Levine v. Everbank Financial Corp. et alMOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM with Brief In SupportN.D. Ga.December 16, 2016IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SAM L. LEVINE, Plaintiff, v. EVERBANK FINANCIAL CORP. A/K/A EVERBANK; HSBC BANK USA, N.A.; HSBC BANK USA, N.A., as TRUSTEE FOR OPTEUM MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-4,; HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS, INC.; AND SHAPIRO PENDERGAST & HASTY, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ MOTION TO DISMISS Defendant EverBank Financial Corp ("EverBank")1 1 Plaintiff appears to have misnamed "EverBank Financial Corp." as a Defendant and appears to have intended instead to name as a Defendant "EverBank, FSA," which is the servicer of the loan referenced in the Complaint. and Defendants HSBC Bank USA, N.A., and HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. (collectively, "HSBC") move to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth in Defendants' contemporaneously filed Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 4 2 Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss, Defendants respectfully request that their Motion to Dismiss be granted and that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed in its entirety. This 16th day of December, 2016. Gregory M. Taube s/ Gregory M. Taube Georgia Bar No. 699166 Attorney for Defendants EverBank and HSBC NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 201 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30363 (404) 322-6000 (Phone) (404) 322-6050 (Fax) greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4 Filed 12/16/16 Page 2 of 4 3 CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE AS TO FONT SIZE The undersigned counsel certifies that the foregoing pleading has been prepared with 14 point Times New Roman font, which is one of the fonts and point selections approved by the Court in LR 5.1C, NDGa. Respectfully submitted this 16th day of December, 2016. Gregory M. Taube s/ Gregory M. Taube Georgia Bar No. 699166 Attorney for Defendants EverBank and HSBC NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 201 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30363 (404) 322-6000 (Phone) (404) 322-6050 (Fax) greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4 Filed 12/16/16 Page 3 of 4 4 I hereby certify that I have this day served the within and foregoing MOTION TO DISMISS by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail in a properly addressed envelope with sufficient postage affixed thereto to ensure delivery to the following: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Sam Levine, pro se Law Office of Sam Levine, LLC 1014 Havenridge Lane, NE Atlanta, GA 30319 This 16th day of December, 2016. Gregory M. Taube s/ Gregory M. Taube Georgia Bar No. 699166 Attorney for Defendants EverBank and HSBC NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 201 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30363 (404) 322-6000 (Phone) (404) 322-6050 (Fax) greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4 Filed 12/16/16 Page 4 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SAM L. LEVINE, Plaintiff, v. EVERBANK FINANCIAL CORP. A/K/A EVERBANK; HSBC BANK USA, N.A.; HSBC BANK USA, N.A., as TRUSTEE FOR OPTEUM MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-4,; HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS, INC.; AND SHAPIRO PENDERGAST & HASTY, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS Defendant EverBank Financial Corp ("EverBank")1 1 Plaintiff appears to have misnamed "EverBank Financial Corp." as a Defendant and appears to have intended instead to name as a Defendant "EverBank, FSA," which is the servicer of the loan referenced in the Complaint. and Defendants HSBC Bank USA, N.A., and HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. (collectively, "HSBC") file this Memorandum in support of their Motion to Dismiss, and show the Court the following: Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 15 2 I. INTRODUCTION This case appears to have been filed in a misguided effort to delay foreclosure. Plaintiff Sam L. Levine ("Levine"), who appears to be a licensed attorney representing himself in this matter, alleges violation of three federal statutes: (1) Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"); (2) Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"); and (3) Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"). Levine also alleges violation of a Consent Order entered in another matter which does not involve Levine as a party. As discussed further below, Levine has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under RESPA, TILA, FDCPA or the Consent Order. Consequently, Defendants respectfully request that this case be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). II. BACKGROUND Levine alleges that he is the owner of property located at 1014 Havenridge Lane, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30319 ("Property"). (Compl. ¶ 4.) Although the Complaint includes few specific allegations, it appears that Levine is alleging that the Property is subject to a security deed and is attempting to stop a foreclosure sale scheduled for November 1, 2016. A copy of a letter referencing such a foreclosure sale is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit "B". The letter is dated September 26, 2016, and identifies EverBank as the loan servicer and as the Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 2 of 15 3 "individual or entity having authority to negotiate, amend and modify the terms of the mortgage loan with the debtor." The letter also includes an address and telephone number for EverBank. However, the letter was not sent by EverBank. It was sent on behalf of EverBank by a law firm, namely Defendant Shapiro, Pendergast & Hasty. Also attached to the Complaint is a copy of a Security Deed that identifies Levine as the borrower and Opteum Financial Services, LLC, as the lender. The Security Deed is recorded at Deed Book 17469, Page 634, in the real property records of DeKalb County, Georgia. (A copy of the recorded document is attached to this Memorandum as Exhibit A.) Also recorded in the same real property records is an assignment of the Security Deed by the original lender to HSBC, which is recorded at Deed Book 23282, Page 333. (A copy of the recorded assignment is attached to this Memorandum as Exhibit B.) Each of these documents was recorded prior to November 1, 2016.2 2 The Security Deed and Assignment may properly be considered at this stage of the proceeding because these documents are public records of which this Court may take judicial notice. Yeboah v. Bank of N. Y. Mellon, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144909, *8 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 30, 2012), adopted at 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144231 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 5, 2012). In addition, the Security Deed is central to Levine's case, and Levine refers to his loan and the scheduled foreclosure throughout his Complaint. See Simpson v. Countrywide Home Loans, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81389, **4-5 (N.D. Ga. April 26, 2010) (when documents central to the plaintiff's case are referred to in the complaint, the court may consider them as part of the Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 3 of 15 4 Levine filed the Complaint on November 1, 2016, in the Superior Court of DeKalb County. EverBank was served on November 10, 2016, and EverBank removed the case to this Court on December 9, 2016, based on Levine's claim for alleged violations of RESPA, TILA, and FDCPA. III. A. Standard for Motion to Dismiss. ARGUMENT AND CITATION OF AUTHORITIES Federal Rule 12(b)(6) provides that dismissal is proper for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." Federal Rule 8(a)(2) requires that a complaint contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." A complaint must provide "the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Charles H. Wesley Educ. Found., Inc. v. Cox, 408 F.3d 1349, 1352 (11th Cir. 2005). While notice pleading does not require a plaintiff to allege specific facts "to cover every element or allege with precision each element of a claim, it is still necessary that a complaint contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material elements necessary to sustain a recovery under some viable legal theory." Fin. Sec. Assur., Inc. v. Stephens, Inc., 500 F.3d 1276, 1282-83 (11th Cir. 2007). pleadings for purposes of Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal), adopted at 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81384 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 11, 2010). Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 4 of 15 5 To avoid dismissal based on Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must provide "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). "While, for most types of cases, the Federal Rules eliminated the cumbersome requirement that a claimant set out in detail the facts upon which he bases his claim, Rule 8(a)(2) still requires a showing, rather than a blanket assertion, of entitlement to relief." Id. at n.3 (quotations and citations omitted). And, while a plaintiff's allegations must generally be taken as true when ruling on a motion to dismiss, the Court is not required to accept “conclusory allegations, unwarranted deductions of facts or legal conclusions masquerading as facts.” Oxford Asset Mgmt. v. Jaharis, 297 F.3d 1182, 1188 (11th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, a complaint should be dismissed "when it consist[s] of only the barest of conclusory allegations without notice of the factual grounds on which they purport to be based." Jackson v. Bellsouth Telecomms., 372 F.3d 1250, 1271 (11th Cir. 2004). B. Levine Failed to Plead a Plausible Claim For Violation of RESPA. "To state a claim for relief under RESPA [arising from an alleged qualified written request of QWR], a plaintiff must allege facts showing that: '(1) the defendant is a loan servicer, (2) the plaintiff sent the defendant a valid QWR, (3) the defendant failed to adequately respond within the statutory period, and (4) the Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 5 of 15 6 plaintiff is entitled to actual or statutory damages.'” McDaniel v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 1:14–CV–2337–WSD, 2016 WL 1071101, at *6 (N.D. Ga. March 7, 2012) (dismissing RESPA claim and quoting Tonea v. Bank of Am., N.A., 6 F. Supp. 3d 1331, 1346 (N.D. Ga. 2014)). In order to qualify as a QWR under RESPA, a request must seek information relating to the servicing of a mortgage loan and must include, among other things, "a statement of the reasons ... that the account is in error or provide[ ] sufficient detail to the servicer regarding other information sought by the borrower.” Id. (quoting from 12 U.S.C. § 2605(e)(1)(B)). In order to plead a viable claim for alleged failure to respond to a QWR as required by RESPA, a plaintiff must show actual damages, which requires a demonstration that the alleged violation of RESPA proximately caused the alleged damages. Id. A plaintiff is limited to recovering actual damages unless the plaintiff shows a pattern or practice of noncompliance. Id. In this case, Levine's RESPA claim is implausible because Levine failed to either attach a copy of the alleged QWR or adequately describe it. Instead, Levine only vaguely alleges, "[on] June 16, 2016, Plaintiff sent a Notice of Revocation of Power of Attorney and a Qualified Written Request ("QWR") pursuant to RESPA to Defendant(s) by certified mail requesting that Defendant(s) cease all foreclosure scheduled to take place on July 1, 2016." (Compl. ¶ 12.) Thus, Levine failed to Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 6 of 15 7 plead facts sufficient show that the alleged QWR included a statement of the reasons that the account is alleged to be in error. Moreover, in the absence of any such factual allegations, Levine's claim that he suffered damages resulting from the alleged failure to respond is "too conclusory to make it plausible that he even suffered damages or that there is a causal connection between any RESPA violation and damages suffered." See Gonsalves-Carvalhal v. Aurora Bank, FSB, 1:14-CV-151-SCJ-LTW, 2016 WL 5339695, at *8 (July 1, 2016) (recommending dismissal of RESPA claim based on conclusory allegations regarding alleged error and damages). Similarly, the Complaint includes only a conclusory allegation regarding an alleged pattern and practice of noncompliance with RESPA, which likewise is not sufficient to state a clam upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, Levine's RESPA claim should be dismissed. C. Levine Failed to Plead a Plausible Claim for Violation of TILA. With respect to TILA, Levine references TILA in a heading on page 14 of the Complaint. However, the allegations following this heading, in paragraphs 12- 18 of the Complaint, reference only alleged violations of RESPA, which are discussed above. The Complaint contains no other references to TILA. Thus, Levine fails to specifically allege any violation of TILA. Consequently, Levine's Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 7 of 15 8 claim for violation of TILA is due to be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. D. Levine Lacks Standing to Assert a Claim under the Consent Order. In paragraphs 32-35 of the Complaint, Levine alleges that "Defendant HSBC through their servicer EverBank" violated the terms of a Consent Order entered between EverBank and the Office of Thrift Supervision with an effective date of April 11, 2011. (A copy of the Consent Order is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit "C".) Levine lacks standing to enforce the Consent Order because Levine is not a party to the Consent Order. See, e.g., Carter v. HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc., 1:13-CV-3792-RWS-WEJ, 2014 WL 12281397 *5 (N.D. Ga. March 4, 2014) (recognizing that "[c]ourts have routinely rejected similar claims based on a servicer's alleged failure to comply with such consent orders), rev'd on other grounds, 622 Fed. App. 783 (11th Cir. 2015). Similarly, as provided in 12. U.S.C. § 1818(i)(l), this Court lacks jurisdiction to enforce the Consent Order because it was entered pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1818(b). See Ferrer v. Yellen, -- Fed. App. --- , 2016, WL 4254357 (11th Cir. Aug. 12, 2016.) Moreover, the alleged violation of the Consent Order relates to a foreclosure sale that was scheduled for July 1, 2016, and was subsequently postponed. Thus, Levine has failed to show how he has been harmed by any violation of the Consent Order. For these reasons, Levine's claim Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 8 of 15 9 for alleged violation of the Consent Order should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. E. Plaintiff Failed to Plead a Plausible Claim for Violation of FDCPA. "To state a claim under FDCPA, a plaintiff must show that '(1) [he] has been the object of collection activity arising from consumer debt, (2) the defendant is a debt collector as defined by the FDCPA, and (3) the defendant has engaged in an act or omission prohibited by the FDCPA.'" Miller v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Inc., 2013 WL 1189503 at *3 (N.D. Ga. March 21, 2013) (quoting from Gass v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2012 WL 3201400, at *14 (N.D. Ga. June 25, 2012). Levine's Complaint fails to state a plausible claim under FDCPA against EverBank or HSBC for at last three reasons. First, Levine's FDCPA claim appears to be based entirely on the Notice of Sale, which was not sent by EverBank or HSBC. In paragraphs 44-50 of the Complaint, Levine vaguely alleges that "Defendants" violated FDCPA "[b]y sending the Notice of Sale based on the fabricated assignment recorded in DeKalb [sic] County." Significantly, a copy of the Notice of Sale is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit C along with a letter from Defendant Shapiro, Pendergast & Hasty. Although Levine more specifically contends that the Notice of Sale includes false representations regarding the effectiveness of the assignment of the Security Deed by the original lender to Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 9 of 15 10 HSBC, Levine pleads no facts to show that he has standing to complain about this alleged irregularity. To the contrary, a borrower lacks standing to challenge the effectiveness of an assignment of a security deed. See Haynes v. McCalla Raymer, LLC, 793 F.3d 1246, 1251 (11th Cir. 2015). Consequently, Levine cannot show that the assignment was invalid and cannot prevail on an FDCPA claim based on his contention hat the assignment was not effective. Second, Levine failed to allege facts sufficient to show that EverBank or HSBC is a debt collector. Under the statutory definition, the term "debt collector" includes "any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another." 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6). In addition, for purposes of 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(6) only, a person may be considered a "debtor collector" if such person is engaged in "any business the principal purpose of which is the enforcement of security interests." Id. Conclusory allegations of a defendant's status as debt collector are not sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss. See Kayama-Joy El v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 2016 WL 4257771 *6 (N.D. Ga. March 29, 2016). Yet, Levine's Complaint includes only conclusory allegations, and thus, Levine's FDCPA claim should be dismissed for this reason. Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 10 of 15 11 F. The Complaint Fails to State a Declaratory Judgment Claim. The purpose of Georgia's Declaratory Judgment Act is to "settle and afford relief from uncertainty and insecurity with respect to rights, status, and other legal relations." O.C.G.A. § 9-4-1; Airport Auth. v. City of St. Marys, 297 Ga. App. 645, 647 (2009). In other words: A declaratory judgment is authorized when there are circumstances showing a necessity for a determination of the dispute to guide and protect the plaintiff from uncertainty and insecurity with regard to the propriety of some future act or conduct, which is properly incident to his alleged rights and which if taken without direction might reasonably jeopardize his interest. Id. at 647-48 (emphasis added). See also S. Gen. Ins. Co. v. Crews, 253 Ga. App. 765, 767 (2002) (affirming dismissal of declaratory judgment action because plaintiff faced no uncertainty regarding future action); Chattahoochee Bancorp, Inc. v. Roberts, 203 Ga. App. 405, 406 (1992) ("A declaratory judgment is not available to a party merely to test the viability of its defenses"); Logan Paving Co. v. Peoples Bank & Trust, 196 Ga. App. 42 (1990) (validity of security deed not proper subject for declaratory judgment where rights had accrued and foreclosure process already started; plaintiff failed to show that it needed direction from the court with respect to future conduct). Here, Levine does not allege any future act or conduct as to which he needs guidance because he has already defaulted on his Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 11 of 15 12 loan. Having done so, he apparently seeks an advisory ruling regarding an anticipated foreclosure. Such advisory opinions are not authorized by Georgia's declaratory judgment statute. St. Marys, 297 Ga. App. at 648; Logan Paving Co., 196 Ga. App. at 42; Milani v. OneWest Bank, FSB, 491 Fed. Appx. 977, 979 (11th Cir. 2012).3 G. Plaintiff's Claim for Injunctive Relief Fails Because the Complaint States No Viable Claim for Relief. A plaintiff cannot obtain injunctive relief when the Complaint fails to state any viable claim for relief on the merits of the underlying causes of action. See McDaniel v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 1:14–CV–2337–WSD, 2016 WL 1071101, at 3 In rejecting a similar claim, in Milani, the Eleventh Circuit stated: As the district court correctly noted, to pursue properly a declaratory judgment under Georgia law "a party must establish that [a declaratory judgment] is necessary to relieve himself of the risk of taking some future action that, without direction, would jeopardize his interests." Porter v. Houghton, 542 S.E.2d 491, 492 (Ga. 2001). No uncertainty exists about any future action by Plaintiff in this case; Plaintiff has already defaulted on the pertinent note. On the facts of this case, a declaratory judgment is unavailable because all material rights have accrued based on past events and what Plaintiff seeks is an advisory opinion on the validity of the future act of another party. See Logan Paving Co. v. Peoples Bank & Trust, 395 S.E.2d 287, 288 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). 491 Fed. Appx. at 979. Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 12 of 15 13 *6 (N.D. Ga. March 7, 2012). Therefore, Levine's claim for injunctive relief should be dismissed. IV. CONCLUSION EverBank and HSBC respectfully request that their Motion to Dismiss be granted and that this action be dismissed with prejudice. This 16th day of December, 2016. Gregory M. Taube s/ Gregory M. Taube Georgia Bar No. 699166 Attorney for Defendants EverBank and HSBC NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 201 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30363 (404) 322-6000 (Phone) (404) 322-6050 (Fax) greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 13 of 15 14 Pursuant to the Civil Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, this is to certify that the foregoing complies with the font and point selections approved by the Court in Local Rule 5.1C. The foregoing was prepared on computer using Times New Roman font (14 point). CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE AS TO FONT SIZE This 16th day of December, 2016. s/ Gregory M. Taube Gregory M. Taube Georgia Bar No. 699166 Attorney for Defendants EverBank and HSBC NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 201 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30363 (404) 322-6000 (Phone) (404) 322-6050 (Fax) greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 14 of 15 15 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day served the within and foregoing MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail in a properly addressed envelope with sufficient postage affixed thereto to ensure delivery to the following: Mr. Sam Levine, pro se Law Office of Sam Levine, LLC 1014 Havenridge Lane, NE Atlanta, GA 30319 This 16th day of December, 2016. Gregory M. Taube s/ Gregory M. Taube Georgia Bar No. 699166 Attorneys for Defendants EverBank and HSBC NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 201 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30363 (404) 322-6000 (Phone) (404) 322-6050 (Fax) greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 15 of 15 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 2 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 3 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 4 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 5 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 6 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 7 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 8 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 9 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 10 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 11 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 12 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 13 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 14 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 15 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 16 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 17 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 18 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 19 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 20 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-2 Filed 12/16/16 Page 21 of 21 Case 1:16-cv-04543-SCJ-CMS Document 4-3 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 1