Pages 1 - 46

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Before The Honorable Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes, Magistrate Judge 

LUIS MANUEL RODRIGUEZ, et al., ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

 VS. ) NO. 20-CV-23287-DPG 

 ) 

IMPERIAL BRANDS PLC, et al., )

 ) 

 Defendants. )

_______________________________) 

 Miami, Florida 

 Friday, May 6, 2022 

TRANSCRIPT OF OFFICIAL ELECTRONIC SOUND RECORDING

OF PROCEEDINGS

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiffs: 

 RODRIGUEZ TRAMONT & NUNEZ 

 255 Alhambra Circle, Suite 1150 

 Coral Gables, Florida 33134

 BY: PAULINO ANTONIO NUNEZ, JR., ESQ.

 FRANCISCO RAMON RODRIGUEZ, ESQ.

 BERENTHAL & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

 777 Third Avenue, Suite 22-D 

 New York, New York 10017 

 BY: DAVID WILLIAM BERENTHAL, ESQ.

 

 BERENTHAL & ASSOCIATES, P.A. 

 317 Madison Avenue, Suite 405 

 New York, New York 10017 

 BY: JAMES LEON BERENTHAL, ESQ.

 

(APPEARANCES CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE) 

 

Transcribed by: James C. Pence-Aviles, RMR, CRR, CSR No. 13059 

 Official Court Reporter 

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 1 of 59
 2

APPEARANCES: (CONTINUED)

For Defendant Imperial Brands, PLC: 

 NELSON MULLINS BROAD AND CASSEL 

 2 South Biscayne Boulevard 

 One Biscayne Tower, 21st Floor 

 Miami, Florida 33131 

 BY: MARK FRANCIS RAYMOND, ESQ. 

 ALLEN & OVERY LLP 

 1221 Avenue of the Americas

 New York, New York 10020 

 BY: ANDREW RHYS DAVIES, ESQ. 

For Defendant Corporacion Habanos, S.A.: 

 TRENAM KEMKER 

 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 2700 

 Tampa, Florida 33602 

 BY: STEPHANIE CRANE LIEB, ESQ. 

 RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD, KRINSKY 

 & LIEBERMAN, P.C. 

 14 Wall Street, 30th Floor 

 New York, New York 10005 

 BY: MICHAEL R. KRINSKY, ESQ. 

 LINDSEY FRANK, ESQ.

 NATHAN YAFFE, ESQ.

For Defendants WPP PLC, Young & Rubicam LLC, and BCW LLC: 

 WILMER, CUTLER, PICKERING, HALE 

 & DORR LLP 

 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest 

 Washington, DC 20006 

 BY: ASHLEY S. LEEN, ESQ. 

 AKERMAN LLP 

 Three Brickell City Center 

 98 Southeast Seventh Street, Suite 1100 

 Miami, Florida 33131 

 BY: PEDRO ARMANDO FREYRE, ESQ.

 

 

(APPEARANCES CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE) 

 

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 2 of 59
 3

APPEARANCES: (CONTINUED)

For Defendants WPP PLC, Young & Rubicam LLC, and BCW LLC: 

 STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP 

 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 3100 

 Miami, Florida 33131 

 BY: NAIM SHAKIR SURGEON, ESQ. 

 WILMER, CUTLER, PICKERING, HALE 

 & DORR LLP 

 350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2400 

 Los Angeles, California 90071 

 BY: CHRISTOPHER T. CASAMASSIMA, ESQ. 

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 3 of 59
 4

Friday - May 6, 2022 1:00 p.m.

P R O C E E D I N G S

---000---

THE CLERK: Luis Rodriguez, et al., versus Imperial

Brands, PLC, et al., Case Number 20-23287-Civil-Gayles.

Counsel, please state your appearances for the record.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes.

Frank R. Rodriguez from the law firm of Rodriguez Tramont

& Nunez on behalf of the plaintiffs. 

And sitting next to me, out of camera view but will be

popping in and out, is Paulino A. Nunez, my partner, also from

Rodriguez Tramont & Nunez, also on behalf of the plaintiffs.

MR. RAYMOND: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Mark

Raymond, Nelson Mullins, along with my co-counsel, Andrew Rhys

Davies, on behalf of Imperial.

MR. DAVID BERENTHAL: David Berenthal and James

Berenthal from Berenthal & Associates on behalf of the

plaintiffs.

MR. SURGEON: Good afternoon, Your Honor. This is

Naim Surgeon of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan on behalf of the WPP

defendants. 

Also with me are Chris Casamassima and Ashley McLaughlin

Leen from Wilmer Hale on behalf of the WPP defendants and Pedro

Freyre from Akerman LLP on behalf of the WPP defendants.

MR. KRINSKY: For Habanos, Your Honor, Michael

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 4 of 59
 5

Krinsky, Lindsey Frank, Nathan Yaffe of Rabinowitz Boudin and

Stephanie Lieb of Trenam Kemker for Habanos.

THE COURT: All right. So will it be Mr. Rodriguez

for plaintiff?

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Your Honor, yes. And with regard to

the issues relating to Habanos, it will be Mr. Nunez.

THE COURT: And Nunez.

Okay. And then for Imperial, Mr. Raymond; for WPP,

Mr. Surgeon; and for Habanos, Mr. Kinsky?

MR. KRINSKY: Krinsky, yes.

THE COURT: Oh. 

MR. KRINSKY: "Krin."

THE COURT: My apologies. Krinsky.

MR. RAYMOND: Pardon me, Judge.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. RAYMOND: Andrew Rhys Davies will take the lead

for Imperial.

THE COURT: All right. But it will be Mr. Raymond;

right?

MR. RAYMOND: No. It will be Andrew who will be

speaking.

THE COURT: Okay. Hold on. Mr. Davies.

All right. I've got the speakers, then. Thank you.

All right. So by order of reference, from Judge Gayles, I

have the defendants' joint motion for a limited stay. I

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 5 of 59
 6

received a response from the plaintiffs. I received a notice

of filing declaration from Imperial relating to their

correspondence with the UK, and then I received a separate

reply from Habanos.

I have reviewed the matters. I have reviewed the file. I

note that there's a -- there's a scheduling order in place

pursuant to Judge Gayles's order, and there is some discussion

as to any impact on that order. I would appreciate addressing

that.

I will note initially that there was an argument made by

Habanos in their reply contending that plaintiffs do not --

I'll quote -- "Plaintiffs do not so much as refer to the

argument," the argument being that subject matter jurisdictions

under the Federal Sovereign Immunities Act must be decided

before merits discovery.

I reviewed the -- when I saw that, I reviewed the

response, and I did see a statement on Page 1. "Habanos claims

that the discovery order is premature until the upcoming motion

to dismiss is decided as it claims it is subject to sovereign

immunity." And that's the only mention I saw there.

I know -- I know, generally, when somebody doesn't clearly

and -- address an argument, sometimes it's deemed waived, but

here there was a mention of the argument. I just didn't see

any elaboration.

It seems to me that under the case law that Habanos is

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 6 of 59
 7

citing, they contend that they have -- and I'll use the word

"absolute," although maybe not quite, to defer discovery

pending resolution of their argument that there's no subject

matter jurisdiction as to them. So I would like to address

that issue first as to Habanos.

MR. NUNEZ: Please.

THE COURT: So I saw the reply. So let me ask --

Mr. Nunez, I think, is who's going to address Habanos. Did I

get that right?

MR. NUNEZ: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. NUNEZ: May I proceed? May I proceed, Judge?

Yes. Judge -- 

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. NUNEZ: -- our position as to that is twofold.

First, we -- we're the ones who first raised the issue, and

Habanos turned it into a sovereign immunity issue.

What we argued in our complaint -- what we pled in our

complaint and what we will argue in response to the motion to

dismiss, which obviously the Court hasn't, you know, considered

yet, is under the Helms-Burton Act, the statute specifically

says that an agency of the government or a government entity, a

Cuban government entity, should be treated as an agency

under -- under the FSIA. 

But that doesn't mean that the statute actually applies

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 7 of 59
 8

because I don't think that was the intent of Helms-Burton at

all. If it does apply, Your Honor, then there's a commercial

exception to that. And clearly, Habanos -- there's no argument

that Habanos is anything but a commercial corporation.

Clearly, there's an exception to the -- the FSIA or Foreign

Sovereign Immunities Act. 

And -- and the third point, Judge, would be that if, for

some reason, the Court were to consider that -- that they are

entitled to a stay pending resolution of the motion, we would

ask that discovery -- that not interfere with discovery against

any other party because we have individual claims against the

other parties.

But this is not a claim arising under -- under FSIA. This

is a claim arising under Helms-Burton, and Helms-Burton says --

and it started, Your Honor, because the defendants made what I

consider to be a really, you know, kind of absurd argument.

It's very creative on their part, but they argue that Habanos

is a Cuban corporation; and under the Helms-Burton Act you

cannot have a claim based on property owned by a Cuban

corporation.

And that is absolutely not the intent of Helms-Burton.

And in that context, we pointed out that the -- for purposes of

determining the application of Helms-Burton, you look at it as

if it was an entity under the -- the FSIA. But that doesn't

mean that they're entitled to immunity. 

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 8 of 59
 9

And certainly, even under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities

Act, when there's a -- when there's commercial conduct -- and

that's all that Habanos does -- there's an exception. There's

an exception, and it is commercial conduct in the United

States, Judge, because we are suing these -- the --

Helms-Burton has a very broad definition of what is trafficking

in property.

And the trafficking in this case includes these

defendants' use of U.S. companies with their U.S. computer

systems and U.S. networks to market the -- the products that

are stored and/or maintained or managed from the property that

is at issue here.

THE COURT: I'm sorry, Mr. Nunez. You're going into a

lot of detail now.

MR. NUNEZ: Okay. All right.

THE COURT: The first question I have for you was the

issue raised by the plaintiffs that you did not respond to

their argument that they are entitled, according to them,

absolutely, to a stay of discovery pending merits discovery.

Then you told me that that came up because of something

that you had argued and that you're not really traveling under

the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act or subject matter

jurisdiction as to this Habanos entity. I'm trying to get it

straight in terms of what gave rise to this argument, and then

I will hear from Habanos.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 9 of 59
 10

So are you saying that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities

Act has no role in this case? Has limited role in this case?

What -- what is your position vis-a-vis FSIA?

MR. NUNEZ: Right. Judge, I believe it has no role.

And initially, Habanos did not raise it in their papers. They

only raised it when we -- in response to one of their arguments

that there was a court -- Cuban corporation; therefore,

Helms-Burton didn't apply. 

We said under Helms-Burton, you look to the Foreign

Sovereign Immunities Act for definitions. And under the

definitions there, Habanos counts as a Cuban corporation for

purposes -- is an entity that can be sued under the

Helms-Burton Act.

But that's when -- when Habanos first filed their motion

to dismiss, they didn't raise the Foreign Sovereign Immunities

Act at all. They only raise it in response to our argument.

And so I know it's convoluted, Judge. But, again, obviously,

this is -- we're taking a peek at the motions, and it's hard to

go into this without extensive argument. 

But I think --

THE COURT: Well -- but the way they're presenting it

is they're presenting it as, "This is an FSIA case," and the

case law cited at length in the next page says you stay

everything because of the sovereign immunities protection.

MR. NUNEZ: Right.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 10 of 59
 11

THE COURT: So that's what I'm trying to get at.

You're telling me this case -- its only relationship to the

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act is as an aid to define

corporations -- that's your position -- and there's no

sovereign immunity.

So then you go on, and you say there's no sovereign

immunity afforded to Habanos, and you go into the, you know,

commercial exception and all of that.

MR. NUNEZ: Right.

THE COURT: But let me ask -- let's see. I know that

I placed them here.

Mr. Krinsky --

MR. KRINSKY: Yes. Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: -- is it your position -- is it your

position that Habanos is immune from suit under the Federal

Sovereign Immunities Act, as you seem to be indicating in your

reply, even if it's a lawsuit under Helms-Burton?

MR. KRINSKY: Yes, Your Honor. On their -- on

their -- on plaintiffs' allegation in the second amended

complaint, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act is the

exclusive source of jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction.

Plaintiff alleges in the second amended complaint Habanos

is an agency or instrumentality of the Cuban government. That

means, under five Supreme Court cases and I don't know how many

Court of Appeals cases, that jurisdiction only exists under the

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 11 of 59
 12

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. That's our position, and

we're supported by, I think, a legion of authority.

They may want to argue -- apparently, they would want to

argue that Title 3 does away with that, that the Foreign

Sovereign Immunities Act is no longer exclusive jurisdiction.

I'd point Your Honor to a recent case in the District of --

District of Columbia, Exxon v. CUPET, in which the District

Court rejected that -- that contention. But in any event,

that's an issue to be decided.

So until it's decided, this discovery has to be stayed

under the -- under all this law -- this case law we've cited.

They say the commercial activity exception applies even if the

FSIA --

THE COURT: Right.

MR. KRINSKY: -- is --

THE COURT: I -- that's why I kind of stopped him

because I didn't need to go there just yet.

MR. KRINSKY: Okay.

THE COURT: I don't need to look at that just yet.

MR. KRINSKY: I'm sorry, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I'm trying -- I'm at the threshold where

you're saying jurisdiction -- subject matter jurisdiction here

is conferred by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and under

legions of cases, you stay discovery until subject matter

jurisdiction is decided.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 12 of 59
 13

It sounds to me like that's your position.

MR. KRINSKY: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And then Mr. Nunez is saying, "No, this

case" -- I may be exaggerating, but something along the line

of, "This case has nothing to do" -- "does not rely on the

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act for jurisdiction. It relies

on Helms-Burton for jurisdiction." It sounds to me like that's

what he's saying. 

And then you turn back, and you say that issue has been

addressed by a court, and they have to be here under FSIA, or

they're out, whether -- you know, whether -- whether it applies

or -- or an exception applies. That's -- you know, I don't

want to go behind that curtain just yet.

MR. KRINSKY: That's a fair statement, Your Honor.

Yes, I think that's right.

THE COURT: All right. All right. So -- and let's

see.

Have you shared that case with Mr. Nunez?

MR. KRINSKY: I think in the original -- in our

motion, yes. In our motion, it's cited.

THE COURT: I'm sorry.

MR. KRINSKY: Not the motion for a stay but our motion

to dismiss. It was cited.

THE COURT: I see.

All right. So you are aware of that case, Mr. Nunez?

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 13 of 59
 14

MR. NUNEZ: Yes, Your Honor. Again, that wasn't their

initial position, but I know that they have cited it in

their -- in their motion to dismiss the amended complaint -- or

the second amended complaint, yes.

THE COURT: So -- so would you agree that -- because,

see, this is sort of going beyond the motion to stay. This is

requiring looking now at the motion to dismiss to determine if

this is legitimately under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities

Act, in which case there's no dispute how that works because of

the -- the immunity from litigation cases that have been cited.

So would you agree, Mr. Nunez, that if, upon review of

that case that is being cited by Mr. Krinsky, I find it to be

applicable and persuasive, then they would be -- then Habanos,

by itself, would be entitled to a stay just on those -- on that

basis?

MR. NUNEZ: Well, Your Honor, I would just say on

the -- on the peek that the motions, which I think is what

Your Honor is alluding to, Your Honor, I think, could also

consider whether the commercial exception would apply. 

But certainly, if you don't consider that, then I would

agree that as to Habanos only, that issue -- obviously, you

don't consider the response to their motion. Then it would be,

you know, the stay as to discovery as to Habanos.

THE COURT: Right, but I don't think -- I think that

the application of the immunity is just on the front end. Then

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 14 of 59
 15

you decide if they're entitled to it or not if they're a

commercial entity. I don't know, and that's why I kept saying

I don't think I need to go that far just yet.

I just need -- I think the issue is whether this case --

the jurisdiction in this case is based on the FSIA or

Helms-Burton. Mr. Krinsky says he has a case, "No way it can

be under Helms-Burton. If it's here, it has to be under FSIA."

I think I've kind of clarified the positions of each

party. Do you agree?

MR. NUNEZ: Yes, Your Honor. I agree that that's --

that's the positions of each side.

I know that the case he referred to from the -- from the

DC Circuit -- or I'm sorry -- Delaware. My recollection is

that that case actually held that there was jurisdiction over

the entity there but no commercial exception. 

But I'm not -- but I understand Your Honor is making a

point before getting to the commercial exception. And right

now, I cannot dispute what Mr. Krinsky said on that issue. I

will say that.

THE COURT: All right. All right. All right. That

clarifies the situation. As to that issue, that's unique to

Habanos.

All right. Then I also wanted to address -- just to -- to

bring up some points, the -- the plaintiffs' memorandum cites

to the Court's discovery practices handbook. Now, I pulled my

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 15 of 59
 16

latest copy of the local rules. I do recall a discovery

practices section in the local rules. I looked through my

current version, and I could not find it.

And I was hoping plaintiffs might be able to point me to

where I can find that in the current version, which is revised

December 1st, 2021.

MR. NUNEZ: Your Honor, someone -- I know that we have

multiple lawyers on the call, and the answer to that, I

think -- and that can best be given by David Berenthal. Again,

I -- you know, I wasn't -- I'm prepared to argue generally, but

that specific item, I don't know.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DAVID BERENTHAL: Hello, Your Honor.

I believe -- and, again, it's been a while since I've --

since I've worked on that. I believe there was a reference in

the local rules and perhaps a cite on a website that referred

to the discovery practices.

I am trying to do two things at once to find it again.

I'm not sure -- I believe our footnote may have also referred

to where it was located. But if I am not mistaken,

Your Honor's asking me where the discovery practices is

actually located?

THE COURT: Well, I'm looking at Discovery

Practices -- I'm looking at Southern District Local Rules,

Appendix A, Discovery Practices Handbook,

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 16 of 59
 17

Roman Numeral I.D(5). 

And I do -- from past experience, I do remember that, but

I'm not sure whether it has survived. And you're relying on

that, and this case that you cite, Flecha, cites to it. And I

just wasn't sure if that was still current. That's basically

the nature of my question.

MR. DAVID BERENTHAL: To my knowledge, it's still

current. This was drafted -- that -- that portion comes from

an item that I drafted about a month -- a month and a half ago,

and it was taken right off the website. 

If I can have -- while argument continues, I will go look

it up and find the current update from the website.

THE COURT: All right. I appreciate that.

All right. Then let's see. I had another question.

Mr. Rodriguez, I just wanted to highlight this from your

response just, again, to make sure we're all on the same page

because on Page 9, you cite to the Fernandez case, and I

happened to be working on that one also. So I'm familiar with

it.

In that case, only one plaintiff, who's still alive, could

survive -- could continue. And the others, who were -- who

were not original owners but were inheritors or, in some

fashion, descendants of the original family members, were

dismissed.

I note on Page 9, where you're arguing about delay, you

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 17 of 59
 18

acknowledge that, "Several court orders in this district have

interpreted the effect of this statute as extinguishing any

claim upon the death of a claimant, although no court order

known to plaintiffs involved an already-litigating claimant."

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Right.

THE COURT: Now, that is the situation here. You're

concerned about, unfortunately, when some of the current

plaintiffs might pass on; is that correct?

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, Your Honor.

Just to give you an idea or a sense of the -- you know,

the plaintiffs that are all family members of mine, my uncle

Luis is 95 years old.

THE COURT: Right. I understand. I just thought, as

it stands right now, under the law, he was alive at the time of

the filing of the complaint.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. Yeah. Yeah. All --

THE COURT: So under common rules, his claims would go

to his estate under normal rules. So --

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Right.

THE COURT: -- do you have a concern about that going

the other way?

MR. RODRIGUEZ: And I -- yes.

THE COURT: Is there case law out there that would

say, contrary to normal rules, when a plaintiff dies -- these

particular plaintiffs -- if they die, their cases are gone?

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 18 of 59
 19

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah. Your Honor, I -- look, I

would -- I would agree with what Your Honor is inferring. I

agree that what should happen is all existing claimants, the

plaintiffs in this case -- should anyone pass like one has,

my -- my aunt to date -- that all those claims -- the rights

would go to the estate. 

Okay. But since there's a certain amount of

uncertainty -- I think Your Honor is right, and I think that's

the way it should work. But to the extent that there's a

certain amount of uncertainty -- I've not seeing an order.

There may be one. I haven't seen an order either way. 

And our -- I think there -- it's not illegitimate to have

a concern that -- I mean, I -- speaking for myself, I'm -- you

know, I -- as -- I try to be dispassionate about this just as a

lawyer, and the reasoning behind the orders that relate to

persons that have -- that have obtained their claim via

succession -- to me, it makes no sense. 

But that's what -- you know, obviously, I'm -- I respect

what the Court's -- the orders, and I have to. As a lawyer, I

respect the orders that have come down. I -- you know, just

like I agree with you that it would make no sense for --

THE COURT: I'm sorry. I didn't express any opinion.

All I said is common -- common practice.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay. I --

THE COURT: If the plaintiff passes during

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 19 of 59
 20

litigation --

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Right.

THE COURT: -- then the estate is substituted. That's

sort of like common law.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay.

THE COURT: So -- and then I wanted to point out the

case that you cited, Fernandez, I'm familiar with.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Right.

THE COURT: In that one, the plaintiffs who were

eliminated were -- I mean, it was left out -- I believe there's

still just one lady there as a plaintiff. 

So I just wanted to just highlight that -- the situation

here. As it stands right now, there's no case that would

eliminate one of the current plaintiffs' -- one of the original

plaintiffs' claims if one of them passed like -- as you said,

one of them has passed away. 

That's -- I didn't want to belabor that too much. I just

wanted to highlight that.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: And I didn't mean to attribute any of

my colorful, you know, language to Your Honor. Yeah.

Your Honor, I agree. Yes, that's correct.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. All right. So -- all

right. Those were a couple of little things that popped out at

me and I wanted to -- to point out.

Now, the other thing I wanted to look at is this reply

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 20 of 59
 21

declaration that was filed on behalf of Imperial. I'll note

that Imperial is joining with the other defendants in asking

for a stay of discovery until an answer is filed, but then

Imperial has an extra request, like, a subcategory request,

pending this business of the UK Secretary of State. 

And in reply, Imperial filed a notice of declaration, and

I'm not quite sure -- and maybe there's more materials that I'm

not looking at right now.

But the letter from the Department of International Trade

from Tristan Breslin says, and I quote, "It is a criminal

offense under Article 2 of the Extraterritorial U.S.

Legislation," yada yada, "to comply, directly or indirectly,

with any proscribed sanctions set out in the Annex," which I

imagine Helms-Burton sanctions are in there. And the wording I

wanted to zero in on was "to comply, directly or indirectly,

with any proscribed sanctions."

And, counsel for Imperial, explain to me -- and it's

probably here somewhere -- how does that translate to not being

able to defend a case at all? Because it says here "comply

with sanctions."

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Thank you, Your Honor. Andrew Rhys

Davies for Imperial.

The wording in the letter that Your Honor just read is a

summary of the regulation itself, and you can find the

regulation itself at Docket Entry 14-2. And what that says is

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 21 of 59
 22

that a UK entity like Imperial must not comply, directly or

indirectly, actively or by deliberate omission, with any

requirement or prohibition, including requests of foreign

courts, based on or resulting directly or indirectly from

Helms-Burton.

So that is why we cannot defend ourselves -- or Imperial

cannot defend itself without prior authorization from the UK

Secretary of State for International Trade. That's what this

letter is -- is summarizing.

THE COURT: So requests from foreign courts, meaning

you can't comply with a court order?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Without authorization, correct,

Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. So then the authorization you

had so far was to engage in the original motion to dismiss

practice that has kind of blossomed into the third round of

motions to dismiss.

What about the issues relating to scheduling and so on?

Did you obtain permission for that? My question is how have

you operated within those bounds?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: I understand the question. Thank

you, Your Honor.

When we initially sought authorization at the beginning of

the case, we sought plenary authorization. And that's at

Docket Entry 14, Paragraph 3; Docket Entry 15-1, Paragraphs 4

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 22 of 59
 23

and 5. When the authorization came, that request for plenary

authorization was not granted. It was limited to filing and

litigating a motion to dismiss.

And so with the things that the plaintiffs say that we

have done, we think they are all well within the scope of the

existing limited authority.

The motion for leave to amend and the WPP depositions were

all part and parcel of litigating the motions to dismiss, and

then we moved to put off entry of the scheduling order

precisely because Imperial's authority is currently limited to

filing and litigating a motion to dismiss. And that's, again,

Docket Entry 217, Paragraph 6; Docket Entry 222 at 3 to 4.

So we think that we have operated clearly within the scope

of the limited authorization that we have so far. And, you

know, we renewed the request for plenary authorization to the

UK government as soon as there was a change of circumstance

that could warrant a renewed request. 

Like -- regulators, like judges, don't entertain just pure

requests for reargument. On April 7th, 2022, Judge Gayles

said, "No. We're going to go forward with a scheduling order."

We promptly then asked the UK government for authorization to

defend the case in its entirety.

THE COURT: So you're saying that your renewed request

was granted by which order from Judge Gayles?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Judge Gayles, April 7th, 2022,

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 23 of 59
 24

denied the defendants' request to put off the scheduling order

until after the motions to dismiss.

At that point, we regarded that as a change of

circumstance that would -- or could justify going back to the

British government to say, you know, "You previously authorized

us only to litigate a motion to dismiss. Now it is possible

the U.S. Court may be about to enter a scheduling order

requiring additional things to happen. So we are coming back

to you and renewing our request for authorization to defend the

case in its entirety." 

We made that application, and as the letter that

Your Honor quoted reflects, it was apparently received, and the

British government is considering it and saying that they will

tell us the outcome in due course.

THE COURT: All right. And after Judge Gayles --

so -- so you sought that leave once you got Docket Entry 223 on

April the 7th, and then did you comply with Judge Gayles's

directive to file a joint scheduling report? I see you did on

April 22nd.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Yes, but the request, Your Honor,

was to have dates that keyed off either -- well, that keyed off

the -- the grant of authorization.

So, yes, everything we've done, everything we have been

proposing, is consistent with a very difficult situation that

Imperial is facing, which is that it's not allowed to do

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 24 of 59
 25

anything else without prior authorization or else it commits a

criminal offense and subjects itself to an unlimited criminal

fine.

THE COURT: So are you saying the joint proposed

scheduling report -- I'm looking at it as I look. Is it saying

that you don't have authorization to do any of this?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Yes, absolutely, Your Honor. Yes.

THE COURT: I'm scrolling through it.

"Other Helpful Information"?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: That's right, Your Honor. That's

one place. It appears also in the introductory paragraph where

we talk about the fact that we are simultaneously seeking a

stay. It's in "Other Helpful Information."

And then when we get on Page 7, where the parties set

forth their dueling proposals for case scheduling, you know,

all of the dates, we have a footnote. We've said that, you

know, this should all be triggered off the letter of -- of when

the Secretary of State actually grants authorization for

Imperial to proceed.

THE COURT: All right. Okay. All right. Those were

the discrete things that jumped at me. I will hear from

Imperial now. As I told you, I have reviewed this -- these

submissions.

So let me hear from Imperial on your -- your request on

behalf of all counsel. I don't think I need to hear from all

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 25 of 59
 26

counsel to repeat the same thing, just briefly [sic] summary

and then your specific request and the interplay between those

two.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you.

Maybe I start by answering the question that Your Honor

asked at the outset, which is what is the impact of the

requested stay on the scheduling order that Judge Gayles

entered last week. And I think the answer is that it could be

very limited, if any.

The scheduling order that Judge Gayles entered

contemplates fact discovery ending at the end of January 2023

and a trial in July 2023. So there is a lot of time.

Now, the motion to dismiss -- the joint motion to dismiss

and Imperial's motion to dismiss will be fully briefed less

than three weeks from now, May 25th, 2022. And it's up to the

Court, of course, but the Court may want to schedule argument

on those motions. 

And I don't know what other counsel's availability is, but

I can make myself available for argument any day between

May 26th and the end of June. So it really could be a very

limited stay that actually ends up being required.

Now, in terms of the discovery stay, as Your Honor is well

aware, there are two limbs to it. There's the preliminary peek

at the merits of the motion to dismiss, and then there's the

weighing of the relative harms, and I'll address briefly the

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 26 of 59
 27

preliminary peek.

The defendants have made four weighty case-dispositive

arguments. They're not, as the plaintiffs say in their

response, pleading defects. There is no basis for personal

jurisdiction. On their third attempt, the plaintiffs still

haven't pleaded a prima facie case of personal jurisdiction

over Imperial. There is no nexus between this lawsuit and this

forum other than the plaintiffs' residence.

And on the personal jurisdiction piece of the motion, I'll

point out that the Department of Justice has said in its

statement of interest that Imperial's personal jurisdiction

motion raises substantial questions similar to those that have

caused other courts in this district to dismiss Helms-Burton

cases.

We've also argued that Congress lacks legislative

jurisdiction to regulate and oversees entities' use of real

property in Cuba for purposes of a non-U.S./Cuban cigar

business. That constitutional challenge is sufficiently

substantial that the Department of Justice, in its statement of

interest, requests an opportunity to be heard on it.

Third, we have argued that the plaintiff --

THE COURT: I'm sorry. While you're on that subject,

let's just make sure we're on the right page there. They said

they want to be heard, but they're saying, "Wait until the case

is at issue." 

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 27 of 59
 28

Is that basically -- my recollection correct?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Correct, Judge.

What they have asked -- actually, they've requested that

the Court resolve the personal jurisdiction question first

because it could obviate the need to get to the legislative

jurisdiction issue. But they've asked that if you get to the

legislative jurisdiction issue, the constitutional challenge,

then the Department of Justice wants to be heard on it. So

those are the first two arguments.

The third argument is that the plaintiffs lack standing

because this lawsuit doesn't seek to remedy a concrete injury

caused by the defendants, and the principal problem they have

there is that they concede that we did not own this property at

the time that the defendants allegedly used it.

We have recognized that Judge Gayles has held that other

Helms-Burton plaintiffs pleaded standing, but he has not had

the opportunity to address the actual arguments that we are

raising. 

We've also pointed out that the question of Article 3

standing in Helms-Burton cases is currently pending before the

Eleventh Circuit in three cases that were argued in October

last year. And the en banc Eleventh Circuit, recently in

February of this year, heard argument in another case that

raises the whole question of standing in cases alleging

statutory violations.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 28 of 59
 29

THE COURT: And that is all still pending? We have no

idea when those opinions will come down?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Correct, Your Honor, although the

Helms-Burton cases were argued, as I said, six months ago. The

Eleventh Circuit asked for input from the Department of

Justice, which was filed, I think, around a month ago. So the

Eleventh Circuit now has the input that it had requested from

the Department of Justice.

THE COURT: And that was submitted a month ago?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Approximately a month ago,

Your Honor. Maybe my colleagues who aren't arguing can

confirm, but that's my recollection.

THE COURT: All right. Well, that's close enough.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: And then finally, this -- the second

amended complaint, their third attempt, doesn't state a claim

for relief. There are a whole bunch of problems with it, and

they're not just pleading defects.

I mean, there's -- for example, the face of the complaint

itself alleges that the -- that the use of the property -- the

last use alleged is in 2010, which is outside the two-year

statute of repose. So these are not just pleading issues.

And if I could just address two things that the plaintiffs

say in their -- in their response that they filed last night,

they say -- first of all, they say that Your Honor already held

that the second amended complaint was not futile when you

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 29 of 59
 30

granted permission to file it. That is obviously not correct.

Your Honor's March 9th, 2022, order that granted leave to

amend said, and I'm quoting, "Defendants' futility-based

objections to the motion to amend should be more fully and

fairly addressed in the context of any future motions to

dismiss that defendants may file in response to the second

amended complaint."

Finally, they say that Judge Gayles's entry of the

scheduling order indicates that he decided that there was no

basis for a stay. That is obviously not correct, either, given

that minutes after he entered the scheduling order, Judge

Gayles referred the stay motion to Your Honor for a decision.

Now, the next piece of the -- of the test for a discovery

stay involves balancing the relative harms. And here, the

balance tips very sharply in favor of the defendants. It's

much more serious here than -- than what's usually at issue,

which is the waste of party and court resources of conducting

discovery that -- that may well turn out to be unnecessary.

As to Imperial, there's no reason to require Imperial to

commit a criminal offense by engaging in discovery without

authorization in circumstances where the case could and should

be dismissed at the threshold on legal grounds without any need

for discovery.

Then looking at what is the harm that's alleged on the

other side, where the plaintiffs refer to the fact that some of

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 30 of 59
 31

them are elderly and/or in poor health, they made exactly this

issue in August of 2020 when we moved for a stay at the outset

of the case. Judge Gayles considered this very issue. It's

Docket Entry Number 50 at -- it's the transcript at Pages 24

and 29.

And Judge Gayles decided that the remedy for that risk was

to grant the plaintiffs' permission to take the depositions of

the two elderly plaintiffs to preserve their testimony. But

remarkably, the plaintiffs never did it. And that is

consistent with the lack of urgency they've shown throughout

the case, which is fine. It's their case, but our point is

purely that they don't have a credible claim of urgency now.

In addition to not taking up Judge Gayles on his grant of

leave to take these depositions, it took the plaintiffs 14

months to file this case after Helms-Burton went into effect.

It took them four months to file it after they told us they

were going to. And for the last year, they have effectively

locked our ability to secure a motion to dismiss ruling by

continually amending the complaint. 

Your Honor asked me also to address the piece of their --

that concerned Imperial's distinct request for a stay of all

proceedings until the Secretary of State for International

Trade has adjudicated the request for authorization. On that,

we think that the same three factors that Judge Gayles weighed

back in September of 2020 require a stay here.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 31 of 59
 32

First of all, in the Turner case, the Eleventh Circuit has

said, "You have to consider international comity." As we've

explained, Imperial is prohibited, on pain of criminal

sanction, from proceeding beyond the motion to dismiss without

prior authorization.

That's a reflection of the UK's view that the

extraterritorial application of this statute violates the

interests of the United Kingdom, but there is a process through

which the United Kingdom government can, if it thinks there

would be serious damage either to Imperial's interests or to

the UK's interest, permit Imperial to defend itself. So that

is the comity piece of this.

The next element that the Eleventh Circuit has said has to

be considered is fairness to the parties. And this, again, is

very limited relief. Judge Gayles previously said the Court

isn't being asked here to defer to UK law but only to give

Imperial time to get the authorization it needs to defend it --

itself. Again, that's the transcript of the September 2020

hearing, Docket Entry Number 50 at 14 and Pages 28 to 29.

And actually, then there would be no incremental delay as

a result of Imperial's separate request for a stay. To the

extent the authorization is granted before the motion to

dismiss is adjudicated, there will actually be no need for this

separate stay.

Then the next element is judicial efficiency. We think

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 32 of 59
 33

plainly here judicial efficiency is promoted by following an

orderly process, allowing Imperial some time to obtain

authorization, especially as there are still motions to dismiss

pending.

It's certainly preferrable to putting Imperial in an

impossible position and just creating unnecessary litigation

here, whether it's default proceedings, discovery sanctions,

you know, alternatively, requiring a violation of the UK

criminal law and opening up criminal proceedings in the United

Kingdom.

And then finally, the Eleventh Circuit has said that you

can't grant a stay that's immoderate. Well, this wouldn't be

immoderate because it will end when the Secretary of State

decides the application. But if the Court has a concern about

it, you can certainly put a time limit on the stay. 

For example, the Court could say that Imperial has a stay

of all proceedings until, for example, 60 or 45 days after

Imperial's answer would otherwise be due under Rule 12(a)(4)(A)

if the motion to dismiss were to be denied, which, of course,

we think it shouldn't be.

THE COURT: I'm sorry. So let me -- let me get it

straight.

On the global motion from everybody, you want a stay,

regardless of whether you (Inaudible), until an answer is due,

assuming that, you know, the motions to dismiss are not fully

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 33 of 59
 34

dispositive.

But then even after that happens, if Imperial hasn't

gotten permission yet, then you want to keep on doing it just

for Imperial until you get permission. And that's where you're

saying tack on the extra 60 or 90 days?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Yes, exactly, Your Honor. 

I mean, just -- I think -- the way I think about it -- if

the Court were to deny Imperial's motion to dismiss, then the

next thing to happen would be the answer, which, under 

Rule 12(a)(4)(A), would be due, I think, 14 days after the

decision denying the motion to dismiss. That's not enough

time, and if authorization hasn't been granted by then, we're

going to end up with emergency motion practice then. 

So what I'm suggesting is a rule that Imperial has a stay

of further proceedings until, say, 60 days or 45 days after the

date when Imperial's answer would otherwise be due under 

Rule 12.

THE COURT: So you're saying that -- you're not --

you're saying that it's not enough, if a global stay is

granted, to give Imperial that time. You're saying, on top of

that, an extra 60 or 90 days for the UK to keep thinking about

it?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Well, that -- yes, and that might

not be necessary because there is, I hope, every possibility

that the UK will grant authorization before the Court

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 34 of 59
 35

adjudicates the motion to dismiss. The risk I'm trying to

address is that if the Court denies our motion to dismiss,

Imperial then has to either answer or fail to answer.

So what I'm asking for is -- is just avoiding an emergency

in the event that the motion to dismiss is denied, and that's

why I'm suggesting giving us some further time beyond the 14

days that Imperial would normally have to file an answer, just

to ensure --

THE COURT: Right, but as you know -- as you know,

this would be by report and recommendation. So you would get

at least some time frame there.

I just -- I just don't see -- I honestly thought that

the -- Imperial's motion to stay was a subset of the global

motion. You're now saying no, it has a tail.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: It has a tail, which might not be

necessary.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: So, Your Honor -- I mean, one way to

handle this -- you know, if Your Honor were inclined to grant

the discovery stay that all of the defendants are requesting,

one way to handle this, if you're not prepared at this point to

grant the additional stay to Imperial, is to say that that

request can be renewed in the future. 

For example, if Your Honor were to recommend that Judge

Gayles deny the motion to dismiss, then maybe at that point

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 35 of 59
 36

we'd come back and renew that portion of the motion.

THE COURT: Right. Right. You see where I'm coming

from?

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Absolutely, Your Honor.

THE COURT: There is -- there is time there if what

you're saying happens and the UK starts thinking about it.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Absolutely, Judge, yes.

THE COURT: All right. Anything else? I do have some

matters to attend to, but I want to give a full opportunity. I

don't know that, of the general motion, the WPP defendants or

Habanos need to add anything, but I'll give you a brief

opportunity if you feel that Mr. Rhys Davies forgot something

that's peculiar to you.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Judge, I'm -- I'm intruding, but I

meant to address your question about the discovery handbook. I

don't know whether it's still in effect, but the version of

it -- 

MR. DAVID BERENTHAL: It is not. I'm sorry. I

thought I was on mute at the same time. I'm sorry for

interrupting.

As I told the Court, I would look into it. No, my

footnote was referring to the original text. I did a little

additional research now. The handbook was removed in 2015 from

the local rules.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 36 of 59
 37

All right. That clarifies that.

All right. Any comments, brief comments, from the WPP

defendants or Habanos? I already -- on purpose, at the

beginning, I addressed the FSIA issue with Habanos. Do you

have anything else? 

I guess I'll hear from Mr. Krinsky first -- and, again,

briefly -- and then from Mr. Surgeon.

You're muted. Muted.

MR. KRINSKY: Sorry, Your Honor.

No, I think we're fine for the moment.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Surgeon?

MR. SURGEON: Your Honor, in addition to the arguments

that Mr. Davies raised, I think, on behalf of the WPP

defendants, it's important for us to raise with respect to why

we think a stay is also appropriate -- is that the issue of

personal jurisdiction with respect to the WPP defendants has

not been cured, even though we are now on the third complaint

with two amendments. 

And so, you know, as the Court is aware, plaintiff was

permitted to take jurisdictional discovery. There has been

extensive and expensive jurisdictional discovery, including two

30(b)(6) depositions. And as it stands, the second amended

complaint still does not state a basis for specific personal

jurisdiction over any of the WPP defendants in Florida. And we

think that that has to be taken into account and is a reason

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 37 of 59
 38

why a stay would be appropriate.

In addition, one of the challenges that going forward with

discovery would present is the fact that what has been

established in jurisdictional discovery is that the advertising

that took place was done by Spanish entities that are not based

in the United States.

Those entities would be subject to the same proscriptions

that we're encountering with respect to Imperial where the

plaintiff were to seek, through the currently named defendants,

to serve discovery that would ultimately have to be answered by

those defendants.

And so we think, again, given that there has not been a

basis stated for specific personal jurisdiction in this

district, that militates in favor of a stay so that the Court

can finally rule on the motions to dismiss that have been

pending where we have stated, from the first motion to dismiss

to the third, that there is no basis alleged for specific

personal jurisdiction in the complaint. 

And the current second amended complaint has ultimately

failed to cure that. We don't believe the plaintiff can make

out a basis for specific personal jurisdiction against the

defendants that haven't been named; and therefore, we think

that the stay wouldn't be appropriate for that reason also.

THE COURT: I'm sorry. You lost me with the Spanish

entities.

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 38 of 59
 39

What's -- what's the -- what's the issue with them?

MR. SURGEON: The issue, Your Honor, is that the

jurisdictional discovery that was taken showed that the

entities that purported to -- to perform these advertising

activities are entities that are based in Spain, not here in

the U.S.

And so the complaint states allegations against WPP, PLC,

against BCW, and against Y&R, none of which -- and those are

not -- those are not the parties who performed the actual

advertising activity. And so what I'm saying is that the

complaint doesn't even name the proper defendants, and then the

Spanish defendants would not be subject to jurisdiction before

the Court in any event.

And so the -- what I was trying to explain with respect to

discovery is if plaintiff were to seek discovery and the

discovery would have to be answered by these Spanish affiliates

that are not subject to jurisdiction and not even properly

before the Court, it presents a similar complication to what

we're discussing with Imperial with respect to having to seek

permission to litigate -- to -- to respond to the discovery, is

what I'm saying.

THE COURT: I'm sorry. Who would have to seek

permission from whom?

MR. SURGEON: The WPP defendants would have to seek

similar permission from the government in order for these

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 39 of 59
 40

Spanish entities to be able to respond to the discovery or

participate in this litigation.

THE COURT: From the government of Spain?

MR. SURGEON: Well, yes, Your Honor, because they

are -- they are -- they are --

THE COURT: I'm sorry.

MR. SURGEON: (Inaudible).

THE COURT: Was discovery already conducted as to the

Spanish entities?

MR. SURGEON: No, Your Honor. There has been

jurisdictional discovery only with respect to the entities that

have been named in the complaint.

THE COURT: All right. So the wrinkle that you're

putting in this whole thing is that for WPP defendants to

respond to discovery, they would need to turn around and get

discovery from Spanish entities, who are prohibited from

furnishing such discovery by the Spanish government?

MR. SURGEON: That is the potential wrinkle,

Your Honor, and I don't mean to suggest that that is a

concession that we think that they -- that this information is

in the possession, custody, or control of these defendants such

that they would be required to respond. But that is

potentially where -- where this comes out.

THE COURT: All right. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Let me hear briefly from plaintiffs' counsel

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 40 of 59
 41

addressing the points that were made by the various defendants.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Right, Judge. Thank you, Your Honor. 

Let me start off by emphasizing a case that we cited --

plaintiff cited in their memo on Page 3, that Cabrera v.

Progressive Behavioral Science case. It's a Southern District

2019 case. It stands for the proposition that a stay of

discovery pending determination of a motion to dismiss is the

exception rather than the rule. 

And the case goes on to sort of give a -- not "sort of"

but give an analysis, and it states that a motion to dismiss

that proposes to dispose of the entire action may serve as good

cause to stay discovery but only if there's a strong likelihood

that the motion will dispose of the action in its entirety.

And that issue of whether it's a strong likelihood that

the motion will dispose of the issue in its entirety has

already been brought up to the Court because in -- in opposing

the plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend the amended

complaint, the parties essentially re- -- reargue the points

that they made in their earlier motions to dismiss and added

some additional points that they're likely to make in the

upcoming motion to dismiss.

And the Court, in evaluating the argument put forth by the

defendants that they should not allow amendment to the

complaint because it would be futile, determined that

apparently the case that was being made by the defendants of

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 41 of 59
 42

futility -- because they're, you know, based on the strength of

their motion, being likely to dispose of the case -- the Court

wasn't persuaded and granted our motion for leave to amend.

The issue -- again, that's a peek. The Court certainly

took a peek into the motions to dismiss at that point in time.

Subsequently, when -- when the issue came up of the -- the

scheduling order --

THE COURT: Right.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: -- the defendants took the position

that the judge -- I'm sorry -- that the Court should postpone

any entering of a scheduling order, again, pending the

resolutions of the motion to dismiss --

THE COURT: Right.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: -- because --

THE COURT: Right. Mr. Rodriguez, I'm sorry. I've

read all that already. 

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay.

THE COURT: Do you have anything specific? Because

I'm running short on real estate here.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay. Yes. Let me -- let me get,

then, to the point, you know, where the rubber meets the road.

International comity is a two-way street, Judge. And, you

know, for the defendants to -- Imperial to argue that they

should be entitled, for the sake of international comity, that

the Court should defer to allow the UK commission to evaluate

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 42 of 59
 43

and give permission -- they certainly have not given that same

comity or respect to the processes in the judicial system of

the United States.

So their -- I would argue that their entitlement to comity

should have a limit. We've already gotten, I think, five

months previously, and that should have been enough to get them

the -- the permission necessary.

I think that it is somewhat telling that the -- the

address -- and we're getting this from, you know,

communications that we've received recently. But the address

of the body -- the email address of the body that the --

Imperial is seeking permission from -- the email address is

Blocking.Regulation@trade.gov.uk. 

You know, it's a blocking -- you know, this is all about,

you know, blocking statutes and preventing the parties in the

United States from being able to implement the Helms-Burton

Act. And, again, if you seek international comity, you should

have been in a position to have given comity and given some

respect to our system, and that hasn't been the case.

I would also harp on the -- their participation up to now

on the issue of the scheduling order. I, again, Your Honor,

have some questions about that. I'm not sure that litigating

the issue of the scheduling order comports with the allegedly

limited permission that they've been given already. 

I'm not sure that there's any evidence or any indication

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 43 of 59
 44

that there's been any -- there's ever been a UK party that has

been sanctioned. I'm not saying there isn't. I have not seen

any evidence of any UK party that has been sanctioned in a

position similar to what Imperial is in now. And it seems that

that's nothing more than sort of a transparent effort to,

again, block the implementation of the Helms-Burton law in the

United States.

With regard to the -- you know, the age and health of my

family members, again, I -- again, we've discussed --

THE COURT: I'm sorry. I think we've discussed that

fully, sir.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: But not completely, Judge. The -- you

know -- I mean, very quickly. At some point, it does matter.

You know, people should get their day in court. And, you know,

these folks -- whether -- whether the claim survives is one

issue, whether it survives to the heirs of the present

plaintiffs. That's an issue we've already discussed.

The other issue is that the -- the -- the plaintiffs

themselves should get their day in court so that they,

themselves, could benefit by the wrongs that have been -- that

have been committed to them, and they should be able to have --

and they, themselves, should get the benefit of an enforcement

of the Helms-Burton Act.

And then the -- well, I -- based on the -- Your Honor's --

Your Honor's schedule and the fact that it's clear to me that

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 44 of 59
 45

Your Honor has read our paper, I'll, you know, rely on the

arguments that have been made. 

Can I have just a second, Judge, to just confer with

Mr. Nunez?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah. Last point with regard to WPP,

Judge.

Worst case for plaintiffs, best case for WPP, there would

still be jurisdiction, if not in the Southern District, in New

York. So that's not a case-dispositive circumstance as it

relates to WPP.

That's the last point I'd make. Thank you for your time,

Judge. Appreciate it greatly.

THE COURT: Well, thank you very much.

My apologies, but I fit you in out of my criminal duty

calendar, and I have people waiting. So I just wanted to make

sure everybody had their say, and we will then issue a report

and recommendation to Judge Gayles on this matter.

Thank you very much.

MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Judge.

MR. RHYS DAVIES: Thank you, Your Honor. Have a good

weekend.

MR. RAYMOND: Thank you, Your Honor.

MR. KRINSKY: Good afternoon.

MR. SURGEON: Thank you, Your Honor. Have a great

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 45 of 59
 46

weekend.

MR. KRINSKY: Good afternoon, everybody.

THE COURT: All right. We're adjourned.

(Proceedings adjourned.) 

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 46 of 59
CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIBER

 I certify that the foregoing is a true and correct 

transcript, to the best of my ability, of the above pages of 

the official electronic sound recording provided to me by the 

U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, of the 

proceedings taken on the date and time previously stated in the 

above matter. 

 I further certify that I am neither counsel for,

related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in

which this hearing was taken, and further that I am not

financially nor otherwise interested in the outcome of the

action.

DATE: Saturday, May 21, 2022 

 /S/ James C. Pence-Aviles 

James C. Pence-Aviles, RMR, CRR, CSR No. 13059 

 U.S. Court Reporter 

 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

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 47 of 59
-

---000 [1] 1:4/3

/

/S [1] 1:47/20

0

000 [1] 1:4/3

1

10005 [1] 1:2/12

10017 [2] 1:1/19 1:1/21

10020 [1] 1:2/6

101 [1] 1:2/9

1100 [1] 1:2/19

1150 [1] 1:1/15

12 [3] 1:33/18 1:34/10 1:34/17

1221 [1] 1:2/6

13059 [2] 1:1/25 1:47/21

14 [6] 1:2/12 1:22/25 1:31/14

 1:32/19 1:34/10 1:35/6

14-2 [1] 1:21/25

15-1 [1] 1:22/25

1875 [1] 1:2/16

1:00 [1] 1:4/1

1st [1] 1:16/6

2

20-23287-Civil-Gayles [1] 1:4/5

20-CV-23287-DPG [1] 1:1/7

200 [1] 1:3/3

20006 [1] 1:2/17

2010 [1] 1:29/20

2015 [1] 1:36/23

2019 [1] 1:41/6

2020 [3] 1:31/2 1:31/25 1:32/18

2021 [1] 1:16/6

2022 [7] 1:1/11 1:4/1 1:23/19

 1:23/25 1:26/15 1:30/2 1:47/16

2023 [2] 1:26/11 1:26/12

21 [1] 1:47/16

217 [1] 1:23/12

21st [1] 1:2/3

22-D [1] 1:1/18

222 [1] 1:23/12

223 [1] 1:24/16

22nd [1] 1:24/19

24 [1] 1:31/4

2400 [1] 1:3/6

255 [1] 1:1/15

25th [1] 1:26/15

26th [1] 1:26/20

2700 [1] 1:2/9

28 [1] 1:32/19

29 [2] 1:31/5 1:32/19

3

30 [1] 1:37/22

30th [1] 1:2/12

3100 [1] 1:3/3

317 [1] 1:1/21

33131 [3] 1:2/4 1:2/20 1:3/3

33134 [1] 1:1/16

33602 [1] 1:2/9

350 [1] 1:3/6

4

405 [1] 1:1/21

45 [2] 1:33/17 1:34/15

46 [1] 1:1/1

5

50 [2] 1:31/4 1:32/19

6

60 [4] 1:33/17 1:34/5 1:34/15

 1:34/21

7

777 [1] 1:1/18

7th [3] 1:23/19 1:23/25 1:24/17

9

90 [2] 1:34/5 1:34/21

90071 [1] 1:3/6

95 [1] 1:18/12

98 [1] 1:2/19

9th [1] 1:30/2

A

ability [2] 1:31/18 1:47/5

able [5] 1:16/4 1:21/19 1:40/1

 1:43/16 1:44/21

about [15] 1:17/9 1:17/25

 1:18/7 1:18/20 1:19/14 1:22/18

 1:24/7 1:25/12 1:33/14 1:34/7

 1:34/21 1:36/6 1:36/15 1:43/14

 1:43/22

above [2] 1:47/5 1:47/9

absolute [1] 1:7/2

absolutely [5] 1:8/21 1:9/19

 1:25/7 1:36/4 1:36/7

absurd [1] 1:8/16

according [1] 1:9/18

account [1] 1:37/25

acknowledge [1] 1:18/1

Act [20] 1:6/14 1:7/21 1:8/6

 1:8/18 1:9/2 1:9/22 1:10/2

 1:10/10 1:10/13 1:10/16 1:11/3

 1:11/16 1:11/20 1:12/1 1:12/5

 1:12/23 1:13/6 1:14/9 1:43/17

 1:44/23

action [4] 1:41/11 1:41/13

 1:47/11 1:47/14

actively [1] 1:22/2

activities [1] 1:39/5

activity [2] 1:12/12 1:39/10

actual [2] 1:28/17 1:39/9

actually [8] 1:7/25 1:15/14

 1:16/22 1:25/18 1:26/21 1:28/3

 1:32/20 1:32/23

add [1] 1:36/11

added [1] 1:41/19

addition [3] 1:31/13 1:37/12

 1:38/2

additional [4] 1:24/8 1:35/22

 1:36/23 1:41/20

address [14] 1:6/22 1:7/4 1:7/8

 1:15/23 1:26/25 1:28/17 1:29/22

 1:31/20 1:35/2 1:36/15 1:43/9

 1:43/10 1:43/11 1:43/12

addressed [3] 1:13/10 1:30/5

 1:37/4

addressing [2] 1:6/8 1:41/1

adjourned [2] 1:46/3 1:46/4

adjudicated [2] 1:31/23 1:32/23

adjudicates [1] 1:35/1

advertising [3] 1:38/4 1:39/4

 1:39/10

affiliates [1] 1:39/16

afforded [1] 1:11/7

after [9] 1:24/2 1:24/15

 1:30/11 1:31/15 1:31/16 1:33/17

 1:34/2 1:34/10 1:34/15

afternoon [4] 1:4/13 1:4/19

 1:45/24 1:46/2

again [18] 1:10/17 1:14/1

 1:16/9 1:16/14 1:16/18 1:17/16

 1:23/11 1:32/14 1:32/18 1:37/6

 1:38/12 1:42/4 1:42/11 1:43/17

 1:43/21 1:44/6 1:44/9 1:44/9

against [6] 1:8/10 1:8/11

 1:38/21 1:39/7 1:39/8 1:39/8

age [1] 1:44/8

agency [3] 1:7/22 1:7/23

 1:11/23

ago [5] 1:17/9 1:29/4 1:29/6

 1:29/9 1:29/10

agree [9] 1:14/5 1:14/11

 1:14/21 1:15/9 1:15/10 1:19/2

 1:19/3 1:19/21 1:20/21

aid [1] 1:11/3

AKERMAN [2] 1:2/18 1:4/24

al [4] 1:1/5 1:1/8 1:4/4 1:4/5

Alhambra [1] 1:1/15

Alicia [1] 1:1/4

alive [2] 1:17/20 1:18/14

all [59] 

allegation [1] 1:11/19

allegations [1] 1:39/7

alleged [3] 1:29/20 1:30/24

 1:38/17

allegedly [2] 1:28/14 1:43/23

alleges [2] 1:11/22 1:29/19

alleging [1] 1:28/24

ALLEN [1] 1:2/5

allow [2] 1:41/23 1:42/25

allowed [1] 1:24/25

allowing [1] 1:33/2

alluding [1] 1:14/18

along [2] 1:4/14 1:13/4

already [9] 1:18/4 1:29/24

 1:37/3 1:40/8 1:41/16 1:42/16

 1:43/5 1:43/24 1:44/17

already-litigating [1] 1:18/4

also [14] 1:4/11 1:4/12 1:4/22

 1:14/18 1:15/23 1:16/19 1:17/18

 1:25/11 1:27/15 1:28/19 1:31/20

 1:37/15 1:38/23 1:43/20

alternatively [1] 1:33/8

although [3] 1:7/2 1:18/3

 1:29/3

am [4] 1:16/18 1:16/20 1:47/10

 1:47/12

amend [5] 1:23/7 1:30/3 1:30/4

 1:41/17 1:42/3

amended [10] 1:11/19 1:11/22

 1:14/3 1:14/4 1:29/15 1:29/25

 1:30/7 1:37/22 1:38/19 1:41/17

amending [1] 1:31/19

amendment [1] 1:41/23

amendments [1] 1:37/18

Americas [1] 1:2/6

amount [2] 1:19/7 1:19/10

analysis [1] 1:41/10

and 5 [1] 1:23/1

and/or [2] 1:9/11 1:31/1

ANDREW [5] 1:2/7 1:4/14 1:5/16

 1:5/20 1:21/21

Angeles [1] 1:3/6

Annex [1] 1:21/13

another [2] 1:17/14 1:28/23

answer [10] 1:16/8 1:21/3

 1:26/8 1:33/18 1:33/24 1:34/9

 1:34/16 1:35/3 1:35/3 1:35/7

answered [2] 1:38/10 1:39/16

answering [1] 1:26/5

ANTONIO [1] 1:1/16

any [25] 1:6/8 1:6/24 1:8/11

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 48 of 59
A

any... [22] 1:12/8 1:18/2

 1:19/22 1:20/19 1:21/13 1:21/16

 1:22/2 1:25/6 1:26/9 1:26/19

 1:30/5 1:30/22 1:37/2 1:37/24

 1:39/13 1:42/11 1:43/25 1:43/25

 1:44/1 1:44/3 1:44/3 1:47/11

anyone [1] 1:19/4

anything [6] 1:8/4 1:25/1

 1:36/8 1:36/11 1:37/5 1:42/18

apologies [2] 1:5/13 1:45/15

apparently [3] 1:12/3 1:24/12

 1:41/25

Appeals [1] 1:11/25

appearances [6] 1:1/13 1:1/23

 1:2/1 1:2/22 1:3/1 1:4/6

appears [1] 1:25/11

Appendix [1] 1:16/25

applicable [1] 1:14/13

application [5] 1:8/23 1:14/25

 1:24/11 1:32/7 1:33/14

applies [4] 1:7/25 1:12/12

 1:13/11 1:13/12

apply [3] 1:8/2 1:10/8 1:14/19

appreciate [3] 1:6/8 1:17/13

 1:45/13

appropriate [3] 1:37/15 1:38/1

 1:38/23

Approximately [1] 1:29/10

April [4] 1:23/19 1:23/25

 1:24/17 1:24/19

April 22nd [1] 1:24/19

April 7th [2] 1:23/19 1:23/25

are [34] 1:4/22 1:8/8 1:9/5

 1:9/11 1:9/18 1:10/1 1:13/25

 1:18/11 1:18/25 1:21/14 1:23/5

 1:24/8 1:25/4 1:25/12 1:26/23

 1:28/9 1:28/17 1:29/16 1:29/21

 1:31/1 1:33/3 1:33/25 1:35/20

 1:37/17 1:38/5 1:39/5 1:39/5

 1:39/8 1:39/9 1:39/17 1:40/5

 1:40/5 1:40/5 1:40/16

aren't [1] 1:29/11

argue [7] 1:7/19 1:8/17 1:12/3

 1:12/4 1:16/10 1:42/23 1:43/4

argued [6] 1:7/18 1:9/21

 1:27/15 1:27/21 1:28/21 1:29/4

arguing [2] 1:17/25 1:29/11

argument [18] 1:6/10 1:6/13

 1:6/13 1:6/22 1:6/23 1:7/3

 1:8/3 1:8/16 1:9/18 1:9/24

 1:10/16 1:10/19 1:17/11 1:26/16

 1:26/19 1:28/10 1:28/23 1:41/22

arguments [6] 1:10/6 1:27/3

 1:28/9 1:28/17 1:37/12 1:45/2

arising [2] 1:8/13 1:8/14

ARMANDO [1] 1:2/20

around [2] 1:29/6 1:40/15

Article [2] 1:21/11 1:28/19

as [46] 1:6/8 1:6/12 1:6/19

 1:7/4 1:7/5 1:7/15 1:7/23

 1:8/23 1:9/23 1:10/11 1:10/22

 1:11/3 1:11/16 1:14/21 1:14/23

 1:14/23 1:15/21 1:18/2 1:18/13

 1:19/14 1:19/14 1:19/19 1:20/11

 1:20/13 1:20/15 1:23/16 1:23/16

 1:24/3 1:24/11 1:25/5 1:25/22

 1:26/22 1:27/3 1:29/4 1:30/19

 1:32/2 1:32/20 1:33/3 1:35/9

 1:35/9 1:36/21 1:37/19 1:37/22

 1:40/8 1:41/11 1:45/10

ASHLEY [2] 1:2/17 1:4/22

ask [3] 1:7/7 1:8/10 1:11/10

asked [7] 1:23/21 1:26/6 1:28/3

 1:28/6 1:29/5 1:31/20 1:32/16

asking [3] 1:16/21 1:21/2

 1:35/4

ASSOCIATES [3] 1:1/18 1:1/20

 1:4/17

assuming [1] 1:33/25

attempt [2] 1:27/5 1:29/15

attend [1] 1:36/9

attribute [1] 1:20/19

August [1] 1:31/2

aunt [1] 1:19/5

authority [3] 1:12/2 1:23/6

 1:23/10

authorization [23] 1:22/7

 1:22/12 1:22/14 1:22/23 1:22/24

 1:23/1 1:23/2 1:23/14 1:23/15

 1:23/21 1:24/9 1:24/22 1:25/1

 1:25/6 1:25/18 1:30/21 1:31/23

 1:32/5 1:32/17 1:32/22 1:33/3

 1:34/12 1:34/25

authorized [1] 1:24/5

availability [1] 1:26/18

available [1] 1:26/19

Avenue [5] 1:1/18 1:1/21 1:2/6

 1:2/16 1:3/6

Aviles [3] 1:1/25 1:47/20

 1:47/21

avoiding [1] 1:35/4

aware [3] 1:13/25 1:26/23

 1:37/19

away [2] 1:12/4 1:20/16

B

back [5] 1:13/9 1:24/4 1:24/8

 1:31/25 1:36/1

balance [1] 1:30/15

balancing [1] 1:30/14

banc [1] 1:28/22

based [8] 1:8/19 1:15/5 1:22/4

 1:30/3 1:38/5 1:39/5 1:42/1

 1:44/24

basically [2] 1:17/5 1:28/1

basis [7] 1:14/15 1:27/4

 1:30/10 1:37/23 1:38/13 1:38/17

 1:38/21

BCW [3] 1:2/15 1:3/2 1:39/8

be [66] 

because [22] 1:8/1 1:8/11

 1:8/15 1:9/5 1:9/20 1:10/24

 1:12/17 1:14/5 1:14/9 1:17/17

 1:21/19 1:23/10 1:28/5 1:28/11

 1:33/13 1:34/24 1:40/4 1:41/16

 1:41/24 1:42/1 1:42/14 1:42/18

been [25] 1:13/9 1:14/10

 1:16/14 1:24/23 1:34/12 1:37/17

 1:37/20 1:38/3 1:38/12 1:38/15

 1:38/22 1:40/10 1:40/12 1:41/16

 1:43/6 1:43/18 1:43/19 1:43/24

 1:44/1 1:44/1 1:44/2 1:44/3

 1:44/20 1:44/21 1:45/2

before [8] 1:1/4 1:6/15 1:15/17

 1:28/20 1:32/22 1:34/25 1:39/12

 1:39/18

beginning [2] 1:22/23 1:37/4

behalf [10] 1:4/9 1:4/12 1:4/15

 1:4/17 1:4/20 1:4/23 1:4/24

 1:21/1 1:25/25 1:37/13

Behavioral [1] 1:41/5

behind [2] 1:13/13 1:19/15

being [8] 1:6/13 1:14/12

 1:21/18 1:26/21 1:32/16 1:41/25

 1:42/2 1:43/16

belabor [1] 1:20/17

believe [6] 1:10/4 1:16/14

 1:16/15 1:16/19 1:20/10 1:38/20

benefit [2] 1:44/20 1:44/22

BERENTHAL [8] 1:1/18 1:1/19

 1:1/20 1:1/22 1:4/16 1:4/17

 1:4/17 1:16/9

best [3] 1:16/9 1:45/8 1:47/5

between [3] 1:26/2 1:26/19

 1:27/7

beyond [3] 1:14/6 1:32/4 1:35/6

Biscayne [3] 1:2/3 1:2/3 1:3/3

block [1] 1:44/6

blocking [2] 1:43/14 1:43/15

Blocking.Regulation [1] 1:43/13

blossomed [1] 1:22/16

body [2] 1:43/11 1:43/11

BOUDIN [2] 1:2/11 1:5/1

Boulevard [3] 1:2/3 1:2/9 1:3/3

bounds [1] 1:22/20

BRANDS [3] 1:1/8 1:2/2 1:4/5

Breslin [1] 1:21/10

Brickell [1] 1:2/19

brief [2] 1:36/11 1:37/2

briefed [1] 1:26/14

briefly [4] 1:26/1 1:26/25

 1:37/7 1:40/25

bring [1] 1:15/24

British [2] 1:24/5 1:24/13

broad [2] 1:2/2 1:9/6

brought [1] 1:41/16

bunch [1] 1:29/16

Burton [25] 1:7/21 1:8/1 1:8/14

 1:8/14 1:8/18 1:8/21 1:8/23

 1:9/6 1:10/8 1:10/9 1:10/13

 1:11/17 1:13/7 1:15/6 1:15/7

 1:21/14 1:22/5 1:27/13 1:28/16

 1:28/20 1:29/4 1:31/15 1:43/16

 1:44/6 1:44/23

business [2] 1:21/5 1:27/18

C

Cabrera [1] 1:41/4

calendar [1] 1:45/16

California [1] 1:3/6

call [1] 1:16/8

came [3] 1:9/20 1:23/1 1:42/6

camera [1] 1:4/10

can [14] 1:10/12 1:15/6 1:16/5

 1:16/9 1:17/11 1:21/24 1:26/19

 1:29/11 1:32/9 1:33/15 1:35/23

 1:38/15 1:38/20 1:45/3

can't [2] 1:22/11 1:33/12

cannot [4] 1:8/19 1:15/18

 1:22/6 1:22/7

CASAMASSIMA [2] 1:3/7 1:4/22

case [53] 

case-dispositive [2] 1:27/2

 1:45/10

cases [10] 1:11/24 1:11/25

 1:12/24 1:14/10 1:18/25 1:27/14

 1:28/20 1:28/21 1:28/24 1:29/4

CASSEL [1] 1:2/2

cause [1] 1:41/12

caused [2] 1:27/13 1:28/12

Center [1] 1:2/19

certain [2] 1:19/7 1:19/10

certainly [6] 1:9/1 1:14/20

 1:33/5 1:33/15 1:42/4 1:43/1

CERTIFICATE [1] 1:47/3

certify [2] 1:47/4 1:47/10

challenge [2] 1:27/18 1:28/7

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 49 of 59
C

challenges [1] 1:38/2

change [2] 1:23/16 1:24/3

Chris [1] 1:4/22

CHRISTOPHER [1] 1:3/7

cigar [1] 1:27/17

Circle [1] 1:1/15

Circuit [8] 1:15/13 1:28/21

 1:28/22 1:29/5 1:29/7 1:32/1

 1:32/13 1:33/11

circumstance [3] 1:23/16 1:24/4

 1:45/10

circumstances [1] 1:30/21

cite [3] 1:16/16 1:17/4 1:17/17

cited [10] 1:10/23 1:12/11

 1:13/20 1:13/23 1:14/2 1:14/10

 1:14/12 1:20/7 1:41/3 1:41/4

cites [2] 1:15/24 1:17/4

citing [1] 1:7/1

City [1] 1:2/19

Civil [1] 1:4/5

claim [8] 1:8/13 1:8/14 1:8/19

 1:18/3 1:19/16 1:29/15 1:31/12

 1:44/15

claimant [2] 1:18/3 1:18/4

claimants [1] 1:19/3

claims [6] 1:6/17 1:6/19 1:8/11

 1:18/17 1:19/5 1:20/15

clarified [1] 1:15/8

clarifies [2] 1:15/21 1:37/1

clear [1] 1:44/25

clearly [4] 1:6/21 1:8/3 1:8/5

 1:23/13

close [1] 1:29/13

co [1] 1:4/14

co-counsel [1] 1:4/14

colleagues [1] 1:29/11

colorful [1] 1:20/20

Columbia [1] 1:12/7

come [3] 1:19/20 1:29/2 1:36/1

comes [2] 1:17/8 1:40/23

coming [2] 1:24/8 1:36/2

comity [8] 1:32/2 1:32/12

 1:42/22 1:42/24 1:43/2 1:43/4

 1:43/17 1:43/18

comments [2] 1:37/2 1:37/2

commercial [10] 1:8/2 1:8/4

 1:9/2 1:9/4 1:11/8 1:12/12

 1:14/19 1:15/2 1:15/15 1:15/17

commission [1] 1:42/25

commit [1] 1:30/20

commits [1] 1:25/1

committed [1] 1:44/21

common [4] 1:18/17 1:19/23

 1:19/23 1:20/4

communications [1] 1:43/10

companies [1] 1:9/9

complaint [21] 1:7/18 1:7/19

 1:11/20 1:11/22 1:14/3 1:14/4

 1:18/15 1:29/15 1:29/18 1:29/25

 1:30/7 1:31/19 1:37/17 1:37/23

 1:38/18 1:38/19 1:39/7 1:39/11

 1:40/12 1:41/18 1:41/24

completely [1] 1:44/12

complication [1] 1:39/18

comply [6] 1:21/12 1:21/15

 1:21/19 1:22/1 1:22/11 1:24/17

comports [1] 1:43/23

computer [1] 1:9/9

concede [1] 1:28/13

concern [3] 1:18/20 1:19/13

 1:33/14

concerned [2] 1:18/7 1:31/21

concession [1] 1:40/20

concrete [1] 1:28/11

conduct [2] 1:9/2 1:9/4

conducted [1] 1:40/8

conducting [1] 1:30/17

confer [1] 1:45/3

conferred [1] 1:12/23

confirm [1] 1:29/12

Congress [1] 1:27/15

consider [6] 1:8/8 1:8/16

 1:14/19 1:14/20 1:14/22 1:32/2

considered [3] 1:7/20 1:31/3

 1:32/14

considering [1] 1:24/13

consistent [2] 1:24/24 1:31/10

constitutional [2] 1:27/18

 1:28/7

contemplates [1] 1:26/11

contend [1] 1:7/1

contending [1] 1:6/11

contention [1] 1:12/8

context [2] 1:8/22 1:30/5

continually [1] 1:31/19

continue [1] 1:17/21

CONTINUED [4] 1:1/23 1:2/1

 1:2/22 1:3/1

continues [1] 1:17/11

contrary [1] 1:18/24

control [1] 1:40/21

convoluted [1] 1:10/17

copy [1] 1:16/1

Coral [1] 1:1/16

Corporacion [1] 1:2/8

corporation [5] 1:8/4 1:8/18

 1:8/20 1:10/7 1:10/11

corporations [1] 1:11/4

correct [9] 1:18/8 1:20/21

 1:22/12 1:28/1 1:28/2 1:29/3

 1:30/1 1:30/10 1:47/4

correspondence [1] 1:6/3

could [13] 1:14/18 1:16/3

 1:17/20 1:17/21 1:23/17 1:24/4

 1:26/8 1:26/20 1:28/5 1:29/22

 1:30/21 1:33/16 1:44/20

counsel [7] 1:4/6 1:4/14

 1:21/17 1:25/25 1:26/1 1:40/25

 1:47/10

counsel's [1] 1:26/18

counts [1] 1:10/11

couple [1] 1:20/23

course [3] 1:24/14 1:26/16

 1:33/19

court [38] 1:1/2 1:1/25 1:7/20

 1:8/8 1:10/7 1:11/24 1:11/25

 1:12/8 1:13/10 1:18/1 1:18/3

 1:22/11 1:24/7 1:26/16 1:26/16

 1:28/4 1:30/17 1:32/15 1:33/14

 1:33/16 1:34/8 1:34/25 1:35/2

 1:36/21 1:37/19 1:38/14 1:39/13

 1:39/18 1:41/16 1:41/22 1:42/2

 1:42/4 1:42/10 1:42/25 1:44/14

 1:44/19 1:47/7 1:47/21

Court's [2] 1:15/25 1:19/19

courts [3] 1:22/4 1:22/10

 1:27/13

CRANE [1] 1:2/10

creating [1] 1:33/6

creative [1] 1:8/17

credible [1] 1:31/12

criminal [8] 1:21/10 1:25/2

 1:25/2 1:30/20 1:32/3 1:33/9

 1:33/9 1:45/15

CRR [2] 1:1/25 1:47/21

CSR [2] 1:1/25 1:47/21

Cuba [1] 1:27/17

Cuban [7] 1:7/23 1:8/18 1:8/19

 1:10/7 1:10/11 1:11/23 1:27/17

CUPET [1] 1:12/7

cure [1] 1:38/20

cured [1] 1:37/17

current [8] 1:16/3 1:16/5

 1:17/5 1:17/8 1:17/12 1:18/7

 1:20/14 1:38/19

currently [3] 1:23/10 1:28/20

 1:38/9

curtain [1] 1:13/13

custody [1] 1:40/21

CUTLER [2] 1:2/15 1:3/5

CV [1] 1:1/7

D

damage [1] 1:32/10

date [4] 1:19/5 1:34/16 1:47/8

 1:47/16

dates [2] 1:24/21 1:25/16

DAVID [3] 1:1/19 1:4/16 1:16/9

DAVIES [7] 1:2/7 1:4/15 1:5/16

 1:5/22 1:21/22 1:36/12 1:37/13

day [3] 1:26/19 1:44/14 1:44/19

days [7] 1:33/17 1:34/5 1:34/10

 1:34/15 1:34/15 1:34/21 1:35/7

DC [2] 1:2/17 1:15/13

death [1] 1:18/3

December [1] 1:16/6

December 1st [1] 1:16/6

decide [1] 1:15/1

decided [7] 1:6/14 1:6/19

 1:12/9 1:12/10 1:12/25 1:30/9

 1:31/6

decides [1] 1:33/14

decision [2] 1:30/12 1:34/11

declaration [3] 1:6/2 1:21/1

 1:21/6

deemed [1] 1:6/22

default [1] 1:33/7

defects [2] 1:27/4 1:29/17

defend [7] 1:21/19 1:22/6

 1:22/7 1:23/22 1:24/9 1:32/11

 1:32/17

Defendant [2] 1:2/2 1:2/8

defendants [32] 1:1/9 1:2/15

 1:3/2 1:4/21 1:4/23 1:4/24

 1:8/15 1:21/2 1:27/2 1:28/12

 1:28/14 1:30/6 1:30/15 1:35/20

 1:36/10 1:37/3 1:37/14 1:37/16

 1:37/24 1:38/9 1:38/11 1:38/22

 1:39/11 1:39/12 1:39/24 1:40/14

 1:40/21 1:41/1 1:41/23 1:41/25

 1:42/9 1:42/23

defendants' [4] 1:5/25 1:9/9

 1:24/1 1:30/3

defer [3] 1:7/2 1:32/16 1:42/25

define [1] 1:11/3

definition [1] 1:9/6

definitions [2] 1:10/10 1:10/11

Delaware [1] 1:15/13

delay [2] 1:17/25 1:32/20

deliberate [1] 1:22/2

denied [3] 1:24/1 1:33/19

 1:35/5

denies [1] 1:35/2

deny [2] 1:34/8 1:35/25

denying [1] 1:34/11

Department [6] 1:21/9 1:27/10

 1:27/19 1:28/8 1:29/5 1:29/8

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 50 of 59
D

depositions [4] 1:23/7 1:31/7

 1:31/14 1:37/22

descendants [1] 1:17/23

detail [1] 1:9/14

determination [1] 1:41/7

determine [1] 1:14/7

determined [1] 1:41/24

determining [1] 1:8/23

did [10] 1:6/17 1:7/8 1:9/17

 1:10/5 1:22/19 1:24/17 1:24/18

 1:28/13 1:31/9 1:36/22

didn't [7] 1:6/23 1:10/8

 1:10/15 1:12/17 1:19/22 1:20/17

 1:20/19

die [1] 1:18/25

dies [1] 1:18/24

difficult [1] 1:24/24

directive [1] 1:24/18

directly [4] 1:21/12 1:21/15

 1:22/1 1:22/4

discovery [44] 1:6/15 1:6/18

 1:7/2 1:8/10 1:8/10 1:9/19

 1:9/19 1:12/10 1:12/24 1:14/23

 1:15/25 1:16/1 1:16/17 1:16/21

 1:16/23 1:16/25 1:21/3 1:26/11

 1:26/22 1:30/13 1:30/18 1:30/20

 1:30/23 1:33/7 1:35/20 1:36/15

 1:37/20 1:37/21 1:38/3 1:38/4

 1:38/10 1:39/3 1:39/15 1:39/15

 1:39/16 1:39/20 1:40/1 1:40/8

 1:40/11 1:40/15 1:40/16 1:40/17

 1:41/7 1:41/12

discrete [1] 1:25/21

discussed [3] 1:44/9 1:44/10

 1:44/17

discussing [1] 1:39/19

discussion [1] 1:6/7

dismiss [39] 1:6/19 1:7/20

 1:10/15 1:13/23 1:14/3 1:14/7

 1:22/15 1:22/17 1:23/3 1:23/8

 1:23/11 1:24/2 1:24/6 1:26/13

 1:26/13 1:26/14 1:26/24 1:27/13

 1:30/6 1:31/18 1:32/4 1:32/23

 1:33/3 1:33/19 1:33/25 1:34/8

 1:34/11 1:35/1 1:35/2 1:35/5

 1:35/25 1:38/15 1:38/16 1:41/7

 1:41/10 1:41/19 1:41/21 1:42/5

 1:42/12

dismissed [2] 1:17/24 1:30/22

dispassionate [1] 1:19/14

dispose [4] 1:41/11 1:41/13

 1:41/15 1:42/2

dispositive [3] 1:27/2 1:34/1

 1:45/10

dispute [2] 1:14/9 1:15/18

distinct [1] 1:31/21

district [13] 1:1/2 1:1/3

 1:12/6 1:12/7 1:12/7 1:16/24

 1:18/1 1:27/13 1:38/14 1:41/5

 1:45/9 1:47/7 1:47/7

do [14] 1:6/11 1:6/12 1:13/5

 1:15/9 1:16/1 1:16/18 1:17/2

 1:17/2 1:18/20 1:24/25 1:25/6

 1:36/8 1:37/4 1:42/18

Docket [8] 1:21/25 1:22/25

 1:22/25 1:23/12 1:23/12 1:24/16

 1:31/4 1:32/19

does [7] 1:8/2 1:9/3 1:12/4

 1:13/5 1:21/18 1:37/23 1:44/13

doesn't [6] 1:6/21 1:7/25

 1:8/24 1:28/11 1:29/15 1:39/11

doing [1] 1:34/3

don't [20] 1:8/1 1:11/24

 1:12/19 1:13/12 1:14/20 1:14/22

 1:14/24 1:15/2 1:15/3 1:16/11

 1:23/18 1:25/6 1:25/25 1:26/18

 1:31/12 1:35/12 1:36/10 1:36/16

 1:38/20 1:40/19

done [3] 1:23/5 1:24/23 1:38/5

DORR [2] 1:2/16 1:3/5

down [2] 1:19/20 1:29/2

DPG [1] 1:1/7

drafted [2] 1:17/8 1:17/9

due [5] 1:24/14 1:33/18 1:33/24

 1:34/10 1:34/16

dueling [1] 1:25/15

during [1] 1:19/25

duty [1] 1:45/15

E

each [2] 1:15/8 1:15/11

earlier [1] 1:41/19

East [1] 1:2/9

effect [3] 1:18/2 1:31/15

 1:36/16

effectively [1] 1:31/17

efficiency [2] 1:32/25 1:33/1

effort [1] 1:44/5

either [5] 1:19/11 1:24/21

 1:30/10 1:32/10 1:35/3

elaboration [1] 1:6/24

elderly [2] 1:31/1 1:31/8

electronic [2] 1:1/12 1:47/6

element [2] 1:32/13 1:32/25

Eleventh [7] 1:28/21 1:28/22

 1:29/5 1:29/7 1:32/1 1:32/13

 1:33/11

eliminate [1] 1:20/14

eliminated [1] 1:20/10

else [4] 1:25/1 1:25/1 1:36/8

 1:37/5

email [2] 1:43/11 1:43/12

emergency [2] 1:34/13 1:35/4

emphasizing [1] 1:41/3

employed [1] 1:47/11

en [1] 1:28/22

encountering [1] 1:38/8

end [5] 1:14/25 1:26/11 1:26/20

 1:33/13 1:34/13

ending [1] 1:26/11

ends [1] 1:26/21

enforcement [1] 1:44/22

engage [1] 1:22/15

engaging [1] 1:30/20

enough [4] 1:29/13 1:34/11

 1:34/19 1:43/6

ensure [1] 1:35/8

enter [1] 1:24/7

entered [3] 1:26/8 1:26/10

 1:30/11

entering [1] 1:42/11

entertain [1] 1:23/18

entire [1] 1:41/11

entirety [4] 1:23/22 1:24/10

 1:41/13 1:41/15

entities [9] 1:38/5 1:38/7

 1:38/25 1:39/4 1:39/5 1:40/1

 1:40/9 1:40/11 1:40/16

entities' [1] 1:27/16

entitled [6] 1:8/9 1:8/25

 1:9/18 1:14/14 1:15/1 1:42/24

entitlement [1] 1:43/4

entity [8] 1:7/22 1:7/23 1:8/24

 1:9/23 1:10/12 1:15/2 1:15/15

 1:22/1

entry [10] 1:21/25 1:22/25

 1:22/25 1:23/9 1:23/12 1:23/12

 1:24/16 1:30/8 1:31/4 1:32/19

especially [1] 1:33/3

ESQ [14] 1:1/16 1:1/17 1:1/19

 1:1/22 1:2/4 1:2/7 1:2/10

 1:2/13 1:2/13 1:2/14 1:2/17

 1:2/20 1:3/4 1:3/7

essentially [1] 1:41/18

established [1] 1:38/4

estate [4] 1:18/18 1:19/6

 1:20/3 1:42/19

et [4] 1:1/5 1:1/8 1:4/4 1:4/5

evaluate [1] 1:42/25

evaluating [1] 1:41/22

even [7] 1:9/1 1:11/17 1:12/12

 1:34/2 1:37/17 1:39/11 1:39/17

event [3] 1:12/8 1:35/5 1:39/13

ever [1] 1:44/1

every [1] 1:34/24

everybody [3] 1:33/23 1:45/17

 1:46/2

everything [3] 1:10/24 1:24/23

 1:24/23

evidence [2] 1:43/25 1:44/3

exactly [2] 1:31/1 1:34/6

exaggerating [1] 1:13/4

example [4] 1:29/18 1:33/16

 1:33/17 1:35/24

exception [11] 1:8/3 1:8/5

 1:9/3 1:9/4 1:11/8 1:12/12

 1:13/12 1:14/19 1:15/15 1:15/17

 1:41/8

exclusive [2] 1:11/21 1:12/5

existing [2] 1:19/3 1:23/6

exists [1] 1:11/25

expensive [1] 1:37/21

experience [1] 1:17/2

explain [2] 1:21/17 1:39/14

explained [1] 1:32/3

express [1] 1:19/22

extensive [2] 1:10/19 1:37/21

extent [2] 1:19/9 1:32/22

extinguishing [1] 1:18/2

extra [3] 1:21/4 1:34/5 1:34/21

extraterritorial [2] 1:21/11

 1:32/7

Exxon [1] 1:12/7

F

face [1] 1:29/18

facie [1] 1:27/6

facing [1] 1:24/25

fact [5] 1:25/12 1:26/11

 1:30/25 1:38/3 1:44/25

factors [1] 1:31/24

fail [1] 1:35/3

failed [1] 1:38/20

fair [1] 1:13/14

fairly [1] 1:30/5

fairness [1] 1:32/14

familiar [2] 1:17/18 1:20/7

family [3] 1:17/23 1:18/11

 1:44/9

far [3] 1:15/3 1:22/15 1:23/14

fashion [1] 1:17/23

favor [2] 1:30/15 1:38/14

February [1] 1:28/23

Federal [2] 1:6/14 1:11/15

feel [1] 1:36/12

Fernandez [2] 1:17/17 1:20/7

file [7] 1:6/5 1:24/18 1:30/1

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 51 of 59
F

file... [4] 1:30/6 1:31/15

 1:31/16 1:35/7

filed [6] 1:10/14 1:21/1 1:21/3

 1:21/6 1:29/6 1:29/23

filing [4] 1:6/2 1:18/15 1:23/2

 1:23/11

finally [4] 1:29/14 1:30/8

 1:33/11 1:38/15

financially [1] 1:47/13

find [6] 1:14/12 1:16/3 1:16/5

 1:16/18 1:17/12 1:21/24

fine [3] 1:25/3 1:31/11 1:37/10

firm [1] 1:4/8

first [11] 1:7/5 1:7/16 1:7/16

 1:9/16 1:10/14 1:28/4 1:28/9

 1:29/24 1:32/1 1:37/6 1:38/16

fit [1] 1:45/15

five [2] 1:11/24 1:43/5

Flecha [1] 1:17/4

Floor [2] 1:2/3 1:2/12

FLORIDA [9] 1:1/3 1:1/10 1:1/16

 1:2/4 1:2/9 1:2/20 1:3/3

 1:37/24 1:47/7

folks [1] 1:44/15

following [3] 1:1/23 1:2/22

 1:33/1

footnote [3] 1:16/19 1:25/16

 1:36/22

foregoing [1] 1:47/4

foreign [15] 1:8/5 1:9/1 1:9/22

 1:10/1 1:10/9 1:10/15 1:11/3

 1:11/20 1:12/1 1:12/4 1:12/23

 1:13/6 1:14/8 1:22/3 1:22/10

forgot [1] 1:36/12

forth [2] 1:25/15 1:41/22

forum [1] 1:27/8

forward [2] 1:23/20 1:38/2

four [2] 1:27/2 1:31/16

frame [1] 1:35/11

FRANCIS [1] 1:2/4

FRANCISCO [1] 1:1/17

FRANK [3] 1:2/13 1:4/8 1:5/1

FREYRE [2] 1:2/20 1:4/24

Friday [2] 1:1/11 1:4/1

front [1] 1:14/25

FSIA [11] 1:7/24 1:8/5 1:8/13

 1:8/24 1:10/3 1:10/22 1:12/13

 1:13/10 1:15/5 1:15/7 1:37/4

full [1] 1:36/9

fully [4] 1:26/14 1:30/4

 1:33/25 1:44/11

furnishing [1] 1:40/17

further [4] 1:34/15 1:35/6

 1:47/10 1:47/12

futile [2] 1:29/25 1:41/24

futility [2] 1:30/3 1:42/1

futility-based [1] 1:30/3

future [2] 1:30/5 1:35/23

G

Gables [1] 1:1/16

gave [1] 1:9/24

Gayles [17] 1:4/5 1:5/24

 1:23/19 1:23/24 1:23/25 1:24/15

 1:26/7 1:26/10 1:28/15 1:30/12

 1:31/3 1:31/6 1:31/13 1:31/24

 1:32/15 1:35/25 1:45/18

Gayles's [3] 1:6/7 1:24/17

 1:30/8

general [1] 1:36/10

generally [2] 1:6/21 1:16/10

get [16] 1:7/9 1:9/23 1:11/1

 1:25/14 1:28/5 1:28/6 1:32/17

 1:33/21 1:34/4 1:35/10 1:40/15

 1:42/20 1:43/6 1:44/14 1:44/19

 1:44/22

getting [2] 1:15/17 1:43/9

give [8] 1:18/10 1:32/16

 1:34/20 1:36/9 1:36/11 1:41/9

 1:41/10 1:43/1

given [7] 1:16/9 1:30/10

 1:38/12 1:43/1 1:43/18 1:43/18

 1:43/24

giving [1] 1:35/6

global [3] 1:33/23 1:34/19

 1:35/13

go [10] 1:10/19 1:11/6 1:11/7

 1:12/17 1:13/13 1:15/3 1:17/11

 1:18/17 1:19/6 1:23/20

goes [1] 1:41/9

going [9] 1:7/8 1:9/13 1:14/6

 1:18/20 1:23/20 1:24/4 1:31/17

 1:34/13 1:38/2

gone [1] 1:18/25

good [6] 1:4/13 1:4/19 1:41/11

 1:45/21 1:45/24 1:46/2

got [2] 1:5/23 1:24/16

gotten [2] 1:34/3 1:43/5

government [12] 1:7/22 1:7/22

 1:7/23 1:11/23 1:23/16 1:23/21

 1:24/5 1:24/13 1:32/9 1:39/25

 1:40/3 1:40/17

Grand [1] 1:3/6

grant [7] 1:24/22 1:31/7

 1:31/13 1:33/12 1:34/25 1:35/19

 1:35/22

granted [8] 1:23/2 1:23/24

 1:30/1 1:30/2 1:32/22 1:34/12

 1:34/20 1:42/3

grants [1] 1:25/18

great [1] 1:45/25

greatly [1] 1:45/13

grounds [1] 1:30/22

guess [1] 1:37/6

H

Habanos [31] 1:2/8 1:4/25 1:5/2

 1:5/6 1:5/9 1:6/4 1:6/11 1:6/17

 1:6/25 1:7/5 1:7/8 1:7/17 1:8/3

 1:8/4 1:8/17 1:9/3 1:9/23

 1:9/25 1:10/5 1:10/11 1:10/14

 1:11/7 1:11/15 1:11/22 1:14/13

 1:14/21 1:14/23 1:15/22 1:36/11

 1:37/3 1:37/4

had [6] 1:9/21 1:17/14 1:22/15

 1:28/16 1:29/7 1:45/17

HALE [3] 1:2/15 1:3/5 1:4/23

half [1] 1:17/9

handbook [4] 1:15/25 1:16/25

 1:36/15 1:36/23

handle [2] 1:35/19 1:35/21

happen [3] 1:19/3 1:24/8 1:34/9

happened [1] 1:17/18

happens [2] 1:34/2 1:36/6

hard [1] 1:10/18

harm [1] 1:30/24

harms [2] 1:26/25 1:30/14

harp [1] 1:43/20

has [40] 1:9/6 1:10/2 1:10/2

 1:10/4 1:12/10 1:13/5 1:13/9

 1:15/6 1:15/7 1:17/3 1:19/4

 1:20/16 1:21/4 1:22/16 1:27/10

 1:28/15 1:28/16 1:29/7 1:31/23

 1:32/1 1:32/13 1:32/13 1:33/11

 1:33/14 1:33/16 1:34/14 1:35/3

 1:35/14 1:35/15 1:37/16 1:37/20

 1:37/25 1:38/3 1:38/12 1:38/19

 1:40/10 1:41/15 1:44/1 1:44/3

 1:45/1

hasn't [4] 1:7/20 1:34/2

 1:34/12 1:43/19

have [66] 

haven't [3] 1:19/11 1:27/6

 1:38/22

having [1] 1:39/19

he [6] 1:15/6 1:15/12 1:18/14

 1:28/16 1:30/9 1:30/11

he's [1] 1:13/8

health [2] 1:31/1 1:44/8

hear [6] 1:9/25 1:25/21 1:25/24

 1:25/25 1:37/6 1:40/25

heard [4] 1:27/20 1:27/24

 1:28/8 1:28/23

hearing [2] 1:32/19 1:47/12

heirs [1] 1:44/16

held [3] 1:15/14 1:28/15

 1:29/24

Hello [1] 1:16/13

Helms [25] 1:7/21 1:8/1 1:8/14

 1:8/14 1:8/18 1:8/21 1:8/23

 1:9/6 1:10/8 1:10/9 1:10/13

 1:11/17 1:13/7 1:15/6 1:15/7

 1:21/14 1:22/5 1:27/13 1:28/16

 1:28/20 1:29/4 1:31/15 1:43/16

 1:44/6 1:44/23

Helms-Burton [25] 1:7/21 1:8/1

 1:8/14 1:8/14 1:8/18 1:8/21

 1:8/23 1:9/6 1:10/8 1:10/9

 1:10/13 1:11/17 1:13/7 1:15/6

 1:15/7 1:21/14 1:22/5 1:27/13

 1:28/16 1:28/20 1:29/4 1:31/15

 1:43/16 1:44/6 1:44/23

Helpful [2] 1:25/9 1:25/13

here [18] 1:6/23 1:9/12 1:11/11

 1:12/22 1:13/10 1:15/7 1:18/6

 1:20/13 1:21/18 1:21/19 1:30/14

 1:30/16 1:31/25 1:32/16 1:33/1

 1:33/7 1:39/5 1:42/19

highlight [3] 1:17/15 1:20/12

 1:20/18

him [1] 1:12/16

his [3] 1:18/17 1:18/18 1:31/13

Hold [1] 1:5/22

honestly [1] 1:35/12

Honor [60] 

Honor's [4] 1:16/21 1:30/2

 1:44/24 1:44/25

Honorable [1] 1:1/4

hope [1] 1:34/24

hoping [1] 1:16/4

how [4] 1:11/24 1:14/9 1:21/18

 1:22/19

I

I'd [2] 1:12/6 1:45/12

I'll [8] 1:6/12 1:7/1 1:21/1

 1:26/25 1:27/9 1:36/11 1:37/6

 1:45/1

I'm [47] 1:9/13 1:9/23 1:11/1

 1:12/20 1:12/21 1:12/21 1:13/21

 1:15/13 1:15/16 1:16/10 1:16/19

 1:16/23 1:16/24 1:17/3 1:17/18

 1:19/13 1:19/18 1:19/22 1:20/7

 1:21/7 1:21/7 1:25/5 1:25/8

 1:27/22 1:30/3 1:33/21 1:34/14

 1:35/1 1:35/4 1:35/6 1:36/2

 1:36/14 1:36/14 1:36/18 1:36/19

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 52 of 59
I

I'm... [12] 1:38/24 1:39/10

 1:39/21 1:39/22 1:40/6 1:42/10

 1:42/15 1:42/19 1:43/22 1:43/25

 1:44/2 1:44/10

I've [6] 1:5/23 1:15/8 1:16/14

 1:16/15 1:19/10 1:42/15

I.D [1] 1:17/1

idea [2] 1:18/10 1:29/2

illegitimate [1] 1:19/12

imagine [1] 1:21/14

immoderate [2] 1:33/12 1:33/13

immune [1] 1:11/15

immunities [16] 1:6/14 1:8/6

 1:9/1 1:9/22 1:10/1 1:10/10

 1:10/15 1:10/24 1:11/3 1:11/16

 1:11/20 1:12/1 1:12/5 1:12/23

 1:13/6 1:14/8

immunity [7] 1:6/20 1:7/17

 1:8/25 1:11/5 1:11/7 1:14/10

 1:14/25

impact [2] 1:6/8 1:26/6

IMPERIAL [40] 1:1/8 1:2/2 1:4/4

 1:4/15 1:5/8 1:5/17 1:6/2

 1:21/1 1:21/2 1:21/4 1:21/6

 1:21/17 1:21/22 1:22/1 1:22/6

 1:24/25 1:25/19 1:25/22 1:25/24

 1:27/7 1:30/19 1:30/19 1:32/3

 1:32/11 1:32/17 1:33/2 1:33/5

 1:33/16 1:34/2 1:34/4 1:34/14

 1:34/20 1:35/3 1:35/7 1:35/22

 1:38/8 1:39/19 1:42/23 1:43/12

 1:44/4

Imperial's [10] 1:23/10 1:26/14

 1:27/11 1:31/21 1:32/10 1:32/21

 1:33/18 1:34/8 1:34/16 1:35/13

implement [1] 1:43/16

implementation [1] 1:44/6

important [1] 1:37/14

impossible [1] 1:33/6

Inaudible [2] 1:33/24 1:40/7

inclined [1] 1:35/19

includes [1] 1:9/8

including [2] 1:22/3 1:37/21

incremental [1] 1:32/20

indicates [1] 1:30/9

indicating [1] 1:11/16

indication [1] 1:43/25

indirectly [4] 1:21/12 1:21/15

 1:22/2 1:22/4

individual [1] 1:8/11

inferring [1] 1:19/2

information [3] 1:25/9 1:25/13

 1:40/20

inheritors [1] 1:17/22

initial [1] 1:14/2

initially [3] 1:6/10 1:10/5

 1:22/23

injury [1] 1:28/11

input [2] 1:29/5 1:29/7

instrumentality [1] 1:11/23

intent [2] 1:8/1 1:8/21

interest [3] 1:27/11 1:27/20

 1:32/11

interested [1] 1:47/13

interests [2] 1:32/8 1:32/10

interfere [1] 1:8/10

international [7] 1:21/9 1:22/8

 1:31/22 1:32/2 1:42/22 1:42/24

 1:43/17

interplay [1] 1:26/2

interpreted [1] 1:18/2

interrupting [1] 1:36/20

introductory [1] 1:25/11

intruding [1] 1:36/14

involved [1] 1:18/4

involves [1] 1:30/14

is [144] 

isn't [2] 1:32/16 1:44/2

issue [31] 1:7/5 1:7/16 1:7/17

 1:9/12 1:9/17 1:12/9 1:13/9

 1:14/21 1:15/4 1:15/18 1:15/21

 1:27/25 1:28/6 1:28/7 1:30/16

 1:31/2 1:31/3 1:37/4 1:37/15

 1:39/1 1:39/2 1:41/14 1:41/15

 1:42/4 1:42/6 1:43/21 1:43/23

 1:44/16 1:44/17 1:44/18 1:45/17

issues [3] 1:5/6 1:22/18

 1:29/21

it [99] 

it's [28] 1:6/22 1:8/17 1:10/17

 1:10/18 1:11/17 1:12/10 1:13/20

 1:15/7 1:16/14 1:17/7 1:19/12

 1:21/17 1:24/25 1:25/13 1:26/15

 1:30/15 1:31/3 1:31/4 1:31/11

 1:33/5 1:33/7 1:34/19 1:36/16

 1:37/14 1:41/5 1:41/14 1:43/14

 1:44/25

item [2] 1:16/11 1:17/9

its [7] 1:11/2 1:23/22 1:24/10

 1:27/10 1:27/19 1:41/13 1:41/15

itself [8] 1:14/14 1:21/24

 1:21/25 1:22/7 1:25/2 1:29/19

 1:32/11 1:32/18

J

JAMES [5] 1:1/22 1:1/25 1:4/16

 1:47/20 1:47/21

January [1] 1:26/11

January 2023 [1] 1:26/11

joining [1] 1:21/2

joint [4] 1:5/25 1:24/18 1:25/4

 1:26/13

JR [1] 1:1/16

judge [38] 1:1/4 1:5/14 1:5/24

 1:6/7 1:7/12 1:7/13 1:8/7 1:9/5

 1:10/4 1:10/17 1:23/19 1:23/24

 1:23/25 1:24/15 1:24/17 1:26/7

 1:26/10 1:28/2 1:28/15 1:30/8

 1:30/11 1:31/3 1:31/6 1:31/13

 1:31/24 1:32/15 1:35/24 1:36/7

 1:36/14 1:41/2 1:42/10 1:42/22

 1:44/12 1:45/3 1:45/7 1:45/13

 1:45/18 1:45/20

judges [1] 1:23/18

judicial [3] 1:32/25 1:33/1

 1:43/2

July [1] 1:26/12

July 2023 [1] 1:26/12

jumped [1] 1:25/21

June [1] 1:26/20

jurisdiction [29] 1:7/4 1:9/23

 1:11/21 1:11/21 1:11/25 1:12/5

 1:12/22 1:12/22 1:12/25 1:13/6

 1:13/7 1:15/5 1:15/14 1:27/5

 1:27/6 1:27/9 1:27/11 1:27/16

 1:28/4 1:28/6 1:28/7 1:37/16

 1:37/24 1:38/13 1:38/18 1:38/21

 1:39/12 1:39/17 1:45/9

jurisdictional [5] 1:37/20

 1:37/21 1:38/4 1:39/3 1:40/11

jurisdictions [1] 1:6/13

just [38] 1:6/23 1:12/17

 1:12/19 1:13/13 1:14/14 1:14/16

 1:14/25 1:15/3 1:15/4 1:15/23

 1:17/5 1:17/15 1:17/16 1:18/10

 1:18/13 1:19/14 1:19/20 1:20/11

 1:20/12 1:20/12 1:20/17 1:21/23

 1:23/18 1:26/1 1:27/23 1:29/17

 1:29/21 1:29/22 1:33/6 1:34/3

 1:34/7 1:35/4 1:35/7 1:35/12

 1:35/12 1:45/3 1:45/3 1:45/16

Justice [5] 1:27/10 1:27/19

 1:28/8 1:29/6 1:29/8

justify [1] 1:24/4

K

keep [2] 1:34/3 1:34/21

KEMKER [2] 1:2/8 1:5/2

Kennedy [1] 1:2/9

kept [1] 1:15/2

keyed [2] 1:24/21 1:24/21

kind [4] 1:8/16 1:12/16 1:15/8

 1:22/16

Kingdom [3] 1:32/8 1:32/9

 1:33/10

Kinsky [1] 1:5/9

know [47] 1:6/21 1:6/21 1:7/20

 1:8/16 1:10/17 1:11/7 1:11/10

 1:11/24 1:13/11 1:13/12 1:14/2

 1:14/23 1:15/2 1:15/12 1:16/7

 1:16/10 1:16/11 1:18/10 1:19/14

 1:19/18 1:19/20 1:20/20 1:23/15

 1:24/5 1:25/15 1:25/17 1:26/18

 1:33/8 1:33/25 1:35/9 1:35/9

 1:35/19 1:36/10 1:36/16 1:37/19

 1:42/1 1:42/21 1:42/23 1:43/9

 1:43/14 1:43/14 1:43/15 1:44/8

 1:44/13 1:44/14 1:44/14 1:45/1

knowledge [1] 1:17/7

known [1] 1:18/4

Krin [1] 1:5/12

KRINSKY [10] 1:2/11 1:2/13

 1:5/1 1:5/10 1:5/13 1:11/12

 1:14/12 1:15/6 1:15/18 1:37/6

L

lack [2] 1:28/10 1:31/10

lacks [1] 1:27/15

lady [1] 1:20/11

language [1] 1:20/20

last [7] 1:26/8 1:28/22 1:29/20

 1:29/23 1:31/17 1:45/6 1:45/12

latest [1] 1:16/1

LAVAN [2] 1:3/2 1:4/20

law [11] 1:4/8 1:6/25 1:10/23

 1:12/11 1:12/11 1:18/14 1:18/23

 1:20/4 1:32/16 1:33/9 1:44/6

lawsuit [3] 1:11/17 1:27/7

 1:28/11

lawyer [2] 1:19/15 1:19/19

lawyers [1] 1:16/8

lead [1] 1:5/16

least [1] 1:35/11

leave [6] 1:23/7 1:24/16 1:30/2

 1:31/14 1:41/17 1:42/3

LEEN [2] 1:2/17 1:4/23

left [1] 1:20/10

legal [1] 1:30/22

legion [1] 1:12/2

legions [1] 1:12/24

Legislation [1] 1:21/12

legislative [3] 1:27/15 1:28/5

 1:28/7

legitimately [1] 1:14/8

length [1] 1:10/23

LEON [1] 1:1/22

less [1] 1:26/14

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 53 of 59
L

let [9] 1:7/7 1:11/10 1:25/24

 1:33/21 1:33/21 1:40/25 1:41/3

 1:42/20 1:42/20

let's [4] 1:11/10 1:13/16

 1:17/14 1:27/23

letter [5] 1:21/9 1:21/23

 1:22/9 1:24/11 1:25/17

LIEB [2] 1:2/10 1:5/2

LIEBERMAN [1] 1:2/11

like [11] 1:7/4 1:13/1 1:13/7

 1:19/4 1:19/21 1:20/4 1:20/15

 1:21/4 1:22/1 1:23/18 1:23/18

likelihood [2] 1:41/12 1:41/14

likely [2] 1:41/20 1:42/2

limbs [1] 1:26/23

limit [2] 1:33/15 1:43/5

limited [10] 1:5/25 1:10/2

 1:23/2 1:23/6 1:23/10 1:23/14

 1:26/9 1:26/21 1:32/15 1:43/24

LINDSEY [2] 1:2/13 1:5/1

line [1] 1:13/4

litigate [2] 1:24/6 1:39/20

litigating [5] 1:18/4 1:23/3

 1:23/8 1:23/11 1:43/22

litigation [4] 1:14/10 1:20/1

 1:33/6 1:40/2

little [2] 1:20/23 1:36/22

LLC [4] 1:2/15 1:2/15 1:3/2

 1:3/2

LLP [6] 1:2/5 1:2/16 1:2/18

 1:3/2 1:3/5 1:4/24

local [5] 1:16/1 1:16/2 1:16/16

 1:16/24 1:36/24

located [2] 1:16/20 1:16/22

locked [1] 1:31/18

longer [1] 1:12/5

look [8] 1:8/23 1:10/9 1:12/19

 1:17/11 1:19/1 1:20/25 1:25/5

 1:36/21

looked [1] 1:16/2

looking [6] 1:14/7 1:16/23

 1:16/24 1:21/8 1:25/5 1:30/24

Los [1] 1:3/6

lost [1] 1:38/24

lot [2] 1:9/14 1:26/12

LUIS [3] 1:1/5 1:4/4 1:18/12

M

made [9] 1:6/10 1:8/15 1:24/11

 1:27/2 1:31/1 1:41/1 1:41/19

 1:41/25 1:45/2

Madison [1] 1:1/21

Magistrate [1] 1:1/4

maintained [1] 1:9/11

make [8] 1:17/16 1:19/21

 1:26/19 1:27/23 1:38/20 1:41/20

 1:45/12 1:45/16

makes [1] 1:19/17

making [1] 1:15/16

managed [1] 1:9/11

MANUEL [1] 1:1/5

many [1] 1:11/24

March [1] 1:30/2

March 9th [1] 1:30/2

MARK [2] 1:2/4 1:4/13

market [1] 1:9/10

materials [1] 1:21/7

matter [9] 1:6/13 1:7/4 1:9/22

 1:11/21 1:12/22 1:12/24 1:44/13

 1:45/18 1:47/9

matters [2] 1:6/5 1:36/9

may [16] 1:1/11 1:4/1 1:7/12

 1:7/12 1:12/3 1:13/4 1:16/19

 1:19/11 1:24/7 1:26/15 1:26/16

 1:26/20 1:30/6 1:30/18 1:41/11

 1:47/16

May 25th [1] 1:26/15

May 26th [1] 1:26/20

maybe [5] 1:7/2 1:21/7 1:26/5

 1:29/11 1:35/25

McLaughlin [1] 1:4/22

me [27] 1:4/10 1:4/22 1:5/14

 1:6/25 1:7/7 1:9/20 1:11/2

 1:11/10 1:13/1 1:13/7 1:16/4

 1:16/21 1:19/17 1:20/24 1:21/17

 1:25/21 1:25/24 1:31/20 1:33/21

 1:33/21 1:38/24 1:40/25 1:41/3

 1:42/20 1:42/20 1:44/25 1:47/6

mean [10] 1:7/25 1:8/25 1:19/13

 1:20/10 1:20/19 1:29/18 1:34/7

 1:35/18 1:40/19 1:44/13

meaning [1] 1:22/10

means [1] 1:11/24

meant [1] 1:36/15

meets [1] 1:42/21

members [3] 1:17/23 1:18/11

 1:44/9

memo [1] 1:41/4

memorandum [1] 1:15/24

mention [2] 1:6/20 1:6/23

merits [3] 1:6/15 1:9/19

 1:26/24

Miami [4] 1:1/10 1:2/4 1:2/20

 1:3/3

MICHAEL [2] 1:2/13 1:4/25

might [4] 1:16/4 1:18/8 1:34/23

 1:35/15

militates [1] 1:38/14

mine [1] 1:18/11

minutes [1] 1:30/11

mistaken [1] 1:16/20

moment [1] 1:37/10

month [5] 1:17/9 1:17/9 1:29/6

 1:29/9 1:29/10

months [4] 1:29/4 1:31/15

 1:31/16 1:43/6

more [4] 1:21/7 1:30/4 1:30/16

 1:44/5

motion [52] 

motions [12] 1:10/18 1:14/17

 1:22/17 1:23/8 1:24/2 1:26/17

 1:30/5 1:33/3 1:33/25 1:38/15

 1:41/19 1:42/5

moved [2] 1:23/9 1:31/2

Mr. [25] 1:5/3 1:5/6 1:5/8

 1:5/9 1:5/9 1:5/18 1:5/22 1:7/8

 1:9/13 1:11/12 1:13/3 1:13/18

 1:13/25 1:14/11 1:14/12 1:15/6

 1:15/18 1:17/15 1:36/12 1:37/6

 1:37/7 1:37/11 1:37/13 1:42/15

 1:45/4

Mr. Davies [2] 1:5/22 1:37/13

Mr. Kinsky [1] 1:5/9

Mr. Krinsky [5] 1:11/12 1:14/12

 1:15/6 1:15/18 1:37/6

Mr. Nunez [8] 1:5/6 1:7/8

 1:9/13 1:13/3 1:13/18 1:13/25

 1:14/11 1:45/4

Mr. Raymond [2] 1:5/8 1:5/18

Mr. Rhys [1] 1:36/12

Mr. Rodriguez [3] 1:5/3 1:17/15

 1:42/15

Mr. Surgeon [3] 1:5/9 1:37/7

 1:37/11

much [6] 1:6/12 1:20/17 1:30/16

 1:36/25 1:45/14 1:45/19

MULLINS [2] 1:2/2 1:4/14

multiple [1] 1:16/8

must [2] 1:6/14 1:22/1

mute [1] 1:36/19

muted [2] 1:37/8 1:37/8

my [21] 1:4/11 1:4/14 1:5/13

 1:15/13 1:15/25 1:16/2 1:17/6

 1:17/7 1:18/11 1:19/5 1:19/5

 1:20/20 1:22/19 1:28/1 1:29/11

 1:29/12 1:36/21 1:44/8 1:45/15

 1:45/15 1:47/5

myself [2] 1:19/13 1:26/19

N

NAIM [2] 1:3/4 1:4/20

name [1] 1:39/11

named [3] 1:38/9 1:38/22

 1:40/12

NATHAN [2] 1:2/14 1:5/1

nature [1] 1:17/6

necessary [3] 1:34/24 1:35/16

 1:43/7

need [10] 1:12/17 1:12/19

 1:15/3 1:15/4 1:25/25 1:28/5

 1:30/22 1:32/23 1:36/11 1:40/15

needs [1] 1:32/17

neither [1] 1:47/10

NELSON [2] 1:2/2 1:4/14

networks [1] 1:9/10

never [1] 1:31/9

New [9] 1:1/19 1:1/19 1:1/21

 1:1/21 1:2/6 1:2/6 1:2/12

 1:2/12 1:45/9

next [6] 1:4/10 1:10/23 1:30/13

 1:32/13 1:32/25 1:34/9

nexus [1] 1:27/7

night [1] 1:29/23

no [32] 1:1/7 1:1/25 1:5/20

 1:7/3 1:8/3 1:10/2 1:10/4

 1:11/4 1:11/6 1:12/5 1:13/3

 1:14/9 1:15/6 1:15/15 1:18/3

 1:19/17 1:19/21 1:20/13 1:23/20

 1:27/4 1:27/7 1:29/1 1:30/9

 1:30/19 1:32/20 1:32/23 1:35/14

 1:36/21 1:37/10 1:38/17 1:40/10

 1:47/21

non [1] 1:27/17

non-U.S./Cuban [1] 1:27/17

none [1] 1:39/8

normal [2] 1:18/18 1:18/24

normally [1] 1:35/7

Northwest [1] 1:2/16

not [64] 

note [4] 1:6/6 1:6/10 1:17/25

 1:21/1

nothing [2] 1:13/5 1:44/5

notice [2] 1:6/1 1:21/6

now [22] 1:9/14 1:14/7 1:15/18

 1:15/25 1:18/6 1:18/14 1:20/13

 1:20/25 1:21/8 1:24/6 1:25/22

 1:26/13 1:26/15 1:26/22 1:29/7

 1:30/13 1:31/12 1:35/14 1:36/23

 1:37/17 1:43/20 1:44/4

Number [3] 1:4/5 1:31/4 1:32/19

Numeral [1] 1:17/1

NUNEZ [14] 1:1/15 1:1/16 1:4/9

 1:4/11 1:4/12 1:5/6 1:5/7 1:7/8

 1:9/13 1:13/3 1:13/18 1:13/25

 1:14/11 1:45/4

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 54 of 59
O

obtain [2] 1:22/19 1:33/2

obtained [1] 1:19/16

obviate [1] 1:28/5

obviously [6] 1:7/20 1:10/17

 1:14/21 1:19/18 1:30/1 1:30/10

October [1] 1:28/21

off [7] 1:17/10 1:23/9 1:24/1

 1:24/21 1:24/21 1:25/17 1:41/3

offense [3] 1:21/11 1:25/2

 1:30/20

official [3] 1:1/12 1:1/25

 1:47/6

Oh [1] 1:5/11

Okay [14] 1:5/8 1:5/22 1:9/15

 1:12/18 1:19/7 1:19/24 1:20/5

 1:20/22 1:25/20 1:35/17 1:37/11

 1:40/24 1:42/17 1:42/20

old [1] 1:18/12

omission [1] 1:22/2

once [2] 1:16/18 1:24/16

one [17] 1:2/3 1:10/6 1:17/18

 1:17/20 1:19/4 1:19/11 1:20/9

 1:20/11 1:20/14 1:20/14 1:20/15

 1:20/16 1:25/11 1:35/18 1:35/21

 1:38/2 1:44/15

ones [1] 1:7/16

only [11] 1:6/20 1:10/6 1:10/16

 1:11/2 1:11/25 1:14/21 1:17/20

 1:24/6 1:32/16 1:40/11 1:41/12

opening [1] 1:33/9

operated [2] 1:22/20 1:23/13

opinion [1] 1:19/22

opinions [1] 1:29/2

opportunity [4] 1:27/20 1:28/17

 1:36/9 1:36/12

opposing [1] 1:41/16

order [24] 1:5/24 1:6/6 1:6/7

 1:6/8 1:6/18 1:18/3 1:19/10

 1:19/11 1:22/11 1:23/9 1:23/20

 1:23/24 1:24/1 1:24/7 1:26/7

 1:26/10 1:30/2 1:30/9 1:30/11

 1:39/25 1:42/7 1:42/11 1:43/21

 1:43/23

orderly [1] 1:33/2

orders [4] 1:18/1 1:19/15

 1:19/19 1:19/20

original [6] 1:13/19 1:17/22

 1:17/23 1:20/14 1:22/15 1:36/22

Otazo [1] 1:1/4

Otazo-Reyes [1] 1:1/4

other [13] 1:8/11 1:8/12

 1:18/21 1:20/25 1:21/2 1:25/9

 1:25/13 1:26/18 1:27/8 1:27/13

 1:28/15 1:30/25 1:44/18

others [1] 1:17/21

otherwise [3] 1:33/18 1:34/16

 1:47/13

our [17] 1:7/15 1:7/18 1:7/18

 1:10/16 1:12/1 1:13/19 1:13/20

 1:13/22 1:16/19 1:19/12 1:24/9

 1:31/11 1:31/18 1:35/2 1:42/3

 1:43/19 1:45/1

ourselves [1] 1:22/6

out [16] 1:4/10 1:4/11 1:8/22

 1:13/11 1:18/23 1:20/6 1:20/10

 1:20/23 1:20/24 1:21/13 1:27/10

 1:28/19 1:30/18 1:38/21 1:40/23

 1:45/15

outcome [2] 1:24/14 1:47/13

outset [2] 1:26/6 1:31/2

outside [1] 1:29/20

over [3] 1:15/14 1:27/7 1:37/24

oversees [1] 1:27/16

OVERY [1] 1:2/5

own [1] 1:28/13

owned [1] 1:8/19

owners [1] 1:17/22

P

P.A [1] 1:1/20

P.C [2] 1:1/18 1:2/11

p.m [1] 1:4/1

page [10] 1:1/23 1:2/22 1:6/17

 1:10/23 1:17/16 1:17/17 1:17/25

 1:25/14 1:27/23 1:41/4

Page 1 [1] 1:6/17

Page 3 [1] 1:41/4

Page 7 [1] 1:25/14

Page 9 [2] 1:17/17 1:17/25

pages [4] 1:1/1 1:31/4 1:32/19

 1:47/5

pain [1] 1:32/3

paper [1] 1:45/1

papers [1] 1:10/5

paragraph [3] 1:22/25 1:23/12

 1:25/11

Paragraph 3 [1] 1:22/25

Paragraph 6 [1] 1:23/12

Paragraphs [1] 1:22/25

parcel [1] 1:23/8

Pardon [1] 1:5/14

part [2] 1:8/17 1:23/8

participate [1] 1:40/2

participation [1] 1:43/20

particular [1] 1:18/25

parties [7] 1:8/12 1:25/14

 1:32/14 1:39/9 1:41/18 1:43/15

 1:47/11

partner [1] 1:4/11

party [5] 1:8/11 1:15/9 1:30/17

 1:44/1 1:44/3

pass [2] 1:18/8 1:19/4

passed [2] 1:20/15 1:20/16

passes [1] 1:19/25

past [1] 1:17/2

PAULINO [2] 1:1/16 1:4/11

peculiar [1] 1:36/13

PEDRO [2] 1:2/20 1:4/23

peek [6] 1:10/18 1:14/17

 1:26/23 1:27/1 1:42/4 1:42/5

Pence [3] 1:1/25 1:47/20

 1:47/21

Pence-Aviles [3] 1:1/25 1:47/20

 1:47/21

pending [10] 1:7/3 1:8/9 1:9/19

 1:21/5 1:28/20 1:29/1 1:33/4

 1:38/16 1:41/7 1:42/11

Pennsylvania [1] 1:2/16

people [2] 1:44/14 1:45/16

perform [1] 1:39/4

performed [1] 1:39/9

perhaps [1] 1:16/16

permission [12] 1:22/19 1:30/1

 1:31/7 1:34/3 1:34/4 1:39/20

 1:39/23 1:39/25 1:43/1 1:43/7

 1:43/12 1:43/24

permit [1] 1:32/11

permitted [1] 1:37/20

personal [10] 1:27/4 1:27/6

 1:27/9 1:27/11 1:28/4 1:37/16

 1:37/23 1:38/13 1:38/18 1:38/21

persons [1] 1:19/16

persuaded [1] 1:42/3

persuasive [1] 1:14/13

PICKERING [2] 1:2/15 1:3/5

piece [4] 1:27/9 1:30/13

 1:31/20 1:32/12

place [3] 1:6/6 1:25/11 1:38/5

placed [1] 1:11/11

plainly [1] 1:33/1

plaintiff [12] 1:5/4 1:11/22

 1:17/20 1:18/24 1:19/25 1:20/11

 1:27/21 1:37/19 1:38/9 1:38/20

 1:39/15 1:41/4

plaintiffs [29] 1:1/6 1:1/14

 1:4/9 1:4/12 1:4/18 1:6/1

 1:6/11 1:6/12 1:9/17 1:16/4

 1:18/4 1:18/8 1:18/11 1:18/25

 1:19/4 1:20/9 1:23/4 1:27/3

 1:27/5 1:28/10 1:28/16 1:29/22

 1:30/25 1:31/8 1:31/9 1:31/14

 1:44/17 1:44/18 1:45/8

plaintiffs' [8] 1:11/19 1:15/24

 1:20/14 1:20/15 1:27/8 1:31/7

 1:40/25 1:41/17

PLC [6] 1:1/8 1:2/2 1:2/15

 1:3/2 1:4/5 1:39/7

pleaded [2] 1:27/6 1:28/16

pleading [3] 1:27/4 1:29/17

 1:29/21

please [2] 1:4/6 1:7/6

pled [1] 1:7/18

plenary [3] 1:22/24 1:23/1

 1:23/15

point [16] 1:8/7 1:12/6 1:15/17

 1:16/4 1:20/6 1:20/24 1:24/3

 1:27/10 1:31/11 1:35/21 1:35/25

 1:42/5 1:42/21 1:44/13 1:45/6

 1:45/12

pointed [2] 1:8/22 1:28/19

points [4] 1:15/24 1:41/1

 1:41/18 1:41/20

poor [1] 1:31/1

popped [1] 1:20/23

popping [1] 1:4/11

portion [2] 1:17/8 1:36/1

position [12] 1:7/15 1:10/3

 1:11/4 1:11/14 1:11/15 1:12/1

 1:13/1 1:14/2 1:33/6 1:42/9

 1:43/18 1:44/4

positions [2] 1:15/8 1:15/11

possession [1] 1:40/21

possibility [1] 1:34/24

possible [1] 1:24/6

postpone [1] 1:42/10

potential [1] 1:40/18

potentially [1] 1:40/23

practice [3] 1:19/23 1:22/16

 1:34/13

practices [6] 1:15/25 1:16/2

 1:16/17 1:16/21 1:16/24 1:16/25

precisely [1] 1:23/10

preferrable [1] 1:33/5

preliminary [2] 1:26/23 1:27/1

premature [1] 1:6/18

prepared [2] 1:16/10 1:35/21

present [2] 1:38/3 1:44/16

presenting [2] 1:10/21 1:10/22

presents [1] 1:39/18

preserve [1] 1:31/8

preventing [1] 1:43/15

previously [4] 1:24/5 1:32/15

 1:43/6 1:47/8

prima [1] 1:27/6

principal [1] 1:28/12

prior [3] 1:22/7 1:25/1 1:32/5

probably [1] 1:21/18

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 55 of 59
P

problem [1] 1:28/12

problems [1] 1:29/16

proceed [3] 1:7/12 1:7/12

 1:25/19

proceeding [1] 1:32/4

proceedings [8] 1:1/12 1:31/22

 1:33/7 1:33/9 1:33/17 1:34/15

 1:46/4 1:47/8

process [2] 1:32/8 1:33/2

processes [1] 1:43/2

products [1] 1:9/10

Progressive [1] 1:41/5

prohibited [2] 1:32/3 1:40/16

prohibition [1] 1:22/3

promoted [1] 1:33/1

promptly [1] 1:23/21

proper [1] 1:39/11

properly [1] 1:39/17

property [6] 1:8/19 1:9/7

 1:9/11 1:27/17 1:28/13 1:29/19

proposals [1] 1:25/15

proposed [1] 1:25/4

proposes [1] 1:41/11

proposing [1] 1:24/24

proposition [1] 1:41/6

proscribed [2] 1:21/13 1:21/16

proscriptions [1] 1:38/7

protection [1] 1:10/24

provided [1] 1:47/6

pulled [1] 1:15/25

pure [1] 1:23/18

purely [1] 1:31/12

purported [1] 1:39/4

purpose [1] 1:37/3

purposes [3] 1:8/22 1:10/12

 1:27/17

pursuant [1] 1:6/7

put [4] 1:23/9 1:24/1 1:33/15

 1:41/22

putting [2] 1:33/5 1:40/14

Q

question [10] 1:9/16 1:17/6

 1:17/14 1:22/19 1:22/21 1:26/5

 1:28/4 1:28/19 1:28/24 1:36/15

questions [2] 1:27/12 1:43/22

quickly [1] 1:44/13

quite [2] 1:7/2 1:21/7

quote [2] 1:6/12 1:21/10

quoted [1] 1:24/12

quoting [1] 1:30/3

R

RABINOWITZ [2] 1:2/11 1:5/1

raise [4] 1:10/5 1:10/15

 1:10/16 1:37/14

raised [4] 1:7/16 1:9/17 1:10/6

 1:37/13

raises [2] 1:27/12 1:28/24

raising [1] 1:28/18

RAMON [1] 1:1/17

rather [1] 1:41/8

RAYMOND [4] 1:2/4 1:4/14 1:5/8

 1:5/18

re [1] 1:41/18

read [3] 1:21/23 1:42/16 1:45/1

real [2] 1:27/16 1:42/19

really [3] 1:8/16 1:9/21

 1:26/20

reargue [1] 1:41/18

reargument [1] 1:23/19

reason [4] 1:8/8 1:30/19

 1:37/25 1:38/23

reasoning [1] 1:19/15

recall [1] 1:16/1

received [5] 1:6/1 1:6/1 1:6/3

 1:24/12 1:43/10

recent [1] 1:12/6

recently [2] 1:28/22 1:43/10

recognized [1] 1:28/15

recollection [3] 1:15/13 1:28/1

 1:29/12

recommend [1] 1:35/24

recommendation [2] 1:35/10

 1:45/18

record [1] 1:4/6

recording [2] 1:1/12 1:47/6

refer [2] 1:6/12 1:30/25

reference [2] 1:5/24 1:16/15

referred [4] 1:15/12 1:16/16

 1:16/19 1:30/12

referring [1] 1:36/22

reflection [1] 1:32/6

reflects [1] 1:24/12

regard [3] 1:5/5 1:44/8 1:45/6

regarded [1] 1:24/3

regardless [1] 1:33/24

regulate [1] 1:27/16

regulation [2] 1:21/24 1:21/25

regulators [1] 1:23/18

rejected [1] 1:12/8

relate [1] 1:19/15

related [1] 1:47/11

relates [1] 1:45/11

relating [3] 1:5/6 1:6/2

 1:22/18

relationship [1] 1:11/2

relative [2] 1:26/25 1:30/14

relief [2] 1:29/16 1:32/15

relies [1] 1:13/6

rely [2] 1:13/5 1:45/1

relying [1] 1:17/3

remarkably [1] 1:31/9

remedy [2] 1:28/11 1:31/6

remember [1] 1:17/2

removed [1] 1:36/23

renew [1] 1:36/1

renewed [4] 1:23/15 1:23/17

 1:23/23 1:35/23

renewing [1] 1:24/9

repeat [1] 1:26/1

reply [6] 1:6/4 1:6/11 1:7/7

 1:11/17 1:20/25 1:21/6

report [4] 1:24/18 1:25/5

 1:35/10 1:45/17

Reporter [2] 1:1/25 1:47/21

repose [1] 1:29/21

request [15] 1:21/4 1:21/4

 1:23/1 1:23/15 1:23/17 1:23/23

 1:24/1 1:24/9 1:24/20 1:25/24

 1:26/2 1:31/21 1:31/23 1:32/21

 1:35/23

requested [3] 1:26/7 1:28/3

 1:29/7

requesting [1] 1:35/20

requests [4] 1:22/3 1:22/10

 1:23/19 1:27/20

require [2] 1:30/19 1:31/25

required [2] 1:26/21 1:40/22

requirement [1] 1:22/3

requiring [3] 1:14/7 1:24/8

 1:33/8

research [1] 1:36/23

residence [1] 1:27/8

resolution [2] 1:7/3 1:8/9

resolutions [1] 1:42/12

resolve [1] 1:28/4

resources [1] 1:30/17

respect [10] 1:19/18 1:19/20

 1:37/14 1:37/16 1:38/8 1:39/14

 1:39/19 1:40/11 1:43/2 1:43/19

respond [5] 1:9/17 1:39/20

 1:40/1 1:40/15 1:40/22

response [10] 1:6/1 1:6/17

 1:7/19 1:10/6 1:10/16 1:14/22

 1:17/16 1:27/4 1:29/23 1:30/6

result [1] 1:32/21

resulting [1] 1:22/4

review [1] 1:14/11

reviewed [5] 1:6/5 1:6/5 1:6/16

 1:6/16 1:25/22

revised [1] 1:16/5

Reyes [1] 1:1/4

RHYS [5] 1:2/7 1:4/14 1:5/16

 1:21/21 1:36/12

right [61] 

rights [1] 1:19/5

rise [1] 1:9/24

risk [2] 1:31/6 1:35/1

RMR [2] 1:1/25 1:47/21

road [1] 1:42/21

RODRIGUEZ [10] 1:1/5 1:1/15

 1:1/17 1:4/4 1:4/8 1:4/8 1:4/12

 1:5/3 1:17/15 1:42/15

role [3] 1:10/2 1:10/2 1:10/4

Roman [1] 1:17/1

round [1] 1:22/16

rubber [1] 1:42/21

Rubicam [2] 1:2/15 1:3/2

rule [6] 1:33/18 1:34/10

 1:34/14 1:34/17 1:38/15 1:41/8

rules [8] 1:16/1 1:16/2 1:16/16

 1:16/24 1:18/17 1:18/18 1:18/24

 1:36/24

ruling [1] 1:31/18

running [1] 1:42/19

S

S.A [1] 1:2/8

said [14] 1:10/9 1:15/18

 1:19/23 1:20/15 1:23/20 1:25/16

 1:27/10 1:27/23 1:29/4 1:30/3

 1:32/2 1:32/13 1:32/15 1:33/11

sake [1] 1:42/24

same [6] 1:17/16 1:26/1 1:31/24

 1:36/19 1:38/7 1:43/1

sanction [1] 1:32/4

sanctioned [2] 1:44/2 1:44/3

sanctions [5] 1:21/13 1:21/14

 1:21/16 1:21/20 1:33/7

Saturday [1] 1:47/16

saw [3] 1:6/16 1:6/20 1:7/7

say [17] 1:11/6 1:12/12 1:13/9

 1:14/16 1:15/19 1:18/24 1:23/4

 1:24/5 1:27/3 1:29/23 1:29/24

 1:29/24 1:30/8 1:33/16 1:34/15

 1:35/22 1:45/17

saying [19] 1:10/1 1:12/22

 1:13/3 1:13/8 1:15/2 1:23/23

 1:24/13 1:25/4 1:25/5 1:27/24

 1:34/5 1:34/18 1:34/19 1:34/20

 1:35/14 1:36/6 1:39/10 1:39/21

 1:44/2

says [7] 1:7/22 1:8/14 1:10/23

 1:15/6 1:21/10 1:21/19 1:21/25

schedule [2] 1:26/16 1:44/25

scheduling [17] 1:6/6 1:22/18

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 56 of 59
S

scheduling... [15] 1:23/9

 1:23/20 1:24/1 1:24/7 1:24/18

 1:25/5 1:25/15 1:26/7 1:26/10

 1:30/9 1:30/11 1:42/7 1:42/11

 1:43/21 1:43/23

Science [1] 1:41/5

scope [2] 1:23/5 1:23/13

scrolling [1] 1:25/8

second [9] 1:11/19 1:11/22

 1:14/4 1:29/14 1:29/25 1:30/6

 1:37/22 1:38/19 1:45/3

Secretary [5] 1:21/5 1:22/8

 1:25/18 1:31/22 1:33/13

section [1] 1:16/2

secure [1] 1:31/18

see [10] 1:6/17 1:6/23 1:11/10

 1:13/17 1:13/24 1:14/6 1:17/14

 1:24/18 1:35/12 1:36/2

seeing [1] 1:19/10

seek [7] 1:28/11 1:38/9 1:39/15

 1:39/19 1:39/22 1:39/24 1:43/17

seeking [2] 1:25/12 1:43/12

seem [1] 1:11/16

seems [2] 1:6/25 1:44/4

seen [2] 1:19/11 1:44/2

sense [3] 1:18/10 1:19/17

 1:19/21

separate [3] 1:6/3 1:32/21

 1:32/24

September [2] 1:31/25 1:32/18

September 2020 [1] 1:32/18

serious [2] 1:30/16 1:32/10

serve [2] 1:38/10 1:41/11

set [2] 1:21/13 1:25/14

Seventh [1] 1:2/19

Several [1] 1:18/1

SHAKIR [1] 1:3/4

shared [1] 1:13/18

sharply [1] 1:30/15

short [1] 1:42/19

should [18] 1:7/23 1:19/3

 1:19/4 1:19/9 1:25/17 1:30/4

 1:30/21 1:41/23 1:42/10 1:42/24

 1:42/25 1:43/5 1:43/6 1:43/17

 1:44/14 1:44/19 1:44/21 1:44/22

shouldn't [1] 1:33/20

showed [1] 1:39/3

shown [1] 1:31/10

sic [1] 1:26/1

side [2] 1:15/11 1:30/25

similar [4] 1:27/12 1:39/18

 1:39/25 1:44/4

simultaneously [1] 1:25/12

since [3] 1:16/14 1:16/15

 1:19/7

sir [1] 1:44/11

sitting [1] 1:4/10

situation [4] 1:15/21 1:18/6

 1:20/12 1:24/24

six [1] 1:29/4

so [60] 

some [14] 1:6/7 1:8/8 1:15/24

 1:17/22 1:18/7 1:30/25 1:33/2

 1:35/6 1:35/11 1:36/8 1:41/20

 1:43/18 1:43/22 1:44/13

somebody [1] 1:6/21

someone [1] 1:16/7

something [3] 1:9/20 1:13/4

 1:36/12

sometimes [1] 1:6/22

somewhat [1] 1:43/8

somewhere [1] 1:21/18

soon [1] 1:23/16

sorry [16] 1:9/13 1:12/20

 1:13/21 1:15/13 1:19/22 1:27/22

 1:33/21 1:36/18 1:36/19 1:37/9

 1:38/24 1:39/22 1:40/6 1:42/10

 1:42/15 1:44/10

sort [5] 1:14/6 1:20/4 1:41/9

 1:41/9 1:44/5

sought [3] 1:22/23 1:22/24

 1:24/16

sound [2] 1:1/12 1:47/6

sounds [2] 1:13/1 1:13/7

source [1] 1:11/21

South [3] 1:2/3 1:3/3 1:3/6

Southeast [1] 1:2/19

SOUTHERN [5] 1:1/3 1:16/24

 1:41/5 1:45/9 1:47/7

sovereign [20] 1:6/14 1:6/19

 1:7/17 1:8/6 1:9/1 1:9/22

 1:10/1 1:10/10 1:10/15 1:10/24

 1:11/3 1:11/5 1:11/6 1:11/16

 1:11/20 1:12/1 1:12/5 1:12/23

 1:13/6 1:14/8

Spain [2] 1:39/5 1:40/3

Spanish [8] 1:38/5 1:38/24

 1:39/12 1:39/16 1:40/1 1:40/9

 1:40/16 1:40/17

speakers [1] 1:5/23

speaking [2] 1:5/21 1:19/13

specific [7] 1:16/11 1:26/2

 1:37/23 1:38/13 1:38/17 1:38/21

 1:42/18

specifically [1] 1:7/21

STANDARD [1] 1:2/11

standing [4] 1:28/10 1:28/16

 1:28/20 1:28/24

stands [4] 1:18/14 1:20/13

 1:37/22 1:41/6

start [2] 1:26/5 1:41/3

started [1] 1:8/15

starts [1] 1:36/6

state [8] 1:4/6 1:21/5 1:22/8

 1:25/18 1:29/15 1:31/22 1:33/13

 1:37/23

stated [3] 1:38/13 1:38/16

 1:47/8

statement [4] 1:6/17 1:13/14

 1:27/11 1:27/19

states [8] 1:1/2 1:9/5 1:38/6

 1:39/7 1:41/10 1:43/3 1:43/16

 1:44/7

statute [5] 1:7/21 1:7/25

 1:18/2 1:29/21 1:32/7

statutes [1] 1:43/15

statutory [1] 1:28/25

stay [37] 1:5/25 1:8/9 1:9/19

 1:10/23 1:12/24 1:13/22 1:14/6

 1:14/14 1:14/23 1:21/3 1:25/13

 1:26/7 1:26/21 1:26/22 1:30/10

 1:30/12 1:30/14 1:31/2 1:31/21

 1:31/25 1:32/21 1:32/24 1:33/12

 1:33/15 1:33/16 1:33/23 1:34/14

 1:34/19 1:35/13 1:35/20 1:35/22

 1:37/15 1:38/1 1:38/14 1:38/23

 1:41/6 1:41/12

stayed [1] 1:12/10

STEPHANIE [2] 1:2/10 1:5/2

still [10] 1:17/5 1:17/7

 1:17/20 1:20/11 1:27/5 1:29/1

 1:33/3 1:36/16 1:37/23 1:45/9

stopped [1] 1:12/16

stored [1] 1:9/11

straight [2] 1:9/24 1:33/22

street [3] 1:2/12 1:2/19

 1:42/22

strength [1] 1:42/1

strong [2] 1:41/12 1:41/14

STROOCK [4] 1:3/2 1:3/2 1:4/20

 1:4/20

subcategory [1] 1:21/4

subject [11] 1:6/13 1:6/19

 1:7/3 1:9/22 1:11/21 1:12/22

 1:12/24 1:27/22 1:38/7 1:39/12

 1:39/17

subjects [1] 1:25/2

submissions [1] 1:25/23

submitted [1] 1:29/9

Subsequently [1] 1:42/6

subset [1] 1:35/13

substantial [2] 1:27/12 1:27/19

substituted [1] 1:20/3

succession [1] 1:19/17

such [2] 1:40/17 1:40/21

sued [1] 1:10/12

sufficiently [1] 1:27/18

suggest [1] 1:40/19

suggesting [2] 1:34/14 1:35/6

suing [1] 1:9/5

suit [1] 1:11/15

Suite [7] 1:1/15 1:1/18 1:1/21

 1:2/9 1:2/19 1:3/3 1:3/6

summarizing [1] 1:22/9

summary [2] 1:21/24 1:26/1

supported [1] 1:12/2

Supreme [1] 1:11/24

sure [9] 1:16/19 1:17/3 1:17/5

 1:17/16 1:21/7 1:27/23 1:43/22

 1:43/25 1:45/17

SURGEON [5] 1:3/4 1:4/20 1:5/9

 1:37/7 1:37/11

survive [1] 1:17/21

survived [1] 1:17/3

survives [2] 1:44/15 1:44/16

system [2] 1:43/2 1:43/19

systems [1] 1:9/10

T

tack [1] 1:34/5

tail [2] 1:35/14 1:35/15

take [4] 1:5/16 1:31/7 1:31/14

 1:37/20

taken [5] 1:17/10 1:37/25

 1:39/3 1:47/8 1:47/12

taking [2] 1:10/18 1:31/13

talk [1] 1:25/12

Tampa [1] 1:2/9

tell [1] 1:24/14

telling [2] 1:11/2 1:43/8

terms [2] 1:9/24 1:26/22

test [1] 1:30/13

testimony [1] 1:31/8

text [1] 1:36/22

than [6] 1:26/15 1:27/8 1:30/16

 1:30/16 1:41/8 1:44/5

thank [15] 1:5/23 1:7/10

 1:21/21 1:22/21 1:26/4 1:36/25

 1:40/24 1:41/2 1:45/12 1:45/14

 1:45/19 1:45/20 1:45/21 1:45/23

 1:45/25

that [322] 

that's [43] 1:6/20 1:9/3

 1:10/14 1:11/1 1:11/4 1:12/1

 1:12/9 1:12/16 1:13/1 1:13/7

 1:13/12 1:13/14 1:13/15 1:15/2

 1:15/10 1:15/11 1:15/21 1:17/5

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 57 of 59
T

that's... [25] 1:19/8 1:19/18

 1:20/3 1:20/17 1:20/21 1:22/8

 1:22/24 1:23/11 1:25/10 1:25/10

 1:29/12 1:29/13 1:30/24 1:32/6

 1:32/18 1:33/12 1:34/4 1:34/11

 1:35/5 1:36/13 1:42/4 1:44/5

 1:44/17 1:45/10 1:45/12

their [35] 1:6/2 1:6/11 1:7/3

 1:8/17 1:9/9 1:9/18 1:10/5

 1:10/6 1:10/14 1:11/18 1:11/19

 1:14/1 1:14/3 1:14/3 1:14/22

 1:18/25 1:19/16 1:25/15 1:27/3

 1:27/5 1:29/15 1:29/23 1:29/23

 1:31/8 1:31/11 1:31/20 1:41/4

 1:41/19 1:42/2 1:43/4 1:43/4

 1:43/20 1:44/14 1:44/19 1:45/17

them [10] 1:7/4 1:9/18 1:11/11

 1:20/15 1:20/16 1:31/1 1:31/16

 1:39/1 1:43/6 1:44/21

themselves [3] 1:44/19 1:44/20

 1:44/22

then [44] 1:5/8 1:5/23 1:6/3

 1:8/2 1:9/20 1:9/24 1:11/6

 1:13/3 1:13/9 1:14/13 1:14/13

 1:14/20 1:14/22 1:14/25 1:15/23

 1:17/14 1:20/3 1:20/6 1:21/3

 1:22/14 1:23/9 1:23/21 1:24/17

 1:25/14 1:26/2 1:26/24 1:28/8

 1:29/14 1:30/24 1:32/20 1:32/25

 1:33/11 1:34/2 1:34/3 1:34/8

 1:34/12 1:34/13 1:35/3 1:35/25

 1:37/7 1:39/11 1:42/21 1:44/24

 1:45/17

there [41] 1:6/7 1:6/10 1:6/20

 1:6/23 1:10/7 1:10/11 1:12/17

 1:15/14 1:15/15 1:16/15 1:18/23

 1:18/23 1:19/11 1:19/12 1:20/11

 1:21/14 1:23/16 1:26/12 1:26/23

 1:27/4 1:27/7 1:27/23 1:28/13

 1:29/16 1:30/9 1:32/8 1:32/9

 1:32/20 1:32/23 1:33/3 1:34/24

 1:35/11 1:36/5 1:36/5 1:36/5

 1:37/20 1:38/12 1:38/17 1:40/10

 1:44/2 1:45/8

there's [26] 1:6/6 1:6/6 1:7/3

 1:8/2 1:8/3 1:8/5 1:9/2 1:9/2

 1:9/3 1:9/3 1:11/4 1:11/6

 1:14/9 1:19/7 1:19/9 1:20/10

 1:20/13 1:21/7 1:26/23 1:26/24

 1:29/18 1:30/19 1:41/12 1:43/25

 1:44/1 1:44/1

therefore [2] 1:10/7 1:38/22

these [11] 1:9/5 1:9/8 1:18/24

 1:25/22 1:29/21 1:31/14 1:39/4

 1:39/16 1:39/25 1:40/21 1:44/15

they [44] 1:7/1 1:7/1 1:8/8

 1:8/17 1:9/18 1:10/5 1:10/15

 1:10/16 1:12/3 1:12/3 1:12/12

 1:13/10 1:14/2 1:14/13 1:18/25

 1:23/5 1:24/13 1:27/23 1:27/24

 1:28/3 1:28/12 1:28/13 1:29/23

 1:29/24 1:29/24 1:30/8 1:31/1

 1:31/12 1:31/16 1:31/16 1:31/17

 1:40/4 1:40/5 1:40/5 1:40/15

 1:40/20 1:40/22 1:41/19 1:41/23

 1:42/23 1:43/1 1:44/19 1:44/21

 1:44/22

they're [11] 1:8/25 1:10/21

 1:10/22 1:13/11 1:15/1 1:15/1

 1:27/3 1:27/24 1:29/17 1:41/20

 1:42/1

they've [4] 1:28/3 1:28/6

 1:31/10 1:43/24

thing [4] 1:20/25 1:26/1 1:34/9

 1:40/14

things [6] 1:16/18 1:20/23

 1:23/4 1:24/8 1:25/21 1:29/22

think [38] 1:7/8 1:8/1 1:10/20

 1:12/2 1:13/15 1:13/19 1:14/17

 1:14/18 1:14/24 1:14/24 1:15/3

 1:15/4 1:15/8 1:16/9 1:19/8

 1:19/8 1:19/12 1:23/5 1:23/13

 1:25/25 1:26/8 1:29/6 1:31/24

 1:32/25 1:33/20 1:34/7 1:34/7

 1:34/10 1:37/10 1:37/13 1:37/15

 1:37/25 1:38/12 1:38/22 1:40/20

 1:43/5 1:43/8 1:44/10

thinking [2] 1:34/21 1:36/6

thinks [1] 1:32/9

third [9] 1:1/18 1:8/7 1:22/16

 1:27/5 1:27/21 1:28/10 1:29/15

 1:37/17 1:38/17

this [63] 

those [14] 1:14/14 1:19/5

 1:20/23 1:22/20 1:25/20 1:26/2

 1:26/17 1:27/12 1:28/9 1:29/2

 1:38/7 1:38/11 1:39/8 1:39/9

though [1] 1:37/17

thought [3] 1:18/13 1:35/12

 1:36/19

three [4] 1:2/19 1:26/15

 1:28/21 1:31/24

threshold [2] 1:12/21 1:30/22

through [4] 1:16/2 1:25/8

 1:32/8 1:38/9

throughout [1] 1:31/10

time [15] 1:18/14 1:26/12

 1:28/14 1:32/17 1:33/2 1:33/15

 1:34/12 1:34/20 1:35/6 1:35/11

 1:36/5 1:36/19 1:42/5 1:45/12

 1:47/8

tips [1] 1:30/15

Title [1] 1:12/4

Title 3 [1] 1:12/4

told [4] 1:9/20 1:25/22 1:31/16

 1:36/21

too [1] 1:20/17

took [5] 1:31/14 1:31/16 1:38/5

 1:42/5 1:42/9

top [1] 1:34/20

Tower [1] 1:2/3

Trade [3] 1:21/9 1:22/8 1:31/23

trade.gov.uk [1] 1:43/13

trafficking [2] 1:9/6 1:9/8

TRAMONT [3] 1:1/15 1:4/8 1:4/12

Transcribed [1] 1:1/25

TRANSCRIBER [1] 1:47/3

transcript [4] 1:1/12 1:31/4

 1:32/18 1:47/5

translate [1] 1:21/18

transparent [1] 1:44/5

traveling [1] 1:9/21

treated [1] 1:7/23

TRENAM [2] 1:2/8 1:5/2

trial [1] 1:26/12

triggered [1] 1:25/17

Tristan [1] 1:21/10

true [1] 1:47/4

try [1] 1:19/14

trying [6] 1:9/23 1:11/1

 1:12/21 1:16/18 1:35/1 1:39/14

turn [3] 1:13/9 1:30/18 1:40/15

turned [1] 1:7/17

Turner [1] 1:32/1

two [10] 1:16/18 1:26/3 1:26/23

 1:28/9 1:29/20 1:29/22 1:31/8

 1:37/18 1:37/21 1:42/22

two-way [1] 1:42/22

two-year [1] 1:29/20

twofold [1] 1:7/15

U

U.S [8] 1:9/9 1:9/9 1:9/10

 1:21/11 1:24/7 1:39/6 1:47/7

 1:47/21

U.S. [1] 1:27/17

UK [14] 1:6/3 1:21/5 1:22/1

 1:22/7 1:23/16 1:23/21 1:32/16

 1:33/8 1:34/21 1:34/25 1:36/6

 1:42/25 1:44/1 1:44/3

UK's [2] 1:32/6 1:32/11

ultimately [2] 1:38/10 1:38/19

uncertainty [2] 1:19/8 1:19/10

uncle [1] 1:18/11

under [33] 1:6/14 1:6/25 1:7/21

 1:7/24 1:7/24 1:8/13 1:8/13

 1:8/14 1:8/18 1:8/24 1:9/1

 1:9/21 1:10/9 1:10/10 1:10/12

 1:11/15 1:11/17 1:11/24 1:11/25

 1:12/11 1:12/11 1:12/23 1:13/10

 1:14/8 1:15/7 1:15/7 1:18/14

 1:18/17 1:18/18 1:21/11 1:33/18

 1:34/9 1:34/16

understand [3] 1:15/16 1:18/13

 1:22/21

unfortunately [1] 1:18/7

unique [1] 1:15/21

UNITED [9] 1:1/2 1:9/4 1:32/8

 1:32/9 1:33/9 1:38/6 1:43/3

 1:43/16 1:44/7

unlimited [1] 1:25/2

unnecessary [2] 1:30/18 1:33/6

until [11] 1:6/18 1:12/10

 1:12/24 1:21/3 1:24/2 1:27/24

 1:31/22 1:33/17 1:33/24 1:34/4

 1:34/15

up [11] 1:9/20 1:15/24 1:17/12

 1:26/15 1:26/21 1:31/13 1:33/9

 1:34/13 1:41/16 1:42/6 1:43/20

upcoming [2] 1:6/18 1:41/21

update [1] 1:17/12

upon [2] 1:14/11 1:18/3

urgency [2] 1:31/10 1:31/12

us [5] 1:24/6 1:24/14 1:31/16

 1:35/6 1:37/14

use [5] 1:7/1 1:9/9 1:27/16

 1:29/19 1:29/20

used [1] 1:28/14

usually [1] 1:30/16

V

various [1] 1:41/1

version [3] 1:16/3 1:16/5

 1:36/16

versus [1] 1:4/4

very [12] 1:8/17 1:9/6 1:24/24

 1:26/9 1:26/20 1:30/15 1:31/3

 1:32/15 1:36/25 1:44/13 1:45/14

 1:45/19

via [1] 1:19/16

view [2] 1:4/10 1:32/6

violates [1] 1:32/7

violation [1] 1:33/8

violations [1] 1:28/25

vis [2] 1:10/3 1:10/3

vis-a-vis [1] 1:10/3

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 58 of 59
W

waiting [1] 1:45/16

waived [1] 1:6/22

Wall [1] 1:2/12

want [9] 1:12/3 1:12/3 1:13/13

 1:20/17 1:26/16 1:27/24 1:33/23

 1:34/3 1:36/9

wanted [9] 1:15/23 1:17/15

 1:20/6 1:20/12 1:20/18 1:20/24

 1:20/25 1:21/15 1:45/16

wants [1] 1:28/8

warrant [1] 1:23/17

was [41] 1:6/10 1:6/23 1:8/1

 1:8/24 1:9/16 1:10/7 1:13/23

 1:15/14 1:16/4 1:16/15 1:16/20

 1:17/5 1:17/8 1:17/10 1:18/14

 1:20/10 1:21/1 1:21/15 1:22/15

 1:23/2 1:23/2 1:23/16 1:23/24

 1:24/12 1:24/21 1:29/6 1:29/9

 1:29/25 1:30/9 1:31/6 1:35/13

 1:36/19 1:36/22 1:36/23 1:37/19

 1:38/5 1:39/3 1:39/14 1:40/8

 1:41/25 1:47/12

Washington [1] 1:2/17

wasn't [4] 1:14/1 1:16/10

 1:17/5 1:42/3

waste [1] 1:30/17

way [9] 1:10/21 1:15/6 1:18/21

 1:19/9 1:19/11 1:34/7 1:35/18

 1:35/21 1:42/22

we [49] 

we'd [1] 1:36/1

we're [12] 1:7/16 1:10/18

 1:12/2 1:17/16 1:23/20 1:27/23

 1:34/12 1:37/10 1:38/8 1:39/19

 1:43/9 1:46/3

we've [11] 1:12/11 1:24/23

 1:25/16 1:27/15 1:28/19 1:32/2

 1:43/5 1:43/10 1:44/9 1:44/10

 1:44/17

website [3] 1:16/16 1:17/10

 1:17/12

week [1] 1:26/8

weekend [2] 1:45/22 1:46/1

weeks [1] 1:26/15

weighed [1] 1:31/24

weighing [1] 1:26/25

weighty [1] 1:27/2

well [13] 1:10/21 1:14/16

 1:16/23 1:23/5 1:24/21 1:26/22

 1:29/13 1:30/18 1:33/12 1:34/23

 1:40/4 1:44/24 1:45/14

went [1] 1:31/15

were [20] 1:8/8 1:17/21 1:17/22

 1:17/22 1:17/23 1:20/9 1:20/10

 1:20/23 1:23/7 1:25/20 1:28/21

 1:29/4 1:31/17 1:33/19 1:34/8

 1:35/19 1:35/24 1:38/9 1:39/15

 1:41/1

what [32] 1:7/18 1:7/18 1:7/19

 1:8/15 1:9/6 1:9/24 1:10/3

 1:10/3 1:11/1 1:13/8 1:14/17

 1:15/18 1:19/2 1:19/3 1:19/18

 1:19/19 1:21/25 1:22/8 1:22/18

 1:26/6 1:26/18 1:28/3 1:30/24

 1:34/14 1:35/4 1:36/5 1:38/3

 1:39/10 1:39/14 1:39/18 1:39/21

 1:44/4

what's [4] 1:30/16 1:39/1

 1:39/1 1:39/1

when [20] 1:6/16 1:6/21 1:9/2

 1:9/2 1:10/6 1:10/14 1:10/14

 1:18/7 1:18/24 1:22/23 1:23/1

 1:25/14 1:25/17 1:29/2 1:29/25

 1:31/2 1:33/13 1:34/16 1:42/6

 1:42/6

where [16] 1:12/21 1:16/5

 1:16/20 1:16/21 1:17/25 1:25/11

 1:25/14 1:30/21 1:30/25 1:34/4

 1:36/2 1:38/8 1:38/16 1:40/23

 1:40/23 1:42/21

whether [13] 1:13/11 1:13/11

 1:13/11 1:14/19 1:15/4 1:17/3

 1:33/7 1:33/24 1:36/16 1:41/14

 1:44/15 1:44/15 1:44/16

which [19] 1:7/20 1:12/7 1:14/9

 1:14/17 1:16/5 1:21/13 1:23/24

 1:24/25 1:26/6 1:29/6 1:29/20

 1:30/17 1:31/11 1:32/9 1:33/19

 1:34/9 1:35/15 1:39/8 1:47/12

while [3] 1:16/14 1:17/11

 1:27/22

who [9] 1:5/20 1:7/16 1:17/21

 1:17/21 1:20/9 1:29/11 1:39/9

 1:39/22 1:40/16

who's [2] 1:7/8 1:17/20

whole [3] 1:28/24 1:29/16

 1:40/14

whom [1] 1:39/23

why [6] 1:12/16 1:15/2 1:22/6

 1:35/6 1:37/14 1:38/1

will [22] 1:4/10 1:5/3 1:5/6

 1:5/16 1:5/18 1:5/20 1:5/20

 1:6/10 1:7/19 1:9/25 1:15/19

 1:17/11 1:24/13 1:25/21 1:26/14

 1:29/2 1:32/23 1:33/13 1:34/25

 1:41/13 1:41/15 1:45/17

WILLIAM [1] 1:1/19

WILMER [3] 1:2/15 1:3/5 1:4/23

within [3] 1:22/20 1:23/5

 1:23/13

without [7] 1:10/19 1:22/7

 1:22/12 1:25/1 1:30/20 1:30/22

 1:32/4

word [1] 1:7/1

wording [2] 1:21/14 1:21/23

work [1] 1:19/9

worked [1] 1:16/15

working [1] 1:17/18

works [1] 1:14/9

Worst [1] 1:45/8

would [45] 1:6/8 1:7/4 1:8/7

 1:8/9 1:12/3 1:14/5 1:14/11

 1:14/13 1:14/14 1:14/16 1:14/19

 1:14/20 1:14/22 1:18/17 1:18/23

 1:19/2 1:19/2 1:19/6 1:19/21

 1:20/13 1:24/4 1:32/10 1:32/20

 1:33/18 1:34/9 1:34/10 1:34/16

 1:35/7 1:35/10 1:35/10 1:36/21

 1:38/1 1:38/3 1:38/7 1:38/10

 1:39/12 1:39/16 1:39/22 1:39/24

 1:40/15 1:40/22 1:41/24 1:43/4

 1:43/20 1:45/8

wouldn't [2] 1:33/12 1:38/23

WPP [18] 1:2/15 1:3/2 1:4/20

 1:4/23 1:4/24 1:5/8 1:23/7

 1:36/10 1:37/2 1:37/13 1:37/16

 1:37/24 1:39/7 1:39/24 1:40/14

 1:45/6 1:45/8 1:45/11

wrinkle [2] 1:40/13 1:40/18

wrongs [1] 1:44/20

Y

yada [2] 1:21/12 1:21/12

YAFFE [2] 1:2/14 1:5/1

Yeah [5] 1:18/16 1:18/16 1:19/1

 1:20/20 1:45/6

year [4] 1:28/22 1:28/23

 1:29/20 1:31/17

years [1] 1:18/12

yes [30] 1:4/7 1:5/5 1:5/10

 1:7/10 1:7/13 1:7/14 1:11/13

 1:11/13 1:11/18 1:13/2 1:13/15

 1:13/20 1:14/1 1:14/4 1:15/10

 1:18/9 1:18/16 1:18/22 1:20/21

 1:24/20 1:24/23 1:25/7 1:25/7

 1:26/4 1:34/6 1:34/23 1:36/7

 1:40/4 1:42/20 1:45/5

yet [6] 1:7/21 1:12/17 1:12/19

 1:13/13 1:15/3 1:34/3

York [9] 1:1/19 1:1/19 1:1/21

 1:1/21 1:2/6 1:2/6 1:2/12

 1:2/12 1:45/10

you [115] 

you're [19] 1:9/13 1:9/21

 1:11/2 1:12/22 1:17/3 1:17/25

 1:18/6 1:23/23 1:27/22 1:34/4

 1:34/18 1:34/18 1:34/19 1:34/20

 1:35/14 1:35/21 1:36/6 1:37/8

 1:40/13

Young [2] 1:2/15 1:3/2

your [78] 

Your Honor [40] 1:4/25 1:5/5

 1:8/2 1:8/15 1:12/6 1:13/14

 1:14/16 1:14/18 1:14/18 1:16/7

 1:16/13 1:19/1 1:19/2 1:19/8

 1:20/20 1:20/21 1:21/23 1:22/13

 1:24/12 1:24/20 1:25/7 1:25/10

 1:26/4 1:26/5 1:26/22 1:29/11

 1:29/24 1:30/12 1:31/20 1:34/6

 1:35/18 1:35/19 1:35/24 1:36/4

 1:37/9 1:37/12 1:39/2 1:40/19

 1:43/21 1:45/1

Your Honor's [4] 1:16/21 1:30/2

 1:44/24 1:44/25

Z

zero [1] 1:21/15

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 252 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2022 Page 59 of 59