, Jr., James L. Crawford, Elizabeth Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Crawford, Jr., James L. Crawford, Jim Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Crawford, Jr., James L. Dunlevy, Leslie Crawford Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Crawford, Jr., James L. Van Duyne, Elizabeth Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dean, William Cryne, Beverly Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dean, William Dean, Donna Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dean, William Dean, Jr., Malcolm Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dean, William Dean, Mark Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dean, William Dean, Sr., Malcolm Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Deangelis, Thomas P. Smollen, Dom1a Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Della Bella, Andrea Lun, David Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Deloughery, Colleen Ann Marrese, Patricia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Deloughery, Colleen Ann McNulty, Joseph Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Demitz, Caro I K. Demitz, Charles Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Demitz, Carol K. Demitz, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Demitz, Carol K. Demitz, Susan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Demitz, Carol K. Demitz, Woody Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dinnoo, Rena Sam, Gina Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dinnoo, Rena Sam, Lisa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dunne, Christopher J. Dunne, Charles Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dunne, Christopher J. Dunne-Keenan, Courtney Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Dunne, Christopher J. Dunne-Welch, Cynthia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Eagleson, John B. Eagleson, William Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Eckna, Paul Eckna, Richard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Eckna, Paul Eckna, Steven Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Espinoza, Fanny Antonio Garcia, Rafael Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Espinoza, Fanny Garcia Lantigua, Monica Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Espinoza, Fanny Garcia, Pedro Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Espinoza, Fanny Garcia, Wanda Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 16 of 22 c ase 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN D acumen t 3687-1 Flre d 08/16/17 Paae 4 0 f 9 IJ•••l1w1111w llW II:.IITTTII ~nl P.l.ll llU,,,., IY.UIM ".Ill Flannery, Christina Donovan, Catherine Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Flannery, Christina Donovan, William Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Flyzik, Carol Flyzik, Claudia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Flyzik, Carol Pritchard, Linda Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Friedman, Andrew Gabrieli, Wendi Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Fry, Peter Fry, Charles Gordon Parent s 8,500,000.00 Fry, Peter Fry, Lance Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Fry, Peter Fry, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gabriel, Richard P. Gabriel, George Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gabriel, Richard P. Gabriel, Patricia Child $ 8,500,000.00 Gabriel, Richard P. Gabriel, Richard Child $ 8,500,000.00 Gallagher, John P. Campbell, Therese Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallagher, John P. Gallagher, Celine Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Gallagher, John P. Jordan, Peter Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallagher, John P. Jordan, Vincent Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallagher, John P. Jordan-Hart, Kathleen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallagher, John P. Sorge, Anne Marie Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Galletti, Lourdes Janet Diaz, John J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Galletti, Lourdes Janet Henriquez, Karine Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Galletti, Lourdes Janet Joglar, Eric J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallo, Cono Gallo, Emilio Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Gallo, Cono Gallo, John Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallo, Cono Gallo, Lisa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gallo, Cono Gallo, Raffaela Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Garcia, Jr., Andrew McAllister, Carolyn Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Garcia, Marlyn C. Garcia, Ingrid Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Garcia, Marlyn C. Garcia, Tania M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Giaccone, Joseph Feldon, Elisabeth Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Giaccone, Joseph Giaccone, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Giaccone, Joseph Giaccone, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Giglio, Laura A Marchese-Collins, Cathy Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Giglio, Laura A Thomas, Marie Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Glenn, Harry Glenn, Birdie Mac Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Glenn, Harry Glenn, Donald 0. Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Glenn, Harry Glenn, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Glenn, Harry Glenn, Jr., Roosevelt Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Glenn, Harry Glenn, Sr., Roosevelt Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Glenn, Harry Murray, Franklin Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Greenleaf, James Greenleaf, Peter Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gregory, Florence M. Gregory, John F. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Gregory, Florence M. Petronis, Maureen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Grillo, Joseph Grillo, Joseph Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Grillo, Joseph Grillo, Steven Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Haag, Gary Haag Herrmann, Lori Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Haag, Gary Haag, Robert Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Hagerty, Karen E. Hagerty, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 17 of 22 c ase 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN Dacumen t 3687-1 F.I1ed 08/16/17 P aae 5 0 f 9 I• • I Nlill1i mn iP•~nl• 1na.. f ~J.{I• 1.. a 1-1~11 M• Ill Hagerty, Karen E. Loeffler, Deborah Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Harvey, Emeric J. Harvey, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Harvey, Emeric J. Harvey, Virgina Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 I-fo.rvey, £rneric J. Ryan, Marie Harvey Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Harvey, Emeric J. Steo, Antoinette Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hinds, Neil Greene, Karen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hinds, Neil Hinds, Coleen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hinds, Neil Hinds, Collin Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Hinds, Neil Hinds, Ethlyn Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Hinds, Neil Hinds, Wade-Roy Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hobbs, Tara Y. Hobbs Cuffee, Sonya Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hobbs, Tara Y. Hobbs Ginsberg, Tammy Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hobbs, Tara Y. Hobbs Lightfoot, Sherian-~ibli1!:~ s 4,250,000.00 Hobbs, Tara Y. Hobbs, Reginald Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hohlweck, Jr., Thomas W. Judge, Mary Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Holland, Ill, Joseph Holland McLin, Michele Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Holland, Ill, Joseph Holland, Brian Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hoom, Bradley Boom, Kara Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Howard, Joseph L. Galizia, Anne Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Howard, Joseph L. Reidlinger, Susan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Hunter, Joseph G. Hunter, Sean Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Irby, Stephanie Irby, Addison J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Irby, Stephanie Irby, Kenneth Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Irby, Stephanie Melton, Pamela Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Iskyan, John Iskyan, Laura Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Iskyan, John lskyan, Paul Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Iskyan, John O'Brien, Joan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Jones III, Arthur J. Jones, Peter Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Jones Ill, Arthur J. Jones, Scott Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Jones Ill, Arthur J. Stufano, Marilyn Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Katsimatides, John Katsimatides, Anthoula Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Kellerman, Peter R. Kellerman Fox, Pamela Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Kellerman, Peter R. Kellerman, Elyssa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Kellett, Joseph P. Sullivan, Ann Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Kelly, Thomas R. Farrell, Jean Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Lafuente, Juan Kazi, Rose Maria Sibling $ 4,250,000. 00 Lamonsoff; Amy Lamonsoff, Steven Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Lamonsoff, Amy McEneany, Wendy,.,..,~-~-·--Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Lasko, Gary E. Jurczyk, Doreen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Lasko, Gary E. Lasko, Deborah Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Lassman, Nicholas Lassman, Ellen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 LeBlanc, Robert LeBlanc, Carolyn Child $ 8,500,000.00 LeBlanc, Robert LeBlanc, John Child $ 8,500,000.00 LeBlanc, Robert LeBlanc, Paul Child $ 8,500,000.00 Lederman, Alan J. Leaf1ight, Nathan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Lederman, Alan J. Lembo, Jean Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 18 of 22 c ase 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN Document 3687-1 F.11ed 08/1 6/17 Paae 6 of 9!1•1 ••......, ·~wu '.r.Jv.n111n.."fITT iltllllll ''~·· I ·••11ill 1111 Lederman, Alan J. Salkin, Roni Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Le Veen, Jeffrey E. LeVeen, Andrew William Child $ 8,500,000.00 LeVeen, Jeffrey E. LeVeen, Margaret L. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Macfarlane, Mariam1e MacFarlane, George Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 MacFarlane, Marianne Macfarlane, Joseph Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Maffeo, Jennieann Maffeo, Joseph Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Martineau, Brian E. Martineau, Cathleen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Martineau, Brian E. Martineau, Edward Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Martineau, Brian E. Martineau, Ronnah Parent $ 8,500,000.00 McAlary, James Higdon, Karen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McAlary, James McAlary, Bryan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McAlary, James McAla1y, John Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McAlary, James Sullivan, Joanne Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 ·--·-···-~---···-···---. McCarthy, Justin McCarthy, Chris Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McCarthy, Justin McCarthy, Lauren Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McCarthy, Michael McCarthy, William James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McGinley, Daniel F. McGinley, Constance Parent $ 8,500,000.00 McGinley, Daniel F. McGinley, Dennis P. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McGinley, Daniel F. McGinley, Martin Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McGinley, Daniel F. McGinley, Michael A. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McGinley, Daniel F. McGinley, Thomas M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Mcginnis, Thomas H. McGinnis, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Mcginnis, Thomas H. McGinnis-Daly, Patricia Parent $ 8,500,000.00 McGovern, Scott M. Bayer, Tara Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 McGovern, Scott M. Scott, Elisabeth Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Mckinney, Darryl L. Blanding Carroll, Katina Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Mckinney, Danyl L. McKinney. Dallas Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Mercado, Steve Mercado, Mary Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Mercado, Steve Mercado, Sr., Louis Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Milewski, Lukasz Milewska-Podejma, Kamila P. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Miller, Robert Alan Miller, Edward Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Morell, George W. Haggerty, Mary Jane Sibling $ 4.250,000.00 Morgenstern, Nancy Itzkowitz, Cindy Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Morgenstern, Nancy Morgenstern, Howard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Morgenstern, Nancy Morgenstern, Jeffrey Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Morgenstern, Nancy Shapiro, Lori Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Murphy, Patrick S. Murphy, Lori-Jean Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Murphy, Patrick S. Murphy, Thomas J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 >----·-··-·--·-····-··---~-----··-"-··-·--Nelson-Risco, Theresa Caggiano, John Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Nelson-Risco, Theresa Caggiano, Joseph Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Nelson-Risco, Theresa Caggiano, Richard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Nicosia, Kathleen A Hawk, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Nicosia, Kathleen A Hawk, Larry Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 I 8,500,000.00 Nicosia, Kathleen A. Hawk, Phyllis Parent $ Nicosia, Kathleen A. Meyer, Kin1berly Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Nicosia, Kathleen A. Nicosia, George Spouse $ 12,500,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 19 of 22 c ase 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN Document 3687-1 Fl1ed 08/16/17 Paae 7 of 9!JJI I • • fl711!Yj • i!Jfi11 ii•• l?f'ihuu1 '~" ill'.•• ···-·Joi.11... 111111 Noonan, Robert W. Noonan Robertson, Anne Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Noonan, Robert W. Noonan, Anne C. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Noonan, Robert W. Noonan, Ashley Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Noonan, Robert W. Noonan, Kelly Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Noonan, Robert W. Noonan, Walter P. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Novotny, Brian C. Novotny, Mary C. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Nussbaum, Jeffrey Brunschwig, Melisa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Nussbaum, Jeffrey Nussbaum, Craig Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 O'Connor, Richard J. O'Connor, William Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 O'Doherty, Amy O'Dohcrty Lee, Maura Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Edward K. Oliver, Barbara Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Oliver, Edward K. Oliver, Donald Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Oliver, Edward K. Oliver,----·----Donald Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Edward K. Oliver, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Edward K. Smith, Barbara Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Leah E. Oliver, Dale J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Leah E. Oliver, Daniel Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Leah E. Oliver, Theodore W. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Oliver, Leah E. Pulver, Joanna S. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Pezzuti, Kaleen E. Pezzuti-Pelino, Megan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Princiotta, Vincent Princiotta, Bernadette Teresa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Princiotta, Vincent Yaniz, Michele A. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reda, Gregory Reda, Christopher Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reda, Gregory Reda, Frank M. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Reda, Gregory Reda, John M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Cruz, Maria Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Holder, Ida Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes Concepcion, Aidaline Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes Rodriguez, Nydia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes, Armando Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes, Enoel Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes, Isabel Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes, Luz Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Reyes, Jr., Eduvigis Reyes, Nemesio Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Richards, Gregory D. Richards Keston, Lisa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Richards, Gregory D. Richards, Carol J Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Richards, Gregory D. Richards, Paul Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rimmele, III, Frederick Connors, Karen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00--··-·---·~--··-•«···-······· Robotham, Michell L. Callum, Rodney Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rodriguez, Anthony Okseniuk, Desiree Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rodriguez, Anthony Rodriguez, Brnnilda Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Rodriguez, Anthony Rodriguez, Pedro Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Rodriguez, Anthony Rodriguez, Peter Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rodriguez, Anthony Suarez, Angelic Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rosenblum, Andrew I. Ornstein, Sheila Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rosenblum, Andrew I. Rosenblum, Adam Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 20 of 22 c ase 1 03-m d-01570-GBD-SN Dacumen t 3687-1 Fl1ed 08/16/17 P aqe 8 0 f 9 I •. I IilliNi ri1Tf ll.IP.lTilni "--~···... ~,fl 1.u·a•111 11•1.,.,.!.(... ·-· JI Rosenblum, Andrew I. Rosenblum, Barbara Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Rosenblum, Andrew I. Rosenblum, Richard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Rosenzweig, Phillip Rosenzweig, Allan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ross, Richard Gordon, Rochelle Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ross, Richard Ross, Irene Sibling $ 4,250,000.00----~xan, Edw~~~ Antonelle, Patricia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ryan, Edward Ryan, Patricia Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Ryan, Edward Ryan, Paul Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ryan, Edward Ryan, Robert Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ryan, Edward Ryan, William Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Ryan, Matthew L. Ryan, Francis Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Santo, Susan Santo, Michael Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Schreier, Jeffrey Hart, Janice Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Schreier, Jeffrey Schreier, Mark Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Schreier, Jef'frey Schreier, Stephanie Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Scibetta, Adrianne Venuto, Caterina Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Scibetta, Adrianne Venuto, Salvatore Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Scullin, Arthur Scullin, James G. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Scullin, Arthur Scullin. James W. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Scullin, Atihur Scullin, Jr., Arthur W. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Scullin, Arthur Scullin, Nora M. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Shulman, Mark Shulman, Lawrence Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Siskopoulos, Muriel Krinsky, Donna Neary Child $ 8,500,000.00 Siskopoulos, Muriel Morrison, Laura Child $ 8,500,000.00 Siskopoulos, Muriel Neary, III, Thomas J. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Siskopoulos, Muriel Rosenblatt, Phi1lip Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Siskopoulos, Muriel Sondak, Terri Child $ 8,500,000.00 Smith. Kevin J. Brown, Margaret Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Smith, Kevin J. Cross, Catherine Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Smith, Kevin J. Panicola, Marianne Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Steinman, Alexander Steinman, Laura Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tallon, Sean Patrick Tallon-Daros, Rosaleen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tamares, Rachel Lopez, Jenny M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tamares, Rachel Paulino, Maria Parent s 8,500,000.00 Terry, Lisa Terry, Leland Dale Sibling $ 4)50,000.00 Thackurdeen, Goumatie Thackurdeen, Raj Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Thackurdeen, Goumatie Thackurdeen, Sat Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tirado, David Tirado, Richard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tones-Victoria, Celeste MarTow, Felice Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Torres-Victoria, Celeste Rodgers, Alphonso A. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tones-Victoria, Celeste Torres, Dean Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Torres-Victoria, Celeste TmTes, Denise Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Torres-Victoria, Celeste Tones, Richard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Torres-Victoria, Celeste Torres-Brown, Dawn Sibling $ 4,250, 000. 00 Trant, Daniel InselTa, Sheila M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trant, Daniel Madamas, Patticia A Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3706 Filed 08/17/17 Page 21 of 22 r.::ic::P 1·---n-~1\1:7-1 i=ilP _7 P::ine 9 of 9 1••lu.iw~11w11:rnnnn:'.fil~n. ' IL Ill.T IHlll 111•lr,1 Y.L •........ Trant, Daniel Trant, Kevin J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trant, Daniel Trant, Matthew J. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trant, Daniel Trant, Maureen A. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trant, Daniel Trant, Sally A. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trentini, James A. Barletta, Bernice Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trentini, James A. Malatesta, Patricia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Trentini, James A. Spadafora, Della-Ann Sibling $ 4,250, 000. 00 Tumulty, Lance Tumulty, James Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tumulty, Lance Tumulty, Shawn Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Tumulty, Lance Tumulty-Seaby, Diane Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Twomey, Robert T. Twomey, John Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Twomey, Robert T. Twomey, Richard Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Twomey, Robert T. Twomey, William Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Valvo, II, Carlton F. Valvo, Brandon C. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Valvo, II, Carlton F. Valvo, Carlton F. Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Valvo, II, Carlton F. Valvo, Trenton Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Virgilio, Lawrence J. Micko, Antonia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Virgilio, Lawrence J. Virgilio, Thomas Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wainio, Honor Elizabeth Wainio, Sarah R. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wainio, Honor Elizabeth Wainio, Thomas F. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Welty, Timothy M. Welty, Darren M. Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Williams, III, Louis C. Perez, Karen Sibling $ 4,250,000_00 Wiswall, David O'Gorman, Barbara Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wiswall, David Rothschild, Christine Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wiswall, David Wiswall, Robert Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Wodenshek, Christopher Delellis, Mariellen Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wodenshek, Christopher Wodensheck, Raymond Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wodenshek, Christopher Wodenshek Garrett, Florence Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wodenshek, Christopher Wodenshek, Patricia Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wolf, Katherine James. Alan Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Wolf: Katherine James, Howard Rhys Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Wolf, Katherine James, Valerie Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Zaltsman, Arkady Zaltsman, Alexander Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Zaltsman, Arkady Zaltsman, Faina Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Ziminski, Ivelin Rodriguez, Celina Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Ziminski, Ivelin Rodriguez, Ivan Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Ziminski, lvelin Rodriguez, Janet Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Zinz~ Michael Placek Zinzi, Madeline Parent $ 8,500,000.00 """••···········-···---. Zion, Charles A. Zion Green, Barbara Sibling $ 4.250,000_00 Zion, Charles A. Zion, Jane Parent $ 8,500,000.00 Zuccala, Joseph.J. Cammarata, Tina Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Zuccala, Joseph J. Paterson, Theresa Sibling $ 4,250,000.00 Zuccala, Joseph J. Zuccala, Jolaine J. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Zuccala, Joseph J. Zuccala, Sandra Sibling s 4,250,000.00 Zuccala, Joseph J. Zuccala-Sams, Kaylene E. Child $ 8,500,000.00 Exhibit B

MEMO ENDORSEMENT: on re: (3690 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, (220 in 1:11-cv-07550-GBD-SN; 30 in case 16cv7853; 47 in case 16cv9663; 46 in case 16cv9937; 46 in 17cv117; 46 in case 17cv450; 36 in case 17cv2651; 9 in case 17cv6123; 23 in case 17cv3887; 39 in case 17cv3908) Letter filed by Hoglan Plaintiffs. ENDORSEMENT: SO ORDERED., Set Deadlines/Hearing as to (3690 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 220 in 1:11-cv-07550-GBD-SN) Letter. (Objections to R&R due by 9/29/2017) (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 8/22/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:11-cv-07550-GBD-SN(ama) Modified on 9/26/2017

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3707 Filed 08/22/17 Page 1 of 2 SO ORDERED: 13 j).yt1:l The Honorable George B. Daniels United States District VIA ECF ated:_-+~.....__""--'_....~~ Judge Daniel Patrick Moynihan AND United States Courthouse FEDERAL EXPRESS 5 00 Pearl Street, Room l 310 New York, NY 10007 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 1:03-MDL-1570 (GBD) (SN) Hoglan, et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran, et al., 1:11-cv-7550 (GBD) (SN) Request for Extension of Time to File Objections Dear Judge Daniels: On August 8, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued a Report and Recommendation in the above-captioned matter. (MDL ECF Doc. 3676, "'Hoglan IV''). The Hoglan IV Report recommended denial of all of the Hoglan Plaintiffs' remaining unresolved claims. The Report specified that any objections to the Hoglan_IV Report would be due to be filed by August 22, 2017. The Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation also notes that Plaintiffs may file with the Court a request for an extension of time for filing Objections. Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation dated August 8, 2017, p. 24 ("Notice of Procedure for Filing Objections to this Report and Recommendation"). Plaintiffs hereby request an extension of time to file Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation until September 29, 2017, or until such other time as the Court deems appropriate. The reasons for this request are as follows: (a) the need to study and consider, and consult with clients regarding, inter alia, the legal framework established by the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation; (b) the desire of counsel to respect the Magistrate Judge's observation regarding the limited judicial resources of the Court for consideration of extended family solatium claims, thus generating a need for appropriate re-examination of the claims in the context of the Hoglan IV framework, and narrowing or consolidation of issues, to the extent possible, (c) several August vacations of counsel and clients (including the unusual factor of the impending solar eclipse), and (d) the annual 9/11 commemorations (which always, in this case, make client consultations during this timeframe somewhat difficult and, for some, undesirable). BIRMINGHAM, AL DELAND, FL NASHVILLE, TN WASHINGTON, D.C. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3707 Filed 08/22/17 Page 2 of 2 Case 1:()3-mrl-01570-GBD-SN Document 3690 Filed 08/18/17 Page 2 of 2 The Honorable George B. Daniels In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 1:03-MDL-1570 (GBD) (SN) Hoglan, et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran, et al., I: l l-cv-7550 (GBD) (SN) August 18, 2017 Page 2 This is the first request for an extension of time in this matter. No other deadlines are affected. No defendant has appeared in this case; hence, no consultation has occurred or is required. A proposed Order is being filed herewith. Respectful! submitted,... Timothy B. Fleming Attorney for the Hoglan_Plaintiffs TBF/tm cc: All counsel ofrecord via ECF

LETTER addressed to Judge George B. Daniels from Douglas A. Latto dated August 26, 2017 re: Related Action Number 1:17-CV-6519. Document filed by Allianz Versicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft, Assurances Generales De France IART, Assurances Generales De France, Allianz Global Risks US Insurance Company f/k/a Allianz Insurance Company, Allianz Insurance Company of Canada, Allianz Suisse Versicherungs-Gesellschaft, Allianz Global Corporate and Specialty SE, Allianz Re, Fireman's Fund Insurance Company.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3708 Filed 08/26/17 Page 1 of 1 SPEISER KRAUSE COUNSELLORS AT LAW 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 PHONE: (914) 223-5333 FAX: (914) 220-5334 August 26, 2017 VIA ECF AND FACSIMILE (212) 805-6737 The Honorable George B. Daniels United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl St. New York, NY 10007 VIA ECF The Honorable Sarah Netburn United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: In Re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 No. 03-md-1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judges Daniels and Netburn: This firm represents the plaintiffs in the newly-filed action Allianz Versicherungs– Aktiengesellschaft, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, civil action number 1:17-CV-6519 (hereinafter the "Allianz Action"). Pursuant to the Court’s May 3, 2017, Order, plaintiffs in the Allianz Action formally request that the Allianz Action be made part of the above-referenced Multi-District Litigation. A Short Form Complaint that is substantially in the form approved by the Court has been filed in the Allianz Action. Plaintiffs utilized the Short Form Complaint procedure in accordance with the Court’s Order of May 3, 2017 (ECF 3543 in 03-md-1570), which adopts the factual and jurisdictional allegations of the Consolidated Amended Complaint that is operative in the above-referenced Multi-District Litigation. Pursuant to that Order, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Allianz Action be made part of In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN). Plaintiffs agree that their complaint shall be deemed subject to any motion to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint (ECF 3463, 03-md-1570) or Answer to the Consolidated Amended Complaint filed by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We thank the Court for its consideration of this matter. Respectfully submitted,/s/Douglas A. Latto Frank H. Granito, III, Esq. (FG 9760) Douglas A. Latto, Esq. (DL 3649) Jeanne M. O’Grady, Esq. (JO 3362) cc: All Counsel (via ECF)

STATUS REPORT. Document filed by Wael Jalaidan.

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3709 Filed 08/28/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03-MDL-1570 (GBD) (SN) In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 DEFENDANT JELAIDAN'S AUGUST 26, 2017 STATUS REPORT The Honorable Judge Netburn, On August 11, 2017I called the OFAC licensing division at 202-622-2480. I was given an automated response asking to type in the case number (2016 330016, after which an automated reply stated that " this case is pending. Please check back at a later date. " I called the same number again on August 23, 2017 and received the same automated reply through their automated system. Because of this I tried going through the automated OFAC menu again, and reached a live person by hitting the " * " key. The information specialist reached at OFAC informed me that the case was indeed still pending, and had been assigned to a case officer named Jae The specialist transferred me to Jae's phone I left a voice mail on his phone asking for an update on the case, explaining again in the message my need to report to the Court every 30 days as to the status of the license application and my efforts to expedite the issuance thereof At this time I am still awaiting a reply to my message. As soon as I do so, I will report it to the Court. I have also not yet received a reply to the letter I sent OFAC on July 25, 2017. Because of this, I sent the attached email (Ex. 1) to OFAC with the letter attached. Respectfully Submitte Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Martin McMahon & Associates Attorney for Defendant

Exhibit Ex. 1

Mail-Te: Case No as 83-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 37AMYEHEHESDET uPage TossAbsd isvere.. GMail Martin McMahon < mm@martinmcmahonlaw.com > by Google re: Case No. 2016-330016 1 message Martin McMahon < mm@martinmcmahonlaw.com To: OFACLicensing@treasury.gov, Agmed@treasury.gov Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 3: 53 PM Dear Licensing Division, I am writing in regard to Case No. 2016-330016 for my client, Wael Jelaidan. Last month left a voicemail and sent a letter (attached) requesting an update on the status of the license, as I am under court order to report to the court every 30 days the status of the application and my efforts to obtain the license from OFAC The automated response system on 202-622-2480 notes that the case is still pending as of today when I call but any more information I could use to satisfy the Court about the status of the application would be very helpful. I was also able to reach an information specialist today on this number who informed me the case had been assigned to a case officer named Jae. She transferred me to his phone where I left a message explaining the above as well Please let me know if there is anything else you need for the application, and what the status is so that I may inform the Court. Sincerely, Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Martin McMahon & Associates 1150 Connecticut Ave., N. W., Suite 900 Washington, D. C. 20036 Tel: (202) 862-4343 Fax: (202) 828-4130 This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged, confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the person(s) named. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure to another person is strictly prohibited. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U. S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed therein OFAC Letter July 25 2017. pdf 49K 1 of 8 23/17, 3: 54 PM

OBJECTION to (219 in 1:11-cv-07550-GBD-SN, 3676 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN) Report and Recommendations &quot;Hoglan IV&quot; Document filed by Hoglan Plaintiffs. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:11-cv-07550-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK-------------------------------------------------------------------X IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001: PLAINTIFFS’ OBJECTIONS: TO MAGISTRATE: JUDGE’S HOGLAN IV: REPORT AND: RECOMMENDATION: ISSUED ON AUGUST 8, 2017:: 1:03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN)-------------------------------------------------------------------X This Document Relates to Hoglan, et al. v. Iran, et al. 1:11-cv-07550 (GBD) (SN) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(C), and Local Rule 72.1, certain of the Hoglan Plaintiffs, through counsel, hereby respectfully object to the Magistrate Judge Netburn’s fourth Report and Recommendation in this matter ("Hoglan IV").1 In Hoglan IV, the Magistrate Judge recommends against any solatium award for relatives of 9/11 decedents that do not fit into a fairly rigid formula. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge only recommends awarding judgments to the estates of 9/11 victims, and their spouses, children, siblings and parents. The Magistrate Judge recognizes that "every plaintiff is entitled to have their damages claim fully evaluated by the Court."2 The Magistrate Judge continues: "rather than apply'a rigid rule or formulaic analysis,’ [the Court] must'embrace a claim-by-claim, family-by-family, fact-driven analysis.’"3 Plaintiffs agree that Magistrate Judge Netburn goes to great lengths to-in 1 Magistrate Judge Netburn’s fourth Report and Recommendation ("Hoglan IV") (MDL Doc. No. 3676), was issued on August 8, 2017. 2 Id., p. 6. 3 Id., citing Hoglan Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Reconsideration of Claims of Functional Equivalents of Immediate Family Members brief at MDL Doc. No. 3551, dated May 5, 2017, at 2. 1 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 2 of 19 her words: "apply objective factors of general applicability to the unique circumstances of each plaintiff seeking relief."4 However, the Hoglan Plaintiffs assert that the factors applied in the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation are too rigid and too formulaic and do not take into account some functional equivalents of very close family members and the evolving concept of "family" (Section II, infra). Further, the factors applied in the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation do not fully take into account the extraordinary and unprecedented nature of the instant underlying tort; the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States of America (Section III, infra). Magistrate Judge Netburn did award some "half-awards" to some Hoglan Plaintiffs who were not 9/11 estates, or spouses, siblings, children or parents thereof, because those Hoglan Plaintiffs evidenced some extraordinary circumstances.5 However, the Hoglan Plaintiffs assert that extraordinary circumstances of 9/11 and a more flexible interpretation of the terms "immediate family member" and "functional equivalent" warrant some type of awards, albeit perhaps partial, to additional Hoglan Plaintiffs. I. Facts The general relevant facts are set forth in detail in the Plaintiffs’ Damages Inquest Memorandum (MDL Doc. 3194), Part VIII and the exhibits cited therein, including detailed damage declarations from every Hoglan Plaintiff;6 the letter brief filed in supplementation thereof on April 1, 2016 (MDL Doc. 3249) and all exhibits cited therein; Plaintiffs’ Objections to Magistrate Judge Netburn’s first and second Reports and Recommendations, dated October 12, 4 Id., p 6. 5 See "Hoglan II" Report and Recommendation, MDL Doc. No. 3363, dated October 14, 2016, pp. 22-24. 6 Paper copies of the previously-submitted, individual damage declarations of each Hoglan Plaintiffs whose awards were denied in Hoglan IV are being provided with the courtesy copy of these Objections being sent to Judge Daniels’ chambers. These damage declarations were previously provided on CD-ROM and filed confidentially on March 31, 2016 (Hoglan Doc. No. 161), pursuant to a File Under Seal Order at Hoglan Doc. No. 160. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 3 of 19 2016 and October 14, 2016 (Reports are Hoglan Doc.s No. 171 and 172; Plaintiffs’ first Objections are Hoglan Doc. No. 177 (dated Oct. 31, 2016)); and, Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Reconsideration of Claims of Functional Equivalents of Immediate Family Members brief at MDL Doc. No. 3551, dated May 5, 2017. Specific facts relevant to those Hoglan Plaintiffs who were denied awards are discussed in Section IV, infra. II.A. Interpretation of "Immediate Family" Should Be More Inclusive The Magistrate Judge correctly notes in Hoglan IV that the terms and definitions used in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (the "FSIA")7 are not static-but rather are dynamic and are defined and re-defined by the ever-evolving standards of American common law: "Although [terrorism] cases arise under a federal cause of action, 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c), the common law of intentional infliction of emotional distress governs questions of who is entitled to recover damages. As such, courts have looked at "state decisional law, legal treatises, or the Restatements in order to find and apply what are generally considered to be the well-established standards of state common law…" Id. at 24. In Hoglan II, the Court found that virtually all courts considering the availability of solatium damages under the FSIA relied on the definitions of RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 46 as a proxy for state common law."8 The Magistrate Judge continues the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation quoting directly from the RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 46, which states in relevant part: "(2) Where such conduct is directed at a third person, the actor is subject to liability if he intentionally… causes severe emotional distress 7 28 U.S.C. § 1608, et seq. 8 Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation, MDL Doc. No. 3676, p. 4 (emphases added). 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 4 of 19 (a) to a member of such person’s immediate family who is present at the time, whether or not such distress results in bodily harm…"9 The term "immediate family member" is not defined in either the RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS, or the RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS. Therefore, per the RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 46 approach, the standards of current common law, as evidenced in recent state decisional law, treatises, statutes, regulations and guidelines, must be considered when determining immediate family members and functional equivalency thereof for solatium recovery eligibility under the FSIA. The instant case certainly warrants the utmost expanded and flexible interpretations of immediate family members and their functional equivalents. II.B. Evolution of Family in American Tort Law The legal definition of family has evolved and expanded as American tort law has evolved with our changing society. Not that long ago, the very concept of solatium damages to any family member was not recognized as a stand-alone tort claim.10 The development and expansion of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress ("IIED") has corresponded to a broader-based sensitivity to emotional security in American tort law. Expansion of the functional equivalency to family members likewise corresponds to similar broader-based sensitivities. It has been noted that "the twentieth century was in fact a veritable breeding ground for the development of new categories of tort recovery for intangible loss, and there is no sign of 9 Id., p. 4 (emphases added). The § (2)(a) "present at the time" requirement has invariably been waived in FSIA terrorism cases. See Salazar v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 370 F. Supp. 2d 105, 115 n.12 (D.D.C. 2005); Jenco v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 154 F. Supp. 2d 27, 35 (D.D.C. 2001). 10 See generally, Rabin, R., Pain and Suffering and Beyond: Some Thoughts on Recovery for Intangible Loss, 55 DePaul L. Rev. 359 (Winter 2006), pp. 362-370. Compensation for intentional outrageous behavior became accepted only with the adoption in 1948 of Section 46 in the RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS, which introduced the intentionally inflicted emotional distress doctrine. 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 5 of 19 retreat as a new century unfolds."11 Intangible loss torts such as loss of consortium, loss of the companionship and counsel, invasion of privacy, and intrusion on privacy, have all greatly expanded their scope in recent decades.12 "IIED is a particularly interesting tort because it mirrors the evolving social attitudes about the extent to which one is expected to have a'thick skin’ in dealing with the occasional insults and indignities that are a part of everyday life."13 This case is certainly not about increasing sensitivities because the underlying act is so egregious. Any recognition of the injuries involved points directly to the propriety of the broadest view of IIED. Thus, as other aspects of American tort law have evolved and expanded with the sensibilities of American society, the definition of "immediate family member" under the FSIA should evolve to adequately redress the egregious acts of 9/11. II.C. The Trump Administration’s "Muslim Travel Bans" As recently as earlier this month, President Donald Trump’s numerous "Muslim travel ban" attempts have brought the definition of "close family member" into the national spotlight. On September 7, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court in Hawaii’s modified preliminary injunction.14 Noting "the Supreme Court deployed fundamental equitable considerations that have guided American law for centuries," the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recognized the changing nature of families and expanded prior familial interpretations.15 The U.S. District Court in Hawaii had previously concluded that the U.S. Government defined "close familial relationships" too narrowly by restricting it to only: "parents, parents-in-law, spouses, fiancés, children, adult sons and daughters, sons-and 11 Id., p. 368. 12 Id., pp. 362-370. 13 Id., p. 369, fn. 40. 14 State of Hawaii and Elshikh v. Trump, et al., 17-16426 (U.S. Ct. App. Ninth Cir., Sept. 7, 2017). 15 Id., p. *8. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 6 of 19 daughters-in-law, siblings (half and whole relationships), and step relationships."16 The Hawaii District Court modified the Trump Administration’s "travel ban" to also no longer prohibit grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins of persons in the United States.17 This month’s opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a clear summary of the history and evolution of the term "close family member" and it offers a succinct statement of current American common law regarding familial relations, and as such, is useful in informing an analysis of this issue under the FSIA: [E]ven if the INA may inform the construction of "close familial relationship[s]," the Government’s decision to rely on the cited specific provisions of the INA is troubling because other provisions of the INA (and other immigration laws) offer broader definitions. In the Family Sponsor Immigration Act of 2002, for example, Congress amended the INA to provide that when the sponsor of an alien’s immigrant visa petition has died, another member of the alien’s "close family"-defined to include family members such as "sister-in-law, brother-in-law, grandparent, or grandchild"-could sponsor the alien for admission. In other words, the INA explicitly refers to sisters-in-law, brothers-in-law, grandparents, and grandchildren as close family. The Government’s "cherry-picked" INA provisions recognize immediate family relationships as those between parents, spouses, children, and siblings, yet other provisions of the INA and other immigration laws offer broader definitions for close family. As Plaintiffs further point out, other immigration laws enable an individual to seek admission on behalf of aunts, uncles, and close blood relatives. fn. 7: For example, Plaintiffs cite an immigration law that permits a juvenile alien to be released from detention to the custody of parents, legal guardians, or "other close blood relatives." Such relatives include "brother, sister, aunt, uncle, [and] grandparent." Other immigration laws enable an individual to seek admission on behalf of grandchildren, nieces, or nephews, to apply for asylum if a "grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, or nephew" resides in the United States; to apply for 16 Hawaii v. Trump, _ F. Supp. 3d _, No. CV 17-00050 DKW-KSC, 2017 WL 2989048, at *1 (D. Haw., July 13, 2017), p. *5-6. 17 Id. at *6, *10. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 7 of 19 naturalization on behalf of a grandchild; or to qualify as a special immigrant if he or she is the "grandparent" of a child orphaned by the September 11, 2001 attacks, USA PATRIOT Act of 2001. The Board of Immigration Appeals has also held that an alien has "close family ties in the United States" for purposes of obtaining cancellation of removal or waiver of inadmissibility if a sibling-in-law or grandchild lives here. The Government offers no explanation as to why it relied on its selected provisions of the INA, while ignoring other provisions of the same statute as well as other immigration laws. The INA was implemented with "the underlying intention of… preservation of the family unit." The Government’s artificially narrow interpretation of close familial relationships directly contradicts this intention… We find further support in other Supreme Court decisions, albeit that arise in different contexts from immigration law, for this broad definition of "close familial relationship." These cases show how the denial of entry can cause concrete hardship to family members in the United States. In Moore v. City of East Cleveland, the Court invalidated as unconstitutional a housing ordinance that limited occupancy of a dwelling unit to members of a nuclear family. 431 U.S. at 495-96, 506. The Court discussed "a larger conception of [] family," derived from "the accumulated wisdom of civilization, gained over the centuries and honored throughout our history," that was worthy of constitutional protection. Id. at 505. To that end, the Court recognized and protected the tradition of "close relatives" as "uncles, aunts, cousins, and especially grandparents"-"sharing a household along with parents and children." Id. at 504-05. Other cases have likewise addressed extended family relationships. See Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 64-65 (2000) (discussing the "important role" grandparents often play); Tooahnippah v. Hickel, 397 U.S. 598, 608 (1970) (noting the "close and sustained familial relationship" between a testator and his niece). In these cases, the Court described the importance of close relatives such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins.18 The Ninth Circuit’s analysis and discussion of the current state of American common law regarding family relationships-especially with direct reference to and in the context of the 9/11 attacks-demonstrates the shift and evolution toward greater functional equivalency and away 18 Hawaii v. Trump, _ F. Supp. 3d _, No. CV 17-00050 DKW-KSC, 2017 WL 2989048, at *1 (D. Haw., July 13, 2017) (emphases added; some internal citations ommitted). 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 8 of 19 from the more simplistic and rigid familial relationship formulas implemented in earlier decades of tort law. II.D. Recent Examples of "Immediate Family Member" Broadly Interpreted There are many examples from American courts just in 2016 and 2017 of the term "immediate family member" being broadly interpreted or specifically being defined to include more categories of relatives than were deemed eligible to recover under the FSIA by the Magistrate Judge in the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation. The Hoglan Plaintiffs assert that the following examples evidence the law’s evolving and expanding definitions of whom ought to be considered an immediate family member: U.S. v. Moreland, 207 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (Dist. Court, N.D. Oklahoma, September 14, 2016) ("immediate family members" described as additional cyber-stalking victims in indictment was not an "indefinite, imprecise term" but rather is expressly stated to be "as defined in Section 115," and thus includes a "spouse, parent, brother or sister, child" or "any other person living in his household and related to him by blood or marriage." 18 U.S.C. § 115(c)(2), 2261A(1)(A)(ii)); Stephens v. Uranium Enery Corp., Civil Action No. H-15-1862 (United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division, July 15, 2016) (discussing S.E.C.’s'Regulation S-K’ which requires disclosure of any'related-party transactions’ and defines "immediate family member" of director, executive officer or nominee for director as "any child, stepchild, parent, stepparent, spouse, sibling, mother-in-law, father-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, or sister-in-law of such director, executive officer or nominee for director, and any person (other than a tenant or employee) sharing the household of such director, executive officer or nominee for director"); Coutard v. Municipal Credit Union, Docket No. 15-1113 (United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, February 9, 2017) (Second Circuit vacated and remanded Family and Medical Leave Act action, holding grandfather is not automatically excluded from "immediate family member" protections of Act); The People v. Thadius Landel Williams, Jr., F073066 (Cal. Ct. App., Jun. 20, 2017) (conditions of probation that required no contact with the victim’s family members was not unconstitutionally vague and the term "immediate family" is defined under Section 646.9 of the California Penal Code, subdivision (l) which provides: "For purposes of this section,'immediate family’ means any 8 spouse, parent, child, any person related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any other person who regularly resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly resided in the household." (A second-degree relative is someone who shares 25% of a person’s genes; it includes uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces, grandparents, grandchildren, half-siblings, and double-cousins)); State of Arizona v. J. Whipple, No. 1 CA-CR 14-0233 PRPC (Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One, April 12, 2016) (Grandparents are considered "immediate family members" pursuant to Arizona law that allows "immediate family members" to give victim impact statements at criminal sentencing hearings); Simon v. Launch Technical Workforce Solutions, LLC, and Dept. of Employ. and Econ. Devel., No. A16-1307 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, March 6, 2017) (while rejecting "fiancée" as category of "immediate family members," unemployment law judge nonetheless defined "immediate family members" as "an individual’s spouse, parent, stepparent, grandparent, son or daughter, stepson or stepdaughter, or grandson or granddaughter" pursuant to Minnesota Stat. § 268.035, subd. 19(a) (2016)); Aiono v. Utah Dept. of Corrections, No. 20160030-CA (Court of Appeals of Utah, August 10, 2017) (state correctional officer was not in violation because policy did not specifically prohibit contact with "immediate family members" although it does cite that the Utah Dept. of Corrections’ Career Service Review Office considers that: "[i]mmediate family members includes cousins"); Fountain v. Michigan Dept. of Corrections, No. 325699 (Court of Appeals of Michigan, May 17, 2016) (state corrections officer required to notify warden if any immediate family member is incarcerated in same facility and immediate family is defined as: "spouse, parent(s), children or step-children, brother(s), sister(s), parent(s)-in-law, grandparent(s), grandchild(ren) and any person(s) whose financial or physical care the employee is principally responsible [for]..."); The People v. Francisco Sanchez, Jr., No. B271011 (Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division One, May 4, 2017) (unmarried long-time girlfriend qualified as "immediate family" pursuant to criminal threat statute that stated "the victim of a criminal threat may be anyone whose immediate family is the target of the threatened violence"; appeals court noted that the unmarried girlfriend "plainly falls under the statutory definition of'immediate family’ because she had resided in the household for three to four years preceding these events"); and, 611 East 179th Street Realty Corp. v. Gonzalez, 2017 NY Slip Op. 50792(U), 76688/2016) (Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County, 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 10 of 19 June 12, 2017 (confirming a granddaughter was an "immediate family member" for purposes of New York tenancy law). Additional recent statutory and regulatory examples of the specific term "immediate family member" being broadly interpreted or specifically being expansively defined include: • Section 1128(j)(1) of the Social Security Act and the regulations at 42 CFR 1001.1001(a)(2) define the term "immediate family member" to mean the person’s: "Husband or wife; Natural or adoptive parent, child, or sibling; Stepparent, stepchild, stepbrother or stepsister; Father-in-law, mother-in-law, daughter-in-law, son-in-law, brother-in-law, or sister-in-law; Grandparent or grandchild; and, Spouse of a grandparent or grandchild." • Pursuant to 18 U.S. Code § 115-Influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a Federal official by threatening or injuring a family member, "immediate family member" of an individual means: "(A) his spouse, parent, brother or sister, child or person to whom he stands in loco parentis; or (B) any other person living in his household and related to him by blood or marriage." • Under 18 U.S. Code § 2261A-Stalking: "Whoever (1) travels in interstate or foreign commerce or is present within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or enters or leaves Indian country, with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel or presence engages in conduct that: (A) places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to: (i) that person; (ii) an immediate family member (as defined in Section 115 [18 U.S.C. § 115(c)(2), 2261A(1)(A)(ii), supra]) of that person; ***** shall be punished as provided in section 2261(b) of this title." • Per the California Department of Industrial Relations Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Code §13692, "immediate family member" is defined as: 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 11 of 19 "spouse, domestic partner, cohabitant, child, stepchild, grandchild, parent, stepparent, mother-in-law, father-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, grandparent, great grandparent, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, stepsibling, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or first cousin (that is, a child of an aunt or uncle)." See also, Part (d) of California Labor Code, Section 2066. III. The September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks Deserve Expansive Interptretation of Torts Law Under the FSIA As correctly pointed out in Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation: "The tragic loss of thousands of innocent lives in the attacks of September 11, 2001, shook our nation like no other event in our recent history. As the submissions that the Court has reviewed in this process amply demonstrate, the loss suffered went far beyond those who perished in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The people who died on that day left behind loving parents, spouses and partners, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters."19 Of course, in addition to loving parents, spouses and partners, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, the Americans who were murdered on September 11, 2001 left behind other very close family members, many of whom were the functional equivalent of even greater traditionally-recognized relationships. Courts have uniformly held that all terrorist attacks by their very inherent nature are directed not only at the victims present but also at the victims’ entire families.20 Further, courts have held uniformly that, in FSIA terrorism cases, if the conduct is sufficiently outrageous and intended to inflict severe emotional harm upon a person which is not present, "no essential reason of logic or policy prevents liability."21 The September 11, 2001 terrorist murders of almost 3,000 Americans warrants the most expansive interpretation of law at every possible point. 19 Hoglan Fourth Report and Recommendation (MDL Doc. No. 3676), dated August 8, 2017, p. 2 (emphases added). 20 See Salazar v. Iran, supra, 370 F. Supp. 2d at 115 n. 12. 21 Jenco v. Islamic Republic of Iran, supra, 154 F. Supp. 2d at 35. 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 12 of 19 Additionally, the rationale often given to avoid inclusion of otherwise deserving and grieving relatives is because of "crushing liability" considerations. This consideration does not apply to 9/11 terrorism litigation. The crushing liability concern could involve a relatively contained number of claims, possibly from a single isolated incident but of enormous aggregate magnitude.22 However, crushing liability is irrelevant in this case because of the nature of the tort, the nature of the sovereign defendants and the size of the defendants’ agencies and instrumentalities. IV. Hoglan Plaintiffs Who Were Denied Recovery Several Hoglan Plaintiffs were deemed ineligible to recover in the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation exclusively because they do not fit neatly into the nuclear family framework with slight expansions implemented by the Magistrate Judge. The Hoglan Plaintiffs hereby respectfully object and request that every Plaintiff has his or her damages claims fully evaluated by the Court under rubric of a fact-driven analysis of what it means to be the functional equivalent of an immediate family member. Those individual Hoglan Plaintiffs who were denied any solatium award are:23 A. Anthony Dorf Hoglan Plaintiff Anthony Dorf is the nephew of 9/11 decedent Stephen Dorf. Under the Magistrate Judge’s fact-driven, case-by-case analysis, Anthony Dorf should be eligible for FSIA solatium damages, particularly because of the long cohabitation at a tender age and the strong financial dependency involved. Anthony Dorf should be eligible for solatium damages as the 22 R. Rabin, Emotional Distress in Tort Law: Themes of Constraint, 1198 Wake Forest L. Rev. 1198 (2009); see also, D. Givelber, The Right to Minimum Social Decency and the Limits of Evenhandedness: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress by Outrageous Conduct, 82 Colum. L. Rev. 42 (1982). 23 These Hoglan Plaintiffs are arranged in the same order as in the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation, MDL Doc. No. 3676, pp. 14-22. 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 13 of 19 functional equivalent of a child of the 9/11 decedent. The facts in Anthony Dorf’s declaration submitted in this matter evidence the extraordinary relationship between Anthony Dorf and decedent Stephen Dorf. As acknowledged in Hoglan IV, "Anthony Dorf never knew his biological father and lived with his mother and her brother Stephen Dorf from his birth in August 1986 until September 11, 2001." MDL Doc. No. 3552, Dorf Supp’l Decl. at ¶ 2; Hoglan IV at 14. Anthony declares that Stephen Dorf was his primary male role model and "the father [he] never had," and noted that his uncle considered formally adopting him and named him as a beneficiary on a small life insurance policy. MDL Doc. No. 3552, Dorf Supp’l Decl. at ¶¶ 2-3; Hoglan IV at 14. The Magistrate Judge even agreed that "that Stephen Dorf was a father figure in his nephew [Anthony Dorf]’s life" and that Anthony cohabitated extensively with the 9/11 decedent. Hoglan IV, MDL Doc. No. 3676, at 14. Plaintiffs assert that a review of Mr. Anthony Dorf’s declaration will attest to the extraordinary relationship that warrants Mr. Anthony Dorf be eligible for solatium damages in this matter as the functional equivalent of a child of a 9/11 decedent. B. Jennie Mandelino, James Mandelino, Mary Ann Pino, and Michael Mandelino Plaintiffs Jennie Mandelino, James Mandelino, Mary Ann Pino, and Michael Mandelino ("the Mandelinos") are the surviving brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law of 9/11 decedent Joseph D. Mistrulli. MDL Doc. No. 3557, Philomena Mistrulli Decl. at ¶ 6. Decedent Joseph Mistrulli and Philomena Mistrulli lived with Jennie, James, and Michael Mandelino and Mary Ann Pino from 1980 until the early 1990s. All four of these Hoglan Plaintiffs were children or teenagers the whole time they live with the 9/11 decedent. MDL Doc. No. 3554, James Mandelino Decl. at ¶¶ 7-8. The declarations by these four survivors detail that Joseph Mistrulli was fully integrated into the family after his marriage to Philomena, participated in family celebrations and served as 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 14 of 19 a role model for the younger family members. In Hoglan IV, the Magistrate Judge noted "[t]he Mandelinos have certainly demonstrated a long period of tight bonds and love with decedent Joseph Mistrulli-an extraordinarily close relationship that persisted over time." Hoglan IV, MDL Doc. No. 3676, at 15-16. The Magistrate Judge denied any solatium recovery sought to the Mandelinos and Mary Ann Pino because, "given that the age of majority is 18, a simple extension of the Court’s analysis as to stepsiblings indicates that, even under the unusual circumstances of extensive cohabitation presented in this case, a brother-in-law or sister-in-law can never recover solatium damages." Id. at 16 (emphasis added). Plaintiffs assert that such an absolute prohibition of against recovering FSIA solatium damages for siblings-in-law abrogates the Court’s obligation to consider extraordinary circumstance and does not account for the subtle yet inevitable changes in American common law that governs FSIA eligibility. Therefore, the Hoglan Plaintiffs contend that the Mandelinos and Mary Ann Pino should be eligible to recover solatium damages in this matter. C. Vaughn Hoglan, Linden Hoagland, Lee N. Hoglan, Kathleen B. Hoglan, Candyce Hoglan, Michelle Arthurs, Kelly Arthurs and Estate of Herbert K. Hoglan These Hoglan Plaintiffs are the grandfather, stepmother, stepsister, uncles, and aunts of 9/11 decedent Mark Bingham. Mark Bingham’s parents, Gerald Bingham and Alice Hoagland, divorced a few months after his birth, and Alice Hoagland moved in with her father Herbert Hoglan, her mother, and her siblings. MDL Doc. No. 3560, Decl. of Alice Hoagland at ¶ 6. Herbert Hoglan and his wife Betty took care of 9/11 decedent Mark Bingham when he was a child and were the "sole caregivers" for Mark over half a decade. Id. at ¶¶ 6, 8. As correctly noted in Hoglan IV: 14 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 15 of 19 Ms. Hoagland’s brothers Lee N. Hoglan, Linden Hoagland and Vaughan Hoglan and younger sister Candyce Hoglan also lived in the family home at that time as teenagers, served as role models and "big brothers" and "big sisters" to the 9/11 decedent and they maintained close ties with Mark Bingham throughout his adult life. Kathleen B. Hoglan is Vaughn Hoglan’s wife, and met Mark Bingham in 1992. MDL Doc. No. 3676 at 18. Utilizing an appropriate and up-to-date definition of "immediate family members" would result in Vaughn Hoglan, Linden Hoagland, Lee N. Hoglan, Kathleen B. Hoglan, Candyce Hoglan, Michelle Arthurs, Kelly Arthurs and the Estate of Herbert K. Hoglan being deemed eligible for some recovery under the FSIA. Grandparents, step-parents, step-sister, uncles, and aunts should all be considered functional equivalents of immediate family members, as noted in numerous citations in Section II.D., supra, and given the extraordinary and exclusive circumstances inherent in the 9/11 litigation, as discussed in Section III, supra. D. Carole Grazioso Carole Grazioso was the step-mother of two 9/11 decedents, John Grazioso and Timmy Grazioso. Carole married John and Tim’s father, Hank Grazioso, when the decedents were six and seven years old, respectively. Carole Grazioso Decl. ¶¶ 4, 8; see also MDL Doc. No. 3566, Grazioso Decl. at ¶ 1. Carole cared for the two boys in her role as their step-mother and, as such, should be eligible to recover solatium damages as the functional equivalent of an immediate family menber. Regardless, the very extraordinary circumstance that Carole Grazioso lost two step-children on September 11th should elevate her to damages-eligible status in this action. 15 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 16 of 19 E. Karen Moreno Plaintiff Karen Moreno was the step-mother of 9/11 decedent Yvette Nichole Moreno. Karen Moreno was married to 9/11 decedent Yvette Moreno’s father. Karen Moreno had known the 9/11 decedent Yvette Nichole Moreno since Yvette was three-years old. Karen Moreno should also be eligible to recover solatium damages under an expansive interpretation of functional equivalent to an immediate family member, which would certainly include step-parents. F. Estate of Paul Scalogna Plaintiff Paul Scalogna was the grandfather of 9/11 decedent Brian Nunez. Brian Nunez’s biological father was absent in his life, and Mr. Scalogna provided support and guidance as a "father figure" in his early life. Moreover, 9/11 decedent Brian Nunez lived with his grandfather, Paul Scalogna, both as an infant and for 3 years in his late-teens and early-twenties. Decl. of Joanne Lovett on Behalf of Paul Scalogna ¶¶ 4, 12–13, 16. Mr. Scalogna should be eligible for FSIA solatium damages under a broad, flexible interpretation of functional equivalent to an immediate family member. G. Donna Corbett-Moran Plaintiff Donna Corbett-Moran was 9/11 decedent Brian Nunez’s long-time girlfriend and was the functional equivalent of Brian’s spouse. Donna Corbett-Moran and Brian Nunez had been together as a couple for many years and conceived a child together (although it was miscarried). As Donna’s declaration in this matter attests, they had planned to be married. Donna Corbett-Moran be considered Brian’s fiancée and, as such, should recover solatium damages in this tragedy as the functional equivalent of Brian Nunez’s spouse. 16 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 17 of 19 H. Diane Ognibene Plaintiff Diane Ognibene was 9/11 decedent Philip Ognibene’s step-mother who cohabited with 9/11 decedent Philip Ognibene for about 10 years. Diane Ognibene married 9/11 decedent Philip Ognibene’s father, Vincent Ognibene, when the decedent was 18 years old. Decl. of Diane Ognibene ¶ 4. Even though Diane Ognibene was not a part of 9/11 decedent Philip Ognibene’s early childhood, Diane performed as his step-mother for a decade and, as such, should be eligible in this action. I. Norma Ward Plaintiff Norma Ward was 9/11 decedent Timothy Raymond Ward’s step-mother. As discussed above, the Hoglan Plaintiffs contend that step-mothers should be considered "immediate family members"-especially for FSIA terrorism cases. Plaintiff Norma Ward also cohabitated with 9/11 decedent Timothy Raymond Ward. Therefore, Norma Ward should also be eligible for FSIA solatium damages under a broad, flexible interpretation of functional equivalent to an immediate family member. J. Jessica Kramer and Christi Pendergraft Plaintiff Jessica Kramer and Plaintiff Christi Pendergraft are Plaintiff Norma Ward’s daughters, who became 9/11 decedent Timothy Raymond Ward’s step-sisters when Norma Ward married Timothy Raymond Ward’s stepfather. Jessica and Christi were children when they became decedent Timothy Raymond Ward’s step-sisters. Step-siblings should be deemed eligible and Jessica Kramer and Christi Pendergraft’s claims should be upheld. 17 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 18 of 19 K. Other Claimants The Magistrate Judge recommends that the claims of the following Plaintiffs be denied solatium damages: Michelle Clendenney, Heather Strickland, Jeanette Coffey, Estate of Daniel F. Coffey, Jr., Estate of Ida Reiss, Estate of Lenore Jackson, Estate of Ken Jackson, Samuel Collazo, Leonardo Collazo, Gabriella Rinehart, Estate of Louise Borzumato, Michelle Baker, Martin Smith, Mateo Pino, Martin Smith, Anthony Pino, Vincent Pappasso, Jr., Brendan Cofresi (Minor), James Montoya, Addison Friedman, Anthony Friedman-Ceraso, Daniel Huber, Danielle Smith, Brittney Cofresi (Minor), Troia Johnson, Diane Smith, Tawanda Sith, Kaitlin Steiner Keller, Kristyn Steiner Martin, Kristen Druckenmiller, Stephanie Feher, Nina Fuller, James Mandelino Sr., Pedro Geraldino, Kathryn Collman, Gail Smith, Julie Bertelsen Hoglan, Raymond Woods, Scott Woods, Lisa Smith, Mike Smith, Jason Smith, Lance Ward and Marc Ward. The Hoglan Plaintiff respectfully object to the denial of solatium damages to all of these Plaintiffs and request their claims and eligibility be reviewed under an expansive interpretation of functional equivalents to immediate family members. V. Conclusion The Court should decline to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations insofar as she recommended denial of awards for immediate family members who were not within the outdated and inappropriate definition of "immediate family member" utilized in the Hoglan IV Report and Recommendation. Instead, the Court should enter awards for such Hoglan Plaintiffs commensurate with those requested in Plaintiffs’ damages inquest submission, or in other appropriate amounts. 18 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3736 Filed 09/29/17 Page 19 of 19 Respectfully submitted, Date: September 29, 2017/s/Timothy B. Fleming_____ Timothy B. Fleming (DC Bar No. 351114) WIGGINS CHILDS PANTAZIS FISHER GOLDFARB PLLC 1850 M Street, NW, Suite 720 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 467-4489 Dennis G. Pantazis (AL Bar No. ASB-2216-A59D) WIGGINS CHILDS PANTAZIS FISHER GOLDFARB LLC The Kress Building 301 19th Street North Birmingham, AL 35203 (205) 314-0500 Richard D. Hailey (IN Bar No. 7375-49) Mary Beth Ramey (IN Bar No. 5876-49) RAMEY & HAILEY 9333 North Meridian Street, Suite 105 Indianapolis, IN 46260 (317) 582-0000 Robert M. Foote (IL Bar No. 03124325) Craig S. Meilke (IL Bar No. 03127485) FOOTE, MIELKE, CHAVEZ & O’NEIL, LLC 10 West State Street, Suite 200 Geneva, IL 60134 (630) 232-7450 Attorneys for the Hoglan Plaintiffs 19

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire, dated September 30, 2017, re: Plaintiffs Executive Committees Revised Discovery Status Letter as to Defendants Muslim World League (MWL), International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), and Dubai Islamic Bank (DIB). Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3737 Filed 09/30/17 Page 1 of 5 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y.) Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Personal Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Injury and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley, (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers/Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC COZEN O’CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O’CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF September 30, 2017 The Honorable Sarah Netburn Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square, Room 430 New York, NY 10007 RE: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Netburn: In accordance with the Court’s Order of July 27, 2017 (ECF No. 3662), the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees ("PECs") write to provide the Court with an update concerning the status of merits discovery with defendants Muslim World League ("MWL"), International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO"), and Dubai Islamic Bank ("DIB"), the ongoing translation and analysis of recent document productions received from the MWL and IIRO, plaintiffs’ intention to submit motions to compel detailing deficiencies in each of the defendants’ productions, and plaintiffs’ anticipated motion for sanctions against the MWL and IIRO. Plaintiffs further respectfully request that the Court grant a reasonable extension of the deadline to submit those motions. 1. Muslim World League and International Islamic Relief Organization Plaintiffs served their consolidated First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to the Muslim World League ("MWL") on October 28, 2005, and their consolidated First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to the International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO") on December 13, 2005, including supplemental document requests to each defendant thereafter. See ECF No. 3516 at pp. 2-4. During the first half of 2011, plaintiffs filed two motions to compel seeking the production of several categories of documentation from the MWL and IIRO. Following extensive briefing and argument, Magistrate Judge Maas issued a number discovery orders Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3737 Filed 09/30/17 Page 2 of 5 Hon. Sarah Netburn September 30, 2017 Page 2 ____________________ directing the MWL and IIRO to immediately produce all documents requested by plaintiffs. See Orders dated April 12, 2011, April 26, 2011 (ECF No. 2424), and June 23, 2011 (ECF No. 2442). The Court expressly warned the MWL and IIRO that failure to comply with the Court’s Orders by July 8, 2011 could lead to case dispositive sanctions. See June 23, 2011 Transcript of Record ("Tr.") at pp. 9-10, 17-18 (advising that the defendants’ failure to fully comply with the Court’s rulings may lead to the entry of default judgments). Notwithstanding those explicit warnings, counsel for the MWL and IIRO repeatedly represented to the Court that his clients had produced all responsive documents that were the subject of the Court’s orders. See June 23 Discovery Hearing Tr. at p. 10 ("What my point is that we have produced everything that was called for in terms of the 8 categories for both MWL and IIRO-SA … that is our position that we have complied."); p. 11 ("It’s our position that we produced everything now, albeit late."); p. 13 ("Yes, Your Honor. To reiterate, we believe we have produced everything."). Those representations were patently false. In the weeks following those statements, the defendants produced over 13,000 pages of new documents, making clear that no meaningful effort had previously been invested in searching for records until the Court threatened the defendants with sanctions. Recognizing the defendants’ unwillingness to comply with the Court’s directives, Judge Maas invited plaintiffs to move for sanctions. See July 26, 2011 Order (ECF No. 2450). Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment was fully briefed as of October 14, 2011 and oral argument was held on November 16, 2011. Despite a wealth of evidence demonstrating the defendants’ willful disregard for the Court’s discovery orders, Judge Maas denied without prejudice plaintiffs’ motion for entry of defaults, but admonished the defendants to undertake greater efforts to search for and produce responsive documents. Failure to do so, the Court warned, "may lead to dispositive sanctions." See November 16, 2011 Tr. at p. 16. Although Judge Maas declined to enter default judgments at that time, he invited plaintiffs to file a motion to recover the costs and expenses incurred as a result of the defendants’ history of non-compliance through November of 2011, including efforts expended to disprove the defendants’ contentions that several categories of documents requested by the plaintiffs did not exist. See id. at pp. 25-26. In 2013, new (and current) counsel for the MWL and IIRO entered appearances in this litigation and the parties have on multiple occasions conducted meet-and-confers to address the defendants’ earlier discovery record and the specific areas where the productions remain incomplete. Although the MWL and IIRO have made further productions since new counsel appeared on their behalves in 2013, plaintiffs believe that their productions remain incomplete in a number of areas. Plaintiffs anticipate filing two motions to address these deficiencies. First, plaintiffs anticipate filing a motion for sanctions against the MWL and IIRO. That motion will seek monetary sanctions for the costs and burdens resulting from the defendants’ non-compliance between the outset of discovery and the hearing before Judge Maas in 2011. In regard to that contemplated application, plaintiffs note that the further productions by the MWL and IIRO since new counsel appeared have (in plaintiffs’ view) confirmed that representations Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3737 Filed 09/30/17 Page 3 of 5 Hon. Sarah Netburn September 30, 2017 Page 3 ____________________ made to the Court by the MWL and IIRO during proceedings at that time were demonstrably false.1 In addition, plaintiffs do not believe that the defendants’ productions, which are now complete, have fulfilled the obligations established by the Court’s prior rulings on plaintiffs’ several motions to compel. The motion will also seek sanctions for non-compliance with those orders. Plaintiffs also anticipate filing a separate (but related in some respects) motion to compel, seeking to require the MWL and IIRO to search for and produce additional relevant records on a number of fronts. Among other topics, plaintiffs believe the defendants’ productions are incomplete with regard to: (i) the activities of MWL and IIRO senior officials and policymaking bodies, particularly as they relate to exchanges with components of the Saudi government concerning the charities’ annual budgets; (ii) the MWL Constituent Council, including the robust reporting submitted to the Council prior to, and during, its annual meetings; (iii) reports submitted to the IIRO Executive Committee, IIRO Board of Directors, and IIRO Constituent Council; (iv) banking records for the MWL and IIRO branch offices; (v) underlying audit records; and (vi) documents relating to numerous raids of MWL and IIRO branch offices and arrests of employees. 2. An Extension of Time to Submit Plaintiffs’ Motions is Necessary At the September 7, 2017 conference, Your Honor indicated a preference for plaintiffs to file any motions to compel as to the MWL and IIRO within thirty days of the filing of this status letter, and indicated that plaintiffs should address any request for additional time in this letter. For the reasons summarized below, plaintiffs respectfully request that they be given until January 15, 2018 to file their motions to compel and motions for sanctions as to the MWL and IIRO. First, the October 30 date the Court referenced during the September 7 hearing closely coincides with several other briefing deadlines previously set by the Court, including: (i) October 27, 2017 due date for plaintiffs’ reply briefs in support of their motions for sanctions against defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obaid, Abdullah Mohsen al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman H.S. al Buthe (ECF No. 3716); and (ii) November 2, 2017 due date for plaintiffs’ oppositions to the motions to dismiss of defendants Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Saudi High Commission (ECF No. 3688). In addition, the Court has set a November 15, 2017 due date for the submission of the revised draft of the proposed deposition protocol from the PECs and Defendants’ Executive Committee ("DEC") (ECF No. 3716). Second, leading up to the August 15, 2017 document production deadline, the MWL and IIRO produced over 57,000 pages of predominately Arabic documents,2 and a preliminary review suggests that many documents of particular significance were included in these late stage 1 Plaintiffs deferred filing the motion for sanctions for the defendants’ earlier misconduct so that this additional evidence from subsequent productions could be included. 2 The productions from defendants have included documents in Arabic, Urdu, Bangladeshi, Serbo-Croatian, Bosnian, Russian, Turkish, German, and French. Local dialects used in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and elsewhere have also been implicated. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3737 Filed 09/30/17 Page 4 of 5 Hon. Sarah Netburn September 30, 2017 Page 4 ____________________ productions. The content of these significant documents suggests gaps in the defendants’ productions. However, plaintiffs anticipate it will take some additional time to complete the analysis of these materials and independent research relating to their contents. The task of analyzing the MWL and IIRO documents is highly complex, requiring extensive translation efforts and the involvement of skilled linguists. Many of the documents are handwritten or include handwritten notations, rendering the translation process even more challenging. Importantly, once translations are complete, knowledgeable subject matter experts are necessary to analyze the materials and determine their relevance. Further complicating the matter, the MWL and IIRO productions have been spread out in batches over the past 11 years, and routinely lack any internal logic or order, an issue plaintiffs have raised with these defendants during prior meet-and-confers. The disorder of the productions requires tedious and time-consuming searches of the defendants’ earlier productions to determine whether corresponding documents exist that can provide further context and insight. Moreover, the MWL and IIRO productions have often been infused with countless irrelevant documents. The process of translating and analyzing scores of documents, only to discover they are unresponsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests, is itself incredibly laborious. See also Robert Haefele’s September 29, 2017 letter to the Honorable Sarah Netburn addressing similar concerns in the context of defendant World Assembly of Muslim Youth’s request for a 60 day extension to compete its document production (ECF No. 3732). After consulting with our subject matter experts and linguists, plaintiffs have determined that an additional 90 days is necessary to complete the translation and review of the MWL and IIRO productions, with time needed to coordinate the drafting of motions among several plaintiffs’ firms. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs respectfully request that the deadline for their motions as to the MWL and IIRO be extended to January 15, 2018. 3. Dubai Islamic Bank Plaintiffs and Dubai Islamic Bank ("DIB") are continuing to confer to narrow areas of disagreement as to the Court’s prior order of March 22, 2016 concerning search terms. See Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Frank Maas: Oral Argument held on 3/22/2016; 1:03-md-01570. Although the parties’ extensive discussions have considerably narrowed the number of search terms in dispute, from several hundred to 42, the parties anticipate they may not be able to fully bridge the remaining gaps on this issue. If not, plaintiffs will file their motion to compel within 30 days of the date of this letter. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3737 Filed 09/30/17 Page 5 of 5 Hon. Sarah Netburn September 30, 2017 Page 5 ____________________ Respectfully submitted, COZEN O’CONNOR By: J. Scott Tarbutton, on behalf of the PECs cc: The Honorable George B. Daniels (via ECF) All MDL Counsel of Record (via ECF) LEGAL\32751984\1

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire, dated September 30, 2017, re: the Plaintiffs Executive Committees revised discovery status letter. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3738 Filed 09/30/17 Page 1 of 2 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y.) Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Personal Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Injury and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley, (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers/Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC COZEN O’CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O’CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF September 30, 2017 The Honorable Sarah Netburn Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square, Room 430 New York, NY 10007 RE: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Netburn: Prior to the filing of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ September 29, 2017 status letter concerning merits discovery with defendants Muslim World League ("MWL"), International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO"), and Dubai Islamic Bank ("DIB") (ECF No. 3733), plaintiffs and counsel for DIB agreed to include a joint statement to the Court and finalized language to include in the plaintiffs’ submission. Unfortunately, an earlier draft of the status letter was mistakenly filed with the Court per my direction and did not include the final version of the joint statement agreed to by the parties. I kindly ask the Court to disregard the letter filed at ECF No. 3733, and respectfully direct Your Honor’s attention to the revised status letter that was filed this morning at ECF No. 3737. My sincerest apologies to the Court and counsel for DIB for the confusion. Respectfully, COZEN O’CONNOR By: J. Scott Tarbutton, on behalf of the PECs Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3738 Filed 09/30/17 Page 2 of 2 Hon. Sarah Netburn September 30, 2017 Page 2 ____________________ cc: The Honorable George B. Daniels (via ECF) All MDL Counsel of Record (via ECF) LEGAL\32751979\1

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn from Waleed Nassar dated October 3, 2017 re: Response to Plaintiffs Executive Committees September 30 Proposal (ECF No. 3737). Document filed by International Islamic Relief Organization(IIRO), Muslim World League.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3739 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1 of 3 October 3, 2017 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING Hon. Sarah Netburn United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square Courtroom 430 New York, NY 10007 Re: In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) – Response to Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee’s September 30 Proposal (ECF No. 3737) Dear Judge Netburn: This firm represents the Muslim World League ("MWL") and the International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO") in the above-referenced matter. We write on behalf of MWL and IIRO in response to the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee’s ("PEC") status letter filed on September 30, 2017 (ECF No. 3737), in which they propose to file concurrent motions to compel and motions for sanctions against MWL and IIRO and request to extend the filing deadline of those motions to January 15, 2018. While MWL and IIRO do not object to the PEC’s request to extend by approximately 3 months the deadline to file their anticipated motions, we submit that the approach proposed by the PEC – to simultaneously file motions to compel and motions for sanctions on what appear to be the same or overlapping issues – would be inefficient and would waste judicial resources and result in the unnecessary duplication of costs and efforts. Instead, MWL and IIRO propose that Your Honor direct the PEC to utilize the time until the filing deadline (i) to complete their review of the additional documents produced by MWL and IIRO (we note that the PEC concede in their September 30 letter to having done only a "preliminary review" on documents produced over the summer) and then (ii) to conduct a meet-and-confer with counsel for MWL and IIRO with the goal of narrowing the areas of disagreement that must be presented to the Court on any motions to compel. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3739 Filed 10/03/17 Page 2 of 3 Hon. Sarah Netburn October 3, 2017 Page 2 We underscore that while it has been almost a year since the PEC have discussed with us their views on what document discovery issues remain, previous meet-and-confers between counsel have proved fruitful and have served to narrow the scope of disagreements. Indeed, as a consequence of our recent meet-and-confer discussions with the PEC in 2016, significant global efforts made by MWL and IIRO to conduct additional inquiries and searches – as a means of reaching compromise on certain areas of disagreement and as part of the good faith efforts by MWL and IIRO to comply with their discovery obligations – resulted in the production of over one hundred thousand pages of documents. This is in addition to the hundreds of thousands of pages previously produced. Given the near silence from Plaintiffs since our last meet-and-confer in October 2016, we were very surprised to learn when we received the PEC’s status letter that there are numerous areas where Plaintiffs believe MWL’s and IIRO’s productions are incomplete. While we do not endeavor to address herein all the inaccurate statements made by the PEC concerning the document productions of MWL and IIRO, we note that the PEC’s complaint that the productions "lack any internal logic or order" is demonstrably wrong. MWL and IIRO have provided over 4800 pages of indices listing the responsive documents, the document request or groups of document requests to which the documents are responsive, and the source of the documents. Moreover, the PEC’s complaint about the volume of "irrelevant documents" documents produced by MWL and IIRO or the manner in which the documents were organized are most likely a direct consequence of the Plaintiffs’ decision to serve over 275 requests on MWL and IIRO, some of which include sub-requests listing a combined total of over 260 names of individuals and entities, essentially multiplying the number of requests to over 500. We have provided documents that Plaintiffs have requested. That they require translation is not surprising as the business of our clients was predominantly conducted in Arabic. Since the inception of our representation, an unprecedented effort has been made in Saudi Arabia and around the world to review and collect responsive documents and to comply fully with all existing Orders. The PEC appears intent on dredging up ancient history and reprising complaints that no longer have any substance. Nearly a half a million pages of documents have been produced in full accordance with the Federal Rules. It is, moreover, not credible that the PEC complain now about the completeness of the production since by their own admission, they have not reviewed all the documents. While all of this can be taken up by the Court when it reviews the motions, given that the PEC have supplemented their "there are too few documents here" with a new claim that "there are too many documents here," we are compelled to tell the Court that despite massive efforts all over the world, the PEC is dead set on seeking to compel documents and sanctions as it has said numerous times for almost the last decade. Based on this record, there is no longer a basis for a motion to compel, and certainly no basis for sanctions. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3739 Filed 10/03/17 Page 3 of 3 Hon. Sarah Netburn October 3, 2017 Page 3 Given the many years of document discovery in this case, the change in counsel that occurred in 2013, and the substantial productions made by MWL and IIRO, any motions for sanctions should be presented, if at all, after the outstanding document discovery issues raised in the PEC’s letter of September 30 have been addressed by meet-and-confer discussions or resolved by Your Honor upon consideration of the full record on these issues.1 Proceeding as the PEC suggests – to simultaneously brief issues of purported non-compliance that they assert were addressed by Judge Maas in hearings that took place nearly six years ago while also raising issues that the PEC concede are "related" to issues to be addressed in their anticipated motions to compel – would be grossly inefficient, prejudicial and wasteful of the parties’ resources. We submit that the better course of action would be to proceed as we have outlined above. Specifically, we would request that Your Honor direct that counsel meet-and-confer after the PEC have completed their review of the supplemental productions made by MWL and IIRO, that any remaining areas of dispute be addressed in motions to compel filed no later than January 15, 2018, and that motions for sanctions be addressed, if at all, after the motions to compel are resolved. Respectfully submitted, Waleed Nassar 1 We welcome the opportunity to present to Your Honor the myriad of ways in which MWL and IIRO have worked to respond to the over 275 document requests served on them and the efforts made to work with the PEC to address what appears to be a never-ending list of complaints about what has been an exhaustive search for and production of decades-old documents that exist all across the globe. As part of this process, Lewis Baach Kaufmann Middlemiss attorneys have traveled on document retrieval visits totaling several months combined to Jeddah, Makkah, the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bosnia, Albania, Macedonia, Kosovo, Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya, Jordan and Vienna, reviewing an estimated two million pages of hard copy documents.

ORDER: On October 2, 2017, the Honorable George B. Daniels referred this case to my docket for general pretrial supervision. Plaintiff Susanne Fraser is directed to review the Courts May 3, 2017 Order in the Multi-District Litigation, ECF No. 3543, which describes the procedures by which plaintiffs may conform their pleadings to the Consolidated Amended Complaint as to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina, ECF No. 3463. Plaintiff is also directed to meet and confer with the Plaintiffs' Executive Committees to determine whether she should file a Notice to Conform. Plaintiff shall file a letter by October 13, 2017, advising the Court how it intends to proceed. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 10/3/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:17-cv-07317-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3740 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK-----------------------------------------------------------------X 10/3/2017 In re: 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 ORDER-----------------------------------------------------------------X SARAH NETBURN, United States Magistrate Judge: This document relates to: Susanne Fraser, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 17-CV-7317 (GBD)(SN). On October 2, 2017, the Honorable George B. Daniels referred this case to my docket for general pretrial supervision. Plaintiff Susanne Fraser is directed to review the Court’s May 3, 2017 Order in the Multi-District Litigation, ECF No. 3543, which describes the procedures by which plaintiffs may conform their pleadings to the Consolidated Amended Complaint as to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina, ECF No. 3463. Plaintiff is also directed to meet and confer with the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees to determine whether she should file a Notice to Conform. Plaintiff shall file a letter by October 13, 2017, advising the Court how it intends to proceed. SO ORDERED. DATED: October 3, 2017 New York, New York

ORDER: The Court previously scheduled a telephone conference for 4:00 p.m. on October 5, 2017, to address certain deadlines. During the conference, the Court will also address the Plaintiffs' Executive Committees' request to extend the deadlines to submit motions to compel or motions for sanctions against Defendants Muslim World League and the International Islamic Relief Organization. ECF No. 3737. The Plaintiffs' Executive Committees are directed to circulate a call-in number to all interested parties and to provide that number to the Court in advance of the telephone conference. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 10/3/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3741 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK-----------------------------------------------------------------X 10/3/2017 In re: 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 ORDER-----------------------------------------------------------------X SARAH NETBURN, United States Magistrate Judge: The Court previously scheduled a telephone conference for 4:00 p.m. on October 5, 2017, to address certain deadlines. During the conference, the Court will also address the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ request to extend the deadlines to submit motions to compel or motions for sanctions against Defendants Muslim World League and the International Islamic Relief Organization. ECF No. 3737. The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees are directed to circulate a call-in number to all interested parties and to provide that number to the Court in advance of the telephone conference. SO ORDERED. DATED: October 3, 2017 New York, New York

MOTION for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3742 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02-cv-06977 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 NOTICE OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT WA’EL HAMZA JELAIDAN PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the Declaration of J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. and the exhibits attached thereto, and the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan, the plaintiffs by and through their undersigned counsel will move the Court before the Honorable Sarah Netburn, U.S. Magistrate Judge, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, Room 430, Courtroom 219, at a date and time to be determined by the Court, for an Order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, sanctioning defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan for his defiance of this Court’s prior orders compelling him to undertake assiduous efforts to secure and produce documents responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests, including in particular his banking records, and for his misrepresentations to the Court and plaintiffs concerning his ability to obtain and possession of such responsive records. In the context of proceedings relating to plaintiffs’ earlier motions to Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3742 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 compel and for sanctions directed to defendant Jelaidan, he represented to the Court and plaintiffs on numerous occasions that he was incapable of obtaining his own banking records from his banks, and that he was not in possession of any banking records (save for two documents) responsive to plaintiffs’ requests. However, Jelaidan’s own submissions to the Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC"), in regards to his application for a license to pay the monetary sanction previously imposed by the Court, confirm that those representations were demonstrably false. As sanctions for this continuing misconduct, plaintiffs request that the Court require Jelaidan to: (1) promptly produce affidavit testimony explaining how and when he came into possession of his banking records from Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. that were submitted to OFAC; (2) explain when he provided those records to his counsel in this litigation; (3) certify under oath whether he is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced; (4) appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to locate and secure documentation responsive to plaintiff’s discovery requests; (5) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, including reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (6) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. Plaintiffs seek this relief for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan. Dated: October 6, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Sean P. Carter Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 2 Jodi W. Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, III, Esq. KREINDLER & KREINDLER, LLP 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 3

FILING ERROR - WRONG EVENT TYPE SELECTED FROM MENU (SEE {{3744}} Memorandum) - MOTION for Sanctions Memorandum of Law in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions against Defendant Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees. Modified on 10/10/2017

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02-cv-06977 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT WA’EL HAMZA JELAIDAN I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Throughout this litigation, defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan has consciously obstructed plaintiffs’ efforts to obtain relevant discovery, demonstrated a profound disregard for the authority of this Court, and engaged in other egregious behavior. See October 28, 2013 Memorandum Decision and Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 2789) at p. 9 ("Jelaidan’s conduct throughout this case evidences a continued unwillingness to participate fairly in discovery and can only be characterized as proceeding in bad faith."); id. ("Jelaidan’s failure to meet even his most basic discovery obligations thus has resulted in extreme delay."); p. 12 (stating there is "significant doubt" that Jelaidan "made prior good faith attempts to contact his banks"); p. 14 (stating that "Jelaidan has not made good faith efforts to satisfy his discovery obligations"); p. 15 (finding "that Jelaidan has willfully disregarded his discovery obligations and acted in bad faith"); id. ("Jelaidan’s failure to undertake any efforts to retrieve responsive Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 9 documents for nearly one and one-half years after he was ordered to do so is clear evidence of his intentionally obstructive conduct."). Materials submitted by Jelaidan’s counsel to the Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC") on June 19, 2017 indicate that Jelaidan has been in possession of records relating to accounts he held at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A., contrary to his representations to this Court and plaintiffs, and which he has never produced in defiance of the specific orders of this Court. In light of the defendant’s continuing obstructionist behavior in these proceedings, intervention by this Court is again necessary. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court issue a sanctions order pursuant to F.R.C.P. 37 requiring Jelaidan to: (1) promptly produce affidavit testimony explaining how and when he came into possession of his banking records from Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. that were submitted to OFAC; (2) explain when he provided those records to his counsel in this litigation; (3) certify under oath whether he is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced; (4) appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to locate and secure documentation responsive to plaintiff’s discovery requests; (5) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, including reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (6) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On June 13, 2006, plaintiffs served their consolidated First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan seeking inter alia, relevant banking and financial records, including documentation relating to accounts held by Jelaidan at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. See Request Nos. A-6 and A-7, attached hereto as Exhibit A. On August 15, 2006, Jelaidan served responses and objections to plaintiffs’ document requests and 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 9 produced his first, and only, document production in this litigation. That production, consisting of a mere 22 documents (104 pages), included two documents relating to Jelaidan’s account at Faisal Finance: (1) a three-page bank statement for Account No. x0409 at Faisal Finance for the month of January 2005 (WJ003); and (2) a September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. x0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013). The remainder of Jelaidan’s production is largely unresponsive to plaintiffs’ document requests. Plaintiffs filed numerous motions to compel directed to Jelaidan in an attempt to secure basic compliance with his discovery obligations, resulting in several orders directing him to undertake assiduous efforts to obtain and produce responsive records, including his banking and financial records, and the imposition of sanctions. The history of Jelaidan’s non-compliance in this litigation is well documented, as detailed in plaintiffs’ letters to the Court dated August 10, 2015 (ECF No. 2988) and May 12, 2017 (ECF No. 3582), which are incorporated by reference and attached hereto as Exhibits B and C respectively. See also plaintiffs’ additional submissions to the Court at Exhibits D and E. More recently, on May 3, 2017, plaintiffs were again compelled to request the Court’s intervention when it became clear that Jelaidan was repeatedly failing to comply with this Court’s October 31, 2017 Order to employ "diligent efforts to secure the necessary OFAC license to comply with the orders of this Court" and to file status letters every 60 days describing those efforts (ECF No. 3380). See plaintiffs’ May 3, 2017 letter motion for sanctions at ECF No. 3542. In response to the Court’s May 25, 2017 Order directing the defendant to submit status reports every thirty days thereafter (ECF No. 3610), defendant Jelaidan submitted his sixth status report to the Court on June 26, 2017 describing additional communications with OFAC (ECF 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 9 No. 3635). See Exhibit F. Included as an attachment to the status report is a June 19, 2017 email from Jelaidan’s counsel to the Treasury Department transmitting "documents from Faisal Finance in Switzerland (noting my client’s bank account numbers with the institution and last known amount with the bank) and a translated copy (with the original) of a letter from the Attorney General of Switzerland that lists his Citi Bank account number and information." See id. The attachments were not included in the defendant’s June 26 submission to the Court, and plaintiffs subsequently sent multiple requests to Jelaidan’s counsel asking for copies of those documents. See plaintiffs’ September 14, 2017 letter to Mr. Martin McMahon at Exhibit G. Mr. McMahon finally provided copies of the requested attachments on September 15, 2017, consisting of: (1) 16 pages of banking records relating to Jelaidan’s bank account at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. (Account No. x0409), including account statements and summaries, wire transfers, and multiple pieces of correspondence between Jelaidan and bank officials; and (2) an October 16, 2002 Order from the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland directing the seizure of Jelaidan’s bank account at Citibank of Geneva (Account No. xx4046).1 See Exhibit K. Upon closer examination of the documents, plaintiffs have confirmed that a majority of the Faisal Finance banking records relating to Account No. x0409 (15 of the 16 pages), have never been produced by Jelaidan in discovery.2 Those documents fall squarely within the scope of the Court’s prior directives that Jelaidan undertake vigorous and expeditious efforts to obtain requested banking records. November 16, 2011 Discovery Hearing Transcript of Record at p. 33 ("I guess, Mr. McMahon, it comes down to the same thing that I said with respect to your other two clients, namely, that there has to be a full court press. And, as Mr. Carter indicated and I’ve 1 The October 16, 2002 Order was previously produced as an exhibit to the defendant’s October 6, 2015 Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel at ECF No. 3062. 2 The first document in that attachment, a September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. x0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013), was produced to plaintiffs on August 16, 2006. 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 9 said before, it has to be documented. If you’re not sufficiently able to document a vigorous effort to obtain those documents, it may be that sanctions are imposed.").3 III. DISCUSSION Throughout discovery, Jelaidan has maintained that Faisal Finance and other banks were unwilling to cooperate with him and his legal team given his designation as a founding member of al Qaeda and terror financier. See, e.g., Defendant Wael Jelaidan’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (ECF No. 3062), at pp. 1-2 ("Defense counsel can represent to the Court that nothing has changed in this regard, i.e., Saudi counsel has been unable to secure Swiss bank account documents."); p. 3 (asserting that "the banks were fearful of working with Defendant"); p. 6 (claiming that Jelaidan and his legal team were blocked from obtaining copies of relevant banking documents once Swiss bank authorities seized his account); and p. 7 (asserting that "an individual designated as an international terrorist cannot secure, let alone produce, bank records that a foreign government has seized and sequestered"). See also October 29, 2011 Affidavit of Wael Hamzah Jelaidan at Exhibit J, at p. 2: I did have a personal bank account with Faisal Finance S.A. in Switzerland. However, after the said UN Designation, the account was frozen by the Swiss Authorities per the UN directive. Since then, I do not have the legal authority to access the account nor request any documentation. The Court rejected these unsubstantiated claims, concluding that responsive banking records are accessible to the defendant: The remaining material proffered in opposition to the Plaintiffs’ motion confirms that Jelaidan has not made good faith efforts to satisfy his discovery obligations. 3 On August 10, 2015, plaintiffs filed a further motion to compel and for leave to seek additional sanctions against Jelaidan, in which plaintiffs argued that documents produced by defendant Yassin Kadi indicated that Jelaidan had successfully obtained certain of his banking records for Kadi’s benefit, including records from Faisal Finance. See Exhibit H (KADI0004271-4272) (Jelaidan personally met with Kadi’s legal team and authorized their access to corporate and banking records.); Exhibit I (KADI0102987) (Faisal Finance advised Jelaidan that the bank was retrieving the requested account records and would courier the documents to Jelaidan once completed.). Plaintiffs argued that the records produced by Kadi indicated not only that Jelaidan’s representations to the Court that he had been unable to obtain his records were false, but also that he was in fact in possession of records that he had not produced. The documents recently submitted to OFAC provide further evidence those facts. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 9 Indeed, some of the materials submitted for in camera review actually suggests that certain relevant bank records are available to Jelaidan, despite his claims to the contrary. Moreover, although Jelaidan continues to take the position that he has been blocked from obtaining any relevant bank records since being designated in 2002, he apparently was able to produce a 2005 account statement from Faisal Finance. (See 11/16/11 Hr’g Tr. at 34). These inconsistencies show that Jelaidan has been less than forthcoming about the documents he is capable of obtaining and producing. See October 28, 2013 Memorandum Decision and Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 2789), at p. 14 (emphasis supplied). The September 2017 disclosure of the Faisal Finance account records affirms the Court’s findings relating to Jelaidan’s practical ability to obtain responsive banking records, indicates that Jelaidan has made knowingly false representations to this Court and plaintiffs in an effort to evade his discovery obligations, and has withheld production of documents in his possession despite the Court’s specific orders directing him to produce those records. In light of these considerations, plaintiffs respectfully submit that an order from this Court sanctioning Jelaidan is appropriate. To that end, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an order requiring Jelaidan to provide a sworn affidavit addressing the following topics and issues: • The circumstances pursuant to which Jelaidan and/or his Saudi legal team came into possession of the Faisal Finance account records that were submitted to OFAC, including how they were obtained, from whom they were obtained, and the date Jelaidan and/or his Saudi legal team came into possession of the records; • The circumstances pursuant to which the Jelaidan’s U.S. counsel (Mr. McMahon) came into possession of the Faisal Finance account records that were submitted to OFAC, including how he obtained them, from whom he obtained them, the date he came into possession of the records, and whether any instructions were given to Mr. McMahon in relation to the purpose of those records; • The circumstances and/or reasoning for withholding the Faisal Finance account records from production until September 15, 2017, eleven years after the start of merits discovery; and • Whether the defendant is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 9 In addition, plaintiffs respectfully submit that Jelaidan should be required to appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to search for and secure documentation responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery, without prejudice to plaintiffs’ right to depose Jelaidan at a later date as to the full scope of claims asserted against him in this litigation. As detailed in plaintiffs’ prior motions to compel at Exhibits B, D, and E, Jelaidan has utterly failed to produce documents relating to his bank accounts,4 businesses, employment and leadership positions with various Saudi da’awa organizations (e.g., Muslim World League ("MWL"), International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO"), Saudi Joint Relief Committee ("SJRC"), Saudi Red Crescent ("SRC"), Rabita Trust, and Al Haramain Al Masjed Al Aqsa), and other associations. Accordingly, plaintiffs respectfully ask the Court to direct Jelaidan to appear for a deposition to explain what steps he has taken to comply with the Court’s prior discovery orders and produce responsive documents. After eleven years of discovery, it is more than appropriate to require the defendant’s presence to personally respond to plaintiffs’ inquiries on these issues. Moreover, given the significant amount of time and resources expended by the plaintiffs over the past six years to compel discovery from the defendant, plaintiffs respectfully request that Jelaidan be required to: (i) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, with a budget to be submitted to the Court for approval in advance; (ii) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (iii) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. See American Cash Card Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 184 F.R.D. 521 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (granting sanctions for repeated failures to comply with discovery orders); Owen v. No Parking Today, Inc., 280 F.R.D. 106 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (imposing sanctions 4 Through their independent investigations, plaintiffs have identified approximately twenty (20) bank accounts linked to Jelaidan, including accounts at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A., Faisal Finance (Turkey), Al Rajhi Bank, Habib Bank, Bank Austria, Privedna Banka Zagreb, Citibank, and others. 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3743 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 9 of attorney’s fees in response to the defendant’s failure to fully respond to discovery requests and multiple orders and directives of the court). IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an order directing defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan to: (1) promptly produce affidavit testimony explaining how and when he came into possession of his banking records from Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. that were submitted to OFAC; (2) explain when he provided those records to his counsel in this litigation; (3) certify under oath whether he is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced; (4) appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to locate and secure documentation responsive to plaintiff’s discovery requests; (5) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, including reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (6) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. Dated: October 6, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Sean P. Carter Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 Jodi W. Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 8 James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, III, Esq. KREINDLER & KREINDLER, LLP 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 9

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: {{3742}} MOTION for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02-cv-06977 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT WA’EL HAMZA JELAIDAN I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Throughout this litigation, defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan has consciously obstructed plaintiffs’ efforts to obtain relevant discovery, demonstrated a profound disregard for the authority of this Court, and engaged in other egregious behavior. See October 28, 2013 Memorandum Decision and Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 2789) at p. 9 ("Jelaidan’s conduct throughout this case evidences a continued unwillingness to participate fairly in discovery and can only be characterized as proceeding in bad faith."); id. ("Jelaidan’s failure to meet even his most basic discovery obligations thus has resulted in extreme delay."); p. 12 (stating there is "significant doubt" that Jelaidan "made prior good faith attempts to contact his banks"); p. 14 (stating that "Jelaidan has not made good faith efforts to satisfy his discovery obligations"); p. 15 (finding "that Jelaidan has willfully disregarded his discovery obligations and acted in bad faith"); id. ("Jelaidan’s failure to undertake any efforts to retrieve responsive Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 9 documents for nearly one and one-half years after he was ordered to do so is clear evidence of his intentionally obstructive conduct."). Materials submitted by Jelaidan’s counsel to the Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC") on June 19, 2017 indicate that Jelaidan has been in possession of records relating to accounts he held at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A., contrary to his representations to this Court and plaintiffs, and which he has never produced in defiance of the specific orders of this Court. In light of the defendant’s continuing obstructionist behavior in these proceedings, intervention by this Court is again necessary. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court issue a sanctions order pursuant to F.R.C.P. 37 requiring Jelaidan to: (1) promptly produce affidavit testimony explaining how and when he came into possession of his banking records from Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. that were submitted to OFAC; (2) explain when he provided those records to his counsel in this litigation; (3) certify under oath whether he is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced; (4) appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to locate and secure documentation responsive to plaintiff’s discovery requests; (5) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, including reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (6) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On June 13, 2006, plaintiffs served their consolidated First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan seeking inter alia, relevant banking and financial records, including documentation relating to accounts held by Jelaidan at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. See Request Nos. A-6 and A-7, attached hereto as Exhibit A. On August 15, 2006, Jelaidan served responses and objections to plaintiffs’ document requests and 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 9 produced his first, and only, document production in this litigation. That production, consisting of a mere 22 documents (104 pages), included two documents relating to Jelaidan’s account at Faisal Finance: (1) a three-page bank statement for Account No. x0409 at Faisal Finance for the month of January 2005 (WJ003); and (2) a September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. x0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013). The remainder of Jelaidan’s production is largely unresponsive to plaintiffs’ document requests. Plaintiffs filed numerous motions to compel directed to Jelaidan in an attempt to secure basic compliance with his discovery obligations, resulting in several orders directing him to undertake assiduous efforts to obtain and produce responsive records, including his banking and financial records, and the imposition of sanctions. The history of Jelaidan’s non-compliance in this litigation is well documented, as detailed in plaintiffs’ letters to the Court dated August 10, 2015 (ECF No. 2988) and May 12, 2017 (ECF No. 3582), which are incorporated by reference and attached hereto as Exhibits B and C respectively. See also plaintiffs’ additional submissions to the Court at Exhibits D and E. More recently, on May 3, 2017, plaintiffs were again compelled to request the Court’s intervention when it became clear that Jelaidan was repeatedly failing to comply with this Court’s October 31, 2017 Order to employ "diligent efforts to secure the necessary OFAC license to comply with the orders of this Court" and to file status letters every 60 days describing those efforts (ECF No. 3380). See plaintiffs’ May 3, 2017 letter motion for sanctions at ECF No. 3542. In response to the Court’s May 25, 2017 Order directing the defendant to submit status reports every thirty days thereafter (ECF No. 3610), defendant Jelaidan submitted his sixth status report to the Court on June 26, 2017 describing additional communications with OFAC (ECF 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 9 No. 3635). See Exhibit F. Included as an attachment to the status report is a June 19, 2017 email from Jelaidan’s counsel to the Treasury Department transmitting "documents from Faisal Finance in Switzerland (noting my client’s bank account numbers with the institution and last known amount with the bank) and a translated copy (with the original) of a letter from the Attorney General of Switzerland that lists his Citi Bank account number and information." See id. The attachments were not included in the defendant’s June 26 submission to the Court, and plaintiffs subsequently sent multiple requests to Jelaidan’s counsel asking for copies of those documents. See plaintiffs’ September 14, 2017 letter to Mr. Martin McMahon at Exhibit G. Mr. McMahon finally provided copies of the requested attachments on September 15, 2017, consisting of: (1) 16 pages of banking records relating to Jelaidan’s bank account at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. (Account No. x0409), including account statements and summaries, wire transfers, and multiple pieces of correspondence between Jelaidan and bank officials; and (2) an October 16, 2002 Order from the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland directing the seizure of Jelaidan’s bank account at Citibank of Geneva (Account No. xx4046).1 See Exhibit K. Upon closer examination of the documents, plaintiffs have confirmed that a majority of the Faisal Finance banking records relating to Account No. x0409 (15 of the 16 pages), have never been produced by Jelaidan in discovery.2 Those documents fall squarely within the scope of the Court’s prior directives that Jelaidan undertake vigorous and expeditious efforts to obtain requested banking records. November 16, 2011 Discovery Hearing Transcript of Record at p. 33 ("I guess, Mr. McMahon, it comes down to the same thing that I said with respect to your other two clients, namely, that there has to be a full court press. And, as Mr. Carter indicated and I’ve 1 The October 16, 2002 Order was previously produced as an exhibit to the defendant’s October 6, 2015 Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel at ECF No. 3062. 2 The first document in that attachment, a September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. x0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013), was produced to plaintiffs on August 16, 2006. 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 9 said before, it has to be documented. If you’re not sufficiently able to document a vigorous effort to obtain those documents, it may be that sanctions are imposed.").3 III. DISCUSSION Throughout discovery, Jelaidan has maintained that Faisal Finance and other banks were unwilling to cooperate with him and his legal team given his designation as a founding member of al Qaeda and terror financier. See, e.g., Defendant Wael Jelaidan’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (ECF No. 3062), at pp. 1-2 ("Defense counsel can represent to the Court that nothing has changed in this regard, i.e., Saudi counsel has been unable to secure Swiss bank account documents."); p. 3 (asserting that "the banks were fearful of working with Defendant"); p. 6 (claiming that Jelaidan and his legal team were blocked from obtaining copies of relevant banking documents once Swiss bank authorities seized his account); and p. 7 (asserting that "an individual designated as an international terrorist cannot secure, let alone produce, bank records that a foreign government has seized and sequestered"). See also October 29, 2011 Affidavit of Wael Hamzah Jelaidan at Exhibit J, at p. 2: I did have a personal bank account with Faisal Finance S.A. in Switzerland. However, after the said UN Designation, the account was frozen by the Swiss Authorities per the UN directive. Since then, I do not have the legal authority to access the account nor request any documentation. The Court rejected these unsubstantiated claims, concluding that responsive banking records are accessible to the defendant: The remaining material proffered in opposition to the Plaintiffs’ motion confirms that Jelaidan has not made good faith efforts to satisfy his discovery obligations. 3 On August 10, 2015, plaintiffs filed a further motion to compel and for leave to seek additional sanctions against Jelaidan, in which plaintiffs argued that documents produced by defendant Yassin Kadi indicated that Jelaidan had successfully obtained certain of his banking records for Kadi’s benefit, including records from Faisal Finance. See Exhibit H (KADI0004271-4272) (Jelaidan personally met with Kadi’s legal team and authorized their access to corporate and banking records.); Exhibit I (KADI0102987) (Faisal Finance advised Jelaidan that the bank was retrieving the requested account records and would courier the documents to Jelaidan once completed.). Plaintiffs argued that the records produced by Kadi indicated not only that Jelaidan’s representations to the Court that he had been unable to obtain his records were false, but also that he was in fact in possession of records that he had not produced. The documents recently submitted to OFAC provide further evidence those facts. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 9 Indeed, some of the materials submitted for in camera review actually suggests that certain relevant bank records are available to Jelaidan, despite his claims to the contrary. Moreover, although Jelaidan continues to take the position that he has been blocked from obtaining any relevant bank records since being designated in 2002, he apparently was able to produce a 2005 account statement from Faisal Finance. (See 11/16/11 Hr’g Tr. at 34). These inconsistencies show that Jelaidan has been less than forthcoming about the documents he is capable of obtaining and producing. See October 28, 2013 Memorandum Decision and Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 2789), at p. 14 (emphasis supplied). The September 2017 disclosure of the Faisal Finance account records affirms the Court’s findings relating to Jelaidan’s practical ability to obtain responsive banking records, indicates that Jelaidan has made knowingly false representations to this Court and plaintiffs in an effort to evade his discovery obligations, and has withheld production of documents in his possession despite the Court’s specific orders directing him to produce those records. In light of these considerations, plaintiffs respectfully submit that an order from this Court sanctioning Jelaidan is appropriate. To that end, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an order requiring Jelaidan to provide a sworn affidavit addressing the following topics and issues: • The circumstances pursuant to which Jelaidan and/or his Saudi legal team came into possession of the Faisal Finance account records that were submitted to OFAC, including how they were obtained, from whom they were obtained, and the date Jelaidan and/or his Saudi legal team came into possession of the records; • The circumstances pursuant to which the Jelaidan’s U.S. counsel (Mr. McMahon) came into possession of the Faisal Finance account records that were submitted to OFAC, including how he obtained them, from whom he obtained them, the date he came into possession of the records, and whether any instructions were given to Mr. McMahon in relation to the purpose of those records; • The circumstances and/or reasoning for withholding the Faisal Finance account records from production until September 15, 2017, eleven years after the start of merits discovery; and • Whether the defendant is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 9 In addition, plaintiffs respectfully submit that Jelaidan should be required to appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to search for and secure documentation responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery, without prejudice to plaintiffs’ right to depose Jelaidan at a later date as to the full scope of claims asserted against him in this litigation. As detailed in plaintiffs’ prior motions to compel at Exhibits B, D, and E, Jelaidan has utterly failed to produce documents relating to his bank accounts,4 businesses, employment and leadership positions with various Saudi da’awa organizations (e.g., Muslim World League ("MWL"), International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO"), Saudi Joint Relief Committee ("SJRC"), Saudi Red Crescent ("SRC"), Rabita Trust, and Al Haramain Al Masjed Al Aqsa), and other associations. Accordingly, plaintiffs respectfully ask the Court to direct Jelaidan to appear for a deposition to explain what steps he has taken to comply with the Court’s prior discovery orders and produce responsive documents. After eleven years of discovery, it is more than appropriate to require the defendant’s presence to personally respond to plaintiffs’ inquiries on these issues. Moreover, given the significant amount of time and resources expended by the plaintiffs over the past six years to compel discovery from the defendant, plaintiffs respectfully request that Jelaidan be required to: (i) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, with a budget to be submitted to the Court for approval in advance; (ii) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (iii) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. See American Cash Card Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 184 F.R.D. 521 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (granting sanctions for repeated failures to comply with discovery orders); Owen v. No Parking Today, Inc., 280 F.R.D. 106 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (imposing sanctions 4 Through their independent investigations, plaintiffs have identified approximately twenty (20) bank accounts linked to Jelaidan, including accounts at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A., Faisal Finance (Turkey), Al Rajhi Bank, Habib Bank, Bank Austria, Privedna Banka Zagreb, Citibank, and others. 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3744 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 9 of attorney’s fees in response to the defendant’s failure to fully respond to discovery requests and multiple orders and directives of the court). IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an order directing defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan to: (1) promptly produce affidavit testimony explaining how and when he came into possession of his banking records from Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. that were submitted to OFAC; (2) explain when he provided those records to his counsel in this litigation; (3) certify under oath whether he is in possession of any other records responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests that have not been produced; (4) appear for a special deposition concerning the efforts undertaken by the defendant and his legal team to locate and secure documentation responsive to plaintiff’s discovery requests; (5) pay for the reasonable costs of the proposed discovery deposition, including reasonable attorneys’ fees associated with the deposition; and (6) pay plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees for bringing this motion. Dated: October 6, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Sean P. Carter Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 Jodi W. Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 8 James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, III, Esq. KREINDLER & KREINDLER, LLP 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 9

FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY (SEE {{3746}} Declaration) - DECLARATION of J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire in Support re: {{3742}} MOTION for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees. Modified on 10/10/2017

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3745 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02-cv-06977 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 DECLARATION OF J. SCOTT TARBUTTON IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT WA’EL HAMZA JELAIDAN J. Scott Tarbutton affirms, under penalty of perjury, as follows: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice pro hac vice in the above-captioned matter, and a member of the law firm Cozen O’Connor. I submit this Declaration to substantiate certain representations and to transmit to the Court the following documents submitted in support of Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan. 2. On August 15, 2006, defendant Wa’el Jelaidan served responses and objections to plaintiffs’ document requests and produced his first, and only, document production in this litigation. That production, consisting of a mere 22 documents (104 pages), included two documents relating to Jelaidan’s account at Faisal Finance: (1) a three-page bank statement for Account No. x0409 at Faisal Finance for the month of January 2005 (WJ003); and (2) a Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3745 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. x0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013). The remainder of defendant Jelaidan’s production is largely unresponsive to plaintiffs’ document requests. 3. Martin McMahon, counsel for defendant Wa’el Jelaidan, provided copies of the attachments to his June 19, 2017 email to the Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC") to plaintiffs on September 15, 2017, consisting of: (1) 16 pages of banking records relating to Jelaidan’s bank account at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. (Account No. x0409), including account statements and summaries, wire transfers, and multiple pieces of correspondence between Jelaidan and bank officials; and (2) an October 16, 2002 Order from the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland directing the seizure of Jelaidan’s bank account at Citibank of Geneva (Account No. xx4046). 4. Plaintiffs have confirmed that a majority of the Faisal Finance banking records relating to defendant Wa’el Jelaidan’s Account No. x0409 (15 of the 16 pages), have never been produced by Jelaidan in discovery. 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Defendant Wael Hamza Jelaidan, dated June 13, 2006. 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ August 10, 2015 Motion to Compel (ECF No. 2988). 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ May 12, 2017 letter to the Honorable Sarah Netburn (ECF No. 3582). 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ October 17, 2011 Motion to Compel. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3745 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 3 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ January 30, 2013 Motion to Compel. 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of Defendant Jelaidan’s June 26, 2017 Status Report (ECF No. 3635). 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ September 14, 2017 letter to Martin F. McMahon, Esq. 12. Attached hereto as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of a document produced in discovery by defendant Yassin Kadi (KADI0004371-4372). 13. Attached hereto as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of a document produced in discovery by defendant Yassin Kadi (KADI0102987). 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of the October 29, 2011 Affidavit of Wael Hamza Jelaidan. 15. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of two attachments to Mr. Martin McMahon’s June 19, 2017 email to OFAC. Executed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on October 6, 2017./s/J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. LEGAL\32794259\1 00000.0000.000/117430.000 3

DECLARATION of J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire in Support re: {{3742}} MOTION for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02-cv-06977 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 DECLARATION OF J. SCOTT TARBUTTON IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT WA’EL HAMZA JELAIDAN J. Scott Tarbutton affirms, under penalty of perjury, as follows: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice pro hac vice in the above-captioned matter, and a member of the law firm Cozen O’Connor. I submit this Declaration to substantiate certain representations and to transmit to the Court the following documents submitted in support of Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan. 2. On August 15, 2006, defendant Wa’el Jelaidan served responses and objections to plaintiffs’ document requests and produced his first, and only, document production in this litigation. That production, consisting of a mere 22 documents (104 pages), included two documents relating to Jelaidan’s account at Faisal Finance: (1) a three-page bank statement for Account No. x0409 at Faisal Finance for the month of January 2005 (WJ003); and (2) a Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. x0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013). The remainder of defendant Jelaidan’s production is largely unresponsive to plaintiffs’ document requests. 3. Martin McMahon, counsel for defendant Wa’el Jelaidan, provided copies of the attachments to his June 19, 2017 email to the Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC") to plaintiffs on September 15, 2017, consisting of: (1) 16 pages of banking records relating to Jelaidan’s bank account at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S.A. (Account No. x0409), including account statements and summaries, wire transfers, and multiple pieces of correspondence between Jelaidan and bank officials; and (2) an October 16, 2002 Order from the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland directing the seizure of Jelaidan’s bank account at Citibank of Geneva (Account No. xx4046). 4. Plaintiffs have confirmed that a majority of the Faisal Finance banking records relating to defendant Wa’el Jelaidan’s Account No. x0409 (15 of the 16 pages), have never been produced by Jelaidan in discovery. 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Defendant Wael Hamza Jelaidan, dated June 13, 2006. 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ August 10, 2015 Motion to Compel (ECF No. 2988). 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ May 12, 2017 letter to the Honorable Sarah Netburn (ECF No. 3582). 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ October 17, 2011 Motion to Compel. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 3 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ January 30, 2013 Motion to Compel. 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of Defendant Jelaidan’s June 26, 2017 Status Report (ECF No. 3635). 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees’ September 14, 2017 letter to Martin F. McMahon, Esq. 12. Attached hereto as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of a document produced in discovery by defendant Yassin Kadi (KADI0004371-4372). 13. Attached hereto as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of a document produced in discovery by defendant Yassin Kadi (KADI0102987). 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of the October 29, 2011 Affidavit of Wael Hamza Jelaidan. 15. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of two attachments to Mr. Martin McMahon’s June 19, 2017 email to OFAC. Executed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on October 6, 2017./s/J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. LEGAL\32794259\1 00000.0000.000/117430.000 3

Exhibit A

EXHIBIT A Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 36 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (RCC) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co. v. al Qaida, Case No. 03-CV-6978 (RCC) (S.D.N.Y.) Kathleen Ashton v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, Case No. 02-CV-6977 (RCC) (S.D.N.Y.) Thomas E. Burnett, Sr. v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., Case No. 03-CV-9849 (RCC) (S.D.N.Y.) PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT WAEL HAMZA JELAIDEN PARTS A and B COZEN O’CONNOR 1900 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: (215) 665-2000 June 13, 2006 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 36 PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT WAEL HAMZA JELAIDEN Plaintiffs in Federal Insurance Co. v. al Qaida, Case No. 03-CV-6978 (RCC), Kathleen Ashton v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, Case No. 02-CV-6977 (RCC), and Thomas E. Burnett, Sr. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., Case No. 03-CV-9849 (RCC) (collectively "Plaintiffs"), propound and serve on Wael Hamza Jelaiden, (hereinafter "Jelaiden" or "Defendant") the following Requests for Production of Documents to be answered fully and under oath, pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, within 30 days of their receipt. INSTRUCTIONS 1. In producing documents and other things, Defendant is requested to furnish all documents or things in his possession, custody or control, regardless of whether such documents or things are possessed directly by Defendant or by Defendant’s employees, agents, attorneys, accountants, auditors, investigators, or other representatives. 2. Documents are to be produced in full; redacted documents will not constitute compliance with this request. If any requested document or thing cannot be produced in full, Defendant is requested to produce it to the extent possible, indicating which document or portion of that document is being withheld and the reason that document is being withheld. 3. In producing documents, Defendant is requested to produce the original of each document requested together with all non-identical copies and drafts of that document. If the original of any document cannot be located, an identical copy shall be provided in lieu thereof, and shall be legible and bound or stapled in the same manner as the original. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 36 4. Documents shall be produced as they are kept in the usual course of business and the documents shall be organized and labeled to correspond to the categories in this request. All documents shall be produced in the file folder, envelope or other container in which the documents are kept or maintained by Defendant. If, for any reason, the container cannot be produced, produce copies of all labels or other identifying marks. 5. Documents shall be produced in such fashion as to identify any organization, department, branch or office in whose possession it was located and, where applicable, the natural person in whose possession it was found and the business address of each document’s custodian. 6. Documents attached to each other should not be separated. 7. If any documents requested herein have been lost, discarded, destroyed or otherwise no longer in Defendant’s possession, custody or control, they shall be identified as completely as possible including, without limitations, the following information: date of disposal, manner of disposal, reason for disposal, person authorizing the disposal and person disposing of the document. 8. Documents shall be produced in such fashion as to identify to which request(s) they are responsive. 9. Each of these requests shall be continuing. If at any time after production of these requests any information becomes available that calls for any supplement to a previous response, provide such documents within a reasonable time period from the time when it becomes available. 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 36 10. If Defendant asserts a privilege or other authorized protection from disclosure with respect to any document requested herein, Defendant is required to provide a privilege log containing the following as to each such document withheld: A. The type of document or information (e.g., letter, notebook, telephone conversation, etc.); B. The date of the document or transaction involving the information; C. The names of each author and any and all participants with respect to the information; D. The names of any and all signatories of the document, if any; E. The name of the document’s current custodian; F. The present whereabouts of the document and/or the names of all persons with personal knowledge with respect to the information; and G. A statement of the grounds on which the claim of privilege rests with respect to each such document or piece of information withheld. 11. For the purpose of this discovery request, except to the extent specifically indicated in the "Definitions" section of this Request, the words used herein are considered to have, and should be understood to have, their ordinary, every day meaning and Plaintiffs refer Defendant to any collegiate dictionary such as Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition by Prentice Hall Press. In the event Defendant asserts that the wording which has been used is somehow vague, ambiguous, unintelligible, indecipherable, confusing or such other 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 36 boiler plate objections to avoid squarely addressing the specific discovery request, Plaintiffs refer Defendant to Webster’s Dictionary for the plain meaning of the terms defined herein. 12. If you object to any request for production on the ground that it is overbroad, is unreasonably burdensome, or seeks information which is not relevant to the subject matter of this action, you should state what you contend to be the proper scope of the request for production and respond in accordance with what you contend is the proper scope. DEFINITIONS 1. The terms "document" or "documents" are defined to be synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the usage of this term in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a), including, without limitation, electronic or computerized data compilations. A draft or non-identical copy is a separate document within the meaning of this term. 2. The term "identify" when used with reference to an individual person shall mean to give, to the extent known, the person’s full name, present or last known address, and when referring to a natural person, additionally, the present or last known place of employment. Once a person has been identified in accordance with this subparagraph, only the name of that person need be listed in response to subsequent discovery requesting identification of that person. 3. The term "identify" when used with reference to a document shall mean to give, to the extent known, the (i) type of document; (ii) general subject matter; (iii) date of the document; (iv) author(s), addressee(s), and recipients(s). 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 36 4. The term "identify" when used with reference to an oral communication, discussion, conversation or any other oral statement, shall mean to (i) identify the person who made the communication and person(s) to whom the communication was directed; (ii) state the date, time and place of such communication; (iii) describe in detail the substance of each communication and state the contents of the communication in verbatim if possible; (iv) identify any other persons present when the communication was made; and (v) identify any documents relating to the communication. 5. The term "identify" when used with reference to an organization or business entity, shall mean to (i) state the formal title of the organization or entity and any other names by which it is known; (ii) state the specific section or organizational unit involved; and (iii) state the business address, including the address of any separate or branch offices. 6. The terms "plaintiff" and "defendant" as well as a party’s full or abbreviated name or pronoun referring to a party mean the party and, where applicable, its officers, directors, employees, partners, corporate parent, subsidiaries or affiliates. 7. The term "Plaintiffs" shall refer to Plaintiffs in Federal Insurance Co. v. al Qaida, Civil Action No. 03-CV-6978 (RCC), Kathleen Ashton v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, Case No. 02-CV-6977 (RCC), and Thomas E. Burnett, Sr. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., Case No. 03-CV-9849 (RCC). 8. The terms "Defendant," "You," "Your," and "Jelaiden" shall refer to Wael Hamza Jelaiden and/or any officer, director, trustee, employee, attorney, consultant, accountant, agent, or representative acting on Wael Hamza Jelaiden’s behalf. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 36 9. The term "communication" means the transmittal of information (in the form of facts, ideas, inquiries or otherwise). 10. The term "person" is defined as any natural person or any business, legal or government entity or association. 11. The term "party" is defined as any natural person or any business, legal or government entity or association, sovereign state or juridical entity. 12. The terms "concerning," "related to" and "relating to" are interchangeable and mean constituting, comprising, containing, describing, evidencing, setting forth, showing, disclosing, describing, explaining, summarizing, or referring to, directly or indirectly. 13. The terms "all" and "each" shall be construed as all and each. 14. The connectives "and" and "or" shall be construed either disjunctively or conjunctively as necessary to bring within the scope of the discovery request all responses that might otherwise be construed to be outside of its scope. 15. The use of the singular form of any word includes the plural and vice versa. 16. The term "Contribution" shall mean the giving, bestowing, granting, awarding, bequeathing, and/or providing of money, checks, services, logistical or administrative support, assets, rights, securities, real estate or any goods, tangible or intangible, including the giving of any "zakat." 17. The term "material support or resources," as defined by 18 U.S.C.S. § 2339A, shall mean currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 9 of 36 training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel, transportation, and other physical assets, except medicine or religious materials. 18. The term "international terrorism," as defined by 18 U.S.C.S. § 2331(1), shall mean activities that--(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended – (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum. 19. The term "domestic terrorism," as defined by 18 U.S.C.S. § 2331(5), shall mean activities that--(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended – (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. 20. The terms "Kingdom of Saudi Arabia" or "KSA" shall mean the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including any agency, instrumentality, organ, political subdivision, official, or agent of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 10 of 36 21. The term "Golden Chain-Related Individuals" means the following individuals: Suleiman al-Rashid, Abdel Qader Bakri, Bakr Bin Laden and the Saudi Bin Laden Group, Youssef Jameel, Ibrahim Muhammad Afandi, Saleh Abdullah Kamel, Suleiman Abdulaziz Al-Rajhi, Mohammed Bin Abdullah Al-Jomaih, Abdulrahman Hassan Al-Sharbatly, Ahmed Mohamed al-Naghi, Khalid Bin Mahfouz, Abdel Qader Faqeeh, Salah Al-Din Abdel Jawad (a/k/a Salahuddin Abduljawad), Ahmad Turki Yamani (a/k/a Ahmad Zaki Yamani), Abdel Hadi Taher, Mohammed Omar, Ahmad Al-Harbi, Mohammed Al-Issai, Hamad Al-Hussaini, Salem Taher, Adel Abdul Jalil Batterjee, Osama Bin Laden and Wael Hamza Jelaiden. 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 11 of 36 PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT WAEL HAMZA JELAIDEN PART A A1. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to Your employment history from 1985 to the present, including without limitation, any and all resumes, curriculum vitaes, biographies, abstracts, media reports, digests, summaries, employment contracts, and/or outlines. ANSWER: A2. Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in Habib Bank and/or any Habib Bank accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account. ANSWER: A3. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any accounts You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of Osama Bin Laden (including any member of the Bin Laden family), including without limitation, any accounts over which You held or hold signatory authority. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 12 of 36 cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account. ANSWER: A4. Please provide any and all documents relating to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s investigation and post 9-11 determination to freeze any and all accounts in Your name and/or any accounts over which you hold or held signatory authority, including without limitation, all documents identifying any and all accounts, assets, and/or monies frozen by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, including the following: "Osama Bin-Laden and Wael Jelaiden FC-CD 50051-1 USS 342.04 Habib Bank Limited (HBL) Cantt Br. Peshawar." ANSWER: A5. Please provide any and all documents relating to any audit, analysis, examination, or review of Your financial accounts, investments, assets, capital, and/or financial affairs, conducted either by employees of Habib Bank or any third party, including but not limited to, any bank, financial institution, government agency, accountant, or auditor. ANSWER: A.6 Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in Faisal Finance and/or any Faisal Finance accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 13 of 36 correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account. ANSWER: A7. Please provide any and all documents relating to Switzerland’s investigation and post 9-11 determination to freeze any and all accounts in Your name and/or any accounts over which you hold or held signatory authority, including without limitation, all documents identifying any and all accounts, assets, and/or monies frozen by the Swiss government. ANSWER: A8. Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in the al Rajhi Banking & Investment Corporation ("al Rajhi") and/or any al Rajhi accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account. ANSWER: A9. Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in the Bank Austria and/or any Bank Austria accounts over which You hold or have held 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 14 of 36 signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account. ANSWER: A10. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between You and the Taliban, including without limitation, the provision of material support and the facilitating of the movement of recruits for the Taliban from the refugee camps in Bangladesh. ANSWER: A11. Please provide any and all documents relating to any joint activities undertaken among and between You, the Muslim World League and/or the International Islamic Relief Organization in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan, including without limitation, any business, charitable, financial, and/or religious activities or otherwise. ANSWER: A12. Please provide all documents relating to investigations or inquiries conducted by any United States state or federal governmental entity or any United States-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("United States Investigator"), or any 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 15 of 36 foreign government or any foreign-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("Foreign Investigator"), into financial transactions linked to accounts held solely or jointly by You and/or any accounts over which you hold or held signatory authority. ANSWER: A13. Please provide any and all documents relating to any sanctions imposed upon you by the United States, United Nations, or any other nation or international body. ANSWER: A14. Please provide all copies of any and all documents and things that have been seized by, or produced by You to, any investigators, auditors, government officials or agencies, and/or international bodies concerning Your alleged support for, or connections to, alleged terrorist or criminal organizations, groups, individuals, or activities. ANSWER: A15. From the period beginning January 1988 through 2002, please provide any and all documents relating to communications between You and any person or entity listed as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the United States Department of the Treasury. ANSWER: 14 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 16 of 36 A16. Please provide any and all documents relating to any investigations or inquiries conducted by the People’s Republic of Bangladesh relating to allegations of Your ties to terrorism, including without limitation, any and all documents relating to the closure of Rabita’s office in Bangladesh. ANSWER: A17. Please provide any and all documents relating to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s investigation and subsequent determination to freeze any and all accounts in the name of Rabita Trust, including without limitation, all documents identifying any and all accounts, assets, and/or monies frozen by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, including the following: (a) Rabita Trust (A/C 9254.0) Rs 15,789.53 HBL-Super Market Br. Lahore; (b) Rabita Trust, (A/C 925.7) Rs 352.20 HBL-Super Market Br. Lahore; (c) Rabita Trust (for stranded Pakistanis) (A/C No. 9536-2 and 10206-4 TDR) Rs 807.921.46 HBL Sectt "A" Block Islamabad. ANSWER: A18. Please provide any and all documents relating to the joint United States-Saudi Arabian investigation and September 6, 2002 designation of You as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist and "an associate of Usama bin Laden and a supporter of al-Qa’ida terror," including without limitation, any and all documents identifying all of Your accounts, assets, and monies that were frozen by the United States and Saudi Arabia per the September 6, 2002 designation. ANSWER: 15 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 17 of 36 A19. Please provide any and all documents relating to any sanctions imposed upon you by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. ANSWER: A20. Please provide any and all documents relating to the United Nations’ investigation and September 2002 determination to designate You as a terrorist financier. ANSWER: A21. Please provide any and all documents relating to the United Nation Mission in Kosovo’s ("UNMIK") investigation and April 2000 raid of the SJRC in Pristina. ANSWER: A22. Please provide all documents, statements, interviews, press releases, internal memos or other materials relating to any accusation that You, or any person associated with You, was associated with or involved in any military or terrorist activity, plot or attack, indicating an intention to direct conduct against or target conduct toward the United States of America. ANSWER: 16 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 18 of 36 A23. Please provide all documents relating to any and all information or notification You received prior to September 11, 2001, that any persons or entities identified in Exhibits A, B, and C, may have been diverting funds or otherwise providing material support or resources to: (i) Islamic radicals, fundamentalists, extremists or persons or organizations associated with international terrorism or domestic terrorism; and/or (ii) al Qaida, other terrorist organizations and/or individuals sympathetic to al Qaida or other terrorist organizations. ANSWER: A24. Please provide all documents relating to any understanding or agreement with any defendant named in the consolidated civil action, 03 MD 1570, whereby You have agreed to pay, indemnify, or reimburse any of their costs associated with defending this lawsuit, including legal fees and/or payments to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be entered in this action against such defendant. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, contracts, agreements, insurance policies, term sheets, or other records. ANSWER: A25. Please provide all documents relating to any understanding or agreement between You and any other individual, entity, and/or government, whereby such party has agreed to pay, indemnify, or reimburse You for any costs associated with defending this lawsuit, including legal fees and/or payments to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be entered in this action against You. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, contracts, agreements, insurance policies, term sheets, or other records. ANSWER: 17 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 19 of 36 PART B B1. Please provide any and all documents relating to the struggle against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan during the 1980s, including without limitation, Your involvement. ANSWER: B2. Please provide any and all documents relating to Your role in providing material support or resources, directly or indirectly, to the mujihadeen forces in Afghanistan in their struggle against Soviet occupation during the 1980’s. ANSWER: B3. From the period beginning January 1984 through 2002, please provide any and all documents relating to Your role in providing material support or resources, directly or indirectly, to any camps, sites, or facilities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Sudan, Somalia, Kenya, or elsewhere, where any form of training was provided relative to combat, military tactics or operations, weapons, reconnaissance, explosives, self-defense, or related activities. ANSWER: B4. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between the Saudi Red Crescent ("SRC"), the Muslim World League ("MWL"), the 18 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 20 of 36 Saudi Joint Relief Committee ("SJRC"), and/or the Rabita Trust ("Rabita") (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Charities") and Osama Bin Laden (including any member of the Bin Laden family). ANSWER: B5. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents the Charities sent to and/or received from Osama Bin Laden or any member of the Bin Laden family, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between the Charities and Osama Bin Laden, and/or any member of the Bin Laden family. ANSWER: B6. From the period beginning January 1988 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to al Qaida. ANSWER: B7. From the period beginning January 1988 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between the Charities and al Qaida, or any members of al Qaida. ANSWER: 19 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 21 of 36 B8. Please provide all documents illustrating, describing or otherwise relating to al Qaida’s formation and organizational structure, the duration of al Qaida’s existence, any documents relating to al Qaida’s initial capitalization and subsequent funding, any documents relating to the duties and powers of any al Qaida boards and/or committees, and/or any other writing relating to the creation or purpose of al Qaida. ANSWER: B9. Please provide any and all documents relating to the establishment, duties, obligations, objectives, membership, composition and/or authority of any committees, boards and/or internal bodies of al Qaida, including without limitation, al Qaida’s Majlis al Shura ("consultation council"), military committee, and fatwah committee. ANSWER: B10. Please provide any and all documents identifying each member, officer, board member, and/or committee member of al Qaida, including without limitation, any and all documents relating to their appointment, resignation, and/or termination. ANSWER: B11. Please provide any and all documents relating to any meetings of members, officers, boards, committees, and/or internal bodies of al Qaida, including without limitation, any agendas or meeting minutes. ANSWER: 20 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 22 of 36 B12. From the period beginning January 1988 to the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any meeting, conference, or gathering that You attended at which any of the persons identified in Exhibit A were present. ANSWER: B13. From the period beginning January 1988 through the present, please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing or otherwise relating to any relationship between the Charities and the persons and/or entities identified in Exhibit A. ANSWER: B14. From the period beginning January 1988 through the present, please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from the persons and/or entities identified in Exhibit A, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between the Charities and those persons and/or entities. ANSWER: B15. Please provide any and all documents relating to your Summer 2000 trip with Abu Zubaydah from Pakistan to Kandahar, Afghanistan, including without limitation, Your subsequent meeting with Osama Bin Laden and Mohammed Atef in Kandahar. ANSWER: 21 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 23 of 36 B16. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between You and the Saudi Red Crescent ("SRC"), the Muslim World League ("MWL"), the Saudi Joint Relief Committee ("SJRC"), and the Rabita Trust ("Rabita") (hereinafter collectively referred to the as the "Charities"), including without limitation, any and all documents relating to any positions You held or hold within the Charities. ANSWER: B17. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to Your role in the organization, funding, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control over the Charities’ operations, including without limitation, appointment and termination of personnel, accounting, banking and financial transactions, fundraising, and actual distribution of financial and non-monetary support to charitable designees. ANSWER: B18. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to Your supervision, management, control of, or distribution of the Charities’ funds, including without limitation, any and all documents relating to Your duties and responsibilities to determine and/or make recommendations as to which charities, individuals, or entities should receive financial and/or non-monetary support from the Charities and the purpose for such disbursements. 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 24 of 36 ANSWER: B19. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the Charities, and/or any Charity accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: B20. From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from the Charities, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds. ANSWER: B21. Please provide any and all documents relating to the Charities’ role in providing material support or resources to the mujihadeen forces or other Islamic fighters in Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia, Chechnya, Egypt, Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Turkey, Yemen, or elsewhere, including without limitation, the support of camps in and/or around those areas, recruitment, training, transportation, lodging, the acquisition, trafficking, and/or smuggling of weapons and arms such as rockets, mortars, rifles, dynamite and other bombs, and the provision of boots, tents, and uniforms. ANSWER: 23 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 25 of 36 B22. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between the Charities and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including without limitation, the following agencies of the KSA: the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the Ministry for Islamic Affairs, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Ministry of Defense and Aviation, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Majlis al Shura (a/k/a the Shura Council), the Ministry of Education, and any embassy or consulate of the KSA. ANSWER: B23. Please provide any and all documents relating to any meeting You attended in your capacity as an official and/or representative of the Charities with any official, representative, or agency of the KSA. ANSWER: B24. Please provide all documents relating to any and all information or notification You and/or the Charities received prior to September 11, 2001 that any individual or entity employed by and/or affiliated with the Charities was associated with or involved in: (i) the sponsorship of any radical, extremist, or terrorist organization; (ii) criminal or corrupt activities; or (iii) any military, radical or terrorist activity, plot, or attack. ANSWER: 24 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 26 of 36 B25. Please provide all documents relating to any and all information or notification You and/or the Charities received prior to September 11, 2001 that any individual or entity employed by and/or affiliated with the Charities may have been or was engaging in conduct unrelated to the Charities’ ostensible charitable or humanitarian purposes, including without limitation, diverting funds or otherwise providing material support or resources to: (i) Islamic radicals, fundamentalists, extremists or persons or organizations associated with international terrorism or domestic terrorism; and/or (ii) al Qaida, other terrorist organizations and/or individuals sympathetic to al Qaida or other terrorist organizations, regardless of whether you believe such person(s) or entity(s) was acting within the scope of his employment in relation to any such activities. ANSWER: B26. Please provide all documents relating to investigations or inquiries conducted by the United States Government or any United States-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("United States Investigator"), or any foreign government or any foreign-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("Foreign Investigator"), into financial transactions linked to accounts held solely or jointly by the Charities. ANSWER: B27. Please provide all documents relating to any disciplinary action taken, or any decision to terminate any relationship with any individual or entity employed by and/or affiliated 25 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 27 of 36 with the Charities as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations into possible links to the financing of terrorist organizations, and/or the support of violence or jihad, including without limitation, any such individuals or entities identified in response to Requests # B24-B26. ANSWER: B28. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between You and any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: B29. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between the Charities and any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: B30. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and the 26 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 28 of 36 any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: B31. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide any and all documents the Charities sent to, and/or received from any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between the Charities and the any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: B32. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, and/or any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: B33. Please provide all documents relating to investigations or inquiries conducted by the United States Government or any United States-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("United States Investigator"), or any foreign government or 27 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 29 of 36 any foreign-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("Foreign Investigator"), into financial transactions linked to accounts held solely or jointly by any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: B34. Please provide all documents relating to any decision to terminate any relationship with any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations into possible links to the financing of terrorist organizations, and/or the support of violence or jihad. ANSWER: B35. From the period beginning January 1988 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between You and the Benevolence International Foundation and its predecessor entity Lajnatt al Birr al Islamiah (hereinafter collectively referred to as "BIF"), including without limitation, any and all documents relating to any positions You held or hold within BIF. ANSWER: 28 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 30 of 36 B36. From the period beginning January 1988 through the present, please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from BIF, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds. ANSWER: B37. Please provide any and all documents relating to BIF’s role in providing material support to the mujihadeen forces or other Islamic fighters in Afghanistan, Chechnya or elsewhere, including without limitation, the support of camps in and/or around those areas, recruitment, training, transportation, lodging, the acquisition, trafficking, and/or smuggling of weapons and arms such as rockets, mortars, rifles, dynamite and other bombs, and the provision of boots, tents, and uniforms. For purposes of this request, the term "support" includes any form of financial, logistical, administrative or other assistance, whether provided directly or indirectly. ANSWER: B38. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between You and the persons identified in Exhibit B. ANSWER: B39. Please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from the persons identified in Exhibit B, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and those persons. ANSWER: 29 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 31 of 36 B40. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the persons identified in Exhibit B, and/or any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: B41. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between You and the entities identified in Exhibit C, including without limitation, any and all documents relating to any positions You held or hold within those entities. ANSWER: B42. Please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from the entities identified in Exhibit C, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and those entities. ANSWER: B43. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the entities identified in Exhibit C, and/or any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 30 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 32 of 36 B44. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between You and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including without limitation, the following agencies of the KSA: the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the Ministry for Islamic Affairs, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Ministry of Defense and Aviation, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Majlis al Shura (a/k/a the Shura Council), the Ministry of Education, and any embassy or consulate of the KSA. ANSWER: B45. Please provide any and all documents You sent to and/or received from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including without limitation, the following agencies of the KSA: the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the Ministry for Islamic Affairs, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Ministry of Defense and Aviation, Endowments, Dawa and Guidance, the Majlis al Shura (a/k/a the Shura Council), the Ministry of Education, and any embassy or consulate of the KSA. ANSWER: B46. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing or otherwise relating Your role in spreading, propagating, or proselytizing Islam outside of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including without limitation any long term strategy, studies or papers. 31 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 33 of 36 ANSWER: B47. From the period beginning January 1990 through the present, please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing or otherwise relating to Your role in advancing the foreign policy objectives of the KSA. ANSWER: B48. Please provide all documents relating to all accounts in any United States or foreign banking institution You hold or have held jointly with the KSA, any members of the Saudi royal family, and/or any Saudi official acting on behalf of the KSA ("KSA Joint Bank Accounts"), and/or any KSA Joint Bank Accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: B49. Please provide all documents relating to any and all information or notification You received prior to September 11, 2001, that al Qaida aspired to conduct terrorist attacks: (i) against the United States and its interests abroad, (ii) against the United States within its borders, and/or (iii) against New York City and the World Trade Center complex, Washington D.C. or other U.S. landmarks. ANSWER: 32 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 34 of 36 EXHIBIT A Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah (a/k/a Abu Mohmaed al Masry) Abu Ubaidah al Banshiri Abu Zubaydah Al Gama’a al Islamiyya (a/k/a "The Islamic Group") Al Masadah (a/k/a the "Lion’s Den") Ali Mohamed Bait-ul-Ansar (a/k/a the "Mujahadeen Services Bureau" or "House of Helpers") Dr. Ayman Al Zawahiri Egyptian Islamic Jihad Maktab al Khidmat (a/k/a the "Office of Services") Mamdouth Mahmud Salim (a/k/a Abu Hajer) Mohammed Jamal Khalifa Mohammed Atef Mohammed Suleiman al Nalfi Muhsin Musa Matwalli Atwah (a/k/a Abdel Rahman al Muhajer) Osama Bin Laden Saif al Adel Sheikh Abdullah Azzam Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 35 of 36 EXHIBIT B Abdel Hadi Taher Abdel Qadir Bakri Abdullah Omar Naseef Abdul Rahman Abdul Aziz Al Suwailim Abi K-Bara Abu Hudhaifa Abu Hajer al Iraqi (a/k/a Mandouh Salim) Abu Mohamed al Maqdisi (a/k/a/Mohamed Taher al Barqawi) Abu Rida al Suri (a/k/a Mohammed Loay Bayazid) Adel Abdul Jalil Batterjee Amin Aqeel Attas Chafiq Ayadi Enaam Aranout Hasan Cengic Mohamed al Zawahiri Salehuddin Abdel Jawad Seik Ajadi Sheikh Abdel Majid Zindani Suleiman al Rashid Syed Abu Nasr Wadih el Hage Yassin Abdullah al Qadi Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 36 of 36 EXHIBIT C Abrar of Saudi Arabia Al Haramain & Al Masjed Al Aqsa Charity Foundation Al Haramain Islamic Foundation Al Kifah Refugee Center Dar el Hekma Euroinvest International Islamic Relief Organization Islamic Center of Tucson, Arizona KA Stan Karavan Construction and Development Lajnat al Dawa al Islamiyah Kuwait Moslem Student Association Muslim Student Association Third World Relief Agency University of Arizona World Assembly of Muslim Youth PHILADELPHIA\2438945\4 117430.000

Exhibit B

EXHIBIT B Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page12ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page23ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page34ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page45ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page56ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page67ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page78ofof89 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document Document3746-2 2988 Filed Filed08/10/15 10/06/17 Page Page89ofof89

Exhibit C

EXHIBIT C Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-3 3582 Filed Filed05/12/17 10/06/17 Page Page12ofof56 0'/3/$,17,))6¶ (;(&87,9(&200,77((6,Q UH 7HUURULVW $WWDFNV RQ 6HSWHPEHU 6' 1 < 3ODLQWLIIV¶ ([HFXWLYH &RPPLWWHH IRU 3HUVRQDO 3ODLQWLIIV¶ ([HFXWLYH &RPPLWWHH IRU,QMXU\ DQG 'HDWK &ODLPV &RPPHUFLDO &ODLPV 5RQDOG/0RWOH\ (OOLRW 5)HOGPDQ Co-Chair-RGL:HVWEURRN)ORZHUV 'RQDOG $ 0LJOLRUL Co-Chairs 6HDQ &DUWHU Co-Chair 027/(< 5,&(//& &2=(1 2¶&21125-DPHV 3.UHLQGOHU Co-Chair.5(,1'/(5.5(,1'/(5//3 $QGUHZ-0DORQH\,,, Co-Liaison Counsel-6FRWW 7DUEXWWRQ Liaison Counsel.5(,1'/(5.5(,1'/(5//3 &2=(1 2¶&21125 5REHUW 7 +DHIHOH Co-Liaison Counsel 027/(< 5,&(//& VIA ECF 0D\ 7KH +RQRUDEOH 6DUDK 1HWEXUQ 7KXUJRRG 0DUVKDOO 8QLWHG 6WDWHV &RXUWKRXVH)ROH\ 6TXDUH 5RRP 1HZ <RUN 1< 5(In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 0'/*%' 61 'HDU-XGJH 1HWEXUQ 2Q EHKDOI RI WKH 3ODLQWLIIV¶ ([HFXWLYH &RPPLWWHHV, ZULWH LQ UHVSRQVH WR WKH ³VWDWXV UHSRUW´ ILOHG E\ FRXQVHO IRU GHIHQGDQW:D¶HO-HODLGDQ 0DUWLQ 0F0DKRQ (&) 1R FRQFHUQLQJ 0U 0F0DKRQ¶V SXUSRUWHG HIIRUWV WR REWDLQ D OLFHQVH IURP WKH 2IILFH RI)RUHLJQ $VVHW &RQWURO ³2)$&´ WR SD\ WKH DWWRUQH\ IHH DQG FRVW DZDUG SUHYLRXVO\ LPSRVHG XSRQ GHIHQGDQW-HODLGDQ IRU KLV SHUVLVWHQW GLVFRYHU\ YLRODWLRQV 3ODLQWLIIV RIIHU ILYH SULQFLSDO SRLQWV LQ UHSO\ WR WKH VWDWXV UHSRUW First, WKH VWDWXV UHSRUW DFNQRZOHGJHV WKDW-HODLGDQ DQG KLV FRXQVHO KDYH IDLOHG HQWLUHO\ WR ILOH WKH LQWHULP VWDWXV UHSRUWV GRFXPHQWLQJ WKH QDWXUH RI HIIRUWV XQGHUWDNHQ WR VHFXUH WKH 2)$& OLFHQVH DV H[SUHVVO\ UHTXLUHG E\ WKLV &RXUW¶V 2FWREHU 2UGHU DW (&) 1R d-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-3 3582 Filed Filed05/12/17 10/06/17 Page Page23ofof56 7KH +RQRUDEOH 6DUDK 1HWEXUQ 0D\ 3DJH Second, 0U 0F0DKRQ¶V VWDWXV UHSRUW FRQILUPV WKDW WKHUH KDYH EHHQ no PHDQLQJIXO HIIRUWV XQGHUWDNHQ WR VHFXUH D OLFHQVH IURP 2)$& VLQFH 0U 0F0DKRQ VHQW DQ LQLWLDO OHWWHU WR 2)$& RQ $SULO,QGHHG WKH VROH GRFXPHQW VXEPLWWHG DORQJ ZLWK WKH VWDWXV UHSRUW LV D 0D\ OHWWHU WR 2)$& WKH GDWH RI ZKLFK FRQILUPV WKDW LW ZDV VXEPLWWHG RQO\ after SODLQWLIIV¶ UHFHQW OHWWHU DSSULVLQJ WKH &RXUW RI-HODLGDQ¶V IDLOXUHV WR ILOH WKH PDQGDWHG VWDWXV UHSRUWV DQG RQ WKH VDPH GD\ DV WKH VWDWXV UHSRUW WR WKH &RXUW DQG PRUH WKDQ D \HDU DIWHU KLV $SULO LQLWLDO OHWWHU WR 2)$& WKH RQO\ RWKHU GRFXPHQW 0U 0F0DKRQ KDV HYHU VXEPLWWHG WR WKH &RXUW FRQFHUQLQJ DOOHJHG HIIRUWV WR REWDLQ WKH UHTXLUHG OLFHQVH 7KXV WKH VWDWXV UHSRUW UHYHDOV WKDW PRUH WKDQ D \HDU SDVVHG ZLWKRXW DQ\ ZULWWHQ HIIRUWV KDYLQJ EHHQ XQGHUWDNHQ WR VHFXUH D OLFHQVH HYHQ LQ WKH IDFH RI WKLV &RXUW¶V GLUHFWLYH WKDW-HODLGDQ DQG KLV FRXQVHO HPSOR\ ³GLOLJHQW HIIRUWV WR VHFXUH WKH QHFHVVDU\ 2)$& OLFHQVH´ DQG ILOH UHSRUWV HYHU\ GD\V WR GRFXPHQW WKH VWDWXV RI WKHLU HIIRUWV Third, WKH LQIRUPDO DQG XQGRFXPHQWHG FRQYHUVDWLRQV 0U 0F0DKRQ FLWHV LQ KLV OHWWHU ZLWK LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR DUH QRW DIILOLDWHG ZLWK 2)$& DV SXUSRUWHG HYLGHQFH RI GLOLJHQFH RQ KLV DQG 0U-HODLGDQ¶V SDUW LQ IDFW UHIOHFW WKH YHU\ SDWWHUQ RI GHIOHFWLRQ LQDFWLRQ DQG GLVUHJDUG IRU WKLV &RXUW¶V DXWKRULW\ WKDW SURGXFHG WKH XQGHUO\LQJ VDQFWLRQV LQ WKH ILUVW SODFH 7KH SURMHFWHG GLVFRYHU\ GLVSXWHV ZKLFK SURGXFHG WKH XQGHUO\LQJ VDQFWLRQV DZDUG DJDLQVW-HODLGDQ VSDQQHG QHDUO\ ILYH \HDUV DQG DUH VXPPDUL]HG LQ SODLQWLIIV¶ $XJXVW/HWWHU 0RWLRQ IRU DGGLWLRQDO VDQFWLRQV DJDLQVW GHIHQGDQW-HODLGDQ (&) 1R d-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-3 3582 Filed Filed05/12/17 10/06/17 Page Page34ofof56 7KH +RQRUDEOH 6DUDK 1HWEXUQ 0D\ 3DJH GRXEW´ WKDW-HODLGDQ ³PDGH SULRU JRRG IDLWK DWWHPSWV WR FRQWDFW KLV EDQNV´ S VWDWLQJ WKDW ³-HODLGDQ KDV QRW PDGH JRRG IDLWK HIIRUWV WR VDWLVI\ KLV GLVFRYHU\ REOLJDWLRQV´ DQG ³KDV EHHQ OHVV WKDQ IRUWKFRPLQJ DERXW WKH GRFXPHQWV WKDW KH LV FDSDEOH RI REWDLQLQJ DQG SURGXFLQJ´ S ILQGLQJ ³WKDW-HODLGDQ KDV ZLOOIXOO\ GLVUHJDUGHG KLV GLVFRYHU\ REOLJDWLRQV DQG DFWHG LQ EDG IDLWK´ id. ³-HODLGDQ¶V IDLOXUH WR XQGHUWDNH DQ\ HIIRUWV WR UHWULHYH UHVSRQVLYH GRFXPHQWV IRU QHDUO\ RQH DQG RQH KDOI \HDUV DIWHU KH ZDV RUGHUHG WR GR VR LV FOHDU HYLGHQFH RI KLV LQWHQWLRQDOO\ REVWUXFWLYH FRQGXFW ´ $V WKHVH UXOLQJV UHIOHFW WKH XQGHUO\LQJ VDQFWLRQV DZDUG DJDLQVW GHIHQGDQW-HODLGDQ ZDV GLUHFWO\ SUHGLFDWHG XSRQ WKLV &RXUW¶V FRQFOXVLRQ WKDW KH KDG GHPRQVWUDWHG D SURIRXQG ODFN RI GLOLJHQFH LQ FRPSO\LQJ ZLWK WKLV &RXUW¶V 2UGHUV DQG WKDW WKH DUJXPHQWV DQG GRFXPHQWV KH KDG VXEPLWWHG WR WKH &RXUW LQ DQ HIIRUW WR PDQXIDFWXUH WKH DSSHDUDQFH RI VRPH HIIRUW ZHUH QRW LQ WKH OHDVW ELW FUHGLEOH +DYLQJ DOUHDG\ EHHQ VDQFWLRQHG IRU IDLOLQJ WR GRFXPHQW GLOLJHQW DQG JRRG IDLWK HIIRUWV WR FRPSO\ ZLWK WKLV &RXUW¶V SULRU RUGHUV RQH ZRXOG H[SHFW WKDW 0U-HODLGDQ DQG KLV FRXQVHO ZRXOG KDYH WDNHQ KHHG DQG SURFHHGHG ZLWK H[WUDRUGLQDU\ FDUH LQ FRPSO\LQJ ZLWK WKH &RXUW¶V GLUHFWLYHV LQ UHODWLRQ WR WKH HIIRUWV WR REWDLQ D OLFHQVH WR IDFLOLWDWH SD\PHQW RI WKH DWWRUQH\ IHH DQG VDQFWLRQ DZDUG DQG LQ GRFXPHQWLQJ WKRVH HIIRUWV,QVWHDG 0U 0F0DKRQ¶V VWDWXV UHSRUW VLPSO\ HYLGHQFHV WKH VDPH ODFN RI GLOLJHQFH DQG SDWWHUQ RI GHIOHFWLRQ WKDW UHVXOWHG LQ WKH XQGHUO\LQJ VDQFWLRQV LQ UHODWLRQ WR WKH &RXUW¶V RUGHUV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH PDQGDWHG HIIRUWV WR REWDLQ WKH OLFHQVH)RU REYLRXV UHDVRQV DQ\ SXUSRUWHG FRQYHUVDWLRQV 0U 0F0DKRQ PD\ KDYH KDG LQ LQIRUPDO VHWWLQJV ZLWK WKLUG SDUWLHV ZKR DUH QRW DIILOLDWHG ZLWK WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV JRYHUQPHQW RU 'HSDUWPHQW RI WKH 7UHDVXU\ KDYH QR UHOHYDQFH WR WKH DGHTXDF\ RI KLV DQG 0U-HODLGDQ¶V HIIRUWV WR REWDLQ D OLFHQVH IURP 2)$& EXW, IHHO FRPSHOOHG WR DGGUHVV WKH FRQYHUVDWLRQ ZLWK PH WKDW KH FLWHV LQ KLV VWDWXV UHSRUW:KDW, UHFDOO LV WKDW KH DSSURDFKHG PH DV, ZDV ZDONLQJ RXW RI WKH FRXUWURRP IROORZLQJ WKH OHQJWK\ RUDO DUJXPHQW RQ WKH 0RWLRQ WR &RPSHO DV WR 'DOODK $YFR RQH RI 0U 0F0DKRQ¶V RWKHU FOLHQWV $IWHU H[FKDQJLQJ SOHDVDQWULHV 0U 0F0DKRQ PDGH DQ XQVSHFLILF VWDWHPHQW DERXW KDYLQJ GLIILFXOW\ GHDOLQJ ZLWK 2)$& ZLWKRXW LGHQWLI\LQJ DQ\ HIIRUWV WKDW KDG EHHQ PDGH RU DQ\ RWKHU VSHFLILFV, GR QRW UHFDOO H[DFWO\ KRZ, UHVSRQGHG DOWKRXJK, DP FHUWDLQ LW ZDV QRW D VXEVWDQWLYH H[FKDQJH DQG, PRVW FHUWDLQO\ GLG QRW LQ DQ\ ZD\ VXJJHVW WR 0U 0F0DKRQ WKDW, RU DQ\ RI WKH RWKHU SODLQWLIIV¶ FRXQVHO LQWHQGHG WR GR KLV ZRUN IRU KLP,Q DGGLWLRQ, GR QRW NQRZ DQ\RQH DW WKH 2IILFH RI)RUHLJQ $VVHWV &RQWURO VR, FHUWDLQO\ GLG QRW VXJJHVW RWKHUZLVH GXULQJ RXU FRQYHUVDWLRQ%\ P\ UHFROOHFWLRQ WKH HQWLUHW\ RI WKH FRQYHUVDWLRQ ODVWHG OHVV WKDQ VHFRQGV Fourth DQG ILQDOO\ 0U 0F0DKRQ¶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urnett FDVH WKHQ SHQGLQJ LQ WKH 'LVWULFW RI &ROXPELD DQG FRQWLQXLQJ WKURXJK WKH Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-3 3582 Filed Filed05/12/17 10/06/17 Page Page45ofof56 7KH +RQRUDEOH 6DUDK 1HWEXUQ 0D\ 3DJH QXPHURXV GLVFRYHU\ GLVSXWHV DQG VDQFWLRQV PRWLRQV DV WR-HODLGDQ LQ WKH 0'/RYHU WKH ODVW VHYHUDO \HDUV *LYHQ 0U-HODLGDQ¶V GHVLJQDWLRQ DQ 2)$& OLFHQVH ZRXOG EH QHFHVVDU\ LQ RUGHU IRU KLP WR SD\ 0U 0F0DKRQ IRU WKDW UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ VR ZH KDYH WR LQIHU WKDW 0U 0F0DKRQ KDV REWDLQHG OLFHQVHV IURP 2)$& WR UHFHLYH SD\PHQWV IURP 0U-HODLGDQ LQ WKH SDVW,Q DGGLWLRQ WR KLV UROH DV FRXQVHO IRU 0U-HODLGDQ 0U 0F0DKRQ DOVR UHSUHVHQWHG 5DELWD 7UXVW DQ HQWLW\ DOVR GHVLJQDWHG SXUVXDQW WR ([HFXWLYH 2UGHU XQWLO-XGJH 0DDV HQWHUHG D GHIDXOW MXGJPHQW DJDLQVW 5DELWD 7UXVW (&) 1RV d-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-3 3582 Filed Filed05/12/17 10/06/17 Page Page56ofof56 7KH +RQRUDEOH 6DUDK 1HWEXUQ 0D\ 3DJH FRPSHQVDWLRQ IRU KLV OHJDO VHUYLFHV See ([KLELW * 1RYHPEHU OHWWHU IURP 6DQDEHO WR,,52 6DXGL $UDELD 7KXV LW LV DSSDUHQW WKDW 0U 0F0DKRQ KDV FRQVLGHUDEOH H[SHUWLVH LQ GHDOLQJ ZLWK 2)$&)RU DOO RI WKH IRUHJRLQJ UHDVRQV SODLQWLIIV UHVSHFWIXOO\ VXEPLW WKDW LPSRVLWLRQ RI DGGLWLRQDO VDQFWLRQV LV ZDUUDQWHG IRU WKH FRPSOHWH IDLOXUH RI 0U-HODLGDQ DQG KLV FRXQVHO WR FRPSO\ ZLWK WKLV &RXUW¶V RUGHUV UHODWLQJ WR WKH SURFXUHPHQW RI D OLFHQVH IURP 2)$& WR SD\ WKH DWWRUQH\ IHH DQG FRVW DZDUG SUHYLRXVO\ LPSRVHG DV D VDQFWLRQ DQG WR ILOH SHULRGLF VWDWXV UHSRUWV GRFXPHQWLQJ GLOLJHQW HIIRUWV LQ WKDW UHJDUG 5HVSHFWIXOO\ VXEPLWWHG &2=(1 2¶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ee ([KLELW * 1RYHPEHU 6DQDEHO OHWWHU UHSRUWLQJ GLVWULEXWLRQV WR 0U 0F0DKRQ WKURXJK DW OHDVW 1RYHPEHU ([KLELW + 'HFODUDWLRQ RI 0DUWLQ 0F0DKRQ LV 6XSSRUW RI 0RWLRQ WR:LWKGUDZ DOVR GDWHG 1RYHPEHU (&) 1R 3ODLQWLIIV WKHUHDIWHU PRYHG WR FRPSHO DGGLWLRQDO GLVFRYHU\ IURP 6DQDEHO LQFOXGLQJ DGGLWLRQDO UHFRUGV UHODWLQJ WR WKH VDOH RI WKH EXLOGLQJ DQG EDVLV IRU GLVWULEXWLQJ SURFHHGV RI WKH VDOH WR,,52 DQG WR GHSRVH 6DQDEHO¶V VROH UHPDLQLQJ UHSUHVHQWDWLYH 'U 0RQLHP $EGHO (O +LOODOL RQ WKRVH DQG RWKHU VXEMHFWV 'U +LOODOL WKHUHDIWHU FHDVHG UHVSRQGLQJ WR 6DQDEHO¶V QHZ FRXQVHO OHDGLQJ WR WKH HQWU\ RI D GHIDXOW MXGJPHQW DJDLQVW 6DQDEHO See (&) 1R 0HPRUDQGXP 2SLQLRQ DQG 2UGHU RI-XGJH *HRUJH% 'DQLHOV see also (&) 1R 5HSRUW DQG 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ RI-XGJH)UDQN 0DDV

Exhibit D Part 1

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT D Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 5 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S. D. N. Y) Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Personal Injury and Death Claims Ronald L. Motley, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Commercial Claims Eliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Sean Carter, Co-Chair CoZEN O' CONNOR Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel CoZEN O' CONNOR Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Paul J. Hanly, Jr. Co-Liaison Counsel HANLY CONROY BIERSTEIN SHERIDAN FISHER & HAYES LLP VIA HAND DELIVERY October 17, 2011 The Honorable Frank Maas United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street, Room 740 New York, NY 10007-1312 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) Dear Judge Maas: In accordance with the Court's January 21, 2011 Order, Plaintiffs in the above referenced action submit this letter and the accompanying exhibits and respectfully request that Your Honor enter an order, pursuant to F. R. C. P. 37 (a), compelling defendant Wa' el Hamza Jelaidan, an Executive Order 13224 terrorist designee, to promptly produce documentation and information relating to certain categories of documents previously requested by the Plaintiffs. Generally speaking, the documents at issue relate to: (1) banking and financial accounts associated with the terror financier, including a frozen account Jelaidan holds jointly with Osama bin Laden; (2) the defendant's relationship with other Executive Order 13224 designees including transfers of millions of dollars between them; and (3) the imposition of financial and other sanctions upon Jelaidan following his September 2002 designations by the United States, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and United Nations. ' There are a number of other serious deficiencies with the defendant's discovery responses that warrant this Court's attention. Plaintiffs will separately address those remaining issues in subsequent letter submissions. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 2 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS On June 13, 2006, Plaintiffs served their consolidated First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Waſel Hamza Jelaidan, attached hereto as Exhibi Plaintiffs' document requests were divided into Part A (comprising the first 25 requests) and Part B (the remaining 49 requests). Those requests seek inter alia: (i) relevant banking and financial documents, including documentation relating to an account Jelaidan holds jointly with Osama bin Laden; (ii) documents relating to investigations conducted by the United States and foreign governments into Jelaidan's terror sponsorship activities, including sanctions leveled against the defendant; (iii) documents relating to Jelaidan's employment with, and oversight of, several of the charities that were an integral part of the al Qaeda financial support infrastructure, including but not limited to the Muslim World League (MWL), International Islamic Relief Organization IIRO '), Rabita Trust, Saudi Joint Relief Committee (SJRC), and Al Haramain & Al Masjed Al Aqsa Charity Foundation (AHAMAA); and (iv) documents relating to Jelaidan's relationship with fellow Executive Order 13224 designees-Yassin Abdullah al Kadi and Chafiq Ayadi – and other prominent financial supporters of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. On August 15, 2006, Jelaidan provided his responses to the Plaintiffs' Part A requests, and on September 13, 2006, Jelaidan provided his responses to the Plaintiffs' Part B requests. See Wael Jelaidan's Responses to the Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents " Part A, " and Wael Jelaidan's Responses to the Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents " Part B, " attached collectively hereto as Exhibit 2. Following an examination of the defendant's discovery responses and documents, it is readily apparent that there are significant problems. First the most glaring deficiency is the fact that the defendant has failed to produce a single document in response to sixty-seven (67) of the Plaintiffs' seventy-four (74) document requests. Just as egregious, the defendant has produced a mere 22 documents (104 pages) since the commencement of merits discovery, several of which are unresponsive to the Plaintiffs' discovery requests and have no relevance to the specific issues articulated in those requests, Second, when responding to Plaintiffs' discovery requests, Jelaidan has in boilerplate fashion asserted conclusory and unsubstantiated objections regarding alleged burdens associated with producing responsive documentation and materials. Although the Federal discovery rules require a party to provide credible evidence to substantiate its objections, the defendant has failed to provide a single affidavit, declaration, or other document in support of those burden objections. See Arias-Zeballos v. Tan, 2007 U. S. Dist. Lexis 40245, * 4 (S. D. N. Y. 2007 (In Plaintiffs staggered their discovery requests in this manner, as well as the response times so as to provide the defendant with sufficient time to search for and gather responsive materials and fully respond to the Plaintiffs' requests. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 3 order to satisfy its the resisting party must do more than simply inton [e the] familiar burden, litany that the [discovery requests] are burdensome, oppressive or overly broad, and must clarify and explain its objections and provide support thereof. Further, not only has Jelaidan blatantly ignored his continuing obligation under Federal Rule 26 (e) to supplement his responses to the Plaintiffs' discovery requests, the defendant has failed to supplement his responses pursuant Judge Daniels' Order holding that the appropriate temporal scope of discovery should reasonably begin in 1992, " and further directing Jelaidan to respond to Plaintiffs' discovery requests in accordance with that determination. See Order, MDL Docket No. 2059, December 21, 2007. Jelaidan's failure to do so has significantly prejudiced the Plaintiffs' ability to obtain relevant and discoverable information Moreover, the defendant attempts to excuse his lack of production by repeatedly asserting that he neither has knowledge of nor possession of responsive documents. Jelaidan particularly relies upon this position when responding to Plaintiffs' requests seeking banking and financial records for accounts under his control But neither Jelaidan's failure to conduct a diligent search for responsive records nor his bare not in my possession " disclaimers fulfill his discovery obligations. See Scott v. Arex, Inc, 124 F. R. D. 39, 41 (D. Conn. 1989) (Court holding that a party to a lawsuit cannot escape the obligation to produce documents by incanting... not in my possession. That a party does not possess documents is simply immaterial if those documents remain in that party's custody or control. Plaintiffs have well-founded concerns that Jelaidan does not intend to fulfill his discovery obligations in this important case and is in fact deliberately withholding the production of responsive documentation. Plaintiffs have attempted to contact Jelaidan's counsel, Martin McMahon, on at least three separate occasions to set up a meet and confer to discuss the defendant s discovery deficiencies, but Mr McMahon's office has not responded to any of Plaintiffs' requests to schedule a conference. See Plaintiffs' emails to Martin McMahon dated April 14, 2011, and May 5, 2011 and May 16, 2011, attached hereto as Exhibit 3. Plaintiffs still do not have the requested information and, particularly given the impending deadline for document productions, intervention by this Court is now necessary. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court order Jelaidan immediately to produce all responsive materials, Jelaidan's Timeframe and Burden Objections Have Previously Been Struck By This Court Plaintiffs have served the defendant with a number of important discovery requests seeking a variety of relevant information, including without limitation, documents concerning: i) meetings and conferences Jelaidan attended with other members of al Qaeda; (ii) relationships between members of al Qaeda and certain charities; (iii) Jelaidan's relationship with fello Executive Order 13224 designees Yassin Abdullah al Kadi Chafiq Ayadi, Adel Batterjee, and Hassan Cengic; iv) Jelaidan's relationship with the al Qaeda charities such as the IIRO, AHAMAA, World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY "), and Third World Relief Agency Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 201 Page 4 (TWRA '); and (v) bank accounts Jelaidan held jointly with the aforementioned individuals and entities. See Plaintiffs' Request Nos. B12-14 and B38-43 at Exhibit 1 Jelaidan has failed to produce a single document in response to these document requests, primarily relying on his objection that the timeframe and breadth of the requests is too expansive and burdensome: Despite the foregoing and preserving all our objections, WJ states that no responsive documents will be produced because both the timeframe and breadth of this request is much too expansive and burdensome. Should Plaintiffs identify a reasonable amount of specific individuals and a reasonable and relevant timeframe, WJ would endeavor to focus a search that may or may not produce documents responsive to this request. (Emphasis added). See Jelaidan's Responses to Plaintiffs' Request Nos. B12-14 and B38-43 at Exhibit 2. As this Court will recall, Judge Daniels previously considered, rejected, and struck the defendant's timeframe and burden objections, holding that the appropriate temporal scope of discovery should reasonably begin in 1992, and further directing Jelaidan to respond to the Plaintiffs' discovery requests in accordance with that determination. See December 21, 2007 Order (MDL Docket Entry No. 2059). The defendant has failed to supplement his discovery responses and/or produce a single document since the Court's December 2007 Order. Plaintiffs therefore respectfully request that Your Honor direct Jelaidan to comply with the Court's prior orders and immediately produce all requested documents Jelaidan Should Be Compelled To Produce All Banking And Financial Records Plaintiffs have served the defendant with several discovery requests seeking banking and financial records for accounts linked to Jelaidan, including the defendant's personal bank accounts and other accounts over which he has signatory authority and control. Although the defendant responded to Plaintiffs' banking requests by producing a few documents (mostly unresponsive), Jelaidan has largely failed to produce any of the requested information relating to a number of bank accounts the Plaintiffs have discovered through their independent investigations, as well as certain accounts Jelaidan himself has acknowledged in his discovery responses. In support of his non-production, the defendant relies primarily upon his contention that he " neither has knowledge of nor possession of the requested banking records. As The discussion which follows focuses on a select number of identified bank accounts held in Jelaidan's name, or over which he held signatory or account authority. Plaintiffs focus on these particular accounts merely as a means of demonstrating Jelaidan's failure to comply with his discovery obligations in responding to Plaintiffs' document requests. However, through the instant application, Plaintiffs seek an Order directing Jelaidan to produce any and all records for any bank account held in his name, or relative to which he held signatory or account authority, during the relevant timeframe. For the reasons discussed in Section F below, that timeframe should extend at least back to the formation of al Qaeda in 1988.

Exhibit D Part 2

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-5 Filed 10/06 17 Page 1 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 201 Page 5 discussed in further detail below, that response fails to meet Jelaidan's most basic obligations under the Federal discovery rules. Jelaidan has of control " over his bank accounts and must produce documents concerning those accounts in accordance with Rule 34, The federal courts have been clear that a party may not forego his duty to produce responsive documents by asserting that they are not in my possession, " and must produce documents where the party has the legal right to obtain such documents on demand. See Scott v. 124 F. R. D. 39, 41 (D, Conn. 1989) (Court holding that a party to a lawsuit cannot escape the obligation to produce documents by incanting.... ' not in my possession.' That a party does not possess documents is simply immaterial if those documents remain in that party's custody or control."). Rule 34 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires production of all responsi non-privileged documents within a party's possession, custody or control " that are responsive to another party's document request. See United States v. Stein, 488 F. Supp. 2d 350, 361 (S. D. N. Y 2007 (Legal ownership of the requested documents or things is not determinative nor is actual possession necessary if the party has control of the items. Control has been defined to include the legal right to obtain the documents requested upon demand. The term " control is broadly construed."); Florentia Contracting Corp. v. The Resolution Trust Corp., 1993 WL 127187, at * 3 (S. D. N. Y. Apr. 22, 1993) (Control has been defined as the legal right, authority, or ability to obtain upon demand documents in the possession of another."); The Bank of New Yor Meridien BIAO Bank Tanzania Ltd., 171 F. R. D. 135 (S. D. N. Y. 1997) (stating that control does not require that the party have legal ownership or actual physical possession of the documents at issue, but rather, documents are considered to be under a party's control when that party has the right, authority or practical ability to obtain the documents from a non-party to the action); In Re Flag Telecom Holdings, 236 F. R. D. 177, 180 (S. D. N. Y. 2006) (If the producing party has the legal right or the practical ability to obtain the documents, then it is deemed to have control even if the documents are actually in the possession of a non-party. Following that reasoning the courts have similarly held that a party has control over his or her bank account records and must produce them in accordance with Rule 34. See Dorocon, Inc. v. Burke 2005 U. S. Dist. Lexis 38839, at * 52-53 (D. D. C. 2005) (reasoning that control is not defined by actual possession but also includes constructive possession (i e, the legal right to obtain documents on demand), the court held that Rule 34 (a) obligates the party to turn over documents such as bank statements given that they enjoy constructive possession of such documents.); Engel v. Town of Roseland, 2007 U. S. Dist. Lexis 73645 (N. D. Ind. 2007 (holding that when a person has a right to obtain copies of his bank statements, the party is in control of those documents and must produce them in response to a request under Rule 34); Thomas V. Deloitte Consulting L. P., 2004 Dist. Lexis. 29154 (N. D. Tex. 2004) (ordering production of bank statements); Zervos v. S. S. Sam Houston, 79 F. R. D. 593, 595-96 (S. D. N. Y. 1978) (where the plaintiff failed to produce the requested banking records by claiming they were not in his possession, the court ordered the plaintiff to request production of the records from the Swiss Bank, holding that " [p] roduction may be ordered when a party has a legal right to obtain Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 6 papers, even though he has no copy, and regardless of whether a paper is beyond the jurisdiction of the Court."). 2. Jelaidan's accounts at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. Plaintiffs served the following requests seeking banking records for accounts held by the defendant at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. Request No. A-6 – Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in Faisal Finance and/or any Faisal Finance accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds leposited into or withdrawn from any such account. Request No. A-7 – Please provide any and all documents relating to Switzerland's investigation and post 9-11 determination to freeze any and all accounts in Your name and/or any accounts over which you hold or held signatory authority, including without limitation, all documents identifying any and all accounts, assets, and/or monies frozen by the Swiss government. Jelaidan produced a mere two documents in response to Request Nos. A-6 and A-7: (1 three-page bank statement for Account No. x0409 at Faisal Finance for the month of January 2005 (WJO03); and (2) a September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance notifying Jelaidan that Account No. X0409 has been frozen per the directives of the Swiss Federal Prosecutor (WJ013) The defendant further responds as follows: WJ neither has knowledge of nor possession of any additional documents other than what has been produced which are responsive to this request. See Exhibit 2, pp. 6-7. As the case law cited above makes clear, Jelaidan's discovery obligations under the Federal Rules require him to do more than simply assert that responsive banking records are not in his possession, particularly when he has the legal right, authority, and/or practical ability to request them from the bank. There is no question that Jelaidan has control over Account No. x0409 and/or any other account associated with him at Faisal Finance. Indeed, the defendant's production of the January 2005 account statement makes clear that Jelaidan has successfully requested and obtained responsive banking records from the Swiss bank despite the freezing of the account three years earlier in 2002. Jelaidan's document production in response to Plaintiffs' Request Nos A-6 and A-7 is significantly inadequate and the defendant should be compelled to immediately produce all responsive documents. Executive Order 13224 designee and al Qaeda financier, Yassin al Kadi, also held personal and business accounts at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. As discussed in Section C (1) herein, Kadi used his accounts at Faisal Finance to transfer millions of dollars to Jelaidan. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 7 Jelaidan's accounts at Al Rajhi Banking & Investment Corporation. Plaintiffs also served the following request seeking banking records for all accounts held by the defendant at Al Rajhi Bank Request No. A-8 – Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in the al Rajhi Banking & Investment Corporation (" al Rajhiº) and/or any al Rajhi accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account The defendant responded to Plaintiffs' discovery request with the following Despite the foregoing and preserving all our objections, WJ has no statements post dating the freezing of his account. WJ is currently endeavoring to obtain statements prior to the freezing of his account (but not prior to 1996) and will produce such documents if and when they may be found. See Exhibit 2, p. 7. Despite the defendant's assurances in 2006 that he was working to obtain the requested documentation, Jelaidan has yet to produce a single document relating to his accounts at Al Rajhi Bank. Nor has the defendant advised Plaintiffs of the status of his efforts to obtain the requested banking records. Accordingly, Jelaidan should be compelled to produce all relevant banking records for any and all accounts associated with the defendant at Al Rajhi Bank, including without limitation, all bank statements for the life of the accounts (both prior to and after the date of freezing). Jelaidan's joint account with Osama bin Laden at Habib Bank. In addition to the frozen accounts at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. and Al Rajhi Bank, a third account linked to Jelaidan has been frozen following the September 11th attacks. According to media reporting the government of Pakistan identified and seized an account Jelaidan held jointly with Osama bin Laden at Habib Bank in Peshawar in or around June 2003 See Ikram Hoti, Accounts of 15 Terrorist Organizations Frozen, World News Connection (June 21, 2003) (identifying the frozen Jelaidan-bin Laden account as: " Osama Bin-Laden and Wael Jelaidan FC-CD xx051-1 USS 342. 04 Habib Bank Limited (HBL) Cantt Br. Peshawar "), attached hereto as Exhibit 4; see also November 18, 2002 letter from the State Bank of Pakistan to William C. Murde Director of the Treasury Department's Task Force on Terrorist Financing, regarding the status of certain frozen accounts, including the Jelaidan-bin Laden account, attached hereto as Exhibit 5. Case a 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 37465 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 8 Based on this reporting and other available information, Plaintiffs served the following document requests: Requests No. A-3 – From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide any and all documents relating to any accounts You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of Osama Bin Laden (including any member of the Bin Laden family). including without limitation, any accounts over which You held or hold signatory authority. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account Request No. A-4 – Please provide any and all documents relating to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan's investigation and post 9-11 determination to freeze any and all accounts in Your name and/or any accounts over which you hold or held signatory authority, including without limitation, all documents identifying any and all accounts, assets, and/or monies frozen by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, including the following: ' Osama Bin-Laden and Wael Jelaiden FC-CD xx051-1 USS 342. 04 Habib Bank Limited (HBL) Cantt Br. Peshawar. Jelaidan responds to Request No. A-3 by merely asserting that no such documents exist. " See Exhibit 2, p. 5. The defendant's contention is simply not true in light of the specifically identified Jelaidan-bin Laden account at Habib Bank in Pakistan. In response to Plaintiffs' Request No. A-4, the defendant has produced seven (7) documents, including but not limited to: (i) a September 25, 2002 letter from Faisal Finance Switzerland) S. A. to Jelaidan stating that the Swiss Federal Prosecutor has ordered the freezing of Jelaidan's account (WJO13); (ii) a letter from the MWL Secretary General, Dr Abdullah bin Abdul Mohsin al Turki, to the Ambassador of Pakistan in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Admiral Abdul Aziz Mirza, requesting that the Rabita Trust accounts in Habib Bank be unfrozen by the government of Pakistan (WJ021); (iii) a December 16, 2002 letter from Javed Masud, Government of Pakistan, Cabinet Division, to the MWL Secretary General, Dr. Abdullah bin Abdul Mohsin al Turki, stating that Jelaidan's continued presence on the Board of Rabita Trust acts as an impediment in defreezing the accounts of the Rabita Trust (WJ008); and (iv) an October 15, 2001 statement by Jelaidan (unsigned) asserting that neither he nor Rabita Trust were involved or connected to al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden (WJ015). None of these mostly self-serving documents are remotely responsive to Plaintiffs' request that made specific reference to the Jelaidan-bin Laden account Moreover, Jelaidan once again falls back on his oft-stated position that he is not in possession of responsive documents: WJ neither has knowledge of nor possession of any additional documents other than what has been produced which are responsive to this request. Case • 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-5 Filed 10 06/17 Page 5 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 201 Page 9 See Exhibit 2, p. 5. As a named account holder and beneficiary of the account at Habib Bank, Jelaidan most certainly has control over the requested documents and thus the legal right, authority, and practical ability to request and obtain all responsive banking records from Habib Bank relating to the account he holds jointly with bin Laden. Accordingly, this Court should compel the defendant to promptly produce the requested banking documents. Other responsive account records at Habib Bank. Given the defendant s relationship with Habib Bank (as evidenced by the Jelaidan-bin Laden account, Plaintiffs served Jelaidan with the following request seeking documents for any and all bank accounts at Habib Bank associated with the defendant, including any account over which Jelaidan holds signatory authority: Request No. A-2 – Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in Habib Bank and/or any Habib Bank accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account Although Jelaidan responds that he " neither has knowledge of nor possession of documents responsive to this request, " the defendant does produce an August 21, 2002 letter authored by himself in his capacity as the Secretary General of Rabita Trust, to the State Bank of Pakistan, requesting that six (6) Rabita Trust accounts held at Habib Bank be unfrozen and the funds contained therein released. See Exhibit 6 (identifying Account Nos. XX973-1, x536, xx206-4, x254, x255, and x414) As the leading official for Rabita Trust, Jelaidan would have signatory authority over the Rabita Trust accounts at Habib Bank and thus the supervisory authority to manage the disposition of the funds in those accounts at the time they were frozen. Accordingly, responsive banking records in the possession of Habib Bank are within defendant Jelaidan's control by virtue of his signatory authority. Therefore, Plaintiffs submit that these six Rabita Trust accounts are responsive to Request No. A-2 and the defendant should be compelled to request, obtain, and produce all responsive banking records relating to these accounts. Similarly, in documents resolving an arbitrated dispute between Jelaidan and another man concerning funds for a project in Afghanistan, Jelaidan indicated that he had control of various accounts at Habib Bank related to that project. According to representations to which Jelaidan agreed, Jelaidan wrested control of all the components of the project, " pressured the director of the (Habib Bank), Peshawar Kant Branch, and managed to seize control of all the bank accounts To the extent Jelaidan is attempting to make a semantic distinction to avoid production of the requested documents, for instance on the ground that bin Laden is not formally listed by name on the account, his attempts to avoid discovery should be rejected. See Exhibit 2, p. 4.

Exhibit D Part 3

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 10 of the project. " See Exhibit 17. Given the control over those accounts that Jelaidan was shown to have, he should be compelled to request, obtain, and produce all responsive banking records relating to those accounts as well Jelaidan's bank accounts associated with the charities, As this Court will recall from Plaintiffs' prior submissions in this case, Jelaidan is a long time associate of Osama bin Laden, a founding member of al Qaeda, and an Executive Order 13224 Specially Designated Global Terrorist. The U. S. Treasury Department statement supporting Jelaidan's designation details the defendant's ties to the terror group and its senior members: Waſel Hamza Julaidan, a Saudi citizen, is an associate of Osama bin Laden. Julaidan fought with bin Laden in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Julaidan is also associated with several individuals and entities linked to al Qaida, including bin Laden's lieutenants, Ayman al Zawahri, Abu Zubaida, and Mohammed Atef and the organizations: Maktab al Khidmat, the Rabita Trust, and al-Gamma al Islamiya. These individuals and entities have been previously designated under President Bush's Executive Order and by the United Nations. Bin Laden himself acknowledged close ties to Julaidan during a 1999 interview with al-Jazeera TV. When referring to the assassination of al Qaida co-founder Abdullah Azzam, bin Laden stated that " we were all in one boat, as is known to you, including our brother, Wa' el Julaidan. " Julaidan has established contacts with several known Islamic extremists, including bin Laden's principal lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahri. Another bin Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaida, claimed that he had accompanied Julaidan from Pakistan to Kandahar, Afghanistan during the summer of 2000. Zubaida said that Julaidan met with bin Laden and senior bin Laden lieutenant Mohammed Atef soon after arriving in Kandahar. In February 2000, Julaidan was appointed to the Board of Trustees of the Rabita Trust and served as its director general. The Rabita Trust is an NGO designated under President Bush's Executive Order as an organization that provided logistical and financial support to al-Qa' ida. BASIS FOR DESIGNATION The United States has credible information that Waſel Hamza Julaidan is an associate of Osama bin Laden and several of bin Laden's top lieutenants. Julaidan has directed organizations that have provided financial and logistical support to al-Qa' ida. Accordingly, the United States is designating Julaidan under Executive Order 13224 as a person who supports terror. (Emphasis added). See U. S. Treasury Department's September 6, 2002 press release discussing the Executive Order 13224 designation of Jelaidan, attached hereto as Exhibit 8. The United Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17 201 Page 11 Nations similarly designated Jelaidan as a member of al Qaeda on September 11, 2002, attached as Exhibit 9. Consistent with the U. S. government s position that the defendant oversaw organizations that supported al Qaeda, Plaintiffs have submitted compelling evidence in these proceedings in support of their contention that Jelaidan used his high-ranking leadership positions within several ostensible charities to deliberately direct material, logistical, ideological, and other forms of support to Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and affiliated terror groups including massive amounts of money. See Plaintiff's Chart at Exhibit 10 (summarizing key allegations and evidence relating to Jelaidan's relationship with the Muslim World League (MWL), International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), Rabita Trust, Saudi Joint Relief Committee (SJRC), Al Haramain & Al Masjed Al Aqsa Charity Foundation (AHAMAA '), and Saudi Red Crescent (" SRC) Importantly, as a principal official of those organizations, Jelaidan would have had signatory authority over the charities' bank accounts and thus the requisite control to direct the movement of funds in and out of those accounts in support of terror activities. For example, Jelaidan opened three bank accounts on behalf of the designated AHAMAA between 1997 and 2001 and continued to have the authorization to handle two of their accounts as a signatory on two [of the NGO's Bosnian accounts. " Id. Additionally, as discussed in the previous section, Plaintiffs are aware of at least six (6) accounts at Habib Bank which were seized from Rabita Trust and frozen following the September 11, 2001 attacks (Account Nos. xx973-1, x536, xx206-4, x254, x255, and x414). As the Secretary General of Rabita Trust, Jelaidan would have had signatory authority and control over these accounts. In light of the evidence of Jelaidan's prominent role in funding the al Qaeda network via the charities, Plaintiffs served the defendant with the following requests seeking relevant bank account records: Request No. B-19 – From the period beginning January 1984 through the present, please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the Charities, and/or any Charity accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. [The term " Charities " refers to the Muslim World League (MWL), Rabita Trust, Saudi Joint Relief Committee (SJRC "), and Saudi Red Crescent (" SRC ").] Request No. B-43 – Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the entities identified in Exhibit C, and/or any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. [Entities identified in Exhibit C include but are not limited to: International Islami Relief Organization (IIRO®), Al Haramain & Al Masjed Al Aqsa Charity Foundation (AHAMAA'), Third World Relief Agency (TWRA "), Al Haramain Islami Foundation, and World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY. Jelaidan fails to produce documents in response to Request No. B-19, again chiefly relying upon his assertion that he has no documents in his possession. See Exhibit 2, pp. Further, the defendant once again asserts that both the timeframe and breadth of the requests are much too expansive and burdensome " to produce relevant documentation in response to Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 12 Request No B-43. Id. at p. 24. As discussed in Section I (A) supra, this Court previously struck the defendant's timeframe and burden objections and directed Jelaidan to respond to the Plaintiffs' discovery requests in accordance with that determination. To date, the defendant has failed to act in accordance with the Court's December 2007 Order and Plaintiffs respectfully submit that the defendant should be compelled to produce all responsive bank records. Jelaidan's bank account associated with the Third World Relie Agency. In addition to his use of the above mentioned charities to fulfill the terror group's fundraising needs, Jelaidan was determined to find and use other opportunities to direct financial and material support to the al Qaeda network. Jelaidan successfully did so by virtue of his relationship with the leaders of the Sudan-based Third World Relief Agency (TWRA), a purported charitable organization that provided the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina with humanitarian assistance during the war in the former Yugoslavia. According to CIA intelligence, the TWRA was in fact aiding Islamic terrorist groups in the region.' The 9/1 Commission similarly concluded that bin Laden made use of the already-established Third World Relief Agency " to provide financial and other support for al Qaeda's terrorist activities. See Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, available at http://govinfo. libre unt. edu 911/report/911Report pdf at p. 58. German authorities, providing judicial assistance to the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Court of Criminal Justice for the former Yugoslavia, conducted an investigation of TWRA bank accounts and discovered large monetary transfers to those accounts from the Islamic world, including six (6) suspicious transactions directly linked to Jelaidan himself at Bank Austria (Acct. No. xxxxx1587), totaling more than $ 11 million. See German Intelligence Report regarding the TWRA, attached as Exhibit 11, pp. 13-15. Consequently, Plaintiffs served the following request: Request No. A-9 – Please provide any and all documents relating to any financial accounts held by You in the Bank Austria and/or any Bank Austria accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including without limitation, monthly or annual account statements, correspondence, deposits, withdrawals, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, or investments, including the source or destination of funds deposited into or withdrawn from any such account. Not surprisingly, the defendant fails to produce a single document in response to the Plaintiffs' request and continues to assert the following: No documents will be produced as WJ neither has knowledge of nor possession of any such documents. See Exhibit 2, pp. 7-8. According to a 1996 CIA report, the TWRA was one of several charitable organizations facilitating the activities terrorist groups operating in Bosnia-Herzegovina region. Employees of the TWRA have conducted suicide bombings and engaged in massive weapons smuggling operations. See Exhibit 27. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 13 Given the defendant's ongoing resistance to produce relevant bank account records under his control, which he has the legal right to request and obtain directly from the bank, this Court should compel Jelaidan to immediately produce all documents responsive to Request No. A-9. Jelaidan's bank accounts in Turkey. Maram Company located in Istanbul, Turkey is a Jelaidan-owned travel and trading firm that has significant ties to al Qaeda. Maram was founded by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, a former al Qaeda financial officer who is now serving time in a U. S. prison for his involvement in the bombing of the U. S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998. In 1997, Jelaidan and his partner Mohamed Bayazid became owners of Maram when Salim transferred his shares in the company to them. In 1998, Yassin al Kadi, an Executive Order 13224 designee and al Qaeda financier, transferred $ 1. 25 million to Jelaidan. See March 23, 2007 letter from the Office of the Swiss Federal Examining Magistrates office to U. S. authorities at Exhibit 12; see also Memorandum in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative For Summary Judgment (Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Timothy Geithner, et al, Case No. 09-0108), attached hereto as Exhibit 13, pp. 11 and 21. Although Kadi told U. S. authorities that the $ 1. 25 million was intended for the Al Imam University in Yemen, the money was suspiciously transferred to Jelaidan through a Turkish account connected to Maram. See Exhibit 14 (Swiss prosecutors investigating Kadi's links to Jelaidan and al Qaeda stated that the Turkish account Juleidan used in Turkey to receive al Qadi's money might be linked to the Maram Company, a * * * ucture connected (according to your intel services) to al Qa aeda."). As the owner of Maram, Jelaidan has the legal right, authority, and practical ability to request and obtain responsive banking records relating to any and all bank accounts associated ith that company. Accordingly, this Court should compel the defendant to produce all banking records for Maram, including any other accounts associated with Jelaidan in Turkey. Bayazid (a/k/a Abu Rida) is an al Qaeda founding member (like Jelaidan) who participated in obtaining weapons and communications equipment for the terror organization. Bayazid also sought to obtain uranium for a nuclear weapon for Osama bin Laden. Al Imam is not the ordinary university one would expect. Founded by Sheikh Abd al Majid al Zindani, a bin Laden associate and al Qaeda recruiter who was designated by the U. S. Department of the Treasury, " Al Imam students are suspected of being responsible, and were arrested, for recent terrorist attacks, including the assassination of three American missionaries and the assassination of the number two leader for the Yemeni Socialist party, Jarallah Omar Notably, John Walker Lindh was also a student at Al Iman University before he joined the Taliban. " See February 24, 2004 OFAC press release regarding the designation of Abd al Majid al Zindani which can be found at http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/js1190. aspx. The $ 1 25 million came from the account of Kadi's company, Karavan Development Group. Karavan's account was held at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 14 Jelaidan should be ordered to produce affidavit testimony and other supporting documentation detailing his efforts to request and obtain esponsive banking records. As demonstrated by the foregoing, including Plaintiffs' Chart at Exhibit 10, the breadth of Jelaidan's involvement in the financial support infrastructure used to fund the al Qaeda terrorist network is staggering. Using his leadership positions within multiple charitable organizations, including his relationships with other prominent financiers of the al Qaeda network, the al Qaeda co-founder was able to direct massive amounts of material, financial, and other forms of support to Osama bin Laden and his terror organization. Consequently, any and all banking accounts linked to Jelaidan, one of the premier al Qaeda financiers over the past 20 + years, should be fair game in these discovery proceedings. Jelaidan contends in his discovery responses that he does not physically possess the requested banking documents. As a central figure in a global terror organization responsible for the murder of nearly 3, 000 innocent individuals on September 11, 2001, it is feasible that Jelaidan would choose not to personally retain copies of sensitive banking records that could be easily seized from him by investigating authorities. However, the Federal discovery rules and the courts are clear that the defendant must do more than merely assert that he does not have possession of responsive banking documents which are under his control. Rather, Jelaidan is required to request the production of those records directly from the bank and produce those immediately to the Plaintiffs upon receipt. To date, Plaintiffs have yet to see any evidence that Jelaidan has made any such effort to request, obtain, and produce the relevant documents. Plaintiffs therefore respectfully request that Your Honor compel Jelaidan to immediately request and produce all bank account records requested by the Plaintiffs. In the event that the defendant is unable to obtain the banking records after a formal request, Plaintiffs respectfully submit that Jelaidan should be ordered to submit an affidavit and all supporting documentation detailing his efforts to obtain the requested materials, including without limitation: identification of all bank representatives that were contacted relative to the defendant's request to produce all banking records, attaching all written communications exchanged in requesting the information; (2) a description of the specific subject matters that were discussed with the bank representatives (3) a description of the search conducted by the bank, including locations searched; (4) a detailed description as to why the defendant was unable to obtain the requested records, and (5) any other detail that demonstrates the defendant made a reasonable, good faith attempt to obtain the requested documents, laidan Should Be Compelled to Produce Documentation Relating To His Relationships with Other Executive Order 13224 Designee Plaintiffs served the defendant with discovery requests seeking documents relating to his relationship with fellow Executive Order 13224 designees Yassin Abdullah al Kadi, Chafiq Ayadi, Hasan Cengic, and Adel Batterjee, including documents relating to the transfers of funds between Jelaidan and those individuals and any banking or financial accounts Jelaidan held jointly with those individuals:

Exhibit D Part 4

Case D 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 15 Request No. B-38 – Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between You and the persons identified in Exhibit B. [Persons identified in Exhibit B include, but are not limited to: Yassin Abdullah al Kadi, Chafiq Ayadi, Hasan Cengic, Adel Batterjee, and Mohamed Bayazid.] Request No. B-39 – Please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from the persons identified in Exhibit B, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and those persons. Request No. B-40 – Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the persons identified in Exhibit B, and/or any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. See Plaintiffs' Request Nos. B38-40 at Exhibit 1 Once again, Jelaidan objects to each of these discovery requests by asserting that both the timeframe and breadth of the requests are much too expansive and burdensome: Despite the foregoing and preserving all our objections, WJ states that no responsive documents will be produced because both the timeframe and breadth of this request is much too expansive and burdensome. Should Plaintiffs identify a reasonable amount of specific individuals and a reasonable and relevant timeframe WJ would endeavor to focus a search that may or may not produce documents responsive to this request. (Emphasis added). See Jelaidan's Responses to Plaintiffs' Request Nos. B38-40 at Exhibit 2. Despite this Court's December 2007 Order MDL Docket Entry No. 2059) rejecting and striking Jelaidan's timeframe and burden objections the defendant has yet to produce a single document in response to Plaintiffs' discovery requests and should be compelled to immediately produce the requested materials. Jelaidan has failed to produce any documents relating to his relationships with Yassin Abdullah al Kadi and Chafiq Ayadi. Jelaidan has failed to produce documents relating to fellow Executive Order 13224 designees Yassin Abdullah al Kadi and Chafiq Ayadi despite well-documented personal and business relationships between and among the three men. See October 12, 2001 U. S. Department of the Treasury designations for Kadi and Ayadi, attached hereto as Exhibit 15. Family friends since the 1980' s, Jelaidan and Kadi are known to have held seats on various boards together, invested in several businesses together, and have generally supported each other's business and/or purported charitable endeavors. For instance, the two men were board members of the Executive Order 13224 designated Al Haramain & Al Masjed Al Aqsa Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 16 Charity Foundation (AHAMAA). See Statement of Yassin Abdullah Kadi to the U. S. Foreign Assets Control at Exhibit 16, pp. 42 and 55; see also Plaintiffs Chart at Exhibit 10 (discussing the Treasury Department's designation of the AHAMAA). In addition, Jelaidan and Kadi sat on the board of the Dar al Walidain School in Sarajevo, Bosnia, which operated under the patronage of the AHAMAA. See Exhibit 16, pp. 54-55 Jelaidan and Kadi were also shareholders in Abrar of Saudi Arabia, a travel company established to provide services to Muslim pilgrims, as well as a Bosnian investment company called Euroinvest which had originally been created by E. O. 13224 designee Ayadi. See Exhibit 16, pp. 54-56, 67 and 77. Moreover, when Jelaidan was appointed as Executive Director of the Saudi Joint Relief Committee (SJRC) in Albania and Kosovo in 1999, Kadi's companies in Albania provided the SJRC with considerable support and resources. See Exhibit 16, pp. 54 and 56 (stating that Kadi's companies provided the SJRC with apartments and office space, among other things) Kadi is also known to have transferred significant sums of money directly to Jelaidan. According to Swiss authorities, Kadi transferred approximately $ 23 million to the accounts of Jelaidan. See Exhibit 17. In addition, Kadi transferred $ 1. 25 million to Jelaidan in 1998 through the defendant's Maram Company in Turkey. See Section B (8) supra. Importantly, Jelaidan was instrumental in introducing Kadi to Chafiq Ayadi. " While working with Kadi to establish an advanced teacher's college in Zagreb, Croatia, Jelaidan recommended that Kadi hire Ayadi to manage the college. See Exhibit 16, pp. 34 and 54; see also Exhibit 19, OFAC Designation Memorandum for Yassin al Kadi, p. 8. That same year, Kadi hired Ayadi to head Muwafaq's European operations, again based upon the recommendation from Jelaidan. See Exhibit 13, pp. 10 and 21-22; Exhibit 19 at p. 28 (stating that there is substantial and credible evidence that both Muwafaq as an entity, and many of the individuals charged with operating it and distributing its funds, were engaged in a longstanding pattern of supporting terrorist and extremist causes."). Notably, all three men were shareholders in KA Stan, a construction company set up in 1996. See Exhibit 16, p. 79. Having failed to produce any documents in response to Request Nos. B-38-B-40, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Your Honor compel the defendant to produce all responsive documentation and information requested by the Plaintiffs. Ayadi has been identified as one of the heads of the Tunisian Islamic Front (TIF "), which is the armed branch of Ennahdha, a Tunisian terrorist organization. See INTERPOL Fusion Taskforce, Financing of Terrorism, March 2003, attached hereto as Exhibit 18, pp. 26-29. In the 1990' s, Ayadi went to Afghanistan where he became the TIF representative to al Qaeda and attended military training camps. Id. During the Bosnian War, Ayadi acted under the cover of a humanitarian organization to buy weapons and false documentation for terrorist activities. Id. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-7 Filed 10 06/17 Page 3 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 17 Jelaidan has failed to produce any documents relating to his relationship with Hasan Cengic. Hasan Cengic is the former Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and a radical, militant Muslim cleric who provided significant financial, material, and logistical support to Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda network. The Imam of an important mosque in Zagreb, Croatia, Cengic served as the local " rimary organizer " of arriving foreign mujihadeen during the Bosnian War and turned his mosque into the central point of entry for Arab militants loyal to al Qaeda traveling to Bosnia via Croatia. Moreover, as a member of the Third World Relief Agency CTWRA) supervisory board, Cengic aided Islamic terrorists, including bin Laden, with the financing and shipment of massive amounts of weapons to Bosnia. On May 29, 2003, the U. S. Department of the Treasury designated Cengic as a specially Designated Global Terrorist. See Exhibit 20. As set forth above in Section 1 (B) (7), an investigation of TWRA bank accounts by German authorities revealed six (6) large monetary transfers linked to Jelaidan himself totaling more than $ 11 million. Four (4) of those transactions attributed to Jelaidan, totaling $ 7, 058, 973. 20, are linked directly to Cengic. At one were Accounting-holding Account onetime Amount in USD Bank Austria Debt repayment-960 000. 000 USD Hasan Cengic Former Z), Vienna Wall Jelaidan Bank Austria (Former Z), Vienna Debt repayment-98, 973. 20 USD Hasan Cengi 294 5/11/93 XXXXXI587 000, 000. 00 USD Wael Jelaidan Acct. no. XXXXXI587 Account with Bank Austria Bank Austria (Former Z), Vienna Debt repayment Hasan Cengic 356 6/30/93 Wael Jelaidan Acct no. XXXXX1587 Bank Austria xxxxx1587 (Former Oelb), Vienna USD-4, 000, 000. 00 USD 4, 000, 000. Less bank charges Debt repayment Hasan Cengic See Exhibit 11, pp. 13-14. See Agence France Presse, " Hostage Drama After Five Killed in Police Raids, March 29, 1996; Agence France Presse, " Police Arrest Gunman, Hostages Released in Belgium, " March 29, 1996. See Washington Post, " Bosnian Officials Involved In Arms Trade Tied To Radical States, " September 22, 1996, p. A26. Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman (a/k/a " The Blind Sheikh "), the radical Egyptian cleric who was convicted for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, has been linked to Cengic and the leadership of the TWRA. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 18 To date, the defendant has failed to produce any documentation relating to his relationship with Executive Order 13224 designee Cengic and/or the transfers of funds identified above by German authorities. Accordingly, Jelaidan should be compelled to immediately produce all requested materials identified in Request Nos. B-38-B-40. Jelaidan has failed to produce any documents relating to hi relationship with Adel Batterjee. On December 21, 2004, the U. S. Department of the Treasury designated Adel Batterjee for providing financial and material support to al Qaida and Usama bin Laden. " See Treasury Designation at Exhibit 21. Batterjee served as the Executive Director and a member of the Board of Directors of the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF "), another purported charitable organization designated in November 2002 for the organization's longstanding support to al Qaeda and bin Laden. Id. According to Treasury, Batterjee has ranked as one of the " ord's foremost terrorist financiers, who employed his private wealth and a network of charitable fronts to bankroll the murderous agenda of al Qaida. " Id. In support of that designation, Treasury identified Batterjee (Baterji) as one of the wealthy financiers of the al Qaeda network listed on the Golden Chain. Jelaidan is also identified on the Golden Chain document. U. S. intelligence and enforcement agencies have concluded that the Golden Chain is an authentic al Qaeda document identifying al Qaeda's most important financial benefactors and the individuals responsible for coordinating their contributions to al Qaeda. Indeed, the 9-11 Commission's Final Report refers to the Golden Chain as the al Qaeda organization's financial supply network " put together mainly by financiers in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states, Jelaidan's long-standing relationship with Batterjee (which dates back to the formation of al Qaeda in the late 1980' s) has been confirmed by additional documentation uncovered during the same raid of the Benevolence International Foundation's (BIF ") offices in Bosnia which led to the discovery of the Golden Chain. As set forth in the seized documents, a 1988 dispute between two purported charitable organizations was submitted to secret arbitration overseen by members of al Qaeda's fatwa committee. One of the relief organizations involved in the The Golden Chain document was discovered during the March 2002 raid of the Bosnian offices of the Benevolence International Foundation, conducted jointly by the FBI and Bosnian Police. During the course of that raid, the authorities seized several computer hard drives, one of which included a file named " Tareekh Osama (Osama's History), containing scanned images of documents chronicling the formation of al Qaida. The Golden Chain document was among several hundred documents contained in this computer file. Based on their analysi all the documents within that file, and intelligence gathered from other sources during the war on terror, officials of the U. S. government concluded that the document is a list of people referred to within al Qaeda " as wealthy donor to the movement. See Government s evidentiary Proffer supporting the Admissibility of Co-Conspirator Statements, United States of America v. Enaam M. Arnaout, No. 02-CR-892 (N. D. Ill. filed January 6, 2003); Ittp://f11. findlaw.com/news. findlaw.com/wsj/docs/bifusarmaoutl0603prof pdf See Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, p. 55, http://www.9. 1commission.gov/sort911Report. pdf. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 19 controversy was the Saudi Red Crescent Society which Jelaidan headed at that time. According to the United States government, Batterjee sided with Jelaidan in the dispute. Notably, this Court denied defendant Batterjee's motion to dismiss on January 18, 2005, finding that the Plaintiffs' allegations regarding the terror financier's activities were sufficient to support a finding of personal jurisdiction. See Judge Richard Casey's Opinion at 349 F. Supp. 2d 765, 823-825. Although Batterjee remains a defendant in this litigation, he is technically in default for his failure to respond to Plaintiffs' discovery requests. In fact, both he and his attorney of record have refused to participate in this litigation following Judge Casey's denial of his motion. In any event the discovery of relevant communications and transactions between the two co-defendants should not be unreasonable, Jelaidan has failed to produce any documents regarding his relationship with Batterjee and should be compelled to produce all responsive information set forth in Request Nos. B-38-B. 40. Jelaidan has failed to produce any documents relating to his relationship with Mohamed Bayazid. As discussed in Section 1 (B) (8) above, Jelaidan owned the Maram Company with Mohamed Bayazid (a/k/a Abu Rida). Although not an Executive Order 13224 designee, Bayazid is a co-founding member of al Qaeda and a key figure in the terror group's efforts to obtain large caches of weapons, including materials for a nuclear bomb. Documents uncovered during the 2002 raid of the BIF's offices in Bosnia reveal the two men were close associates to bin Laden in the early days of al Qaeda. In a letter to Bayazid (Abu al Ridha) on Saudi Red Crescent letterhead, bin Laden requests that all weapons be inventoried. At the bottom of the letter is a note from bin Laden to Jelaidan (Abu al Hasan ") stating that " we have an extreme need for weapons so I urge that you not provide them with more than 25% of the existing weapons. " See Exhibit 22. In a second letter to Bayazid, bin Laden concludes the letter by asking him to communicate my greeting to Abu Al-Hasan Al Madani [Jelaidan]. " See Exhibit 23 Jelaidan has yet to produce any documentation relating to his relationship with Bayazid. Accordingly, the defendant should be compelled to immediately produce all materials identified in Request Nos. B-38-B-40. See Government s evidentiary Proffer supporting the Admissibility of Co-Conspirator Statements, United Stat of America v. Enaam M. Arnaout, No. 02-CR-892 (N. D. Ill. filed January 6, 2003), p. 31, n. 18. See Government s Evidentiary Proffer supporting the Admissibility of Co-Conspirator Statements, United States of America v. Enaam M. Arnaout, No. 02-CR-892 (N. D, Ill. filed January 6, 2003), pp. 20-24, 30-32, 38, 46, and 49.

Exhibit D Part 5

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-8 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 20 Jelaidan Should Be Compelled To Produce Documentation Relating To Any And All Sanctions Imposed Upon Him On September 6, 2002, the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia jointly designated Jelaidan as " an associate of Usama bin Laden and a supporter of al-Qa ida terror. See Exhibit 8. A week later on September 11, 2002, the United Nations Security Council Committee (a/k/a the " 1267 Committee ") similarly designated Jelaidan for his connections to al Qaeda. See Exhibit 9. Plaintiffs served the defendant with the following document requests Request No. A-13 – Please provide any and all documents relating to any sanctions imposed upon you by the United States, United Nations, or any other nation or international body. Request No. A-18 – Please provide any and all documents relating to the joint United States-Saudi Arabian investigation and September 6, 2002 designation of You as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist and " an associate of Usama bin Laden and a supporter of al-Qa' ida terror " including without limitation, any and all documents identifying all of Your accounts, assets, and monies that were frozen by the United States and Saudi Arabia per the September 6, 2002 designation. Request No. A-19 – Please provide any and all documents relating to any sanctions imposed upon you by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Yet again, the defendant responds to each of the Plaintiffs' requests by claiming that he does not have possession of relevant documents: WJ neither has knowledge of nor possession of any documents responsive to this request See Exhibit 2, p. 9 and 11. Jelaidan's contention is questionable. As this Court is well aware, a principal method by which the United States government and other foreign states seek to deny financial resources to terrorist organizations, including those who sponsor them or act on their behalf, has been the imposition of asset-blocking orders and related economic sanctions. See Exhibit 8 (stating that the U. S. and Saudi Arabia are taking joint action to publicly identify and freeze the assets of terrorists and their supporters '). Indeed, by Jelaidan's own acknowledgement in his discovery responses, at least three financial institutions have blocked assets linked to him following his 2002 designations – Faisal Finance, Al Rajhi Bank, and Habib Bank. In conjunction with their determination to freeze problematic accounts, participating banks routinely provide official notification of their actions to named account holders, beneficiaries, and persons with signatory authority. For example, Faisal Finance notified Jelaidan of the bank's decision to freeze Account No. x0409 in a September 2002 letter to the Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-8 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 201 Page 21 defendant, attached hereto as Exhibit 24. Habib Bank also advised Jelaidan of the freezing of six Rabita Trust accounts identified in Section B (5), leading to him ask the bank to reconsider it decision. See Exhibit 6. Moreover, other designated defendants in this litigation have received documented notice that their bank accounts were frozen as a result of U. S. and U. N. designations. In a December 14, 2006 letter to the IIRO, the Bank of Philippines Islands notified the Saudi charity that its account at the bank was ordered frozen. See Exhibit 25. In response to Plaintiffs' Request No. 8 seeking documents relating to accounts at Al Rajhi Bank, the defendant fully acknowledges that his account at the bank was frozen, but produces no documentation to that effect. See Exhibit 2, p. 7. Surely he received some form of official notification from Al Rajhi Bank, the Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority (SAMA). and/or the Kingdom itself advising him of the bank's actions and the reasons for doing so. See Exhibit 26 (July 25, 2003 article from the Saudi newspaper, Ain Al Yaqeen, reporting that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia took steps to freeze the assets of Jelaidan, a close aid to Osama bin Laden who funneled money to al Qaeda). Similarly, Habib Bank and/or the State Bank of Pakistan must have sent official notice to Jelaidan that it was freezing the six Rabita Trust accounts and the account he holds jointly with Osama bin Laden. The defendant has failed to produce any such documentation and this Court should compel Jelaidan to produce all responsive materials relating to all accounts, assets, and/or monies that were seized and frozen by the United States, Saudi Arabia, other foreign states, and financial institutions following his September 2002 designations. In addition to the freezing of assets, other types of sanctions have been effectively imposed upon terror financiers such as Jelaidan. Sanctions such as travel restrictions, seizure of passports, and home detention are known to have been used by the host government where the designee resides and/or does business. In the instant case, it is implausible to believe that the Saudi government and other governments and institutions implementing the U. N. mandated sanctions as to Jelaidan failed to provide any form of official notification and/or explanation to Jelaidan (a Saudi citizen and long-time official to several of the Kingdom's global charities) in relation to his September 2002 designations, Plaintiffs have yet to receive any such documentation. Accordingly, Jelaidan should be compelled to produce all documents relating to any and all types of sanctions imposed upon him by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or any other foreign state. E. Jelaidan Should Be Compelled To Specifically Identify Any Documents Responsive To Plaintiffs' Requests That Have Been Lost Discarded Or Destroyed (Or Seized) Jelaidan's boilerplate objection to the production of documents that are no longer in his physical possession " also fails to meet his obligation to identify any responsive documents that have been lost, discarded or destroyed, and describe the circumstances under which those responsive documents were lost, discarded, or destroyed. In this regard, Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents directed to defendant Jelaidan included the following specific instruction: Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-8 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 22 If any documents requested herein have been lost, discarded, destroyed or otherwise no longer in Defendant's possession, custody or control, they shall be identified as completely as possible including, without limitations, the following information: date of disposal, manner of disposal, reason for disposal, person authorizing disposal and person disposing of the document See Exhibit 1, p. 3. The Definitions section of Plaintiffs' document requests to defendant Jelaidan, fully consistent with Local Rule 26. 3 (c) (4), go on to state as follows The term " identi " when used with reference to a document shall mean to give, to the extent known, the (i) type of document (ii) general subject matter; (iii) date of the document; (iv) author(s), addressee(s) and recipient(s), Id., p. 5. Although Jelaidan has generically denied that responsive materials are currently in his " possession, " he has failed to indicate in his responses whether responsive documents were at one time within his care, custody, or control but were at some point lost, destroyed, or discarded. That information, as well as information sufficient to identify the nature of the documents, its disposition, and perhaps its current custodian, is absolutely necessary to determine whether Jelaidan has engaged in any spoliation of evidence, and to determine whether responsive documents may be available from another source. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' respectfully request the Court direct Jelaidan to comply with the instructions in Plaintiffs' documents requests, and identify any responsive documents that were at any point within his care, custody, or control, and to describe the circumstances under which any such documents were lost, destroyed, discarded, or seized. The Temporal Scope Of Discovery Concerning Defendant Jelaidan Should Extend To Periods Prior To 1992 As discussed in Section I (A) above, Judge Daniels previously issued an Order setting 1992 as the presumptive starting point for discovery in this litigation. However, in issuing that Order, Judge Daniels made clear that discovery concerning information and activities relating to earlier periods may be appropriate upon a " showing of relevance as to a particular issue or defendant. " See Order, MDL Docket No. 2059, December 21, 2007. With regard to defendant Jelaidan, the extension of discovery to earlier periods is singularly appropriate. As the United States government s public declarations concerning Jelaidan make clear, he is a founding member of al Qaeda, and a close and long term associate of Osama bin Laden. Defendant Jelaidan's own counsel has confirmed that his client's relationship with Osama bin Laden predates 1992, acknowledging during a prior hearing in these proceedings that " Wael Jelaidan, your Honor, was very important in Afghanistan. He headed up the refugee mission, Case • 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-8 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 23 and he got to know, among other things, Osama bin Laden very well. " See April 12, 2011 Discovery Hearing Transcript, pp. 40-41 Significantly, the U. S. government has asserted, and Plaintiffs have alleged, that Jelaidan was instrumental in assisting bin Laden adapt the support network established to support the Afghan jihad into a global infrastructure to support al Qaeda's jihad against the United States. To that end, Jelaidan is alleged to have used bank accounts under his control, and the charities for which he worked, as tools to channel financial and other forms of support to al Qaeda from that organization's inception. Given his status as a founding member of al Qaeda, and his role in adapting the Afghan support network into a global infrastructure to support al Qaeda's jihad against the West, Plaintiffs respectfully submit that discovery as to Jelaidan should presumptively extend to 1988, the year in which al Qaeda was founded. In addition, at least with respect to certain facts and issues, such as Jelaidan's relationship with bin Laden, the extension of discovery to periods prior to 1988 would be appropriate. However, for purposes of the documents at issue in the present Motion, Plaintiffs at this time merely request an Order directing Jelaidan to provide documentation from the period between 1988 and 2004. Plaintiffs reserve their right to request documents and information pertaining to the subject matter of this motion for earlier and later periods, after they have reviewed the responsive materials from defendant Jelaidan. III. CONCLUSION As the foregoing demonstrates, Plaintiffs have legitimate concerns that defendant Jelaidan is deliberately withholding the production of responsive documents and information. Accordingly, intervention by this Court is now necessary and Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court order the defendant to immediately to produce all responsive materials. Respectfully submitted, Mr Aler rubCon Aks THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-8 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 5 The Honorable Frank Maas October 17, 2011 Page 24 CC: Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. Jodi Westbrook Flowers, Esq. John M. Eubanks, Esq. James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, Esq. Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Alan Kabat, Esq. PHILADELPHIA6053428) 7430, 000

Exhibit E

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT E Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 6 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S. D. N. Y) Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Commercial Claims Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Personal Injury and Death Claims Ronald L L. Motley, Co-Chair [OTLEY RICE LLC James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Elliot R. Feldman, Co-C Sean Carter, Co-Chair COZEN O' CONNOR J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel COZEN O' CONNOR Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Paul J. anly, Jr, Co-Liaison Counsel HANLY CONROY BIERSTEIN SHERIDAN FISHER & HAYES LLP VIA HAND DELIVERY January 30, 2013 The Honorable Frank Maas United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street, Room 740 New York, NY 10007-1312 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) Dear Judge Maas: The Plaintiffs' Executive Committees, on behalf of all plaintiffs, submit this letter and the accompanying exhibits and respectfully request that the Court enter an Order, pursuant to F. R. C. P. 37 (a), compelling defendant Wa' el Hamza Jelaidan, a co-founder of al Qaeda and Executive Order 13224 designee to: (1) immediately produce documentation verifying all efforts the defendant and his counsel have undertaken to request and secure documents responsive to plaintiffs' requests for production of documents, consistent with this Court's November 16, 2011 Order; and (2) immediately produce all documents and materials in his possession, custody, or control responsive to plaintiffs' Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents. If the defendant will not comply with this Court's discovery orders, plaintiffs respectfully submit that severe sanctions are warranted given defendant Jelaidan's ongoing refusal to meaningfully respond to plaintiffs' discovery and failure to comply with this Court's clear orders. DEFENDANT JELAIDAN HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THIS COURTS NOVEMBER 16, 2011 DISCOVERY ORDER On October 17, 2011, plaintiffs submitted a letter motion to this Court seeking an order compelling defendant Jelaidan to produce several categories of documents, including but not limited to: (1) banking and financial accounts associated with the al Qaeda financier; (2) the defendant's relationship with other Executive Order 13224 designees including transfers of Case • 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-9 Filed 100617 Page 3 of 6 The Honorable Frank Maas January 30, 2013 Page 2 lions of dollars between them; and (3) the imposition of financial and other sanctions upon Jelaidan following his September 2002 designations by the United States, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and United Nations See October 17, 2011 letter motion at Exhibit A. With respect to the bank accounts, plaintiffs' submission identified a number of specific accounts linked to Jelaidan, several of which had been frozen following his designations as a terrorist financier, including an account Jelaidan holds jointly with Osama bin Laden. See id. (identifying accounts at Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A., Al Rajhi Bank, Habib Bank, and other banks). In opposition to plaintiffs' motion, Jelaidan primarily asserted that he had made a number of good faith attempts to request and obtain responsive account records from the banks, but that banking officials were unwilling to cooperate with him given his designations. The defendant did not provide any documentary evidence to verify these claims, but merely submitted his own affidavit in support. In response, plaintiffs offered affidavit testimony from Professor Jimmy Gurulé, former Under-Secretary (Enforcement) of the United States Department of the Treasury, which makes clear that the sanctions programs implemented by the United States and United Nations were purposely designed to prevent designees like Jelaidan from gaining access to funds or other assets in frozen bank accounts, but not from requesting and obtaining basic banking records for the blocked account(s). As Professor Gurule states: Neither the text of E. O. 13224, nor any regulations promulgated thereunder, nor the text of UN Security Resolution 1267, nor any related Security Council resolutions, preclude a financial institution from providing a designated or listed party with account statements concerning an account that has been frozen or blocked. Neither the Treasury Department nor the UN 1267 Committee have ever interpreted either E. O. 13224 or UN Security Resolution 1267, or any related regulations or security resolutions, to preclude a financial institution from providing a designated or listed party with account statements concerning an account that has been frozen or blocked. And finally, neither the Treasury Department nor the UN 1267 Committee have ever prohibited or banned or taken action otherwise to preclude a financial institution from providing a designated or listed party with account statements concerning an account that has been frozen or blocked. See Declaration of Professor Jimmy Gurulé, Exhibit 1 to plaintiffs' November 9, 2011 letter reply brief, attached hereto as Exhibit B. Since the commencement of merits discovery with the defendant, Jelaidan has made only a single production of documents to plaintiffs. That production, dating back to August 15, 2006, consisted of a mere 22 documents (104 pages), many of which are unresponsive to plaintiffs' discovery requests and have no relevance to the specific issues articulated in those requ Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 6 The Honorable Frank Maas January 30, 2013 Page 3 At the November 16, 2011 discovery hearing, after first determining that the account records are in fact within Jelaidan's control given his practical ability to obtain them from the banks, the Court directed the defendant to undertake vigorous and expeditious efforts to obtain the requested banking materials, and to document those good faith efforts: I guess, Mr McMahon, it comes down to the same thing I said with respect to your other two clients, namely, that there has to be a full-court press. And, as Mr Carter indicated and I' ve said before, it has to be documented. If you' re not sufficiently able to document a vigorous effort to obtain those documents, it may be that sanctions are imposed. See November 16, 2011 Discovery Hearing Transcript, p. 33. Only a few short weeks following the hearing (19 days), defendant's counsel sent a cursory email to plaintiffs' counsel, advising that further attempts by Jelaidan and his Saudi Arabian attorney (Mr Bassim Alim) to obtain responsive documentation had been exhausted, claiming once again that certain government and commercial entities were unwilling to cooperate with the defendant and/or his attorney. See December 5, 2011 email from Martin McMahon to plaintiffs' counsel, attached hereto as Exhibit C. To date, plaintiffs have heard nothing further from the defendant regarding his attempts to obtain and produce responsive discovery materials, nor has the defendant produced any documentary evidence verifying his claims that he and his attorneys have made diligent and exhaustive efforts to contact banking officials and/or other potential custodians of documents responsive to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Wa' el Hamza Jelaidan. Indeed, the August 30, 2012 discovery deadline passed without receiving a single document from defendant Jelaidan or any explanation as to the vigorous efforts made to obtain any responsive documents. 2 Accordingly, plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter an order compelling the defendant to immediately produce all documentation supporting any and all attempts undertaken by Jelaidan and his representatives to obtain the requested discovery materials. Specifically, Jelaidan should be compelled to: Identify every source to which requests for responsive documents were made, including ithout limitation: (a) the date of the request; (b) the name of the individual and/or organization to whom the request was directed, including their title, address, telephone number, and email address; (c) documents sought by the request; and (d) the time period covered by the request; Produce all communications (oral and written) sent to and received from each identified source concerning the defendant's requests for documents and information (responsive Jelaidan's failure to produce any documents in accordance with the August 30 deadline directed by this Court should not serve to benefit the defendant in these proceedings. In the event that Jelaidan eventually complies with this Court's orders and produces responsive documentation and information, plaintiffs reserve the right to seek extensions of the existing discovery schedule to allow for translation, follow-up discovery, and motion practice. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 6 The Honorable Frank Maas January 30, 2013 Page 4 documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, emails, facsimiles, transcribed voicemails, or otherwise); Identify any and all independent efforts undertaken by Jelaidan to request and obtain responsive documents, including documentation verifying those efforts; Identify any additional efforts undertaken by Mr McMahon and his staff at the Law Offices of Martin F. McMahon & Associates, and/or Mr Alim, to request and obtain responsive documents, including documentation verifying those efforts, and Produce the letter received from Mr Alim identified in Exhibit C. Plaintiffs respectfully submit that the scope of the proposed order should extend to the defendant's attempts to request and obtain responsive materials both prior to and after the November 16, 2011 heari II. DEFENDANT JELAIDAN HAS FAILED TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS' SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENT REQUESTS On July 31, 2012, plaintiffs served their consolidated Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents to Wael Jelaidan, attached hereto as Exhibit D. Those requests seek inter alia: (i) banking and financial documents for additional accounts directly linked to the defendant; (ii) documents relating to Jelaidan's relationship with U. S. aviation schools attended by certain of the 9/11 hijackers; (iii) documents relating to Jelaidan's relationship with the Muwafaq Foundation, a purported charity co-founded by defendants Khalid bin Mahfouz and Yassin al Kadi which merged with al Qaeda prior to the 9/11 attacks; and (iv) documents relating to Jelaidan's relationship with individuals and entities that were a part of the al Qaeda financial network. To date, the defendant has failed to serve responses to plaintiffs' supplemental discovery requests, and thus waives any objection to those requests. Accordingly, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court order Jelaidan to immediately produce all responsive materials in accordance with Rule 34 (b) (2) (E) Plaintiffs reserve their right to seek sanctions from defendant Jelaidan for the issues addressed in this letter submission. See American Cash Card Corp. v. AT & T Corp., 184 F. R. D. 521 (S. D. N. Y. 1999) (granting sanctions and entering default judgment for repeated failures to comply with discovery orders); Montblanc-Simplo GMBH v. Colibri Corp., 692 F. Supp. 2d 245 (E. D. N. Y, 2010) (granting motion for default judgment where defendants willfully refused to participate in the litigation); Owen v. No Parking Today, Inc, 280 F. R. D. 106 (S. D. N. Y. 2011) (imposing sanctions of attorney's fees in response to the defendant's failure to fully respond to discovery requests and multiple orders and directives of the court). However, largely because Jelaidan has provided virtually no information to date, plaintiffs believe that the issue of sanctions may be more appropriately addressed on the basis of a more complete record. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 6 The Honorable Frank Maas January 30, 2013 Page 5 Respectfully submitted, On THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES CC: The Honorable George B. Daniels, U. S. D. J. (Via Hand Delivery) Members of Plaintiffs' Executive Committees (Via Email) Martin F. McMahon, Esq. (Via Email) Alan R. Kabat, Esq. (Via Email) PHILADELPHIA \ 6809995 \ 3 117430. 000

Exhibit F

EXHIBIT F Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-10 3635 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page1 2ofof1 6 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-10 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page13of of46 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-10 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page24of of46 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-10 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page35of of46 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-10 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page46of of46

Exhibit G

EXHIBIT G Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-11 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 8 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y) Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Personal Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Injury and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley, (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers/Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC COZEN O’CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O’CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA E-MAIL September 14, 2017 Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Martin McMahon & Associates 1150 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 900 Washington, D.C. 20036 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) Dear Martin: On June 26, 2017, you submitted a report to the Court concerning the status of your efforts to secure a license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control, to allow for the payment of the sanction award previously issued against Wa’el Jelaidan. You included as an attachment to the status report a June 19, 2017 email correspondence from you to the Department of Treasury, a copy of which is attached. Your June 19, 2017 email to OFAC included documents from Faisal Finance in Switzerland and English and French versions of a letter from the Attorney General of Switzerland concerning a Citibank account held by Mr. Jelaidan. Those documents were not included in your June 26, 2017 submission to the Court. I wrote to you on June 26, 2017 following the filing of your status report, to request that you provide copies of those documents. A copy of my email is attached. I did not receive any response to that email. Pursuant to the Court’s Order of June 28, 2017, plaintiffs thereafter submitted a letter report concerning the status of discovery as to defendants who were subject to the Court’s June 16, 2017 document production deadline. In the section of that letter addressing defendant Jelaidan, we renewed our request that you provide the documents submitted to OFAC under cover of your June 19, 2017 email. Having still not received any response from you concerning our request, we raised the issue with Judge Netburn at the discovery conference held on September 7, 2017, which you did not Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-11 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 8 Martin F. McMahon, Esq. September 14, 2017 Page 2 _______________________________________ attend. Given your absence, Judge Netburn directed us to continue to meet and confer regarding this issue, and set an October 6 deadline for plaintiffs to "file any motion before [the Court] with respect to those bank records." Consistent with the Court’s directive, we write to again request that you provide copies of the records that were submitted to OFAC under cover of your June 19, 2017 email. Of course, if you wish to discuss this matter, I would be happy to do so. Sincerely, Sean P. Carter, Esq. THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES SPC/bdw cc: Members of Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees (via e-mail) LEGAL\32509885\1 00000.0000.000/117430.000 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-11 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page14of of48 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-11 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page25of of48 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-11 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page36of of48 Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3746-11 3635-1 Filed Filed06/26/17 10/06/17 Page Page47of of48

Exhibit H

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-12 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT H Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document DIAB-12 Filed QB/06/13 Page 2 of 3 SUBMISSION OF YASSIN ABDULLAH KADI TO THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SWITZERLAND, MR CLAUDE NICATI, FURTHER TO THE MEETING AT THE SWISS EMBASSY IN RIYADH ON 1 JULY 2003 1. INTRODUCTION At the meeting at the Swiss Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on 1 July 2003, the Deputy Attorney General of Switzerland, Mr Claude Nicati (Mr Nicati ") met Mr Yassin Kadi in the presence of his legal team, Mr Nicati requested Mr Kadi and his legal team to provide a detailed explanation of the issues raised at the meeting. This memorandum sets out the evidence as requested by Mr Nicati 1. 1 PART 1 of this memorandum relates to certain transfers authorised by Mr Kadi from the account of Caravan Development Group Limited (account 10257) at Faisal Finance, Geneva, for the benefit of Wael Hamza Jeleidan (for convenience referred to as Mr Jeleidan ") between 24 February 1998 and 3 August 1998 in the total sum of US $ 1. 25 million. Mr Kadi testified at the 1 July 2003 meeting that he authorised all these transfers for the sole purpose of giving financial support for prefabricated housing for students and ancillary buildings for the Al Eman University in Sanaa, Yemen. 1. 2 PART I O, this memorandum contains clarification and supplemental evidence on certain issues raised by Mr Nicati during the 1 July 2003 meeting. PCR1-192420. 00010448 DOJ AR-002022 KAD10004271 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document DIAB-12 Filed QB/06/13 Page 3 of 3 Following the meeting on 1 July 2003, Mr Kad's legal team and his staff have urgently undertaken substantial investigations in various jurisdictions around the world including in Yemen, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey and Switzerland. During these investigations a significant number of relevant documents have been obtained in various different languages, including Turkish and Arabic. Following that meeting, Mr Kadi s legal team has also met Mr Jeleidan. Mr Jeleidan has co-operated with the legal team including by authorising access to corporate documents for Maram Travel Importation and Exportation Trading Limited Company (for convenience " Maram ") as well as banking documents relating both to Mr Jeleidan's personal accounts and the account of Maram. Mr Kadi s legal team has arranged for many of these documents to be translated. All the foregoing work has been undertaken as a matter of urgency as a result of the short deadline imposed at the 1 July 2003 meeting by Mr Nicatl It must be noted at the outset that these investigations have been impeded, in part, by the very recent removal by the Turkish government authorities of crucial documents relating to Maram, a company that had a central role in the Al Eman University housing project. These documents were removed in late June or early July 2003, at around the same time as the 1 July 2003 meeting with Mr Nicati, when representatives of the Turkish Ministry of Finance visited Ms Semra Sonmez, the accountant in Istanbul who formerly represented Maram The Turkish government authority that removed these documents is HESAP YZMANLARI KURULU, a division of MALIYE BAKANLIGE (Ministry of Finance) in Karakoy, Istanbul. Due to this, Mr Kadi s legal team has not been able to access all documents relevant to the transfers. This memorandum has, therefore, been prepared, and the evidence collated, despite, and subject to, these constraints. A paginated file of supporting documentation is provided with this memorandum together with, wherever necessary, translations. PCR1-192420. 1 00010449 DOJ AR-002023 KADIO004272

Exhibit I

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-13 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT I Case, 103-md: 01570-GBB: SN Document 236-13 Filed MO/0/13 Page 2 afia: an a 18 5 N THE NAME OF ALLIAM, THE DESCENT THE MERCU FAISAL FINANCE (Switzerland) S. A. p• Le (hash) UU a trio 3, Duai du Mont-Blomg-P. O. Box 14QL-21T GENEVA 1. SWITZERLAND-PHONE H1 Czz 908 53 00-TELEX 415 35 FFS-CH FAX 41 022 905 53 90 in IT)-Italy.-DNA-Mrs Sr FPS-CHE sor:-H1. YT CA ar..:-lry CONFIDENTMEL Mr Wael Hamzah Jelaidan Offcc No. 9, 3rd Floor, Beshwari Building, Sari Bridge, Madinah Road, PO, Box 126756, Jeddah 21352 Saudi Arabia. Phone: 9662 682360s Fax: 966 2 6824007 E-mail: whaisa@yahoo.com 18 " July 2003 Dear Sir, We have already started the work you requested by fax dated July 8, 2003. Please note however that this request is time consuming, since the information goes back to October 1997 and must be retrieved from our archives. We kindly ask you therefore to courier to us your check in the amount of CHF 700.-as a participation towards our expenses. Upon receipt of your payment we will courier to you the documents retrieved. Sincerely yours, Mondher Bach-Hamba Authorised signatory Shabbir Ameen Authorised signatory Copy: Dr. Bassim A. Alim Law Office, Fax: 966 2 6510846, Saudi Arabia A MEMBER OF THE DARA AL MAAL AL-SLAM GROUP Mr JJs is your pubs KADI0102987

Exhibit J

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-14 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT J Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-14 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 4 Affidavit of Wael Hamzah Jelaidan IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE MERCIFUL THE COMPASSIONATE I Wael Hamzah Jelaidan, state as follows: 1. I give this affidavit in support of our memorandum in opposition to the plaintiffs' motion to compel 2. I do not now and have never supported international terrorism of any kind, and the only relationship I had with Osama bin-Laden was in connection with my supporting humanitarian efforts in Afghanistan in the late 1980' s. There was a tremendous number of Afghani refugees who fled into Pakistan during that time due to the Russian invasion and occupation. I would like to add that during my limited interaction with Osama Binladen, he was an acceptable figure locally and internationally. Further I would mention that I ran my Offices in complete transparency to the extent that Local and International envoys systematically visited our offices and project sites including the US Embassy officials and His Excellency President Jimmy Carter and Mrs. Carter. 3. My humanitarian career began with the Saudi Red Crescent during 1986-88, and then I directed the Muslim World League office in Pakistan from 1989-1994 in addition to being the Director of the Muslim World League office in Pakistan, I was also given the added responsibility of overseeing the repatriation of the Stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh as the Manager of the said Project (AKA Rabita Trust) since 1992 onwards till 1994. I want the court to know specifically that, in connection with Pakistani activities, there was a complete separation between the MWL and IIRO organizations — separate offices, bank accounts, etc. 4. I have been the Secretary-General of the Rabita Trust since 1999 till this date. It is worth noting that although, I submitted my resignation, it was never ratified nor accepted. Rabita Trust was a humanitarian organization that engaged in the construction of housing units for the repatriation and rehabilitation of Pakistanis displaced in Bangladesh by the 1970 Indo-Pakistan War. 5. On 11/09/2002, I was designated by the UN as a " individual associated with Al Qaida. Since then, as mentioned below, all of my bank accounts have been frozen by the respective governments of which the accounts were located. I do not possess any documents, such as notifications, concerning these accounts being frozen. With several of these accounts, I was made aware that they were frozen via a phone call or verbal answer to my inquiries. 6. On or about 2001, the Pakistani Authorities froze all of Rabita Trust's bank Poir 29. accounts and confiscated any and all of its documents. The bank accounts referred 16 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-14 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 4 to by the Plaintiffs were mainly for the Stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh Repatriation Program. I was the signatory for these accounts. Ever since the Pakistani Authorities seized these accounts, I have been unable to access them nor obtain documents. Any documents that are in my control have been handed over to the Plaintiffs. 7. I did have a personal bank account with Faisal Finance S. A. in Switzerland. However, after the said UN Designation, the account was frozen by the Swiss Authorities per the UN directive. Since then, I do not have the legal authority to access the account nor request any documentation. On several occasions, I have initiated contact with the bank but they have not been responsive. It is very important to understand that because of my designation by the UN, I have been barred from traveling abroad to contact the Banks in person, which has made the requisite effort extremely difficult and in many cases unattainable. 8. I did maintain a bank account with Al Rajhi Bank to facilitate my personal finances. However, that accounts have been frozen and is controlled by the Saudi Authorities. Since the Kingdom has confiscated my account, I neither have authority to access the account nor request any documentation. I have contacted the bank on several occasions and was informed that all relevant information in regards to the account can only be disseminated by the Saudi Authorities. 9. To the best of my recollection, the joint account with Usama bin Laden at Habib Bank was opened in 1985 during the height of the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. The account was solely used to receive governmental aid and donations allotted to the Afghan refugees. This account has also been frozen. I have attempted to acquire responsive documents from the bank, but they are not illing to cooperate with me. 10. Over the years, I have had signatory authority over charity accounts with the MWL, Rabita Trust, SJRC AHAMAA, and SRC. I have never had signatory authority over any account associated with IIRO. I was the principal officer for SRC in Pakistan. MWL in Pakistan, Rabita Trust in Pakistan and SJRC in Albania and Kosovo. Though I used to have signatory authority, I no longer work for these organizations and have been currently out of touch with all of them. As a result, I do not have access or control over any of these said accounts and cannot obtain documents concerning these accounts. 11. Maram Company did maintain bank accounts in Turkey. However Maram Co. has long ceased operations. I do not have authority to access any of these accounts and cannot request any documentation. Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-14 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 4 12. I did have an account at the Bank of Austria but cannot recall the account number. If the account number mentioned by the Plaintiffs is that of the Third World Relief Agency, then I had no privity at all to it. If the account number was that of my personal account, then I do not have any control or access to the said account at this time. That personal account was used to receive donations for the purpose of humanitarian aid as part of the international humanitarian effort for the Bosnia Herzegovina Refugee's plight during the Serbian Ethnic Cleansing 13. I also had a personal account in Turkey but like every other account it has been frozen due to my UN designation. Therefore, I neither have access to nor legal authority to oversee the account and secure documentation pertaining to the accoun 14. As stated previously, I have tried on several occasions to initiate contact with some of the Banks mentioned above; however, to this date, my efforts have been fruitless. Because of my designation I am barred from traveling and cannot contact the banks in person. When I attempt to contact them, they are not willing to cooperate because of my designation. 15. I do know Yassin Kadi and Chafiq Ayadi but do not possess any records documenting any money transfers nor any documents relating to any business relationship with them. I may have sat on a board with them but do not recall the exact board, date or organization. 16. The Plaintiffs refer to debt repayment transfers made by H. E. the representative and Humanitarian Envoy of the President of Bosnia Herzegovina Mr Hasan Cengic. I do not recall wether any payment were indeed made by Mr Cengic. However, to be precise, all debt repayment transactions were repayment of comfort loans (banking overdraft) extended to the Bosnian Government to help their relief efforts. This loan was continuously repaid via monies received by the Bosnian Government from international Governmental & Non Governmental Organizations and was subsequently utilized when necessary because the funds were in short supply and not always available when needed. In other words, these transfers were very much like a revolving credit mechanism. As to the six money transfers specifically mentioned by the Plaintiffs, I do not recall the specifics of them. Sassim 17. The Plaintiffs mentioned my relationships with Adel Batterjee and Mohamed Bayazid I do not have any documents in my possession concerning these individuals AD 20 I) Wael Heltaican Date The Law F Cciates Certifies that the above Syafi, document is his/her correct signature, without assuming any responsibility to the contents of the doctment Bassim A. Alim, E: Attorney at Law Ministry of Jus No. 9 Kingdom ice Licent sia A. Ali U

Exhibit K

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 22 EXHIBIT K Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 22 ID FAISAL FINANCE (Switzerland) S. A. It (tennis) a Jha innis Mr Wael. Hamzah Jelaidan P. O. Box 1436 Jeddah 21431-Saudi Arabia Geneva – September 25, 2002 MB/Dm-FFS/LBA Leller Jelaidan. doc Dear Sir, Re: Your IFA # 0 409 This is to inform you that the Swiss Federal Banking Commission (SFBC) transmitted to all banks and securities dealers in Switzerland, the lists Bush 17 and Bush 18. Your good name appeared on the list Bush 18 as you will see in the attached Communication. Pursuant to Articles 9 and 10 of the Federal Law On Combating Money Laundering In The Financial Sector (please see unofficial translation enclosed) to which our company is subject, financial intermediaries have an obligation to notify and block all valuables if there is a justified suspicion that these valuables are related to a punishable act as defined in Article 305 bis of the Penal Code. In the above-mentioned letter, the SFBC stated that financial intermediaries were required to enquire about any business relationship involving a person appearing on the lists and to notify and freeze all accounts involving a person appearing on the same lists. In view of the above, we had to block your account with us and notify our business relationship with you to the authorities. The Swiss Federal Prosecutor has ordered the freezing of your account and has requested us to provide him with all the documents relative to your account. Please find attached copy of the said order for your information and any further action you may see appropriate. Should you need any clarification or assistance please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours slncerely, l L. Mohammed Boughaba Legal Counsel Encl.: as stated above 3, Qual du Mont-Blanc-PO. Box 1494-1211 GENEVA, SWITZERLAND PHONE (022) 900 53 00-TELEX 416 354 FFSCH-FAX (022) 908 53 99 (Orr) 9. A or 99:-Si-FFS-CH E roE:-Ki-. (Orr) 9•n or so nila--I trip ITY)-IE9ty-3--S Sr O13 A MEMBER OF THE DAA AL MAAL AL-ISLAML GROUP NL JJ Ab is rare is Case a 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 22 WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN ACCOUNT # 10409 O saMar saw N DATED WAMOUNT ACGY KE DETAILS 1 22-Oct-97 D 200, 000. 00USDErom Mr. Kais I. A. Julaidan Account with FFS Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No. 2 26-Nov-97-150, 000. 00 USD 950905 with Faisal Finance Institution INC Turkey. 3 24-Feb-98 D T350, 000. 00USD From Caravan Development Group Ltd Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No 150, 000. 00 USD 160377 with Faisal Finance Institution INC Turke 5 23-Mar-98 D 370, 000. 00 DEM Amount received from Citibank (Switzerland Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan: Account No 6 13-Apr-98-176, 000. 00 DEM 877191 with Faisal Finance Institution INC. Turkey. Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No. 7 3-Apr-98-200, 000. 00 USD 160377 with Faisal Finance Institution INC. Turkey. From Caravan Development Group Ltd Account with 300 000. 00 USD FFS Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No. 9 22-Apr-98 250, 000. 00 USD rith Faisal Finance Institution INC Turkey Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No 10 22-May-98 150, 000. 00 DEM 877191 with Faisal Finance Institution INC Turkey Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No 11 26 May-98 50, 000. 00 USD Bhe Apr 9s D w 1 w 2 a May saw 14 15-Jun-98 D 16 3-Jul-98 17 13-Aug-98 18 14-Aug-98 Tw 195 Dec-00 Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidant Account No.-200, 000. 00 USD 160377 with Faisal Finance Institution INC Turkey From Caravan Development Group Ltd Account with 250 000. 00 USD FFS 249, 986. 50 USD Cheque Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan-Account No 300, 000. 00 USD 160377 with Faisal Finance Institution INC Turkey From Caravan Development Group Ltd Account with 150, 000. 00 USD FFS From Caravan Development Group Ltd Account with 200, 000. 00 USD FFS Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan Account No. 300, 000. 00 USD 950905 with Faisal Finance Institution INC Turke Transfer to Wael Hamzah Jelaidan AC 24, 090. 00 USD 314608010016294 with Al-Rajhi Banking & Investment Cor Haye Al Salamah-Jeddah Saudi Arabia Transfer to Sparkasse Bonn Bank, Bonn Badgobesberg, Germany-BLZ 3805000-For A/C-27, 000. 00 DEM 24018905 of Dr. MED, K. Schoebe-for the treatment A/C of the patient Al Amin Abdallah Mohammed Al Shan Transfer to Sparkasse Bonn Bank, Bonn Badgobesberg, Germany-BLZ 3805000-For A/C 13, 000. 00 DEM 126097245 M Ramadan-To handover to. Abdallah Mohammed Al-Shangity to cover the expenditure of his son's treatment. 4, 160. 61EUR Internal transfer from DEM account to EUR account-8, 137 32 DEM Internal transfer from DEM account to EUR account From Caravan Development Group Ltd Account with 150, 000. 00 USD FFS 206 Feb-01 216 Feb-01 22 (25-Oct 01 L 23 (25-Oct-01 D W 24 poulos D Jelaidan deposit/withdrawal/SH/lw 1 of 1 09: 25-24/09/2002 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page of 22. 4 FAISAL FINANCE (Switzerland) S. A. Up (' m.) 3, Quai du Mont-Blanc-PO, Box 1494-1211 GENEVA 1,) as NY) – 1 Yp-Sly--or $ > IS A SWITZERLAND-PHONE + 41 022 908 53 00-TELEX 415 354 FFS-CH FFS-CH Elo ros ir-+ E YT an or AA – EASEAN FAX + 41 022 908 53 99 + 1 TT * A or 09 Sil WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN POBOX: 1436 JEDDAH 21 431 SAUDI ARABIA Page 22 USD ASSETS AS OF 12/09/2002 (PORTFOLIO IN USD 01 0 4 09. 01 CATEGORY AMT " Aſ oTY DESCRIPTION MATURITY ACR PRICE ASSET VALUE CASH USD 112. 75 JCASH WITH CITIBANK 275 112. 75 PPSC/c USD 103, 000. 00 INVESTMENT 52063 17/09/02 103, 000. 00 103, 000, 00 This document is considered approved unless we are notified in writing of any objection within one month TOTAL ASSETS a 103. 2. 75. EVLT540/SHA/FFs 23/09/02 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 FAISAL FINANCE (Switzerland) S. A. 5 22) Cee of rising LID to NT 3, Quai du Mont Blanc-PO Box 1494 GENEVA SWITZERLAND-PHONE + 41 022 908 53 00-TELEX 415 354 FFS-CH FAX + 41 022 908 53 99 JAY – by S > r Y 4A or FFS-CH or-1 1 TT • A or 99:-Sil WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN POBOX 14 36 JEDDAH 21431 SAUDI ARABIA Page STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT USD IFA 01 04 09. 01. 0 0. 840 FROM 01/01/1997 To 12/09/2002 * * * CASH BALANCE WITH CITIBANK * * * DATE DESCRIPTION USD BALANCE 200, 000. 00 0. 00 200, 000 on 0. 00 i2. 50 19 9, 987. 50 200, 384. 72 12. 50 39. 72 200., 345. 00 200, 000. 00 3 45. 00 200 345. 00 200, 560: 06 21. 50 200, 000. 00 01/01 CARRIED FORWARD 20/10 CASH IN FM A/C 10381 23/10 PPSC/C INVESTMENT 31/10 MANAGEMENT FEES 03/1 PPSC/C REIMBURSEMENT 03/11 GROSS INCOME 03/11 PROFIT PARTICIPATION 05/11 PPSC/O INVESTMENT 10/1 PPSC/C REIMBURSEMENT 10/11 GROSS INCOME 10/11 PROFIT PARTICIPATION 12/11 PPSC/C INVESTMENT 4/1 PPSC/c REIMBURSEMENT 24/11 GROSS INCOME 24/11 PROFIT PARTICIPATION 24/11 TRF TO F. F. I TURKEY 26/1 Ppsc/c INVESTMENT 30/11 MANAGEMENT FEES 01/12 PPSC/C REIMBURSEMENT 01/12 GROSS INCOME 01/12 PROFIT PARTICIPATION 03/12 PPSC/C INVESTMENT 08/12 PPSC/C REIMBURSEMENT 08/12 GROSS INCOME 08/12/PROFIT PARTICIPATION 10/12 PPSC/C INVESTMENT 15/12 PPSC/C REIMBURSEMENT 15/12 GROSS INCOME 43. 26 200, 000. 00 22/10/97 23/10/9 31/10/97 200, 000. 00 o5/11/97 397. 22 05/11/97 05/11/97 05/11/97 200, 000. 00 (12/11/97 215. 06 12/11/97 12/11/97 12/11/97 200, 000. 00 26/11/97 432. 64 26/11/97 26/11/97 26/11/97 26/11/97 30/11/97 50, 000. 00 03/12/97 53. 76 03/12/97. 03/12/97 03/12/97 50, 000. 00 10/12/97 54. 35 10/12/97 10/12/97 10/12/97) 50, 000 Goo 17/12/97 53. 47. 17/12/97 150, 000. 00 50, 000. 00 36. 45 200, 538 56 538, 56. 20053856 200 9720 200 9 2794 50, 927 94 927. 94 8919 50, 891. 49 50, 945. 25 50, 939. 88 5. 37 50, 000. 00 939, 89 50, 939. 88 50, 994. 23 50988 80 5. 43 50, 000. 00 988. 80 50, 988. 80 5 104 2 27 Case 1 03-md-GBD-SN: 01570-Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 22 FAISAL FINANCE (SWITZERLAND) SA Plure. 2YUI crimes as FAISAL FINANCE (SWITZERLAND) S. A. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE ORDERS BY TELEPHONE, TELEGRAPH, TELEX AND TELEFAX I/We, the undersigned, hereby authorize Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. to accept and execute for the account to l9, orders received by telephone, telegraph, telex and telefax or other means of telecommunication without written confirmation thereof. I/We hereby release Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. from any obligation to further examine the legitimacy of such orders. I/We hereby assume all loss and damage resulting from transmission mistakes or identification defects of any kind and I/We hereby discharge Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. from any arid all responsibility therefore, Correspondingly, I/We hereby undertake to fully idemnify and hold harmless Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. for and from any such loss or damage I/We hereby acknowledge and sustain towards Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. any and all debit or debit balance arising from such orders and hereby undertake upon Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. first written demand to either repay such debt or to furnish such security therefore as Faisal Finance (Switzerland). S. A. in its discretion may deem sufficient. In case of my/our deth or incapacity, this authority shall remain valid and full force. 20-4 GL Place and Date Signature RF/go M043/1-19/9/9 B4, Av. LOUIS-CASA-PO Box 161-1216 COINTRINGENEVA, sWITZERLAND PHONE (022) 793 40 40. TELEX 415 354 FFS-CH • FAX (022) 788 21 89 (T) YAA TV at 1 i l:-FFS-CH LYs rol is:-(OTT).: Site----1 1 1 sels-1). Yu 4-Y 155 for a YA E. L Y) NYI Jul is is a ne The MARSHAMZA HEEGANDANES ISAE FINANCE SWIFZ FRLANDT, SA TAHLED OVERALL PORTFOLIO POSITION AS AT 11/09/02, S a GORY IRRENCY DESCRIPTION HOLDINGS BOOK KT PRICE YIELD: ARKET MARKET VALUE CY VSD UNREALIZED GAIN/Loss Harket Trans. Total VALUE h ACCOUNTS CASH WLTH CITIBANK 0. 0 0 0. 00 GO 112. 5 CASH WITH CITIBANK CASH WITH CITIBANK 112. 75 4, 2160. 61 4, 160. 61 GLEL PURCHASE & SALE OF CURRENCIES (*) INVESTRIENT 52063 17/09/02 103, 000. 00 103, 004. 81 1. 68 no si GRAD TOTALs//FS 11/09/02 PAGE 1 BAEL HAZAR GAITDAN AISAL FINANCR SWITZERLAND SA ETAILED OVERAL PORTFOELTO POSITION AS AT 11/09/02 Qago, Car SUMMARY FOLIO SUMMARY IN THOUSANDS OF USD (Refer to pray our pages for details) Currency PPSC/C Real Leasing Equity TOTAL Cash Premature Account withdraw. Reverse Payable Pesc/c Account Trade Finance Bstate DF USD 103. 0 103. 1 EUR 4. 1 4. 1 TOTAL 4. 103. 0 107. 2 (*) Vsd With Bangue Tat. Luxembourg, Societe generale, Chase Manhattan bk N. A, Citibank Bahrain, Arab Invt. Company ChE With Banque Int. Luxembourg, Societe general The del Bosque ii. Tuxembourg eur with Banglue Lt. Luxembourg, Societe generale Sar With Citibank Bahrain//FPS 22/09/02 PAGE 2 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 9 of 22 WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN POBOX: 1436 JEDDAH 21431 SAUDI ARABIA USD IFA 010 4 09. 01. 00. 840 REF: 0000 06 68 2 DATE 241/1997 ACCORDING TO YOUR INSTRUCTIONS WE MADE THE FOLLOWING TRANSFER USD PRE 15 0, ooo. oa. To FAISAL FINANCE INSTITUTION INC ISTANBUL-TURKEY A/C No. 950905 1 MR. WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN REFERENCE: TRF TO F. F. I.-TURKEY Form without signature valuE aermany AusD, 150, 000 0 0 ACNTss0/SHA/FFs 24/11/97 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10 06/17 Page 10 of 22 WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN POBOX 3 1436 JEDDAH 2 1431 SAUDI ARABIA PEBIT ADVICE ORIA, I USD IFA 01 04 09. 01. 0 0. 84 0 REF ": 0000072 25, DATE. 27 10 21 9 98, ACCORDING TO YOUR INSTRUCTIONS WE MADE THE FOLLOWING TRANSFER USD. 150, ooooo TO FAYSAL FINANCE INSTITUTION, INC ISTANBUL-TURKEY A/C No. 160 377 WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN REFERENCE: TRF FFI TURKEY, ISTANBUL Fom without signature VazOE OF 03/1998 USD 150 ooo: OO ACNTS50/SHA/FFS 27/02/98 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 11 of 22 WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN POBOX: 1436 JEDDAH 21 431 SAUDI ARABIA DEBIT ADVICE DEM IFA O104 09. 01. 00. 280 REF: Ooooo7406 DATE:, 02/04/1998 176, Ooooo a ACCORDING TO YOUR INSTRUCTIONS WE MADE THE FOLLOWING TRANSFER DEM TO FAISAL FINANCE INSTITUTION INC TURKEY A/C No. 877191 MR. WAEL HAMZAH JELAIDAN REFERENCE: TRF TO FFI TURKEY Form without signature VALUE. 03 04/1998 DEM. i76, 000. 00 ACNT550/SH/FFS 02/04/98 " Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 12 of 22 Clls a hoa Jilg Wael Hamzah Jelaidan is e-aka Trading Services 30-39g Date IMr. RasheedTymoor Faisal F a ce, (swt Sarland) Pease trous face the a mo ww of one handed sevent siſ than sored D. Mast (S. M, 17, o001-) frol, oceuwst h no. (to 404) to the account no (877 190) in Faisal Finance (Istanbul, Faisa! Finance (Switzerland) S. A. On Dear Duk. to a car that a writ like 4 Coeur Bes. Haf. ML CLE at La a el A. Tadan, He ale de SPD, ce Irences and We l be on 24 to 4/98, Lewes to LA (11-TIFYI was undu-a Wise to try/T. Aart Stu-TNSr IEri-tists or siſsy List – E. Jeddah-Alandalos Sr.-M, C. C. Bldg-P. O. Box 1436 Jeddah 21431-Tel. 8608871 6654 437 Ext. 153 Fax (966-2) 6671964 H JLH D, E resertz CE O-F A true D 0, a, FN RL e d I na, е а2424. EDIT ACCOUNTING MOVEMENTS are. DATE: 2409/02 a. TIMEO99 27 PAGE DESCRIPTION TRANSACTION ID 46862 STATUSCTR CREATED/UPDATED BY: MBA ON 22/05/98 CONTROLLED BY ON 22/05/98 VALUE DATE 26/05/98 OPERATION DATE 22/05/98 CURRENCY 840 USD ACCOUNT ID CL I E N T L E D GER DESCRIPTION 250, 000. 00-DB 250, 000. 00 DB 10257. 01. 00. 84 0 7402. 00. 11. 840 10409. 01. 00. 840 7102. 00. 11. 84 0 TO A/C 10409 TRSF FR A/C 10257 TO 10409 FM 10409 TRSF FR A/C 10257 TO 10409 250, 000. 00 CR 250, 000. 00. CR 0. 00 0. 00/SHA/FFs 24/09/02 Case P 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 14 of 22 a is al fi nance Cswat to land) Mr. Rasheed 1 meet Please trans fare amount, of (f 250, 000/-) two handles fe as it uses us D. Has go acco wwA 4D Tthe To Wr account # 1040 97) " at Tte see (bank 14/6/9 8 Faisal Finance (Switzerla ASA. Annie case Ap3-massisToGPD-SN, Document s746-15 Filed 10 06/17 Page 15 of 22 Customer Transfer. Citibank Reference Status Code 052541CK336 001 Processed by the Bank. C121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06563 Customer Reference A PreFormat Ref Its Customer Information NO Priority Wire for Ordering Customer Faisal Finance 84, Av. Louis-Casai 1216 Cointrin-Geneva Switzerland 3 69 663 25 Ninebt Account Mumber gent NO Cash FI Mgt: " Citibank NY count: Description FAISAL FINANCE SWITZERLAND-USD... value Date/Ccy/Amount 05/12/00 USD 24' 090: 00. Beneficiary's Name WAEL HAMZAH ABDUL FATTAH JELAIDAN 314608010 016294 Beneficiary's Account NO Intracompany AL RAJHI BANKING INVESTMENT Beneficiary's Bank Name AND CORP HAYE ALSALAMAH JEDDAH SAUDI ARABIA Beneficiary's Bank Code SWIFT Code I Intermediary Bank Name CHASE-MANHATTAN BANK NEW YORK ntermediary Bank Code CHASUS33 SWIFT Code Bank to Bank Information Payment Details TRF. Customer's Charges Case hoSmaroſsro-Gebrsk' Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 16 of 22 Hael Kamgah Jelaidan P. O. Box 1436 Jeddah 21431, Kingdom of Saudi Arabla. 05 February 2001 The Manager, Faisal Finance (Switzerland) S. A. 3. Quai du Mont-Blanc, P. O. Box 1494-1211 Genera1, Switzerland. Fax: (022) 908 53. 99 Please transfer DEM 27, 000 (Twenty seven Thousand Marks Only) to Dr. Med. K. Schoebe, Account Number 24018905 Sparkasse Bonn Bank, BLZ 3805000, Bonn, Badgobesberg, Germany. The above amount is for the treatment account of the patient Al-Amin Abdallah Mohammed Al-Shangity. I will appreciate your urgent response in this regard. Thank you, Wael Hamzah Jelaidan Account: DEM-IFA-010409. 01. 00. 280--in F/jsal Finange Switzerland) SA A. IQ SIGNATURE. CANFOANYE A Page A. Case 103-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 17 of 22 Set Date ': 23. 09. 02. Time: 1l: 28 A customer Transfer A' Citibank Reference The status Code C121000000007158 002 Under Process by the Bank 5. Customer. Reference C121 0 000000071 58 PreFormat Ref. TV Eircuistomer Information in SR Priority Wire NO ordering Customer Faisal Finance 84, Av. Louis-Casai 1216 Cointrin-Geneva Switzerland I Debit Account Number 4114942001 UrgenE NO Frankfurt Citibank AG ccount Description FAISAL FINANCE (SWITZERLAND) is a value Date/Ccy/Amount 06/02/01 DEM 27' 000. 00 Beneficiary's Name DR MED K SCHOEBE Beneficiary's Account 24018905 Intracompany NO Beneficiary's Bank Name SPARKASSE BONN, BONN BADGOBESBERG GERMANY BLZ 3805000 Beneficiary's Bank Code SWIFT Code Intermediary Bank Name intermediary Bank Code... SWIFT " ' Code Bank to Bank Information Paymºnt Details THIS AMOUNT IS FOR THE TREATMENT ACCOUNT OF THE PATIENT, AL AMIN ABDALLAH MOHAMED ALSHAGITY Charges Customer's of 3, Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10 06/17 Page 18 of 22 a [Logo] The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland EAII/1/01/007/Nic Berne, October 16, 2002 DOCUMENT SEIZURE AND PRODUCTION ORDER Given the procedure opened September 15, 2001 for violation of articles 90ss of the Federal Law on Aviation (LA; RS 748 0), in connection with articles 5 and 61s CPS, to associate with articles 111, 112, 181, 183, 184, 185, and 340 CPS, Given the documents provided in annex to announcement number Arl 1596 55 of the Money Laundering Reporting Office of the OFP, Given the fact that a person having the name of Wael Hamza JULAIDAN appears on the list " Bush 18 " and is thus designated by the American authorities as connected to international terrorism, Given the extension of the aforementioned procedure to wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN, considering: 1. That on October 11, 2002, the Money Laundering Reporting Office (MROs) transmitted to the Office of the Attorney General a communication within the meaning of article 9 LBA, 2. That the communication alleges that a Saudi citizen named Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN opened an individual numbered account registered under the number 340406 at Citibank of Geneva; 3. That it appears very probable that Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN at Wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN are the same person, given that the date of birth and the citizenship also coincide; 4. That the examination of the documents provided and the fact that Mr. wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN appears on Bush list number 18 allows for the opening of a criminal investigation; 5. That investigations will be conducted in order to shed light on the holder of this bank account; 6. That as is, on the basis of information held by the Office of the Attorney General, there exists the suspicious of money laundering, or the fact that Article 305bis CPS Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 19 of 22 Mr. wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN born January 22, 1958, holder of Saudi passport number A-992535, Or Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN, born January 22, 1958, holder of the Saudi passport which is the holder of account number 240406, Belongs to a criminal organizationſ susceptible of participating in the financing of terrorist activities. Appling articles 65, 69-71 PPF; It is ordered: 1. The seizure of account number 340406 with Citibank of Geneva. 2. The sequestration of all the documents, relative to the aforementioned individual, that were not provided as an annex to the communication made October 10, 2002, in particular the opening documents, supporting documents since the opening (account statement notices of debits and credits,..), documents highlighting the provenance and the destination of transfers, correspondence, internal notices related to contacts with the client and the verification of the contracting parties' identity, the production of all documents held by the bank tied to Mr Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN 3. The present blocking order is notified: To the Money Laundering Reporting Office, Bundesrain 20, 3003 Berne (by internal Courier; To Citibank (Switzerland), Bahnhofstrasse 63, PO Box 3760, 8021 Zurich (by fax number 01/205 72 22 and signed letter); To the Federal Judicial Police, 3003 Berne (rif.: Alr 1596 55). Legal Remedy The present order may be the subject of an appeal to the President of the Grand Jury Chambers of the federal court within five days after receipt by the parties and by any person having suffered an illegitimate prejudice (article 1osbis al. 2 in connection with articles 214-210 PPF). FEDERAL PROSECUTOR [seal of the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland) [Signature] Sergio Mastroianni 2 Article 260ter CPS Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 20 of 22 I certlfy that I am proficient in English and French, and that the above is an accurate translation of the October 16, 2002 Document Seizure and Production order from French into English. Date W. Jameson Fox Associate Martin F. McMahon & Associates SCHWEas IWE FUNDSYMOBGCSN' T Document 3746-15 Filed 10 06 17 Page 21 of 22/MINISTERE PUBLIC DE LA CONFEDERATION MINISTERO PUBBLICO DELLA CONFEDERAZIONE PROCURA FEDERALA EAll/1/01/007/Nic Berne, le 16 octobre 2002 ORDONNANCE DE PERQUISITION ET D' EDITION DE DOCUMENTS Vu la procedure ouverte le 15 septembre 2001 pour violation des art. 90ss de la loi fédérale sur l aviation (LA; RS 748. 0), en liaison avec les art. 5 at 661 CPs, à associer aux ant. 111, 112, 181, 183, 184, 185 et 340 CPS, O Vu les documents fournis en annexe à l annonce nº Arl 1596 55 du Bureau de communication en matière de blanchiment de' OFP, vu le fait qu' une personne ayant le nom de Wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN figure sur la liste " Bush 18 " et est ainsi designée par les autorités américaines comme liée au terrorisme international, vu' extension de la procedure précitée à Wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN, considerant: 1. que le 11 octobre 2002, le bureau de communication en matière de blanchiment d' argent MROS) a transmis au Ministère public de la Confédération une communication au sens de l article 9 LBA, 2. que la communication allègue qu' un citoyen saoudien nommé Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN aurait ouvert un compte individuel numéroté enregistré sous le nr. 340406 auprès de la Ci. tibank de Genève; 3. qu il paraſt fort probable que Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN et Wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN soient la même personne, étant donné que la date de naissance et la citoyenneté coinci dent aussi; 4. que l examen des documents fournis et le fait que M. Wa' el Hamza JULAIDAN figure sur la liste Bush n° 18 permettent l ouverture d' une procedure d' enquête penale; 5. que des investigations seront conduites afin de faire la lumière sur le titulaire de ce compte bancaire 6. qu' en l' état, sur la base des informations dont le Ministère public de la Confédération dis pose, il existe le soupçon de blanchiment d' argent ', ou le fait que art. 305bis CPS Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3746-15 Filed 10/06/17 Page 22 of 22 M. Wael Hamza JULAIDAN né le 22. 01 1958, titulaire du passeport saoudien nº A 992535. i ou Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN, né le 22. 01. 1958 titulaire du passeport saoudien titulaire du compte nº 240406, appartien à une organisation criminelle susceptible de participer au financement d' activi tes terroristes. En application des articles 65, 69 a 71 PPF; Il est Ordonné La perquisition du Compte nº 340406 auprès de la Citibank à Genève. 2. Le sequestre de tous les documents, relatifs à la relation susmentionnée, qui n au raient pas été fournis en annexe à la communication faite le 10 octobre 2002, en parti culier les documents d' ouverture, les justificatifs depuis' ouverture (extrait de compte, avis de débits et de credit,...), les documents faisant ressortir la provenance et la desti nations des virements, la correspondance, les notices internes relatives aux contacts avec la clientèle et la verification de l identité des contractants, la production de tous les documents détenus par la banque liés à M. Wael Hamzah A. JELAIDAN; 3. La presente ordonnance de blocage est notifiée au bureau de communication en matière de blanchiment, Bundesrain 20, 3003 Berne (par courrier interne); a Citibank (Switzerland), Bahnhofstrasse 63, PO Box 3760, 8021 Zürich (par fax n. 01/205 72 22 et lettre signature); à la police judiciaire fédérale, 3003 Berne (rif: Alr 1596 55). Voie de droit La presente ordonnance peut faire lobjet d' un recours après du President de la Chambre d accusation du tribunal fédéral dans les cing jours dès la reception par les parties et par toute personne ayants subi un prejudice illegitime (art. 105bis al. 2 en ralation avec les art. 214-219 PPF). DE LaLE PRPCUREUR FEDERAL SC Sergio Mastroianni Lar. 26Oter CPS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Motion for Santions, Memo of Law and Declaration served on Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan on 10/6/17. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3747 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02-cv-06977 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 CONSOLIDATED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true copy of Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan, Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan, and the Declaration of J. Scott Tarbutton in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Wa’el Hamza Jelaidan with exhibits, was filed electronically this 6th day of October 2017. Notice of this filing will be served upon all parties in 03 MDL 1570 by operation of the Southern District of New York’s Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") system, which all parties may access./s/J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq.

MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3748 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Estate of O’Neill v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., 04-CV-1923 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald Associates, LP v. Akida Investment Co., Ltd., 04-CV-7065 PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AS TO CHARITY OFFICIAL DEFENDANTS ABDULLAH OMAR NASEEF, ABDULLAH BIN SALEH AL OBAID, ABDULLAH MAHSEN AL TURKI, ADNAN BASHA, AND SOLIMAN AL-BUTHE PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the Declaration of Robert T. Haefele, Esq, and the exhibits attached thereto, and the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman al-Buthe, the plaintiffs by and through their undersigned counsel will move the Court before the Honorable Sarah Netburn, U.S. Magistrate Judge, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, Room 430, Courtroom 219, at a date and time to be determined by the Court, for an Order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, sanctioning the Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman al-Buthe for their defiance of this Court’s prior orders compelling them to produce their passports, to produce sworn or affirmed certifications that they had each produced all documents responsive to the plaintiffs’ discovery requests, and to produce privilege logs identifying any responsive document that was not produced. Plaintiffs seek this relief for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum of Law in Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3748 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 2 Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman al-Buthe. Dated: October 6, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Robert T. Haefele Jodi W. Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, III, Esq. KREINDLER & KREINDLER, LLP 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: (546 in 1:04-cv-07065-GBD, 987 in 1:03-cv-06978-GBD-SN, 3748 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 774 in 1:03-cv-09849-GBD, 571 in 1:04-cv-07279-GBD, 850 in 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 630 in 1:04-cv-01923-GBD, 582 in 1:04-cv-05970-GBD-SN) MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Estate of O’Neill v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., 04-CV-1923 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald Associates, LP v. Akida Investment Co., Ltd., 04-CV-7065 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AS TO CHARITY OFFICIAL DEFENDANTS ABDULLAH OMAR NASEEF, ABDULLAH BIN SALEH AL OBAID, ABDULLAH MAHSEN AL TURKI, ADNAN BASHA, AND SOLIMAN AL-BUTHE Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY.........................................................................2 A. The previous motions to compel the charity official defendants.................................. 3 B. The Court’s previous rulings as to the Charity Official Defendants........................... 5 C. Productions after the March 22, 2016 hearing................................................................... 6 D. Productions after the September 7, 2017 hearing............................................................. 8 1. Mr. Al-Buthe............................................................................................... 8 2. Drs. Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, and Naseef.......................................................... 8 3. Dr. Basha..................................................................................................... 9 III. ARGUMENT.........................................................................................................................10 A. Rule 37(b)(2) authorizes the Court to impose a range of sanctions on the five charity official defendants for failing to obey the Court’s orders authorizing discovery.............................................................................................................. 10 B. The Four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants should be sanctioned fortheir failure to produce their passports......................................................................... 11 C. All five charity official defendants should be sanctioned because the certifications of all five charity official defendants fall far short of what the Court ordered the defendants to provide.................................................................... 13 D. All five charity official defendant should be sanctioned because the certifications provided do not meet the statutory requirement................................... 16 E. All five charity official defendant should be sanctioned because none of them have provided a privilege log identifying responsive documents that have been withheld in discovery.......................................................................................... 16 IV. CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................17 i Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 22 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES O'Neill v. Asat Trust Reg. (In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001), 714 F.3d 659 (2d Cir. 2013).................................................................................................. 2, 12 STATUTES 28 U.S.C. § 1746................................................................................................................. 1, 15, 16 RULES Fed. R. Civ. Proc. Rule 34............................................................................................................ 15 Fed. R. Civ. Proc. Rule 37............................................................................................ 1, 10, 17, 18 ii Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 22 I. Introduction The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees ("PECs") request that the Court enter an order, under Rule 37(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Court’s inherent powers, sanctioning defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Abdullah Mohsen Al-Turki, Adnan Basha and Soliman Al-Buthe ("the charity official defendants") for each defendant’s failure to comply with this Court’s discovery orders of March 22, 2016 (see Exhibit A,1 Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 84-85) and September 8, 2017 (see Exhibit B, Transcript of Sept. 7, 2017 hearing, at 10-13). At the March 22, 2016 hearing, the charity official defendants were each instructed to provide a "sworn or affirmed certification" that he had "produced all documents responsive to the [plaintiffs’ discovery] requests" and to identify any withheld documents on a privilege log. A specific item the Court ordered each defendant to produce is their passports. At the September 7, 2017 conference, the Court reiterated the earlier direction for the five charity official defendants to provide the certifications, passports, and privilege logs, setting an October 6, 2017 deadline, or they would face sanctions. Because, as of the writing of this motion, the charity official defendants have not complied with the Court’s orders, plaintiffs request that the Court impose sanctions. Aside from Mr. Al-Buthe, no defendant has produced a passport. And though defendants Al-Buthe, Al-Obaid, and Basha have each provided a document labelled a certification, none of the "certifications" provide the information the Court required and none are sworn or affirmed or meet the statutory requirements for unsworn declarations required under 28 U.S.C. § 1746, thus making the documents essentially worthless. Defendants Naseef and Al-Turki have provided no certification at all. Finally, no defendant has produced a privilege log. 1 The exhibits cited herein are attached to the Declaration of Robert T. Haefele, dated October 6, 2017. 1 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 22 II. Background and Procedural History In April 2013, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanded all five charity official defendants for jurisdictional discovery. O'Neill v. Asat Trust Reg. (In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001), 714 F.3d 659, 678-679 (2d Cir. 2013). Defendants Naseef, Al-Obaid, and Al-Turki all served as senior officials of defendant Muslim World League (MWL). Dr. Basha served as a senior official of defendant International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), a MWL subsidiary. Soliman Al-Buthe, who remains criminally indicated and designated by the United State as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT), served as a senior official of defaulted defendant Al Haramain. The Second Circuit authorized jurisdictional discovery concerning plaintiffs’ allegations that the charity official defendants "controlled and managed some of [the purported charitable organizations that allegedly supported al Qaeda] and, through their positions of control, they allegedly sent financial and other material support directly to al Qaeda when al Qaeda allegedly was known to be targeting the United States." Id. Plaintiffs served jurisdictional discovery requests on August 22, 2013. In addition to seeking documents accessible to the charity official defendants from the charity’s files, the requests also sought documents more likely found in the individual defendants’ files. For example, requests to Mr. Al-Buthe sought his passports and personal accounting and financial account and transaction documents (see, e.g., Exhibit C, Al-Buthe Request Nos. 17, 19, 48, 59, 60, 64).2 And for example, requests to the other charity official defendants sought passports, visas, or other documents authorizing each defendants’ travel worldwide (see, e.g., Exhibit D, Naseef Request Nos. 20, 89, 90; Exhibit E, Al-Obaid Requests Nos. 24, 96, 97; Exhibit F, Al-Turki Requests Nos. 2 See also Exhibit H, Aug. 31, 2017 Letter of Robert T. Haefele, ECF No. 3713, summarizing the discovery requests served on Mr. Al-Buthe into nine categories. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 22 27, 103, 104, Exhibit G, Basha Requests Nos. 20, 93, 94), as well as financial account documentation personally accessible to the charity official defendants (see, e.g., Exhibit D, Naseef Request No. 98; Exhibit E, Al-Obaid Request No. 105; Exhibit F, Al-Turki Request No. 112; Exhibit G, Basha Request Nos. 102). The five charity official defendants initially responded by asserting numerous objections and arguing that the documents sought were wholly under the control of the charities themselves. A. The previous motions to compel the charity official defendants In August and September 2015, plaintiffs filed motions to compel discovery from the five charity official defendants. On August 10, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion as to the criminally indicted SDGT Al-Buthe (ECF No. 2990, 3111), arguing that he had interposed only objections and produced no documents. On September 2, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion as to defendants Naseef, Al-Obaid, Al-Turki, and Basha (ECF Nos. 3024, 3129). Before the motion to compel, the four MWL/IIRO-related charity official defendants had collectively produced only 84 documents, and the few documents that had been produced consisted principally of affidavits and other documents they previously filed with the Court in 2003 and 2005 in support of their initial motions to dismiss. The central premise of all five defendants’ oppositions to plaintiffs’ motions was that none of them were personally in possession of any records relating to their roles as officials at the relevant charities, and they each were relying upon the productions of those charities to satisfy their distinct discovery obligations. In short, each of the five argued that they had not retained a single piece of information – not a commendation, a photo, a media account, or a single piece of paper – from their respective tenures with some of the world’s most prominent Islamic organizations. 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 22 The PECs responded, arguing (1) that each charity official defendant had an independent obligation and the practical ability to facilitate the charities’ production of relevant and responsive documentation, and (2) that the individual charity officer defendants’ claims that none of the five had access to any relevant and responsive records apart from the charities’ records was implausible. At oral argument on March 22, 2016, for example, plaintiffs explained that the positions the charity official defendants held were prominent roles in the world’s largest Islamic institutions, in relation to which the individual officials traveled throughout the world, often in the company of senior Saudi government officials, and participated in and gave speeches at high profile international events and conferences. See Exhibit, A, Transcript of March 22, 2016 Hearing at 71-72. Plaintiffs expressed skepticism that the individual officials had retained nothing commemorating such prominent work – again, no commendations, photographs, media accounts, etc. At a minimum, the PECs noted, the individual defendants’ passports would reflect travel undertaken during their service with the organizations, and should have been produced in response to plaintiffs’ requests. Each of the defendants sought to avoid other relevant areas of discovery that obligated them to produce documents unlikely to be in the organization’s records – e.g., passports, financial records, and records of regarding the individuals’ activities with other implicated organizations. For example, in addition to being officers of MWL, defendants Naseef, Al-Obaid, and Al-Turki have all held positions in other organizations that are likely sources of relevant documents. Defendants Naseef and Al-Obaid had been a founder and officer, respectively, of defaulted defendant Rabita Trust, a United States designated terrorist organization. Dr. Al-Obaid was also an officer of various Sanabel entities that were previously defendants in these proceedings, but certified that they no longer had any records from the relevant time period. Dr. Al-Turki served 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 22 from 1993 to 1999 as Saudi Minister of Islamic Affairs, where he had supervisory authority over all of the Saudi proselytizing organizations. Id. at 67-68. Similarly, although Mr. Al-Buthe has identified responsive documents from the collection produced by al-Haramain’s now defunct United States office, he was also affiliated with the entity’s office in Saudi Arabia, which declined to engage in discovery and was defaulted. Mr. Al-Buthe has also held a governmental position in Riyadh where he reported to a member of the Saudi royal family. B. The Court’s previous rulings as to the Charity Official Defendants At the March 22, 2016 hearing, Judge Maas directed the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants to provide a "sworn or affirmed certification... that except to the extent to which they have specified that a document is being withheld, they have produced all documents responsive to the requests unless those documents are part of the productions of the MWL or IIRO." Id. at 85 (emphasis added). To comply, the defendants needed to produce all responsive documents – including, inter alia, their passports and financial data – or identify the withheld documents on a privilege log. Id. The Court rejected defense counsel’s request to limit the certifications to areas unilaterally deemed by them to be relevant to jurisdictional discovery. Instead, the Court ordered that the certifications apply to all documents sought by plaintiffs’ discovery requests.3 Notably, Judge Maas recognized that the defendants’ passports were responsive to several of plaintiffs’ requests and "would seem to be something the charities would not have produced." See id at 84. 3 The Court limited the declarations in one respect – namely, the defendants were not be obligated to produce documents related to the Golden Chain. However, defendant were obligated to produce documents related to individuals identified in the Golden Chain. Compare Exhibit A, Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 77 ("I'm not going to require the production of any documents related to the golden chain so we can move on from there) with Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 87-88 (agreeing that production must include documents as to "people on the golden chain other than the contributors, for instance Wael Jelaidain [and] Osama Bin Laden....") 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 9 of 22 During that March 22, 2016 hearing, the Court ruled regarding the motion to compel discovery from Mr. Al-Buthe. The Court overruled Mr. Al-Buthe’s objections and ordered as follows: "I am going to require production of the documents that the plaintiffs seek as well as a certification that Mr. Al-Buthe has produced all the responsive documents in his possession, custody or control." Id. at 113:19-22. During the September 7, 2017 hearing, the Court ordered all five charity official defendants to provide the sworn or affirmed certifications that the Court had previously ordered the defendants to provide and directed the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants to produce their passports. Transcript of Sept. 7, 2017 hearing at 11-13. The Court expressed its expectation that the charity official defendants would obtain certified copies of their passports from the relevant government entities. Id. at 11. When counsel for the MWL/IIRO charity official defendants sought to excuse their non-compliance, the Court explained that "You’ve been ordered to produce these documents. You failed to do so.... I’ll give you time to have one last opportunity... to produce these documents, but... if they aren’t produced within the next 30 days, I am going to invite a sanctions motion from the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee[s]." Id. The Court also reaffirmed all five defendants’ obligation to produce privilege logs identifying any documents the defendants were withholding. Id. at 12. C. Productions after the March 22, 2016 hearing On June 2, 2017, counsel for the MWL and IIRO officials sent a letter to plaintiffs’ counsel enclosing indices for defendants Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, Naseef, and Basha, identifying documents within the productions of the MWL and IIRO that the individual defendants had determined to be responsive to the discovery requests directed to those individual defendants. Exhibit I, June 2, 2017 Letter from Alan Kabat enclosing indices. In that letter, those defendants acknowledged the MWL and IIRO had not yet completed their document productions, and that the indexes would 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 10 of 22 have to be supplemented upon completion of those productions. The charity official defendants’ counsel, Mr. Kabat, expressed his expectation to complete the necessary review and supplementation of the index "within one week of the completion of the MWL and IIRO’s final production." Id. In that same letter, Mr. Kabat advised that "we understand that the individual defendants do not themselves have documents relating to their work at the charities, as those documents remain with the charities after their retirement." Id. On the basis of this representation, plaintiffs understood that the individual charity official defendants were maintaining their position that they are not in possession of any responsive documents (including their passports), other than the 84 documents they have collectively produced to date. As to Judge Maas’ directive that the individual charity officials produce their passports, Mr. Kabat represented that "since they traveled on official passports, which the government retained after each trip, they do not have personal possession of those passports." Id. The PECs understood this statement to indicate that the individual charity officials traveled on government or diplomatic passports in their capacities as the heads of the MWL and IIRO, and that the Saudi government retained possession of those governmental or diplomatic passports. On June 14, 2017, more than a year after the Court’s unambiguous direction to produce all of the documents plaintiffs requested and to certify that he had done so, Mr. Al-Buthe produced a set of documents accompanied with an interposed slate of objections that the defendant had long ago waived and that the Court had explicitly overruled at the March 22, 2016 hearing. Exhibit J, June 14 2017 Letter from Kabat regarding Al-Buthe production. And, although Mr. Al-Buthe produced passports, he did not provide the sworn or affirmed certification that the Court had ordered him to provide to certify under oath that he had produced all responsive documents in his 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 11 of 22 care, custody, or control. Nor did he provide a log identifying responsive documents that he had withheld. The PECs raised various defects in the defendants’ responses and productions following the March 22, 2016 hearing in their letter of August 31, 2017 (ECF No. 3713), and at the conference on September 7, 2017 the Court directed the defendants to take steps to bring themselves into compliance with the Court’s prior orders or face sanctions. D. Productions after the September 7, 2017 hearing Since the September 7, 2017 hearing, three of the charity official defendants – namely, Mr. Al-Buthe, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Basha – have provided documents labelled certifications. Defendants Naseef and Al-Turki have not provided certifications. Aside from the passports of Mr. Al-Buthe (which had been produced prior to the hearing), none of the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants have produced passports. None of the defendants have produced a log identifying any responsive documents that they have withheld from their productions. 1. Mr. Al-Buthe Under cover letter dated September 26, 2017 (Exhibit K), Mr. Al-Buthe produced a document titled "Certification of Soliman H. Al-Buthe," dated September 26, 2017, with a signature that purports to be Mr. Al-Buthe’s. The certifications states: I, Soliman H. Al-Buthe, hereby certify that I have searched for and produced (through my attorneys) all non-privileged document that are relevant for jurisdictional discovery and responsive to the plaintiffs’ jurisdictional discovery document requests. These include documents that were previously produced by the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. (USA). Exhibit K (emphasis added). 2. Drs. Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, and Naseef Defendants Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, and Naseef sent two letters since the September 7, 2017 hearing. On September 26, 2017, defendants Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, and Naseef produced a 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 12 of 22 supplemental index sourcing documents from the MWL production to plaintiffs’ discovery requests. The indices did not identify or otherwise include the defendants’ passports, their personal financial accounts, nor any documents not in MWL files. In a letter dated October 5, 2017 (Exhibit L), counsel for Dr. Naseef and Dr. Al-Turki indicates that, notwithstanding the Court’s orders to do so, neither of those defendants has provided any certification or supplemental documentation, including their passports. Dr. Al-Obaid produced a document titled "Certification of Dr. Abdullah Bin Saleh Al-Obaid," dated October 4, 2017, with a signature that purports to be Dr. Al-Obaid’s. The certification states: I, Dr. Abdullah Bin Saleh Al-Obaid, hereby certify that, as a long-retired Secretary-General of the Muslim World League (MWL) (having served from 1995 to 2000), I no longer have access to the MWL’s files and archives. I further certify that, though my attorneys, I have produced all documents responsive to the document requests, including both the documents that are available to me, and the documents that were part of the productions of the MWL and the International Islamic Relief Organization. Of note, the covering letter from counsel enclosing that certification stated that the certification confirms that he has "produced the responsive documents that he has that are relevant to jurisdictional discovery." Exhibit L (emphasis added). 3. Dr. Basha Under cover letter dated September 26, 2017 (Exhibit M), Dr. Basha produced a document titled "Certification of Dr. Adnan Basha," dated September 19, 2017, with a signature that purports to be Dr. Basha’s, and a supplemental index sourcing documents from the IIRO production to discovery requests plaintiffs served on Dr. Basha. The certification states: I, Dr. Adnan Basha, hereby certify that, prior to my recent retirement as the Secretary-General of the [IIRO], I directed my assistants to guide the IIRO’s attorneys through the IIRO’s files and archives, and I ensured that the attorneys had full access to the IIRO’s files and archives. 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 13 of 22 I further certify that, through my attorneys, I have produced all document responsive to the document requests, including both the documents that are available to me, and the documents that were part of the productions of the Muslim World League and the IIRO." Under cover letter dated October 2, 2017 (Exhibit N), Dr. Basha produced another document titled "Declaration of Dr. Adnan Basha," dated September 30, 2017, with a signature that again purports to be Dr. Basha’s. The declaration states: Under penalty of perjury, I attest to the following is true: 1. I, Dr. Adnan Basha, hereby provide the following information on my travels to the United States of America from 1992 through 2002. 2. I made two family vacation trips to Orlando, Florida in July 1997 and August 1999, accompanied by my wife and our four children. 3. In June 2001, I made a trip to New York to attend the meetings of the Special Committee of the United Nations General Assembly concerning children, and was accompanied by my two daughters. 4. I do not have my passports for that time period, and the above information is from my memory. III. Argument A. Rule 37 (b)(2) authorizes the Court to impose a range of sanctions on the five charity official defendants for failing to obey the Court’s orders authorizing discovery. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2) authorizes the Court to impose sanctions "[i]f a party... fails to obey an order to provide or permit discovery. Among the sanctions permitted under Rule 37 are: (i) directing that the matters embraced in the order or other designated facts be taken as established for purposes of the action, as the prevailing party claims; (ii) prohibiting the disobedient party from supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses, or from introducing designated matters in evidence; (iii) striking pleadings in whole or in part; (iv) staying further proceedings until the order is obeyed; (v) dismissing the action or proceeding in whole or in part; 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 14 of 22 (vi) rendering a default judgment against the disobedient party; or (vii) treating as contempt of court the failure to obey any order except an order to submit to a physical or mental examination. In this instance, all five of the charity official defendants have failed, in at least one respect, to obey the Court’s orders to produce their passports, certifications, and privilege logs. All five were ordered to produce their passports; only Mr. Al-Buthe complied with that direction. All five were ordered to provide logs identifying responsive documents withheld from production; no defendant provided such a log. All five were ordered to provide sworn or affirmed certifications. Two of the defendants, Drs. Nassef and Al-Turki, did not provide any certifications. The remaining three, Mr. Al-Buthe, Dr. Obaid, and Dr. Basha, provided documents titled "certifications" but they did not comply with the Court’s requirements, thus evading their very purpose, and they do not comply with the federal statute for such certifications. In short, the documents are worthless nullities. In light of each charity official defendants separate failures to obey the Court’s orders, plaintiffs request that the Court impose sanctions on each. B. The Four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants should be sanctioned for their failure to produce their passports. During both the March 22, 2016 and the September 7, 2017 hearings, the Court was abundantly clear that the defendants were to produce their passports. Indeed, in the more recent hearing, the Court made the point abundantly clear, stating "You’ve been ordered to produce these. You failed to do so.... [I]f they aren’t produced within the next 30 days, I am going to invite a sanctions motion." Exhibit B, at 11. Not only has none of the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants produced his passport, but none has offered an explanation as to what efforts were made to try to obtain their passport. Inasmuch as the four defendants have flat out failed to obey the Court’s order to produce the documents, sanctions are warranted. 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 15 of 22 In the recent cover letters from counsel for the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants, counsel has offered some information from some of the defendants concerning their travels to the United States. Dr. Basha had offered an additional declaration identifying several trips he took to the United States. The suggestion, though not necessarily explicit, seems to be that the information offered regarding their trips to the United States should satisfy their obligation to produce their passports because only their trips to the United States have any jurisdictional relevance (presumably in a general jurisdiction context). But the suggestion that only those trips to the United States are relevant is completely at odds with the plaintiffs’ specific jurisdiction approach to these defendants, at odds with the jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Second Circuit, at odds with the specific requests that were before the Court during the March 22, 2016 hearing, and at odds with the Court’s order for the defendants to produce their passports. As indicated in the Second Circuit’s decision, the jurisdictional issue as to these defendants is tied to their alleged activities of directing conduct at the United States by using their positions of control to provide material support to al Qaeda. In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 714 F.3d at 678. As a result, the Circuit Court authorized jurisdictional discovery concerning plaintiffs’ allegations that the charity official defendants "controlled and managed some of [the purported charitable organizations that allegedly supported al Qaeda] and, through their positions of control, they allegedly sent financial and other material support directly to al Qaeda when al Qaeda allegedly was known to be targeting the United States." Id. The particular requests that concerned defendants’ passports did not, as defendants suggest, address their travels solely to the United States as a premise to general jurisdiction. The requests inquired into the defendants’ activities in their respective positions of control, principally with the respective charities, and 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 16 of 22 engagements they may have had in those capacities with al Qaeda. For example, historical documents relating to al Qaeda’s founding indicate that defendant Naseef, who was Secretary General of the MWL at the time, was present at a founding meeting of bin Laden’s terror organization. Thus, the inquiries the Court directed the defendants to address by producing their passports sought information about the defendants’ travels worldwide, but especially to locations of activity for the defendant charities and al Qaeda. In short, the defendants’ suggestion that their obligations to produce the passports can be satisfied by offering various indications within MWL or IIRO records (or in a separate declaration from Dr. Basha) about their trips to the United States, is an exercise in deflection that merely serves to underscore their lack of regard for this Court’s orders. C. All five charity official defendants should be sanctioned because the certifications of all five charity official defendants fall far short of what the Court ordered the defendants to provide. The Court clearly instructed each charity official defendant to provide a "sworn or affirmed certification" that he had "produced all documents responsive to the [plaintiffs’ discovery] requests." Exhibit A, Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 85. Defendants Naseef and Al-Turki must be sanctioned because neither has provided a certification. Counsel for Drs. Naseef and Al-Turki may argue that their failures should be excused due to the two defendants’ unavailability since the September 7, 2017 hearing, but when asked at the September 7, 2017 hearing, counsel expressed an expectation to be able to provide the certifications for each of the defendants "within a week or two." Exhibit B, Transcript of Sept. 7, 2017 hearing at 12. Moreover, their unavailability in the past 30 days does not excuse their failure to provide a certification they have been obliged to provide since March 2016, more than a year and a half ago. The lack of availability of these two defendants for over a year and a half would strongly imply that they may no longer be participating in their defense, a circumstance that would 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 17 of 22 warrant the Court entering a default here as the Court has previously done in two other circumstances in this MDL. See ECF No. 2851 (ordering entry of default judgment against Rabita Trust after counsel had been unable to identify any representative of the entity with whom he had contact); ECF No. 3311 (ordering entry of default judgment against Sanabel when counsel was unable to contact a representative for more than a year.) Although the other three charity official defendants provided documents titled "certification," all three of their certifications are completely deficient, leaving gaping holes for the defendants to continue precisely that same evasive conduct that prompted the Court to require the certifications. Because the deficiencies enable the defendants to withhold documents by unilaterally deeming them beyond the scope or not relevant to jurisdictional discovery, the "certifications" are effectively a nullity. The certifications became necessary because the defendants’ discovery responses evinced a pattern that indicated a likelihood that they were either not being appropriately aggressive in searching for documents or they were circumscribing their productions based on their unilateral determinations as to what fell within the proper scope of jurisdictional discovery. To address the issue, Judge Maas ordered each defendant to certify (in a sworn or affirmed document) that the defendant had conducted a reasonable search and produced all documents in the defendants’ control. When the defendants tried to limit the certification to "anything to do with jurisdictional discovery," the Court rejected the limitation and required the defendants to address whether they had produced all documents as to all of plaintiffs’ requests. Exhibit A, Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 86-87. Review of the three "certifications" that have been offered demonstrate the following gaping deficiencies: 14 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 18 of 22 First, the "certifications" should be considered in light of their accompanying cover letters which indicate that each of the defendants are making their productions "without waiving [their] prior objections." Given that a central objection that each defendant asserted was that plaintiffs’ requests went beyond the proper scope of jurisdictional discovery, is wholly unclear from the "certifications" whether defendants’ searches and productions were artificially circumscribed to exclude documents based on that objection. Indeed, the certification provided by defendant Al-Buthe is expressly limited to documents "relevant to jurisdictional discovery," and the cover letter accompanying defendant Al-Obaid’s contains similar limiting language. Those limitations are in direct conflict with the Court’s order expressly rejecting the defendants’ counsel’s request to limit the certifications to documents the defendants deemed relevant to jurisdictional discovery. Second, a central reason for the Court requiring the certifications was to bring the defendants in compliance with the provision within Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that requires "an objection must state whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the basis of the objection." See Exhibit A, Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 85. Because neither the Court nor the plaintiffs were able to determine whether the defendants had withheld any documents (and if so, what was withheld and why) the Court required the certifications. But the information within the certifications, especially because the defendants continue to re-assert their objections, does nothing to clarify whether documents were withheld. Third, none of the "certifications" afford any assurance that the defendants understood that failure to tell the truth carried any consequence. Nothing on the face of the documents even makes clear that the signatories agreed to be truthful. See also Section II.D., below regarding the certifications’ non-compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1746. 15 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 19 of 22 Fourth, to the extent that the "certifications" purport to certify that the defendants have produced all documents available to the witness, nothing in the documents purport to explain the absence of documents that were presumably more available (or exclusively available) to the defendants, such as document that related to their positions outside of MWL and IIRO (including positions with, among others, Rabita Trust, a designated terrorist organization, and with the Saudi Kingdom itself); their personal accounting and financial documents; or commendations, photos, or media reports of any activity in which they were involved while they were in positions with some the world’s foremost Islamic charities, who often interacted with world leaders. D. All five charity official defendant should be sanctioned because the certifications provided do not meet the statutory requirement. The three certifications that have been offered, from Mr. Al-Buthe and Dr. Al-Obaid and two from Dr. Basha, do not comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1746. Under § 1746, unsworn declarations executed outside the United States (plaintiffs understand each of the declarations were executed overseas) must contain a statement that states in substantially the following form: "I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date)." The certifications offered do not contain language substantially similar to what is identified in the statute, particularly inasmuch as nothing in the text of the certification indicates that the signatory of the document has signed the document "under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America." Nor does the certification state that the statements are "true and correct." E. All five charity official defendant should be sanctioned because none of them have provided a privilege log identifying responsive documents that have been withheld in discovery. Though the defendants would not be obligated to provide a log if no documents have been withheld, their coy approach to the certification process has made it impossible to determine 16 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 20 of 22 whether any documents have been withheld. If any documents have been withheld, even if they were not produced due to a defendants’ unilateral view that they fall outside the scope of what they deem is proper jurisdictional discovery, then the defendant has violated the Court’s order. Again, a central purpose for the Court’s approach was to flag whether documents were being withheld and the reason for their withholding. IV. Conclusion Because all of the defendants have disobeyed the Court’s orders in at least one regard, plaintiffs request that, under Rule 37(b)(2)(A) and the Court’s inherent powers, the Court impose sanctions on each of the charity official defendants. Mr. Al-Buthe has not provided a certification that complies with the Court’s order, nor has he provided a log of responsive documents that have been withheld. Dr. Obaid and Dr. Basha have not provided certifications that comply with the Court’s order, nor have they provided their passports or a log of responsive documents that have been withheld. Dr. Naseef and Dr. Al-Turki have not provides their passports, certifications, or logs. Among the sanctions plaintiffs ask the Court to impose on Mr. Al-Buthe are: • Ordering Mr. Al-Buthe to re-submit a sworn or affirmed certification that complies with the Court’s previous orders • Imposing costs and reasonable attorney fees for the legal proceedings necessary to bring Mr. Al-Buthe in compliance with his discovery obligations; • Treating the defendants’ refusal as an act of contempt (Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(vii); and • Such other sanctions as the Court may deem appropriate. Among the sanctions plaintiffs ask the Court to impose on the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants are: • Striking the MWL/IIRO charity official defendants’ objections in their entirety and ordering them to produce every responsive document; • Ordering the MWL/IIRO charity official defendants’ to re-submit sworn or affirmed certifications that comply with the Court’s previous orders 17 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749 Filed 10/06/17 Page 21 of 22 • Ordering clarification as to the continued participation of defendants Al-Turki and Naseef, including when they were last responsive to counsel’s communication; • Imposing costs and reasonable attorney fees for the legal proceedings necessary to bring the defendants in compliance with their discovery obligations; • Treating the defendants’ refusal as an act of contempt (Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(vii); and • Such other sanctions as the Court may deem appropriate. Respectfully Submitted, Dated: October 6, 2017/s/Robert T. Haefele Jodi W. Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, III, Esq. KREINDLER & KREINDLER, LLP 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 18 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 19

Consolidated Certificate of Service

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3749-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 1 CONSOLIDATED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true copy of Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al-Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe, Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al-Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe, and the Declaration of Robert T. Haefele in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al-Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe with exhibits, was filed electronically this 6th day of October 2017. Notice of this filing will be served upon all parties in 03 MDL 1570 by operation of the Southern District of New York’s Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") system, which all parties may access./s/Robert T. Haefele, Esq.

DECLARATION of Robert T. Haefele in Support re: (987 in 1:03-cv-06978-GBD-SN, 3748 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 850 in 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 582 in 1:04-cv-05970-GBD-SN, 546 in 1:04-cv-07065-GBD, 774 in 1:03-cv-09849-GBD, 571 in 1:04-cv-07279-GBD, 630 in 1:04-cv-01923-GBD) MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Estate of O’Neill v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., 04-CV-1923 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald Associates, LP v. Akida Investment Co., Ltd., 04-CV-7065 DECLARATION OF ROBERT T. HAEFELE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AS TO CHARITY OFFICIAL DEFENDANTS ABDULLAH OMAR NASEEF, ABDULLAH BIN SALEH AL OBAID, ABDULLAH MAHSEN AL TURKI, ADNAN BASHA, AND SOLIMAN AL-BUTHE I, Robert T. Haefele, Esq., affirm, under penalty of perjury, as follows: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice before this Court, a member of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees in this MDL, and associated with the law firm Motley Rice LLC, counsel for Plaintiffs in this MDL. I submit this Declaration to transmit to the Court the following documents submitted in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman al-Buthe. 2. Attached hereto are true and correct copies of the Exhibits A – N as indicated below. a. Exhibit A is a copy of excerpts from the transcript of proceedings in this MDL on Mar. 22, 2016, including pages 67-68, 71-72, 77, 84-85, 87-88, and 113; b. Exhibit B is a copy of excerpts from the transcript of proceedings in this MDL on Sept. 7, 2017 including pages 10-13; c. Exhibit C is Plaintiffs’ document requests served on defendant Al-Buthe, Request Nos. 17, 19, 48, 59, 60, 64; d. Exhibit D is Plaintiffs’ document requests served on defendant Naseef, Request Nos. 20, 89, 90, and 98; e. Exhibit E is Plaintiffs’ document requests served on defendant Al-Obaid, Requests Nos. 24, 96, 97, and 105; f. Exhibit F is Plaintiffs’ document requests served on defendant Al-Turki, Requests Nos. 27, 103, 104, and. 112; g. Exhibit G is Plaintiffs’ document requests served on defendant Basha, Requests Nos. 20, 93, 94, and 102; h. Exhibit H is an Aug. 31, 2017 Letter of Robert T. Haefele, ECF No. 3713, summarizing the discovery requests served on Mr. Al-Buthe into nine categories; i. Exhibit I is a June 2, 2017 letter from Alan Kabat with enclosed indices from Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, Naseef and Basha (the indices are not included in the exhibit); j. Exhibit J is a June 14 2017 Letter from Alan Kabat regarding Al-Buthe production; k. Exhibit K is a Sept. 26, 2017 Letter from Alan Kabat with "Certification of Soliman H. Al-Buthe," dated September 26, 2017; l. Exhibit L is a Oct. 5, 2017 Letter from Alan Kabat regarding Naseef, Al-Turki, and Al-Obaid, with "Certification of Dr. Abdullah Bin Saleh Al-Obaid," dated October 4, 2017; 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 3 m. Exhibit M is a Sept. 26, 2017 Letter from Alan Kabat regarding Basha, with "Certification of Dr. Adnan Basha," dated September 19, 2017; and n. Exhibit N is an October 2, 2017 Letter from Kabat, regarding Basha, with "Declaration of Dr. Adnan Basha," dated September 30, 2017. Affirmed in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, on October 6, 2017. _/s/Robert T. Haefele______________ Robert T. Haefele, Esquire 3

Exhibit A

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 12 EXHIBIT A Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06 17 Page 2 of 121 G3M5terA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X IN RE: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (FM) X New York, N. Y. March 22, 2016 10: 20 a. m. Before: HON. FRANK MAAS 10 Magistrate Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 12 67 G3M5terA document requests and are producing documents, and that plaintiffs should look exclusively to those productions in relation to the discovery we are seeking from the individuals Obviously, your Honor, the rules require that the defendants respond individually to the document requests directed to them and the fact that other defendants may or may not be producing documents relating to the same areas of inquiry does not relieve them of their independent discovery obligations. 10 The related problem is that even if a party to 11 litigation could rely on the separate discovery responses of 12 another party to satisfy its obligations, the reality is that 13 many of the charities these officials had roles in are not 14 meaningfully participating in discovery at all. So, for 15 example, your Honor, Abdullah Naseef was not merely the 16 secretary of the Muslim world League, he also founded 17 Rabidi Trust and that, your Honor will recall, was designated 18 by the United States government, failed to participate in 19 discovery in the case, and was ultimately defaulted by this 20 Court 21 Naseef also had relationships with individuals of 22 considerable interest. For example, he was responsible for 23 appointing Wael Jelaidain to his position in the Muslim world 24 League, also responsible for appointing Osama Bin Laden's 25 brother-in-law, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa to the designated IIRO SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 12 68 G3M5terA 1 branch in the Philippines. Abdullah Bin Saleh Obaid was, in addition to his secretary of Muslim World League also an officer of Rabidi Trust and of many of the Sanabel entities that were incorporated in the items Your Honor will recall that the Sanabel entities in the United States have stated that they no longer have any records relating to the periods of greatest interest including the period when Obaid was an officer of the entity, Abdullah bin Muhsen al Turki, your Honor, is currently the head of the 10 Muslim World League and therefore in a position to direct that 11 entity to respond to request relating to his position 12 Before that, he was the Saudi Minister of Islamic 13 Affairs from 1993 to 1999. In that capacity he had a 14 supervisory role over all of the kingdom's proselytizing 15 organizations according to the 9/11 Commission, the Muslim 16 World League, the International World Islamic Relief 1 7 Organization, the World Assembly of Muslims and al-Haramain 18 Islamic Foundation 19 We also know, your Honor, that al-Haramain filed an 20 affidavit early in the case when it was still participating in 21 which it specifically stated that al-Haramain works under the 22 supervision of the Audi Minister of Islamic affairs who 23 appoints its board members and senior management personnel 24 And, again, al-Haramain Saudi Arabia is no longer 25 participating in the proceedings SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 12 71 G3M5terA filed an affidavit at one point way back in 2011 stating that the IIRO had two kinds of documents; public documents and documents that were protected from discovery by virtue of the king and his immunity Now, again, that objection was withdrawn entirely but it does indicate a certain desire to protect certain categories of documents relating to the activities of the charities from disclosure because of the governmental character. There is just no basis to do that 10 I think, your Honor, there was a recent article in the 11 New York Times in September of 2015 that underscores the issue 12 and that I shared with Mr. Kabat in advance of the hearings. 13 It was issued in September of 2015 and describes the kingdom's 14 efforts to both spread a certain variant of Islam and use those 15 efforts to counter Iranian influence and describes the very 16 close coordination within the Saudi government in doing that 17 The report indicates that the documents describe an 18 extensive apparatus inside the Saudi government dedicated to 19 missionary activity that brings in officials from the foreign 20 interior and Islamic affairs ministry, the intelligence 21 service, and the office of the king. It goes on to say the 22 intelligence agency, sometime potentially the Saudi-supported 23 Muslim World League helps coordinate strategy 24 And so, what we understand from all of the information 25 we have gathered largely on our own that these are very SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 12 12 G3M5terA significant positions of respect and of achievement relative to which these individuals interacted, traveled with, met with some of the most senior officials of the Saudi government, as well as foreign dignitaries. People who reach that level of accomplishment maintain some record of their life's work, your Honor, and we are to believe that all four of these individuals are so devoid of any interest in their own accomplishments that they haven' t retained a single record responsive to plaintiff's requests? That simply can' t be the case. They routinely gave 10 speeches at international conferences, they attended world 11 summits, they met with world leaders. They have some records 12 in their possession that are responsive and we would simply ask 13 that they be directed to undertake the reasonable and necessary 1 4 efforts to collect them and produce them 15 Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. 16 1 7 Mr. Kabat, why don' t you use the microphone over 18 there 19 MR. KABAT: Your Honor, again, we need context of the 20 discovery 21 What plaintiffs have not told you is that they served 22 a total of 129 document requests on the four charity officers 23 but of those 129 requests, 97 were identical or substantively 24 identical to the merits discovery request that they served on 25 the Muslim World League and the IIRO SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 12 77 G3M5terA sureties because there is no evidence of day-to-day control and it appeared that the only reason the plaintiffs are really seeking this discovery from the four defendants is not to prove their liability, instead it is a backdoor way to get the government back in the case. An example of that was yesterday Mr. Carter sent me an article from the New York Times which he 7 said he was going to rely upon today. That article actually came out in July of 2015, it is based on Wikileaks which is double hearsay 10 THE COURT: It is based on what? 11 MR. KABAT: Wikileaks--12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 MR. KABAT: which of course is double hearsay, but 14 the article that Mr. Carter gave me yesterday and aid he was 15 going to rely on specifically says the documents do not show 16 any Saudi support for militant activity 17 That's what Mr. Carter wanted to rely upon today 18 The last point I want to make is that plaintiffs, in 19 their document requests, had numerous requests relating to the 20 golden chain which he may remember from years ago when Judge 21 Casey had this case--THE me save you' m going COURT: Let some time. I not 22 23 to require the production of any documents related to the 24 golden chain so we can move on from there 25 MR. KABAT: Thank you. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 12 84 G3M5terA response was go look at what the charities produced. And what we are really here about is compelling the defendants to conduct their own searches MR. KABAT: Your Honor, regardless of whether the 5 request asked for the passport, the reality is the plaintiffs 6 simply cut and pasted their merits discovery into the four individual defendants and they have not bothered they have 8 not bothered--to meet with us, to send us a discovery deficiency letter, completely at all with Rule 37 meet and 10 confer requirement 11 THE COURT: Well, but the passports would seem to be 12 something that the charities would not have produced that 13 perhaps-well, I don' t see one that relates to passports but 14 I do see 89: Provide all documents relating to any trips you 15 took to Sudan and 90 is the same for trips to Afghanistan 16 Let me take a moment and look at the responses 17 (pause) 18 THE COURT: Unfortunately they don' t track from 19 defendant to defendant 20 (pause) 21 THE COURT: Well, here. For 89 and 90 the answer to 22 both is: See objections to document request no. 10. Document 23 request no. 10 says: Defendant objects to this request as 24 overly broad seeking documents relating to his employment with 25 the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which has SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 9 of 12 85 G3M5terA sovereign immunity, improperly seeks official records of the Saudi government, improperly seeks business records of the MWL 3 and IRRO; and goes on and on. And going back to the specific answers it says: Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any, when available So, I think what I am going to do is, first of all, invoke the current version of Rule 34 bear with me a second which requires that an objection state specifically--let me read it: An objection must state 10 whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the 11 basis of that obiection. 12 So, I am going to require several things. First, a 13 sworn or affirmed certification from each of the four charity 14 defendants that except to the extent to which they have 15 specified that a document is being withheld, they have produced 16 all documents responsive to the requests unless those documents 17 are part of the productions of the MWL or IIRO. Secondly, that 18 there be a privilege log if there are documents being withheld 19 on the basis of privilege. 20 I think at the moment that's all I need direct with 21 respect to the motion related to these four defendants 22 Is there something else you seek, Mr. Carter, at the 23 moment? 24 MR. CARTER: Your Honor, only based on the response 25 that you read to the request, which very much seemed to invoke SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 10 of 12. 37 G3M5terA discovery and we have not undertaken a search for that THE COURT: Well, I think by invoking the provision of Rule 34 that I have directed you to comply with, it will become clear whether you are withholding documents. I think there may be categories of documents or requests as to which your response is we have nothing beyond what the corporate charities have produced and therefore there is not much point in worrying about whether the request relates to jurisdictional or merits discovery 10 If, at the end of the process I have just directed 11 there are lingering issues, you can bring those back to the 12 Court or Mr. Carter can, but I think for the moment this takes 13 us further down the road 14 MR. KABAT: Thank you 15 MR. CARTER: Thank you, your Honor. 16 THE COURT: You said you had two points? 17 MR. KABAT: Pardon? 18 THE COURT: I guess the other was the golden chain 19 Thank you. MR. CARTER: Your Honor, I' m sorry. THE COURT: Yes. 20 21 22 MR. CARTER: With regard to the golden chain, and I 23 don' t want to belabor this point because I understand the 24 Court's ruling, but there are people on the golden chain other 25 than the contributors, for instance Wael Jelaidain is listed on SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 11 of 12 88 G3M5terA the golden chain, Osama Bin Laden is listed on the golden chain. And so, we just want clarity that you are not talking about those people THE COURT: That's correct MR. CARTER: Thank you. THE COURT: I am talking specifically about the requests that use the phrase " and seek those documents. " MR. CARTER: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: So, if there were other more specific 10 requests, those, of course, are not affected by that ruling. 11 MR. CARTER: Thank you, your Honor. 12 THE COURT: we can break for lunch now or we can deal 13 with the next one 14 Mr. Haefele? 15 MR. HAEFELE: I leave it up to you, your Honor. 16 THE COURT: Why don' t we move on. 17 Okay. Fire away, Mr. Haefele. 18 MR. HAEFELE: Your Honor, I think it is a good 19 afternoon at this point. We made it past, into the afternoon. 20 Robert Haefele from Motley Rice for the plaintiffs, 21 your Honor. I am here to talk about the plaintiff's motion 22 regarding Soliman Al-Buthe 23 Much of what Mr. Charter had to say about the other 24 charity officials applies also to Mr. Al-Buthe and I refer back 25 to the dialogue that you had with Mr. Carter for what was said SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 12 of 12113 G3M5 terA defendants and not Mr. Al-Buthe's property. I take a different view; namely, if there were documents in his possession that relate to those entities that are responsive, they have to be produced. The objections that have been asserted are essentially all boiler plate. The letter that I received essentially talks about several things that I don' t think are relevant, one of which is, as I discussed with Mr. Haefele and we all had some interchange about, the fact of delisting and also the collapse of the Oregon criminal case which occurred 10 for a number of reasons, none of which relate to whether 11 Mr. Al-Buthe is or is not somebody who supports terrorism in a 12 fashion that impacted the United States 13 Among other things, there is, as I think indicated in 14 a footnote, there was a different standard applicable to the 15 criminal case in terms of burden of proof, and obviously Grady 16 applies as a concept in the criminal case and apparently may 17 have been somewhat tortured and is not applicable in this 18 setting 19 So, I am going to require production of the documents 20 that the plaintiffs seek as well as a certification that 21 Mr. Al-Buthe has produced all the responsive documents in his 22 possession, custody or control. 23 So, that's my ruling regarding Mr. Al-Buthe. 24 MR. KABAT: Your Honor, one question? THE COURT: Yes, sure. 25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300

Exhibit B

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-2 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT B Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-2 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 6 1 H97s INRC 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X IN RE: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 03 MD 1570 (GBD) (SN) X New York, N. Y. September 7, 2017 3: 30 p. m. 10 Before: 11 HON. SARAH NETBURN 12 U. S. Magistrate Judge 13 APPEARANCES 1 4 SIMMONS HANLY CONROY Attorneys for the Burnett plaintiffs BY: ANDREA BIERSTEIN 15 16 KREINDLER & KREINDLER Attorneys for the Ashton plaintiffs 17 BY: ANDREW J. MAHONEY JAMES KREINDLER 18 COZEN O' CONNOR 19 Attorneys for Federal Insurance plaintiffs BY: SEAN P. CARTER 20 MOTLEY RICE 21 Attorneys for the Burnett plaintiffs BY: ROBERT T. HAEFELE 22 ANDERSON KILL 23 Attorneys for the O' Neill plaintiffs and putative class BY: BRUCE STRONG 24 ETHAN W. MIDDLEBROOKS 25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-2 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 6 10 that there is also, related to some of the individual defendants, a question about passports, both personal passports and governmental passports I' m not sure at this point a motion to compel is the right motion to be filing. It seems to me a motion for sanctions is the appropriate motion to be filing MR. CARTER: Your Honor, we wanted, obviously, to give the defendants an opportunity to cure the problems, and that is why we went into the level we did in the status report. I 10 think we agree, if they haven' t complied, that's the 11 appropriate recourse 12 THE COURT: Counsel, is there an intention to comply 13 any further with Judge Maas' orders? 14 MR. KABAT: With respect to the individual 15 defendants-16 THE COURT: I' m sorry. Put the microphone to you as 17 well 18 MR. KABAT: With respect to the individual defendants, 19 we had to wait until the World League completed the production 20 with them to be able to certify that all documents had been 21 produced and abeyances are involved and so forth, and that 22 production was completed two weeks ago. We submitted the 23 certification to our client for their review, and we hope to 24 have them sign within a week or two, certainly by the end of 25 the month SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case D 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-2 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 6 11 THE COURT: The certification will be provided in the next two weeks. What about with respect to passports? My understanding is that there was a response to one of the discovery demands that the officials were traveling primarily on official passports which were not in their possession I don' t understand why your clients can' t obtain a certified copy of their passports from the relevant government entity in order to produce that, and then there is 10 also a question about any personal passports that they may have 11 and travel on 12 MR. KABAT: Our client inquired about that, and we 13 have not been successful so far. We will keep on working on 14 it. I' m sorry. 15 THE COURT: The alternative, as I mentioned, I don' t 16 think a motion to compel the production is the right posture at 17 this point. You' ve been ordered to produce these documents 18 You failed to do so. 19 What I am going to do is set a deadline for the 20 sanctions motion. I' ll give you time to have one last 21 opportunity to cure, to produce these documents, but if they 22 can' t be, if they aren' t produced within the next 30 days, I 23 am going to invite a sanctions motion from the Plaintiffs' 24 Executive Committee 25 Today is September 7. Why don' t we set Friday, the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, PC (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 37502 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 6 12 6th of October, as a deadline for any sanctions motion with respect to those individual defendants. Is two weeks enough time to respond to that motion? Any opposition to that motion will be filed on 5 October 20, and if the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee wants to file a reply, that will be filed October 27 Who is here on behalf of Mr. Al-Buthe? MR. KABAT: I am. THE COURT: You as well? 10 Same question. I think there's been some productions 11 and certifications that Judge Maas previously ordered 12 MR. KABAT: We should be able to have the 13 certification within a week or two, or certainly by the end of 14 the month, and I am going to have to review the rest of the 15 documents they claim we haven' t produced to double-check again 16 what we have. It may be that he simply does not have those 17 documents. I need to double-check with our client on that 18 THE COURT: OK. If you can continue the 19 meet-and-confer with respect to all those individuals, 20 hopefully there will be a cure and the appropriate 21 certifications will be provided. To the extent your clients 22 are withholding any documents on privilege grounds, that needs 23 to be produced, a privilege log needs to be produced, I 24 understand that hasn' t been produced yet, and obviously 25 certified copies of both the official passport and any personal SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 37502 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 6 13 1 passport that would be in your clients' possession, that needs to be produced. Your time to cure is up until October 6, at which time the sanctions motion will be filed MR. KABAT: I would just note that Mr. Al-Buthe has 5 already submitted his passport. That is not an issue for him. THE COURT: Terrific. Thank you. Any issues with respect to obviously Dallah Avco, We already addressed motions to compel. I interpret the letter to say there is nothing further that the Executive Committee is 10 seeking. With respect to Mr. Jelaidan, I understand we are 11 trying to get the OFAC license issue squared away. I don' t 12 think there is anything for the court to do on that defendant 13 MR. CARTER: Your Honor, there were two issues 14 With regard to Dallah Avco, we thought there was some 15 ambiguity in the letter we received from Mr. Kry about the 16 scope of the search, for meetings within Dallah Avco about the 1 7 September 11 investigation pursuant to your Honor's order 18 I spoke to Mr. Kry. It sounds as though from his 19 explanation to me that they have searched for all potential 20 meetings, but we are just asking for clarification of that in 21 writing 22 THE COURT: Can you provide that? 23 MR. KRY: I' ll raise that with my client and provide 24 the appropriate clarification 25 THE COURT: If you can get that done in the next two SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P. C (212) 805-0300

Exhibit C

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT C Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) ECF Case In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 This document relates to: Ashton v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army 02-CV-6977 Burnett v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp, 03-CV-5738 Cantor Fitzgerald Associates, LP v. Akida Investment Co., Ltd., 04-CV-7065 Continental Casualty Co. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, 04-CV-05970 Euro Brokers, Inc v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp, 04-CV-07279 Federal Insurance Co v. Al Qaida, 03-CV-6978 Estate of O' Neill v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., 04-CV-1923 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DEFENDANT SOLIMAN H. S. AL-BUTHE THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES August 22, 2013 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 7 15. Please provide all documents relating to any meetings of officers, directors, trustees, shareholders, managers, boards, committees, andor internal bodies of Al Haramain, including without limitation, any agendas or meeting minutes. RESPONSE: 16. Please provide statements for all banking and financial accounts held by Al Haramain RESPONSE: 17. Please provide documents (including bank or financial statements) relating to all banking or financial accounts held by You or any member of your family that have been used to send, receive, or otherwise transfer Al Haramain Funds. RESPONSE: 18. Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, duties, and responsibilities (for Al Haramain or otherwise) concerning volunteers, delegations, or other groups or individuals active in Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Island of Comoros, Chechnya, Egypt Ethiopia, Europe Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Netherlands Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, and Yemen. RESPONSE: 19. Provide all documents relating to Your travel to the United States for any purpose, including without limitation copies of Your Saudi Arabia Passport B049614 and Saudi Arabia Passport C536660. 12 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 7 47. Please provide all documents relating to all accounts You hold or have held with or on behalf of Al Haramain, and/or all Al Haramain accounts over which You hold or have held any responsibility or authority, including signatory authority, including but not limited to the following accounts: A. Bank of America, Account number 28803-14895 (Ashland, OR Branch 2880); B. Bank of America, Account number 28803-1561 (Ashland, OR Branch 2880); C. Bank of America, Account number 28804-15615 (Ashland, OR Branch 2880). D. Bank of America, Account number 34733-86549 (Kansas City, MO); and E. Bank of America, Account number 34733-24381 (Springfield, MO); Capital One Corporation Account. RESPONSE: 48. Please provide all documents relating to all financial transactions or donations by You or Al Haramain or from any account in which You held a direct or beneficial interest, or over which you held signatory authority, involving individuals or entities Designated by the United States Government regardless of whether the individual or entity was Designated before or after the financial transaction or donation. RESPONSE: 49. Please provide all documents relating to any investigation, inquiry, review, audit, due diligence or analysis conducted by any United States state or federal governmental entity or any United States-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor (United States Investigator "), by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or any Saudi-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor (" Saudi Investigator "), or by any other 20 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 7 against such defendant Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, contracts, agreements, insurance policies, term sheets, or other records. RESPONSE: 58. Please provide all documents relating to any understanding or agreement between You and any individual, entity, and/or government, whereby such party has agreed to pay, indemnify, or reimburse You for any of the costs associated with defending this lawsuit, including legal fees and/or payments to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be entered in this action against You. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, contracts, agreements, insurance policies, term sheets, or other records. RESPONSE: 59. Provide all documents relating to all accounts in United States financial institutions (U. S. Accounts') held in Your personal capacity, on Your behalf, or by You as an official of a charity or business and/or any U. S. Accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including but not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect any communications between or among You and the U. S. financial institution, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, and any I documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from Your account. RESPONSE: 60. Please provide all documents relating to any investments made within the United States (U. S. Investments ") on Your behalf, either in Your personal capacity, in Your capacity as 24 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 7 a director, officer, trustee, advisor and/or member of a corporation, partnership, organization, or trust, or for Your benefit through a holding company, corporation, partnership, organization, trust or other entity. RESPONSE: 61. Please provide all documents relating to any filing submitted by You, or Your agent acting on Your behalf, to any local state and/or federal agency, including without limitation, the Internal Revenue Service, Securities Exchange Commission, Department of Justice, Department of Treasury, and the Office of Foreign Assets Control. RESPONSE: 62. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between companies owned by You and/or in which You held an equity interest, and Al Haramain. RESPONSE: 63. Please provide all documents relating to Your relationship with, communication with, andlor supervision, management or control over any of the entities listed below, including any subsidiary or branch office thereof including without limitation, correspondence, working papers, reports, memoranda (including, but not limited to, inter and intra-office communications, notes, diaries, logs, appointment books, calendars, messages (including, but not limited to, reports of telephone conversations and conferences), meeting minutes and lists of persons attending meetings. A. Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya Saudi Red Crescent 25 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-3 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 7 C. International Islamic Relief Organization D. Muslim World League World Assembly of Muslim Youth Islamic Assembly of North America G. Islamic Society of North America H. Council on American-Islamic Relations Muwafag Foundation RESPONSE: 64. Please provide all records relating to any contributions, donations, gifts, grants, Zakat, and/or any other financial or non-monetary support, to any of the co-defendant ostensible Charities' made by You, on Your behalf, at Your Direction, with Your authorization/approval, or by or on behalf of any foundations, trusts, committees and/or other entities () formed by You, (ii) funded by You (iii) established in Your name, and/or (iv) for which You held a position as director, officer, trustee or other position. If the contribution was made by wire transfer, please provide records identifying the name of the individual who sent the money, the bank from which the money was sent, the wire transfer number, the recipient of the funds, the bank which received the wire transfer and the bank account numbers of the sender and receiver. RESPONSE: 65. Please provide all records relating to any contributions, donations, gifts, grants, Zakat, and/or any other financial or non-monetary support, made by You, on Your behalf at Your Direction, with Your authorization/approval, or by or on behalf of any foundations, trusts, The term " co-defendant ostensible Charity " includes any part or branch of any defendant in 03 MDL 1570 that has represented itself as a charitable organization, including, in addition to Al Haramain, the Muslim World League, the International Islamic Relief Organization, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, Sana-Bell, and Sanabel al Kheer. 26

Exhibit D

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT D Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Kathleen Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al, Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Thomas Burnett Sr, et al v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp, et al, No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co, et al, v. Al Qaida, et al, No. 03 Civ. 6978 Euro Brokers Inc, et al, v. Al Baraka, et al, No. 04 Civ. 7279 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO ABDULLAH OMAR NASEEF DOCUMENTS THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES August 22, 2013 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 6 20. Please provide all documents relating to any delegation, commission, task force, or group You participated in during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, to assess conditions and needs both within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in other foreign countries, including without limitation, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe, Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine the Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, United States, and Yemen. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, copies of Your passports, visas, or other documents authorizing Your entry into those countries, ANSWER: 21. Please provide all documents You received during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, which describe, detail, or otherwise relate to delegations, commissions, task forces, or groups of other high-ranking representatives of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government to assess conditions and needs both within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in other foreign countries, including without limitation, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine the Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, United States, and Yemen. ANSWER: 18 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 6 ANSWER: 89. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 1997 please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Sudan. ANSWER: 90. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 2002, please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Afghanistan. ANSWER: 91. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and Mohammed Jamal Khalifa (a/k/a Abu Bara, including without limitation, all documents relating to Your role in appointing Khalifa to positions within the MWL and IIRO. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, Khalifa's personnel or employment files. ANSWER: 92. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and Wa el Hamza Jelaidan aka Abu Hasan al Madani, including without limitation, all documents relating to 41 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 6 95. Please provide all documents relating to any disciplinary action taken, or any decision to terminate any relationship with Khalifa or Jelaidan, including any individual or entity affiliated with those individuals, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations into possible links to the financing of terrorist organizations, and/or the support of violence or jihad. ANSWER: 96. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 97. Please provide all documents You and/or the Charities sent to, and/or received from, any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and/or the Charities and the any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 98. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of any of the Golden Chain-Related 43 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-4 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 6 Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, including any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 99. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the Charities, including any accounts over which the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 100. Please provide all documents relating to any investigations or inquiries conducted by any United States Investigator, Foreign Investigator, or KSA Investigator, into financial transactions linked to accounts held solely or jointly by any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 101. Please provide all documents relating to any decision to terminate any relationship with any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations 44

Exhibit E

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT E Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Thomas Burnett, Sr, et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp, et al No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co, et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Euro Brokers Inc, et al, v. Al Baraka, et al, No. 04 Civ. 7279 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO ABDULLAH AL OBAID THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES August 22, 2013 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 6 23. Please provide all documents authored, generated, or drafted by You during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, which describe, detail, or otherwise relate to the organizations' financial performance. Responsive documents shall include all financial reports or executive summaries submitted by You to: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, members of the Saudi royal family, the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Endowments, Da' wah and Guidance; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Endowments, Da wah and Guidance; and/or the Charities' governing bodies, including but not limited to, the MWL Constituent Council, the MWL General Secretariat, the IIRO Executive Council (a/k/a Board of Directors), and the IIRO Executive Committee ANSWER: 24. Please provide all documents relating to any delegation, commission, task force, or group You participated in during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, to assess conditions and needs both within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in other foreign countries, including without limitation, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine the Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, United States, and Yemen. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, copies of Your passports, visas, or other documents authorizing Your entry into those countries. ANSWER: 20 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 6 95. Please provide all documents You and/or the Charities sent to, and/or received from, the persons and/or entities identified in Attachment A, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and/or the Charities and those persons and/or entities. ANSWER: 96. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 1997, please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Sudan. ANSWER: 97. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 2002, please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Afghanistan. ANSWER: 98. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and Mohammed Jamal Khalifa (a/k/a Abu Bara). Responsive documents shall include but are not limited to, Khalifa's personnel or employment files. ANSWER: 44 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 6 102. Please provide all documents relating to any disciplinary action taken, or any decision to terminate any relationship with Khalifa or Jelaidan, including any individual or entity affiliated with those individuals, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations into possible links to the financing of terrorist organizations, and/or the support of violence or jihad. ANSWER: 103. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 104. Please provide all documents You and/or the Charities sent to, and/or received from, any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and/or the Charities and the any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 105. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of any of the Golden Chain-Related 46 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-5 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 6 Individuals, and/or any " individual or entity associated therewith, including any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 106. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the Charities, including any accounts over which the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 107. Please provide all documents relating to any investigations or inquiries conducted by any United States Investigator, Foreign Investigator, or KSA Investigator, into financial transactions linked to accounts held solely or jointly by any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 108. Please provide all documents relating to any decision to terminate any relationship with any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations 47

Exhibit F

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT F Case a 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 37506 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Kathleen Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al, Case No. 02 Civ, 6977 Thomas Burnett Sr, et al. v. Al Baraka Inv & Dev. Corp, et al, No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al v. Al Qaida, et al, No. 03 Civ. 6978 Continental Casualty Co. et al v. Al Qaeda, et al, No. 04 Civ. 5970 Euro Brokers Inc, et al, v. Al Baraka, et al, No. 04 Civ. 7279 PLAINTIFF S' FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO ABDULLAH AL TURKI THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES August 22, 2013 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 6 2 26. Please provide all documents authored, generated, or drafted by You during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, which describe, detail, or otherwise relate to the organizations' financial performance. Responsive documents shall include all financial reports or executive summaries submitted by You to: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; members of the Saudi royal family, the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs; the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Endowments, Da' wah and Guidance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Endowments, Da wah and Guidance; and/or the Charities' governing bodies, including but not limited to, the MWL Constituent Council, the MWL General Secretariat, the IIRO Executive Council (a/k/a Board of Directors), and the IIRO Executive Committee. ANSWER: 27. Please provide all documents relating to any delegation, commission, task force, or group You participated in during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, to assess conditions and needs both within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in other foreign countries, including without limitation, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine the Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, United States, and Yemen. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, copies of Your passports, visas, or other documents authorizing Your entry into those countries, ANSWER: 21 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 6 102. Please provide all documents You and/or the Charities sent to, and/or received from, the persons and/or entities identified in Attachment A, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and/or the Charities and those persons and/or entities. ANSWER: 103. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 1997, please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Sudan. ANSWER: 104. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 2002, please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Afghanistan. ANSWER: 105. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment financial charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and Mohammed Jamal Khalifa (aka Abu Bara). Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, Khalifa's personnel or employment files. ANSWER: 46 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 6 109. Please provide all documents relating to any disciplinary action taken, or any decision to terminate any relationship with Khalifa or Jelaidan, including any individual or entity affiliated with those individuals, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations into possible links to the financing of terrorist organizations, and/or the support of violence or jihad. ANSWER: 110. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 111. Please provide all documents You and/or the Charities sent to, and/or received from, any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and/or the Charities and the any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 112. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of any of the Golden Chain-Related 48 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-6 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 6 Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, including any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 113. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, andlor any individual or entity associated therewith, hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the Charities, including any accounts over which the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 114. Please provide all documents relating to any investigations or inquiries conducted by any Dr United States Investigator, Foreign Investigator, or KSA Investigator, into financial transactions linked to accounts held solely or jointly by any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 115. Please provide all documents relating to any decision to terminate any relationship with any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, as a result of financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations 49

Exhibit G

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT G Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Kathleen Ashton, et al v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army et al, Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Federal Insurance Co., et al v. Al Qaida, et al, No. 03 Civ. 6978 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al, No. 04 Civ. 5970 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO ADNAN BASHA THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES August 22, 2013 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 5 20. Please provide all documents relating to any delegation, commission, task force, or group You participated in during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, to assess conditions and needs both within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in other foreign countries, including without limitation, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Egypt Ethiopia, Europe Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Russia, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, United States, and Yemen. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, copies of Your passports, visas, or other documents authorizing Your entry into those Countries. ANSWER: 21. Please provide all documents relating to the 1997 delegation to Bosnia Herzegovina You participated in along with MWL Secretary-General Abdullah al Obaid to meet with Alija Itzetbegovic and other members of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina. ANSWER: 22. Please provide all documents You received during Your tenure as an official representative of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, which describe, detail, or otherwise relate to delegations, commissions, task forces, or groups of other high-ranking representatives of the Charities and/or Saudi Arabian government, to assess conditions and needs both within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in other foreign countries, including without 18 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 5 93. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 1997 please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Sudan. ANSWER: 94. From the period beginning January 1, 1988 through 2002, please provide all documents relating to any trips you took to Afghanistan. ANSWER: 95. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and Mohammed Jamal Khalifa (a/k/a Abu Bara). Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, Khalifa's personnel or employment files. ANSWER: 96. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and Wael Hamza Jelaidan (a/k/a Abu Hasan al Madani. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, Jelaidan's personnel or employment files. ANSWER: 42 Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-7 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 5 100. Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious, or other relationship between You and/or the Charities and any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 101. Please provide all documents You and/or the Charities sent to, and/or received from, any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between You and/or the Charities and the any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith. ANSWER: 102. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution You hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of any of the Golden Chain-Related Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, including any accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority. ANSWER: 103. Please provide all documents relating to any accounts in any banking or financial institution any of the Golden Chain-Related-Individuals, and/or any individual or entity associated therewith, hold or held jointly with, or on behalf of the Charities, including any 44

Exhibit H

EXHIBIT H Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page12ofof10 11 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y) Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Personal Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Injury and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers/Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC COZEN O’CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O’CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF August 31, 2017 The Honorable Sarah Netburn, U.S. Magistrate Judge United States District Court for the S.D.N.Y. Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse, Room 430 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Netburn: In accordance with the Court’s Order of July 28, 2017 (ECF No. 3662), the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees (PECs) write to advise the Court of the results of their preliminary review of the documents produced by the defendants who were subject to the June 16, 2017 document production deadline, and whether the Executive Committees’ anticipate filing any motions to compel as to those defendants. Initially, the PECs note that they have not had the opportunity to depose any of the individual defendants or representatives of any of the organizational defendants whose productions are addressed in this letter. As in any case, the PECs anticipate that testimony provided by the defendants and their representatives during upcoming depositions is likely to identify the existence of additional relevant documents that have not been produced. To the extent the parties are not able to reach agreement concerning the production of additional relevant documents identified during depositions, it may be necessary for plaintiffs to move to compel the production of such documents. However, for obvious reasons, this letter focuses only on anticipated motion practice based on the content of the document productions made to date. 1. Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obeid, Abdullah Mohsen al Turki and Adnan Basha Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page23ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 2 _______________________________________ Through its decision of April 16, 2013, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanded defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obeid, Abdullah Mohsen al Turki and Adnan Basha, for jurisdictional discovery. O'Neill v. Asat Trust Reg. (In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001), 714 F.3d 659, 678-679 (2d Cir. 2013). Defendants Naseef, Obaid, and Turki all served as senior officials of defendant Muslim World League (MWL). Defendant Basha served as a senior official of defendant International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), a subsidiary of the MWL. The Second Circuit authorized jurisdictional discovery in regards to plaintiffs’ allegations that they "controlled and managed some of [the purported charitable organizations that allegedly supported al Qaeda] and, through their positions of control, they allegedly sent financial and other material support directly to al Qaeda when al Qaeda allegedly was known to be targeting the United States." Id. Plaintiffs served jurisdictional discovery requests on August 22, 2013. In response, the four charity official defendants asserted numerous objections and argued that the documents plaintiffs sought were under the control of the charities themselves. On September 2, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion to compel directed to defendants Naseef, Obeid, Turki, and Basha (ECF Nos. 3024, 3129). That motion noted that the four defendants had collectively produced only 84 documents, and that the few documents that had been produced consisted principally of affidavits and other documents they previously filed with the Court in 2003 and 2005 in support of their initial motions to dismiss. As further detailed in that motion and the PECs’ related reply brief, the PECs urged that the four defendants must be in possession of additional materials responsive to plaintiffs’ document requests, and had the practical ability to compel the charities for which they worked to produce records relating to their activities and duties with those organizations. In response, the defendants principally argued that they were not personally in possession of any additional records relating to their roles as heads of the relevant charities, and were relying upon the productions of those charities to satisfy their separate discovery obligations.1 The defendants also objected to the scope of plaintiffs’ requests. In response, the PECs argued that the defendants had the practical ability to facilitate production by the charities of relevant and responsive documentation, and an independent obligation to do so. In addition, plaintiffs expressed their view that the individual charity defendants’ claim that they have no relevant and responsive records in their own possession concerning their activities with the charities did not seem plausible. On this final point, plaintiffs noted at oral argument on March 22, 2016, that the positions they held with the MWL and IIRO were prominent roles in two of the world’s largest Islamic institutions, in relation to which the individual officials traveled throughout the world, often in the company of senior Saudi government officials, and participated in and gave speeches at high profile international events and conferences. See Transcript of March 22, 2016 Hearing at pp. 71-72. The PECs expressed their skepticism that the individual officials had not retained a single document commemorating such prominent work. At a minimum, the PECs noted that the individual 1Because of this approach, discovery as to these defendants is inextricably tied to the discovery directed to MWL and IIRO, and those defendants’ document productions. Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page34ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 3 _______________________________________ defendants’ passports would reflect travel undertaken during their service with the organizations, and should have been produced in response to plaintiffs’ requests. At the hearing on March 22, 2016, Judge Maas recognized that the defendants’ passports "would seem to be something the charities would not have produced" and were responsive to several of plaintiffs’ requests. See id at p. 84. In addition, as interim steps to address the issues raised in plaintiffs’ motion to compel, Judge Maas directed the individual officials to provide a "sworn or affirmed certification from each of the four charity defendants that except to the extent to which they have specified that a document is being withheld, they have produced all documents responsive to the requests unless those documents are part of the productions of the MWL or IIRO." Judge Maas further directed the charity officials to provide a privilege log of any documents being withheld on the basis of privilege. On June 2, 2017, Alan Kabat, as counsel for the MWL and IIRO officials, sent a letter to plaintiffs’ counsel enclosing indexes for defendants Turki, Obeid, Naseef, and Basha, identifying documents within the productions of the MWL and IIRO that the individual defendants had determined to be responsive to the discovery requests directed to those individual defendants. In that letter, those defendants acknowledged the MWL and IIRO had not yet completed their document productions, and that the indexes would have to be supplemented upon completion of those productions. Mr. Kabat expressed his expectation to complete the necessary review and supplementation of the index "within one week of the completion of the MWL and IIRO’s final production." In that same letter, Mr. Kabat advised that "we understand that the individual defendants do not themselves have documents relating to their work at the charities, as those documents remain with the charities after their retirement." On the basis of this representation, we understand that the individual charity official defendants are maintaining their position that they are not in possession of any documents responsive to plaintiffs’ requests (presumably including their passports, which were a specific subject of discussion during the hearing), other than the 84 documents they have collectively produced to date. Finally, as to Judge Maas’ directive that the individual charity officials produce their passports, Mr. Kabat’s letter represented that "since they traveled on official passports, which the government retained after each trip, they do not have personal possession of those passports." The PECs understand this statement to indicate that the individual charity officials traveled on government or diplomatic passports in their capacities as the heads of the MWL and IIRO, and that the Saudi government retained possession of those governmental or diplomatic passports. There are several issues that need to be addressed with respect to the MWL and IIRO officials’ responses to plaintiffs’ document requests and the specific directives issued by the Court at the hearing on March 22, 2016. First, because the MWL and IIRO officials are relying upon the productions of those purported charities to respond to plaintiffs’ document requests directed to them individually, their compliance with their discovery obligations will depend on the sufficiency of the MWL’s and IIRO’s productions relating to their roles and work for those organizations. The MWL and IIRO received Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page45ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 4 _______________________________________ an extension to August 15, 2017 to complete their productions, and plaintiffs have not completed their review of those productions. However, based on the review conducted to date, the PECs do believe there are significant gaps and deficiencies in those productions, including as to the roles, duties and activities of the four charity officials with those organizations. Plaintiffs anticipate that any motion to compel directed to the MWL and IIRO relating to documents responsive to the requests served on the individual charity defendants would be directed to those individual defendants as well. Second, plaintiffs have not received the specific certification Judge Maas directed the charity officials to provide "that except to the extent to which they have specified that a document is being withheld, they have produced all documents responsive to the requests unless those documents are part of the productions of the MWL or IIRO." Counsel’s June 2, 2017 correspondence did include a statement that he "understands" that they do not have any documents in their personal files, and that all relevant materials are in the possession of the organizations for which they worked. But that statement does not meet the form or substantive requirements of the Court’s directive. The defendants should supplement their responses to plaintiffs’ document requests, to formally present those representations in those responses rather than in a letter from counsel, and include the specific certification required by the Court. To the extent any documents are being withheld on the basis of a privilege, including any claim of sovereign immunity, they should also provide a privilege log. Third, with respect to their passports, the MWL and IIRO officials have not explained what efforts, if any, they have undertaken to obtain copies of the relevant passports from the Saudi government. The roles each held with the MWL and IIRO have been described as government positions, as evidenced by the fact that they traveled in those capacities on "official" passports, and several of them have held other high level posts within the Saudi government throughout their careers. The nature of their roles for the Saudi government suggest that each may have the practical ability to obtain copies of their relevant passports from the government to assist in their defenses in this litigation, but there is no indication that they have undertaken any efforts to do so. Plaintiffs anticipate moving to compel them to do so, and also submit that they should be required to supplement their discovery responses to formally state the representations presented in counsel’s June 2, 2017 letter in those responses, and to also describe all efforts undertaken to obtain copies of the relevant passports. Plaintiffs also intend to move to compel the individual charity officials to produce any personal passports, as those may reflect relevant travel and would also be responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests and within the scope of the Court’s prior production order. Fourth, the charity officials’ indexes identifying documents in the productions of the MWL and IIRO that are responsive to document requests directed to them individually need to be updated, given the further productions by the MWL and IIRO. Soliman al-Buthe Through its decision on April 16, 2013, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the district court’s judgment insofar as it dismissed claims versus criminally indicted and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) defendant Soliman al-Buthe for jurisdictional discovery and remanded the claims as to al-Buthe for jurisdictional discovery. Al-Buthe served as a representative Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page56ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 5 _______________________________________ of defaulted defendant Al Haramain, including as an officer of Al Haramain’s United States branch office in Ashland, Oregon. Plaintiffs served jurisdictional discovery requests on August 22, 2013. Instead of producing documents responsive to plaintiffs’ discovery requests, defendant al-Buthe interposed myriad objections. On August 10, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion to compel (ECF Nos. 2990, 3111), which was the subject of a hearing before the Court on March 22, 2016. For the hearing, plaintiffs described the discovery sought from al-Buthe as falling generally into nine categories, including Category 1. Banking or other financial/transactional documents of al-Buthe or his family (particularly where used to transfer AH funds (RFP 17, 21, 48, 53, 59, 60), including investigations into any such accounts or transactions (by others or by al-Buthe) (RFP 49, 50, 51); Category 2. Banking or other financial/transactional documents of AH (RFP 16, 21, 47, 48, 49, 53), including investigations into any such accounts or transactions (by others or by al-Buthe) (RFP 49, 50, 51); Category 3. Al-Buthe’s indictment by USDOJ; investigations, his listing/delisting (including efforts to be delisted) and sanctions by US, UN, and others: • RFP 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32 (US indictment, asset freezing, designation/sanctions (including delisting efforts)); • RFP 24, 26, 27, 29, 30 (UN designation/sanctions (including delisting efforts and delisting)); • RFP 29 (Other sanctions imposed on al-Buthe); • RFP 21-22 (Documents regarding the subject of his indictment and/or listings) • RFP 49, 50, 51 (Investigations into any AH/al-Buthe accounts or transactions (by others or by al-Buthe)); Category 4. Internal inquiries into allegations of criminality, corruption, extremism, financial irregularities, suspicious activities, terrorism links, or support for violent jihad) (RFP 50, 51, 52); Category 5. Items particularly personal to al-Buthe – RFP 1 (bio/resume); RFP 18 (association with groups in designated locations); RFP 19 (travel docs, passports, etc.); RFP 61 (al-Buthe’s filings with local, state, federal agencies); Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page67ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 6 _______________________________________ Category 6. Documents in al-Buthe’s possession regarding any AH entity (including the Quran Foundation in Oregon), including any AH property in the US (including property/mosque in Springfield, MO) (RFP 2-15, 28, 33, 34, 43, 44, 46); Category 7. Al Haramain designations/sanctions/office closures/asset disposition by US, UN, KSA, etc. (35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 45, 54); Category 8. Interrelationships among, or familiarity with terrorist propensity of, other alleged co-conspirators (RFP 18, 56, 57, 58, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 78); and Category 9. Interrelationships among Al Haramain and other companies or properties in which he had an interest (RFP 42, 62, 75, 76, 78). At the conclusion of the portion of the hearing addressing plaintiffs’ motion as to al-Buthe, the Court ruled from the bench, overruling al-Buthe’s objections and ordering as follows: "I am going to require production of the documents that the plaintiffs seek as well as a certification that Mr. Al-Buthe has produced all the responsive documents in his possession, custody or control." Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 113:19-22. In a letter with accompanying attachments, dated June 14, 2017, well over a year after the Court’s unambiguous direction to produce all of the documents plaintiffs had sought and to certify that he had done so with regard to all documents to which he had access, al-Buthe produced a set of 2,918 pages of documents. However, the responses that accompanied the letter interposed a slate of objections that had long been overruled or waived, asserted throughout many of his responses that "Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession," failed to provide the referenced court-ordered certification, and failed to include a log identifying documents that he withheld premised on the asserted (though overruled or belatedly raised) objections. Plaintiffs anticipate filing an additional, follow-up motion, asserting that al-Buthe has not met his discovery obligations under the rules and as ordered by the Court following the hearings on March 22, 2016. Review of documents produced to date indicate that al-Buthe has not produced documents responsive to each category for which he was ordered to respond; he has not identified documents withheld; and he has not provided the court-ordered certification. Dallah Avco The PECs previously filed a motion to compel as to Dallah Avco on February 8, 2016 (ECF No. 3211, 3314), and Your Honor heard oral argument on that motion on January 18, 2017. At the conclusion of argument, Your Honor directed Dallah Avco (1) to produce the Ercan documents it had previously identified; (2) to search for and produce certain calendar entries for relevant Dallah Avco employees for periods surrounding the 1995 decision to second Omar al Bayoumi to the ANSS project, and the 1999 decisions to deny and then grant an extension of Bayoumi’s Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page78ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 7 _______________________________________ secondment; and (3) to search for and produce any Dallah Avco Board minutes concerning the 9/11 investigations in early 2002. Robert Kry, counsel for Dallah Avco, sent plaintiffs a letter on June 16, 2017, outlining the steps Dallah Avco had undertaken in response to the Court’s directives. In that letter, Mr. Kry advised that Dallah Avco had searched for, but not located any calendar entries for the three Dallah Avco representatives who were the subject of the Court’s Order. As to the Court’s directive that Dallah Avco produce Board minutes relating to discussions of the 9/11 investigations, Mr. Kry advised that "[u]pon investigation, we determined that, due to its corporate structure, Dallah Avco does not have a Board of Directors. Accordingly, we instead searched for minutes of any other Dallah Avco meetings in which Mr. Kamel [referring to Alawi Kamel] participated on behalf of Dallah Avco concerning the 9/11 investigations in early 2002. That search did not identify any responsive documents, so we have nothing to produce." Given the wording of Mr. Kry’s letter concerning the search for Board minutes, plaintiffs have some question as to whether there may be relevant Dallah Avco meeting minutes pertaining to the 9/11 investigations in early 2002, relating to meetings in which Mr. Kamel did not personally participate. Plaintiffs are seeking clarification from counsel for Dallah Avco on that issue, and to the extent such records do exist, plaintiffs believe that they should be produced. Aside from that issue, and recognizing that plaintiffs already moved to compel as to Dallah Avco, plaintiffs do not anticipate any further motions to compel directed to Dallah Avco at this time. Wa’el Jelaidan Plaintiffs filed their first set of request for production of documents directed to defendant Jelaidan on June 13, 2006, and have subsequently filed numerous motions seeking to compel defendant Jelaidan to comply with his most basic discovery obligations. Those motions resulted in numerous court orders directing defendant Jelaidan to undertake meaningful efforts to collect and produce documents responsive to plaintiffs’ requests, including several specific directives that Jelaidan undertake diligent efforts to obtain banking and financial documents for accounts held in his name or in which he held a beneficial interest, including any accounts that were frozen as a result of his terrorist designations by the United States and United Nations. Defendant Jelaidan failed to do so, resulting in the imposition of a monetary sanction against him. In his October 28, 2013 Memorandum Decision and Report and Recommendation relating to that monetary sanction, Judge Maas found that Jelaidan exhibited a "continued unwillingness to participate fairly in discovery" over seven years, and that Jelaidan had "willfully disregarded his discovery obligations and acted in bad faith." See Memorandum Decision and Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 2789, at pp. 9, 14. After the Court imposed that monetary sanction, plaintiffs came into possession of information, contained in documents produced by co-defendants Yassin al Kadi, indicating that defendant Jelaidan had successfully obtained records relating to certain of his bank accounts, including accounts held at Faisal Finance in Switzerland, that he had never produced to plaintiffs, despite the Court’s numerous orders directing him to produce those specific documents. By letter motion dated August 10, 2015, the PECs bought this additional information to the Court’s Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page89ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 8 _______________________________________ attention, and requested leave from Judge Maas to file further motions seeking additional monetary sanctions against Jelaidan, based on his apparent misrepresentations to the Court and failure to produce documents that were in fact in his possession. At the discovery conference on March 22, 2016, Judge Maas authorized plaintiffs to do so. Tr. of Mar. 22, 2016, at 164. However, Your Honor has since directed plaintiffs to refrain from filing that motion, while the issues surrounding the issuance of the license by OFAC for payment of the prior sanction had been resolved. This Court has directed Jelaidan’s counsel, Martin McMahon, to file monthly status reports concerning his efforts to obtain a license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to authorize payment of the monetary sanction imposed on Jelaidan for violation of his discovery obligations. One of those recent status reports concerning Mr. McMahon’s efforts to obtain the OFAC license, included as an exhibit a June 19, 2017 email to the licensing division of the Office of Foreign Asset Control (ECF No. 3635). The email indicates that Mr. McMahon had "attached below documents from Faisal Finance in Switzerland (noting my client’s bank account numbers with the institution’s last known amount with the bank) and a translated copy (with the original) of a letter from the Attorney General of Switzerland that lists his Citi Bank account number and information." The records included as attachments to the correspondence were not included in Mr. McMahon’s filings with the Court. Plaintiffs were unsure whether the documents included as attachments to the June 19, 2017 correspondence with OFAC have been produced by Jelaidan to plaintiffs. Accordingly, plaintiffs wrote to Mr. McMahon on June 26, 2017 to request that he provide copies of the attachments that were sent to OFAC relating to defendant Jelaidan’s accounts at Faisal Finance and Citi Bank. Mr. McMahon did not respond to that email request. Plaintiffs are reiterating that request here. The PECs do not want to waste the Court’s time by filing additional motions to compel the production of documents that the Court has already directed defendant Jelaidan to produce, and also are mindful of the Court’s directive that the PECs refrain from filing any additional motions for sanctions as to Jelaidan until the issue surrounding the current request for an OFAC license have been resolved. At the same time, the PECs do not want to relinquish any rights to obtain appropriate relief for Jelaidan’s continuing defiance of the Court’s rulings. The PECs propose to defer discussions concerning the appropriate next steps as to defendant Jelaidan until after the issues relating to the OFAC license have been resolved. Yassin al Kadi Plaintiffs served document demands on counsel for Yasin Abdullah Kadi ("Kadi") on August 15, 2013 and after receiving multiple objections, began receiving documents over the next year until December 2014 when Kadi’s counsel stated that they were finished with their production. On May 6, 2015 the PECs served Kadi with a good faith letter to identify production deficiencies and served a supplement document request. Counsel agreed to make another production and informed it would take time. Kadi next began making periodic productions over the next two years claiming once again, that he had finished on March 30, 2017. While thousands of pages were received, many of them were not responsive or irrelevant, and many did not indicate to which Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed 08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page 910ofof1011 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 9 _______________________________________ demand they purported to be responsive. Nonetheless, once Kadi’s counsel indicated they were finished with their production on March 30, 2017 the PECs attempted to narrow the gaps in the production to identify areas where documents appeared to be missing. In a July 20, 2017 letter the PECs identified the following areas of deficiencies: documents relating to the KSA’s investigation of Kadi and the freezing of his assets in the KSA and several countries around the world; Kadi’s relationship with specific charities Muwafaq, Al Haramain Islamic Foundation ("AHIF"), the IIRO, SHC and the SJRC; Kadi’s relationship with Osama bin Laden and Wadi al Aqiq and al Qaeda companies in the Sudan such as Solano, Adiyat Trading, East African Grains, and Rowad Development and many more; certain Shamal Bank accounts and information regarding Kadi’s beneficial interest in the bank and investment arm; documents reflecting Kadi’s relationships with Wael Jelaidan, Adel Batterjee, and others; and all FOIA correspondence and FOIA responses. Counsel for Kadi responded to the good faith meet & confer request and addressed only the gaps from the Muwafaq activities by claiming that Kadi was under no obligation to preserve documents relating to the claims in the litigation until he became aware of them and many of the requests ask for documents that pre-date the September 11 attacks by many years. Counsel did not state that any documents were destroyed and in fact did produce some documents from as early as 1990, largely from Bosnia but very little with respect to activities in the al Qaeda centric areas of operation in Sudan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Counsel also notes that the Albanian government seized Muwafaq records in Albania and Kosovo. Kadi’s counsel also indicated that the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused to respond to Kadi’s request to unfreeze his assets as a matter of national security. Kadi produced thousands of documents regarding his frozen assets and his attempt to have them unfrozen in the United States, United Kingdom, the European Union, Switzerland, Turkey, Albania and the United Nations; but strangely, nothing about his attempts to unfreeze his assets in Saudi Arabia nor anything regarding Saudi Arabia’s investigation of Kadi. Another topic addressed by counsel in the meet & confer was the FOIA demands, which Kadi argued the plaintiffs’ discovery demands did not specifically request, despite Judge Maas’ directive that "Defendants are directed to produce any responsive FOIA communications that they previously have withheld on the basis that they are protected by the work product doctrine." (ECF No. 2730 filed 6/12/13) and that all parties "update their written responses to their adversaries’ FOIA requests.…" (ECF No. 2837 filed 2/19/14). Plaintiffs produced all relevant FOIA applications and responses and understood that all defendants were obligated to do the same. Plaintiffs takes issue with the over broad privilege log objections Kadi has served. Likewise, Plaintiffs have produced to Kadi all non-privileged documents in our possession responsive to Kadi’s requests and where feasible, identified which documents were specific to a Kadi request, and also provided documents of a more general nature that may arguably be responsive subject to connection, in prosecuting our claims against Kadi. 2 The contention interrogatories 2 The PECs have made two supplemental productions in the last few months, on June 16, 2017 and August 15, 2017, of documents received more recently, including in response to long pending FOIA requests. The PECs have not completed indexing those productions, but are doing so. However, in response to an inquiry from counsel for defendant Kadi, the PECs identified documents in the June 16, 2017 production that related Case Case1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document Document3750-8 3713 Filed Filed08/31/17 10/06/17 Page Page10 11ofof10 11 The Honorable Sarah Netburn August 31, 2017 Page 10 _______________________________________ served by Kadi on plaintiffs are pre-mature and Judge Maas agreed that those should wait for a later time. Plaintiffs anticipate a motion to compel will be necessary to address the production gaps that were addressed in counsel’s letter response and those that were not addressed at all in that response, as well as several documents listed on the privilege log. Pirouz Sedaghaty (a/k/a Pete Seda) As the Court is aware, proceedings as to defendant Pirouz Sedaghaty have been stayed, for the moment, by virtue of his bankruptcy proceeding in Oregon. At the time the stay was imposed, the Court had found Mr. Sedaghaty was non-compliant with his discovery obligations and imposed financial sanctions for that non-compliance (which remained unsatisfied in light of the stay). So long as the MDL proceedings remain stayed as to Mr. Sedaghaty, plaintiffs intend to comply with the stay and will refrain from filing any motions against him in the MDL. Respectfully submitted, COZEN O’CONNOR MOTLEY RICE LLC By:/s/Sean P. Carter By:/s/Robert T. Haefele SEAN P. CARTER ROBERT T. HAEFELE For the Plaintiffs Exec. Committees For the Plaintiffs Exec. Committees cc: The Honorable George B. Daniels, via ECF All Counsel of Record via ECF to defendant Kadi and related individuals and associates. The PECs also advised that the August 15, 2017 production consisted overwhelmingly of records obtained from the physical records of the National Archives relating to the work of two of the 9/11 Commission’s investigative teams. As plaintiffs advised defense counsel, the National Archives does not maintain a comprehensive online database of all 9/11 Commission records that have been released to date, and certain of the records are available only in physical form at the National Archives. Several years ago, plaintiffs conducted a review of the then-available records at the National Archives, and retrieved those relevant to the litigation, which were produced previously. Plaintiffs recently received indications that additional records may have been released in the physical files at the National Archives, and therefore hired a third party vendor to visit the National Archives and collect and scan in their entireties all records relating to two of the relevant 9/11 Commission investigative teams. The vendor completed that work on August 15, 2017, and the PECs arranged for the vendor to produce them to the defendants that same day. Given the previous efforts undertaken to collect records from the National Archives and production of those records, plaintiffs anticipate that the vast majority of the records received from the third party vendor on August 15, 2017 were produced previously, and to the extent responsive to a defendant’s document requests would have been so identified. However, the PECs are reviewing the August 15, 2017 production and will identify any additional documents responsive to defendants’ discovery requests.

Exhibit I

EXHIBIT I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1775 T STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 DEVIN WRIGLEY PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM By Email June 2, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL 1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the document indexes for Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Naseef (combined in one file), and for Dr. Basha. These are in Word format, and can be readily exported to Excel. Since the first three defendants were officers of MWL (all are now retired), the responsive documents are in the possession of the MWL, and were produced by the MWL as part of its merits document production. For Dr. Basha, who is retired from the IIRO, the responsive documents are in the possession of the IIRO, and were produced by the IIRO as part of its merits document production. We understand that the individual defendants do not themselves have documents relating to their work at the charities, as those documents remained with the charities after their retirement. Further, since they travelled on official passports, which the government retained after each trip, they do not have personal possession of those passports. All four defendants continue to maintain their objections to the jurisdictional discovery document requests as asserted in their initial responses on November 11, 2013, including that many of the requests exceed the scope of jurisdictional discovery, and are not relevant to determining personal jurisdiction pursuant to the Second Circuit’s remand decision. Subject to and without waiving those objections, a subset of the MWL’s and IIRO’s document production Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-9 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 3 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire June 2, 2017 Page 2 of 2 is or may be responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to these four individuals, as set forth on the attached indexes. We have tried to be overinclusive in indexing the documents, as many documents (or ranges of documents) can be responsive to multiple jurisdictional discovery document requests, given the broad and overlapping nature of those requests. However, not all of the MWL and IIRO documents were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests, so these indexes only include those that we determined were responsive to those requests. For Drs. Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, and Naseef, note that part of the early MWL production was Bates-stamped with "IIRO" numbers even though it consisted of MWL documents (i.e., the January 10 and 18, 2012 productions). The subset of the MWL documents indexed herein, comprising at least 80,050 documents (or groups of closely related documents), are responsive to at least 51 of the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to each of those three defendants. For Dr. Basha, the subset of the IIRO documents indexed herein, comprising at least 52,600 documents (or groups of closely related documents), are responsive to at least 45 of the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to him. Finally, there is one remaining tranche of MWL and IIRO documents that is being reviewed and indexed, and we hope to have those reviewed for the individual defendants’ jurisdictional discovery document requests within one week of the completion of the MWL’s and IIRO’s final production. Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel

Exhibit J

EXHIBIT J Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 44 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________) IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001) No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(SN)) ________________________________________________) DEFENDANT SOLIMAN H.S. AL-BUTHE’S SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Defendant Soliman H.S. Al-Buthe ("Mr. Al-Buthe" or "Defendant"), through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Rule 34(b)(2), provides his supplemental objections and responses to Plaintiffs’ First Set of Jurisdictional Requests for Production of Documents (Aug. 22, 2013). GENERAL OBJECTIONS 1. Defendant objects to plaintiffs’ "Definitions" and Document Requests insofar as they: (a) request information or identification of documents concerning confidential communications between defendant and his attorneys, on the grounds that the information sought is protected under the attorney/client privilege; (b) request information or identification of documents prepared by defendant’s counsel for their own use, or prepared by defendant or defendant’s witnesses for use by defendant’s counsel, on the grounds that the information sought is protected from disclosure by the attorney work-product doctrine; (c) seek to enlarge defendant’s obligation to respond to discovery beyond the obligations established by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court; or 1 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 44 (d) are overbroad, vague, ambiguous, unduly burdensome, not limited to the subject matter of this litigation, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible information, and/or do not specify the information sought with sufficient particularity. 2. Defendant objects to the Document Requests, including the definitions and instructions included therein, to the extent that they go beyond the limited scope of the jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17, including by improperly seeking merits discovery. See In re Terrorist Attacks (Asat Trust Reg., et al.), 714 F.3d 659, 678-79 (2d Cir. 2013), petition for reh’g denied (June 10, 2013), cert. denied, 573 U.S. ___, 134 S. Ct. 2870 (2014) (limited scope of jurisdictional discovery); Case Management Order No. 2, ¶ 17 (ECF No. 247) (June 16, 2004) ("As to any defendant that has filed a motion to dismiss … for lack of personal jurisdiction, merits discovery shall not take place until such jurisdictional motion has been resolved by this Court"). 3. Defendant objects to the Document Requests, including the definitions and instructions included therein, since the burden and expense outweigh any potential benefits. See (888) Justice, Inc. v. Just Enter., Inc., No. 06 CV 6410 (GBD), 2007 WL 2398504, at *3 n.4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2007) (denying application for additional jurisdictional discovery; "discovery need not be granted to allow plaintiff to engage in an unfounded fishing expedition for jurisdictional basis."); Spina v. Our Lady of Mercy Med. Ctr., No. 97 Civ. 4661 (RCC), 2001 WL 630481, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 7, 2001) (parties are prohibited from engaging in a "fishing expedition" or to "roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so."). 4. Defendant objects to the Document Requests, including the definitions and instructions included therein, since the document requests are overly broad, unduly burdensome 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 44 and/or oppressive due to the volume of materials sought. See Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the So. Dist. of Iowa, 482 U.S. 522, 546 (1987) ("American courts, in supervising pretrial proceedings, should exercise special vigilance to protect foreign litigants from the danger that unnecessary, or unduly burdensome discovery may place them in a disadvantageous position."); id. ("Objections to'abusive’ discovery that foreign litigants advance should therefore receive the most careful consideration."); see generally MANUAL FOR COMPLEX LITIGATION, § 11.494, at 109-10 (4th ed. 2004) ("The additional cost of foreign discovery may increase the danger that it will be used for an improper purpose, such as to burden or harass.... Comity also dictates that American courts take into account special problems confronted by the foreign litigant because of its nationality or location and any sovereign interests expressed by a foreign state."). 5. Defendant objects to the Document Requests, including the definitions and instructions included therein, to the extent that they seek documents or information concerning communications by, with, or from the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or its agencies, instrumentalities, officers, and employees, since such documents and information are the exclusive property of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is entitled to sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. See In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, 538 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 557 U.S. 935 (2009); In re Terrorist Attacks (Saudi Joint Relief Committee, et al.), 714 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. 2013), petition for reh’g denied (June 10, 2013). 6. Defendant objects to the Document Requests, including the definitions and instructions included therein, to the extent that they seek documents or information that are the business records of the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. (USA) ("Al Haramain USA") or the Al Haramain Foundation (Saudi Arabia) ("Al Haramain Saudi Arabia"), since those records 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 44 are the corporate property of those entities, and Defendant lacks personal possession of those records. Moreover, Al Haramain USA has already produced their relevant business records in this litigation. 7. Defendant objects to the Document Requests, including the definitions and instructions included therein, to the extent that they seek information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding. See Klinghoffer v. S.N.C. Achille Lauro, 937 F.2d 44, 52 (2d Cir. 1991) ("personal jurisdiction depends on the defendant’s contacts with the forum state at the time the lawsuit was filed"); In re Ski Train Fire in Kaprun, Austria on November 11, 2000, 342 F. Supp. 2d 207, 213 n.44 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (contacts "occurred after the complaint was filed on June 27, 2001, and are thus irrelevant for determining personal jurisdiction," since the "‘fair warning’ requirement of due process cannot be satisfied by post-complaint activities"). 8. Defendant has made a diligent and reasonable search and inquiry for the information requested. Any response contained herein, however, is given with the understanding that Defendant and his attorneys are still conducting discovery and investigation in connection with this action. Defendant’s responses are therefore without waiver of, or prejudice to, its right to later use additional information not set forth or referred to in this response. In addition, any response contained herein is made with the express reservation of all rights pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court to supplement or amend these responses or to present evidence either discovered subsequent to the date hereof, or the significance of which is later discovered. 9. The above-stated General Objections are hereby incorporated in each of Defendant’s following responses to specific requests, whether or not expressly repeated in response to a particular request. 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 44 DOCUMENT REQUESTS DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 1: Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to Your employment history from 1980 to the present, including without limitation, any and all resumes, curricula vitae, biographies, abstracts, media reports, digests, summaries, employment contracts, and/or outlines. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 1: Defendant objects that this Request is overly broad; improperly seeks documents relating to his employment with the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which has sovereign immunity; improperly seeks business records of Al Haramain USA or other entities; improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Document Bates-stamped Al-Buthe 0001. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 2: Please provide all documents illustrating, describing, or otherwise relating to the formation, organizational structure, purpose, date and location of incorporation, duration of existence, administration, governance, and long-term strategic decision-making of Al Haramain, including but not limited to articles of incorporation, by-laws, corporate charters, mission statements, statements of purpose, constitutions, documents relating to the duties and powers of any officers, boards and/or committees and any other related writing. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 2: Defendant objects that this Request is overly broad; improperly seeks business records of Al Haramain USA, Al Haramain Saudi Arabia, or other entities; improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 9 of 44 possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 2: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Documents Bates-stamped Al-Buthe 000158-000928; Al-Buthe 000969-000986; Al-Buthe 001008-001046; Al-Buthe 001066-001084. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 3: Please provide all documents illustrating, describing, or otherwise relating to Al Haramain’s initial capitalization and subsequent funding. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 3: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. Other responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 4: Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to any relationship between You and Al Haramain, including without limitation, all documents relating to all positions You held or hold within Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 4: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 4: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Supplemental Objections and Response to Request No. 2; see also Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 5: Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, duties, and responsibilities for Al Haramain. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 10 of 44 OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 5: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 5: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Supplemental Objections and Response to Request No. 2; see also Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 6: For each position You held within Al Haramain, whether held formally or informally, please provide an organizational chart identifying the position within Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 6: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 7: Please provide all documents relating to Your role in the establishment, organization, funding, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control of Al Haramain, including without limitation, appointment, direction, and/or termination of personnel, selection of committee/board members or other officers, accounting, internal or external auditing, banking and financial transactions, fundraising, and actual distribution of financial and non-monetary support to charitable designees. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 7: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 4: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Supplemental Objections 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 11 of 44 and Response to Request No. 2; see also Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 8: Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, duties, and responsibilities as a fundraiser for Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 8: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 9: Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, duties, responsibilities, supervision, management, and/or control over Al Haramain’s purchasing, selling, transferring, or otherwise disposing of real and/or personal property or assets. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 9: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 10: Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to Your authority, role, responsibility, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control over Al Haramain’s various committees, including without limitation, Al Haramain’s Americas, IT, Zakat, Audit, and Shariah Committees. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 10: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 11: 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 12 of 44 Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, responsibility, oversight, supervision, management, control of, or distribution of Al Haramain Funds. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 11: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 12: Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, and/or responsibility in determining and/or recommending which entities or individuals receive financial and/or non-monetary support from Al Haramain and the purpose for such disbursements. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 12: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 13: Please provide all documents relating to the establishment, duties, obligations, objectives, membership, composition and/or authority of any committees, boards, and/or internal bodies of Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 13: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 14: Please provide all documents identifying each officer, director, trustee, shareholder, board member, committee member, and/or volunteer of Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 14: 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 13 of 44 See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 14: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Supplemental Objections and Response to Request No. 2; see also Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 15: Please provide all documents relating to any meetings of officers, directors, trustees, shareholders, managers, boards, committees, and/or internal bodies of Al Haramain, including without limitation, any agendas or meeting minutes. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 15: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 16: Please provide statements for all banking and financial accounts held by Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 16: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 17: Please provide documents (including bank or financial statements) relating to all banking or financial accounts held by You or any member of Your family that have been used to send, receive, or otherwise transfer Al Haramain Funds. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 17: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 14 of 44 foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 17: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 001085-001095; Al-Buthe 001147-001155; see also ALR-1, ALR-1a, ALR-2 (produced by Al Haramain USA). DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 18: Please provide all documents relating to Your authority, role, duties, and responsibilities (for Al Haramain or otherwise) concerning volunteers, delegations, or other groups or individuals active in Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Island of Comoros, Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe, Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, Turkey, and Yemen. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 18: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 19: Provide all documents relating to Your travel to the United States for any purpose, including without limitation copies of Your Saudi Arabia Passport B049614 and Saudi Arabia Passport C536660. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 19: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 19: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000002-000020; Al-Buthe 000021-000023; Al-Buthe 000024-000027. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 20: 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 15 of 44 Please provide all documents relating to Your indictment in February 2005 by the United States Department of Justice. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 20: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 20: Defendant was never served with the indictment. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see also Al-Buthe 001085-001095. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 21: Please provide all documents related any funds or donation provide to Al Haramain by the Mahmoud Talaat El Fiki (a/k/a Feki) through an Al Haramain account at Bank of America in Ashland, Oregon. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 21: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 21: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 001085-001095; Al-Buthe 001129-001159. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 22: Please provide all documents relating to the search of Al Haramain property in Ashland, Oregon, conducted by U.S. authorities. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 22: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 16 of 44 responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 23: Please provide all documents relating to the determination of the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control’s ("OFAC") to freeze/block the assets of Al Haramain’s branch office in the United States. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 23: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 23: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000028; Al-Buthe 000029-000044; Al-Buthe 000045-000047; Al-Buthe 000048-000049; Al-Buthe 000050-000051; Al-Buthe 000052-000053; Al-Buthe 000054-000096; Al-Buthe 000097-000098; Al-Buthe 000099-000133; Al-Buthe 000134-000157; Al-Buthe 000158-000177; Al-Buthe 000178-000928; Al-Buthe 000929-000933; Al-Buthe 000934-000959; Al-Buthe 000960-000962; Al-Buthe 000963-000964; Al-Buthe 000965-000967. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 24: Please provide all documents relating to the United Nations Security Council’s Al Qaida Sanctions Committee’s placement of You on the United Nations 1267 Sanctions List on September 28, 2004. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 24: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 24: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000968; Al-Buthe 000969-000986; Al-Buthe 000987-000990; Al-Buthe 000991; Al-Buthe 000992-000994; Al-Buthe 000995-000996; Al-Buthe 000997-001000; Al-Buthe 001001-001007; Al-Buthe 001008-001046; Al-Buthe 001047-001061; Al-Buthe 001062-001063; Al-Buthe 001064; Al-Buthe 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 17 of 44 001065. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 25: Please provide all documents relating to Your Designation as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist ("SDGT") by The U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control ("OFAC"), on September 9, 2004. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 25: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 25: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000028; Al-Buthe 000029-000044; Al-Buthe 000045-000047; Al-Buthe 000048-000049; Al-Buthe 000050-000051; Al-Buthe 000052-000053; Al-Buthe 000054-000096; Al-Buthe 000097-000098; Al-Buthe 000099-000133; Al-Buthe 000134-000157; Al-Buthe 000158-000177; Al-Buthe 000178-000928; Al-Buthe 000929-000933; Al-Buthe 000934-000959; Al-Buthe 000960-000962; Al-Buthe 000963-000964; Al-Buthe 000965-000967. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 26: Please provide all documents relating to any communication between You, or on Your behalf, and any representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia concerning (a) the United Nations Security Council’s Al Qaida Sanctions Committee’s placement of You on the United Nations 1267 Sanctions List or (b) the Designation of You as an SDGT by OFAC. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 26: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 27: Please provide all documents relating to, including any communication between You, or on Your behalf, and any representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, concerning terms or restrictions imposed on You (e.g., confinement, travel restrictions, employment restrictions, restrictions on financial transactions) by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including without 14 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 18 of 44 limitation as a result of (a) the United Nations Security Council’s Al Qaida Sanctions Committee’s placement of You on the United Nations 1267 Sanctions List, (b) the Designation of You as an SDGT by OFAC, or (c) any concerns that You provided support to al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, or any other terrorist entity. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 27: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 28: Please provide any documents regarding the oversight of Al Haramain by the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 28: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 29: Please provide all documents relating to any sanctions imposed upon You by the United States, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, United Nations, or any other nation or international body. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 29: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 29: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000028; Al-Buthe 000029-000044; Al-Buthe 000045-000047; Al-Buthe 000048-000049; Al-Buthe 000050-000051; Al-Buthe 000052-000053; Al-Buthe 000054-000096; Al-Buthe 000097-000098; Al-Buthe 000099-000133; Al-Buthe 000134-000157; Al-Buthe 000158-000177; Al-Buthe 000178-000928; Al-Buthe 000929-000933; Al-Buthe 000934-000959; Al-Buthe 000960-000962; Al-Buthe 000963-000964; Al-Buthe 000965-000967; Al-Buthe 000968; Al-Buthe 000969-000986; Al-Buthe 000987-000990; Al-Buthe 000991; Al-Buthe 000992-000994; Al-Buthe 000995-000996; Al-Buthe 000997-001000; Al-Buthe 001001-001007; Al-Buthe 001008-001046; Al-15 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 19 of 44 Buthe 001047-001061; Al-Buthe 001062-001063; Al-Buthe 001064; Al-Buthe 001065. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 30: Please provide all documents originating from You, or on Your behalf, or received by You relating to Your delisting from the United Nations 1267 Sanctions List on February 10, 2013 by the United Nations Security Council’s Al Qaida Sanctions Committee, including but not limited to all communications to or from You concerning any effort to be delisted. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 30: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 30: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000968; Al-Buthe 000969-000986; Al-Buthe 000987-000990; Al-Buthe 000991; Al-Buthe 000992-000994; Al-Buthe 000995-000996; Al-Buthe 000997-001000; Al-Buthe 001001-001007; Al-Buthe 001008-001046; Al-Buthe 001047-001061; Al-Buthe 001062-001063; Al-Buthe 001064; Al-Buthe 001065. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 31: Please provide all documents originating from You, or on Your behalf, or received by You relating to Your challenge to the OFAC Designation of You as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 31: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 31: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000028; Al-Buthe 000029-000044; Al-Buthe 000045-000047; Al-Buthe 000048-000049; Al-Buthe 000050-000051; Al-Buthe 000052-000053; Al-Buthe 000054-000096; Al-Buthe 000097-000098; Al-Buthe 000099-000133; Al-Buthe 000134-000157; Al-Buthe 000158-000177; Al-Buthe 000178-000928; Al-Buthe 000929-000933; Al-Buthe 000934-000959; Al-Buthe 000960-000962; Al-16 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 20 of 44 Buthe 000963-000964; Al-Buthe 000965-000967. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 32: Please provide copies of all documents that have been seized by, or produced by You to, any United States Investigator, any Foreign Investigator, or any KSA Investigator, concerning any investigation or inquiry relating to You and/or Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 32: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 32: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 001085-001095. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 33: Please provide all documents relating to any communication between You, or on Your behalf, and any Al Haramain branch office in the United States; Bosnian-Herzegovina [sic]; Pakistan; Somalia; Kenya; Tanzania; Indonesia; Afghanistan; Albania; Bangladesh; Ethiopia; the Netherlands; and the Comoros Islands. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 33: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 34: Please provide all documents relating to any communication between You, or on Your behalf or on behalf of Al Haramain, and the Qur’an Foundation. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 34: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds of relevancy: the Qur’an Foundation is not a named party in this litigation, and plaintiffs have 17 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 21 of 44 made no allegations as to the Qur’an Foundation’s involvement with terrorism. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 34: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 001670-001676. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 35: Please provide all documents relating to the United Nations Security Council’s Al Qaida Sanctions Committee’s placement of Al Haramain on the United Nations 1267 Sanctions List, including the Designations of the following: A. Al Haramain’s branch office in the United States (September 28, 2004); B. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Bosnian [sic] (March 13, 2002, amended December 26, 2003); C. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Pakistan and Somalia (March 13, 2002); D. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Kenya, Tanzania, and Indonesia (January 26, 2004); E. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Ethiopia and the Netherlands (June 6, 2004); and F. Al Haramain’s branch office in the Union of the Comoros (September 28, 2004). OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 35: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 36: Please provide all documents relating to the Designations of Al Haramain as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist ("SDGT") by The U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control ("OFAC"), including the Designations of the following: A. Al Haramain’s branch office in the United States (September 9, 2004); B. Al Haramain’s headquarters office in Saudi Arabia (June 19, 2008); C. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Bosnian [sic] (March 11, 2002, amended December 22, 2003); D. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Pakistan and Somalia (March 11, 2002); E. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Kenya, Tanzania, and Indonesia (January 22, 2004); F. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Ethiopia and the 18 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 22 of 44 Netherlands (June 2, 2004); G. Al Haramain’s branch office in the Union of the Comoros (September 9, 2004); and H. Al Haramain’s offices in any location worldwide (June 19, 2008). OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 36: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 37: Please provide all documents relating to the Designations of Al Haramain by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including the Designations of the following: A. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Bosnian [sic] (March 11, 2002, amended December 22, 2003); B. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Pakistan and Somalia (March 11, 2002); and C. Al Haramain’s branch offices in Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Ethiopia and the Netherlands (June 2, 2004). OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 37: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 38: Please provide all documents relating to any communication between You, or on Your behalf, and any representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia concerning (a) the U.N.’s Designations of Al Haramain, (b) the Designations of Al Haramain by OFAC, and/or (c) the Designations of Al Haramain by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and/or (d) any other Designation of Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 38: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 39: 19 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 23 of 44 Please provide all documents relating to any communication between You, or on Your behalf, and any representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia concerning terms or restrictions imposed on Al Haramain by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as a result of (a) the U.N.’s Designation of Al Haramain, (b) the Designation of Al Haramain by OFAC, (c) the Designations of Al Haramain by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, (d) any other Designation of Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 39: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 40: Please provide all documents relating to any sanctions imposed upon Al Haramain by the United States, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, United Nations, the European Union, or any other nation or international body due to Designation. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 40: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 41: Please provide all documents originating from You, or on Your behalf, or received by You relating to any challenge by Al Haramain to any Designation of Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 41: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 41: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000158-000928; Al-Buthe 001066-001084. 20 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 24 of 44 DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 42: Provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between You and Datapact, including without limitation, all documents relating to all positions You held or hold within Datapact and all documents relating to Your role in the organization, funding, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control over Datapact’s operations. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 42: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 42: Defendant further objects that this document request improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Further, this discovery would only be relevant to the exercise of general jurisdiction, but plaintiffs’ appeal and remand as to Defendant was solely for specific jurisdiction. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 43: Please provide all documents relating to Aqeel Al-Aqeel’s purported departure as an officer of Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 43: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects to the characterization of Al-Aqeel’s resignation from Al Haramain USA as "purported." Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 44: Please provide all documents relating to Your purported departure from Al Haramain. 21 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 25 of 44 OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 44: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects to the characterization of his resignation from Al Haramain USA as "purported." Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 44: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 001036-001038. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 45: Please provide all documents relating, in whole or in part, to the purported closing of Al Haramain offices, including without limitation any instructions concerning the disposition of Al Haramain documents and other assets – including but not limited to the offices in United States, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Island of Comoros, Croatia, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Kenya, Netherlands, Pakistan, Somalia, and Tanzania. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 45: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 46: Please provide all documents relating, in whole or in part, to any audit, due diligence, analysis, examination, or review of any of Al Haramain’s financial accounts, investments, assets, capital, and/or financial affairs, conducted either by Al Haramain or any third party, including but not limited to, any bank, financial institution, government agency, accountant, or auditor. Such documents shall include any audit, due diligence, analysis, examination, or review ordered, conducted, supervised, or overseen by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and/or the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency ("SAMA"). OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 46: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 26 of 44 responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 47: Please provide all documents relating to all accounts You hold or have held with or on behalf of Al Haramain, and/or all Al Haramain accounts over which You hold or have held any responsibility or authority, including signatory authority, including but not limited to the following accounts: A. Bank of America, Account number 28803-14895 (Ashland, OR Branch 2880); B. Bank of America, Account number 28803-11561 (Ashland, OR Branch 2880); C. Bank of America, Account number 28804-15615 (Ashland, OR Branch 2880). D. Bank of America, Account number 34733-86549 (Kansas City, MO); and E. Bank of America, Account number 34733-24381 (Springfield, MO); F. Capital One Corporation Account. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 47: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 48: Please provide all documents relating to all financial transactions or donations by You or Al Haramain or from any account in which You held a direct or beneficial interest, or over which You held signatory authority, involving individuals or entities Designated by the United States Government regardless of whether the individual or entity was Designated before or after the financial transaction or donation. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 48: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 49: Please provide all documents relating to any investigation, inquiry, review, audit, due diligence or analysis conducted by any United States state or federal governmental entity or any United States-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("United 23 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 27 of 44 States Investigator"), by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or any Saudi-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("Saudi Investigator"), or by any other foreign government or any foreign-based regulatory body, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor ("Foreign Investigator"), which reference any account held by Al Haramain, any financial transaction linked to accounts held by You or by Al Haramain, or any connection between Al Haramain and Al Qaida. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 49: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 50: Please provide all documents relating to any internal investigation conducted by You and/or Al Haramain, relating to any assertion that Al Haramain, including any individual or entity employed by or otherwise affiliated with Al Haramain, was associated with or involved in any criminal, corrupt, or extremist activity, including without limitation any terrorist or radical religious, political, or social activities. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 50: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 51: Please provide all documents You and/or Al Haramain sent to, and/or received from, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, relating to any assertion that Al Haramain, or any individual or entity employed by or otherwise affiliated with Al Haramain, was associated with or involved in any criminal, corrupt, or extremist activity, including without limitation any terrorist or radical religious, political, or social activities. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 51: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. 24 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 28 of 44 DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 52: Please provide all documents relating to any disciplinary action taken, or any decision to terminate any relationship with any individual or entity employed by or otherwise affiliated with Al Haramain, as a result of allegations or concerns about financial irregularities, suspicious activities, investigations into possible links to the financing of terrorist organizations, and/or the support of violence or jihad. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 52: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 53: Please provide all documents relating to any transactions, financial or otherwise, between You and Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 53: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 53: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 001085-001095; Al-Buthe 001147-001155. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 54: Please provide all documents relating to the disposition of all of the Al Haramain’s accounts, documents, and other assets, whether held at an Al Haramain office, at a banking or other financial institution, or anywhere else, following Al Haramain’s Designation and alleged closure. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 54: 25 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 29 of 44 See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 55: Please provide all documents relating to any entity that has, at any time since the alleged closure of Al Haramain, performed essentially the same function as Al Haramain, and that has operated with the same people, assets, or in the same location(s) as Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 55: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 56: Please provide all documents relating to any business, employment, financial, charitable, religious or other relationship between You and the following individuals, including without limitation all documents You sent to and/or received from the individuals identified in the preceding Request and all documents relating to any financial transfers between You and any of the identified individuals: A. Osama bin Laden B. Aqeel Al-Aqeel C. Pirouz Sedaghaty a/k/a Pete Seda D. Mansour Al-Kadi E. Sofiane Benziadi F. Habis Abdulla Al Saoub G. Wadih El Hage H. Mahmoud El-Fiki I. Ali Al-Tamimi a/k/a Ali Al-Timimi J. Safar Al-Hawali K. Salman Al-Auda L. Abdirashid Aidid Ahmed aka Samatar M. Omar Rajab Amin N. Adnan Arour aka Ar-Roor O. Abderazak Arroum P. Sheikh Bandar Q. Agus Dwikarna R. Omar Farouq 26 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 30 of 44 S. Fahad Mohamed Fouzan T. Ahmed Hajji U. Sami Omar Hussayen V. Yasin al Kadi W. Mohamed Krimi X. Ahmed Ibrahim Najjar Y. Prince Turki al Faisal Z. Ahmed Zuhayri AA. Muhammed Salah OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 56: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that three of the named individuals were dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction and plaintiffs did not appeal that dismissal: Safar Al-Hawali, Salman Al-Auda, and Sami Omar Hussayen; defendant further objects on the grounds that Prince Turki Al Faisal’s dismissal for sovereign immunity was upheld by the Second Circuit, so that discovery as to those individuals cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents as to Aqeel Al-Aqeel, Pirouz Sedaghaty, Mansour Al-Kadi and Mahmoud El-Fiki may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 56: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, with respect to 56(B) (Al-Aqeel), 56(C) (Sedaghaty), 56(D) (Al-Kadi), and 56(H) (El-Fiki), see Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 57: Please provide all documents relating to any understanding or agreement with any defendant named in the consolidated civil action, 03 MDL 1570, whereby You have agreed to pay, indemnify, or reimburse any of their costs associated with defending this lawsuit, including legal fees and/or payments to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be entered in this action against such defendant. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, contracts, agreements, insurance policies, term sheets, or other records. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 57: Defendant objects that this Request is overly broad; improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 27 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 31 of 44 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 58: Please provide all documents relating to any understanding or agreement between You and any individual, entity, and/or government, whereby such party has agreed to pay, indemnify, or reimburse You for any of the costs associated with defending this lawsuit, including legal fees and/or payments to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be entered in this action against You. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, contracts, agreements, insurance policies, term sheets, or other records. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 58: Defendant objects that this Request is overly broad; improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 59: Provide all documents relating to all accounts in United States financial institutions ("U.S. Accounts") held in Your personal capacity, on Your behalf, or by You as an official of a charity or business and/or any U.S. Accounts over which You hold or have held signatory authority, including but not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect any communications between or among You and the U.S. financial institution, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from Your account. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 59: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the 28 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 32 of 44 foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 59: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Al-Buthe 000158-000928; Al-Buthe 0001085-001095. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 60: Please provide all documents relating to any investments made within the United States ("U.S. Investments") on Your behalf, either in Your personal capacity, in Your capacity as a director, officer, trustee, advisor and/or member of a corporation, partnership, organization, or trust, or for Your benefit through a holding company, corporation, partnership, organization, trust or other entity. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 60: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 60: Defendant further objects that this document request improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Further, this discovery would only be relevant to the exercise of general jurisdiction, but plaintiffs’ appeal and remand as to Defendant was solely for specific jurisdiction. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 61: Please provide all documents relating to any filing submitted by You, or Your agent acting on Your behalf, to any local state and/or federal agency, including without limitation, the Internal Revenue Service, Securities Exchange Commission, Department of Justice, Department of Treasury, and the Office of Foreign Assets Control. 29 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 33 of 44 OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 61: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 61: Defendant further objects that this document request improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Further, this discovery would only be relevant to the exercise of general jurisdiction, but plaintiffs’ appeal and remand as to Defendant was solely for specific jurisdiction. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 62: Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between companies owned by You and/or in which You held an equity interest, and Al Haramain. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 62: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 62: Defendant further objects that this document request improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Further, this discovery would only be relevant to the exercise of general jurisdiction, but plaintiffs’ appeal and remand as to Defendant was solely for specific jurisdiction. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 63: 30 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 34 of 44 Please provide all documents relating to Your relationship with, communication with, and/or supervision, management, or control over any of the entities listed below, including any subsidiary or branch office thereof, including without limitation, correspondence, working papers, reports, memoranda (including, but not limited to, inter and intra-office communications), notes, diaries, logs, appointment books, calendars, messages (including, but not limited to, reports of telephone conversations and conferences), meeting minutes and lists of persons attending meetings. A. Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya B. Saudi Red Crescent C. International Islamic Relief Organization D. Muslim World League E. World Assembly of Muslim Youth F. Islamic Assembly of North America G. Islamic Society of North America H. Council on American-Islamic Relations I. Muwafaq Foundation OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 63: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that two of the named entities were dismissed for sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Saudi Joint Relief Committee and Saudi Red Crescent, and that dismissal was upheld by the Second Circuit; one of the entities (Council on American-Islamic Relations) was dismissed for failure to state a claim, and plaintiffs did not appeal that dismissal, so that discovery as to those three entities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents as to the International Islamic Relief Organization, Muslim World League and the World Assembly of Muslim Youth may have been produced by those entities. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 64: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Documents Bates-stamped Al-Buthe 001864; Al-Buthe 002376-002379; Al-Buthe 002418-002419; Al-Buthe 002422; Al-Buthe 002427-002434; Al-Buthe 002720. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 64: Please provide all records relating to any contributions, donations, gifts, grants, zakat, 31 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 35 of 44 and/or any other financial or non-monetary support, to any of the co-defendant ostensible Charities, made by You, on Your behalf, at Your Direction, with Your authorization/approval, or by or on behalf of any foundations, trusts, committees and/or other entities (i) formed by You, (ii) funded by You, (iii) established in Your name, and/or (iv) for which You held a position as director, officer, trustee or other position. If the contribution was made by wire transfer, please provide records identifying the name of the individual who sent the money, the bank from which the money was sent, the wire transfer number, the recipient of the funds, the bank which received the wire transfer and the bank account numbers of the sender and receiver. The term "co-defendant ostensible Charity" includes any part or branch of any defendant in 03 MDL 1570 that has represented itself as a charitable organization, including, in addition to Al Haramain, the Muslim World League, the International Islamic Relief Organization, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, Sana-Bell, and Sanabel al Kheer. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 64: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 65: Please provide all records relating to any contributions, donations, gifts, grants, zakat, and/or any other financial or non-monetary support, made by You, on Your behalf, at Your Direction, with Your authorization/approval, or by or on behalf of any foundations, trusts, committees and/or other entities (i) formed by You, (ii) funded by You, (iii) established in Your name, and/or (iv) for which You held a position as director, officer, trustee or other position, to any of the entities listed below. If the contribution, donation, gift, grant, zakat, or support was made by wire transfer, please provide records identifying the name of the individual who sent it, the bank from which it was sent, the wire transfer number, the recipient of the funds, the bank which received the wire transfer and the bank account numbers of the sender and receiver. A. Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya B. Saudi Red Crescent C. International Islamic Relief Organization D. Muslim World League E. World Assembly of Muslim Youth F. Islamic Assembly of North America G. Islamic Society of North America H. Council on American-Islamic Relations I. Muwafaq Foundation 32 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 36 of 44 OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 65: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that two of the named entities were dismissed for sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Saudi Joint Relief Committee and Saudi Red Crescent, and that dismissal was upheld by the Second Circuit; one of the entities (Council on American-Islamic Relations) was dismissed for failure to state a claim, and plaintiffs did not appeal that dismissal, so that discovery as to those three entities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 66: Please provide all records relating to any contributions, donations, gifts, grants, zakat, and/or any other financial or non-monetary support, made to any foundations, trusts, committees and/or other entities (i) formed by You, (ii) funded by You, (iii) established in Your name, and/or (iv) for which You held a position as director, officer, trustee or other position, from any of the entities listed below. If the contribution, donation, gift, grant, zakat, or support was made by wire transfer, please provide records identifying the name of the individual who sent the money, the bank from which the money was sent, the wire transfer number, the recipient of the funds, the bank which received the wire transfer and the bank account numbers of the sender and receiver. A. Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya B. Saudi Red Crescent C. International Islamic Relief Organization D. Muslim World League E. World Assembly of Muslim Youth F. Islamic Assembly of North America G. Islamic Society of North America H. Council on American-Islamic Relations I. Muwafaq Foundation OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 66: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that two of the named entities were dismissed for sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Saudi Joint Relief Committee and Saudi Red Crescent, and that dismissal was upheld by the Second Circuit; one of the entities (Council on American-Islamic Relations) was dismissed for failure to state a claim, and plaintiffs did not appeal that dismissal, so that discovery as to those three entities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction over 33 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 37 of 44 Defendant. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 67: Please provide all records relating to all information or notification You received before September 11, 2001, that any of the entities listed below, or any subsidiary or branch office thereof, or any agent or employee of said Charity, may have been or were alleged to have been engaging in conduct unrelated to their ostensible charitable or humanitarian purposes, including without limitation, diverting funds or otherwise providing material support or resources to Islamic radicals, fundamentalists, extremists or persons or organizations associated with international terrorism or domestic terrorism. A. Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya B. Saudi Red Crescent C. International Islamic Relief Organization D. Muslim World League E. World Assembly of Muslim Youth F. Islamic Assembly of North America G. Islamic Society of North America H. Council on American-Islamic Relations I. Muwafaq Foundation OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 67: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that two of the named entities were dismissed for sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Saudi Joint Relief Committee and Saudi Red Crescent, and that dismissal was upheld by the Second Circuit; one of the entities (Council on American-Islamic Relations) was dismissed for failure to state a claim, and plaintiffs did not appeal that dismissal, so that discovery as to those three entities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 68: Please provide all records relating to any information or notification You received before September 11, 2001, that any of the entities listed below, or any subsidiary or branch office thereof, or any agent or employee of said Charity, may have been or were alleged to have been diverting funds or otherwise providing material support of resources to Al Qaida, other terrorist organizations and/or individuals sympathetic to Al Qaida or other terrorist organizations. 34 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 38 of 44 A. Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya B. Saudi Red Crescent C. International Islamic Relief Organization D. Muslim World League E. World Assembly of Muslim Youth F. Islamic Assembly of North America G. Islamic Society of North America H. Council on American-Islamic Relations I. Muwafaq Foundation OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 68: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that two of the named entities were dismissed for sovereign immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Saudi Joint Relief Committee and Saudi Red Crescent, and that dismissal was upheld by the Second Circuit; one of the entities (Council on American-Islamic Relations) was dismissed for failure to state a claim, and plaintiffs did not appeal that dismissal, so that discovery as to those three entities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 69: Please provide all documents relating to all information or notification You and/or Al Haramain received before September 11, 2001 that any individual or entity employed or otherwise affiliated with Al Haramain was associated with or involved in: (i) al Qaida; (ii) the sponsorship of any radical, extremist, or terrorist organization; (iii) criminal or corrupt activities; or (iv) any military, radical, or terrorist activity, plot, or attack. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 69: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 70: Please provide all documents relating to all information or notification You and/or Al Haramain received before September 11, 2001 that any individual or entity employed or otherwise affiliated with Al Haramain may have been or was directing funds or otherwise providing material support or resources to: (i) Islamic radicals, fundamentalists, extremists, or 35 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 39 of 44 persons or organizations associated with international terrorism or domestic terrorism; and/or (ii) al Qaida, other terrorist organizations and/or individuals sympathetic to al Qaida or other terrorist organizations, regardless of whether you believe such person(s) or entity(s) was acting within the scope of his employment in relation to any such activities. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 70: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 71: Please provide all documents relating to all information or notification You and/or Al Haramain received before September 11, 2001 that any individual or entity employed by and/or affiliated with Al Haramain was associated with or involved in: (i) providing funds, services, assets, medical assistance, or any other form of support to mujahideen in any part of the World; or (ii) providing financial, logistical, religious, political or any other form of assistance in relation to any armed jihad, regardless of whether such jihad was declared legitimate by competent religious authorities. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 71: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 72: Please provide all records relating to all information or notification You received before September 11, 2001, that Al Qaida aspired to conduct terrorist attacks: (i) against the United States and its interests abroad; (ii) against the United States within its borders; and (iii) against New York City and the World Trade Center complex, Washington, D.C. or other U.S. landmarks. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 72: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 73: 36 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 40 of 44 Please provide all records relating to sponsorship of U.S. educational institutions or students in the United States, whether through an embassy in the United States or otherwise, either by You, an agent working on Your behalf, or any foundation, trust, committee and/or other entity which was formed by You, funded by You, established in Your name, and/or for which You held a position as director, officer, trustee or any other position. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 73: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant has no responsive documents. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 74: Please provide all records relating to the distribution of literature in the United States, including but not limited to, public relations materials, educational materials, religious materials, charitable materials, promotional materials, fundraising materials, or political materials, either by You, an agent working on Your behalf of any foundation, trust, committee and/or other entity which was formed by You, funded by You, established in Your name, and/or for which You held a position as director, officer, trustee or any other position. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 74: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 74: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see Documents Bates-stamped Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 75: Please provide all records relating to commercial and/or residential property ("real property") You, or Your agents acting on Your behalf and/or at Your direction, or where You acted as an agent for another, purchased, rented, leased, resided in, conducted business, charitable and/or religious affairs, or otherwise occupied in the United States, whether directly or indirectly, including but not limited to homes, apartments, condominiums, offices, schools, mosques, prayer centers, social centers, community centers and the sale of properties located at 1257 Siskiyon [sic] Blvd., Ashland, Oregon; 3800 Highway 99 South, Ashland, Oregon; 2151 E. 37 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 41 of 44 Division St., Springfield, MO, and 419-429 West Onondaga Street, Syracuse, NY. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 75: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 75: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, see generally Documents Bates-Stamped Al-Buthe 001182-002947. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 76: Please provide all records relating to Your ownership interest, whether direct or indirect, in any business entities domiciled in the United States ("U.S. Entity"), and/or records relating to Your position as director, officer, trustee, advisor, and/or member of any American Entity. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 76: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that any such ownership interest is unrelated to plaintiffs’ claims against him, and cannot form the basis for the exercise of personal jurisdiction. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 76: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, with respect to Defendant’s role with Al Haramain USA, see Documents Bates-Stamped Al-Buthe 000158-000928; Al-Buthe 000969-000986; Al-Buthe 001008-001046; Al-Buthe 001066-001084. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 77: Please provide all records relating to Your ownership interest, whether direct or indirect, in any business entity registered, but not domiciled in the United States ("Non-U.S. Entity"), that has distributed products or provided services in the United States; distributed products manufactured and/or designed in the United States; solicited business in the United States; maintained an office in the United States; maintained a bank account in the United States; 38 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-10 Filed 10/06/17 Page 42 of 44 advertised products or services in the United States; contracted with companies in the United States for the purchase and/or sale of merchandise and/or services; maintained a registered agent in the United States; or otherwise transacted business in the United States. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 77: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Defendant further objects on the grounds that any such ownership interest is unrelated to plaintiffs’ claims against him, and cannot form the basis for the exercise of personal jurisdiction. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 77: Defendant further objects that this document request improperly seeks discovery beyond the limited scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the Court of Appeals and CMO No. 2 ¶ 17; improperly seeks information that post-dates the filing of the actions in this MDL-1570 proceeding; improperly seeks information that is not relevant to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; and improperly seeks information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible information. Further, this discovery would only be relevant to the exercise of general jurisdiction, but plaintiffs’ appeal and remand as to Defendant was solely for specific jurisdiction. DOCUMENT REQUEST No. 78: Please provide copies of and all documents relating to websites owned, managed, run, operated, or edited by You and/or by Al Haramain, including: A. www.plaintruth.org. B. www.alharamain.org, C. www.foca.net, D. www.islamway.com, and E. www.islamtoday.net. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 78: See Objections to Document Request No. 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant will produce responsive documents, if any are in his possession; responsive documents may have been produced by Al Haramain USA. SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO REQUEST No. 78: 39

Exhibit K

EXHIBIT K Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-11 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1400 16th STREET, N.W., SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2223 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 MICHAEL ELLEMENT* PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM DEVIN WRIGLEY * ADMITTED IN MD ONLY By Email and First Class Mail September 26, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL-1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the certification from Mr. Soliman H. Al-Buthe. Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel

Exhibit L

EXHIBIT L Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-12 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 4 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1400 16th STREET, N.W., SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2223 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 MICHAEL ELLEMENT* PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM DEVIN WRIGLEY * ADMITTED IN MD ONLY By Email and First Class Mail October 5, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL-1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the Certification of Dr. Abdullah Bin Saleh Al-Obaid (October 4, 2017), which confirms that having retired from the Muslim World League (MWL) in 2000, he no longer has access to its documents and has produced the responsive documents that he has that are relevant to jurisdictional discovery (including referencing the MWL’s documents). We have been unable to reach Dr. Abdullah Omar Naseef, who has been in ill health for some time and is currently unable to communicate with us. As you know, Dr. Naseef served the MWL from 1983 to 1993, and has not had access to the MWL’s files since that time. Finally, we have attempted to contact Dr. Al-Turki but have not yet received a response. He is also retired from the MWL. As you know, we already provided information on their travels to the United States. See Al-Turki Motion to Dismiss (Burnett), ECF No. 85, Ex. 1, ¶ 11 (Apr. 8, 2004); Al-Turki Consolidated Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 1185, Ex. 1, ¶ 11 (Sept. 6, 2005); Al-Obaid Motion to Dismiss (Burnett), ECF No. 98, Ex. 1, ¶ 8 (Apr. 8, 2004); Al-Obaid Consolidated Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 1182, Ex. 1, ¶ 8 (Sept. 6, 2005); Naseef Motion to Dismiss (Burnett), ECF No. 87, Ex. 1, ¶ 7 (Apr. 8, 2004); Naseef Consolidated Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 1206, Ex. 1, ¶ 7 (Sept. 6, 2005). Additional information on their travels for the MWL is included in the MWL’s own production, including the MWL’s Annual Reports. We will let you know if we are able to obtain any further information. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-12 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 4 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire October 5, 2017 Page 2 of 2 Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel

Exhibit M

EXHIBIT M Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-13 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1400 16th STREET, N.W., SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2223 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 MICHAEL ELLEMENT* PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM DEVIN WRIGLEY * ADMITTED IN MD ONLY By Email and First Class Mail September 26, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL-1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the supplemental document index for Dr. Basha, which reflects the production made by the IIRO subsequent to his June 2, 2017 index. For Dr. Basha, who is retired from the IIRO, the responsive documents are in the possession of the IIRO, and were produced by the IIRO as part of its merits document production. Subject to and without waiving Dr. Basha’s prior objections, a subset of the IIRO’s document production is or may be responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to him, as set forth on the attached index of over 770 entries. Also enclosed is Dr. Basha’s Certification. We have tried to be overinclusive in indexing the documents, as many documents (or ranges of documents) can be responsive to multiple jurisdictional discovery document requests, given the broad and overlapping nature of those requests. However, not all of the IIRO documents were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests, so these indexes only include those that we determined were responsive to those requests. Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel

Exhibit N

EXHIBIT N Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3750-14 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 3 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1400 16th STREET, N.W., SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2223 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 MICHAEL ELLEMENT* PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM DEVIN WRIGLEY * ADMITTED IN MD ONLY By Email and First Class Mail October 2, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL-1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the Declaration of Dr. Adnan Basha (Sept. 30, 2017), which sets forth the information on his travels to the United States, and confirms that he does not have his passports for the 1992 to 2002 time period. Further, the IIRO’s annual report for 1421/22 (2000-2001) also listed Dr. Basha’s international travel, which confirms his attendance at the United Nations meeting in New York in June 2001. See Document Bates-stamped 340871-341098, at 341073. However, Dr. Basha’s participation in that meeting cannot form the basis for the exercise of personal jurisdiction. See, e.g., Klinghoffer v. S.N.C. Achille Lauro, 937 F.2d 44, 51-52 (2d Cir. 1991) (United Nations activities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction); Sokolow v. Palestinian Liberation Organization, No. 04-CV-00397 (GBD), 2011 WL 1345086, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2011) ("The Second Circuit has also held that participation in the United Nation’s affairs by a "foreign organization" may not properly be considered as a basis of jurisdiction in New York."), aff’d in relevant part, 835 F.3d 317, 325 (2d Cir. 2016); id. ("With respect to the activities involving the New York office, Defendants are entitled to the Klinghoffer jurisdictional exception."). Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn from Peter C. Salerno dated 10/10/2017 re: Motion to compel. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3751 Filed 10/10/17 Page 1 of 2 SALERNO & ROTHSTEIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW AMY ROTHSTEIN 221 SCHULTZ HILL ROAD PETER C. SALERNO PINE PLAINS, NY 12567 — T: 518.771.3050 WRITER’S EMAIL ADDRESS: F: 866.589.9010 peter.salerno.law@gmail.com October 10, 2017 By ECF The Honorable Sarah Netburn United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square, Room 430 New York, New York 10007 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) This document relates to: Kathleen Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Thomas Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 Estate of John P. O’Neill et. al., v. Al Baraka et. al., No. 04 Civ. 1923 World Trade Center Properties, L.L.C. et al. v. Al Baraka Investment and Development Corp., et al., No. 04 Civ. 7280 Dear Judge Netburn: We represent defendant Yassin Abdullah Kadi in this matter. We write to advise the Court that after further consideration, we have determined to defer filing a motion to compel until later in discovery, if it should still be necessary. Respectfully, s/Peter C. Salerno Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3751 Filed 10/10/17 Page 2 of 2 Hon. Sarah Netburn-2-October 10, 2017 cc: The Honorable George B. Daniels (via ECF) All MDL Counsel of Record (via ECF)

SECOND LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time of the deadlines for plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss addressed to Judge George B. Daniels from James P. Kreindler dated 10/11/2017. Document filed by Kathleen Ashton(as Administrator of the Estate of Thomas Ashton, deceased and on behalf of all survivors of Thomas Ashton).

Case 1: 03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3752 Filed 10/11/17 Page 1 of 1 Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Personal Injury and Death Claims Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley (1944-2013) Jodi Westbrook Flowers Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs MOTLEY RICE LLC James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Sean Carter, Co-Chair CoZEN O' CONNOR Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O' CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF AND OVERNIGHT MAIL October 11, 2017 The Honorable George B. Daniels United States District Court Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 RE: In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Daniels The Ashton Plaintiffs write to respectfully request a brief one week extension of the deadlines for plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Saudi High Commission (SHC), from November 2, 2017 to November 9, 2017. The short extension is requested to accommodate a personal matter of the undersigned. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission have advised that they consent to the Ashton plaintiffs' request for the proposed one week extension of the opposition deadline. In Addition, to allow for the necessary coordination and ensure that the relevant deadlines remain synchronized, the Kingdom and the SHC have consented to a corresponding extension of the deadline for the Consolidated Amended Complaint Plaintiffs to file their opposition briefs. Since oral argument is set for January 18, 2018, we do not foresee any effect on that date. Defense counsel has advised that they will request a preferred date for filing their reply briefs when they have received the plaintiffs' opposition briefs, We thank Your Honor for the Court's attention to this matter. Respectfully submitted, James P. Kreindler

ORDER granting {{3752}} Letter Motion for Extension of Time: SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 10/12/2017) (jwh) (Main Document 3753 replaced on 10/12/2017)

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3753 Filed 10/12/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK---------------------------------------------------------)(NovaSparks, SA, Plaintiff(s). 17cv7745(G) INITIAL PRET-against-CONFERENCE "' EnyxEPGA. Inc; Enyx SA, Defendant(s).---------------------------------------------------------)(TO: The Attorney(s) for Plaintiff(s): This case has been designated an electronic case and has been assigned to this rt for all purposes. Counsel for all parties are required to promptly register as filing "USERS" in accordance with the procedure for Electronic Case Filing.,,. Counsel for all parties are hereby directed to attend a conference at the time and place fixed below, for the purpose of Case Management and scheduling pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. You are directed to furnish all attorneys in this action with copies of this order and enclosures, and to furnish chambers with a copy of any transmittal letter(s). If you are unaware of the identity of counsel for any of the parties, you must forthwith send a copy of the notice and rules to that party personally. An Initial pretrial conference will be held on Wednesday, January 10, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. at the United States District Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, Courtroom 11A. No application for adjournment will be considered unless made at least one week prior to the date of this initial conference. Enclosed is a proposed Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order, pursuant to Rules 16 and 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Counsel for all parties are directed to confer regarding the proposed plan and order. If the proposed schedule is agreeable to all parties, counsel shall sign and file the enclosed plan and order with the Court seven (7) days before the date of the initial pretrial conference. If counsel agree that a different plan and schedule is appropriate, counsel shall sign and file a different proposed plan and schedule for the Court's consideration seven (7) days before the date of the pretrial conference. In the absence of agreement, the Court, after hearing from counsel, will order a Case Management Plan and schedule at the conference. Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Plan shall provide that the case be ready for trial within six months. In addition to the matters covered in the Case Management Plan, counsel should also be prepared to address at the conference the factual and legal bases for their claims or defenses, any issue as to subject matter jurisdiction, and any other issue relevant to case management. Dated: New York, New York October 11, 2017 DERED: 11J.,,J 8, y (){l,{~ Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3753 Filed 10/12/17 Page 2 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK---------------------------------------------------->< NovaSparks, SA Plaintiff(s)-against-17cv7745(GBD) CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT EnyxEPGA, Inc; Enyx SA PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER Defendant(s)----------------------------------------------------)(After consultation with counsel for the parties, the following Case Management Plan is adopted. This plan is also a scheduling order pursuant to Rules 16 and 26(f) of the Federal Rules of civil Procedure. 1. An Initial pretrial conference will be held on Wednesday, January 10, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. at the United States District Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, Courtroom 11 A. 2. No Additional parties may be joined after April 18, 2018. 3. No amendment to the pleadings will be permitted after April 18, 2018. 4. Except for good cause shown, all discovery shall be commenced in time to be completed by June 20, 2018. The court expects discovery to be completed within 90 days of the first scheduling conference unless, after the expiration of that 90 days period, all counsel stipulate that additional time (not to exceed 60 more days) is needed to complete discovery. In such event, discovery may be extended by the parties on consent, without application to the Court, provided the parties are certain they can still meet the discovery completion date ordered by the Court. The discovery completion date shall not be adjourned except upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances. 5. Dispositive motions are to be served by July 18, 2018. Answering papers are to be served within 14 days. Reply papers are to be served within seven (7) days. In the event a dispositive motion is made, the date for submitting the Joint Pretrial Order shall be changed from that shown herein to three(3) weeks from the decision on the motion. The final pretrial conference shall be adjourned to a date four (4) weeks from the decision on the motion. 6. A final pretrial conference will be held on August 22, 2018 at 9:45 a.m.. 7. The Joint Pretrial Order shall be filed no later than August 15, 2018. The requirements for the pretrial order and other pretrial submissions shall be governed by the Court's Individual Rules of Practice. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3753 Filed 10/12/17 Page 3 of 3 8. All motions and applications shall be governed by the Court's Individual Rules of Practice. 9. The parties shall be ready for trial within 48 hours, notice on or after September 19, 2018. The estimated trial time is days, and this is a Uury)(non-jury) trial. 10. A Subsequent Case Management Conference will be held on May 16, 2018 at 9:45 a.m.. Dated: October 11, 2017 New York, New York SO ORDERED: George B. Daniels United States District Judge Attorney for Plaintiff(s) Attorney for Defendant(s)-2-

NOTICE of Short Form Complaint, Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen, et al., v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., 17-cv-7914. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, As relates to: 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) 2001 MUENCHENER RUECKVERSICHERUNGS-CIVIL ACTION NO: GESELLSCHAFT AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT IN MUENCHEN; NEW REINSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.; AIG SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY; CHARTIS SHORT FORM COMPLAINT AND EXCESS LIMITED; AIU INSURANCE DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY COMPANY; AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY; AIG INSURANCE COMPANY – PUERTO RICO; ECF CASE AIG INSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA; AIG ASSURANCE COMPANY; AIG PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY; COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY; GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY; ILLINOIS NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.; THE INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA; LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY; NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA; AND NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY Plaintiffs, v. KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA; SAUDI HIGH COMMISSION FOR RELIEF OF BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA; AL RAJHI BANK; NATIONAL COMMERCIAL BANK; AND SAUDI BINLADIN GROUP Defendants. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 2 of 10 SHORT FORM COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY Plaintiffs Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen, New Reinsurance Company, Ltd., AIG Specialty Insurance Company, Chartis Excess Limited, AIU Insurance Company, American Home Assurance Company, AIG Insurance Company – Puerto Rico, AIG Insurance Company of Canada, AIG Assurance Company, AIG Property Casualty Company, Commerce and Industry Insurance Company, Granite State Insurance Company, Illinois National Insurance Co., The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, Lexington Insurance Company, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., and New Hampshire Insurance Company (collectively "Plaintiffs"), file this Short Form Complaint and Demand for Trial by Jury against Defendants named herein by and through the undersigned counsel. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the specific allegations, as indicated below, of Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Amended Complaint as to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia ("Kingdom" or "Saudi Arabia") and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina ("the SHC") and Demand for Jury Trial in In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (hereinafter "the CAC"). Plaintiffs file this Short Form Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial as permitted and approved by the Court’s Order of May 3, 2017, ECF No. 3543. Additionally, Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the specific allegations, as indicated below, of the First Amended Complaint as to Defendants Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and Saudi Binladin Group and Demand for Jury Trial in The Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicates 2, et al. v. Al Rajhi Bank, et al., Case No. 1:16-CV-07853, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (hereinafter "the FAC"). By letter filed separately with this Short Form Complaint, Plaintiffs acknowledge their agreement to have any 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 3 of 10 motion to dismiss the FAC, or Answer to the FAC, filed by Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and Saudi Binladin Group be deemed applicable to this Complaint, as contemplated by the Court’s Order of May 16, 2017, ECF No. 3584. I. PLAINTIFFS 1. Plaintiff, Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen ("MR Munich"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Germany, with a principal place of business at Koeniginstrasse 107, Munich, Germany. At all times relevant hereto, MR Munich was engaged in the business of reinsurance. 2. Plaintiff, New Reinsurance Company, Ltd. ("New Re"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Switzerland, with a principal place of business at Zollikerstrasse 226, Zurich, Switzerland. At all times relevant hereto, New Re was engaged in the business of reinsurance. 3. Plaintiff, AIG Specialty Insurance Company ("AIG Specialty"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, AIG Specialty was engaged in the business of insurance. 4. Plaintiff, Chartis Excess Limited ("Chartis"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Ireland, with a principal place of business at 30 North Quay Wall, Dublin, Ireland. At all times relevant hereto, Chartis was engaged in the business of insurance. 5. Plaintiff, AIU Insurance Company ("AIU"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, AIU was engaged in the business of insurance. 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 4 of 10 6. Plaintiff, American Home Assurance Company ("American Home"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, American Home was engaged in the business of insurance. 7. Plaintiff, AIG Insurance Company – Puerto Rico ("AIG Puerto Rico"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Puerto Rico, with a principal place of business at 250 Munoz Rivera Avenue, Suite 500, Hato Rey, Puerto Rico. At all times relevant hereto, AIG Puerto Rico was engaged in the business of insurance. 8. Plaintiff, AIG Insurance Company of Canada ("AIG Canada"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Canada, with a principal place of business at 145 Wellington Street W., Suite 1400, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. At all times relevant hereto, AIG Canada was engaged in the business of insurance. 9. Plaintiff, AIG Assurance Company ("AIG Assurance"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, AIG Assurance was engaged in the business of insurance. 10. Plaintiff, AIG Property Casualty Company ("AIG Property Casualty"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, AIG Property Casualty was engaged in the business of insurance. 11. Plaintiff, Commerce and Industry Insurance Company ("Commerce and Industry"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 5 of 10 a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, Commerce and Industry was engaged in the business of insurance. 12. Plaintiff, Granite State Insurance Company ("Granite"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, Granite was engaged in the business of insurance. 13. Plaintiff, Illinois National Insurance Co. ("Illinois National"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, Illinois National was engaged in the business of insurance. 14. Plaintiff, The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania ("ICSPA"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, ICSPA was engaged in the business of insurance. 15. Plaintiff, Lexington Insurance Company ("Lexington"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 99 High Street, 18th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts. At all times relevant hereto, Lexington was engaged in the business of insurance. 16. Plaintiff, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. ("National Union"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, National Union was engaged in the business of insurance. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 6 of 10 17. Plaintiff, New Hampshire Insurance Company ("New Hampshire Insurance"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with a principal place of business at 175 Water Street, New York, New York. At all times relevant hereto, New Hampshire Insurance was engaged in the business of insurance. 18. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiffs were engaged in the business of providing insurance and/or reinsurance coverage under various lines, including property damage, business interruption, worker’s compensation, energy, political risk, casualty, and other coverages, to numerous corporations, companies, partnerships, trusts and persons that sustained losses as a result of the September 11th attacks. 19. Pursuant to applicable policies of insurance and/or contracts of reinsurance, Plaintiffs and/or their predecessors in interest made payments in compensation for injuries suffered by nationals of the United States to their persons, properties and businesses by reason of the September 11, 2001 attacks, including payments in compensation for the physical destruction of the World Trade Center and other buildings, structures, or property, as well as, in certain cases, payments in compensation for death and physical injury to innocent civilians, and are thereby subrogated to the rights of recovery of those nationals of the United States. In total, Plaintiffs’ payments in compensation for losses resulting from the September 11th attacks are in excess of $1.5 billion. II. DEFENDANTS 20. The following entities are Defendants herein: (a) Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; (b) Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina; (c) Al Rajhi Bank; 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 7 of 10 (d) National Commercial Bank; and (e) Saudi Binladin Group. 21. This Short Form Complaint shall be deemed subject to any motion to dismiss the CAC, or Answer to the CAC, filed by Saudi Arabia and the SHC. 22. This Short Form Complaint shall also be deemed subject to any motion to dismiss the FAC, or Answer to the FAC, filed by Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and Saudi Binladin Group. 23. By way of filing this Short Form Complaint, Plaintiffs shall not be deemed to have adopted any class-action allegations set forth in the CAC or waived any right to object to class certification or opt out of any certified class. This Short Form Complaint also does not serve as a request for exclusion from any class that the Court may certify. III. VENUE 24. Venue in this district is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)(2) and 1391(f)(1), as a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred in this district. Venue is also proper in this district pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2334(a). IV. JURISDICTION 25. Jurisdiction as to Saudi Arabia and the SHC is as asserted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1605B (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act). Jurisdiction as to Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and Saudi Binladin Group is as asserted in the FAC. 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 8 of 10 V. CAUSES OF ACTION A. Defendants Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina 26. Plaintiffs hereby adopt and incorporate by reference the CAC (except for the allegations in paragraphs 20-21 of the CAC that relate solely to the plaintiffs identified therein) as if set forth fully herein. 27. Furthermore, the following claims and allegations are asserted by Plaintiffs against Saudi Arabia and the SHC and are herein adopted by reference from the CAC: • Count I-Aiding and Abetting and Conspiring with al Qaeda to Commit the September 11th Attacks Upon the United States in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d) (JASTA); • Count II-Aiding and Abetting and Conspiring with al Qaeda to Commit the September 11th Attacks Upon the United States in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a); • Count III-Committing Acts of International Terrorism in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2333; • Count IV-Wrongful Death; • Count V-Survival; • Count VI-Alien Tort Claims Act; • Count VII-Assault and Battery; • Count VIII-Conspiracy; • Count IX-Aiding and Abetting; • Count X-Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; • Count XI-Liability Pursuant to Restatement (Second) of Torts § 317 and Restatement (Third) of Agency § 7.05: Supervising Employees and Agents; • Count XII-Liability Pursuant to Restatement (Second) of Torts § 317 and Restatement (Third) of Agency § 7.05: Hiring, Selecting, and Retaining 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 9 of 10 Employees and Agents; • Count XIII-18 U.S.C. § 1962(a)-(d) – CIVIL RICO; • Count XIV-Trespass; • Count XV-Violations of International Law; and • Count XVI-Punitive Damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Saudi Arabia and the SHC, jointly and severally, for an amount authorized by governing law to be determined at trial, together with treble damages, punitive damages, pre-and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, costs of this action and such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. B. Defendants Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and Saudi Binladin Group 28. Plaintiffs hereby adopt and incorporate by reference the FAC (except for the allegations in paragraphs 1-66 of the FAC that relate solely to the plaintiffs identified therein) as if set forth fully herein. 29. Furthermore, the following claims and allegations are asserted by Plaintiffs against Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and the Saudi Binladin Group and are herein adopted by reference from the FAC: • Count I-Aiding and Abetting and Conspiring with al Qaeda to Commit the September 11th Attacks Upon the United States in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d) (JASTA). WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank, and the Saudi Binladin Group, jointly and severally, for an amount authorized by governing law to be determined at trial, together with treble damages, punitive damages, pre-and 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3755 Filed 10/13/17 Page 10 of 10 post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, costs of this action and such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate under the circumstances. JURY DEMAND Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury as to the claims in this action. Dated: October 13, 2017 Respectfully submitted, BY:/s/John J. McDonough JOHN J. MCDONOUGH, ESQUIRE NY Bar ID #1690882 COZEN O’CONNOR 45 Broadway, 16th Floor New York, NY 10006 Direct: (212) 908-1226 Fax: (866) 263-1342 E-mail: JMcDonough@cozen.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Of Counsel: Stephen A. Cozen, Esquire PA Bar ID #03492 Sean P. Carter, Esquire PA Bar ID #78886 Elliott R. Feldman, Esquire PA Bar ID #32115 J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire PA Bar ID #90716 COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 LEGAL\30928565\1 10

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Frank H. Granito, III on behalf of Rudy Abad, Cynthia Barkway, Maureen Basnicki, Basmattie Bishundat, Bhola Bishundat, Thomas Bocchino, Irene Boehm, Francisco Bourdier, Magdalena Bourdier, Manuel Bourdier, Caroline Breitweiser, Kristen Breitweiser, Erica Brennan, Kathleen Brunton, Michael Brunton, Ernst Buck, Josephine Buck, Sheri Burlingame, Elaine Chevalier, Kenneth Chu, Melinda Cooper, Theresa Cove, James Cudmore, Stephen Davidson, Robert Delapenha, Samantha Delapenha, Lorraine Delapenha Fichera, Kathryn Dennis, Irene Dickey, Rosemary Dillard, Gregory Dimmling, Leslie Dimmling, Nicholas Dimmling, Rudy Dimmling, Marguerita Domanico, Maureen Dominguez, Christopher Dowling, Cynthia Droz, Jacqueline Eaton, Charles Evans, Corrine Evans, Catherine Faughnan, Joan Faughnan, Juliet Faughnan, Liam Faughnan, Lynne Faughnan, Siena Faughnan, Thomas Faughnan, Nancy Kimbell, Christina Kurinzi, Debra Lavender, Deborah Razzano, Amy Waters. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 1:17-cv-02003-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3756 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK This document relates to: Ashton, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 17-cv-02003 (GBD)(SN) Ashton, et al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(SN) APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL To the Clerk of Court and all parties of record: I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this Court, and I appear in this case as counsel for the Burlingame subset of plaintiffs in the above consolidated action: SHERI G. BURLINGAME, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES FRANK BURLINGAME, III, Deceased; RUDY ABAD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARIE ROSE ABAD, Deceased; CYNTHIA LYNN BARKWAY, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID MICHAEL BARKWAY, Deceased; MAUREEN BASNICKI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH BASNICKI, Deceased; BHOLA AND BASMATTIE BISHUNDAT, Individually as Parents, and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of KRIS ROMEO BISHUNDAT; DEBRA LAVENDER, Individually as Sibling, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Deceased; DEBRA LAVENDER as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Surviving Father of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; LUCY BOCCHINO, Surviving Mother of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; and THOMAS BOCCHINO, Surviving Sibling of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; IRENE BOEHM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRUCE BOEHM, Deceased; 1 NANCY H. KIMBELL, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY JANE BOOTH, Deceased; FRANCISCO BOURDIER and MAGDALENA BOURDIER Individually as Surviving Parents of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; MANUEL BOURDIER as Surviving Sibling of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; KRISTEN BREITWEISER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD BREITWEISER, Deceased; CAROLINE BREITWEISER as Surviving Child of RONALD BREITWEISER; ERICA BRENNAN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER BRENNAN, Deceased; KATHLEEN BRUNTON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT BRUNTON, Deceased; MICHAEL BRUNTON, as Surviving Sibling of VINCENT BRUNTON; ERNST H. BUCK and JOSEPHINE BUCK, Individually as Parents of GREGORY J. BUCK, Deceased; ELAINE M. CHEVALIER, Individually as Mother and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SWEDE CHEVALIER, Deceased; KENNETH CHU, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PAMELA CHU, Deceased; DEBORAH RAZZANO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANTHONY COLADONATO, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JULIAN COOPER, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER as Parent and Natural Guardian of J.C., a Minor, Surviving Child of JULIAN COOPER; THERESA COVE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES E. COVE, Deceased; JAMES CUDMORE, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of NEIL CUDMORE, Deceased; AMY WATERS, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT DAVIDSON, Deceased; STEPHEN DAVIDSON, as Surviving Parent of SCOTT DAVIDSON; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DONALD A. DELAPENHA, Deceased; SAMANTHA DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; 2 ROBERT DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA as Parent and Natural Guardian of M.D., a Minor, Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; KATHRYN R. DENNIS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS F. DENNIS, Deceased; IRENE DICKEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH DICKEY, Deceased; ROSEMARY DILLARD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDDIE DILLARD, Deceased; LESLIE DIMMLING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM DIMMLING, Deceased; GREGORY DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; NICHOLAS DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; RUDY DIMMLING as Surviving Sibling of WILLIAM DIMMLING; MARGUERITA DOMANICO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES DOMANICO, Deceased; CHRISTINA KURINZI as Surviving Child of JAMES DOMANICO; MAUREEN S. DOMINGUEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, Deceased; CHRISTOPHER DOWLING, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY YOLANDA DOWLING, Deceased; CYNTHIA M. DROZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES DROZ, Deceased; JACQUELINE EATON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT EATON, Deceased; CORRINE J. EVANS and CHARLES R. EVANS, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of ERIC B. EVANS, Deceased; CATHERINE ANN FAUGHNAN, Individually as Spouse as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN, Deceased; SIENA FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JULIET FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LIAM FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; THOMAS FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JOAN FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; 3 DIANE BARNES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LYNNE FAUGHNAN LEE as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MAUREEN STINES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MARCO CALLE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HENRY HOMERO FERNANDEZ, Deceased; MARY AND FRANK FETCHET, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of BRADLEY FETCHET, Deceased; ERIN FINNEGAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Deceased; BRIDGET FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; ERIN FINNEGAN as Mother and Natural Guardian of F.F, a Minor, Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; PATRICIA FITZSIMONS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD FITZSIMONS, Deceased; CARLOS GAMBOA, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GIANN F. GAMBOA, Deceased; CATHY GEYER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES G. GEYER, Deceased; MICHELE GEYER as Surviving Child of JAMES G. GEYER; PHYLLIS GILLY and JOSEPH GILLY, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Laura Gilly, Deceased; GERALD GOLKIN and JANET GOLKIN, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ANDREW H. GOLKIN, Deceased; SUSAN GOLKIN as Surviving Sibling of ANDREW H. GOLKIN; TERESA GOMEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ENRIQUE A. GOMEZ, Deceased; BLANCA GOMEZ, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of JOSE B. GOMEZ, Deceased; SANDRA MUNRO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ELVIRA GRANITTO, Deceased; ANNE EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; DAMIEN EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; 4 ANNA GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; COSIMO GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; MARIO GRANITTO, as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; FILIPPA GRANITTO as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; RAYMOND HABIB, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARBARA HABIB, Deceased; THOMAS P. HEIDENBERGER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHELE HEIDENBERGER, Deceased; MARY JEAN HELLER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of H. JOSEPH HELLER, Deceased; EDWARD HENRY and ALICE HENRY, Individually, and as Surviving Parents and as Personal Representatives Estate of JOSEPH PATRICK HENRY, Deceased; TENNYSON HUIE, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SUSAN HUIE, Deceased; SHERI ANN ISKENDERIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ARAM ISKENDERIAN, Deceased; JENNIFER L. JARDIM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARK S. JARDIM, Deceased; CHRISTINE JEAN-PIERRE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCOIS JEAN-PIERRE, Deceased; ELIZABETH JORDAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT JORDAN, Deceased; GEOFFREY JUDGE, Individually a Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANN JUDGE, Deceased; DOHEE KANG, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOON KOO KANG, Deceased; JANET KELLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FREDERICK KELLEY, Deceased; FREDERICK KELLEY as Surviving Child of FREDERICK KELLEY; JOANNE KELLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES KELLY, Deceased; ALISON M. KINNEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN KINNEY, Deceased; 5 PAUL AND VIVIAN KOLPAK, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of VANESSA KOLPAK, Deceased; THADDEUS KOLPAK as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ALEXIS KOLPAK LERNER as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ELIZABETH KOVALCIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID P. KOVALCIN, Deceased; ANNA M. KREN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN J. KREN, Deceased; ANDREA SASSONE as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN; JANINE WENTWORTH as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN SANDRA LANG PANGBORN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRENDAN LANG, Deceased; DONNA CABALLERO and WILLIAM M. LANG, Individually as Siblings and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ROSEANN LANG, Deceased; CAROLANN LARSEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT LARSEN, Deceased; CAROLE LEAVEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH GERARD LEAVEY, Deceased; DENNIS LEVI and JENNIFER LEVI-LONGYEAR, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JOHN LEVI, Deceased; JOSEPH J. REITANO as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT LITTO, Deceased; LINDA LITTO as Surviving Spouse of VINCENT LITTO; CATHERINE LITTO-PETRAS as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KRISTEN SERRA as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KIMBERLY REX as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; JOSEPH REITANO as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL LITTO and MARIE LITTO, Surviving Parents of VINCENT LITTO; ELIZABETH DAVILA-LOPEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DANIEL LOPEZ, Deceased; EILEEN LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FARRELL LYNCH, Deceased; 6 CHRISTINA LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD D. LYNCH, Deceased; LORRAINE LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SEAN LYNCH, Deceased; GRACE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; MARY ROSE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; SEAN LYNCH, Jr., as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; VALERIE MAGEE, Individually as Surviving Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN MAGEE, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY as Mother and Natural Guardian of M.M. and T.M., Surviving Children of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III; MEGAN MANNING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TERENCE JOHN MANNING, Deceased; MAIREAD MANNING as Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; MEGAN MANNING as Mother and Natural Guardian of T.M., Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; NICHOLAS MAOUNIS, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MAOUNIS, Deceased; SHEILA MARTELLO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MARTELLO, Deceased; MARGARET MATHERS, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES MATHERS, Deceased; LYNN McGUINN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCIS McGUINN, Deceased; TARYN McHALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS McHALE, Deceased; ELIZABETH McLAUGHLIN O’BRIEN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT McLAUGHLIN, Deceased; ELIZABETH McNALLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDMUND MCNALLY, Deceased; JOSEPH RICHARD MICKLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY, Deceased; MARIE MICKLEY as Surviving Child of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY; 7 ARJAN MIRPURI, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RAJESH MIRPURI, Deceased; SUSANNE MLADENIK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JEFFREY P. MLADENIK, Deceased; MARK MORABITO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LAURA LEE MORABITO, Deceased; CATHERINE MORAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KATHLEEN MORAN, Deceased; KIMBERLY A. MARTONE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. MORRISON, Deceased; MADELINE LEW MOY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TEDDINGTON H. MOY, Deceased; PATRICK MULLAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL D. MULLAN, Deceased; AMY NACKE MARTINEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUIS J. NACKE, Deceased; HEIDI NAPLES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK J. NAPLES, Deceased; AMY NEWTON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Deceased; SUSAN NEWTON-CARTER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON-CARTER, Deceased; CHRISTINE O'BERG CONNOLLY, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DENNIS O'BERG, Deceased; DENNIS O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; DOROTHY O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; LISA O'BRIEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TIMOTHY O'BRIEN, Deceased; ANTOINETTE D. OGNIBENE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PHILLIP PAUL OGNIBENE, Deceased; MARY DUFF-ORTALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER KEITH ORTALE, Deceased; CATHERINE GRIMES, Individually as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY ORTALE, Surviving Mother of PETER KEITH ORTALE; MARY MALITAS as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; 8 JULIE ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; GILBERT ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; DANIEL ORTH, MICHELLE ORTH and ELIZABETH ORTH, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JANE MARIE ORTH, Deceased; WANDA GARCIA-ORTIZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EMILIO ORTIZ, Deceased; ALEXANDRA M. ORTIZ RESZKA, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SONIA M. ORTIZ, Deceased; JEAN M. PALOMBO, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK A. PALOMBO, Deceased; CAROLYN PANATIER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. PANATIER, Deceased; NAVILA PATTERSON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BERNARD E. PATTERSON, Deceased; MEGAN P. PELINO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TODD DOUGLAS PELINO, Deceased; STEVEN POLLICINO and CELESTE POLLICINO, Individually as Surviving Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of STEVEN POLLICINO, Deceased; VICKI TURESKI as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANE POLLICINO, Surviving Spouse of STEVEN POLLICINO; ELAINE P. MILLER and CORRINE KRACHTUS, Individually and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DAPHNE POULETSOS, Deceased; JANICE K. PUNCHES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JACK D. PUNCHES, Deceased; MICHAEL QUINN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES QUINN, Deceased; NOREEN QUINN as Surviving Parent of JAMES QUINN; MICHAEL QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; JOSEPH QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; NANCY HOLZHAUER, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GERARD P. RAUZI, Deceased; MARILYN REICH, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HOWARD REICH, Deceased; 9 JAMES J. RICHES, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES C. RICHES, Deceased; RITA RICHES as Surviving Parent of JAMES C. RICHES; TIMOTHY RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; DANIEL RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; THOMAS RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; BARBARA ROPITEAU-GALLOWAY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU, Deceased; JEAN-MARC ROPITEAU as Surviving Sibling of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU; BRENDAN RYAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KRISTIN IRVINE RYAN, Deceased; BERNARD P. SALAMONE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARJORIE C. SALAMONE, Deceased; DANIELLE BEHAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN SALERNO, Deceased; SALLY CALVIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK SALVATERRA, Deceased; CHRISTIAN SALVATERRA, as Surviving Child of FRANK SALVATERRA; EUGENIA BOGADO, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO, Deceased; LUIS SAMANIEGO as Surviving Sibling of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO; LYNNE SAN PHILLIP, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP, Deceased; CARRIE SAN PHILLIP as Surviving Child of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP; ABRAHAM SCOTT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANICE M. SCOTT, Deceased; DARA SEAMAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL SEAMAN, Deceased; MARIA SILVERSTEIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CRAIG SILVERSTEIN, Deceased; LAURIE SIMOWITZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARRY SIMOWITZ, Deceased; JAMES P. SLATTERY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER PAUL SLATTERY, Deceased; 10 SUSAN M. SLIWAK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT F. SLIWAK, Deceased; MICHAEL T. JAMMEN, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HEATHER L. SMITH, Deceased; YONGJIN L. SONG and HYUNGSHIN K. SONG, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DANIEL W. SONG a/k/a WON-HYEONG SONG, Deceased; FRANK SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; JULIE SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; CHRISTINA L. KMINEK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARI-RAE SOPPER, Deceased; CHRISTINE SPENCER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT A. SPENCER, Deceased; JACQUELINE GALLERON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SELINA SUTTER, Deceased; LORRAINE SZOCIK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KEVIN T. SZOCIK, Deceased; MARC TADDONIO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL TADDONIO, Deceased; JANE TERRENZI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN TERRENZI, Deceased; NORMAN THOMPSON and PATRICIA THOMPSON, Individually as Surviving Parents of NIGEL THOMPSON; MARK THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; NEAL THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; BASIL G. THORPE and VALDA M. BINNS, Individually, and as Co-Administrators of the Estate of NICHOLA ANGELA THORPE, Deceased; ANNE TODISCO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD TODISCO, Deceased; GREGORY TODISCO as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; LISA DEBARBRIE as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; TANJA TOMASEVIC, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VLADIMIR TOMASEVIC, Deceased; DORRY GROH-TOMPSETT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEPHEN TOMPSETT, Deceased; 11 MARY ELIZABETH TUCKER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL P. TUCKER, Deceased; JENNIFER VAUK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD VAUK, Deceased; DENNIS VIANNA and MARILYNDA VIANNA, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of MATHEW G. VIANNA, Deceased; NAYDA VOSKERIJIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GARO VOSKERIJIAN, Deceased; CAROL WALDIE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH WALDIE, Deceased; ANDREW PETISCE as Surviving Stepchild of KENNETH WALDIE; ALLISON WALLICE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN WALLICE, JR., Deceased; MICHELLE GARTNER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DINAH WEBSTER, Deceased; MARCIA WEISS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID T. WEISS, Deceased; PATRICK WELSH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DEBORAH ANNE WELSH, Deceased; ELIZABETH ANN PAYNE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM WILSON, Deceased; BENJAMIN WONG, Individually as Father, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JENNIFER Y. WONG, Deceased; PAMELA WORKS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN BENTLEY WORKS, Deceased; PATRICIA GREENE-WOTTON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodney Wotton, Deceased; WILLIAM WREN and CHRISTOPHER WREN, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of WILLIAM WREN, Deceased and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of PATRICIA WREN, Surviving Spouse of WILLIAM WREN; KATHY A. CORDERO, Individually; PATRICIA CUBAS-BIELFELD, Individually; VIRGINIA DICHIARA, Individually; ROBERT EICHELE and CARMELA EICHELE, Individually; 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3756 Filed 10/16/17 Page 13 of 14 KEVIN FARRELL, Individually; CHONG P. FARRELL, Individually; MICHAEL HENRY and REBECCA HENRY, Individually; JAMES B. LEACH and CARRIE LEACH, Individually; ERIC LEVINE, Individually; JAMES McCAFFREY and AGNES McCAFFREY, Individually; EDWARD NICHOLLS, and STACIE NICHOLLS, Individually; VALENCIAL. PARKER, Individually; KEVIN WARD, Individually; LING N. YOUNG and DONALD M. YOUNG, Individually; Dated: Westchester, New York October 16, 2017/s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3756 Filed 10/16/17 Page 14 of 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 16th day of October 2017, I caused copies of the foregoing document to be served electronically pursuant to the Court’s ECF system and by United States first-class mail on any parties not participating with the Court’s ECF system as thereafter advised by the Court./s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 14

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Frank H. Granito, III on behalf of Diane Barnes, Marco Calle, Anne Earthman, Damien Earthman, Frank Fetchet, Mary Fetchet, Bridget Finnegan, Erin Finnegan, Michael Finnegan, Patricia Fitzsimons, Carlos Gamboa, Cathy Geyer, Michele Geyer, Joseph Gilly, Phyllis Gilly, Gerald Golkin, Janet Golkin, Susan Golkin, Blanca Gomez, Teresa Gomez, Anna Granitto, Cosimo Granitto, Filippa Granitto, Mario Granitto, Raymond Habib, Thomas Heidenberger, Mary Heller, Alice Henry, Edward Henry, Tennyson Huie, Sheri Iskenderian, Jennifer Jardim, Christine Jean-Pierre, Elizabeth Jordan, Geoffrey Judge, Dohee Kang, Frederick Kelley, Janet Kelley, Joanne Kelly, Alison Kinney, Paul Kolpak, Thaddeus Kolpak, Vivian Kolpak, Alexis Kolpak Lerner, Elizabeth Kovalcin, Anna Kren, Sandra Munro, Sandra Pangborn, Andrea Sassone, Maureen Stines, Janine Wentworth. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 1:17-cv-02003-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3757 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK This document relates to: Ashton, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 17-cv-02003 (GBD)(SN) Ashton, et al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(SN) APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL To the Clerk of Court and all parties of record: I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this Court, and I appear in this case as counsel for the Burlingame subset of plaintiffs in the above consolidated action: SHERI G. BURLINGAME, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES FRANK BURLINGAME, III, Deceased; RUDY ABAD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARIE ROSE ABAD, Deceased; CYNTHIA LYNN BARKWAY, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID MICHAEL BARKWAY, Deceased; MAUREEN BASNICKI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH BASNICKI, Deceased; BHOLA AND BASMATTIE BISHUNDAT, Individually as Parents, and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of KRIS ROMEO BISHUNDAT; DEBRA LAVENDER, Individually as Sibling, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Deceased; DEBRA LAVENDER as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Surviving Father of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; LUCY BOCCHINO, Surviving Mother of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; and THOMAS BOCCHINO, Surviving Sibling of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; IRENE BOEHM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRUCE BOEHM, Deceased; 1 NANCY H. KIMBELL, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY JANE BOOTH, Deceased; FRANCISCO BOURDIER and MAGDALENA BOURDIER Individually as Surviving Parents of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; MANUEL BOURDIER as Surviving Sibling of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; KRISTEN BREITWEISER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD BREITWEISER, Deceased; CAROLINE BREITWEISER as Surviving Child of RONALD BREITWEISER; ERICA BRENNAN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER BRENNAN, Deceased; KATHLEEN BRUNTON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT BRUNTON, Deceased; MICHAEL BRUNTON, as Surviving Sibling of VINCENT BRUNTON; ERNST H. BUCK and JOSEPHINE BUCK, Individually as Parents of GREGORY J. BUCK, Deceased; ELAINE M. CHEVALIER, Individually as Mother and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SWEDE CHEVALIER, Deceased; KENNETH CHU, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PAMELA CHU, Deceased; DEBORAH RAZZANO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANTHONY COLADONATO, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JULIAN COOPER, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER as Parent and Natural Guardian of J.C., a Minor, Surviving Child of JULIAN COOPER; THERESA COVE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES E. COVE, Deceased; JAMES CUDMORE, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of NEIL CUDMORE, Deceased; AMY WATERS, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT DAVIDSON, Deceased; STEPHEN DAVIDSON, as Surviving Parent of SCOTT DAVIDSON; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DONALD A. DELAPENHA, Deceased; SAMANTHA DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; 2 ROBERT DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA as Parent and Natural Guardian of M.D., a Minor, Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; KATHRYN R. DENNIS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS F. DENNIS, Deceased; IRENE DICKEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH DICKEY, Deceased; ROSEMARY DILLARD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDDIE DILLARD, Deceased; LESLIE DIMMLING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM DIMMLING, Deceased; GREGORY DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; NICHOLAS DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; RUDY DIMMLING as Surviving Sibling of WILLIAM DIMMLING; MARGUERITA DOMANICO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES DOMANICO, Deceased; CHRISTINA KURINZI as Surviving Child of JAMES DOMANICO; MAUREEN S. DOMINGUEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, Deceased; CHRISTOPHER DOWLING, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY YOLANDA DOWLING, Deceased; CYNTHIA M. DROZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES DROZ, Deceased; JACQUELINE EATON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT EATON, Deceased; CORRINE J. EVANS and CHARLES R. EVANS, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of ERIC B. EVANS, Deceased; CATHERINE ANN FAUGHNAN, Individually as Spouse as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN, Deceased; SIENA FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JULIET FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LIAM FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; THOMAS FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JOAN FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; 3 DIANE BARNES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LYNNE FAUGHNAN LEE as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MAUREEN STINES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MARCO CALLE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HENRY HOMERO FERNANDEZ, Deceased; MARY AND FRANK FETCHET, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of BRADLEY FETCHET, Deceased; ERIN FINNEGAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Deceased; BRIDGET FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; ERIN FINNEGAN as Mother and Natural Guardian of F.F, a Minor, Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; PATRICIA FITZSIMONS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD FITZSIMONS, Deceased; CARLOS GAMBOA, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GIANN F. GAMBOA, Deceased; CATHY GEYER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES G. GEYER, Deceased; MICHELE GEYER as Surviving Child of JAMES G. GEYER; PHYLLIS GILLY and JOSEPH GILLY, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Laura Gilly, Deceased; GERALD GOLKIN and JANET GOLKIN, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ANDREW H. GOLKIN, Deceased; SUSAN GOLKIN as Surviving Sibling of ANDREW H. GOLKIN; TERESA GOMEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ENRIQUE A. GOMEZ, Deceased; BLANCA GOMEZ, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of JOSE B. GOMEZ, Deceased; SANDRA MUNRO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ELVIRA GRANITTO, Deceased; ANNE EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; DAMIEN EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; 4 ANNA GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; COSIMO GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; MARIO GRANITTO, as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; FILIPPA GRANITTO as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; RAYMOND HABIB, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARBARA HABIB, Deceased; THOMAS P. HEIDENBERGER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHELE HEIDENBERGER, Deceased; MARY JEAN HELLER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of H. JOSEPH HELLER, Deceased; EDWARD HENRY and ALICE HENRY, Individually, and as Surviving Parents and as Personal Representatives Estate of JOSEPH PATRICK HENRY, Deceased; TENNYSON HUIE, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SUSAN HUIE, Deceased; SHERI ANN ISKENDERIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ARAM ISKENDERIAN, Deceased; JENNIFER L. JARDIM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARK S. JARDIM, Deceased; CHRISTINE JEAN-PIERRE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCOIS JEAN-PIERRE, Deceased; ELIZABETH JORDAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT JORDAN, Deceased; GEOFFREY JUDGE, Individually a Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANN JUDGE, Deceased; DOHEE KANG, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOON KOO KANG, Deceased; JANET KELLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FREDERICK KELLEY, Deceased; FREDERICK KELLEY as Surviving Child of FREDERICK KELLEY; JOANNE KELLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES KELLY, Deceased; ALISON M. KINNEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN KINNEY, Deceased; 5 PAUL AND VIVIAN KOLPAK, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of VANESSA KOLPAK, Deceased; THADDEUS KOLPAK as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ALEXIS KOLPAK LERNER as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ELIZABETH KOVALCIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID P. KOVALCIN, Deceased; ANNA M. KREN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN J. KREN, Deceased; ANDREA SASSONE as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN; JANINE WENTWORTH as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN SANDRA LANG PANGBORN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRENDAN LANG, Deceased; DONNA CABALLERO and WILLIAM M. LANG, Individually as Siblings and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ROSEANN LANG, Deceased; CAROLANN LARSEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT LARSEN, Deceased; CAROLE LEAVEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH GERARD LEAVEY, Deceased; DENNIS LEVI and JENNIFER LEVI-LONGYEAR, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JOHN LEVI, Deceased; JOSEPH J. REITANO as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT LITTO, Deceased; LINDA LITTO as Surviving Spouse of VINCENT LITTO; CATHERINE LITTO-PETRAS as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KRISTEN SERRA as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KIMBERLY REX as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; JOSEPH REITANO as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL LITTO and MARIE LITTO, Surviving Parents of VINCENT LITTO; ELIZABETH DAVILA-LOPEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DANIEL LOPEZ, Deceased; EILEEN LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FARRELL LYNCH, Deceased; 6 CHRISTINA LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD D. LYNCH, Deceased; LORRAINE LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SEAN LYNCH, Deceased; GRACE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; MARY ROSE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; SEAN LYNCH, Jr., as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; VALERIE MAGEE, Individually as Surviving Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN MAGEE, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY as Mother and Natural Guardian of M.M. and T.M., Surviving Children of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III; MEGAN MANNING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TERENCE JOHN MANNING, Deceased; MAIREAD MANNING as Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; MEGAN MANNING as Mother and Natural Guardian of T.M., Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; NICHOLAS MAOUNIS, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MAOUNIS, Deceased; SHEILA MARTELLO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MARTELLO, Deceased; MARGARET MATHERS, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES MATHERS, Deceased; LYNN McGUINN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCIS McGUINN, Deceased; TARYN McHALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS McHALE, Deceased; ELIZABETH McLAUGHLIN O’BRIEN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT McLAUGHLIN, Deceased; ELIZABETH McNALLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDMUND MCNALLY, Deceased; JOSEPH RICHARD MICKLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY, Deceased; MARIE MICKLEY as Surviving Child of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY; 7 ARJAN MIRPURI, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RAJESH MIRPURI, Deceased; SUSANNE MLADENIK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JEFFREY P. MLADENIK, Deceased; MARK MORABITO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LAURA LEE MORABITO, Deceased; CATHERINE MORAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KATHLEEN MORAN, Deceased; KIMBERLY A. MARTONE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. MORRISON, Deceased; MADELINE LEW MOY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TEDDINGTON H. MOY, Deceased; PATRICK MULLAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL D. MULLAN, Deceased; AMY NACKE MARTINEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUIS J. NACKE, Deceased; HEIDI NAPLES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK J. NAPLES, Deceased; AMY NEWTON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Deceased; SUSAN NEWTON-CARTER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON-CARTER, Deceased; CHRISTINE O'BERG CONNOLLY, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DENNIS O'BERG, Deceased; DENNIS O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; DOROTHY O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; LISA O'BRIEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TIMOTHY O'BRIEN, Deceased; ANTOINETTE D. OGNIBENE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PHILLIP PAUL OGNIBENE, Deceased; MARY DUFF-ORTALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER KEITH ORTALE, Deceased; CATHERINE GRIMES, Individually as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY ORTALE, Surviving Mother of PETER KEITH ORTALE; MARY MALITAS as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; 8 JULIE ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; GILBERT ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; DANIEL ORTH, MICHELLE ORTH and ELIZABETH ORTH, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JANE MARIE ORTH, Deceased; WANDA GARCIA-ORTIZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EMILIO ORTIZ, Deceased; ALEXANDRA M. ORTIZ RESZKA, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SONIA M. ORTIZ, Deceased; JEAN M. PALOMBO, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK A. PALOMBO, Deceased; CAROLYN PANATIER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. PANATIER, Deceased; NAVILA PATTERSON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BERNARD E. PATTERSON, Deceased; MEGAN P. PELINO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TODD DOUGLAS PELINO, Deceased; STEVEN POLLICINO and CELESTE POLLICINO, Individually as Surviving Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of STEVEN POLLICINO, Deceased; VICKI TURESKI as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANE POLLICINO, Surviving Spouse of STEVEN POLLICINO; ELAINE P. MILLER and CORRINE KRACHTUS, Individually and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DAPHNE POULETSOS, Deceased; JANICE K. PUNCHES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JACK D. PUNCHES, Deceased; MICHAEL QUINN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES QUINN, Deceased; NOREEN QUINN as Surviving Parent of JAMES QUINN; MICHAEL QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; JOSEPH QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; NANCY HOLZHAUER, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GERARD P. RAUZI, Deceased; MARILYN REICH, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HOWARD REICH, Deceased; 9 JAMES J. RICHES, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES C. RICHES, Deceased; RITA RICHES as Surviving Parent of JAMES C. RICHES; TIMOTHY RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; DANIEL RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; THOMAS RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; BARBARA ROPITEAU-GALLOWAY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU, Deceased; JEAN-MARC ROPITEAU as Surviving Sibling of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU; BRENDAN RYAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KRISTIN IRVINE RYAN, Deceased; BERNARD P. SALAMONE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARJORIE C. SALAMONE, Deceased; DANIELLE BEHAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN SALERNO, Deceased; SALLY CALVIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK SALVATERRA, Deceased; CHRISTIAN SALVATERRA, as Surviving Child of FRANK SALVATERRA; EUGENIA BOGADO, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO, Deceased; LUIS SAMANIEGO as Surviving Sibling of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO; LYNNE SAN PHILLIP, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP, Deceased; CARRIE SAN PHILLIP as Surviving Child of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP; ABRAHAM SCOTT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANICE M. SCOTT, Deceased; DARA SEAMAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL SEAMAN, Deceased; MARIA SILVERSTEIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CRAIG SILVERSTEIN, Deceased; LAURIE SIMOWITZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARRY SIMOWITZ, Deceased; JAMES P. SLATTERY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER PAUL SLATTERY, Deceased; 10 SUSAN M. SLIWAK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT F. SLIWAK, Deceased; MICHAEL T. JAMMEN, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HEATHER L. SMITH, Deceased; YONGJIN L. SONG and HYUNGSHIN K. SONG, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DANIEL W. SONG a/k/a WON-HYEONG SONG, Deceased; FRANK SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; JULIE SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; CHRISTINA L. KMINEK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARI-RAE SOPPER, Deceased; CHRISTINE SPENCER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT A. SPENCER, Deceased; JACQUELINE GALLERON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SELINA SUTTER, Deceased; LORRAINE SZOCIK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KEVIN T. SZOCIK, Deceased; MARC TADDONIO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL TADDONIO, Deceased; JANE TERRENZI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN TERRENZI, Deceased; NORMAN THOMPSON and PATRICIA THOMPSON, Individually as Surviving Parents of NIGEL THOMPSON; MARK THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; NEAL THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; BASIL G. THORPE and VALDA M. BINNS, Individually, and as Co-Administrators of the Estate of NICHOLA ANGELA THORPE, Deceased; ANNE TODISCO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD TODISCO, Deceased; GREGORY TODISCO as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; LISA DEBARBRIE as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; TANJA TOMASEVIC, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VLADIMIR TOMASEVIC, Deceased; DORRY GROH-TOMPSETT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEPHEN TOMPSETT, Deceased; 11 MARY ELIZABETH TUCKER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL P. TUCKER, Deceased; JENNIFER VAUK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD VAUK, Deceased; DENNIS VIANNA and MARILYNDA VIANNA, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of MATHEW G. VIANNA, Deceased; NAYDA VOSKERIJIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GARO VOSKERIJIAN, Deceased; CAROL WALDIE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH WALDIE, Deceased; ANDREW PETISCE as Surviving Stepchild of KENNETH WALDIE; ALLISON WALLICE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN WALLICE, JR., Deceased; MICHELLE GARTNER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DINAH WEBSTER, Deceased; MARCIA WEISS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID T. WEISS, Deceased; PATRICK WELSH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DEBORAH ANNE WELSH, Deceased; ELIZABETH ANN PAYNE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM WILSON, Deceased; BENJAMIN WONG, Individually as Father, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JENNIFER Y. WONG, Deceased; PAMELA WORKS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN BENTLEY WORKS, Deceased; PATRICIA GREENE-WOTTON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodney Wotton, Deceased; WILLIAM WREN and CHRISTOPHER WREN, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of WILLIAM WREN, Deceased and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of PATRICIA WREN, Surviving Spouse of WILLIAM WREN; KATHY A. CORDERO, Individually; PATRICIA CUBAS-BIELFELD, Individually; VIRGINIA DICHIARA, Individually; ROBERT EICHELE and CARMELA EICHELE, Individually; 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3757 Filed 10/16/17 Page 13 of 14 KEVIN FARRELL, Individually; CHONG P. FARRELL, Individually; MICHAEL HENRY and REBECCA HENRY, Individually; JAMES B. LEACH and CARRIE LEACH, Individually; ERIC LEVINE, Individually; JAMES McCAFFREY and AGNES McCAFFREY, Individually; EDWARD NICHOLLS, and STACIE NICHOLLS, Individually; VALENCIAL. PARKER, Individually; KEVIN WARD, Individually; LING N. YOUNG and DONALD M. YOUNG, Individually; Dated: Westchester, New York October 16, 2017/s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3757 Filed 10/16/17 Page 14 of 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 16th day of October 2017, I caused copies of the foregoing document to be served electronically pursuant to the Court’s ECF system and by United States first-class mail on any parties not participating with the Court’s ECF system as thereafter advised by the Court./s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 14

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Frank H. Granito, III on behalf of Donna Caballero, Elizabeth Davila-Lopez, Mary Duff-Ortale, Catherine Grimes, William Lang, Carolann Larsen, Carole Leavey, Dennis Levi, Jennifer Levi-Longyear, Linda Litto, Catherine Litto-Petras, Christina Lynch, Eileen Lynch, Grace Lynch, Lorraine Lynch, Sean Lynch, Jr., Valerie Magee, Mary Malitas, Brinley Maloney, Mairead Manning, Megan Manning, Nicholas Maounis, Sheila Martello, Kimberly Martone, Margaret Mathers, Lynn Mcguinn, Taryn Mchale, Elizabeth Mclaughlin, Elizabeth Mcnally, Joseph Mickley, Marie Mickley, Arjan Mirpurj, Susanne Mladenik, Mark Morabito, Catherine Moran, Madeline Moy, Patrick Mullan, Amy Nacke, Heidi Naples, Amy Newton, Susan Newton-Carter, Christine O'berg Connolly, Lisa O'brien, Dennis Oberg, Dorothy Oberg, Antoinette Ognibene, Gilbert Ortale, Julie Ortale, Joseph Reitano, Kimberly Rex, Mary Rose Lynch, Kristen Serra. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 1:17-cv-02003-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3758 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK This document relates to: Ashton, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 17-cv-02003 (GBD)(SN) Ashton, et al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(SN) APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL To the Clerk of Court and all parties of record: I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this Court, and I appear in this case as counsel for the Burlingame subset of plaintiffs in the above consolidated action: SHERI G. BURLINGAME, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES FRANK BURLINGAME, III, Deceased; RUDY ABAD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARIE ROSE ABAD, Deceased; CYNTHIA LYNN BARKWAY, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID MICHAEL BARKWAY, Deceased; MAUREEN BASNICKI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH BASNICKI, Deceased; BHOLA AND BASMATTIE BISHUNDAT, Individually as Parents, and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of KRIS ROMEO BISHUNDAT; DEBRA LAVENDER, Individually as Sibling, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Deceased; DEBRA LAVENDER as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Surviving Father of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; LUCY BOCCHINO, Surviving Mother of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; and THOMAS BOCCHINO, Surviving Sibling of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; IRENE BOEHM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRUCE BOEHM, Deceased; 1 NANCY H. KIMBELL, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY JANE BOOTH, Deceased; FRANCISCO BOURDIER and MAGDALENA BOURDIER Individually as Surviving Parents of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; MANUEL BOURDIER as Surviving Sibling of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; KRISTEN BREITWEISER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD BREITWEISER, Deceased; CAROLINE BREITWEISER as Surviving Child of RONALD BREITWEISER; ERICA BRENNAN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER BRENNAN, Deceased; KATHLEEN BRUNTON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT BRUNTON, Deceased; MICHAEL BRUNTON, as Surviving Sibling of VINCENT BRUNTON; ERNST H. BUCK and JOSEPHINE BUCK, Individually as Parents of GREGORY J. BUCK, Deceased; ELAINE M. CHEVALIER, Individually as Mother and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SWEDE CHEVALIER, Deceased; KENNETH CHU, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PAMELA CHU, Deceased; DEBORAH RAZZANO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANTHONY COLADONATO, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JULIAN COOPER, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER as Parent and Natural Guardian of J.C., a Minor, Surviving Child of JULIAN COOPER; THERESA COVE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES E. COVE, Deceased; JAMES CUDMORE, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of NEIL CUDMORE, Deceased; AMY WATERS, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT DAVIDSON, Deceased; STEPHEN DAVIDSON, as Surviving Parent of SCOTT DAVIDSON; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DONALD A. DELAPENHA, Deceased; SAMANTHA DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; 2 ROBERT DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA as Parent and Natural Guardian of M.D., a Minor, Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; KATHRYN R. DENNIS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS F. DENNIS, Deceased; IRENE DICKEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH DICKEY, Deceased; ROSEMARY DILLARD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDDIE DILLARD, Deceased; LESLIE DIMMLING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM DIMMLING, Deceased; GREGORY DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; NICHOLAS DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; RUDY DIMMLING as Surviving Sibling of WILLIAM DIMMLING; MARGUERITA DOMANICO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES DOMANICO, Deceased; CHRISTINA KURINZI as Surviving Child of JAMES DOMANICO; MAUREEN S. DOMINGUEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, Deceased; CHRISTOPHER DOWLING, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY YOLANDA DOWLING, Deceased; CYNTHIA M. DROZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES DROZ, Deceased; JACQUELINE EATON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT EATON, Deceased; CORRINE J. EVANS and CHARLES R. EVANS, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of ERIC B. EVANS, Deceased; CATHERINE ANN FAUGHNAN, Individually as Spouse as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN, Deceased; SIENA FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JULIET FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LIAM FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; THOMAS FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JOAN FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; 3 DIANE BARNES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LYNNE FAUGHNAN LEE as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MAUREEN STINES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MARCO CALLE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HENRY HOMERO FERNANDEZ, Deceased; MARY AND FRANK FETCHET, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of BRADLEY FETCHET, Deceased; ERIN FINNEGAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Deceased; BRIDGET FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; ERIN FINNEGAN as Mother and Natural Guardian of F.F, a Minor, Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; PATRICIA FITZSIMONS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD FITZSIMONS, Deceased; CARLOS GAMBOA, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GIANN F. GAMBOA, Deceased; CATHY GEYER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES G. GEYER, Deceased; MICHELE GEYER as Surviving Child of JAMES G. GEYER; PHYLLIS GILLY and JOSEPH GILLY, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Laura Gilly, Deceased; GERALD GOLKIN and JANET GOLKIN, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ANDREW H. GOLKIN, Deceased; SUSAN GOLKIN as Surviving Sibling of ANDREW H. GOLKIN; TERESA GOMEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ENRIQUE A. GOMEZ, Deceased; BLANCA GOMEZ, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of JOSE B. GOMEZ, Deceased; SANDRA MUNRO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ELVIRA GRANITTO, Deceased; ANNE EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; DAMIEN EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; 4 ANNA GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; COSIMO GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; MARIO GRANITTO, as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; FILIPPA GRANITTO as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; RAYMOND HABIB, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARBARA HABIB, Deceased; THOMAS P. HEIDENBERGER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHELE HEIDENBERGER, Deceased; MARY JEAN HELLER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of H. JOSEPH HELLER, Deceased; EDWARD HENRY and ALICE HENRY, Individually, and as Surviving Parents and as Personal Representatives Estate of JOSEPH PATRICK HENRY, Deceased; TENNYSON HUIE, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SUSAN HUIE, Deceased; SHERI ANN ISKENDERIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ARAM ISKENDERIAN, Deceased; JENNIFER L. JARDIM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARK S. JARDIM, Deceased; CHRISTINE JEAN-PIERRE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCOIS JEAN-PIERRE, Deceased; ELIZABETH JORDAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT JORDAN, Deceased; GEOFFREY JUDGE, Individually a Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANN JUDGE, Deceased; DOHEE KANG, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOON KOO KANG, Deceased; JANET KELLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FREDERICK KELLEY, Deceased; FREDERICK KELLEY as Surviving Child of FREDERICK KELLEY; JOANNE KELLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES KELLY, Deceased; ALISON M. KINNEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN KINNEY, Deceased; 5 PAUL AND VIVIAN KOLPAK, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of VANESSA KOLPAK, Deceased; THADDEUS KOLPAK as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ALEXIS KOLPAK LERNER as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ELIZABETH KOVALCIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID P. KOVALCIN, Deceased; ANNA M. KREN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN J. KREN, Deceased; ANDREA SASSONE as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN; JANINE WENTWORTH as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN SANDRA LANG PANGBORN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRENDAN LANG, Deceased; DONNA CABALLERO and WILLIAM M. LANG, Individually as Siblings and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ROSEANN LANG, Deceased; CAROLANN LARSEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT LARSEN, Deceased; CAROLE LEAVEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH GERARD LEAVEY, Deceased; DENNIS LEVI and JENNIFER LEVI-LONGYEAR, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JOHN LEVI, Deceased; JOSEPH J. REITANO as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT LITTO, Deceased; LINDA LITTO as Surviving Spouse of VINCENT LITTO; CATHERINE LITTO-PETRAS as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KRISTEN SERRA as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KIMBERLY REX as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; JOSEPH REITANO as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL LITTO and MARIE LITTO, Surviving Parents of VINCENT LITTO; ELIZABETH DAVILA-LOPEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DANIEL LOPEZ, Deceased; EILEEN LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FARRELL LYNCH, Deceased; 6 CHRISTINA LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD D. LYNCH, Deceased; LORRAINE LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SEAN LYNCH, Deceased; GRACE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; MARY ROSE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; SEAN LYNCH, Jr., as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; VALERIE MAGEE, Individually as Surviving Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN MAGEE, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY as Mother and Natural Guardian of M.M. and T.M., Surviving Children of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III; MEGAN MANNING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TERENCE JOHN MANNING, Deceased; MAIREAD MANNING as Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; MEGAN MANNING as Mother and Natural Guardian of T.M., Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; NICHOLAS MAOUNIS, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MAOUNIS, Deceased; SHEILA MARTELLO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MARTELLO, Deceased; MARGARET MATHERS, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES MATHERS, Deceased; LYNN McGUINN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCIS McGUINN, Deceased; TARYN McHALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS McHALE, Deceased; ELIZABETH McLAUGHLIN O’BRIEN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT McLAUGHLIN, Deceased; ELIZABETH McNALLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDMUND MCNALLY, Deceased; JOSEPH RICHARD MICKLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY, Deceased; MARIE MICKLEY as Surviving Child of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY; 7 ARJAN MIRPURI, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RAJESH MIRPURI, Deceased; SUSANNE MLADENIK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JEFFREY P. MLADENIK, Deceased; MARK MORABITO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LAURA LEE MORABITO, Deceased; CATHERINE MORAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KATHLEEN MORAN, Deceased; KIMBERLY A. MARTONE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. MORRISON, Deceased; MADELINE LEW MOY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TEDDINGTON H. MOY, Deceased; PATRICK MULLAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL D. MULLAN, Deceased; AMY NACKE MARTINEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUIS J. NACKE, Deceased; HEIDI NAPLES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK J. NAPLES, Deceased; AMY NEWTON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Deceased; SUSAN NEWTON-CARTER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON-CARTER, Deceased; CHRISTINE O'BERG CONNOLLY, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DENNIS O'BERG, Deceased; DENNIS O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; DOROTHY O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; LISA O'BRIEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TIMOTHY O'BRIEN, Deceased; ANTOINETTE D. OGNIBENE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PHILLIP PAUL OGNIBENE, Deceased; MARY DUFF-ORTALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER KEITH ORTALE, Deceased; CATHERINE GRIMES, Individually as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY ORTALE, Surviving Mother of PETER KEITH ORTALE; MARY MALITAS as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; 8 JULIE ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; GILBERT ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; DANIEL ORTH, MICHELLE ORTH and ELIZABETH ORTH, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JANE MARIE ORTH, Deceased; WANDA GARCIA-ORTIZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EMILIO ORTIZ, Deceased; ALEXANDRA M. ORTIZ RESZKA, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SONIA M. ORTIZ, Deceased; JEAN M. PALOMBO, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK A. PALOMBO, Deceased; CAROLYN PANATIER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. PANATIER, Deceased; NAVILA PATTERSON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BERNARD E. PATTERSON, Deceased; MEGAN P. PELINO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TODD DOUGLAS PELINO, Deceased; STEVEN POLLICINO and CELESTE POLLICINO, Individually as Surviving Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of STEVEN POLLICINO, Deceased; VICKI TURESKI as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANE POLLICINO, Surviving Spouse of STEVEN POLLICINO; ELAINE P. MILLER and CORRINE KRACHTUS, Individually and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DAPHNE POULETSOS, Deceased; JANICE K. PUNCHES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JACK D. PUNCHES, Deceased; MICHAEL QUINN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES QUINN, Deceased; NOREEN QUINN as Surviving Parent of JAMES QUINN; MICHAEL QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; JOSEPH QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; NANCY HOLZHAUER, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GERARD P. RAUZI, Deceased; MARILYN REICH, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HOWARD REICH, Deceased; 9 JAMES J. RICHES, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES C. RICHES, Deceased; RITA RICHES as Surviving Parent of JAMES C. RICHES; TIMOTHY RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; DANIEL RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; THOMAS RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; BARBARA ROPITEAU-GALLOWAY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU, Deceased; JEAN-MARC ROPITEAU as Surviving Sibling of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU; BRENDAN RYAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KRISTIN IRVINE RYAN, Deceased; BERNARD P. SALAMONE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARJORIE C. SALAMONE, Deceased; DANIELLE BEHAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN SALERNO, Deceased; SALLY CALVIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK SALVATERRA, Deceased; CHRISTIAN SALVATERRA, as Surviving Child of FRANK SALVATERRA; EUGENIA BOGADO, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO, Deceased; LUIS SAMANIEGO as Surviving Sibling of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO; LYNNE SAN PHILLIP, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP, Deceased; CARRIE SAN PHILLIP as Surviving Child of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP; ABRAHAM SCOTT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANICE M. SCOTT, Deceased; DARA SEAMAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL SEAMAN, Deceased; MARIA SILVERSTEIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CRAIG SILVERSTEIN, Deceased; LAURIE SIMOWITZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARRY SIMOWITZ, Deceased; JAMES P. SLATTERY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER PAUL SLATTERY, Deceased; 10 SUSAN M. SLIWAK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT F. SLIWAK, Deceased; MICHAEL T. JAMMEN, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HEATHER L. SMITH, Deceased; YONGJIN L. SONG and HYUNGSHIN K. SONG, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DANIEL W. SONG a/k/a WON-HYEONG SONG, Deceased; FRANK SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; JULIE SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; CHRISTINA L. KMINEK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARI-RAE SOPPER, Deceased; CHRISTINE SPENCER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT A. SPENCER, Deceased; JACQUELINE GALLERON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SELINA SUTTER, Deceased; LORRAINE SZOCIK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KEVIN T. SZOCIK, Deceased; MARC TADDONIO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL TADDONIO, Deceased; JANE TERRENZI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN TERRENZI, Deceased; NORMAN THOMPSON and PATRICIA THOMPSON, Individually as Surviving Parents of NIGEL THOMPSON; MARK THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; NEAL THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; BASIL G. THORPE and VALDA M. BINNS, Individually, and as Co-Administrators of the Estate of NICHOLA ANGELA THORPE, Deceased; ANNE TODISCO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD TODISCO, Deceased; GREGORY TODISCO as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; LISA DEBARBRIE as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; TANJA TOMASEVIC, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VLADIMIR TOMASEVIC, Deceased; DORRY GROH-TOMPSETT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEPHEN TOMPSETT, Deceased; 11 MARY ELIZABETH TUCKER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL P. TUCKER, Deceased; JENNIFER VAUK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD VAUK, Deceased; DENNIS VIANNA and MARILYNDA VIANNA, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of MATHEW G. VIANNA, Deceased; NAYDA VOSKERIJIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GARO VOSKERIJIAN, Deceased; CAROL WALDIE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH WALDIE, Deceased; ANDREW PETISCE as Surviving Stepchild of KENNETH WALDIE; ALLISON WALLICE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN WALLICE, JR., Deceased; MICHELLE GARTNER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DINAH WEBSTER, Deceased; MARCIA WEISS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID T. WEISS, Deceased; PATRICK WELSH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DEBORAH ANNE WELSH, Deceased; ELIZABETH ANN PAYNE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM WILSON, Deceased; BENJAMIN WONG, Individually as Father, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JENNIFER Y. WONG, Deceased; PAMELA WORKS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN BENTLEY WORKS, Deceased; PATRICIA GREENE-WOTTON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodney Wotton, Deceased; WILLIAM WREN and CHRISTOPHER WREN, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of WILLIAM WREN, Deceased and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of PATRICIA WREN, Surviving Spouse of WILLIAM WREN; KATHY A. CORDERO, Individually; PATRICIA CUBAS-BIELFELD, Individually; VIRGINIA DICHIARA, Individually; ROBERT EICHELE and CARMELA EICHELE, Individually; 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3758 Filed 10/16/17 Page 13 of 14 KEVIN FARRELL, Individually; CHONG P. FARRELL, Individually; MICHAEL HENRY and REBECCA HENRY, Individually; JAMES B. LEACH and CARRIE LEACH, Individually; ERIC LEVINE, Individually; JAMES McCAFFREY and AGNES McCAFFREY, Individually; EDWARD NICHOLLS, and STACIE NICHOLLS, Individually; VALENCIAL. PARKER, Individually; KEVIN WARD, Individually; LING N. YOUNG and DONALD M. YOUNG, Individually; Dated: Westchester, New York October 16, 2017/s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3758 Filed 10/16/17 Page 14 of 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 16th day of October 2017, I caused copies of the foregoing document to be served electronically pursuant to the Court’s ECF system and by United States first-class mail on any parties not participating with the Court’s ECF system as thereafter advised by the Court./s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 14

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Frank H. Granito, III on behalf of Danielle Behan, Valda Binns, Eugenia Bogado, Sally Calvin, Jacqueline Galleron, Wanda Garcia-Ortiz, Nancy Holzhauer, Michael Jammen, Christina Kminek, Corrine Krachtus, Elaine Miller, Daniel Orth, Elizabeth Orth, Michelle Orth, Alexandra Ortiz, Jean Palombo, Carolyn Panatier, Navila Patterson, Megan Pelino, Lynne Phillip, Celeste Pollicino, Steven Pollicino, Janice Punches, Joseph Quinn, Michael Quinn, Noreen Quinn, Marilyn Reich, Daniel Riches, James Riches, Rita Riches, Thomas Riches, Timothy Riches, Jean-Marc Ropiteau, Barbara Ropiteau-Galloway, Brendan Ryan, Bernard Salamone, Christian Salvaterra, Luis Samaniego, Carrie San Phillip, Abraham Scott, Dara Seaman, Maria Silverstein, Laurie Simowitz, James Slattery, Susan Sliwak, Frank Song, Hyungshin Song, Julie Song, Yongjin Song, Christine Spencer, Lorraine Szocik, Marc Taddonio, Jane Terrenzi, Mark Thompson, Neal Thompson, Norman Thompson, Patricia Thompson, Basil Thorpe, Vicki Tureski. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 1:17-cv-02003-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3759 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK This document relates to: Ashton, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 17-cv-02003 (GBD)(SN) Ashton, et al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(SN) APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL To the Clerk of Court and all parties of record: I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this Court, and I appear in this case as counsel for the Burlingame subset of plaintiffs in the above consolidated action: SHERI G. BURLINGAME, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES FRANK BURLINGAME, III, Deceased; RUDY ABAD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARIE ROSE ABAD, Deceased; CYNTHIA LYNN BARKWAY, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID MICHAEL BARKWAY, Deceased; MAUREEN BASNICKI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH BASNICKI, Deceased; BHOLA AND BASMATTIE BISHUNDAT, Individually as Parents, and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of KRIS ROMEO BISHUNDAT; DEBRA LAVENDER, Individually as Sibling, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Deceased; DEBRA LAVENDER as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Surviving Father of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; LUCY BOCCHINO, Surviving Mother of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; and THOMAS BOCCHINO, Surviving Sibling of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; IRENE BOEHM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRUCE BOEHM, Deceased; 1 NANCY H. KIMBELL, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY JANE BOOTH, Deceased; FRANCISCO BOURDIER and MAGDALENA BOURDIER Individually as Surviving Parents of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; MANUEL BOURDIER as Surviving Sibling of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; KRISTEN BREITWEISER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD BREITWEISER, Deceased; CAROLINE BREITWEISER as Surviving Child of RONALD BREITWEISER; ERICA BRENNAN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER BRENNAN, Deceased; KATHLEEN BRUNTON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT BRUNTON, Deceased; MICHAEL BRUNTON, as Surviving Sibling of VINCENT BRUNTON; ERNST H. BUCK and JOSEPHINE BUCK, Individually as Parents of GREGORY J. BUCK, Deceased; ELAINE M. CHEVALIER, Individually as Mother and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SWEDE CHEVALIER, Deceased; KENNETH CHU, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PAMELA CHU, Deceased; DEBORAH RAZZANO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANTHONY COLADONATO, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JULIAN COOPER, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER as Parent and Natural Guardian of J.C., a Minor, Surviving Child of JULIAN COOPER; THERESA COVE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES E. COVE, Deceased; JAMES CUDMORE, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of NEIL CUDMORE, Deceased; AMY WATERS, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT DAVIDSON, Deceased; STEPHEN DAVIDSON, as Surviving Parent of SCOTT DAVIDSON; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DONALD A. DELAPENHA, Deceased; SAMANTHA DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; 2 ROBERT DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA as Parent and Natural Guardian of M.D., a Minor, Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; KATHRYN R. DENNIS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS F. DENNIS, Deceased; IRENE DICKEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH DICKEY, Deceased; ROSEMARY DILLARD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDDIE DILLARD, Deceased; LESLIE DIMMLING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM DIMMLING, Deceased; GREGORY DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; NICHOLAS DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; RUDY DIMMLING as Surviving Sibling of WILLIAM DIMMLING; MARGUERITA DOMANICO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES DOMANICO, Deceased; CHRISTINA KURINZI as Surviving Child of JAMES DOMANICO; MAUREEN S. DOMINGUEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, Deceased; CHRISTOPHER DOWLING, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY YOLANDA DOWLING, Deceased; CYNTHIA M. DROZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES DROZ, Deceased; JACQUELINE EATON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT EATON, Deceased; CORRINE J. EVANS and CHARLES R. EVANS, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of ERIC B. EVANS, Deceased; CATHERINE ANN FAUGHNAN, Individually as Spouse as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN, Deceased; SIENA FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JULIET FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LIAM FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; THOMAS FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JOAN FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; 3 DIANE BARNES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LYNNE FAUGHNAN LEE as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MAUREEN STINES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MARCO CALLE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HENRY HOMERO FERNANDEZ, Deceased; MARY AND FRANK FETCHET, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of BRADLEY FETCHET, Deceased; ERIN FINNEGAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Deceased; BRIDGET FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; ERIN FINNEGAN as Mother and Natural Guardian of F.F, a Minor, Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; PATRICIA FITZSIMONS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD FITZSIMONS, Deceased; CARLOS GAMBOA, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GIANN F. GAMBOA, Deceased; CATHY GEYER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES G. GEYER, Deceased; MICHELE GEYER as Surviving Child of JAMES G. GEYER; PHYLLIS GILLY and JOSEPH GILLY, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Laura Gilly, Deceased; GERALD GOLKIN and JANET GOLKIN, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ANDREW H. GOLKIN, Deceased; SUSAN GOLKIN as Surviving Sibling of ANDREW H. GOLKIN; TERESA GOMEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ENRIQUE A. GOMEZ, Deceased; BLANCA GOMEZ, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of JOSE B. GOMEZ, Deceased; SANDRA MUNRO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ELVIRA GRANITTO, Deceased; ANNE EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; DAMIEN EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; 4 ANNA GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; COSIMO GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; MARIO GRANITTO, as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; FILIPPA GRANITTO as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; RAYMOND HABIB, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARBARA HABIB, Deceased; THOMAS P. HEIDENBERGER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHELE HEIDENBERGER, Deceased; MARY JEAN HELLER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of H. JOSEPH HELLER, Deceased; EDWARD HENRY and ALICE HENRY, Individually, and as Surviving Parents and as Personal Representatives Estate of JOSEPH PATRICK HENRY, Deceased; TENNYSON HUIE, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SUSAN HUIE, Deceased; SHERI ANN ISKENDERIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ARAM ISKENDERIAN, Deceased; JENNIFER L. JARDIM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARK S. JARDIM, Deceased; CHRISTINE JEAN-PIERRE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCOIS JEAN-PIERRE, Deceased; ELIZABETH JORDAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT JORDAN, Deceased; GEOFFREY JUDGE, Individually a Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANN JUDGE, Deceased; DOHEE KANG, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOON KOO KANG, Deceased; JANET KELLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FREDERICK KELLEY, Deceased; FREDERICK KELLEY as Surviving Child of FREDERICK KELLEY; JOANNE KELLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES KELLY, Deceased; ALISON M. KINNEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN KINNEY, Deceased; 5 PAUL AND VIVIAN KOLPAK, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of VANESSA KOLPAK, Deceased; THADDEUS KOLPAK as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ALEXIS KOLPAK LERNER as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ELIZABETH KOVALCIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID P. KOVALCIN, Deceased; ANNA M. KREN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN J. KREN, Deceased; ANDREA SASSONE as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN; JANINE WENTWORTH as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN SANDRA LANG PANGBORN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRENDAN LANG, Deceased; DONNA CABALLERO and WILLIAM M. LANG, Individually as Siblings and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ROSEANN LANG, Deceased; CAROLANN LARSEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT LARSEN, Deceased; CAROLE LEAVEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH GERARD LEAVEY, Deceased; DENNIS LEVI and JENNIFER LEVI-LONGYEAR, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JOHN LEVI, Deceased; JOSEPH J. REITANO as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT LITTO, Deceased; LINDA LITTO as Surviving Spouse of VINCENT LITTO; CATHERINE LITTO-PETRAS as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KRISTEN SERRA as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KIMBERLY REX as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; JOSEPH REITANO as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL LITTO and MARIE LITTO, Surviving Parents of VINCENT LITTO; ELIZABETH DAVILA-LOPEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DANIEL LOPEZ, Deceased; EILEEN LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FARRELL LYNCH, Deceased; 6 CHRISTINA LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD D. LYNCH, Deceased; LORRAINE LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SEAN LYNCH, Deceased; GRACE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; MARY ROSE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; SEAN LYNCH, Jr., as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; VALERIE MAGEE, Individually as Surviving Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN MAGEE, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY as Mother and Natural Guardian of M.M. and T.M., Surviving Children of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III; MEGAN MANNING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TERENCE JOHN MANNING, Deceased; MAIREAD MANNING as Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; MEGAN MANNING as Mother and Natural Guardian of T.M., Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; NICHOLAS MAOUNIS, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MAOUNIS, Deceased; SHEILA MARTELLO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MARTELLO, Deceased; MARGARET MATHERS, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES MATHERS, Deceased; LYNN McGUINN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCIS McGUINN, Deceased; TARYN McHALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS McHALE, Deceased; ELIZABETH McLAUGHLIN O’BRIEN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT McLAUGHLIN, Deceased; ELIZABETH McNALLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDMUND MCNALLY, Deceased; JOSEPH RICHARD MICKLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY, Deceased; MARIE MICKLEY as Surviving Child of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY; 7 ARJAN MIRPURI, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RAJESH MIRPURI, Deceased; SUSANNE MLADENIK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JEFFREY P. MLADENIK, Deceased; MARK MORABITO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LAURA LEE MORABITO, Deceased; CATHERINE MORAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KATHLEEN MORAN, Deceased; KIMBERLY A. MARTONE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. MORRISON, Deceased; MADELINE LEW MOY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TEDDINGTON H. MOY, Deceased; PATRICK MULLAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL D. MULLAN, Deceased; AMY NACKE MARTINEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUIS J. NACKE, Deceased; HEIDI NAPLES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK J. NAPLES, Deceased; AMY NEWTON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Deceased; SUSAN NEWTON-CARTER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON-CARTER, Deceased; CHRISTINE O'BERG CONNOLLY, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DENNIS O'BERG, Deceased; DENNIS O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; DOROTHY O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; LISA O'BRIEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TIMOTHY O'BRIEN, Deceased; ANTOINETTE D. OGNIBENE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PHILLIP PAUL OGNIBENE, Deceased; MARY DUFF-ORTALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER KEITH ORTALE, Deceased; CATHERINE GRIMES, Individually as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY ORTALE, Surviving Mother of PETER KEITH ORTALE; MARY MALITAS as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; 8 JULIE ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; GILBERT ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; DANIEL ORTH, MICHELLE ORTH and ELIZABETH ORTH, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JANE MARIE ORTH, Deceased; WANDA GARCIA-ORTIZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EMILIO ORTIZ, Deceased; ALEXANDRA M. ORTIZ RESZKA, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SONIA M. ORTIZ, Deceased; JEAN M. PALOMBO, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK A. PALOMBO, Deceased; CAROLYN PANATIER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. PANATIER, Deceased; NAVILA PATTERSON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BERNARD E. PATTERSON, Deceased; MEGAN P. PELINO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TODD DOUGLAS PELINO, Deceased; STEVEN POLLICINO and CELESTE POLLICINO, Individually as Surviving Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of STEVEN POLLICINO, Deceased; VICKI TURESKI as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANE POLLICINO, Surviving Spouse of STEVEN POLLICINO; ELAINE P. MILLER and CORRINE KRACHTUS, Individually and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DAPHNE POULETSOS, Deceased; JANICE K. PUNCHES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JACK D. PUNCHES, Deceased; MICHAEL QUINN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES QUINN, Deceased; NOREEN QUINN as Surviving Parent of JAMES QUINN; MICHAEL QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; JOSEPH QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; NANCY HOLZHAUER, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GERARD P. RAUZI, Deceased; MARILYN REICH, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HOWARD REICH, Deceased; 9 JAMES J. RICHES, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES C. RICHES, Deceased; RITA RICHES as Surviving Parent of JAMES C. RICHES; TIMOTHY RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; DANIEL RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; THOMAS RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; BARBARA ROPITEAU-GALLOWAY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU, Deceased; JEAN-MARC ROPITEAU as Surviving Sibling of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU; BRENDAN RYAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KRISTIN IRVINE RYAN, Deceased; BERNARD P. SALAMONE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARJORIE C. SALAMONE, Deceased; DANIELLE BEHAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN SALERNO, Deceased; SALLY CALVIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK SALVATERRA, Deceased; CHRISTIAN SALVATERRA, as Surviving Child of FRANK SALVATERRA; EUGENIA BOGADO, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO, Deceased; LUIS SAMANIEGO as Surviving Sibling of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO; LYNNE SAN PHILLIP, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP, Deceased; CARRIE SAN PHILLIP as Surviving Child of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP; ABRAHAM SCOTT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANICE M. SCOTT, Deceased; DARA SEAMAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL SEAMAN, Deceased; MARIA SILVERSTEIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CRAIG SILVERSTEIN, Deceased; LAURIE SIMOWITZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARRY SIMOWITZ, Deceased; JAMES P. SLATTERY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER PAUL SLATTERY, Deceased; 10 SUSAN M. SLIWAK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT F. SLIWAK, Deceased; MICHAEL T. JAMMEN, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HEATHER L. SMITH, Deceased; YONGJIN L. SONG and HYUNGSHIN K. SONG, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DANIEL W. SONG a/k/a WON-HYEONG SONG, Deceased; FRANK SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; JULIE SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; CHRISTINA L. KMINEK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARI-RAE SOPPER, Deceased; CHRISTINE SPENCER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT A. SPENCER, Deceased; JACQUELINE GALLERON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SELINA SUTTER, Deceased; LORRAINE SZOCIK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KEVIN T. SZOCIK, Deceased; MARC TADDONIO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL TADDONIO, Deceased; JANE TERRENZI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN TERRENZI, Deceased; NORMAN THOMPSON and PATRICIA THOMPSON, Individually as Surviving Parents of NIGEL THOMPSON; MARK THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; NEAL THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; BASIL G. THORPE and VALDA M. BINNS, Individually, and as Co-Administrators of the Estate of NICHOLA ANGELA THORPE, Deceased; ANNE TODISCO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD TODISCO, Deceased; GREGORY TODISCO as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; LISA DEBARBRIE as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; TANJA TOMASEVIC, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VLADIMIR TOMASEVIC, Deceased; DORRY GROH-TOMPSETT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEPHEN TOMPSETT, Deceased; 11 MARY ELIZABETH TUCKER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL P. TUCKER, Deceased; JENNIFER VAUK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD VAUK, Deceased; DENNIS VIANNA and MARILYNDA VIANNA, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of MATHEW G. VIANNA, Deceased; NAYDA VOSKERIJIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GARO VOSKERIJIAN, Deceased; CAROL WALDIE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH WALDIE, Deceased; ANDREW PETISCE as Surviving Stepchild of KENNETH WALDIE; ALLISON WALLICE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN WALLICE, JR., Deceased; MICHELLE GARTNER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DINAH WEBSTER, Deceased; MARCIA WEISS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID T. WEISS, Deceased; PATRICK WELSH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DEBORAH ANNE WELSH, Deceased; ELIZABETH ANN PAYNE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM WILSON, Deceased; BENJAMIN WONG, Individually as Father, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JENNIFER Y. WONG, Deceased; PAMELA WORKS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN BENTLEY WORKS, Deceased; PATRICIA GREENE-WOTTON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodney Wotton, Deceased; WILLIAM WREN and CHRISTOPHER WREN, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of WILLIAM WREN, Deceased and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of PATRICIA WREN, Surviving Spouse of WILLIAM WREN; KATHY A. CORDERO, Individually; PATRICIA CUBAS-BIELFELD, Individually; VIRGINIA DICHIARA, Individually; ROBERT EICHELE and CARMELA EICHELE, Individually; 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3759 Filed 10/16/17 Page 13 of 14 KEVIN FARRELL, Individually; CHONG P. FARRELL, Individually; MICHAEL HENRY and REBECCA HENRY, Individually; JAMES B. LEACH and CARRIE LEACH, Individually; ERIC LEVINE, Individually; JAMES McCAFFREY and AGNES McCAFFREY, Individually; EDWARD NICHOLLS, and STACIE NICHOLLS, Individually; VALENCIAL. PARKER, Individually; KEVIN WARD, Individually; LING N. YOUNG and DONALD M. YOUNG, Individually; Dated: Westchester, New York October 16, 2017/s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3759 Filed 10/16/17 Page 14 of 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 16th day of October 2017, I caused copies of the foregoing document to be served electronically pursuant to the Court’s ECF system and by United States first-class mail on any parties not participating with the Court’s ECF system as thereafter advised by the Court./s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 14

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Frank H. Granito, III on behalf of Elizabeth Ann Payne, Kathy Cordero, Patricia Cubas-Bielfeld, Lisa Debarbrie, Virginia Dichiara, Carmela Eichele, Robert Eichele, Chong Farrell, Kevin Farrell, Michelle Gartner, Patricia Greene-Wotton, Dorry Groh-Tompsett, Michael Henry, Rebecca Henry, Carrie Leach, James Leach, Eric Levine, Agnes Mccaffrey, James Mccaffrey, Edward Nicholls, Stacie Nicholls, Valencial Parker, Andrew Petisce, Anne Todisco, Gregory Todisco, Tanja Tomasevic, Mary Tucker, Jennifer Vauk, Dennis Vianna, Marilynda Vianna, Nayda Voskerijian, Carol Waldie, Allison Wallice, Kevin Ward, Marcia Weiss, Patrick Welsh, Benjamin Wong, Pamela Works, Christopher Wren, Patricia Wren, William Wren, Donald Young, Ling Young. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 1:17-cv-02003-GBD-SN

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3760 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK This document relates to: Ashton, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 17-cv-02003 (GBD)(SN) Ashton, et al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 02-cv-6977 (GBD)(SN) APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL To the Clerk of Court and all parties of record: I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this Court, and I appear in this case as counsel for the Burlingame subset of plaintiffs in the above consolidated action: SHERI G. BURLINGAME, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES FRANK BURLINGAME, III, Deceased; RUDY ABAD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARIE ROSE ABAD, Deceased; CYNTHIA LYNN BARKWAY, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID MICHAEL BARKWAY, Deceased; MAUREEN BASNICKI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH BASNICKI, Deceased; BHOLA AND BASMATTIE BISHUNDAT, Individually as Parents, and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of KRIS ROMEO BISHUNDAT; DEBRA LAVENDER, Individually as Sibling, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Deceased; DEBRA LAVENDER as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL BOCCHINO, Surviving Father of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; LUCY BOCCHINO, Surviving Mother of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; and THOMAS BOCCHINO, Surviving Sibling of MICHAEL BOCCHINO; IRENE BOEHM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRUCE BOEHM, Deceased; 1 NANCY H. KIMBELL, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY JANE BOOTH, Deceased; FRANCISCO BOURDIER and MAGDALENA BOURDIER Individually as Surviving Parents of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; MANUEL BOURDIER as Surviving Sibling of FRANCISCO BOURDIER; KRISTEN BREITWEISER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD BREITWEISER, Deceased; CAROLINE BREITWEISER as Surviving Child of RONALD BREITWEISER; ERICA BRENNAN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER BRENNAN, Deceased; KATHLEEN BRUNTON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT BRUNTON, Deceased; MICHAEL BRUNTON, as Surviving Sibling of VINCENT BRUNTON; ERNST H. BUCK and JOSEPHINE BUCK, Individually as Parents of GREGORY J. BUCK, Deceased; ELAINE M. CHEVALIER, Individually as Mother and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SWEDE CHEVALIER, Deceased; KENNETH CHU, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PAMELA CHU, Deceased; DEBORAH RAZZANO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANTHONY COLADONATO, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JULIAN COOPER, Deceased; MELINDA COOPER as Parent and Natural Guardian of J.C., a Minor, Surviving Child of JULIAN COOPER; THERESA COVE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES E. COVE, Deceased; JAMES CUDMORE, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of NEIL CUDMORE, Deceased; AMY WATERS, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT DAVIDSON, Deceased; STEPHEN DAVIDSON, as Surviving Parent of SCOTT DAVIDSON; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DONALD A. DELAPENHA, Deceased; SAMANTHA DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; 2 ROBERT DELAPENHA as Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; LORRAINE DELAPENHA FICHERA as Parent and Natural Guardian of M.D., a Minor, Surviving Child of DONALD A. DELAPENHA; KATHRYN R. DENNIS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS F. DENNIS, Deceased; IRENE DICKEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH DICKEY, Deceased; ROSEMARY DILLARD, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDDIE DILLARD, Deceased; LESLIE DIMMLING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM DIMMLING, Deceased; GREGORY DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; NICHOLAS DIMMLING as Surviving Child of WILLIAM DIMMLING; RUDY DIMMLING as Surviving Sibling of WILLIAM DIMMLING; MARGUERITA DOMANICO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES DOMANICO, Deceased; CHRISTINA KURINZI as Surviving Child of JAMES DOMANICO; MAUREEN S. DOMINGUEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, Deceased; CHRISTOPHER DOWLING, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY YOLANDA DOWLING, Deceased; CYNTHIA M. DROZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES DROZ, Deceased; JACQUELINE EATON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT EATON, Deceased; CORRINE J. EVANS and CHARLES R. EVANS, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of ERIC B. EVANS, Deceased; CATHERINE ANN FAUGHNAN, Individually as Spouse as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN, Deceased; SIENA FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JULIET FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LIAM FAUGHNAN as Surviving Child of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; THOMAS FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; JOAN FAUGHNAN as Surviving Parent of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; 3 DIANE BARNES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; LYNNE FAUGHNAN LEE as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MAUREEN STINES as Surviving Sibling of CHRISTOPHER FAUGHNAN; MARCO CALLE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HENRY HOMERO FERNANDEZ, Deceased; MARY AND FRANK FETCHET, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of BRADLEY FETCHET, Deceased; ERIN FINNEGAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Deceased; BRIDGET FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; MICHAEL FINNEGAN, Individually as Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; ERIN FINNEGAN as Mother and Natural Guardian of F.F, a Minor, Surviving Child of MICHAEL FINNEGAN; PATRICIA FITZSIMONS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD FITZSIMONS, Deceased; CARLOS GAMBOA, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GIANN F. GAMBOA, Deceased; CATHY GEYER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES G. GEYER, Deceased; MICHELE GEYER as Surviving Child of JAMES G. GEYER; PHYLLIS GILLY and JOSEPH GILLY, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Laura Gilly, Deceased; GERALD GOLKIN and JANET GOLKIN, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ANDREW H. GOLKIN, Deceased; SUSAN GOLKIN as Surviving Sibling of ANDREW H. GOLKIN; TERESA GOMEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ENRIQUE A. GOMEZ, Deceased; BLANCA GOMEZ, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of JOSE B. GOMEZ, Deceased; SANDRA MUNRO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ELVIRA GRANITTO, Deceased; ANNE EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; DAMIEN EARTHMAN as Surviving Child of ELVIRA GRANITTO; 4 ANNA GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; COSIMO GRANITTO as Surviving Parent of ELVIRA GRANITTO; MARIO GRANITTO, as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; FILIPPA GRANITTO as Surviving Sibling of ELVIRA GRANITTO; RAYMOND HABIB, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARBARA HABIB, Deceased; THOMAS P. HEIDENBERGER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHELE HEIDENBERGER, Deceased; MARY JEAN HELLER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of H. JOSEPH HELLER, Deceased; EDWARD HENRY and ALICE HENRY, Individually, and as Surviving Parents and as Personal Representatives Estate of JOSEPH PATRICK HENRY, Deceased; TENNYSON HUIE, Individually as Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SUSAN HUIE, Deceased; SHERI ANN ISKENDERIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ARAM ISKENDERIAN, Deceased; JENNIFER L. JARDIM, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARK S. JARDIM, Deceased; CHRISTINE JEAN-PIERRE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCOIS JEAN-PIERRE, Deceased; ELIZABETH JORDAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT JORDAN, Deceased; GEOFFREY JUDGE, Individually a Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ANN JUDGE, Deceased; DOHEE KANG, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOON KOO KANG, Deceased; JANET KELLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FREDERICK KELLEY, Deceased; FREDERICK KELLEY as Surviving Child of FREDERICK KELLEY; JOANNE KELLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES KELLY, Deceased; ALISON M. KINNEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN KINNEY, Deceased; 5 PAUL AND VIVIAN KOLPAK, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of VANESSA KOLPAK, Deceased; THADDEUS KOLPAK as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ALEXIS KOLPAK LERNER as Surviving Sibling of VANESSA KOLPAK; ELIZABETH KOVALCIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID P. KOVALCIN, Deceased; ANNA M. KREN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN J. KREN, Deceased; ANDREA SASSONE as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN; JANINE WENTWORTH as Surviving Child of JOHN J. KREN SANDRA LANG PANGBORN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRENDAN LANG, Deceased; DONNA CABALLERO and WILLIAM M. LANG, Individually as Siblings and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of ROSEANN LANG, Deceased; CAROLANN LARSEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SCOTT LARSEN, Deceased; CAROLE LEAVEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOSEPH GERARD LEAVEY, Deceased; DENNIS LEVI and JENNIFER LEVI-LONGYEAR, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JOHN LEVI, Deceased; JOSEPH J. REITANO as Personal Representative of the Estate of VINCENT LITTO, Deceased; LINDA LITTO as Surviving Spouse of VINCENT LITTO; CATHERINE LITTO-PETRAS as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KRISTEN SERRA as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; KIMBERLY REX as Surviving Child of VINCENT LITTO; JOSEPH REITANO as Proposed Personal Representative of the Estates of MICHAEL LITTO and MARIE LITTO, Surviving Parents of VINCENT LITTO; ELIZABETH DAVILA-LOPEZ, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DANIEL LOPEZ, Deceased; EILEEN LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FARRELL LYNCH, Deceased; 6 CHRISTINA LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD D. LYNCH, Deceased; LORRAINE LYNCH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SEAN LYNCH, Deceased; GRACE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; MARY ROSE LYNCH as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; SEAN LYNCH, Jr., as Surviving Child of SEAN LYNCH; VALERIE MAGEE, Individually as Surviving Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN MAGEE, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III, Deceased; BRINLEY MALONEY as Mother and Natural Guardian of M.M. and T.M., Surviving Children of EDWARD F. MALONEY, III; MEGAN MANNING, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TERENCE JOHN MANNING, Deceased; MAIREAD MANNING as Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; MEGAN MANNING as Mother and Natural Guardian of T.M., Surviving Child of TERENCE JOHN MANNING; NICHOLAS MAOUNIS, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MAOUNIS, Deceased; SHEILA MARTELLO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES MARTELLO, Deceased; MARGARET MATHERS, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHARLES MATHERS, Deceased; LYNN McGUINN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANCIS McGUINN, Deceased; TARYN McHALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS McHALE, Deceased; ELIZABETH McLAUGHLIN O’BRIEN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT McLAUGHLIN, Deceased; ELIZABETH McNALLY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EDMUND MCNALLY, Deceased; JOSEPH RICHARD MICKLEY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY, Deceased; MARIE MICKLEY as Surviving Child of PATRICIA E. MICKLEY; 7 ARJAN MIRPURI, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RAJESH MIRPURI, Deceased; SUSANNE MLADENIK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JEFFREY P. MLADENIK, Deceased; MARK MORABITO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LAURA LEE MORABITO, Deceased; CATHERINE MORAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KATHLEEN MORAN, Deceased; KIMBERLY A. MARTONE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. MORRISON, Deceased; MADELINE LEW MOY, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TEDDINGTON H. MOY, Deceased; PATRICK MULLAN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL D. MULLAN, Deceased; AMY NACKE MARTINEZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUIS J. NACKE, Deceased; HEIDI NAPLES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK J. NAPLES, Deceased; AMY NEWTON, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Deceased; SUSAN NEWTON-CARTER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER NEWTON-CARTER, Deceased; CHRISTINE O'BERG CONNOLLY, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DENNIS O'BERG, Deceased; DENNIS O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; DOROTHY O’BERG, Individually and as Surviving Parent of DENNIS O’BERG; LISA O'BRIEN, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TIMOTHY O'BRIEN, Deceased; ANTOINETTE D. OGNIBENE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PHILLIP PAUL OGNIBENE, Deceased; MARY DUFF-ORTALE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PETER KEITH ORTALE, Deceased; CATHERINE GRIMES, Individually as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY ORTALE, Surviving Mother of PETER KEITH ORTALE; MARY MALITAS as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; 8 JULIE ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; GILBERT ORTALE as Surviving Sibling of PETER KEITH ORTALE; DANIEL ORTH, MICHELLE ORTH and ELIZABETH ORTH, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of JANE MARIE ORTH, Deceased; WANDA GARCIA-ORTIZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of EMILIO ORTIZ, Deceased; ALEXANDRA M. ORTIZ RESZKA, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SONIA M. ORTIZ, Deceased; JEAN M. PALOMBO, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK A. PALOMBO, Deceased; CAROLYN PANATIER, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER M. PANATIER, Deceased; NAVILA PATTERSON, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BERNARD E. PATTERSON, Deceased; MEGAN P. PELINO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TODD DOUGLAS PELINO, Deceased; STEVEN POLLICINO and CELESTE POLLICINO, Individually as Surviving Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of STEVEN POLLICINO, Deceased; VICKI TURESKI as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANE POLLICINO, Surviving Spouse of STEVEN POLLICINO; ELAINE P. MILLER and CORRINE KRACHTUS, Individually and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DAPHNE POULETSOS, Deceased; JANICE K. PUNCHES, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JACK D. PUNCHES, Deceased; MICHAEL QUINN, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES QUINN, Deceased; NOREEN QUINN as Surviving Parent of JAMES QUINN; MICHAEL QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; JOSEPH QUINN as Surviving Sibling of JAMES QUINN; NANCY HOLZHAUER, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GERARD P. RAUZI, Deceased; MARILYN REICH, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HOWARD REICH, Deceased; 9 JAMES J. RICHES, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JAMES C. RICHES, Deceased; RITA RICHES as Surviving Parent of JAMES C. RICHES; TIMOTHY RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; DANIEL RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; THOMAS RICHES as Surviving Sibling of JAMES C. RICHES; BARBARA ROPITEAU-GALLOWAY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU, Deceased; JEAN-MARC ROPITEAU as Surviving Sibling of ERIC THOMAS ROPITEAU; BRENDAN RYAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KRISTIN IRVINE RYAN, Deceased; BERNARD P. SALAMONE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARJORIE C. SALAMONE, Deceased; DANIELLE BEHAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN SALERNO, Deceased; SALLY CALVIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of FRANK SALVATERRA, Deceased; CHRISTIAN SALVATERRA, as Surviving Child of FRANK SALVATERRA; EUGENIA BOGADO, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO, Deceased; LUIS SAMANIEGO as Surviving Sibling of CARLOS A. SAMANIEGO; LYNNE SAN PHILLIP, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP, Deceased; CARRIE SAN PHILLIP as Surviving Child of MICHAEL V. SAN PHILLIP; ABRAHAM SCOTT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JANICE M. SCOTT, Deceased; DARA SEAMAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL SEAMAN, Deceased; MARIA SILVERSTEIN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CRAIG SILVERSTEIN, Deceased; LAURIE SIMOWITZ, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BARRY SIMOWITZ, Deceased; JAMES P. SLATTERY, Individually as Parent and as Personal Representative of the Estate of CHRISTOPHER PAUL SLATTERY, Deceased; 10 SUSAN M. SLIWAK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT F. SLIWAK, Deceased; MICHAEL T. JAMMEN, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of HEATHER L. SMITH, Deceased; YONGJIN L. SONG and HYUNGSHIN K. SONG, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of DANIEL W. SONG a/k/a WON-HYEONG SONG, Deceased; FRANK SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; JULIE SONG, Individually as Surviving Sibling of DANIEL W. SONG; CHRISTINA L. KMINEK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MARI-RAE SOPPER, Deceased; CHRISTINE SPENCER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT A. SPENCER, Deceased; JACQUELINE GALLERON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SELINA SUTTER, Deceased; LORRAINE SZOCIK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KEVIN T. SZOCIK, Deceased; MARC TADDONIO, Individually as Sibling and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL TADDONIO, Deceased; JANE TERRENZI, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of BRIAN TERRENZI, Deceased; NORMAN THOMPSON and PATRICIA THOMPSON, Individually as Surviving Parents of NIGEL THOMPSON; MARK THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; NEAL THOMPSON as Surviving Sibling of NIGEL THOMPSON; BASIL G. THORPE and VALDA M. BINNS, Individually, and as Co-Administrators of the Estate of NICHOLA ANGELA THORPE, Deceased; ANNE TODISCO, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RICHARD TODISCO, Deceased; GREGORY TODISCO as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; LISA DEBARBRIE as Surviving Child of RICHARD TODISCO; TANJA TOMASEVIC, Individually as Spouse, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of VLADIMIR TOMASEVIC, Deceased; DORRY GROH-TOMPSETT, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of STEPHEN TOMPSETT, Deceased; 11 MARY ELIZABETH TUCKER, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of MICHAEL P. TUCKER, Deceased; JENNIFER VAUK, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of RONALD VAUK, Deceased; DENNIS VIANNA and MARILYNDA VIANNA, Individually as Parents and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of MATHEW G. VIANNA, Deceased; NAYDA VOSKERIJIAN, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GARO VOSKERIJIAN, Deceased; CAROL WALDIE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of KENNETH WALDIE, Deceased; ANDREW PETISCE as Surviving Stepchild of KENNETH WALDIE; ALLISON WALLICE, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN WALLICE, JR., Deceased; MICHELLE GARTNER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DINAH WEBSTER, Deceased; MARCIA WEISS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DAVID T. WEISS, Deceased; PATRICK WELSH, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of DEBORAH ANNE WELSH, Deceased; ELIZABETH ANN PAYNE, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of WILLIAM WILSON, Deceased; BENJAMIN WONG, Individually as Father, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JENNIFER Y. WONG, Deceased; PAMELA WORKS, Individually as Spouse and as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN BENTLEY WORKS, Deceased; PATRICIA GREENE-WOTTON, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rodney Wotton, Deceased; WILLIAM WREN and CHRISTOPHER WREN, Individually as Children and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of WILLIAM WREN, Deceased and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of PATRICIA WREN, Surviving Spouse of WILLIAM WREN; KATHY A. CORDERO, Individually; PATRICIA CUBAS-BIELFELD, Individually; VIRGINIA DICHIARA, Individually; ROBERT EICHELE and CARMELA EICHELE, Individually; 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3760 Filed 10/16/17 Page 13 of 14 KEVIN FARRELL, Individually; CHONG P. FARRELL, Individually; MICHAEL HENRY and REBECCA HENRY, Individually; JAMES B. LEACH and CARRIE LEACH, Individually; ERIC LEVINE, Individually; JAMES McCAFFREY and AGNES McCAFFREY, Individually; EDWARD NICHOLLS, and STACIE NICHOLLS, Individually; VALENCIAL. PARKER, Individually; KEVIN WARD, Individually; LING N. YOUNG and DONALD M. YOUNG, Individually; Dated: Westchester, New York October 16, 2017/s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3760 Filed 10/16/17 Page 14 of 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this 16th day of October 2017, I caused copies of the foregoing document to be served electronically pursuant to the Court’s ECF system and by United States first-class mail on any parties not participating with the Court’s ECF system as thereafter advised by the Court./s/Frank H. Granito, III Frank H. Granito, III (FG9760) Speiser Krause, PC 800 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-608 Rye Brook, New York 10573 Tel: (914) 220-5333 Fax: (914) 220-5334 f3g@speiserkrause.com 14

LETTER addressed to Judge George B. Daniels from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire, dated October 19, 2017 re: Request that Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen, et al. (17-cv-7914) be made part of In Re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570. Document filed by Muenchener Rueckversicherungs Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft In Muenchen.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3761 Filed 10/19/17 Page 1 of 2 October 19, 2017 J. Scott Tarbutton Direct Phone 215-665-7255 Direct Fax 215-701-2467 VIA ECF starbutton@cozen.com The Honorable George B. Daniels The Honorable Sarah Netburn Daniel Patrick Moynihan Thurgood Marshall United United States Courthouse States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street 40 Foley Square Room 1310 Room 430 New York, NY 10007 New York, NY 10007 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN); Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-07914 Dear Judge Daniels and Judge Netburn: This firm represents the plaintiffs in Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., Case No. 1:17:cv-07914, a new action filed with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on October 13, 2017, asserting claims against defendants Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina ("SHC") (the "Sovereign Defendants"), along with claims against defendants Al Rajhi Bank, National Commercial Bank ("NCB"), and Saudi Binladin Group ("SBG") (the "Non-Sovereign Defendants"). Pursuant to the Court’s Order of May 3, 2017 (ECF No. 3543), plaintiffs filed a Short Form Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial incorporating the specific allegations of the March 17, 2017 Consolidated Amended Complaint ("CAC") as to the Kingdom and SHC. See ECF No. 3463. As contemplated by the Court’s May 3, 2017 Order, and as stated in their Complaint, plaintiffs agree that their Complaint shall be deemed subject to the renewed motions to dismiss filed by the Sovereign Defendants on August 1, 2017 at ECF Nos. 3667-3669 and 3670-3672. Further, plaintiffs’ Short Form Complaint incorporates the specific allegations of the May 19, 2017 First Amended Complaint ("FAC") in Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 2, et al. v. Al Rajhi Bank, et al., Case No. 16-cv-07853, as to Al Rajhi Bank, NCB, and SBG. See ECF No. 56. As contemplated by the Court’s May 16, 2017 Order (ECF No. 3584), and as stated in their Complaint, plaintiffs agree that their Complaint shall be deemed subject to the motions to dismiss filed by the Non-Sovereign Defendants on August 21, 2017 at ECF Nos. 3691-3692, 3700-3701, and 3702-3703. One Liberty Place 1650 Market Street Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 215.665.2000 800.523.2900 215.665.2013 Fax cozen.com Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3761 Filed 10/19/17 Page 2 of 2 The Honorable George B. Daniels The Honorable Sarah Netburn October 19, 2017 Page 2 _______________________________________ Plaintiffs respectfully request that Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft in Muenchen, et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-07914, be made part of In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570. We thank the Court for its consideration of this matter. Respectfully, COZEN O’CONNOR J. SCOTT TARBUTTON JT:pak cc: All MDL 1570 Counsel (via ECF) LEGAL\32944989\1

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: {{3748}} MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Document filed by Abdullah Omar Naseef, Addullah Bin Abdul Muhsen Al Turki, Soliman H.S. Al-Buthe, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Adnan Basha.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________) IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001) No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD/SN) ________________________________________________) Defendants Dr. Abdullah Al-Turki, Dr. Abdullah Al-Obaid, Dr. Abdullah Naseef, Dr. Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, Dr. Naseef, Dr. Basha, and Mr. Al-Buthe, through undersigned counsel, respectfully submit their Opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions (ECF Nos. 3748-3750). As set forth below, it would be an abuse of discretion to impose any sanctions on these five Defendants, who were remanded by the Second Circuit for the limited purpose of jurisdictional discovery, because they have properly responded to the plaintiffs’ jurisdictional discovery requests, and any remaining open issues as to several of the Defendants are of minor importance in light of the extensive prior evidence in the record. I. The Plaintiffs’ Grounds for Personal Jurisdiction over the Five Defendants. On April 9, 2004, three of the five Defendants submitted motions to dismiss the Burnett case for lack of personal jurisdiction and sovereign immunity. See Al-Turki Mot. to Dismiss (ECF No. 85); Al-Obaid Mot. to Dismiss (ECF No. 98); Naseef Mot. to Dismiss (ECF No. 87). In 2005, after several other cases were consolidated into the MDL-1570, and several earlier complaints were amended, all five Defendants submitted motions to dismiss the other cases in which they were named as a defendant. Those motions to dismiss similarly argued lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a claim: Al-Turki Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 1183-1185) (Sept. 6, 2005); Al-Obaid Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 1180-1182) (Sept. 6, 2005); Naseef Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 1204-1206) (Sept. 6, 2005); Basha Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 1195-1197) (Sept. 6, 2005); and Al-Buthe Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 891-893) (May 9, 2005). 1 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 2 of 13 Three of the five Defendants submitted declarations in 2004 and 2005 setting forth their professional and educational background and their limited travel to the United States: • Declaration of Abdullah bin Abdul Mohsen Al-Turki (Mar. 31, 2004) (ECF No. 85, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1185, Exhibit 1) (attached hereto as Attachment A). Dr. Al-Turki confirmed that he has lived his entire life in Saudi Arabia, id. at ¶ 3; set forth his educational background (entirely in Saudi Arabia), id. at ¶ 4; set forth his employment history and positions held from 1975 through the present (also entirely in Saudi Arabia), id. at ¶¶ 5-10; and discussed his three trips to the United States, in (1) 1979, to UCLA, in his capacity as Rector of a university in Saudi Arabia; (2) 1998, to Los Angeles, to attend a mosque opening, in his capacity as Minister of Islamic Affairs; and (3) June 2002, to New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C., in his capacity as Secretary-General of the Muslim World League (MWL), id. at ¶ 11. • Declaration of Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid (Mar. 29, 2004) (ECF No. 98, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1182, Exhibit 1) (attached hereto as Attachment B). Dr. Al-Obaid confirmed that he has lived his entire life in Saudi Arabia except for when he was in graduate school in Oklahoma in the late 1970s, id. at ¶¶ 3-4; set forth his educational background (in both Saudi Arabia and Oklahoma, in the 1970s), id. at ¶ 4; set forth his employment history and positions held from 1980 through the present (all in Saudi Arabia), id. at ¶¶ 4-7; explained that his service as Secretary-General of the MWL was from 1995 to 2000, id. at ¶ 5; and explained that he made several trips to the United States since the 1970s, with the most recent being in 2000 and 2000, id. at ¶ 8. • Declaration of Abdullah Naseef (Mar. 30, 2004) (ECF No. 78, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1206, Exhibit 1) (attached hereto as Attachment C). Dr. Naseef confirmed that he has lived his entire life in Saudi Arabia, id. at ¶ 3; set forth his employment history and positions held through the present (all in Saudi Arabia), id. at ¶¶ 4-6; explained that his service as Secretary-General of the MWL ended in 1993, id. at ¶ 5; explained that he made several trips to the United States since 1965, including studying at Stanford University and attending the World Economic Forum Conference in 2002, as well as several trips as a tourist, id. at ¶ 7. Mr. Al-Buthe also submitted a declaration to this Court on December 10, 2009, as part of the letter response by the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. (USA) ("AHIF") to plaintiffs’ motion to compel. See Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Dec. 9, 2009) (attached hereto as 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 3 of 13 Attachment D).1 Mr. Al-Buthe set forth his educational history (entirely in Saudi Arabia), and his employment history through 2009. Id. at ¶¶ 1-2. He also explained that as of June 2004, when the U.S. government demanded that the Saudi government shut down the AHIF offices in Saudi Arabia, it was no longer possible to access any of its documents or files. Id. at ¶¶ 12-13. In 2009, Mr. Al-Buthe also submitted a declaration to the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, as part of AHIF’s ultimately successful challenge to its designation by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury. See Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Feb. 15, 2009), which was subsequently submitted to this Court in 2013 (ECF 2676-2, at 22-26) (Jan. 31, 2013) (attached hereto as Attachment E).2 That declaration similarly set forth his educational background (in Saudi Arabia), and his employment history through 2009. Id. at ¶¶ 1-2. Mr. Al-Buthe explained his limited role as a volunteer with AHIF, and that he stopped that involvement in 2002, "due to the death of my son." Id. at ¶¶ 3-7, 9. Judge Daniels granted the motions to dismiss of all five Defendants (and numerous other defendants) in 2010, based on a lack of personal jurisdiction. See In re Terrorist Attacks, 718 F. Supp. 2d 456, 476, 483, 484 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (Dr. Al-Turki and Dr. Al-Obaid) [Opinion, at 25-26, 40 (ECF No. 2252) (June 17, 2010)]; In re Terrorist Attacks, 740 F. Supp. 2d 494, 506-07 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (Dr. Naseef, Dr. Basha, and Mr. Al-Buthe) [Opinion, at 11-14 (ECF No. 2312) (Sept. 13, 2010)]. 1 At that time, discovery letters to Magistrate Judge Maas were not docketed in the MDL-1570 ECF docket, but the existence of this letter is reflected in the order granting plaintiffs additional time to respond to this letter. See Order (ECF No. 2214) (Dec. 17, 2009). Mr. Al-Buthe’s declaration was subsequently docketed with this Court in 2013 as part of AHIF’s briefing of a discovery motion (ECF No. 2676-2, at 40-41) (Jan. 31, 2013). 2 This declaration was originally filed in Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury, No. 07-CV-1155-KI (ECF No. 103-3) (D. Oregon Feb. 16, 2009). 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 4 of 13 On appeal, the plaintiffs argued to the Second Circuit that personal jurisdiction was warranted over these five Defendants (the "charity officers") on the following grounds: As the district court properly understood plaintiffs’ pleadings and acknowledged, the claims against the Charity Official Defendants were predicated on their respective roles in forging their charities’ alliances with al-Qaeda, maintaining the channels of material support through the charities to al-Qaeda, and utilizing the charities to provide material support to al-Qaeda. Each of the Charity Official Defendants is expressly alleged to have acted knowingly in facilitating the charities’ institutional support for al-Qaeda. In re: Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, No. 11-3294, Appellants’ Consolidated Brief with Respect to Personal Jurisdiction, at 106 (ECF No. 298) (2d Cir. Jan. 20, 2012). As the district court itself acknowledged, the claims against the Defendants were based on their respective roles in knowingly establishing, maintaining and promoting the charities’ collaboration with al-Qaeda. Id. at 111. Therefore, the basis for plaintiffs’ assertion of personal jurisdiction over the five Defendants was limited to the alleged roles that each of the five Defendants had with their respective charities, i.e., the Muslim World League (MWL) and the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) for Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Naseef; the IIRO alone for Dr. Basha; and the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. (AHIF) for Mr. Al-Buthe. Plaintiffs did not argue on appeal that general jurisdiction existed as to these five Defendants. Nor did plaintiffs argue that conduct outside of their roles with these charities, such as governmental positions that several held during their careers, or faculty positions that several had with local universities, was relevant for the exercise of personal jurisdiction. In response, the Second Circuit granted a remand for the limited purpose of jurisdictional discovery. The Second Circuit identified the following areas as examples of what would be encompassed within jurisdictional discovery: 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 5 of 13 (1) Whether they "allegedly controlled or managed some of those charitable organizations;" (2) Whether, "through their positions of control, they allegedly sent financial and other material support directly to al Qaeda when al Qaeda allegedly was known to be targeting the United States;" (3) Whether they "directly provided financial and other resources to al Qaeda knowing that al Qaeda was engaged in a global campaign of terror directed at the United States;" (4) "Whether this support was'expressly aimed’ at the United States;" and (5) "(1) when the alleged support was given to al Qaeda, (2) what support was given, (3) whether the support was'earmarked’ for use in specific schemes or attacks not directed at the United States, or (4) specifically how those defendants were involved in the process of providing support to al Qaeda." In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 (Asat Trust Reg., et al.), 714 F.3d 659, 678-79 (2d Cir. 2013) (emphasis in original), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 2870 (2014). These limited grounds were consistent with those set forth in plaintiffs’ appellate briefing. The Second Circuit thus remanded the five Defendants (and several others), "pursuant to United States v. Jacobson, 15 F.3d 19 (2d Cir. 1994), for the prompt commencement of a course of judicially-supervised jurisdictional discovery." Id. at 682. II. The Plaintiffs’ Jurisdictional Discovery Requests. The plaintiffs served jurisdictional discovery requests on the five Defendants on August 22, 2013. Those requests encompassed over 100 requests to each Defendant, with some requests asking for information about dozens of named individuals and entities, essentially imposing several hundred requests on each of the five Defendants. Some of these requests sought information that went far afield from plaintiffs’ theory of personal jurisdiction as to these five Defendants that plaintiffs had previously argued to both this Court and the Second Circuit. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 6 of 13 Nonetheless, the five Defendants attempted to answer these requests to the best extent possible, as set forth below. At the time that these jurisdictional discovery requests were served, three of the five Defendants – Drs. Al-Obaid, Dr. Naseef, and Mr. Al-Buthe – were no longer officers or volunteers with the charities where they had formerly worked or volunteered, and had not been for over a decade. Dr. Al-Obaid was Secretary-General of the MWL from 1995 to 2000. See Al-Obaid Declaration, at ¶ 5 (Att. B hereto). Dr. Naseef was Secretary-General of the MWL from 1983 to 1993. See Naseef Declaration, at ¶ 5 (Att. C hereto). Mr. Al-Buthe ceased any substantive involvement with AHIF after 2002, other than assisting AHIF’s former counsel for litigation purposes with respect to AHIF’s challenge to its designation. See Al-Buthe Declaration I, at ¶¶ 3, 12 (Att. D hereto); Al-Buthe Declaration II, at ¶¶ 3-4 (Att. E hereto). Therefore, they no longer had access to the files and documents of those charities, and had to rely largely or entirely on the document production of those charities. Dr. Basha, who was the director of the IIRO until his retirement, directed the charity’s staff to work with the IIRO’s outside counsel to search for and produce documents that were relevant to the merits discovery requests served on the IIRO, and/or relevant to the jurisdictional discovery requests, as he did not have personal files outside the IIRO containing documents relevant to plaintiffs’ allegations for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him. See Certification of Dr. Adnan Basha (Sept. 19, 2017) (attached hereto as Attachment F). As a result, counsel for the five Defendants, in addition to producing their resumes (which set forth their educational and professional backgrounds), and the previously submitted affidavits, reviewed the document production of the MWL, IIRO, and AHIF, in order to identify the documents produced by those charity defendants (in merits discovery) that were also relevant 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 7 of 13 to the jurisdictional requests served on the five Defendants. Here, the MWL and IIRO collectively produced over 574,000 pages of documents, and AHIF produced over 81,000 pages of documents and emails. With respect to Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Naseef, counsel prepared indexes to the subset of the MWL’s and IIRO’s documents that were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery requests, and produced those indexes on June 2, 2017, with a supplemental index on September 26, 2017. For Dr. Basha, counsel prepared indexes to the subset of the IIRO’s documents that were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery requests, and produced those indexes on June 2, 2017 and September 26, 2017. See A. Kabat letters to S. Carter, et al. (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017) (attached hereto as Attachment G). For Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Naseef, the document indexes were 1,751 pages and 378 pages, respectively, for a total of 2,129 pages. See Dr. Al-Turki, et al., Document Indexes (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017) (excerpts attached hereto as Attachment H). For Dr. Basha, the document indexes were 1,147 pages and 19 pages, respectively, for a total of 1,166 pages. See Dr. Basha, Document Indexes (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017) (excerpts attached hereto as Attachment I). III. Information on the Five Defendants’ Travels. In 2004 and 2005, three of the five Defendants provided the plaintiffs and this Court with information on their travels to the United States. See Part I, supra. In 2017, several of the Defendants were able to update this information, in response to plaintiffs’ requests. Dr. Al-Obaid provided additional information on his travels to the United States, i.e., two trips he made in August 1997 and in August or early September 1998. See Certification of Dr. Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, at ¶ 3 (Oct. 14, 2017) (attached hereto as Attachment J). Dr. Al-Obaid no longer has the passport(s) that he used during that time period. Id. at ¶ 4. Some of the 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 8 of 13 information on his travels to the United States, along with other countries, was already reflected in the annual reports that were previously produced to plaintiffs on January 10, 2012, over five years ago. See, e.g., Documents Bates-stamped IIRO 16973-17130 (1997 travels); IIRO 17131-17414 (1998 travels). Dr. Al-Obaid also certified that he has not withheld any documents on the basis of privilege, other than communications with his lawyers after these lawsuits were filed. See Al-Obaid Declaration, at ¶ 2 (Att. J hereto). Dr. Basha, through a signed declaration, provided information on his travels to the United States, which were limited to two family vacation trips, both to Orlando (Florida) in 1997 and 1999, and a trip to New York in June 2001 to attend the meetings of the Special Committee of the United Nations General Assembly concerning children. See Declaration of Dr. Adnan Basha, at ¶¶ 2-3 (Sept. 30, 2017) (attached hereto as Attachment K). Dr. Basha does not have his passports for that time period. Id. at ¶ 4. Some of the information on Dr. Basha’s travel to the United States, i.e., his one trip to the United Nations, along with his travel to other countries, is reflected in the annual reports produced to plaintiffs, e.g., Document Bates-stamped IIRO 341073, which is part of an IIRO annual report (IIRO 340871-341098). In any event, Dr. Basha’s travel to the United Nations does not count for purposes of exercising personal jurisdiction over him, under the Second Circuit’s Klinghoffer jurisdictional exception. See Klinghoffer v. S.N.C. Achille Lauro, 937 F.2d 44, 51-52 (2d Cir. 1991) (United Nations activities cannot form the basis for personal jurisdiction); Sokolow v. Palestinian Liberation Organization, No. 04-CV-00397 (GBD), 2011 WL 1345086, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2011) ("The Second Circuit has also held that participation in the United Nation’s affairs by a'foreign organization’ may not properly be considered as a basis of jurisdiction in New York."), aff’d in relevant part, 835 F.3d 317, 325 (2d 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 9 of 13 Cir. 2016); id. at *5 ("With respect to the activities involving the New York office, Defendants are entitled to the Klinghoffer jurisdictional exception."). Mr. Al-Buthe had received his old passports from the Saudi government for the period of 1996 through 2003, so he was able to produce scans of those passports to the plaintiffs on June 14, 2017, together with a detailed list of his travels to the United States from 1990 through 2001. (Documents Bates-stamped Al-Buthe 0002-0020 (passport for 1996 to 2000); Al-Buthe 0021-0023 (passport for 2001 to 2003); Al-Buthe 0024-0027 (chronology of travels to the U.S., 1990-2001)). Mr. Al-Buthe also certified that he has not withheld any documents on the basis of privilege, other than communications with his lawyers after these lawsuits were filed. See Certification of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Oct. 17, 2017) (attached hereto as Attachment L). Over the past year, counsel for Drs. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, Dr. Naseef, and Dr. Basha have attempted to obtain additional information on their passports, and to supplement the information already in the record through their declarations and the annual reports. On April 13, 2016, and again on May 26, 2017, undersigned counsel sent letters to local counsel in Saudi Arabia to request, inter alia, information on their passports and foreign travel, but were unable to obtain any additional information. See Declaration of Alan R. Kabat, at ¶ 1 (Oct. 20, 2017) (attached hereto as Attachment M). Undersigned counsel renewed this request on October 10, 2017, through a letter to the Embassy of Saudi Arabia, requesting that our contacts at the Embassy communicate with the General Directorate of Passports, Ministry of Interior (Saudi Arabia) to determine if their passports and related travel information for 1992 to 2002 were still available; the Embassy contacts promptly acknowledged this request. Id. at ¶ 1. Counsel will apprise the Court and the parties if the Saudi government is able to provide any information, whether copies of the passports, or any other information on their international travels. Id. 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 10 of 13 Over the past two months, subsequent to this Court’s September 7, 2017 status conference, counsel for Dr. Al-Turki and Dr. Naseef have repeatedly attempted to contact their clients, both through their sons, and through local counsel and colleagues in Saudi Arabia, but have been unsuccessful in receiving any response. Id. at ¶ 2 (Att. M hereto). Counsel have learned that Dr. Naseef (age 78) is incapacitated and unable to communicate with others about substantive topics. Id. Dr. Al-Turki (age 77) is apparently out of the country, which may be for medical purposes, and is not responding to our communications. Id. Nonetheless, counsel are continuing their efforts to contact Dr. Al-Turki to obtain a certification in compliance with the Court’s order, and to obtain a certification from Dr. Naseef’s son as to his current health condition. Id. Counsel have also been in contact with Dr. Basha to obtain an updated certification – one that would differ from the two certifications in September 2017 (Att. F & K hereto) only in the language used in the perjury statement, and to certify that he has not withheld anything on the grounds of privilege other than communications with his counsel after these lawsuits were filed. However, counsel have just learned that he is going through at least two weeks’ of medical procedures, and is unable to respond at present. Id. at ¶ 3. IV. Sanctions are Not Warranted on the Five Defendants. The five Defendants respectfully submit that sanctions are not warranted, and that it would be an abuse of discretion to do so. As a threshold matter, the information that plaintiffs are now seeking – their travels to the United States and their passports – are largely addressed through the declarations that the five Defendants have submitted to this Court, some of which date back to 2004. At no time from 2004 to 2010 did the plaintiffs contest the veracity or accuracy of those earlier declarations, or otherwise argue to this Court that additional 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 11 of 13 information about their travels was needed to contest those three Defendants’ then-pending motions to dismiss, even though plaintiffs had over six years to raise any concerns with Judge Casey or Judge Daniels. Moreover, information about the travels of the former MWL and IIRO officers is corroborated through several of the annual reports that those organizations previously produced in discovery – and those annual reports also include information about their travel to yet other countries. Similarly, Mr. Al-Buthe’s passports also provide information about his travels to yet other countries. Plaintiffs’ remaining concerns about the form of the declarations, such as the perjury certification, do not warrant any sanctions, and undersigned counsel have attempted to address those minor concerns through obtaining updated certifications that are substantively the same as the previous declarations and certifications. Finally, undersigned counsel have confirmed that no documents were withheld on the basis of privilege, other than communications that the five Defendants had with their lawyers after these lawsuits were filed – communications that are not within the scope of discovery and do not have to be included on a privilege log. See Kabat Declaration, at ¶ 4 (Att. M hereto). Thus, counsel for the five Defendants have made multiple efforts over the past year to obtain the passports for four of the five Defendants, including through a formal written request to the Saudi government, and will continue their efforts to communicate with Dr. Al-Turki and with the son of Dr. Naseef, to determine their current status and their ability to communicate regarding this litigation. Counsel will apprise this Court and the plaintiffs of any further developments in that regard. 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 12 of 13 V. Conclusion. Therefore, this Court should find that sanctions on the five Defendants are not warranted, since they have provided more than sufficient information about their travels to the United States, and have made renewed efforts to obtain their passports (for four of the five Defendants). Plaintiffs’ remaining concerns about the content and format of the certifications (for three of the five Defendants) are of minor import, and counsel for the five Defendants has confirmed that nothing was withheld on the basis of privilege other than communications they had with their counsel subsequent to the filing of these lawsuits. Moreover, plaintiffs have received abundant discovery from the five Defendants and from the associated charities – discovery that goes well beyond plaintiffs’ own theory of personal jurisdiction as to these five Defendants, as adopted by the Second Circuit in its remand decision. Respectfully submitted,/s/Alan R. Kabat __________________________________ Lynne Bernabei (LB 2489) Alan R. Kabat (AK7194) Bernabei & Kabat, PLLC 1400 – 16th Street, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20036-2223 (202) 745-1942 Attorneys for Defendants Dr. Al-Turki, et al. DATED: October 20, 2017 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3763 Filed 10/20/17 Page 13 of 13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 20, 2017, I caused the foregoing to be served electronically on counsel of record by the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (ECF) System, pursuant to ¶ 9(a) of Case Management Order No. 2 (June 16, 2004)./s/Alan R. Kabat ___________________________ Alan R. Kabat 13

DECLARATION of Alan Kabat in Opposition re: {{3748}} MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Document filed by Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Muhsen Al Turki, Soliman H.S. Al-Buthe, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Adnan Basha.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 77 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK) IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001) No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD/SN) Declaration of Alan R. Kabat in Support of Defendants Dr. Abdullah Al-Turki, Dr. Abdullah Al-Obaid, Dr. Abdullah Naseef, Dr. Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion I am an attorney licensed to practice in the District of Columbia and am admitted pro hac vice in this matter. I am with the law firm of Bernabei & Kabat, PLLC, counsel to defendants Dr. Abdullah bin Mohsen Al-Turki, Dr. Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Dr. Abdullah Omar Naseef, Dr. Adnan Basha, and Mr. Soliman H.S. Al-Buthe. I submit this declaration to transmit to the Court the following documents submitted in support of the Defendants’ Opposition to the Plaintiffs’ Motion. 1. Attachment A is the Declaration of Abdullah bin Abdul Mohsen Al-Turki (Mar. 31, 2004) (ECF No. 85, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1185, Exhibit 1) (exhibits to the declaration are not included). 2. Attachment B is the Declaration of Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid (Mar. 29, 2004) (ECF No. 98, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1182, Exhibit 1). 3. Attachment C is the Declaration of Abdullah Naseef (Mar. 30, 2004) (ECF No. 78, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1206, Exhibit 1) (exhibits to the declaration are not included). 4. Attachment D is the Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Dec. 9, 2009), initially submitted as an exhibit to a letter to Magistrate Judge Maas, and subsequently formally docketed with this Court in 2013 (ECF No. 2676-2, at 40-41) (Jan. 31, 2013) (exhibits to the declaration are not included). 5. Attachment E is the Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthi (Feb. 15, 2009), Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 2 of 77 originally filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, and subsequently submitted to this Court (ECF 2676-2, at 22-26) (Jan. 31, 2013) (exhibits to the declaration are not included). 6. Attachment F is the Certification of Dr. Adnan Basha (Sept. 19, 2017). 7. Attachment G comprises the letters from Alan Kabat to Sean Carter, et a!. (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017). 8. Attachment H comprises excerpts (first and last pages) from Dr. Al-Turki, et a!., Document Indexes (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017). 9. Attachment I comprises excerpts (first and last pages) from Dr. Basha, Document Indexes (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017). 10. Attachment J is the Certification of Dr. Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid (Oct. 14, 2017). 11. Attachment K is the Declaration of Dr. Adnan Basha (Sept. 30, 2017). 12. Attachment L is the Certification of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Oct. 17, 2017). 13. Attachment M is the Declaration of Alan R. Kabat (Oct. 20, 2017). 14. I declare under the penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Executed on October 20, 2017. ALAN R. KABAT 2 Attachment A Declaration of Abdullah bin Abdul Mohsen Al-Turki (Mar. 31, 2004) (ECF No. 85, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1185, Exhibit 1) (exhibits to the declaration are not included) Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment B Declaration of Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid (Mar. 29, 2004) (ECF No. 98, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1182, Exhibit 1) Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment C Declaration of Abdullah Naseef (Mar. 30, 2004) (ECF No. 78, Exhibit 1; ECF No. 1206, Exhibit 1) (exhibits to the declaration are not included) Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment D Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Dec. 9, 2009) Initially submitted as an exhibit to a letter to Magistrate Judge Maas, and subsequently formally docketed with this Court in 2013 (ECF No. 2676-2, at 40-41) (Jan. 31, 2013) (exhibits to the declaration are not included) Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 31 of 77 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 40 of 79 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MW YORK INRE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 1 1, 2001) 03 MDL No. 1570 (GBD)(FM) THOMAS E. BURNETT, SR., et al,) Plaintiffs,) v.) C.A. No.03 CV 9849 (GBD)(FM) Ac BARAKA INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT) CORPORATiON, et a!.,) Defendants.)) DECLARATION OF SOLIMAN H. AL-BUTHE I, Soliman H. Al-Buthi, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief: 1. I reside in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and am currently the General Director of Environmental Health for the Capital City of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. I have held this position since 2006. 1 submit this declaration in support of Al Haramain Islamic Foundation’s (AHIF USA) response to the plaintiffs’ motion to compel. 2. I attended the King Saud University in Riyadh from 1981 to 1985, and earned a Bachelor’s degree in Agricultural Science in 1985. From 1985 to 2006, 1 was the Landscaping Engineer for the City of Riyadh, General Administration of Gardens and Beautification, and was subsequently promoted to General Director of the Environmental HealthDepa1tmei3t 3. 1 have reviewed the plaintiffs’ motion to compel. Onpages 12 and 13 of the motion to compel, reference is made to certain documents relating to the Al Haramain Islamic Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthi Attachment D Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 32 of 77 Case 1:03-md-01 570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 41. of 79 Foundation (Saudi Arabia) ("Al Haramain Saudi Arabia"), as listed in plaintiffs’ Exhibits 58, 59, and 60. These receipts and letters were documents that I provided in early 2004 to the attorneys for AHIF-USA, since I had kept copies in my personal files. I did not have to request those documents from Al Haramain Saudi Arabia in 2004, since I already had them in my possession. The motion to compel, Exhibit 58, also refers to an affidavit from Mr. Khalid Bin Obaid Azzahri, which is a document that AHIF USA’s attorneys were able to obtain in early May 2004, at a time when Al Haramain Saudi Arabia was legally operating in Saudi Arabia. 4. However, in June 2004, the Saudi Arabia government shut down Al Haramain Saudi Arabia under pressure from the United States. At that time, its offices were closed, and since then it has become impossible to obtain any records relating to Al Haramain Saudi Arabia’s activities from Al Haramain Saudi Arabia. I have worked closely with attorney Tom Nelson, who has traveled to Riyadh on several occasions, to try to obtain such records, but we were not able to obtain any documents from Al Haramain Saudi Arabia. DATED: December, 2009 Page 2 of 2 B Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthi Attachment D Attachment E Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Feb. 15, 2009) Originally filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, and subsequently submitted to this Court (ECF 2676-2, at 22-26) (Jan. 31, 2013) (exhibits to the declaration are not included) Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 22 of 79 Case 3:07-cv-01 155-KI Document 103-3 Filed 02/16/2009 Page 2 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON Al Haramain Islamic Foundation. Inc.. eta!., Plaintiffs. Case No. 07-CV-l 155-KI V. DECLARATION OF SOLIMAN H. AL-BUTHI United States Department of the Treasury, et cii., Defendants. I, Soliman [I. Al-Buthi, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief: I. I reside in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and am currently the Director of Environmental Health for the Capital City of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. I have held this position since 2006. 1 submit this declaration in support of Al Haramain Islamic Foundation’s (Al-hF-Oregon) challenge to its designation as a specially designated global terrorist. 2. 1 attended the King Saud University in Riyadh from 1981 to 1985, and earned a Bachelor’s degree in Agricultural Science in 1985. From 1985 to 2006, 1 was the Landscaping Engineer for tile City of Riyadh, General Administration of Gardens and Beautification, and was subsequently promoted to Director of the Environmental Health Department. 3. From 1997 to the fail of 2002 1 was active in the American and internet Committee (AIC) of Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation — Saudi Arabia (AHF-SA), which was responsible for providing internet support for Islamic outreach activities and for development of Islamic outreach efforts in the United States. There were eight (8) members of the A1C, and two Attachment E Declaration of Solirnan H. AL-Buthi Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 23 of 79 Case 3:07-cv-01 155-KI Document 103-3 Filed 02/1 6/2009 Page 3 of 19 paid secretaries who provided clerical support to the A[C. I was a volunteer and was never paid for my work on behalf of this charitablc organization. During the period I worked on the AIC. I held a responsible, lull-time government position as Landscaping Engineer. I devoted approximately 6-8 hours per week to my volunteer work for the A1C. [slopped volunteering for AHF-SA in 2002, due to the death of my son. 4. 1 am aware that there were other committees under AE-IF-SA, hut my activities on behalf of the charity were limited to outreach in America and internet matters only. My internet activities were carried out primarily in Saudi Arabia. 5. AHF-SA was governed by a Board of Directors, also known as the Management Council. See Al Haramain Foundation, Organizational Chart (original and translation attached hereto as Exhibit 1); Al liaramain Foundation, Constitution (1992) (attached hereto as Exhibit 2). 1 was not a member of the Board of Directors (Management Council) of Al IF-SA As a volunteer, I had no authority over, involvement in, or input into, any activities of AHF-SA or its affiliated organizations in countries other than the United States. Even with respect to the America and Internet Committee, I only made recommendations, which the Management Council or the General Manager could either accept or reject. 6. E did occasionally attend Management Council meetings, but only by invitation when matters relating to the AIC were on the agenda. I attended only that portion of the meeting dealing with my committee’s work and did not attend the portions of the meetings dealing with other branches or other activities of AHF-SA. 7. I was not familiar with AHF-SA’s financial books and records, and as a part-tune volunteer had no access to or responsibility for these records. 8. To the best of my knowledge my employer, the Saudi Arabia government, was Attachment E Page 2 of 5 B Declaration of Soliman H. Al-Buthi Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 24 of 79 Case 3:07-cv-01155-Kl Document 103-3 Filed 02/1 6/2009 Page 4 of 19 aware of my volunteer activities with AHF-SA and did not object to them. The Saudi government officially recognized AF{F-SA as a charitable organization. and it was one of the largest charities in Saudi Arabia. 9. Except as stated below, [had no involvement in, or knowledge of, the work of Al lF-SA branches in countries other than the United States, except in general terms. I understood that AFIF-SA carried on humanitarian efforts in many other areas of the world, but did not know anything about how these activities in other countries were funded or how they operated. As a volunteer, I did not have the time, nor would it have been appropriate given my limited involvement, to become engaged in the activities of the other branches. 10. The Al-1-laramain [slamic Foundation in Oregon (Al-HF-Oregon), of which I have been on the board, has never been involved with the operations of any of the other branches of’ AHE-SA. Furthermore, Al-lW-Oregon has never been involved in any terrorist activities, or in funding any terrorist activities. II. Had I known that my involvement in AHIF-Oregon was a potential basis for designating AHIF-Oregon, I would have resigned as a member ofthe hoard. Because I was not aware that my involvement was an issue until it was too fate — until AHI F-Oregon had already been designated and redesignated, I was unable to take this action. I am willing to resign my position for the future if this Court orders OFAC to vacate its current designation of AHIF Oregon, and OFAC seeks to designate AF-IIF-Oregon again. 12. During the entire tenure of my involvement in Al-IF-SA, through the fall of 2002, it was not a designated organization on any US or UN terrorism lists. I-tad I been informed that Al-HF-Oregon’s relationship to AHF-SA was an issue in the designation process for A HIP Oregon, I would likely have been able to obtain substantial records from AHF-SA showing that Attachment E Page 3 of 5 B Declaration of Solirnan I-I. Al-Buthi Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 37 of 77 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 25 of 79 Case 3:07-cv-01 155-KI Document 103-3 Filed 02/16/2009 Page 5 of 19 Al-HF-Oregon acted independently oIAHF-SA. and was not involved in any decision-making regarding AHF-SA’s activities in other countries or with any ol’ AHF-SA’s affiliated organizations. However, in JLIne 2004, Saudi Arabia shut down AHF-SA under pressure from the United States to do so. At that time, its offices were closed, and since then it has become extraordinary difficult to obtain any records relating to Al-I.F-SA’s activities. I have worked closely with attorney Tom Nelson, who has traveled to Riyadh on several occasions, to try to obtain such records, to little avail. Accordingly, OFAC’s failure to notify AHJF-Oregon in early 2004 of the basis for its potential designation has irreparably undermined its ability to defend itsclt by maki rig it virtually impossible to obtain evidence regarding the activities of AHF-SA. 13. 1-lad 1 known that OFAC sought to designate Al-hF-Oregon based on a claim that it supported SDGTs through its activities with AHF-SA, I would have obtained records of all the financial transactions between Ai IF-SA and AlliF-Oregon, and showed that none of them funded any "specially designated terrorists." In fact, for the most part, A[-IF-SA funded AIIIF Oregon, not vice versa. On one occasion, I brought a $1 50,000 donation from AHIF-Oregon to Saudi Arabia, but that was solely intended for humanitarian support to those suffering from violence and poverty among the Chechen population in Russia, through the Saudi Joint Relief Commission, a government relief agency. in no instance did AHIF-Oregon transfer any money to AHF-SA in order to support a SDGT. In n instance did AHTF-Oregon ever approve any funding of an SDGT. And for the entire time that Al-HF-Oregon was involved with the activities of AHF-SA, AHF-SA was not a SDGT, and thus as far as we knew, there was no bar on providing funds or engaging in transactions with AHF-SA. Moreover, while AHIF-Oregon was affiliated with AHF-SA, it had absolutely no say in or authority over any decisions regarding AHF-SA’s activities in other parts of the world. Had we known that this was an issue, we would Attachment E Fage 4 ot’5 B DecIara(on ofSoliman I-I. AI-l3uthi Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-FM Document 2676-2 Filed 01/31/13 Page 26 of 79 Case 3:07-cv-01 155-KI Document 103-3 Filed 02/16/2009 Page 6 of 19 have submitted records and evidence from AHF-SA supporting all of these claims. But because we did not even learn that this was a basis for designation until AH[F-Oregon was redesignated in February 2008, we never had an opportunity to develop the record. And now that AHF-SA has been closed down at the request of the tJ.S. government, it is exceedingly difficult to obtain such evidence..L2 liman H. Al-Buthi DATED: February/5 2009 Page 5 of 5 B Declaration of Soliman It. Al-Buthi Attachment E Attachment F Certification of Dr. Adnan Basha (Sept. 19, 2017) Attachment F Attachment G Letters from Alan Kabat to Sean Carter, et al. (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017). Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 42 of 77 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1775 T STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 DEVIN WRIGLEY PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM By Email June 2, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL 1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the document indexes for Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Naseef (combined in one file), and for Dr. Basha. These are in Word format, and can be readily exported to Excel. Since the first three defendants were officers of MWL (all are now retired), the responsive documents are in the possession of the MWL, and were produced by the MWL as part of its merits document production. For Dr. Basha, who is retired from the IIRO, the responsive documents are in the possession of the IIRO, and were produced by the IIRO as part of its merits document production. We understand that the individual defendants do not themselves have documents relating to their work at the charities, as those documents remained with the charities after their retirement. Further, since they travelled on official passports, which the government retained after each trip, they do not have personal possession of those passports. All four defendants continue to maintain their objections to the jurisdictional discovery document requests as asserted in their initial responses on November 11, 2013, including that many of the requests exceed the scope of jurisdictional discovery, and are not relevant to determining personal jurisdiction pursuant to the Second Circuit’s remand decision. Subject to and without waiving those objections, a subset of the MWL’s and IIRO’s document production Attachment G Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 43 of 77 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire June 2, 2017 Page 2 of 2 is or may be responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to these four individuals, as set forth on the attached indexes. We have tried to be overinclusive in indexing the documents, as many documents (or ranges of documents) can be responsive to multiple jurisdictional discovery document requests, given the broad and overlapping nature of those requests. However, not all of the MWL and IIRO documents were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests, so these indexes only include those that we determined were responsive to those requests. For Drs. Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, and Naseef, note that part of the early MWL production was Bates-stamped with "IIRO" numbers even though it consisted of MWL documents (i.e., the January 10 and 18, 2012 productions). The subset of the MWL documents indexed herein, comprising at least 80,050 documents (or groups of closely related documents), are responsive to at least 51 of the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to each of those three defendants. For Dr. Basha, the subset of the IIRO documents indexed herein, comprising at least 52,600 documents (or groups of closely related documents), are responsive to at least 45 of the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to him. Finally, there is one remaining tranche of MWL and IIRO documents that is being reviewed and indexed, and we hope to have those reviewed for the individual defendants’ jurisdictional discovery document requests within one week of the completion of the MWL’s and IIRO’s final production. Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel Attachment G Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 44 of 77 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1400 16th STREET, N.W., SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2223 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 MICHAEL ELLEMENT* PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM DEVIN WRIGLEY * ADMITTED IN MD ONLY By Email and First Class Mail September 26, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL-1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the supplemental document index for Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid and Dr. Nassef, which reflects the production made by the MWL subsequent to their June 2, 2017 index. For these three defendants, who are retired from the MWL, the responsive documents are in the possession of the MWL, and were produced by the MWL as part of its merits document production. Subject to and without waiving their prior objections, a subset of the MWL’s document production is or may be responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to them, as set forth on the attached index of over 16,190 entries. We have tried to be overinclusive in indexing the documents, as many documents (or ranges of documents) can be responsive to multiple jurisdictional discovery document requests, given the broad and overlapping nature of those requests. However, not all of the MWL documents were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests, so these indexes only include those that we determined were responsive to those requests. Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel Attachment G Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 45 of 77 BERNABEI & KABAT, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1400 16th STREET, N.W., SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2223 LYNNE BERNABEI 202.745.1942 KRISTEN SINISI ALAN R. KABAT FAX: 202.745.2627 MICHAEL ELLEMENT* PETER M. WHELAN WWW.BERNABEIPLLC.COM DEVIN WRIGLEY * ADMITTED IN MD ONLY By Email and First Class Mail September 26, 2017 Sean P. Carter, Esquire Scott Tarbutton, Esquire Cozen O’Connor, P.C. 1650 Market Place Philadelphia, PA 19103-7301 Re: In re Terrorist Attacks, No. 03-MDL-1570 Sean and Scott, Enclosed please find the supplemental document index for Dr. Basha, which reflects the production made by the IIRO subsequent to his June 2, 2017 index. For Dr. Basha, who is retired from the IIRO, the responsive documents are in the possession of the IIRO, and were produced by the IIRO as part of its merits document production. Subject to and without waiving Dr. Basha’s prior objections, a subset of the IIRO’s document production is or may be responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests directed to him, as set forth on the attached index of over 770 entries. Also enclosed is Dr. Basha’s Certification. We have tried to be overinclusive in indexing the documents, as many documents (or ranges of documents) can be responsive to multiple jurisdictional discovery document requests, given the broad and overlapping nature of those requests. However, not all of the IIRO documents were responsive to the jurisdictional discovery document requests, so these indexes only include those that we determined were responsive to those requests. Sincerely,/s/Alan Alan R. Kabat Enc. cc: MDL 1570 counsel Attachment G Attachment H Excerpts (first and last pages) from Dr. Al-Turki, et al., Document Indexes (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017) Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 47 of 77 Document index for Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, and Dr. Naseef. Al-Turki Doc. Req. Doc. Req. 30; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. JT-MWL 00001 – JT-MWL 00034 29; Naseef Doc. Req. 23 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, JT-MWL 00035 – JT-MWL 00315 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 29, 30; JT-MWL 00316 – JT-MWL 00613 Naseef Doc. Req. 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 17, 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 17, JT-MWL 00614 – JT-MWL 00723 29, 30; Naseef Doc. Req. 17, 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 17, 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 17, JT-MWL 00724 – JT-MWL 00939 29, 30; Naseef Doc. Req. 17, 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 17, 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 17, JT-MWL 00940 – JT-MWL 00995 29, 30; Naseef Doc. Req. 17, 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 8; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 8; Naseef JT-MWL 00996 – JT-MWL 01332 Doc. Req. 8 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 8; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 8; Naseef JT-MWL 01333 – JT-MWL 01396 Doc. Req. 8 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef JT-MWL 01397 – JT-MWL 03791 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef JT-MWL 03792 – JT-MWL 03841 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef JT-MWL 03842 – JT-MWL 04273 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef JT-MWL 04274 – JT-MWL 04512 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 17, 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 17, JT-MWL 04513 – JT-MWL 04534 29, 30; Naseef Doc. Req. 17, 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 17, 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 17, JT-MWL 04535 – JT-MWL 04577 29, 30; Naseef Doc. Req. 17, 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 17, 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 17, JT-MWL 04578 – JT-MWL 04855 29, 30; Naseef Doc. Req. 17, 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 29, 30; JT-MWL 04856 – JT-MWL 04938 Naseef Doc. Req. 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 29, 30; JT-MWL 04939 – JT-MWL 05036 Naseef Doc. Req. 23, 24 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef JT-MWL 05037 – JT-MWL 05141 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 005142 – MWL 005343 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 005344 – MWL 005370 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 005371 – MWL 005501 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 30, 31; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 29, 30; MWL 005502 – MWL 005529 Naseef Doc. Req. 23, 24 Page 1 of 1751 Attachment H Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 48 of 77 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 005530 – MWL 005820 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 005821 – MWL 006107 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 006108 – MWL 006125 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 006126 – MWL 006269 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9; Al-Obaid Doc. Req., 5, 8, MWL 006270 – MWL 006395 9; Naseef Doc. Req. 5, 8, 9 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 016768 – IIRO 016872 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 016873 – IIRO 016972 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 016973 – IIRO 017130 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 017131 – IIRO 017414 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 017415 – IIRO 017720 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 017721 – IIRO 017944 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 34; Naseef IIRO 017945 – IIRO 018162 Doc. Req. 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018163 – IIRO 018193 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018194 – IIRO 018222 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018223 – IIRO 018254 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018255 – IIRO 018274 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018275 – IIRO 018301 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018302 – IIRO 018335 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 12, 35; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 12, 34; IIRO 018336 – IIRO 018382 Naseef Doc. Req. 12, 28, 29 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef IIRO 018383 – IIRO 018401 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef IIRO 018402 – IIRO 018414 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef IIRO 018415 – IIRO 018421 Doc. Req. 13 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 13; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 13; Naseef IIRO 018422 – IIRO 018444 Doc. Req. 13 Page 2 of 1751 Attachment H Pages 3 to 1749 omitted Attachment H Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 50 of 77 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 101, 102, 116, 117; Al-Obaid Doc. MWL 064375 MWL 064376 Req. 94, 95, 109, 110; Naseef Doc. Req. 87, 88, 102, MWL 064128 MWL 064128 103 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 75, 76; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 68, 69; MWL 062576 MWL 062601 Naseef Doc. Req. 61, 62 MWL 062602 MWL 062642 MWL 062708 MWL 062729 MWL 063299 MWL 063301 MWL 063059 MWL 063059 MWL 063064 MWL 063064 MWL 063264 MWL 063265 MWL 063288 MWL 063288 MWL 063292 MWL 063293 MWL 063302 MWL 063302 MWL 063309 MWL 063309 MWL 063311 MWL 063311 MWL 064252 MWL 064252 MWL 064254 MWL 064254 MWL 064558 MWL 064558 MWL 062410 MWL 062444 MWL 062445 MWL 062465 MWL 063007 MWL 063014 MWL 062677 MWL 062707 MWL 063465 MWL 063470 MWL 062513 MWL 062540 MWL 062466 MWL 062492 MWL 062541 MWL 062575 MWL 063015 MWL 063018 MWL 063271 MWL 063272 MWL 063275 MWL 063277 MWL 063282 MWL 063283 MWL 063297 MWL 063298 MWL 063306 MWL 063307 MWL 063291 MWL 063291 MWL 063462 MWL 063464 MWL 063452 MWL 063452 MWL 062975 MWL 062977 MWL 064127 MWL 064127 MWL 064129 MWL 064131 MWL 064562 MWL 064562 MWL 063471 MWL 063473 MWL 063439 MWL 063439 MWL 063453 MWL 063453 MWL 063454 MWL 063454 MWL 064096 MWL 064097 MWL 064549 MWL 064549 MWL 063259 MWL 063259 Page 1750 of 1751 Attachment H Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 51 of 77 MWL 064426 MWL 064429 MWL 064386 MWL 064400 MWL 063019 MWL 063019 MWL 063031 MWL 063041 MWL 063060 MWL 063060 MWL 063260 MWL 063260 MWL 063323 MWL 063328 MWL 064071 MWL 064078 MWL 064118 MWL 064118 MWL 064119 MWL 064121 MWL 064220 MWL 064220 MWL 064222 MWL 064224 MWL 064225 MWL 064229 MWL 064352 MWL 064353 MWL 064362 MWL 064362 MWL 064377 MWL 064379 MWL 064383 MWL 064383 MWL 064384 MWL 064384 MWL 064423 MWL 064425 MWL 064503 MWL 064519 MWL 064531 MWL 064531 MWL 064535 MWL 064536 MWL 064552 MWL 064553 MWL 064555 MWL 064556 MWL 064557 MWL 064557 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 77; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 70; Naseef MWL 062708 MWL 062729 Doc. Req. 63 MWL 063455 MWL 063458 MWL 062985 MWL 062986 MWL 064062 MWL 064070 MWL 064437 MWL 064438 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 86; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 79; Naseef MWL 062445 MWL 062465 Doc. Req. 72 MWL 063057 MWL 063058 MWL 063279 MWL 063279 MWL 063284 MWL 063287 MWL 064245 MWL 064245 Al-Turki Doc. Req. 56, 57, 58; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. 49, MWL 062541 MWL 062575 50, 51; Naseef Doc. Req. 42, 43, 44 Page 1751 of 1751 Attachment H Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 52 of 77 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________) IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001) No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(SN)) ________________________________________________) DEFENDANT DR. ABDULLAH AL-TURKI, ET AL.’S SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Defendants Dr. Abdullah Al-Turki, Dr. Abdullah Al-Obaid, and Dr. Abdullah Naseef, through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Rule 34(b)(2), provide their supplemental responses to Plaintiffs’ First Set of Jurisdictional Requests for Production of Documents (Aug. 22, 2013). The following index supplements that produced on June 6, 2017: Al-Turki Doc. Req. Nos. 5, 8; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. Nos. 5, 8; Naseef MWL 070485 MWL 070486 Doc. Req. Nos. 5, 8 MWL 070487 MWL 070489 Al-Turki Doc. Req. Nos. 6, 9-12; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. Nos. 6, 9-12; MWL 065139 MWL 065139 Naseef Doc. Req. Nos. 6, 9-12 MWL 065390 MWL 065403 MWL 066182 MWL 066182 MWL 066189 MWL 066190 MWL 066388 MWL 066388 MWL 067659 MWL 067659 MWL 067668 MWL 067677 MWL 068269 MWL 068269 MWL 068311 MWL 068311 MWL 068312 MWL 068315 MWL 068319 MWL 068319 MWL 068320 MWL 068320 MWL 068332 MWL 068335 MWL 068336 MWL 068337 MWL 068343 MWL 068343 MWL 068383 MWL 068384 MWL 068395 MWL 068395 MWL 068396 MWL 068396 MWL 070371 MWL 070392 MWL 070394 MWL 070394 Page 1752 of 2129 Attachment H MWL 070490 MWL 070490 MWL 070491 MWL 070491 MWL 070492 MWL 070492 MWL 070493 MWL 070514 MWL 070515 MWL 070520 MWL 070626 MWL 070626 MWL 070627 MWL 070627 MWL 070638 MWL 070646 MWL 070647 MWL 070647 MWL 070648 MWL 070649 MWL 070650 MWL 070651 MWL 070652 MWL 070653 MWL 070654 MWL 070655 MWL 070656 MWL 070656 MWL 070667 MWL 070668 MWL 070669 MWL 070669 MWL 070828 MWL 070828 MWL 070838 MWL 070838 MWL 070839 MWL 070839 MWL 070867 MWL 070867 MWL 070935 MWL 070956 MWL 070957 MWL 070962 MWL 071298 MWL 071298 MWL 071299 MWL 071299 MWL 071300 MWL 071300 MWL 071301 MWL 071301 MWL 071302 MWL 071302 MWL 071303 MWL 071303 MWL 071304 MWL 071304 MWL 071305 MWL 071305 MWL 071499 MWL 071499 MWL 071642 MWL 071642 MWL 071643 MWL 071643 MWL 071650 MWL 071650 MWL 071701 MWL 071701 MWL 071702 MWL 071702 MWL 071711 MWL 071711 MWL 071761 MWL 071761 MWL 071762 MWL 071762 MWL 071763 MWL 071763 MWL 071764 MWL 071764 MWL 071779 MWL 071779 MWL 071790 MWL 071790 Page 1753 of 2129 Attachment H Pages 1754 to 2128 omitted Attachment H Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 55 of 77 MWL 110182 MWL 110184 MWL 110217 MWL 110218 MWL 110279 MWL 110281 MWL 110285 MWL 110287 MWL 110288 MWL 110291 MWL 110299 MWL 110301 MWL 110302 MWL 110303 MWL 110304 MWL 110305 MWL 110316 MWL 110317 MWL 110323 MWL 110325 MWL 110354 MWL 110358 MWL 110398 MWL 110399 MWL 110458 MWL 110459 MWL 114426 MWL 114435 MWL 110254 MWL 110272 MWL 114476 MWL 114490 MWL 114654 MWL 114659 MWL 114491 MWL 114492 MWL 114650 MWL 114653 MWL 109848 MWL 109851 MWL 114436 MWL 114439 MWL 110672 MWL 110674 MWL 109834 MWL 109839 MWL 110014 MWL 110015 MWL 110017 MWL 110020 MWL 110036 MWL 110041 MWL 110078 MWL 110083 MWL 114309 MWL 114315 MWL 110381 MWL 110392 MWL 110294 MWL 110298 MWL 110501 MWL 110515 MWL 109933 MWL 109947 MWL 114924 MWL 114936 MWL 110132 MWL 110142 MWL 114353 MWL 114371 MWL 110149 MWL 110155 Al-Turki Doc. Req. No. 86; Al-Obaid Doc. Req. No. 79; Naseef Doc. MWL 115252 MWL 115253 Req. No. 72 MWL 115006 MWL 115021 MWL 114898 MWL 114909 MWL 114862 MWL 114877 MWL 116516 MWL 116522 Page 2129 of 2129 Attachment H Attachment H Attachment I Excerpts (first and last pages) from Dr. Basha, Document Indexes (June 2, 2017; Sept. 26, 2017) Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 58 of 77 Basha, Index to IIRO documents (2017) Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 000024 IIRO 000050 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 000051 IIRO 000083 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000084 IIRO 000095 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000096 IIRO 000108 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000109 IIRO 000110 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000111 IIRO 000119 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000120 IIRO 000124 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000125 IIRO 000132 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000133 IIRO 000137 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000138 IIRO 000163 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000164 IIRO 000190 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000191 IIRO 000203 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000204 IIRO 000208 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000248 IIRO 000297 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000298 IIRO 000340 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000341 IIRO 000353 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000354 IIRO 000368 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000369 IIRO 000387 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000428 IIRO 000667 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000668 IIRO 000691 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000692 IIRO 000707 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000722 IIRO 000727 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000728 IIRO 000732 Basha Doc. Req. 8 IIRO 000733 IIRO 000740 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 000741 IIRO 000765 Basha Doc. Req. 36 IIRO 000766 IIRO 000943 Basha Doc. Req. 29 IIRO 000944 IIRO 000968 Basha Doc. Req. 36 IIRO 000984 IIRO 001004 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001005 IIRO 001006 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001007 IIRO 001014 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001139 IIRO 001139 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001140 IIRO 001153 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001154 IIRO 001184 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001185 IIRO 001185 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001186 IIRO 001190 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001191 IIRO 001214 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001215 IIRO 001218 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001219 IIRO 001223 Page 1 of 1147 Attachment I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 59 of 77 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001224 IIRO 001225 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001226 IIRO 001226 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001227 IIRO 001230 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001231 IIRO 001234 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001235 IIRO 001236 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001237 IIRO 001245 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001246 IIRO 001248 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001249 IIRO 001252 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001253 IIRO 001255 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001256 IIRO 001258 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001259 IIRO 001262 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001263 IIRO 001264 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001265 IIRO 001270 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001271 IIRO 001271 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001272 IIRO 001272 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001273 IIRO 001275 Basha Doc. Req. 24, 25 IIRO 001276 IIRO 001277 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8, 24, 25 IIRO 001278 IIRO 001278 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8, 24, 25 IIRO 001279 IIRO 001279 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001280 IIRO 001280 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001281 IIRO 001282 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001283 IIRO 001283 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001284 IIRO 001286 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001287 IIRO 001287 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001288 IIRO 001288 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001289 IIRO 001294 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001295 IIRO 001295 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001296 IIRO 001298 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001299 IIRO 001303 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001304 IIRO 001316 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001317 IIRO 001322 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001323 IIRO 001328 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001329 IIRO 001330 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001331 IIRO 001332 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001333 IIRO 001335 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001336 IIRO 001339 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001340 IIRO 001344 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001345 IIRO 001353 Basha Doc. Req. 5, 8 IIRO 001354 IIRO 001354 Page 2 of 1147 Attachment I Pages 3 to 1145 omitted Attachment I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 61 of 77 IIRO 334745 IIRO 334745 IIRO 334793 IIRO 334793 IIRO 335269 IIRO 335269 IIRO 337106 IIRO 337106 IIRO 337108 IIRO 337108 IIRO 337275 IIRO 337275 IIRO 337278 IIRO 337278 IIRO 337395 IIRO 337395 IIRO 337396 IIRO 337396 IIRO 338310 IIRO 338310 IIRO 338312 IIRO 338312 IIRO 338313 IIRO 338319 IIRO 338390 IIRO 338390 IIRO 338421 IIRO 338421 Basha Doc. Req. 67. IIRO 334981 IIRO 334981 IIRO 334982 IIRO 334982 IIRO 334983 IIRO 334983 IIRO 334984 IIRO 334984 IIRO 334986 IIRO 334986 IIRO 334987 IIRO 334987 IIRO 334988 IIRO 334988 IIRO 334997 IIRO 334998 IIRO 334999 IIRO 334999 IIRO 335000 IIRO 335000 IIRO 335001 IIRO 335002 IIRO 335003 IIRO 335003 IIRO 335004 IIRO 335004 IIRO 335005 IIRO 335005 IIRO 335006 IIRO 335006 IIRO 335007 IIRO 335008 IIRO 335009 IIRO 335010 IIRO 335011 IIRO 335011 IIRO 335012 IIRO 335012 IIRO 335013 IIRO 335014 IIRO 335015 IIRO 335015 IIRO 335016 IIRO 335016 IIRO 335017 IIRO 335017 IIRO 335018 IIRO 335018 IIRO 335019 IIRO 335019 IIRO 335020 IIRO 335020 IIRO 335021 IIRO 335021 IIRO 335022 IIRO 335022 IIRO 335023 IIRO 335023 IIRO 335024 IIRO 335024 IIRO 335025 IIRO 335026 IIRO 335027 IIRO 335027 Page 1146 of 1147 Attachment I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 62 of 77 IIRO 335028 IIRO 335028 IIRO 335032 IIRO 335032 IIRO 335033 IIRO 335033 IIRO 335034 IIRO 335034 IIRO 335035 IIRO 335036 IIRO 335037 IIRO 335039 IIRO 335040 IIRO 335040 IIRO 335041 IIRO 335042 IIRO 335043 IIRO 335046 IIRO 335047 IIRO 335048 IIRO 335049 IIRO 335049 IIRO 335050 IIRO 335050 IIRO 334760 IIRO 334760 Basha Doc. Req. 76, 78. IIRO 337013 IIRO 337013 Basha Doc. Req. 51, 54. IIRO 336105 IIRO 336105 IIRO 336140 IIRO 336141 IIRO 336142 IIRO 336143 IIRO 336160 IIRO 336160 IIRO 336171 IIRO 336171 IIRO 336185 IIRO 336187 IIRO 336393 IIRO 336393 IIRO 336414 IIRO 336414 IIRO 336430 IIRO 336430 IIRO 336442 IIRO 336442 IIRO 336443 IIRO 336443 IIRO 336446 IIRO 336446 IIRO 336896 IIRO 336896 IIRO 337202 IIRO 337206 IIRO 336424 IIRO 336425 Basha Doc. Req. 53, 54, 55. IIRO 334821 IIRO 334821 IIRO 334788 IIRO 334788 IIRO 334789 IIRO 334789 Page 1147 of 1147 Attachment I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 63 of 77 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________) IN RE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001) No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(SN)) ________________________________________________) DEFENDANT DR. ADNAN BASHA’S SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF JURISDICTIONAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Defendant Dr. Adnan Basha, through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Rule 34(b)(2), provides his supplemental responses to Plaintiffs’ First Set of Jurisdictional Requests for Production of Documents (Aug. 22, 2013). The following index supplements that produced on June 6, 2017: Basha Doc. Req. Nos. 2-3, 5-6, 8-9 IIRO 338512 IIRO 338516 Basha Doc. Req. No. 11 IIRO 338474 IIRO 338474 IIRO 338475 IIRO 338475 Basha Doc. Req. Nos. 7, 13, 18. IIRO 338422 IIRO 338431 IIRO 338432 IIRO 338437 Basha Doc. Req. No. 24 IIRO 339000 IIRO 339000 IIRO 339031 IIRO 339031 IIRO 339051 IIRO 339051 IIRO 339053 IIRO 339053 IIRO 339054 IIRO 339054 IIRO 339055 IIRO 339055 IIRO 339253 IIRO 339255 IIRO 339256 IIRO 339256 IIRO 339257 IIRO 339257 Basha Doc. Req. Nos. 24, 25 IIRO 338790 IIRO 338793 IIRO 338794 IIRO 338797 IIRO 338798 IIRO 338807 IIRO 338808 IIRO 338817 IIRO 338818 IIRO 338823 IIRO 338824 IIRO 338834 IIRO 338835 IIRO 338854 IIRO 338855 IIRO 338871 IIRO 338872 IIRO 338880 Page 1148 of 1166 Attachment I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 64 of 77 IIRO 338881 IIRO 338906 IIRO 338907 IIRO 338932 IIRO 338933 IIRO 338949 IIRO 338950 IIRO 338961 IIRO 338962 IIRO 338977 IIRO 338978 IIRO 338996 IIRO 339002 IIRO 339002 IIRO 339003 IIRO 339003 IIRO 339256 IIRO 339256 IIRO 339257 IIRO 339257 Basha Doc. Req. No. 77 IIRO 338568 IIRO 338568 IIRO 338610 IIRO 338615 IIRO 338616 IIRO 338628 IIRO 338629 IIRO 338649 IIRO 338650 IIRO 338680 IIRO 338681 IIRO 338715 IIRO 338716 IIRO 338727 IIRO 338728 IIRO 338733 IIRO 338734 IIRO 338782 IIRO 338783 IIRO 338786 IIRO 338787 IIRO 338789 IIRO 338790 IIRO 338793 IIRO 338794 IIRO 338797 IIRO 338798 IIRO 338807 IIRO 338808 IIRO 338817 IIRO 338999 IIRO 338999 Basha Doc. Req. No. 66 IIRO 338582 IIRO 338582 IIRO 338583 IIRO 338583 IIRO 338584 IIRO 338584 IIRO 338585 IIRO 338585 IIRO 338587 IIRO 338587 IIRO 338588 IIRO 338588 IIRO 338592 IIRO 338592 IIRO 338872 IIRO 338880 IIRO 338907 IIRO 338932 Basha Doc. Req. Nos. 91, 92 IIRO 338568 IIRO 338568 IIRO 338569 IIRO 338569 Basha Doc. Req. No. 76 IIRO 338591 IIRO 338591 IIRO 338592 IIRO 338592 IIRO 338593 IIRO 338593 IIRO 338594 IIRO 338594 IIRO 338595 IIRO 338595 Page 1149 of 1166 Attachment I Pages 1150 to 1165 omitted Attachment I Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 66 of 77 IIRO 341912 IIRO 341912 IIRO 341913 IIRO 341913 IIRO 341914 IIRO 341914 IIRO 341915 IIRO 341915 IIRO 341916 IIRO 341916 IIRO 341917 IIRO 341917 IIRO 341918 IIRO 341918 IIRO 341919 IIRO 341919 IIRO 341920 IIRO 341920 IIRO 341921 IIRO 341921 IIRO 341922 IIRO 341922 IIRO 341923 IIRO 341923 IIRO 341924 IIRO 341924 IIRO 341925 IIRO 341925 IIRO 341926 IIRO 341926 IIRO 341927 IIRO 341927 IIRO 341928 IIRO 341928 IIRO 341929 IIRO 341929 IIRO 341930 IIRO 341930 IIRO 341931 IIRO 341931 IIRO 341932 IIRO 341932 IIRO 341933 IIRO 341933 IIRO 341934 IIRO 341934 IIRO 341935 IIRO 341935 Basha Doc. Req. No. 92 IIRO 341936 IIRO 341971 Page 1166 of 1166 Attachment I Attachment I Attachment J Certification of Dr. Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid (Oct. 14, 2017) Attachment J Attachment J Attachment K Declaration of Dr. Adnan Basha (Sept. 30, 2017) Attachment K Attachment L Certification of Soliman H. Al-Buthe (Oct. 17, 2017) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK) In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001) No. 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) CERTIFICATION OF SOLIMAN H. AL-BUTHE Under penalty of perjury, I, Soliman H. Al-Buthe, attest that the following is true and correct to the best of my knowledge: 1. I hereby certify that I have searched for and produced (through my attorneys) all non-privileged documents that are relevant and responsive to the plaintiffs’ jurisdictional discovery document requests. These include documents that were previously produced by the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. (USA). 2. I have not withheld any documents on the basis of privilege, other than communications with my lawyers after this lawsuit was filed. 3. I have previously produced copies of my passports, which document my foreign travels during the period of 1992 to 2002. 4. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. SIGNED: Soliman. Al.Buthe EXECUTED ON: 10 — ZOI Attachment L Attachment M Declaration of Alan R. Kabat (Oct. 20, 2017) Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 76 of 77 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK) INRE TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11,2001) No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD/SN) Declaration of Alan R. Kabat in Support of Defendants Dr. Abdullah Al-Turki, Dr. Abdullah Al-Obaid, Dr. Abdullah Naseef, Dr. Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion I am an attorney licensed to practice in the District of Columbia and am admitted pro hac vice in this matter. I am with the law firm of Bernabei & Kabat, PLLC, counsel to defendants Dr. Abdullah bin Mohsen Al-Turki, Dr. Abdullah bin Saleh Al-Obaid, Dr. Abdullah Omar Naseef, Dr. Adnan Basha, and Mr. Soliman H.S. Al-Buthe. I submit this declaration in support of these five defendants’ opposition to the Plaintiffs’ motion, in order to provide information in response to the plaintiffs’ requests for additional documentation on their travels. 1. On April 13, 2016, and on May 16, 2017, I sent letters to local counsel in Saudi Arabia to request information on the passports of Dr. Al-Turki, Dr. Al-Obaid, Dr. Naseef, and Dr. Basha, but was unable to obtain any information. I renewed this request in early September 2017, through local counsel for the Muslim World League, but they were similarly unsuccessful. Hence, on October 10, 2017, I wrote to our contacts at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C., to request that they contact the General Directorate of Passports, Ministry of Interior, to see if the passports or other information relating to their foreign travels was available, and while our contacts promptly acknowledged the request, I have not yet received any further information. 2. With respect to Dr. Al-Turki and Dr. Naseef, our prior communications with them were through local counsel in Saudi Arabia. In September and October 2017, I made repeated attempts through both local counsel and a colleague in Saudi Arabia, to contact them to obtain more information about their travels, and to have them review, edit, and sign an updated Attachment M Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3764 Filed 10/20/17 Page 77 of 77 certification (similar to those by Dr. Al-Obaid and Mr. Al-Buthe). I have now learned that Dr. Naseef (age 78), is in ill health, incapacitated, and unable to communicate about substantive issues, including this litigation. I have not received any response from or about Dr. Al-Turki, although it appears that he is out of the country, which given his age (77) may indicate medical travel. I will continue these efforts to contact Dr. Al-Turki to obtain an updated certification, and to obtain a certification from Dr. Naseef’s son as to his current health condition. 3. With respect to Dr. Basha, I had obtained certifications from him earlier this year (Sept. 19, 2017 and Sept. 30, 2017), regarding his travels to the United States, and his role in directing the ITRO staff to assist outside counsel in searching for documents. After the plaintiffs argued in their Motion that those certifications were inadequate in format (the perjury statement) and unclear as to whether privileged documents were withheld, I contacted Dr. Basha anew to have him review, edit, and sign a revised certification, but learned that over the past two weeks he is undergoing medical tests that are underway, and is presently unable to review the draft of the revised certification. 4. I further certify that these five Defendants have not withheld any documents on the basis of privilege, other than their communications with their lawyers subsequent to the 2002 filing of the lawsuits in this action, which do not have to be included on a privilege log. 5. I declare under the penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Executed on October 20, 2017. L-E cL$t ALAN R. KABAT 2 Attachment M

ORDER: This document relates to: Susanne Fraser, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 17-CV-7317 (GBD)(SN). By Order dated October 3, 2017, the Court directed Plaintiff Susanne Fraser to file a letter no later than October 13, 2017, advising the Court of whether she intends to conform her pleadings to the Consolidated Amended Complaint as to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina. Plaintiff did not file a letter as directed. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a letter by October 25, 2017. To the extent the Plaintiffs Executive Committees have been in contact with counsel for Plaintiff, the PEC may also file a letter if it has information regarding the Plaintiff's intentions. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 10/23/2017)

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3765 Filed 10/23/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK-----------------------------------------------------------------X 10/23/2017 In re: 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 ORDER-----------------------------------------------------------------X SARAH NETBURN, United States Magistrate Judge: This document relates to: Susanne Fraser, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 17-CV-7317 (GBD)(SN). By Order dated October 3, 2017, the Court directed Plaintiff Susanne Fraser to file a letter no later than October 13, 2017, advising the Court of whether she intends to conform her pleadings to the Consolidated Amended Complaint as to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina. Plaintiff did not file a letter as directed. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a letter by October 25, 2017. To the extent the Plaintiffs Executive Committees have been in contact with counsel for Plaintiff, the PEC may also file a letter if it has information regarding the Plaintiff’s intentions. SO ORDERED. DATED: October 23, 2017 New York, New York

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn from Jerry S. Goldman, Esq dated 10/25/2017 re: In response to the Courts Order. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees, Plaintiffs PI Executive Committee.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3766 Filed 10/25/17 Page 1 of 1 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y.) Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Personal Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Injury and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers/Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC COZEN O’CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O’CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF and FEDEX October 25, 2017 The Honorable Sarah Netburn Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse 40 Foley Square, Room 430 New York, NY 10007 Re: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Netburn: I write on behalf of the Plaintiffs Executive Committees ("PEC") in response to your Order of October 24, 2017 (ECF No. 3765) in relation to the newly filed matter Susanne Fraser, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., 17-CV-7317 (GBD)(SN) ("Fraser"). In response to the Court’s Order of October 3, 2017 (ECF No 3740), and after conferring with other members of the PEC, I attempted to contact counsel of record for the Fraser Plaintiffs, leaving telephone messages. Mr. Robert Haefele, from Motley Rice, was also separately in touch with his office. In response to the Court’s most recent order both Mr. Haefele and I again immediately attempted to contact counsel for the Fraser Plaintiffs by both telephone and by email. On October 25, 2017 I had a lengthy telephone conversation with counsel for Fraser Plaintiff. Following that conversation, he advised that his intent is to withdraw his clients’ complaint, without prejudice, and that certain member firms of the PEC will prosecute the Fraser Plaintiffs’ case. I anticipate that the withdrawal papers will be quickly filed. Respectfully submitted,/s/Jerry S. Goldman Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ON BEHALF OF THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES cc: All counsel of record via ECF nydocs1-1098259.1

LETTER addressed to Judge George B. Daniels from Sean P. Carter, Esquire, dated October 27, 2017 re: PEC, on behalf of the CAC Plaintiffs and the Ashton Plaintiffs, write to respectfully request the Court's endorsement of proposals concerning page limits for further briefing as to the Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina. The Kingdom and the SHC join in this request. Plaintiffs also seek the Court's approval of an administrative proposal relating to their oppositions. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3767 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 2 MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y) Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Personal Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee for Injury and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers/Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair MOTLEY RICE LLC COZEN O’CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP COZEN O’CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF AND OVERNIGHT MAIL October 27, 2017 The Honorable George B. Daniels United States District Court Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 RE: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Daniels: The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees, on behalf of the Consolidated Amended Complaint ("CAC") Plaintiffs and the Ashton Plaintiffs, write to respectfully request the Court’s endorsement of the below proposals concerning page limits for further briefing as to the Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina ("SHC"). The Kingdom and SHC join in this request. Plaintiffs also seek the Court’s approval of an administrative proposal relating to their oppositions. As the Court is aware, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia previously filed a 75 page1 Memorandum of Law in support of its Motion to Dismiss the separate CAC and Ashton complaints. The SHC filed a separate Memorandum of Law in support of its Motion to Dismiss, totaling 25 pages. Pursuant to the Court’s Order of April 13, 2017, ECF No. 3514, the CAC Plaintiffs and Ashton Plaintiffs are filing separate oppositions to those motions. After spending considerable time working on the opposition briefs, and after conferring with counsel for the defendants, the parties propose as follows: 1 The CAC and Ashton plaintiffs consented to the Kingdom’s request for an extension of the page limit for its brief to 75 pages, based on the Kingdom’s separate assurances to the CAC and Ashton Plaintiffs that it would consent to comparable extensions of the page limit for their briefs. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3767 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 2 The Honorable George B. Daniels Page Two October 27, 2017 _________________________ 1. The CAC Plaintiffs will file a single brief in opposition to the separate Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom and SHC, not to exceed 80 pages; 2. The Ashton Plaintiffs will file a single brief in opposition to the Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom and SHC, not to exceed 70 pages; and 3. The Kingdom and SHC will be afforded 75 pages in total for their replies. The parties believe that the proposal outlined above will allow for the most effective presentation of the issues to the Court. The PECs respectfully request the Court’s authorization to file documentary materials and evidence offered in support of their Oppositions with the Clerk’s office via a CD or thumb drive. The Court authorized plaintiffs to do so earlier in the litigation, and the PECs understand that a specific order authorizing the filing of exhibits via a CD or thumb drive will be required by the Clerk’s office to do so again in this instance. We will of course serve those materials on counsel for the defendants, and provide courtesy copies to the Court, in whatever form the Court would prefer. We thank Your Honor in advance for the Court’s attention to this matter. Respectfully, COZEN O’CONNOR By: Sean P. Carter SPC/bdw cc: The Honorable Sarah Netburn All Counsel of Record LEGAL\33027710\1 2

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Kanishka Agarwala on behalf of Estate of John P.O'Neill, Sr., Carol O'Neill, Christine Irene O'Neill, Dorothy A. O'Neill, Holly O'Neill(Individually), Holly O'Neill(Personal Representative of the Estate of SEAN G.C. O'NEILL, Deceased), Holly O'Neill(As surviving Spouse of SEAN G. C. O'NEILL, Deceased), John Patrick O'Neill, Jr.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3768 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) This filing relates to: The Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. The Republic of Iraq, et al., No. 04-cv-1076 (GBD) (SN) The Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Investment and Development Corporation, et al., No. 04-cv-01923 (GBD) (SN) The Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., No. 04-cv-01922 (GBD) (SN) ENTRY OF APPEARANCE To The Clerk of the District Court: Kindly enter my appearance on behalf of the Plaintiffs in the above-captioned matters. October 27, 2017 By:/s/Kanishka Agarwala Kanishka Agarwala Anderson Kill P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020-1182 Telephone: 212-278-1000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., et al. nydocs1-1098407.1

STATUS REPORT. 30-day Status Report 10/27 Document filed by Wael Jalaidan.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3769 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _____________________________________________________ 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 DEFENDANT JALAIDAN’S OCTOBER 27, 2017 STATUS REPORT The Honorable Judge Netburn, Since the last Status Report, I have not received any response from OFAC regarding my voice messages, letter, or emails. On October 11, 2017 I again called the OFAC licensing division at 202-622-2480. I was given an automated response asking to type in the case number (2016-330016), after which an automated reply stated, "This case is pending. Please check back at a later date." I then called back and dialed "*" to reach the OFAC operator, who just transferred me to a voicemail box for the case officer again without letting me ask for more information. I again left a voice message asking about the status of the case and our requirement to provide a 30 day status report update to the Court each month and asked for a return call or email. I again called the OFAC licensing during the week of October 22, 2017, and received the same automated response. After that automated response, I once more dialed "*" and spoke to another operator, and was transferred to another voicemail. I left another detailed message explaining the need to update the Court on the license status and I asked for a return call with an update. I called again today, October 27, 2017, with the same result as all previous attempts. I was transferred to a voicemail after being told the case is still pending. As of the filing of this status report, I have still not yet received a call back from OFAC. As I have stated previously, if I do receive a fruitful call soon, or am able to reach OFAC for a more detailed update on the license and its current timeline, I will promptly 1 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3769 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 2 update the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee with the information OFAC provides me before the next status report is due. Respectfully Submitted, _____/s/___________________ Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Martin McMahon & Associates Attorney for Defendant 2

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: (546 in 1:04-cv-07065-GBD, 987 in 1:03-cv-06978-GBD-SN, 3748 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 774 in 1:03-cv-09849-GBD, 571 in 1:04-cv-07279-GBD, 850 in 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 630 in 1:04-cv-01923-GBD, 582 in 1:04-cv-05970-GBD-SN) MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Estate of O’Neill v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., 04-CV-1923 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald Associates, LP v. Akida Investment Co., Ltd., 04-CV-7065 PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AS TO CHARITY OFFICIAL DEFENDANTS ABDULLAH NASEEF, ABDULLAH AL-OBAID, ABDULLAH AL-TURKI, ADNAN BASHA, AND SOLIMAN AL-BUTHE The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees ("PECs") offer this memorandum in further support of their request (ECF Nos. 3748-50, filed Oct. 6, 2017) that the Court enter an order, under Rule 37(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Court’s inherent powers, sanctioning defendants Abdullah Naseef, Abdullah Al-Obaid, Abdullah Al-Turki, Adnan Basha and Soliman Al-Buthe ("the charity official defendants") for each defendant’s now-acknowledged failure to comply with this Court’s discovery orders of March 22, 2016 (see Exhibit A,1 Transcript of Mar. 22, 2016 hearing at 84-85) and September 8, 2017 (see Exhibit B, Transcript of Sept. 7, 2017 hearing, at 10-13). This memorandum responds to the charity official defendants’ opposition filed at ECF No. 3763. This Court should not countenance the charity official defendants’ indefatigable efforts to re-litigate issues the Court has already decided. The issue before the Court now is not whether plaintiffs’ 1Exhibits A and B cited herein are attached to the Declaration of Robert T. Haefele, dated October 6, 2017. Exhibit O, comprised of pages 81-83 and 114 from the transcript of the March 22, 2016 hearing, is attached to the Supplemental Declaration of Robert T. Haefele, date October 26, 2017. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 9 discovery requests were overly broad, not about providing information limited to their travels to the United States, or even whether the defendants had failed to respond to any given request (aside from the direction to produce their passports). Indeed, the Court’s approach here was to advance the matter by ordering the charity official defendants to comply with the Court’s specific directions as to all of plaintiffs’ requests and then addressing any remaining issues thereafter.2 The discrete issue presented by the PECs’ October 6, 2017 application (ECF Nos. 3748-50) is whether to impose sanctions for the charity official defendants’ failure to comply with the Court’s orders of March 22, 2016 (Exhibit A) and September 8, 2017 (Exhibit B). Those orders unambiguously imposed on each charity official defendant obligations to provide a "sworn or affirmed certification" that they have produced all documents responsive to the requests, produce his passport(s), and identify any documents responsive that have been withheld. Exh. A at 85. The Court unambiguously rejected the defendants’ effort to limit that obligation to documents they unilaterally deemed relevant to the jurisdictional issue. Id. at 87. The Court was especially clear on this point in the context of Mr. Al-Buthe, where, in response to defense counsel’s request to carve out discovery defendants deemed beyond jurisdictional discovery, the Court stated, "I am not carving anything out" because those objections were waived. Exh. O at 114. Instead of addressing straight forward whether the charity official defendants met their obligations under those two orders (they have not), the charity official defendants offer extensive discourse rearguing whether plaintiffs’ discovery requests were proper (ECF No. 3763 at 5-7) and implying that, notwithstanding their failure to produce passports (which the Court ordered to be produced to show their travel not only to the U.S. but also to other international locations), the 2 As for Mr. Al-Buthe, the Court specifically ruled that he had waived objections as to relevance or over breadth. Id. at 114. As to the other charity official defendants, the Court required each of them, in the first instance, to address their productions as to all of plaintiffs’ discovery requests, certifying that they had done the necessary search and identified what they have withheld from production in the case of each of the requests. The Court added that, "[i]f, at the end of the process... there are lingering issues, [plaintiffs] can bring those back to the Court...." Id. at 87.. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 3 of 9 limited information they produced about their travels to the United States should suffice to meet their individual obligations to produce their passports. Because, even their opposition brief acknowledges that none of the charity official defendants provided the sworn or affirmed certifications as ordered by this Court and because only Al-Buthe provided his passport, each of the defendants has remained in willful noncompliance of the Court’s orders and sanctions are warranted. A. The charity official defendants failed to provide sworn or affirmed certifications in compliance with the Court’s orders. Although the charity official defendants try to sidestep the issue by arguing about information provided to support their 2005 motions to dismiss (more than a decade before the Court issued the 2016 and 2017 orders at issue here), even in their opposition they acknowledge that they have failed to comply with the Court’s orders to provide sworn or affirmed certifications. (See, e.g., ECF No. 3763 at 9.) Although the obligation was initially imposed in March 2016 (more than a year and a half ago) and the Court recently allowed them until October 6, 2017 to comply (Exh. B at 13), none of the defendants complied by the deadline. After that deadline, Mr. Al-Buthe (and only Mr. Al-Buthe) sought to belatedly comply (see ECF 3764 at 74, Attachment L to Declaration of Alan R. Kabat). However, Mr. Al-Buthe’s certification still insists on limiting his certification to documents he (or his counsel) deem "relevant," leaving unacceptably open questions about whether he inappropriately limited his search or refrained from producing documents based on unilateral views of relevance. The remainder of the charity official defendants wholly acknowledge that they have not complied with the Court’s direction to provide timely sworn or affirmed certifications. Although they offer no excuse for their non-compliance with the Court’s unambiguous directions, they nonetheless argue that the Court should simply overlook their non-compliance. Given the continued and longstanding lack of attention to this Court’s orders (an issue that has not been confined to these several defendants), sanctions are essential. The charity official 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 4 of 9 defendants were ordered over a year ago to provide the sworn or affirmed certifications to push the discovery disputes forward; but they completely ignored the Court’s order until more than a year later when pressed by the Court during the September 2017 conference. Then the defendants reacted by providing inadequate, ineffective responses. Then when those documents were questioned, counsel for the defendants claims that his clients are largely unavailable. What may be more concerning is that the reasons for at least some of the defendants’ unavailability (counsel for the charity official defendants Naseef, Al-Turki, and Basha indicates that they are mentally or physically incapacitated; see ECF No. 3763 at 10), suggest that ultimately the defendants longstanding delay tactics will result in further irreparable prejudice to the plaintiffs. If, after years of prejudicial delay in providing full discovery, the defendants ultimately evade discovery by their own incapacity, plaintiffs will be further irreparably prejudiced and these defendants rewarded for their dilatory discovery tactics. B. Charity official defendants Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, Naseef, and Basha have still not produced passports, as they were ordered to do in March 2016 and again in September 2017. Despite being unambiguously ordered to produce their passports – first in March 2016 and again in September 2017 – four of the five charity official defendants have not complied with the Court’s order. Although not especially candid about their failures, the charity official defendants’ opposition brief acknowledges that defendants Al-Turki, Al-Obaid, Naseef, and Basha all remain in non-compliance with the Court’s order to produce their passports. See ECF No. 3763 at 9. What the opposition brief and the supporting certification of Mr. Kabat underscore is the near complete lack of attention given to trying to comply with the Court’s March 2016 order regarding the passports until after the Court’s October 6, 2017 date for production had passed. In response to the Court’s March 2016 direction for these defendants to produce their passports, the only efforts made were an April 2016 letter to a lawyer in Saudi Arabia and another letter to a Saudi lawyer a year later 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 5 of 9 in May 2017. The record includes no other reference to any attempt on behalf of these four defendants to obtain their passports before the October 6 deadline. Only after the production deadline passed, finally a letter was allegedly sent to the Saudi Embassy – though we have little information as to what that letter said. C. The charity official defendants’ continued focus on travels limited to the United States is deceptive and ignores that the Court’s order (and plaintiffs’ discovery requests) were unambiguously focused on travels that included locations other than the United States. The charity official defendants inexplicably insist that the information they have provided about their travels to the United States should suffice to meet their obligation to produce their passports; but the Court and plaintiffs have been consistently unambiguous that the reason the passports were to be produced was to provide evidence of the defendants’ travel not only to the United States, but to a multitude of other locations. As the Court and plaintiffs observed during the conference that led to the Court ordering the passports to be produced (see Exh. O at 81-82), and as plaintiffs argued in the brief requesting these sanctions (see ECF 3749 at 15), and as the charity official defendants observe in their opposition brief (see, e.g., ECF No. 3763 at 4), by and large plaintiffs’ focus in jurisdictional discovery over the charity official defendants has been on specific jurisdiction as opposed to general jurisdiction. Defendants’ continued suggestions that their limited references to trips to the United States is particularly curious, given that plaintiffs have repeatedly explained why the markers of travel on the charity defendants’ passports are relevant to the jurisdictional issues identified by the Second Circuit. (See Exh. O at 82-83; ECF No. 15-16). For example, during the March 2016 hearing, pointing to one area of jurisdictional discovery that the Second Circuit identified (namely, the roles and activities of these defendant at identified charitable organizations), plaintiff explained that evidence of these defendants’ participation in dialogue and global events is relevant to determining their role in setting 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 6 of 9 in motion the program of Al Qaeda support alleged in plaintiffs pleadings. One example identified in the hearing concerned evidence that places defendant Naseef at a meeting with Saudi officials thanking them for generous support and encouraging jihad fighters worldwide. (Exh. O at 82-83.) Another example, identified in plaintiffs’ brief requesting sanctions, concerned evidence that places defendant Naseef at the founding meeting of Al Qaeda. (ECF No. 3749 at 16.) In short, passport markers that place Naseef, or any of the other charity official defendants, at relevant locations worldwide (not just in the United States) support plaintiffs’ claims. All too often in this litigation, defendants have sought to impose on the plaintiffs and the Court their "better" idea as to how discovery should proceed. Usually, the real purpose seems simply to allow defendants to evade production of discovery. For example, in one instance, counsel proposed that rather than producing specific documents responsive to plaintiffs’ requests, plaintiffs should come search a warehouse of documents in Riyadh. In another instance, rather than producing responsive documents, defendants insisted the plaintiffs should travel overseas to depose a witness about what documents exist responsive to the requests. And now, the charity official defendants insist that rather than complying with the Court’s order to produce their passports, evidencing their travels worldwide, they should be permitted to rely on potentially self-serving declarations that limit information to travels to the United States only. Their proposal should be rejected. D. The Court should reject any reliance on the charity official defendants’ deficient "certifications" or counsel’s declaration that the defendants withheld no documents from production. The purpose for requiring certifications from each of the various individual defendants was to obviate questions about whether the defendants engaged in proper searches for responsive documents and whether they withheld any responsive documents from production. Reliance on "certifications" which are effectively nullities, or reliance on a lawyer’s declaration that cannot attest to the searches the individual defendants performed, cannot alleviate the problem the Court’s order sought to address. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 7 of 9 E. The Court should require the charity official defendants claiming physical impairment of mental incapacity to provide certification of their impairment or disability. Given the long history in this litigation of defendants evading discovery, plaintiffs ask that the Court order the defendants to tender certifications supporting the defendants’ alleged physical impairments and mental incapacity. Multiple defendants in this litigation (including several represented by the same counsel as the charity official defendants) have evaded discovery for years only to disappear once they are forced to participate in defending themselves or face sanctions. See ECF No. 3550 at 3-4 (plaintiffs’ letter to the Court regarding defendant Sedaghaty’s counsel’s post-bankruptcy petition motion to withdraw, which was filed after Sedaghaty was sanctioned for years of refusing to defend himself; the letter also describes similar discovery evasion, sanctioning, and disappearances of defendants Al Haramain, Rabita Trust, and Sanabel). The opposition brief of the charity official defendant calls to the Court’s and plaintiffs’ attention for the first time alleged physical impairments and mental incapacity of three of the charity official defendants. Namely, Dr. Al-Turki and Dr. Basha are raising medical impairments, and Dr. Naseef’s counsel has claimed that he is now mentally incapacitated. Plaintiffs request that the Court order those three defendants to produce competent sworn or affirmed certifications from qualified treating physicians of the three defendants identifying the specific medical issues that have and will prevent them from fulfilling their discovery obligations in a timely manner. As to the certification regarding Dr. Naseef’s alleged mental incapacity, the certification should be required to identify not only the nature of Dr. Naseef’s incapacity, but also when Dr. Naseef became incapacitated. 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 8 of 9 Conclusion For the reasons and authorities stated here and in plaintiffs’ moving papers at ECF Nos. 3749-50, and because even the charity official defendants acknowledge that they have failed to comply with the Court’s orders (even to the extent that they made no attempt to comply with the direction to produce the passports until after the deadline had passed), imposition of sanctions under Rule 37(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is authorized and necessary. Among the sanctions plaintiffs ask the Court to impose on Mr. Al-Buthe are:  Ordering Mr. Al-Buthe to re-submit a sworn or affirmed certification that complies with the Court’s previous orders  Imposing costs and reasonable attorney fees for the legal proceedings necessary to bring Mr. Al-Buthe in compliance with his discovery obligations;  Treating the defendants’ refusal as an act of contempt (Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(vii); and  Such other sanctions as the Court may deem appropriate. Among the sanctions plaintiffs ask the Court to impose on the four MWL/IIRO charity official defendants are:  Striking the MWL/IIRO charity official defendants’ objections in their entirety and ordering them to produce every responsive document;  Ordering the MWL/IIRO charity official defendants’ to re-submit sworn or affirmed certifications that comply with the Court’s previous orders  Ordering clarification as to the continued participation of defendants Al-Turki and Naseef, including when they were last responsive to counsel’s communication;  Imposing costs and reasonable attorney fees for the legal proceedings necessary to bring the defendants in compliance with their discovery obligations;  Treating the defendants’ refusal as an act of contempt (Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(vii); and  Such other sanctions as the Court may deem appropriate. As to Drs. Al-Turki, Basha, and Naseef, plaintiffs ask the Court to require the defendants to produce competent sworn or affirmed certifications from qualified treating physicians of those defendants identifying the specific medical issues that have and will prevent them from fulfilling their discovery obligations in a timely manner; and as to the certification regarding Dr. Naseef’s alleged 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3770 Filed 10/27/17 Page 9 of 9 mental incapacity, the certification is required to identify not only the nature of Dr. Naseef’s incapacity, but also when Dr. Naseef became incapacitated. Dated: October 27, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Robert T. Haefele Jodi W. Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 James P. Kreindler, Esq. Andrew J. Maloney, III, Esq. KREINDLER & KREINDLER, LLP 750 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 687-8181 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 9

REPLY AFFIRMATION of Robert T. Haefele in Support re: (546 in 1:04-cv-07065-GBD, 987 in 1:03-cv-06978-GBD-SN, 3748 in 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN, 774 in 1:03-cv-09849-GBD, 571 in 1:04-cv-07279-GBD, 850 in 1:02-cv-06977-GBD-SN, 630 in 1:04-cv-01923-GBD, 582 in 1:04-cv-05970-GBD-SN) MOTION for Sanctions - Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah Bin Saleh Al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen Al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman Al-Buthe. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN et al.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3771 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD)(FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977 Estate of O’Neill v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., 04-CV-1923 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald Associates, LP v. Akida Investment Co., Ltd., 04-CV-7065 SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF ROBERT T. HAEFELE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AS TO CHARITY OFFICIAL DEFENDANTS ABDULLAH OMAR NASEEF, ABDULLAH BIN SALEH AL OBAID, ABDULLAH MAHSEN AL TURKI, ADNAN BASHA, AND SOLIMAN AL-BUTHE I, Robert T. Haefele, Esq., affirm, under penalty of perjury, as follows: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice before this Court, a member of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committees in this MDL, and associated with the law firm Motley Rice LLC, counsel for Plaintiffs in this MDL. I submit this Supplemental Declaration to transmit to the Court the following documents submitted in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions as to Charity Official Defendants Abdullah Omar Naseef, Abdullah bin Saleh al Obaid, Abdullah Mahsen al Turki, Adnan Basha, and Soliman al-Buthe. 2. Attached hereto are true and correct copies of Exhibits O, which is comprised of pages 81, 82, 83, and 114 from the transcript of proceedings in this MDL on March 22, 2016. Affirmed in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, on October 27, 2017. _/s/Robert T. Haefele______________ Robert T. Haefele, Esquire

Exhibit O - Hearing Transcript Excerpts

EXHIBIT O Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3771-1 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 6-@/F1gXe9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-NGBM>=!LM9M>L!=BLMKB<M!<HNKM! LHNMA>KG!=BLMKB<M!H?!G>P!RHKD!!.))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))k!!!/BG!K>6!M>KKHKBLM!9MM9<DL!HG! L>IM>F;>K!--(!.,,-(!!0!!!!!!!!!!!!i*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,/!F=E!-13,!&?F'!!1!))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))k!!2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!GXj!Rbe^(!G*R*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FTeV[!..(!.,-2!!3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-,6.,!T*`*!!!4;XYbeX6!!!5 AHG*!?K9GD!F99L(!!-,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FTZ\fgeTgX!ChWZX!!---.-/-0-1-2-3-4-5.,.-.../.0.1!!!!!!!!!!LHNMA>KG!=BLMKB<M!K>IHKM>KL(!I*<*!!!!!!!!!!!!&.-.'!4,1),/,, Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3771-1 Filed 10/27/17 Page 3 of 6 4-@/F1gXe9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-WbVh`Xagf!g[Tg!eXY_XVg!TVg\i\g\Xf!bY!g[XfX!\aW\i\WhT_f*!!PX!Wb!. abg!g[\a^!\g!\f!Tg!T__!Vb`c_XgX*!!9ZT\a(!jX!j\__!TWWeXff!g[X!/fhYY\V\XaVl!bY!g[X\e!cebWhVg\baf!j\g[!g[bfX!WXYXaWTagf*!0 MA>!<HNKM6!!Abj!TUbhg!Fe*!DTUTg%f!TeZh`Xag!g[Tg!g[XeX!1 [Tf!UXXa!ab!`XXg!TaW!VbaYXe![XeX8!2 FK*!<9KM>K6!!Rbhe!Ababe(!jX!_T\W!bhg!\a!bhe!eXc_l!3 Ue\XY!Tg!cTZX!/!g[Tg!jX!eT\fXW!g[\f!Tg!`h_g\c_X![XTe\aZf!\a!4 `h_g\c_X!_XggXef!gb!g[X!<bheg!TaW!g[XeX!jTf!T!Vbaf\fgXag!5 eXfcbafX6!!*@!=@@<!6@B!D859B!CDE66%!!9aW!fb!jX!VT`X!gb!g[X-, <bheg!gb!fTl!g[Tg!\f!abg!fhYY\V\Xag*!!M[Tg!jTf!bhe!cb\ag!T__--T_baZ*-. Lb(!jX!jXag!Wbja!g[\f!ebTW!Ybe!T!j[\_X*!!M[XeX!f\`c_l-/\fa%g!Ta!\aW\VTg\ba!ba!g[X!eXVbeW(!TYY\e`Tg\iX(!\a!T!eXfcbafX(-0 B![TiX!fXTeV[XW!T__!bY!g[X!eXVbeWf!\a!`l!cbffXff\ba(!VhfgbWl(-1 be!Vbageb_!TaW!lbh![TiX!XiXelg[\aZ!eXfcbaf\iX!gb!lbhe!W\fVbiXel-2 eXdhXfgf*!!9aW!TZT\a(!jX!Wba%g!jTag!gb!XaW!hc!Tg!T!WXcbf\g\ba-3 TaW![TiX!baX!bY!g[XfX!\aW\i\WhT_f!fTl(!jX__(!bY!VbhefX!B-4 `T\agT\aXW!T!W\Tel!Whe\aZ!g[X!g\`X!g[Tg!B!jTf!Fhf_\`!Pbe_W-5 EXTZhX!LXVeXgTel(!be!bY!VbhefX!B![TiX!Vbc\Xf!bY!T__!g[X., fcXXV[Xf!B!jebgX!TaW!?TgjT[f!B!\ffhXW!Whe\aZ!g[Tg!g\`X(!be!bY.-VbhefX!B![TiX!T!Vbcl!bY!`l!cTffcbeg!Yeb`!g[bfX!cXe\bWf*.. 9f!Ta!XkT`c_X(!lbhe!Ababe(!g[XeX!\f!Ta!T__XZTg\ba./UTfXW!ba!NL!ZbiXea`Xag!\aiXfg\ZTg\baf!g[Tg!9UWh__T[!H`Te!GTfXXY.0 jTf!ceXfXag!Tg!g[X!YbhaW\aZ!`XXg\aZ!bY!T_!JTXWT!j\g[!;\a!ETWXa.1 \a!g[X!LhWTa*!!M[X!geTiX_f!bY!g[XfX!\aW\i\WhT_f(!Tf!eXY_XVgXW!!!!!!!!!!LHNMA>KG!=BLMKB<M!K>IHKM>KL(!I*<*!!!!!!!!!!!!&.-.'!4,1),/,, Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3771-1 Filed 10/27/17 Page 4 of 6 4.@/F1gXe9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-Ul!g[X\e!cTffcbegf(!TeX!eX_XiTag*!. Mb!g[X!XkgXag!g[Xl![TiX!eXVX\iXW!_XggXef!bY!/Vb``XaWTg\ba!be!f\`\_Te!TjTeWf!g[Tg![TiX!_ThWXW!g[X\e!0 TVg\i\g\Xf!Whe\aZ!g[X\e!fXei\VX!TaW!bhg_\aXW!j[Tg!g[Xl!W\W(!lbh!1 jbh_W![TiX!XkcXVgXW!g[X`!gb!UX!^Xcg*!!HaX!bY!g[X`!eXVX\iXW!g[X!2 D\aZ!?T\fT_!TjTeW!Ybe!fXei\VX!gb!Bf_T`*!!M[Tg!jbh_W!WXfVe\UX!3 j[Tg!g[Tg!cXefba!W\W*!4 MA>!<HNKM6!!Abj!WbXf!g[Tg!TWW!gb!g[X!]he\fW\Vg\baT_!5 W\fVbiXel8-, FK*!<9KM>K6!!B!g[\a^!g[X!cebcXe!dhXfg\ba!\a!g[X--]he\fW\Vg\baT_!W\fVbiXel!jTf!j[Tg!W\W!g[XfX!\aW\i\WhT_f!Wb!Tg-. g[XfX!V[Te\gTU_X!beZTa\mTg\baf(!j[Tg!jTf!g[X!aTgheX!bY!g[X\e-/eb_Xf*!!B!VTa!Z\iX!lbh!Ta!XkT`c_X(!lbhe!Ababe*!!-0 Ba!bhe!bja!\aiXfg\ZTg\baf!jX![TiX(!Ul!jTl!bY!XkT`c_X(!-1 T!eXcbeg!\a!g[X!9eTU\V!iXef\ba!bY!g[X!Fhf_\`!Pbe_W!EXTZhX!-2 CbheaT_!WTg\aZ!gb!g[X!cXe\bW!\a!-55.!j[XeX!WXYXaWTag!GTfXXY!-3 TggXaWf!T!`XXg\aZ!j\g[!`X`UXef!bY!g[X!eblT_!YT`\_l!TaW!g[X!-4 LThW\!@eTaW!FhYg\(!j[b!\f!g[X!ZbiXea`Xag!bYY\V\T_!Whe\aZ!j[\V[!-5 GTfXXY!g[Ta^f!g[X!D\aZ!Ybe!g[X!ZXaXebhf!fhccbeg!bY!g[X!Fhf_\`!., Pbe_W!EXTZhX!TaW!g[X!@eTaW!FhYg\!\aW\VTgXW!g[X!]\[TW!Y\Z[gXef!.-`hfg!UX!XaVbheTZXW!jbe_Wj\WX*!!9!lXTe!_TgXe!GTfXXY!TZT\a!g[Ta^f!.. D\aZ!?T[W!Ybe!T!WbaTg\ba!bY!.,!`\__\ba!Z\iXa!Ybe!Fhf_\`f!\a!./;bfa\T!fb!g[Xl!Vbh_W!Vbag\ahX!g[X\e!_XZT_!]\[TW!TZT\afg!g[X!.0 LXeUf*!.1 Lb(!g[XfX!^\aWf!bY!W\T_bZhXf!TUbhg!cb_\Vl!\ffhXf(!!!!!!!!!!LHNMA>KG!=BLMKB<M!K>IHKM>KL(!I*<*!!!!!!!!!!!!&.-.'!4,1),/,, Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3771-1 Filed 10/27/17 Page 5 of 6 4/@/F1gXe9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-Z_bUT_!XiXagf(!TeX!iXel!eX_XiTag!gb!g[X!WXgXe`\aTg\ba!Tf!gb!. j[Xg[Xe!be!abg!g[XfX!\aW\i\WhT_f!jXeX!eXfcbaf\U_X!Ybe!fXgg\aZ!/\a!`bg\ba!g[X!cebZeT`!bY!fhccbeg!jX![TiX!WXfVe\UXW!\a!bg[Xe!0 c_XTW\aZf*!!9aW(!TZT\a(!\g!\f!T!`TggXe!bY!g[X`!Zb\aZ!TaW!1 fXTeV[\aZ!g[X\e!bja!eXVbeWf!\a!g[X!fT`X!jTl!g[Tg!g[X!<bheg!2 W\eXVgXW!WXYXaWTag!CX_T\WT\a!gb!Wb!fb*!3 M[Ta^!lbh(!lbhe!Ababe*!4 MA>!<HNKM6!!Abj!TUbhg!g[X!cTffcbegf(!Fe*!DTUTg8!5 FK*!D9;9M6!!B!VTa!Tf^![\`!Ybe!g[Tg!Uhg!B!g[\a^!g[X-, cebcXe!jTl!))--MA>!<HNKM6!!B!ZTg[Xe!g[XeX!jTf!T!fcXV\Y\V!eXdhXfg!g[Tg-. Tf^XW!Ybe!g[bfX*!!P[Tg!jTf!lbhe!eXfcbafX!gb!g[Tg!eXdhXfg8-/FK*!D9;9M6!!B!Wba%g!))-0 MA>!<HNKM6!!Fe*!<TegXe(!VTa!lbh!cb\ag!`X!\a!g[X!e\Z[g-1 W\eXVg\ba![XeX8-2 FK*!D9;9M6!!9ZT\a(!lbhe!Ababe!))-3 MA>!<HNKM6!!ATaZ!ba!]hfg!T!`\ahgX*-4 FK*!<9KM>K6!!B!g[\a^!\a!T!`b`Xag!jX!j\__!UX!TU_X!gb*-5 B!^abj!g[XeX!jXeX!eXdhXfgf!eX_Tg\aZ!gb!geTiX_!gb!c_TVXf!_\^X., LhWTa(!9YZ[Ta\fgTa(!IT^\fgTa!Whe\aZ!eX_XiTag!cXe\bWf!TaW(.-TZT\a(!g[Tg!VXegT\a_l!jbh_W![TiX!XaVb`cTffXW!T!cTffcbeg*.. MA>!<HNKM6!!B!g[bhZ[g!g[XeX!jTf!T!fcXV\Y\V!eXYXeXaVX./gb!fhccbegf!\a!g[X!eXdhXfg*.0 FK*!<9KM>K6!!M[XeX!cebUTU_l!jTf*!!;hg!B!g[\a^(!lbhe.1 Ababe(!eXZTeW_Xff!bY!g[X!\aW\i\WhT_!eXdhXfg(!g[X!biXeTeV[\aZ!!!!!!!!!!LHNMA>KG!=BLMKB<M!K>IHKM>KL(!I*<*!!!!!!!!!!!!&.-.'!4,1),/,, Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3771-1 Filed 10/27/17 Page 6 of 6--0@/F1gXe9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-FK*!D9;9M6!!>iXel!WbVh`Xag!eXdhXfg!cXegT\af!gb!.]he\fW\Vg\baT_!W\fVbiXel*!!9eX!lbh!VTei\aZ!Talg[\aZ!bhg8!/MA>!<HNKM6!!B!T`!abg!VTei\aZ!Talg[\aZ!bhg!UXVThfX!`l!0 i\Xj!\f!g[X!_XggXe!j[\V[!W\Wa%g!eT\fX!fcXV\Y\V!bU]XVg\baf!1 XffXag\T__l!jT\iXW!g[bfX!bU]XVg\baf!TaW!g[Tg!g[X!ZXaXeT_!2 bU]XVg\baf!g[Tg!TeX!fXg!Ybeg[!\a!g[X!Ybe`T_!WbVh`Xag!eXfcbafX!3 TeX!abg!fhYY\V\Xag!gb!TffXeg!Ta!bU]XVg\ba*!4 EXg!`X!]hfg!ZXaXeT__l(!j[\_X!jX!TeX!ba!g[Tg!gbc\V(!g[X!5 eh_Xf!Tcc_\VTU_X!gb!g[\f!VTfX(!?XWXeT_!Kh_Xf!bY!<\i\_-, IebVXWheX(!V[TaZXW!Tf!lbh!T__!^abj!XYYXVg\iX!=XVX`UXe!-fg(!TaW--g[X!9Wi\fbel!<b``\ggXX%f!abgXf(!B!UX_\XiX!\g!\f(!fhZZXfg!g[Tg-. g[X!g[Xl!f[bh_W!UX!Tcc_\XW(!gb!g[X!XkgXag!cbff\U_X!be-/ceTVg\VTU_X!))!B!T`!cTeTc[eTf\aZ(!abg!dhbg\aZ!))!\a!VTfXf!g[Tg-0 TeX!baZb\aZ*-1 Lb(!Tf!YTe!Tf!B%`!VbaVXeaXW!ba!T!Zb\aZ)YbejTeW!UTf\f(-2 T_g[bhZ[!B!T_fb![X_W!g[X!i\Xj!XiXa!UXYbeX!g[X!eh_X%f-3 T`XaW`Xagf(!ZXaXeT_!bU]XVg\baf!TeX!abg!bU]XVg\baf!g[Tg!g[X-4 <bheg!j\__!Z\iX!Tal!jX\Z[g!gb*-5 9WW\g\baT__l(!g[X!V[TaZX!\a!g[X!eh_X!g[Tg!B!\aW\VTgXW., XTe_\Xe!fTlf!g[Tg!\Y!WbVh`Xagf!TeX!UX\aZ!j\g[[X_W!UTfXW!ba!Ta.-bU]XVg\ba(!g[Tg!`hfg!UX!W\fV_bfXW!\a!T!Kh_X!/0!eXfcbafX*.. Lb(!B!\agXaW!gb!XaYbeVX!Ubg[!g[bfX!cebi\f\baf!bY!g[X./eXi\fXW!eh_X*.0 M[X!Ub\_Xe!c_TgX!bU]XVg\baf!g[Tg!XiXelUbWl![Tf!UXXa.1 hf\aZ!f\aVX!g[X!UXZ\aa\aZ!bY!g\`X!g[Tg!bU]XVg\baf!TeX!iTZhX!TaW!!!!!!!!!!LHNMA>KG!=BLMKB<M!K>IHKM>KL(!I*<*!!!!!!!!!!!!&.-.'!4,1),/,,

MEMO ENDORSEMENT: on re: {{3769}} Status Report filed by Wael Jalaidan. ENDORSEMENT: The Court deems this status report to be sufficient. Counsel is directed to continue his efforts to communicate directly and proactively with OFAC to pursue the approval of the necessary license. To the extent counsel has not already, he shall provide OFAC with the Court's May 25, 2017 Order. ECF No. 3610. Counsel must remind OFAC of the burden on the Court that further delay imposes. The next status report shall be due on November 27, 2017. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 10/30/2017)

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3772 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _____________________________________________________ 03-MDL-1570 (GBD)(SN) 10/30/2017 In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 DEFENDANT JALAIDAN’S OCTOBER 27, 2017 STATUS REPORT The Honorable Judge Netburn, Since the last Status Report, I have not received any response from OFAC regarding my voice messages, letter, or emails. On October 11, 2017 I again called the OFAC licensing division at 202-622-2480. I was given an automated response asking to type in the case number (2016-330016), after which an automated reply stated, "This case is pending. Please check back at a later date." I then called back and dialed "*" to reach the OFAC operator, who just transferred me to a voicemail box for the case officer again without letting me ask for more information. I again left a voice message asking about the status of the case and our requirement to provide a 30 day status report update to the Court each month and asked for a return call or email. I again called the OFAC licensing during the week of October 22, 2017, and received the same automated response. After that automated response, I once more dialed "*" and spoke to another operator, and was transferred to another voicemail. I left another detailed message explaining the need to update the Court on the license status and I asked for a return call with an update. I called again today, October 27, 2017, with the same result as all previous attempts. I was transferred to a voicemail after being told the case is still pending. As of the filing of this status report, I have still not yet received a call back from OFAC. As I have stated previously, if I do receive a fruitful call soon, or am able to reach OFAC for a more detailed update on the license and its current timeline, I will promptly 1 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3772 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 2 update the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee with the information OFAC provides me before the next status report is due. Respectfully Submitted, _____/s/___________________ Martin F. McMahon, Esq. Martin McMahon & Associates Attorney for Defendant The Court deems this status report to be sufficient. Counsel is directed to continue his efforts to communicate directly and proactively with OFAC to pursue the approval of the necessary license. To the extent counsel has not already, he shall provide OFAC with the Court's May 25, 2017 Order. ECF No. 3610. Counsel must remind OFAC of the burden on the Court that further delay imposes. The next status report shall be due on November 27, 2017. SO ORDERED. October 30, 2017 New York, New York 2

MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: {{3767}} Letter filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees. ENDORSEMENT: SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 10/30/2017)

---·-------------------.-,·=-~:"'··~ Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3773 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3767 Filed 10/27/17~~~~g~:t~: ''it"'-~ MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES.,:'"·... t;'t(]·t..->) In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (S.D.N.Y). '.·~:~,, ~<-"'1.zt'"·/'/'.:::~:~••/'.,"l>., • '.: ·l Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for Personal In'ur and Death Claims Commercial Claims Ronald L. Motley (1944-2013) Elliot R. Feldman, Co-Chair Jodi Westbrook Flowers I Donald A. Migliori, Co-Chairs Sean Carter, Co-Chair Mon.EV RICE I.LC COZEN O'CONNOR James P. Kreindler, Co-Chair KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP Andrew J. Maloney III, Co-Liaison Counsel J. Scott Tarbutton, Liaison Counsel KREI!\DLER & KREI!\DLER I.LP COZEN O'CONNOR Robert T. Haefele, Co-Liaison Counsel MOTLEY RICE LLC VIA ECF AND OVERNIGHT MAIL October 27, 2017 The Honorable George B. Daniels United States District Court ge Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street Dated: 0CT ~ 0 Z017 New York, NY 10007 ~:!l. 1 RE: In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 03MDL f570 (GBD) (SN) Dear Judge Daniels: The Plaintiffs' Executive Committees, on behalf of the Consolidated Amended Complaint ("CAC") Plaintiffs and the Ashton Plaintiffs, write to respectfully request the Court's endorsement of the below proposals concerning page limits for further briefing as to the Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia & Herzegovina ("SHC"). The Kingdom and SHC join in this request. Plaintiffs also seek the Court's approval of an administrative proposal relating to their oppositions. As the Court is aware, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia previously filed a 75 page 1 Memorandum of Law in support of its Motion to Dismiss the separate CAC and Ashton complaints. The SHC filed a separate Memorandum of Law in support of its Motion to Dismiss, totaling 25 pages. Pursuant to the Court's Order of April 13, 2017, ECF No. 3514, the CAC Plaintiffs and Ashton Plaintiffs are filing separate oppositions to those motions. After spending considerable time working on the opposition briefs, and after conferring with counsel for the defendants, the parties propose as follows: 1 The CAC and Ashton plaintiffs consented to the Kingdom's request for an extension of the page limit for its brief to 75 pages, based on the Kingdom's separate assurances to the CAC and Ashton Plaintiffs that it would consent to comparable extensions of the page limit for their briefs. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3773 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3767 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 2 The Honorable George B. Daniels Page Two October 27, 2017 1. The CAC Plaintiffs will file a single brief in opposition to the separate Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom and SHC, not to exceed 80 pages; 2. The Ashton Plaintiffs will file a single brief in opposition to the Motions to Dismiss of the Kingdom and SHC, not to exceed 70 pages; and 3. The Kingdom and SHC will be afforded 75 pages in total for their replies. The parties believe that the proposal outlined above will allow for the most effective presentation of the issues to the Court. The PECs respectfully request the Court's authorization to file documentary materials and evidence offered in support of their Oppositions with the Clerk's office via a CD or thumb drive. The Court authorized plaintiffs to do so earlier in the litigation, and the PECs understand that a specific order authorizing the filing of exhibits via a CD or thumb drive will be required by the Clerk's office to do so again in this instance. We will of course serve those materials on counsel for the defendants, and provide courtesy copies to the Court, in whatever form the Court would prefer. We thank Your Honor in advance for the Court's attention to this matter. Respectfully, COZEN O'CONNOR By: Sean P. Carter SPC/bdw cc: The Honorable Sarah Nctbum All Counsel of Record LEG/\L\33027710\1 2

MOTION to Compel Defendant, Dubai Islamic Bank to comply with the Court's March 22, 2016 Order. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3774 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 NOTICE OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S MARCH 22, 2016 ORDER PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the Declaration of J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. and the exhibits attached thereto, and the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Defendant Dubai Islamic Bank to Comply with the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order, the plaintiffs by and through their undersigned counsel will move the Court before the Honorable Sarah Netburn, U.S. Magistrate Judge, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, Room 430, Courtroom 219, at a date and time to be determined by the Court, for an Order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a), directing Dubai Islamic Bank to comply with the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order and immediately: (1) search its electronic legacy account database for relevant banking and financial records for the 31 individuals and entities at issue; (2) search its electronic legacy account database for relevant banking and financial records for the individuals, entities, and accounts previously agreed to by the parties; and (3) search for and produce relevant Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3774 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 2 documentation relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, as previously directed by this Court. Plaintiffs seek this relief for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Defendant Dubai Islamic Bank to Comply with the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order. Dated: October 30, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Sean P. Carter Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 Jodi Westbrook-Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 2

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: {{3774}} MOTION to Compel Defendant, Dubai Islamic Bank to comply with the Court's March 22, 2016 Order. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S MARCH 22, 2016 ORDER October 30, 2017 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 18 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND............................................................................................. 1 II. DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................... 6 A. DIB’s Objections to Plaintiffs’ List of Search Terms on Relevancy and Burden Grounds are Improper Under Magistrate Judge Maas’s Order.............................. 6 B. Plaintiffs’ Search Terms Are Relevant to Their Claims that Dubai Islamic Bank Maintained Institutional Links to Al Qaeda and Associated Terrorist Groups................................................................................................................................. 7 1. International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO")....................................................... 7 2. Abdullah Azzam............................................................................................................. 9 3. Ali Amin Al Rashidi....................................................................................................... 9 4. Hamas Entities.............................................................................................................. 10 5. Sheikh Mohamed bin Saqar.......................................................................................... 10 C. DIB Should be Ordered to Comply Immediately With the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order and Produce Responsive Documentation Relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy Bombings.......................................................................................... 11 III. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 13 i Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 3 of 18 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Other Authorities Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37.............................................................................................1, 5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.................................................................................................7 ii Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 4 of 18 I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On October 15, 2010, plaintiffs served their consolidated First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Dubai Islamic Bank ("DIB"), attached hereto as Exhibit A, seeking inter alia: (i) banking and financial records for DIB accounts linked to Osama bin Laden, members of al Qaeda, and financiers of the terrorist organization; (ii) banking and financial records for Taliban accounts at DIB; (iii) documents relating to DIB’s involvement in the funding of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings; (iv) documents relating to the 1998 and 1999 meetings between U.S. officials and representatives of DIB and the UAE government concerning al Qaeda’s use of DIB to launder and move money; and (v) DIB accounts that were frozen following the September 11, 2001 attacks. Plaintiffs served supplemental discovery requests on DIB on July 31, 2012 and March 21, 2016, also seeking banking records for DIB accounts linked to members of al Qaeda connected to the September 11th plot, al Qaeda charity front organizations, associates of Osama bin Laden, and al-Qaeda related terror groups. See Exhibits B and C. DIB served responses and objections to plaintiffs’ discovery on January 21, 2011, September 4, 2012, and April 25, 2016 respectively, and has to date produced documents bates-stamped DIB00001-5587 in several tranches. On July 14, 2015, plaintiffs filed a Motion to Compel pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a), requesting that the Court enter an order directing DIB to immediately undertake efforts to secure and produce additional documents and information responsive to plaintiffs’ document requests. See Exhibits D, E, and F (ECF Nos. 2973, 2974, and 3164). As described in plaintiffs’ motion, DIB had failed to produce basic account and other financial records for many DIB bank accounts used by members of al Qaeda, al Qaeda charity fronts such as the International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO"), al Qaeda related terrorist organizations, and Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 5 of 18 terror financiers. See Exhibit D at pp. 2-5 (describing DIB’s provision of critical banking services and other financial support to members of al Qaeda, 9/11 hijackers, prominent terrorism financiers, and al Qaeda charity fronts); pp. 2-3, 10 (Abdallah Azzam, spiritual mentor to Osama bin Laden and co-founder of al Qaeda, used DIB Account No. 1335 to direct monetary support to bin Laden’s Islamic army); pp. 3, 6-7 (Saidi Madani al Tayyib, al Qaeda’s "chief financial officer" in Sudan, used at least two accounts at DIB (Account Nos. xx-xxx-xxx4302 and xx-xxxxxxx-x20-01)); pp. 3, 9 (Mamdouh Mahmoud Ahmed Salim, a founding member of al Qaeda, was arrested for his connection to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa with three DIB banking cards in his possession (Nos. xxxx xxxx xxxx 1013, xxxx xxxx xxxx 2362, and xxx4008)); pp. 4, 8-9 (Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, al Qaeda member and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s nephew, held an account at DIB (Account No. xx-xxx-xxxxx63-01), and was responsible for transferring significant sums of money to the 9/11 hijackers in the United States); pp. 4, 10 (9/11 hijacker Fayez Banihammad used an account at DIB (Account No. xx-xxxxxxx-x20-06)); id. (Ali Salah Muhammad al Marri, an al Qaeda member linked to the 9/11 plot, also held an account at DIB (Account No. xx-xxxxxxx-580-7)); pp. 5, 10-11 (al Qaeda financier Ahmed Nur Ali Jumale held several personal and business accounts at DIB (Account Nos. xxx-xxx-xxx-960, xxx1192, xxx7440, xxx7483, xxx339, and xx-xxx-xx-x13-01)); and p. 5 (defendant International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO") held at least one bank account at DIB (Account No. xxx0287)). Plaintiffs’ motion also sought the production of banking records relating to DIB accounts that were frozen following the September 11th attacks. Id. at p. 4 (explaining that the Central Bank of the UAE ordered the freezing of accounts and investments of approximately 26 individuals and organizations suspected of ties to al Qaeda, including accounts at DIB). 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 6 of 18 Plaintiffs additionally asked the Court to direct DIB to produce banking records for DIB accounts associated with the designated terrorist organization Hamas. Id. at p. 5, n. 10 (seeking account records for the International Islamic Charity Association (Account No. xxx2845), Nablus Zakat Committee (Account No. xxx5/939), Al Fujairah Charity Organization (Account No. xxxxxxxxxx2006), Emirates Red Crescent (Account No. xxx6754), Human Appeal International, and the Union of Good). Plaintiffs further requested that the Court order DIB to produce documents relating to DIB’s involvement in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya; the subsequent agreement by the UAE government to close certain Taliban accounts at DIB following meetings with U.S. officials after the bombings; and all banking records relating to those accounts. Id. at p. 3 (DIB was directly implicated in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania as well. According to the NATO report at Ex. A, "Al Qaida had previously used the Dubai Islamic Bank and local Hawala transfer companies to fund the bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania." In the wake of the attacks, U.S. officials pressed the UAE to enact more rigorous banking controls and to close certain accounts at DIB that were used to move money intended for the attacks. In connection with those discussions, "the U.S. asked in 1998 that some Taliban accounts be closed at Dubai Islamic Bank."). Plaintiffs’ motion to compel was fully briefed as of December 11, 2015, and was the subject of a hearing before the Court on March 22, 2016. During the hearing, Magistrate Judge Frank Maas issued an order from the bench permitting plaintiffs to provide DIB with a list of 500 individuals, entities, and/or accounts of their choosing, and requiring DIB to conduct searches of its electronic legacy account database using each of those names and accounts identified by plaintiffs to locate and produce responsive 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 7 of 18 banking records, including account opening and closing records, account statements, and other transactional data such as wire transfers. See March 22, 2016 Transcript of Record ("Tr."), attached as Exhibit G, at pp. 55 and 57. As to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings, DIB acknowledged that it had failed to produce anything in response to plaintiffs’ discovery requests on that topic, and the Court directed DIB to "expand the search" for documentation relating to "investigations or other responses that the bank internally may have had in terms of checking whether it had troublesome accounts or relationships" following the embassy bombings. See Tr. at pp. 63-64 (emphasis supplied).1 Pursuant to the Court’s Order, on October 10, 2016, plaintiffs provided DIB with their list of 500 individuals, entities, and accounts to be searched in DIB’s electronic account database. See Exhibit H (Plaintiffs’ Tranche Nos. 1 and 2).2 After three months passed without a response from the defendant, DIB finally transmitted a January 4, 2017 letter asserting numerous objections to plaintiffs’ October 10 proposal, arguing that (i) plaintiffs’ search term list exceeded the 500 limitation set by Judge Maas’s March 22, 2016 Order, (ii) plaintiffs’ list fell outside of the four search term categories permitted by the Court, and (iii) that many of the individuals and entities on plaintiffs’ list were "overly broad, unduly burdensome," and "not relevant to a claim or defense of any party." See Exhibit I. 1 The Court also ordered DIB to: (i) produce an un-redacted version of the U.A.E. Central Bank’s July 6, 2003 circular sent to DIB identifying the names of 152 individuals and 1 entity "belonging to/or associated with the Taliban," and instructing DIB to "search for immediately and freeze any accounts, deposits, investments or remittances" relating to those individuals and entity; and (ii) identify all members of DIB’s Fatwa and Sharia Supervisory Board for the relevant period of discovery. DIB produced documents responsive to those categories of inquiry on April 13, 2016 (DIB003558-3582), and August 11, 2016 (DIB005019) respectively. 2 The process of finalizing plaintiffs’ list was delayed for several months due to DIB’s delay in responding to Judge Maas’s Order to search for and produce documents relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings. As plaintiffs explained to DIB in correspondence at Exhibits J and K, any responsive records relating to the embassy bombings would inform the composition of the plaintiffs’ list of 500 individuals, entities, and accounts, thus making certain that any exchange of the plaintiffs’ list would be premature until DIB completed its search for responsive documentation. DIB made a supplemental production of documents on August 11, 2016 (DIB004196-5023), contending that it complied with the Court’s Order to produce "documents possibly related to the persons involved in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings," but it is unclear whether any of those documents relate in any way to the embassy bombings. DIB still has not yet responded to plaintiffs’ requests for information concerning DIB’s efforts to search for and locate materials concerning the embassy bombings. See infra at pp. 11-13. 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 8 of 18 In the ensuing months, the parties conducted several meet-and-confers and exchanged numerous pieces of correspondence in an effort to narrow the areas of disagreement as to the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order. On multiple occasions, plaintiffs agreed to undertake additional reviews of their proposed search terms to determine whether areas of compromise may exist. Though plaintiffs’ initial list complied with the Court’s order to limit the list to 500 individuals, entities, and/or accounts of plaintiffs’ choosing, as a demonstration of their good faith, plaintiffs agreed to eliminate a total of 126 individuals and entities (and all associated aliases) from their original list of 500 provided to DIB on October 10, 2016.3 Although the parties’ extensive discussions significantly narrowed the number of search terms in dispute, DIB continues to object to a final 31 individuals and entities, principally on relevance grounds. See DIB’s October 11, 2017 letter at Exhibit R.4 Plaintiffs submit that DIB’s relevance objections are improper pursuant to Judge Maas’s Order, and that the remaining 31 individuals and entities in dispute are directly relevant to plaintiffs’ claims (and DIB’s defenses to plaintiffs’ claims) that DIB knowingly provided financial services and other support to Osama bin Laden, members of al Qaeda, al Qaeda charity front organizations, al Qaeda related terrorist organizations, and terror financiers. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a), plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court order DIB to immediately comply with this Court’s March 22, 2016 Order and commence the process of searching its electronic legacy account database for these 31 individuals and entities, as well as the individuals, entities, and accounts previously agreed to by 3 See Exhibit L (plaintiffs’ March 8, 2017 correspondence agreeing to remove 100 individuals and entities from plaintiffs’ list in the interests of good faith and compromise); Exhibit M (plaintiffs’ April 21, 2017 letter to DIB agreeing to remove an additional 15 individuals and entities); Exhibit N (plaintiffs’ June 2, 2017 letter to DIB providing a summary of the relevant allegations and evidence relating to certain individuals and entities on plaintiffs’ list); Exhibit O (plaintiffs’ June 8, 2017 letter to DIB agreeing to remove another 6 individuals and entities); Exhibit P (plaintiffs’ August 3, 2017 letter to DIB concerning plaintiffs’ proposals); and Exhibit Q (plaintiffs’ September 22, 2017 letter to DIB agreeing to a final narrowing of plaintiffs list by removing an additional 5 individuals and entities). 4 DIB asserts that the parties remain in disagreement over "37 search terms." That number represents the 31 individuals and entities in dispute, and 6 alias names associated with two individuals and two entities. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 9 of 18 the parties. Plaintiffs further request that the Court order DIB (again) to immediately search for and produce documents relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings, as previously directed by this Court at the March 22, 2016 conference, or face sanctions for failure to do so. II. DISCUSSION A. DIB’s Objections to Plaintiffs’ List of Search Terms on Relevancy and Burden Grounds are Improper Under Magistrate Judge Maas’s Order Throughout the course of the parties’ negotiations, DIB has persisted in objecting to many of the individuals and entities comprising plaintiffs’ list of 500 by arguing that those selections fall outside the scope of relevant discovery, including the remaining 31 individuals and entities at issue. See Exhibit I (objecting to plaintiffs’ search terms as "overly broad, unduly burdensome," and "not relevant to a claim or defense of any party"); Exhibit R (same).5 That position, however, is contrary to the pragmatic approach constructed by the Court to address plaintiffs’ earlier motion to compel at ECF Nos. 2973, 2974, and 3164, seeking banking records and other responsive documentation plaintiffs allege evidence the essential financial services and other forms of material support DIB provided to Osama bin Laden, members of al Qaeda, and related terror groups in the decade leading up to the September 11th attacks. In issuing a ruling that permitted plaintiffs to identify 500 individuals, entities, and accounts of their choosing, and requiring DIB to search for records relating to those individuals, entities, and accounts, Judge Maas clearly sought to obviate the need to micromanage the selection process by precluding DIB from litigating relevance objections as to each and every selection by the plaintiffs. Indeed, the entire point of Judge Maas’s methodology to resolving the parties’ dispute during the March 22, 2016 conference, by setting a reasonable number of individuals and entities to be selected by plaintiffs for searching purposes, was to avoid the very 5 DIB responded to every one of plaintiffs’ document requests, including requests relating to many of the remaining 31 individuals and entities, with the following unsupported, boilerplate objection: "Dubai Islamic Bank objects to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and seeking information not relevant to a claim or defense of any party." 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 10 of 18 delay that DIB’s objections caused. Notwithstanding the intent of the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order, DIB has insisted on micro-litigating plaintiffs’ search term list, demanding that plaintiffs provide evidence of relevance for every individual and entity DIB unilaterally contends has an insufficient connection to al Qaeda (itself an incorrect standard that is more narrow than the scope of discovery permitted under Rule 26).6 In doing so, DIB has appointed itself the sole arbiter of determining what information sought by the plaintiffs is relevant (and what is not), the specific result Judge Maas wanted to avoid. Under the Court’s order, DIB should be directed to search the terms plaintiffs have provided, and no micro-analysis of DIB’s unilateral relevancy objections is warranted. B. Plaintiffs’ Search Terms Are Relevant to Their Claims that Dubai Islamic Bank Maintained Institutional Links to Al Qaeda and Associated Terrorist Groups Plaintiffs have consistently maintained that they are not required to provide such justification for their selections, but nevertheless agreed to provide DIB with detailed explanations of relevance in the hopes of narrowing the areas of disagreement and avoiding the need to seek the Court’s intervention in this dispute. See Exhibit N (Plaintiffs’ June 2, 2017 letter summarizing the relevant allegations and evidence for a number of al Qaeda members, al Qaeda charity fronts, and al Qaeda related individuals and entities); Exhibit Q (Plaintiffs’ September 22, 2017 letter detailing allegations and evidence relating to 47 individuals and entities). A few examples are illustrative: 1. International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO") The folly of DIB’s position is made most immediately obvious by DIB’s continuing objection to searching for and producing responsive documentation relating to the International Islamic Relief Organization ("IIRO"), a defendant in the pending litigation. Banking records and 6 For example, discovery of DIB’s extensive ties to Hamas-related entities would demonstrate its broader alignment with jihad organizations, and provide evidence to undercut its claims that it would never associate itself with terrorism of any kind. 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 11 of 18 other responsive documents relating to IIRO’s Account No. xxx0287 at DIB are relevant to plaintiffs’ claims that DIB provided financial services to an entity the U.S. government has described as the preeminent sponsor of al Qaeda training camps prior to the September 11th attacks. See Exhibit Q at p. 2: International Islamic Relief Organization – On August 3, 2006, the U.S. Treasury Department designated the IIRO’s Philippine and Indonesian branch offices and a senior IIRO official in Saudi Arabia, Abd al Hamid Sulaiman al Mujil, "for facilitating fundraising for al Qaida and affiliated terrorist groups." According to U.S. Treasury officials, "Abd Al Hamid Sulaiman Al-Mujil, a high ranking IIRO official in Saudi Arabia, has used his position to bankroll the al Qaida network in Southeast Asia. Al Mujil has a long record of supporting Islamic militant groups, and he has maintained a cell of regular financial donors in the Middle East who support extremist causes." U.S. State Department diplomatic cables further identify IIRO as "the principal sponsor of terrorist training camps in Afghanistan during the Taliban regime" and indicate that "Usama bin Ladin used the entire IIRO network for his terrorist activities." See June 2004 and February 13, 2007 State Department cables. Moreover, a 1996 CIA Report concerning the involvement of purported charities in the sponsorship of terrorism indicates that the IIRO provided the funding for six al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. See also FSB intelligence document at BUR-PEC014984-14987, stating that "the Sharja affiliation of the Saudi'International Islamic Relief Organization’ and the'Human Appeal International’ established the'Special Chechen Refugees Assistance Fund’ (account number 01520483656101 in the'Islamic Bank of Dubai.’"). DIB’s resistance to locating and producing banking records for the IIRO on relevancy grounds is even more untenable given DIB’s agreement to search its database for other charity defendants in the litigation which are similarly alleged to have provided al Qaeda and related terror groups with massive amounts of financial, material, and logistical assistance in the years leading up to the September 11th attacks. Indeed, DIB has agreed to conduct searches for the Muslim World League ("MWL") (the IIRO’s parent organization), World Assembly of Muslim Youth ("WAMY"), Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, and Sanabel al Kheer. Accordingly, DIB’s objection to conducting searches for responsive documents relating to the IIRO is without merit, 8 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 12 of 18 and suggests that its objections are more about protecting damaging evidence from discovery than anything else. 2. Abdullah Azzam DIB also objects to searching for responsive documents and banking records for Abdullah Azzam, Al Qaeda’s co-founder and spiritual mentor to Osama bin Laden. Azzam used DIB Account No. 1335 to direct monetary donations for jihadist activities: Abdullah Azzam – DIB’s collaboration with Osama bin Laden in the cause of violent jihad dates to the Afghan jihad. During that time, DIB maintained and serviced a jihad account for Abdallah Azzam, spiritual mentor to Osama bin Laden, co-founder of al Qaeda, and co-leader (with bin Laden) of the mujahideen during the "holy war" against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan of the 1980s. In his book, "Ayyat al Rahman fee Jihad al-Afghan," ("God’s Signs in the Afghan Jihad"), Azzam directs monetary donations for the Afghan mujahideen be sent to Account No. 1335 at Dubai Islamic Bank. See Exhibit Q at p. 5. As plaintiffs have previously pointed out, Azzam was instrumental in establishing al Qaeda with Osama bin Laden at the very same time when Azzam was collecting money to finance a mujahideen army for violent jihad through the account in his name at DIB. The historical relationship between DIB and the senior-most leadership of al Qaeda is directly relevant to the character of the relationship between DIB and al Qaeda in the years that followed. Moreover, although Azzam may have died, the relevant account at DIB continued to be active for many years after his death. See Exhibit D at pp. 2-3. 3. Ali Amin Al Rashidi Rashidi is a senior al Qaeda member who was present at the founding meetings of al Qaeda in Afghanistan in 1988. Banshiri headed al Qaeda’s Military Committee, and according to the 9/11 Commission, was considered "one of the most capable and popular leaders of al Qaeda." See 9/11 Commission Final Report at p. 65. Like Azzam, the relationship between DIB and senior members of al Qaeda is directly relevant to the plaintiffs’ claims in this litigation. 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 13 of 18 4. Hamas Entities Plaintiffs also seek banking records and related documentation for several entities associated with the Hamas terrorist organization. See supra at p. 3 (seeking account records for DIB accounts connected to Hamas entities International Islamic Charity Association, Nablus Zakat Committee, Al Fujairah Charity Organization, Emirates Red Crescent, and Human Appeal International); see also Exhibit Q at pp. 2-3 (stating that the U.S. Department of State designated Hamas as a Foreign Terrorist Organization on October 8, 1997). Banking records and other responsive documents relating to these entities are relevant not only to plaintiffs’ claims that DIB knew and intended to support radical terrorist groups like al Qaeda, but also to DIB’s defenses in this litigation, particularly where DIB has represented to the plaintiffs and the Court that it is a sophisticated, international financial institution which adheres to the highest standards of international banking practices and abhors terrorism of any kind. Notably, Dr. Hussein Hamid Hassan, a long-time senior banking official at DIB and the current Chairman of DIB’s Fatwa and Shariah Oversight Board, has acknowledged that Hamas is a terrorist organization that engages in acts of violence. See Excerpt of the August 3, 2017 Deposition Transcript of Dr. Hussein Hamid Hassan at Exhibit S. Particularly, in light of Dr. Hassan’s statements, plaintiffs respectfully submit that disclosure of all DIB bank accounts connected to Hamas is warranted. 5. Sheikh Mohamed bin Saqar Plaintiffs’ list also includes Sheikh Mohamed bin Saqar, an individual the German government concluded used his bank account at DIB to transfer funds to al Qaeda charity front Third World Relief Agency. See Exhibit Q at p. 11: Sheikh Mohamed bin Saqar – According to the German government, on multiple occasions Sheikh Saqar authorized the transfer of funds from his account at DIB to the Third World Relief Agency’s bank account in Vienna, Austria. See Expert Report of the Federal Office of Criminal Investigation relating to the judicial assistance request, ref. no. 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 14 of 18 INV/10289/T09-PH(245), dated 8/27/2002 of the "Office of the Prosecutor" (OTP) of the International Court of Criminal Justice for the former Yugoslavia relating to the "Third World Relief Agency" (TWRA), Vienna/Austria, pp. 19, 20, and 57. The 9/11 Commission concluded that Osama bin Laden used the TWRA to "covertly provide financial and other support for terrorist activities." See 9/11 Report at p. 58. See also June 8, 2017 letter to DIB. Whether Sheikh Saqar used his DIB account to finance al Qaeda terrorist activities is probative to the inquiry as to whether DIB maintained a supportive relationship with al Qaeda. Plaintiffs’ relevance summaries for the remaining individuals and entities at issue are equally compelling. See Exhibit Q. However, despite plaintiffs’ good faith efforts to reach compromise, DIB continues to resist its obligation to search its electronic database for responsive materials within its possession, custody, and control. Accordingly, plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court compel DIB to comply with this Court’s March 22, 2016 Order and immediately undertake all efforts to search for relevant banking and financial records for the 31 individuals entities at issue, including the individuals, entities, and accounts previously agreed to by the parties. C. DIB Should be Ordered to Comply Immediately With the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order and Produce Responsive Documentation Relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy Bombings DIB’s conduct in these proceedings raises additional concerns that it is purposely evading its obligation to comply with the Court’s Order directing DIB to search for and produce responsive documents relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings. As referenced above, Judge Maas unambiguously ordered DIB to "expand the search" for documentation relating to "investigations or other responses that the bank internally may have had in terms of checking whether it had troublesome accounts or relationships" following the bombings. See supra at p. 4. That Order clearly contemplates that responsive documentation may potentially include: (i) internal DIB meeting minutes, communications, reports, memoranda, and other records relating 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 15 of 18 to any information that DIB, DIB personnel, and/or individuals associated with DIB may have had a connection to the embassy bombings; (ii) meeting minutes or communications between DIB and the UAE government regarding same; (iii) investigations and/or audits conducted by DIB and/or the UAE government in response to those accusations; (iv) reports, memoranda, account records, and other documents generated as a result of any investigation or audit; and (v) reports, memoranda, account records, and other documents DIB and/or the UAE government provided to U.S. investigators. Notwithstanding the explicit language and intent of the Court’s Order, DIB has to date failed to produce any materials remotely responsive to Judge Maas’s ruling. Concerned that DIB had disregarded the Court’s Order and was withholding responsive records implicating DIB’s role in the embassy bombings, plaintiffs sent multiple letters to DIB reminding the defendant of its obligation to "expand the search" for documents relating to the attacks, and requesting that DIB update the plaintiffs with information concerning the status and/or findings of the Court-ordered search.7 After failing to provide a response to plaintiffs’ requests on the issue for months, DIB eventually responded on August 14, 2017 with a single sentence merely asserting that "[w]e included responsive documents in our supplemental productions following the March 22, 2016 hearing." See Exhibit T. No further information or explanation has been offered. Plaintiffs subsequently requested further clarification, asking DIB to "please identify all such responsive documents, including bates numbers, DIB contends relate to the embassy bombings." See Exhibit Q at p. 11. Rather than specify the documents it contends are responsive to the Court-ordered search, DIB directed plaintiffs to over 800 pages of documents "possibly related to the persons involved in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings." See Exhibit R at p. 2. Despite the 7 See Exhibit M at p. 2 (April 21, 2017 letter requesting an update as to where DIB’s search for responsive documentation stands); Exhibit N at p. 4 (June 2, 2017 letter asking DIB again to address plaintiffs’ request for information concerning the status and/or findings of DIB’s search for responsive documents); and Exhibit P (August 3, 2017 letter advising that plaintiffs await DIB’s response to their previous requests for information regarding the status of its searches for documents relating to the embassy bombings). 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 16 of 18 fact that DIB was publicly implicated in the embassy bombings in prominent media reports, the production to which DIB has directed plaintiffs does not include any internal memoranda, meeting minutes, investigation records, or other materials a sophisticated financial institution would possess in response to public accusations of involvement in acts of terrorism. Further, the documents in the production have no clear or apparent relationship to the embassy bombings. Even more troubling, DIB’s responses suggest the defendant is attempting to redefine Judge Maas’s Order in such a way that it narrows the intended scope of the Court-order searches, thereby excluding highly relevant categories of responsive documents from production, including potentially damaging information linking DIB to the embassy bombings. See DIB’s August 11, 2016 letter at Exhibit U (stating that its supplemental production of documents, as ordered by the Court on March 22, 2016, contains "documents possibly related to the persons involved in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings"); DIB’s January 4, 2017 letter at Exhibit I (identifying documents to be produced as "accounts … that will relate to the embassy bombings"); DIB’s May 22, 2017 letter (same). Any unilateral attempt by DIB to construct a search methodology intended to significantly limit the discovery of relevant materials is in direct violation of the Court’s Order. Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court order DIB (again) to immediately search for and produce documents relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings as previously directed by this Court, or face sanctions for failure to do so. III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an order directing defendant Dubai Islamic Bank to immediately: (1) search its electronic legacy account database for relevant banking and financial records for the 31 individuals and entities at issue; (2) search its electronic legacy account database for relevant banking and financial records for 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 17 of 18 the individuals, entities, and accounts previously agreed to by the parties; and (3) search for and produce relevant documentation relating to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, as previously directed by this Court. Dated: October 30, 2017 Respectfully Submitted,/s/Sean P. Carter Sean P. Carter, Esq. J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. COZEN O’CONNOR 1650 Market Street, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 665-2000 Jodi Westbrook-Flowers, Esq. Robert T. Haefele, Esq. MOTLEY RICE, LLC 28 Bridgeside Boulevard P.O. Box 1792 Mount Pleasant, SC 29465 Tel: (843) 216-9000 Jerry S. Goldman, Esq. ANDERSON KILL P.C. 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: (212) 278-1000 Robert M. Kaplan, Esq. FERBER CHAN ESSNER & COLLER, LLP 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2050 New York, New York 10165 Tel: (212) 944-2200 Christopher T. Leonardo, Esq. ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 740-South Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: (202) 580-8820 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 14 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3775 Filed 10/30/17 Page 18 of 18 CONSOLIDATED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true copy of Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion to Compel, Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel, and the Declaration of J. Scott Tarbutton in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel with exhibits, was filed electronically this 30th day of October 2017. Notice of this filing will be served upon all parties in 03 MDL 1570 by operation of the Southern District of New York’s Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") system, which all parties may access./s/J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. LEGAL\33105172\1 88888.8888.888/801767.000 15

DECLARATION of J. Scott Tarbutton, Esquire, in Support re: {{3774}} MOTION to Compel Defendant, Dubai Islamic Bank to comply with the Court's March 22, 2016 Order. Document filed by Plaintiffs Executive Committees.

Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (SN) ECF Case This document relates to: Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03-cv-06978 Thomas Burnett, Sr., at al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03-cv-09849 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-01923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04-cv-05970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd., et al., Case No. 04-cv-07065 Euro Brokers, Inc., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04-cv-07279 DECLARATION OF J. SCOTT TARBUTTON IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S MARCH 22, 2016 ORDER J. Scott Tarbutton affirms, under penalty of perjury, as follows: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice pro hac vice in the above-captioned matter, and a member of the law firm Cozen O’Connor. I submit this Declaration to transmit to the Court the following documents submitted in support of Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Defendant Dubai Islamic Bank to Comply with the Court’s March 22, 2016 Order. 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Dubai Islamic Bank, dated October 15, 2010. 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents to Dubai Islamic Bank, dated July 31, 2012. Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 3 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ Second Set of Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Dubai Islamic Bank, dated March 21, 2016. 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ July 14, 2015 Motion to Compel (Plaintiffs’ Letter Brief #1) (ECF No. 2973). 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ July 14, 2015 Motion to Compel (Plaintiffs’ Letter Brief #2) (ECF No. 2974). 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs’ December 11, 2015 Reply Motion to Compel (ECF No. 3164). 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of the March 22, 2016 Discovery Hearing Transcript of Record. 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of the October 10, 2016 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of the January 4, 2017 letter from Steve Cottreau, Esq. to Sean Carter, Esq. 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of the May 6, 2016 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. 12. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of the September 29, 2016 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. 13. Attached hereto as Exhibit L is a true and correct copy of the March 8, 2017 email correspondence from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of the April 21, 2017 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Katie Barlow. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776 Filed 10/30/17 Page 3 of 3 15. Attached hereto as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of the June 2, 2017 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Katie Barlow. 16. Attached hereto as Exhibit O is a true and correct copy of the June 8, 2017 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. and Katie Barlow. 17. Attached hereto as Exhibit P is a true and correct copy of the August 3, 2017 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. 18. Attached hereto as Exhibit Q is a true and correct copy of the September 22, 2017 letter from J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. to Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. 19. Attached hereto as Exhibit R is a true and correct copy of the October 11, 2017 letter from Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. to J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. and Sean Carter, Esq. 20. Attached hereto as Exhibit S is a true and correct copy of an excerpt from the transcript of the August 3, 2017 Videotaped Deposition of Dr. Hussein Hamid Hassan, pp. 245-247, 265-266. 21. Attached hereto as Exhibit T is a true and correct copy of the August 14, 2017 letter from Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. to Sean Carter, Esq, and J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. 22. Attached hereto as Exhibit U is a true and correct copy of the August 11, 2016 letter from Steven T. Cottreau, Esq. to Sean Carter, Esq, and J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. Executed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on October 30, 2017./s/J. Scott Tarbutton, Esq. 3

Exhibit A Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents

EXHIBIT A Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 63 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Thomas Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka., et al., No. 04 Civ. 1923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7065 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 WTC Properties LLC, et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7280 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES October 15, 2010 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 3 of 63 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK Plaintiffs in Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. al Qaida, et al.,Case No. 03 Civ. 6978, Thomas Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03 Civ. 9849, Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka., et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 1923, Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 5970, Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7065, Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7279, and WTC Properties LLC, et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7280, propound and serve on Dubai Islamic Bank (hereinafter "Defendant" or "DIB"), the following Requests for Production of Documents to be answered fully and under oath, pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, within 30 days of their receipt. INSTRUCTIONS 1. In producing documents and other things, Defendant is requested to furnish all documents or things in its possession, custody or control, regardless of whether such documents or things are possessed directly by Defendant or by Defendant's employees, agents, attorneys, accountants, auditors, investigators, or other representatives. 2. Documents are to be produced in full; redacted documents will not constitute compliance with this request. If any requested document or thing cannot be produced in full, Defendant is requested to produce it to the extent possible, indicating which document or portion of that document is being withheld and the reason that document is being withheld. 3. In producing documents, Defendant is requested to produce the original of each document requested together with all non-identical copies and drafts of that document. If the original of any document cannot be located, an identical copy shall be provided in lieu thereof, and shall be legible and bound or stapled in the same manner as the original. 2 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 4 of 63 4. Documents shall be produced as they are kept in the usual course of business or the documents shall be organized and labeled to correspond to the categories in this request. All documents shall be produced in the file folder, envelope or other container in which the documents are kept or maintained by Defendant. If, for any reason, the container cannot be produced, produce copies of all labels or other identifying marks. 5. Documents shall be produced in such fashion as to identify any organization, department, branch or office in whose possession it was located and, where applicable, the natural person in whose possession it was found and the business address of each document's custodian. 6. Documents attached to each other should not be separated. 7. If any documents requested herein have been lost, discarded, destroyed or are otherwise no longer in Defendant's possession, custody or control, they shall be identified as completely as possible including, without limitations, the following information: date of disposal, manner of disposal, reason for disposal, person authorizing the disposal and person disposing of the document. 8. Documents shall be produced in such fashion as to identify which request(s) they are responsive to. 9. Each of these requests shall be continuing. If at any time after production of these requests any information becomes available that calls for any supplement to a previous response, provide such documents within a reasonable time period from the time when it becomes available. 3 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 5 of 63 10. If Defendant asserts a privilege or other authorized protection from disclosure with respect to any document requested herein, Defendant is required to provide a privilege log containing the following as to each such document withheld: A. The type of document or information e.g., letter, notebook, telephone conversation, etc.); B. The date of the document or transaction involving the information; C. The names of each author and any and all participants with respect to the information; D. The names of any and all signatories of the document, if any; E. The name of the document's current custodian; F. The present whereabouts of the document and/or the names of all persons with personal knowledge with respect to the information; and G. A statement of the gounds on which the claim of privilege rests with respect to each such document or piece of information withheld. 11. For the purpose of these discovery requests, except to the extent specifically indicated in the "Definitions" section of this Set of Requests, the words used herein are considered to have, and should be understood to have, their ordinary, every day meaning and Plaintiffs refer Defendant to any collegiate dictionary such as Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition by Prentice Hall Press. In the event Defendant asserts that the wording which has been used is somehow vague, ambiguous, unintelligible, indecipherable, confusing or such other boiler plate objections to avoid squarely addressing the specific discovery request, Plaintiffs refer Defendant to Webster's Dictionary for the plain meaning of the terms defined herein. 4 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 6 of 63 12. If you object to any request for production on the gound that it is overbroad, is unreasonably burdensome, or seeks information which is not relevant to the subject matter of this action, you should state what you contend to be the proper scope of the request for production and respond in accordance with what you contend is the proper scope. 13. Unless otherwise specified, the relevant scope of discovery will be for the time period from January 1, 1990 through the present. 14. Unless otherwise specified, DIB's responses to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Dubai Islamic Bank, including any production of documents by the defendant, shall be directed to the law offices of Motley Rice at 275 Seventh Ave., 2' Floor, New York, NY 10001, eo Robert T. Haefele, Esq. DEFINITIONS 1. The terms "document" or "documents" are defined to be synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the usage of this term in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a), including, without limitation, electronic or computerized data compilations. A draft or non-identical copy is a separate document within the meaning of this term. 2. The term "Plaintiffs" shall refer to Plaintiffs in Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03 Civ. 6978, Thomas Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03 Civ. 9849, Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka., et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 1923, Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 5970, Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7065, Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7279, and WTC Properties LLC, et al. v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7280. 5 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 7 of 63 3. The terms "Defendant," "You," "Your, and "DIB" shall refer to the Dubai Islamic Bank and any branch office, officer, director, trustee, employee, attorney, consultant, accountant, agent, alter ego, or representative acting on the Dubai Islamic Bank's behalf. 4. The term "communication" means the transmittal of information (in the form of facts, ideas, inquiries or otherwise). 5. The term "person" is defined as any natural person or any business, legal or government entity or association. 6. The term "concerning" means relating to, referring to, describing, evidencing or constituting. 7. The terms "all" and "each" shall be construed as all and each. 8. The connectives "and" and "or" shall be construed either disjunctively or conjunctively as necessary to bring within the scope of the discovery request all responses that might otherwise be construed to be outside of its scope. 9. The use of the singular form of any word includes the plural and vice versa. 10. The terms "United Arab Emirates" or "U.A.E." shall mean the United Arab Emirates, including any agency, instrumentality, organ, political subdivision, official, representative, or agent of the United Arab Emirates, as well as any member of the ruling family for each of the seven Emirates (Abu Dhabi, Ajman, Fujairah, Sharjah, Dubai, Ras al Khaimah and Umm al Quwain), and any official, representative, or agent acting on their behalf 11. The term "DIB Personnel" shall refer to any officer, director, trustee, employee, attorney, consultant, accountant, agent, alter ego, or other representative employed by Dubai Islamic Bank and/or acting on Dubai Islamic Bank's behalf. 6 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 8 of 63 12. The term "jihad" (.344) shall refer to, but is not limited to, al jihad bi-al-lisan ("jihad of the tongue"), al jihad bi-al-qalam ("jihad of the pen"), al jihad al nafs ("jihad of the soul"), al jihad bi-al-nafs ("self—sacrificing jihad"), and al jihad bi-al-mal ("financial jihad"). 7 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 9 of 63 PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED TO DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK 1. Please provide all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of Osama bin Laden, any DIB account for any entity in which bin Laden held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which bin Laden had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among bin Laden and/or his representative(s) and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 2. Please provide all documents relating to all other transactions at DIB, financial or otherwise, involving Osama bin Laden or any entity in which he has held any beneficial interest, and which are not responsive to Request No. 1 above. ANSWER: Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 10 of 63 3. Please provide all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of Mustafa Ahmed al Hisawi (a/k/a Shaykh Sa'id; a/k/a Mustafa Muhammed Ahmed), any DIB account for any entity in which al Hisawi held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which al Hisawi had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among al Hisawi and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 4. Please provide all documents relating to all other transactions at DIB, financial or otherwise, involving Mustafa Ahmed al Hisawi or any entity in which he has held any beneficial interest, and which are not responsivee to Request No. 3 above. ANSWER: 9 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 11 of 63 5. Please provide all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of Ali Abdul Aziz Ali (a/Ida Ammar al Baluchi), any DIB account for any entity in which Ali held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which Ali had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among Ali and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 6. Please provide all documents relating to all other transactions at DIB, financial or otherwise, involving Ali Abdul Aziz Ali or any entity in which he has held any beneficial interest, and which are not responsive to Request No. 5 above. ANSWER: 10 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 12 of 63 7. Please provide all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of any of the September 11, 2001 hijackers identified in Attachment A [hereinafter collectively referred to as the "9-11 Hijackers"], any DIB account for any entity in which the 9-11 Hijackers held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which the 9-11 Hijackers had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the 9-11 Hijackers and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 8. Please provide all documents relating to all other transactions at DIB, financial or otherwise, involving the 9-11 Hijackers or any entity in which they held any beneficial interest, and which are not responsive to Request No. 7 above. ANSWER: 11 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 13 of 63 9. For all DIB accounts relating to Osama bin Laden, Mustafa Ahmed al Hisawi, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and the 9-11 Hijackers, please provide all documents describing, detailing, or summarizing all transfers of funds between and among those accounts. ANSWER: 10. Please provide all documents relating to any business, banking, financial, employment, charitable, religious, or other relationship between DIB and the persons identified in Attachment B, including without limitation, all documents relating to any and all transactions, financial or otherwise, involving those persons. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of, and/or for the benefit of the persons identified in Attachment B, any DIB account for any entity in which those persons held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which the persons identified in Attachment B had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Responsive documents shall also include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the persons identified in Attachment B and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any 12 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 14 of 63 documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 11. Please provide all documents relating to any business, banking, financial, employment, charitable, religious or other relationship between DIB and the entities identified in Attachment C, including without limitation, all documents relating to any and all transactions, financial or otherwise, involving those entities. Responsive documents shall include, but are not limited to, documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of, and/or for the benefit of the entities identified in Attachment C, and/or any DIB account in which the entities identified in Attachment C had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Responsive documents shall also include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the entities identified in Attachment C and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 13 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 15 of 63 12. Please provide all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of, and/or for the benefit of DIB's founder and current board member, Saeed Ahmad Lootah, any DIB account for any entity in which Lootah held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which Lootah had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among Lootah and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 13. Please provide all documents relating to any business, banking, financial, employment, charitable, religious, or other relationship between Saeed Ahmad Lootah and Saidi Madani al Tayyib. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all written or oral communications between Lootah and al Tayyib (correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, emails, facsimiles or otherwise). ANSWER: 14 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 16 of 63 14. Please provide all documents relating to any transaction, financial or otherwise, involving Saeed Ahmad Lootah and Saidi Madani al Tayyib, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds from any of Mr. Lootah's accounts to Saidi Madani al Tayyib (including any DIB account established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of al Tayyib, any DIB account for any entity in which al Tayyib held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which al Tayyib had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest). ANSWER: 15. Please provide all documents relating to any transaction, financial or otherwise, involving Saeed Ahmad Lootah and the persons and entities in Attachments A-C, including without limitation, all documents relating to the transfer of funds from any of Mr. Lootah's accounts to the persons and entities in Attachments A-C (including any DIB account established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the persons and entities in Attachments A-C, any DIB account for any entity in which the persons and entities in Attachments A-C held any beneficial interest, and/or any DIB account over which the persons and entities in Attachments A-C had signatory authority or had any actual or potential beneficial interest). ANSWER: 15 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 17 of 63 16. Please provide all documents relating to any investigation, inquiry, review, audit, or analysis conducted by any United States state or federal governmental entity, agency and/or department, or any United States-based regulatory body, law enforcement agency, grand jury, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor (collectively "United States Investigator"), any foreign government or any foreign-based regulatory body, law enforcement agency, grand jury, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor (collectively "Foreign Investigator"), or by the United Arab Emirates or any U.A.E.-based regulatory body, law enforcement agency, grand jury, bank, financial institution, accountant, or auditor (collectively "U.A.E. Investigator"), which references or addresses any of the DIB accounts, persons, or entities identified in Requests Nos. 1-15 above. ANSWER: 17. Please provide copies of all documents that have been seized by, or produced by DIB to, any United States Investigator, any Foreign Investigator, or any U.A.E. Investigator, which references or addresses any of the DIB accounts, persons, or entities identified in Requests Nos. 1-15 above. ANSWER: 18. Please provide all documents relating to any audit, analysis, examination, survey, or review of the DIB accounts, persons, or entities identified in Requests Nos. 1-15 above, conducted either by DIB (including DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Advisory Board — a/k/a "Haiat al-Fatawa wa-al Rakaba al-Shareeyah-libank Dubai al-Islami"), or any third party, including but not 16 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 18 of 63 limited to, any bank, financial institution, government agency, accountant, or auditor. Such documents shall include any audit, analysis, examination, survey, or review ordered, conducted, supervised, overseen, or reviewed by the U.A.E. ANSWER: 19. Please provide all documents relating to any written or oral communication between DIB and the U.A.E., which references or addresses any of the DIB accounts, persons, or entities identified in Requests Nos. 1-15 above. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, emails, facsimiles or otherwise. ANSWER: 20. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to any relationship between DIB and Osama bin Laden. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all records identifying all DIB officials, board members, trustees, committee members, employees, and/or any U.A.E. official, that: (i) met with and/or consulted with Osama bin Laden and/or his representative(s) regarding DIB's banking and financial services; (ii) approved of and/or directed DIB to provide banking and financial services to bin Laden; and (iii) supervised or managed accounts at DIB in which bin Laden held any actual or potential beneficial interest, or over which he had signatory authority. ANSWER: 17 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 19 of 63 21. Please provide all documents DIB sent to, and/or received from, U.A.E. officials, regarding DIB's relationship with Osama bin Laden, including without limitation, all documents relating to the decision to provide banking and financial services to bin Laden, and the supervision and management of accounts at DIB in which bin Laden held any actual or potential beneficial interest, or over which he had signatory authority. ANSWER: 22. Please provide all documents relating to the meeting(s) held between U.S. officials and representatives of DIB and the U.A.E., occurring in or around July 1999 ("July 1999 Meeting(s)") in the U.A.E., regarding Osama bin Laden, DIB's relationship with Osama bin Laden, money laundering, and/or terrorist financing. ANSWER: 23. Please provide all documents identifying all DIB and U.A.E. officials and/or representatives who participated in the July 1999 Meeting(s) with U.S. officials. ANSWER: 18 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 20 of 63 24. Please provide all documents relating to the one-time bank transfer of approximately $50 million to Osama bin Laden through DIB, and which was specifically raised with the ruling Al Maktoum family during the July 1999 Meeting(s). Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, records identifying the name of the individual(s) who sent the $50 million, the bank from which the $50 million was sent, the wire transfer number, the recipient of the funds, and the bank account numbers of the sender and receiver. ANSWER: 25. Please provide all documents exchanged between and among the U.S., DIB and the U.A.E. before, during, and after the July 1999 Meeting(s), relating to Osama bin Laden, al Qaida, money laundering, and/or terrorist financing. Such documents shall include but are not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, emails, banking and financial reports, investigative reports and/or summaries, intelligence reports and/or summaries, terrorism reports and/or summaries, security files, and any other records. ANSWER: 26. Please provide all documents DIB sent to, and/or received from, U.A.E. officials, relating to the July 1999 Meeting(s) and allegations that DIB was associated with or involved in money laundering or terrorist financing for the benefit of Osama bin Laden and/or al Qaida. ANSWER: 19 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 21 of 63 27. Please provide all documents relating to any and all actions taken by DIB and/or the U.A.E. following the July 1999 Meeting(s) regarding Osama bin Laden, DIB's relationship with Osama bin Laden, money laundering, and/or terrorist financing. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, procedures, protocols, standards and/or guidelines which were implemented and used, or are currently being used, to prevent or deter financial crimes such as money laundering or the facilitation of terrorism financing. ANSWER: 28. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing or relating to the actions taken by DIB and/or the U.A.E. with regard to the accounts that were discussed and/or the subject of the July 1999 Meeting(s), including without limitation, all documents identifying those accounts, the account holders, the account numbers, and the status of those accounts. ANSWER: 29. Please provide all documents relating to communications by the U.S. to DIB and/or the U.A.E. in 1998 that DIB was providing banking and financial services to the Taliban and/or al Qaida, including the request from the U.S. that all Taliban and/or al Qaida-related accounts at DIB be closed. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the U.S., DIB and/or the U.A.E., and any banking or financial documents specifically identifying any Taliban and/or al Qaida accounts, the account holders, the account numbers, and the status of those accounts. 20 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 22 of 63 ANSWER: 30. Please provide all documents relating to the DIB-Taliban and/or al Qaida accounts identified in response to Request No. 29. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the account holder(s) and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 31. Please provide all documents relating to DIB Account No. 1335. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among Abdullah Azzam and/or the account holder(s) and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, 21 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 23 of 63 cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 32. Please provide all documents relating to any written or oral communication between DIB and the U.A.E., which references or addresses the Taliban, al Qaida, Abdullah Azzam, and any of the accounts identified in Requests Nos. 29-31 above. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, emails, facsimiles or otherwise. ANSWER: 33. Please provide all documents, statements, interviews, press releases, internal memos, or other materials relating to any accusation that DIB, DIB Personnel, or other persons associated with DIB, were associated with, involved in, or supported the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. For purposes of this request, the term "support" includes any form of financial, logistical, administrative or other assistance, whether provided directly or indirectly. ANSWER: 22 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 24 of 63 34. Please provide all documents relating to any internal investigation or audit conducted by DIB (including DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Advisory Board), relating to any accusation that DIB, DIB Personnel, or other persons associated with DIB, were associated with, involved in, or supported the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings. Such documents shall include any investigation or audit ordered, conducted, supervised, overseen, or reviewed by the U.A.E. ANSWER: 35. Please provide copies of all documents that have been seized by, or that DIB has produced to, any United States Investigator, any Foreign Investigator, or any U.A.E. Investigator, which references or addresses any accusation that DIB, DIB Personnel, or other persons associated with DIB were associated with, involved in, or supported the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings. ANSWER: 36. Please provide all documents relating to any written or oral communication between DIB and the U.A.E., which references or addresses any accusation that DIB, DIB Personnel, or other persons associated with DIB were associated with, involved in, or supported the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, emails, facsimiles or otherwise. ANSWER: 23 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 25 of 63 37. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the seizure, freezing, closing, monitoring, or restricting of any and all DIB accounts following the September 11, 2001 attack, including without limitation, all DIB accounts that were frozen per the orders of the Central Bank of the U.A.E. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all documents identifying those accounts, the account holders, the account numbers, and the status of those accounts. ANSWER: 38. Please provide all documents exchanged between and among the U.S., DIB, and the U.A.E. following the September 11, 2001 attack, relating to DIB's relationship with Osama bin Laden and/or other alleged members of al Qaida, including without limitation, any such documents which reference or address any of the DIB accounts identified in response to Request No. 37 above. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, emails, banking and financial reports, investigative reports and/or summaries, intelligence reports and/or summaries, terrorism reports and/or summaries, security files, and any other records. ANSWER: 24 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 26 of 63 39. Please provide all documents relating to any investigation, inquiry, review, audit, or analysis conducted by any United States Investigator, any Foreign Investigator, or any U.A.E. Investigator, following the September 11, 2001 attack, which references or addresses any of the DIB accounts identified in response to Request No. 37 above. ANSWER: 40. Please provide copies of all documents that have been seized by, or that DIB has produced to, any United States Investigator, any Foreign Investigator, or any U.A.E. Investigator, which reference or address any of the DIB accounts identified in response to Request No. 37 above. ANSWER: 41. Please provide all documents relating to any audit, analysis, examination, survey, or review of the DIB accounts identified in response to Request No. 37 above, conducted either by DIB (including DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Advisory Board), or any third party, including but not limited to, any bank, financial institution, government agency, accountant, or auditor. Such documents shall include any audit, analysis, examination, survey, or review ordered, conducted, supervised, overseen, or reviewed by the U.A.E. ANSWER: 25 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 27 of 63 42. Please provide all documents relating to any written or oral communication between DIB and the U.A.E., which references or addresses any of the DIB accounts identified in response to Request No. 37 above. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, emails, facsimiles, or otherwise. ANSWER: 43. Please provide all documents relating to any investigation, inquiry, audit, due diligence, or analysis conducted by the U.A.E., relating in any way to DIB. ANSWER: 44. Please provide all documents relating to all accounts at DIB that have been seized, frozen, closed, monitored, or in any way restricted due to identification or suspicion that the account is related to actual, potential, suspected, or alleged terrorists, or terrorist organizations or entities, including without limitation, all documents referring or relating to the reasons or basis for the freezing, seizing, closing, monitoring, or restricting of the accounts. ANSWER: 26 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 28 of 63 45. Please provide all documents relating to any guidance, advice, direction, directives, instructions, circulars or recommendations provided, disseminated, published, issued, or transmitted by any depai went, agency, or ministry of the govermnent of the U.A.E., the United States, or any other governmental entity to DIB concerning anti-money laundering, terrorist financing, investigating, monitoring, detecting or reporting of suspicious activity, or dealing in any way with Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 46. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and Sheikh Yousef al Qaradawi, including without limitation, any and all documents relating to all positions Qaradawi has held or holds within DIB. ANSWER: 47. Please provide any and all documents relating to Qaradawi's role in the establishment, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control over DIB's various boards and committees, including without limitation, DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 27 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 29 of 63 48. Please provide any and all documents relating to the establishment, duties, obligations, objectives, composition, and/or authority of DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board, including without limitation, any and all documents identifying all former and current members of DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 49. Please provide any and all documents relating to the role or roles of Qaradawi and/or the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board in the establishment, organization, funding, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control over DIB's operations, including without limitation, selection of board members, committee members or other officers, internal and external auditing or due diligence, credit and loan activities, appointment and termination of personnel, accounting, banking and financial transactions, analysis of investments funds and portfolios, and actual distribution of DIB financial and non-monetary support to charitable designees. ANSWER: 50. Please provide any and all documents relating to the role or roles of Qaradawi and/or the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board in developing Islamic banking products for DIB, as well as designing and implementing Shariah training programs for DIB. ANSWER: 28 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 30 of 63 51. Please provide any and all documents relating to the role or roles of Qaradawi and/or the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board in the supervision, management, control of, or distribution of DIB's funds, including without limitation, any and all documents relating to their duties and responsibilities to determine and/or make recommendations as to which individuals or entities should receive financial and/or non-monetary support from DIB and the purpose for such disbursements. ANSWER: 52. Please provide any and all documents relating to the role or roles of Qaradawi and/or the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board in determining and/or recommending which charities, humanitarian organizations, or dawah organizations should receive financial and/or non-monetary support from DIB and the purpose for such disbursements. ANSWER: 53. Please provide any and all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to DIB 's policies and procedures regarding zakat and haram monies, including the collection and distribution of such monies to charitable or other designees. ANSWER: 29 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 31 of 63 54. Please provide all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board meeting minutes. ANSWER: 55. Please provide all fatwas authored and/or issued by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board, including without limitation, any and all books or compilations of fatwas authored and/or issued by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 56. Please provide all annual reports authored and/or prepared by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 57. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board's oversight, supervision, management, control, or influence over DIB's branch offices. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, e-mails, meeting minutes, organizational diagxams and charts, and any reports sent to and/or received from the branch offices (banking and financial reports, status reports, auditing reports, shariah compliance reports, due diligence reports, or otherwise). ANSWER: 30 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 32 of 63 58. Please provide any and all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board documents relating to the conflicts, crises, or conditions facing Muslim communities in Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe, Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, and Turkey. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, any and all fatwas issued by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 59. Please provide any and all interviews, statements or speeches by members of the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board regarding the conflicts, crises or conditions facing Muslim communities in Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe, Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, and Turkey. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, any and all fatwas issued by members of the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 31 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 33 of 63 60. Please provide any and all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board documents discussing Islamic independence movements and/or the legitimacy of armed jihad or resistance by Muslims in Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chechnya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Europe, Indonesia, Kashmir, Kenya, Kosovo, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Sudan, Somalia, Tanzania, and Turkey. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, any and all fatwas issued by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 61. Please provide any and all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board documents discussing the provision of support to mujahideen forces in any part of the World. For purposes of this request, the term "support" includes any form of financial, medical, logistical, administrative, religious, political or any other form of assistance, whether provided directly or indirectly. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, any and all fatwas issued by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 32 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 34 of 63 62. Please provide any and all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board documents discussing the provision of support to any armed jihad in any part of the World, regardless of whether such jihad was declared legitimate by competent religious authorities. For purposes of this request, the term "support" includes any form of financial, medical, logistical, administrative, religious, political or any other form of assistance, whether provided directly or indirectly. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, any and all fatwas issued by the Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board. ANSWER: 63. Please provide any and all Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board documents mentioning "jihad" (.344) (see Definition No. 12), which can be generated via an electronic search of DIB's computers or electronic data storage systems. ANSWER: 64. Please provide any and all fatwas issued by members of DIB's Fatwa and Shariah Supervisory Board which mention "jihad" (.14+) (see Definition No. 12), regardless of whether you believe such board member(s) was or was not acting within the scope of his employment at DIB in relation to such activity. ANSWER: 33 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 35 of 63 65. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to DIB's policies, practices, procedures, and controls for anti-money laundering ("AML") and combating the financing of terrorism ("CFT"), including without limitation: a. All AML/CFT compliance manual(s), memoranda or other documents identifying or describing DIB's AML/CFT policies, practices, procedures, or controls; memoranda or other documents identifying or describing exceptions to DIB's AML/CFT policies, practices, procedures, or controls set forth in any compliance manual; memoranda or other documents stating or describing the manner and degree in which DIB's AML/CFT compliance program is integrated into the bank's activities; b. All reports, audits, memoranda, or other documents evaluating, critiquing, commenting upon or offering suggestions to modify or enhance DIB's AML/CFT compliance program; c. All documents created to respond to, or in response to, items referenced in the preceding item (b); d. All documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth or otherwise relating to DIB's policies, practices, procedures, or controls concerning what due diligence to employ to detect, investigate, and respond to high-risk wire transfers; e. All documents relating to the designation of one or more compliance officers and/or other individuals at DIB responsible for coordinating and monitoring day-to-day compliance, employee training, and the independent audit function to assess AML/CFT programs, including without limitation the identification, titles, and responsibilities of such individuals. ANSWER: 34 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 36 of 63 66. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to DIB's policies, practices, procedures, and controls aimed at preventing terrorists and other criminals from having access to bank accounts or wire transfer services for moving funds, and to detect such misuse when it occurs. ANSWER: 67. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to DIB's policies, practices, procedures, and controls regarding internal monitoring and/or reporting of wire transfers, including: a. Internal monitoring and/or reporting documents concerning wire transfers, incomplete originator information, high risk transactions and/or indications of possible money laundering or terrorist financing; and b. Internal monitoring and/or reporting documents concerning what action was taken upon identification of instances of incomplete originator information, high risk transactions, and/or indications of possible money laundering or terrorist financing. ANSWER: 68. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to DIB's Know-Your-Customer or Customer Identification policy, practices, procedures, or programs. ANSWER: 35 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 37 of 63 69. Please provide all DIB documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to account opening policies, practices and procedures at DIB, including without limitation: a. Copies of the Account Opening applications used by DIB during the relevant time period; b. Copies of all manuals, instruction booklets or procedures outlining the information to be obtained and verified before an account may be opened, and c. All account opening documents for any account maintained by or for the benefit of: Osama bin Laden, Mustafa Ahmed al Hisawi, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, the 9-11 Hijackers, and the persons and entities identified in Attachments B and C. ANSWER: 70. Please provide all DIB documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to DIB's customer acceptance policies, practices, and procedures, including without limitation, all documents that describe DIB's policies, practices, and procedures regarding the types of customers that are likely to pose a higher than average risk. ANSWER: 36 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 38 of 63 71. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth,or otherwise relating to the training of DIB Personnel regarding: a. ML/CFT policies, practices, procedures, or controls; b. Know-Your-Customer or Customer Identification policies, practices, procedures, or controls; c. Investigating or filing suspicious activity or transaction reports; d. Investigating Politically Exposed Persons; e. Compliance with any laws, rules or regulations concerning money laundering, terrorist financing, suspicious activity or Politically Exposed Persons, including but not limited to the certification of any DIB employee as having knowledge, skills, expertise or education concerning the enforcement of or compliance with any laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures related to anti-money laundering, anti-terrorist financing, suspicious activity or Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 72. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to any software or internet-based application that DIB has used, currently uses, or has investigated for use, for the detection, monitoring, or investigation of money laundering, terrorist financing, suspicious activity, Politically Exposed Persons, or compliance with any laws, rules or regulations concerning money laundering, terrorist financing, suspicious activity, or Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 37 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 39 of 63 73. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, setting forth, or otherwise relating to DIB's policies, practices, procedures and controls regarding DIB's compliance with Suspicious Transaction Reports ("STRs") or Suspicious Activity Reports ("SARs") requirements, including without limitation: a. All documents relating to the roles and responsibilities of DIB Personnel for the filing of STRs or SARs; and b. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for determining whether or not to file a SAR or STR. ANSWER: 74. Please provide all documents relating to any written or oral communication prepared by DIB or DIB Personnel concerning good banking practices, best banking practices, or recommended banking practices with respect to detection, prevention, or compliance with regulations relating to money laundering, terrorist financing, or dealing with Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 75. Please provide copies of any speeches, statements, or presentations regarding money laundering or terrorist financing, given by DIB or DIB Personnel, at any banking organization conference, or other conference concerning, wholly or in part, any issues related to anti-money laundering, terrorist financing, Know-Your-Customer practices, suspicious activity or transaction reporting, or Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 38 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 40 of 63 76. Please provide all documents relating to any written or oral communication, including memoranda, notes, and/or recommendations, concerning best practices discussed at any anti-money laundering, terrorist financing, and/or risk assessment conference sponsored or attended by DIB or DIB Personnel. ANSWER: 77. Please provide all documents relating to DIB 's internal controls concerning money laundering, terrorist financing, Know-Your-Customer or Customer Identification policies, practices, and procedures, suspicious activity or transactions, or Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 78. Please provide all documents relating to any internal audits, examinations, studies, or investigations performed by DIB and/or DIB Personnel, concerning, in whole or in part, AML, CFT, Know-Your-Customer/Customer Identification policies, practices, procedures, and controls, suspicious activities or transactions, Politically Exposed Persons, or compliance with any laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, Know-Your-Customer/Customer Identification, suspicious activity or transactions, and Politically Exposed Persons. ANSWER: 39 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 41 of 63 79. Please provide all documents relating to any audits, examinations, studies, or investigations performed by DIB or by any outside consultants, auditors, accountants or other parties employed or utilized by DIB, regarding any individual, department, or group of DIB concerning, in whole or in part, AML, CFT, Know-Your-Customer/Customer Identification policies, practices, procedures, and controls, suspicious activities or transactions, Politically Exposed Persons, or compliance with any laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, Know-Your-Customer/Customer Identification, suspicious activity or transactions, and Politically Exposed Persons. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, engagement letters or memoranda, scope of audit memoranda or correspondence, studies, reports, presentations, proposals, notes or minutes of meeting, advice, recommendation, analysis, or any other communications and the results thereof ANSWER: 80. Please provide all documents relating to any external or independent audits, examinations, studies, or investigations of DIB which refer or relate to compliance with bank secrecy rules and regulations, Know-Your-Customer rules, suspicious activity or transaction reporting, money laundering, terrorist financing, or investigations of DIB by any agency of Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, the United States or any other foreign government, including but not limited to the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. ANSWER: 40 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 42 of 63 81. Please provide all documents relating to any external or independent evaluation of DIB's AML/CFT compliance program, including: a. Copies of any such evaluations; b. The policies, practices, procedures, and controls for performing, handling, and responding to or implementing the recommendations of such evaluations; and c. Documents comprising, describing, or setting forth any actions taken to respond to recommendations made in audit reports evaluating the effectiveness of DIB's AML/CFT program. ANSWER: 82. For any department, committee, or group at DIB responsible for opening, maintaining, and managing customer accounts at DIB ("Account Representatives"), please provide the following: a. All documents identifying such department, committee, or group, the responsibilities and duties of the department, committee, or group, and the names of DIB Personnel within the department, committee, or group, including their title, tenure, and responsibilities; b. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for the management and maintenance of customer accounts by Account Representatives; c. All documents relating to training of Account Representatives; d. All documents relating to all procedures and protocols used to ensure the authenticity of client correspondence to officers such as signature verifications; e. Copies of all Information Technology ("IT") protocols used by Account Representatives to assist them with the management and maintenance of customer accounts; 41 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 43 of 63 f. All documents detailing or describing DIB policies, practices, procedures, or controls used to monitor compliance with the Account Representative filing procedures; and g. Copies of any "Corporate Code of Conduct" guidelines that apply to Account Representatives. ANSWER: 83. For any department, committee, or group at DIB responsible for ensuring DIB's compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, suspicious activity or transactions, or Politically Exposed Persons ("DIB Compliance Personnel"), please provide the following: a. All documents identifying such department, committee, or group, the responsibilities and duties of the department, committee, or group, and the names of DIB Personnel within the department, committee, or gtoup, including their title, tenure, and responsibilities; b. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for ensuring DIB's compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, policies, ptactices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, suspicious activity or transactions, or Politically Exposed Persons; c. All documents relating to training of DIB Compliance Personnel; d. All documents, including copies of forms, used by DIB Compliance Personnel to report on DIB's compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, suspicious activity or transactions, or Politically Exposed Persons; e. Copies of all IT protocols used by DIB Compliance Personnel to assist them in ensuring DIB's compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, suspicious activity or transactions, or Politically Exposed Persons; and f. Copies of any "Corporate Code of Conduct" guidelines that apply to DIB Compliance Personnel. ANSWER: 42 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 44 of 63 84. For any department, committee, or group at DIB responsible for monitoring, reviewing, and/or investigating account activity, either in whole or in part, for purposes of compliance with any laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures related to AML/CFT, suspicious activity or transactions, or Politically Exposed Persons ("DIB Investigative Personnel"), please provide the following: a. All documents identifying such department, committee, or group, the responsibilities and duties of the depai tment, committee, or goup, and the names of DIB Personnel within the department, committee, or goup, including their title, tenure, and responsibilities; b. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for monitoring, reviewing and investigating account and transaction activity; c. All documents relating to training of DIB Investigative Personnel; d. All documents, including copies of forms, used by DIB Investigative Personnel to report on the monitoring, review, or investigation of accounts and transactions; e. Copies of all IT protocols used by DIB Investigative Personnel to assist them in monitoring, reviewing, and investigating account and transaction activity; f. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for reporting suspicious account or transaction activity; g. Copies of any "Corporate Code of Conduct" guidelines that apply to DIB Investigative Personnel. ANSWER: 43 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 45 of 63 85. For any depal tment, committee, or group at DIB responsible for performing internal audit functions at DIB related, in whole or in part, to AML, CFT, Know-Your-Customer/Customer Identification policies, practices, procedures, and controls, suspicious activities or transactions, Politically Exposed Persons, or compliance with any laws, rules, regulations, policies, practices, or procedures concerning AML/CFT, Know-Your-Customer/Customer Identification, suspicious activity or transactions, and Politically Exposed Persons ("DIB Internal Audit Personnel"), please provide the following: a. All documents identifying such department, committee, or group, the responsibilities and duties of the department, committee, or group, and the names of DIB Personnel within the department, committee, or group, including their title, tenure, and responsibilities; b. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for monitoring, reviewing, investigating and auditing account activity by DIB Internal Audit Personnel; c. All documents relating to training of DIB Internal Audit Personnel; d. All documents, including copies of forms, used by DIB Internal Audit Personnel to report on the monitoring, reviewing, investigating, and auditing of accounts; e. Copies of all IT protocols used by DIB Internal Audit Personnel to assist them in monitoring, reviewing, investigating, and auditing accounts; f. Copies of all audit plans for account activity; g. All documents detailing or describing the policies and procedural guidelines for reporting suspicious activity or transaction; and h. Copies of any "Corporate Code of Conduct" guidelines that apply to DIB Internal Audit Personnel. ANSWER: 44 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 46 of 63 86. For any department, committee, or group at DIB responsible for tracking and/or maintaining a database relating to designations of, and information about, individuals and entities designated as terrorists or terror financiers ("DIB Designation Personnel"), please provide the following: a. All documents identifying such department, committee, or group, the responsibilities and duties of the department, committee, or group, and the names of DIB Personnel within the department, committee, or group, including their title, tenure, and responsibilities; b. All documents detailing or describing how DIB tracks the designation of individuals or entities as Specially Designated Global Terrorists or otherwise, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by the United States Office of Foreign Asset Control, the United Nations and/or any other government or regulatory body; c. All documents relating to training of DIB Designation Personnel; d. Copies of all IT protocols used by DIB Designation Personnel to assist them in tracking and/or maintaining information about individuals and entities designated as terrorists or terror financiers; e. All documents detailing or describing any software programs used by DIB to monitor the designation of individuals or entities as Specially Designated Global Terrorists or otherwise, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by the United States Office of Foreign Asset Control, the United Nations and/or any other government or regulatory body; f. Copies of all internal manuals, memoranda, reports or protocols detailing or describing the appropriate actions to be taken by DIB Personnel when examining whether any designated individual or entity maintains accounts at DIB, or is the recipient of funds from DIB; and g. Copies of all internal manuals, memoranda, reports or protocols detailing or describing the appropriate actions to be taken by DIB Personnel if a DIB account has been opened and/or used by a designated terrorist individual or entity. ANSWER: 45 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 47 of 63 87. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and the persons identified in Attachment D, including without limitation, all documents relating to all positions those persons have held or currently hold within DIB and their personnel files. ANSWER: 88. Please provide all documents relating to the persons identified in Attachment D and their roles in the establishment, organization, funding, oversight, supervision, management, and/or control over DIB's operations, including without limitation, banking and financial transactions, opening, maintenance and closing of accounts, regulatory and compliance matters, customer and banking account records, AML, CFT, and KYC policies and procedures, government relations, and/or any other facet of DIB's operations. ANSWER: 89. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and HAMAS (a/k/a Harakat al Muqawamat al Islamiyyah; a/k/a Islamic Resistance Movement), including without limitation, the following HAMAS-related entities: the International Islamic Charity Organization, the Nablus Zakat Committee, the Fujairah Charity Organization, the Emirates Red Crescent, Human Appeal International, and the Union of Good. ANSWER: 46 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 48 of 63 90. Please provide any and all documents sent to, and/or received from HAMAS, including without limitation, any of the following HAMAS-related entities: the International Islamic Charity Organization, the Nablus Zakat Committee, the Fujairah Charity Organization, the Emirates Red Crescent, Human Appeal International, and the Union of Good. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between DIB and those entities. ANSWER: 91. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the International Islamic Charity Organization ("IICO"), including but not limited to DIB Account No. 4032845. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the IICO and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 47 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 49 of 63 92. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Nablus Zakat Committee, including but not limited to DIB Account No. 5295/939. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Nablus Zakat Committee and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 93. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Fujairah Charity Organization, including but not limited to DIB Account Nos. 06520509045801 and 01609045852006. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Fujairah Charity Organization and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, 48 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 50 of 63 deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 94. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Emirates Red Crescent, including but not limited to DIB Account No. 5346754. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Emirates Red Crescent and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 49 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 51 of 63 95. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Human Appeal International. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Human Appeal International and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 96. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Union of Good. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Union of Good and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan 50 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 52 of 63 records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 97. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and the Al Ihsan Charitable Society of Hebron. ANSWER: 98. Please provide any and all documents sent to and/or received from the Al Ihsan Charitable Society of Hebron. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between DIB and the Al Ihsan Charitable Society. ANSWER: 99. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Al Ihsan Charitable Society of Hebron, including but not limited to DIB Account Nos. 1-520-4581737, 1-520-4581737-01 and 1-520-4581636-01. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Al Ihsan Charitable Society and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, 51 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 53 of 63 suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 100. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and the Dar al Bir Society. ANSWER: 101. Please provide any and all documents sent to and/or received from the Dar al Bir Society. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between DIB and the Dar al Bir Society. ANSWER: 52 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 54 of 63 102. Please provide any and all documents relating to DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Dar al Bir Society, including but not limited to DIB Account Nos. 02 520 4053087 02, 03 520 4053087 03, 04 520 4053087 04, 06 520 405 3087 06, 01 520 4557271 01, 01 520 7260466 01, 01 520 4557298 01, 01 520 5003342 01, 02 520 5003342 02, 03 520 5003342 03, 07 520 5003342 07, and 01 520 5291798 01. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Human Appeal International and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 103. Please provide any and all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and the Pak Kashmir Welfare Council. ANSWER: 53 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 55 of 63 104. Please provide any and all documents sent to and/or received from the Pak Kashmir Welfare Council. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, all documents relating to the transfer of funds between DIB and the Pak Kashmir Welfare Council. ANSWER: 105. Please provide any and all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of and/or for the benefit of the Pak Kashmir Welfare Council. Such documents shall include, but are not limited to, correspondence, letters, memoranda, notes, and/or e-mails, that refer to, relate to, or reflect communications between or among the Pak Kashmir Welfare Council and DIB, documents detailing the establishment of and/or closing of the account(s), Know-Your-Customer and/or other customer due diligence reports, suspicious activity and/or transaction reports, account numbers, monthly account statements, annual account statements, account notices, deposits, withdrawals, deposit slips, check stubs, cleared or canceled checks, cashier checks, money orders, debit/credit memos, financial ledgers, journals, investment records, real estate records, records of assets, loan records, audit work papers, audit reports, wire transfers, and any documentation showing the source(s) and/or destination(s) of any funds deposited into or withdrawn from those accounts. ANSWER: 54 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 56 of 63 106. Please provide all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the relationship between DIB and the banks identified in Attachment E, including without limitation, all documents governing, describing, detailing, or otherwise relating to the due diligence policies, practices, procedures, and measures employed by DIB prior to entering into any relationship with those banks (including reviewing and/or analyzing each bank's AML, CFT, and KYC policies, practices, and procedures), as well as all due diligence policies, practices, procedures, and measures DIB continues to utilize during its on-going relationship with those banks (including the continued review and/or analysis of each bank's AML, CFT, and KYC policies, practices, and procedures). ANSWER: 107. Please provide all documents relating to any formal or informal record keeping and document retention policies, practices, or procedures maintained by DIB, any DIB branch, or any DIB subsidiary or affiliate, including without limitation: a. All documents relating to DIB's document retention policies, practices, or procedures for all account documents; and b. All documents relating to DIB's document retention policies, practices, or procedures concerning anti-money laundering, countering the financing of terrorism, bank secrecy compliance, suspicious activity or transaction reporting, cash or currency reporting, and fund transfer functions. ANSWER: 55 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 57 of 63 108. Please provide all documents relating to any formal or informal document destruction policies, practices, or procedures maintained by DIB, any DIB branch, or any DIB subsidiary or affiliate, including without limitation, descriptions of all documents destroyed by DIB. ANSWER: Dated: October 15, 2010 Respectfully submitted, TffE Irre T 5 OP 1T1 S' EXE ■ UTIVE COMM TEES 56 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 58 of 63 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true copy of the Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Dubai Islamic Bank were served via electronic mail and U.S. first-class mail, postage prepaid, this 15th day of October 2010, upon: Robert G. Houck, Esq. Clifford Chance U.S. LLP 31 West 52nd Street New York, New York 10019-6131 Alan R. Kabat, Esq. Bernabei & Wachtel, PLLC 1775 T Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009-7124 (Defendants' Executive Committee's appointed representative to receive discovery requests and responses in 03-MDL-1570) 57 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 59 of 63 ATTACHMENT A September 11, 2001 Hijackers: 1. Khalid al Mihdhar 2. Majed Moqed 3. Nawaf al Hamzi 4. Salem al Hamzi 5. Hani Hanjour 6. Satam al Suqami 7. Waleed al Shehri 8. Wail al Shehri 9. Mohamed Atta 10. Abdulaziz al Omari 11. Marwan al Shehhi 12. Fayez Banihammad 13. Ahmed al Ghamdi 14. Hamza al Ghamdi 15. Mohand al Shehri 16. Saeed al Ghamdi 17. Ahmad al Haznawi 18. Ahmed al Nami 19. Ziad Jarrah 58 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 60 of 63 ATTACHMENT B 1. Saidi Madani al Tayyib (a/k/a Sidi al Madani al Ghazi Mustafa al Tayyib; a/k/a Sayed Tayib al Madani; a/k/a Sa'idi al Madani al Ghazi Mustfa al Tayyib; a/k/a Abu Fadl; a/k/a Abu Fadil; a/k/a Abu Fadil al Makki; a/k/a Abu Amjed; a/k/a Abu Mahdi; a/k/a Abu Khalifah al Omani) 2. Jamal Ahmad Mohamed al Fadl 3. Sharif al Din Ali Mukhtar 4. Abu Rida al Sufi (a/k/a Mohamed Loay Bayazid; a/k/a/Mohammed Loay Baizid; a/k/a Abu Ridha al Sufi; a/k/a Abu Rida the Syrian) 5. Mamdouh Mahmoud Salim (a/k/a Abu Hajer al Iraqi) 6. Wa'el Hamza Jelaidan (a/k/a Abu al Hasan; a/k/a Abu Hassan al Madani) 7. Abu Anas (a/k/a Abu Anas al Saudi) 8. Abu Hammam (a/k/a Abu Hamam al Saudi) 9. Abu Horan (a/k/a Ali Haroun; a/k/a Abu Hassan al Sudani) 10. Abu Ubaidah al Banshiri (a/k/a Ali Amin al Rashidi) 11. Abu Hafs al Masri (a/k/a Sheikh Taysir Abdullah; a/k/a Abu Hafs; a/k/a Abu Sitta; a/k/a Abu Hafs al Kabir; a/k/a Abu Khadijah; a/k/a Abu Fatima) 12. Sheikh Said al Masri (a/lc/a Saeed al Masri; a/lc/a Mustafa Ahmed Muhammad Uthman Abu al Yazid) 13. Abu Yassir Sarrir (a/k/a Abu Yassir al Jaza'iri) 14. Mohammed Yassir al Masri 15. Aafia Siddiqui (a/k/a Fahrem Shahin) 59 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 61 of 63 ATTACHMENT C 1. Wadi al Aqiq Company, Ltd. 2. Al Hijrah Construction and Development, Ltd. 3. Taba Investment Company, Ltd. 4. Al Timar al Mubarikah 5. Gum Arabic Company 6. Bin Ladin International 7. Al Qudarat Transport Company 8. Blessed Fruits Company Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 62 of 63 ATTACHMENT D 1. Muhammad Khalfan bin Kharbash 2. Muhammad Azeem Memon 3. Saeed Ahmed al Sharif 4. Abdulla Abdul Rahman 5. Mohamed Ghayyath 6. Mohammed Ayoub Mohammed 7. Zohair Saeed al Rabii 8. Taymerz Zendaki 61 Case 1:03-md-01570-GBD-SN Document 3776-1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 63 of 63 ATTACHMENT E 1. Bank of Khartoum 2. Tadamon Islamic Bank 3. Al Shamal Bank 4. Islamic Bank of Bangladesh Limited 5. Bank al Falah PHILADELPHIA\5639385\3 117430.000 62

Exhibit B Supplemental Requests

EXHIBIT B UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM) In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 ECF Case This document relates to: Thomas Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., No. 03 Civ. 9849 Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Al Qaida, et al., No. 03 Civ. 6978 Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka., et al., No. 04 Civ. 1923 Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., No. 04 Civ. 5970 Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7065 Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., No. 04 Civ. 7279 PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK THE MDL 1570 PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES July 31, 2012 1 PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK Plaintiffs in Kathleen Ashton, et al. v. Al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., Case No. 02 Civ. 6977, Thomas Burnett, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka Inv. & Dev. Corp., et al., Case No. 03 Civ. 9849, Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. al Qaida, et al., Case No. 03 Civ. 6978, Estate of John P. O’Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka., et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 1923, Continental Casualty Co., et al. v. Al Qaeda, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 5970, Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al. v. Akida Bank Private Ltd, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7065, and Euro Brokers Inc., et al., v. Al Baraka, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 7279, propound and serve on Dubai Islamic Bank (hereinafter "Defendant" or "DIB") the following Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents to be answered fully and under oath, pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, within 30 days of their receipt. The "Instructions" and "Definitions" set forth in the Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Dubai Islamic Bank are incorporated herein by reference. 2 PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DUBAI ISLAMIC BANK 1. Please provide all documents regarding accounts held by and/or foreign transfers by Ali Abdul Aziz Ali (A/K/A Ammar al-Baluchi, Amar al-Balochi, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, Isam Mansur, Aliosh, or Ali A.). This includes, but is not limited to, foreign transfers through the UAE Exchange. ANSWER: 2. Please provide all documents relating to all DIB accounts established or held in the name of, on behalf of, and/or for the benefit of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed ("KSM") (A/K/A Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Khalid Shaikh Muhammed, Khalid Shaykh Mohammad, Khaled Shaikh Mohammad, Khalid Shaykh Muhammed, Ashraf Refaat Nabith Henin, Khalid Abdul Wadood, Salem Ali, Fahd Bin Abdallah Bin Khalid, Fahd Bin Abdallah Bin Khalid, Abdulrahman A. A. Al Ghamdi, Abdulrahman Abdullah al-Ghamdi, Mukhtar