Such a holding would turn Cascade’s above-cost safe harbor on its head and, therefore, should be summarily rejected. Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 87 Filed 06/26/2008 Page 20 of 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 15 ABBOTT LABORATORIES’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF AN INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) W in st on & S tr aw n L L P 35 W . W ac ke r D ri ve C hi ca go , I L 6 06 01 -9 70 3 III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Abbott Laboratories respectfully requests that the Court grant its motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Dated: June 26, 2008 Winston & Strawn LLP By: ___/s/ James F. Hurst_____ James F. Hurst Attorneys for Defendant ABBOTT LABORATORIES Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 87 Filed 06/26/2008 Page 21 of 21

Such a holding would turn Cascade’s above-cost safe harbor on its head and, therefore, should be summarily rejected. Case 4:07-cv-05985-CW Document 107 Filed 06/26/2008 Page 20 of 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 15 ABBOTT LABORATORIES’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF AN INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) W in st on & S tr aw n L L P 35 W . W ac ke r D ri ve C hi ca go , I L 6 06 01 -9 70 3 III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Abbott Laboratories respectfully requests that the Court grant its motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Dated: June 26, 2008 Winston & Strawn LLP By: ___/s/ James F. Hurst_____ James F. Hurst Attorneys for Defendant ABBOTT LABORATORIES Case 4:07-cv-05985-CW Document 107 Filed 06/26/2008 Page 21 of 21

Alternative proposed orders are attached hereto. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Government Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Appeal and for Certification of Interlocutory Appeal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) Al-Haramain et al. v. Obama et al. (07-cv-109-VRW) (MDL06-cv-1791-VRW) -14- Dated: February 11, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, MICHAEL F. HERTZ Acting Assistant Attorney General DOUGLAS N. LETTER Terrorism Litigation Counsel JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch s/ Anthony J. Coppolino ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel ALEXANDER K. HAAS Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Rm. 6102 Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 514-4782—Fax: (202) 616-8460 Email: tony.coppolino@usdoj.gov Attorneys for the Government Defendants

4044) (sreis@edelson.com) EDELSON MCGUIRE, LLP 30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300 Rancho Santa Margarita, California 92688 Telephone: (949) 459-2124 Facsimile: (949) 459-2123 RAFEY S. BALABANIAN (rbalabanian@edelson.com) BRADLEY BAGLIEN (bbaglien@edelson.com) EDELSON MCGUIRE, LLC 350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300 Chicago, Illinois 60654 Telephone: (312) 589-6370 Facsimile: (312) 589-6378 Case 2:10-cv-05306-ODW-AGR Document 62 Filed 07/18/11 Page 20 of 21 Page ID #:747 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion 10-CV-5306-ODW (AGRx) To Certify the May 11, 2011 Order for Interlocutory Appeal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Sean P. Reis, an attorney, certify that on July 18, 2011, I served the above and foregoing Plaintiff’s Opposition To Defendant’s Motion to Certify the May 11, 2011 Order for Interlocutory Appeal and Stay Action Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), by causing true and accurate copies of such paper to be filed and transmitted to counsel of record via the Court’s CM/ECF electronic filing system. s/ Sean P. Reis_______________ Sean P. Reis EDELSON MCGUIRE LLC Case 2:10-cv-05306-ODW-AGR Document 62 Filed 07/18/11 Page 21 of 21 Page ID #:748

V. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, ARG respectfully requests this Court certify its July 30, 2008 Order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for an immediate appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), stay the proceedings pending the Ninth Circuit s two decisions, or in the alternative, require Plaintiffs to post a bond. // // // // Case 3:07-cv-06211-TEH Document 54 Filed 08/18/2008 Page 13 of 14 Defendant s Motion For Certification Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), a Stay, Or a Security 264782.1 Page 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 D A V IS W R IG H T T R E M A IN E L L P DATED: August 18, 2008 Respectfully submitted, DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP By: /s/ Thomas R. Burke_________ THOMAS R. BURKE RONALD LONDON (admitted pro hac vice) AMBIKA K. DORAN (admitted pro hac vice) Attorneys for Defendant ACTIVE RESPONSE GROUP, INC.

SHARAN NIRMUL (Pro Hac Vice) snirmul@ktmc.com NATHAN HASIUK (Pro Hac Vice) nhasiuk@ktmc.com JONATHAN F. NEUMANN (Pro Hac Vice) jneumann@ktmc.com 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 Telephone: (610) 667-7706 Facsimile: (267) 948-2512 - and – JENNIFER L. JOOST (Bar No. 296164) jjoost@ktmc.com STACEY M. KAPLAN (Bar No. 241989) skaplan@ktmc.com One Sansome Street, Suite 1850 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 400-3000 Facsimile: (415) 400-3001 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Thomas DiBiase and David Steinberg, and Lead Counsel for the Putative Class ROSMAN & GERMAIN LLP DANIEL L. GERMAIN (Bar No. 143334) germain@lalawyer.com 16311 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 788 0877 Facsimile: (818) 788-0885 Case 2:17-cv-03679-SVW-AGR Document 106 Filed 07/18/18 Page 17 of 18 Page ID #:1817 MEMO OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO SNAP DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF AN INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) CASE NO. 2:17-CV-03679-SVW-AGR 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Liaison Counsel for the Putative Class Case 2:17-cv-03679-SVW-AGR Document 106 Filed 07/18/18 Page 18 of 18 Page ID #:1818

Case 4:07-cv-05985-CW Document 83 Filed 06/03/2008 Page 10 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8 ABBOTT LABORATORIES’ MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) - CASE NOS. C 07-5702, C 07-5470, C 07-5985, C 07-6010, C 07-6118 W in st on & S tr aw n L L P 35 W . W ac ke r D ri ve C hi ca go , I L 6 06 01 -9 70 3 CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Abbott respectfully requests that its motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) be granted. Dated: June 3, 2008 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP By: /s/ James F. Hurst James F. Hurst Attorneys for Defendant ABBOTT LABORATORIES Case 4:07-cv-05985-CW Document 83 Filed 06/03/2008 Page 11 of 11

Case 4:07-cv-06010-CW Document 73 Filed 06/03/2008 Page 10 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8 ABBOTT LABORATORIES’ MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) - CASE NOS. C 07-5702, C 07-5470, C 07-5985, C 07-6010, C 07-6118 W in st on & S tr aw n L L P 35 W . W ac ke r D ri ve C hi ca go , I L 6 06 01 -9 70 3 CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Abbott respectfully requests that its motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) be granted. Dated: June 3, 2008 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP By: /s/ James F. Hurst James F. Hurst Attorneys for Defendant ABBOTT LABORATORIES Case 4:07-cv-06010-CW Document 73 Filed 06/03/2008 Page 11 of 11

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 84 Filed 06/03/2008 Page 10 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8 ABBOTT LABORATORIES’ MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) - CASE NOS. C 07-5702, C 07-5470, C 07-5985, C 07-6010, C 07-6118 W in st on & S tr aw n L L P 35 W . W ac ke r D ri ve C hi ca go , I L 6 06 01 -9 70 3 CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Abbott respectfully requests that its motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) be granted. Dated: June 3, 2008 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP By: /s/ James F. Hurst James F. Hurst Attorneys for Defendant ABBOTT LABORATORIES Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 84 Filed 06/03/2008 Page 11 of 11

In light of the “controlling” nature of the question as to which certification is sought and the likelihood that future litigation relating to this and related questions would be materially streamlined if certification is granted, all future proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court with respect to the Omnibus Application should be stayed pending disposition of the interlocutory appeal. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth herein, Appellees respectfully request that this Court (i) amend the Order to include the certification required for interlocutory review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b); and (ii) issue a stay of further litigation relating to the Omnibus Application pending disposition of the appeal. Dated: New York, New York MILBANK, TWEED, HADLEY & McCLOY LLP April 25, 2014 By: /s/ Dennis F. Dunne Dennis F. Dunne Dennis C. O’Donnell 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 530-5000 Fax: (212) 530-5219 David S. Cohen Andrea M. McNamara 1850 K Street N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 835-7500 Fax: (202) 835-7586 Counsel for the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., et al.