IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

CAMELLIA THERAPEUTIC )

FOSTER AGENCY, LLC, ETC., )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO.: 2: 06CV735-MHT

)

v. )

)

THE ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF )

HUMAN RESOURCES, )

)

Defendant.

PLAINTIFF’S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

In response to the Motion by Defendant Alabama Department of Human

Resources for summary judgment, this Court issued an order on June 1, 2007,, requiring

that the Plaintiff file his Opposition Response to said Motion on or before June 20, 2007.

Therefore, this Opposition Response is submitted, together with supporting brief,

affidavits, deposition pages, and exhibits.

I.

INTRODUCTION

This is a meritorious claim of Title VI discrimination along with various state

claims filed by Camellia Therapeutic Foster Agency, LLC, represented by Joseph

Appiah, an African-American. There are genuine issues of material fact in this case

which are discussed below.

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 24
II.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Joseph Appiah, an African-American from South Africa, is the Chairman

and Chief Executive Officer of the Camellia Therapeutic Foster Agency, a

limited liability company. (Camellia Therapeutic Foster Agency, LLC,

represented by Joseph Appiah dep. pgs. 9-10).

2. Camellia Therapeutic Foster Agency, LLC, was incorporated in 2000.

Members include, in addition to Joseph Appiah, Dr. D.A. Ellis, Honorable

Arthur Sumbry, all of Phoenix City, Alabama. (Camellia Therapeutic Foster

Agency, LLC, dep. p. 12, lines 1-18).

3. Camellia Therapeutic Foster Agency, LLC, began accepting foster care

children in 2002. Joseph Appiah recruited, trained, confirmed that all foster

parents were licensed, and prepared foster parents. It is very difficult to

recruit foster care parents. All of the foster parents were licensed and

trained. By 2005 Camellia Foster Care Agency had approximately sixty-six

(66) foster care children and over one hundred (100) foster parents.

(Camellia Therapeutic Foster Agency, LLC, dep. pgs. 23, lines 15-23 and

24, lines 1-7; Appiah Aff.).

4. On or about May 14, 2004, Gary Mitchell, Director of Resource

Development, asked Dr. Appiah to attend a meeting in his office in

Montgomery. Also present was Nan Johnson, Marlene Henning, and Carol

Davenport, all of whom are Resource Supervisors with DHR. Mitchell

advised Appiah that his agency was growing too fast. Mitchell said he was

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 24
concerned that all of Camellia Therapeutic Foster Care Agency’s foster

parents were not licensed. Dr. Appiah assured Mitchell that all of his

parents were properly licensed. Office Manager, Renee Lyles can testify that

all of the foster care parents were fully licensed and trained according to

DHR standard. (Appiah aff.; Lyles aff.).

5. Gary Mitchell is the director of the Office of Resource Development. His

staff reviews individual children’s records to determine that they are

receiving the services they need. (Ward pgs. 26, lines 22-23; 27, lines 1-

10).

6. Mitchell also told Dr. Appiah that foster parents were coming to his

agency because he paid more money than the state required. Dr. Appiah

assured Mitchell that his foster parents were not paid more than the state

required. (Appiah aff.).

7. Following this May 14, 2004, meeting, Dr. Appiah was harassed by Gary

Mitchell and his staff. Nan Johnson (now Nan Bagget) went to Camellia

Agency and requested that two of its foster care children be removed from

his foster homes, because the foster care parents had come to Camellia from

other agencies, TPI and Seraaj. One child went into a rage when he was told

he had to leave his foster home for another one. DHR did not act in the best

interest of those children by taking this action. (Appiah aff.; Lyles aff.).

8. Between May and June of 2004 about thirty (30) children were removed

from foster homes under the supervision of Camellia Therapeutic Foster

Care Agency. This action disrupted the lives of these children, the foster

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 24
parents and the Camellia agency. Renee Lyles, Office Manager, observed

the destruction and the injury caused to the children. (Appiah aff.; Lyles

aff.).

9. On July 26, 2004, Dr. Appiah received a letter from Commissioner Page

Walley stating that there were foster parents within his agency that had not

been cleared by FBI/ABI. This was not correct. Dr. Appiah submitted

copies of all documentation proving that his foster parents had been cleared

and approved by DHR. (Appiah aff.).

10. On or about August 10, 2004, DHR sent staff to the Camellia agency

offices located in Montgomery, Birmingham, Huntsville, and Phoenix City

to audit his records. DHR staff were at his offices before 8:00 am. After a

thorough check of all records it was determined that the Camellia agency

was in full compliance with DHR requirements. (Appiah aff.).

11. Even though Dr. Appiah’s agency was in complete compliance, the

harassment did not stop. Numerous spontaneous audits were conducted at

all offices within his agency. (Appiah aff., Exhibit 19).

12. In November of 2004 DHR revised its Therapeutic Foster Care Manual.

The responsibility of completing Intake Evaluations on all children in

therapeutic foster care traditionally was done by the individual agencies.

That was changed so that DHR staff was required to complete Intake

Evaluations on all children in TFC. Copies of the assessment and ISP must

be provided to TFC agencies. (Appiah aff.; Exhibit 1, DHR’s Therapeutic

Foster Care Manual revised November 2004).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 24
13. Joyce Wilson was asked by Gary Mitchell to participate in the evaluation

of the February 2005 RFP’s. She apparently did not know of the revision in

the 2004 manual that DHR perform the initial treatment plan, since she took

points away from Dr. Appiah’s proposal for stating that DHR would

perform the initial treatment plan for foster care children. (Wilson dep. pgs.

12-13; Exhibit 9).

14. The Division of Resource Management is the specific division of the

Alabama Department of Human Resources at issue in this case, since it

awards contracts to vendors that have been selected through the RFP

process. Susan Ward is the division director. (Ward dep. p. 7, lines 3-23).

15. As the director Susan Ward oversees the activities of the Office of

Contracts, the Office of Licensing, the Office of Resource Development,

and the Office of Utilization Review. (Ward dep. p. 8, lines 3-10).

16. The Division of Resource Management, under the supervision of Susan

Ward, awards contracts to vendors (providers) that have been selected

through the RFP process. (Ward dep. p. 8k lines 14-18).

17. Mary Baggett, Resource Consultant/Program Specialist with DHR, visited

therapeutic foster care agencies at least once a year to evaluate their

programs. Her immediate supervisor is Gary Mitchell. Mitchell’s

supervisor is Susan Ward. (Baggett dep. pgs. 5-7).

18. Baggett reviewed the files of Camellia Care Foster Agency based in

Russell, Madison, and Jefferson counties. (Baggett dep. p. 10, lines 8-13).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 24
19. Baggett used a checklist, the Foster Family Homes Minimum Standards,

and the Therapeutic Foster Home guidelines when monitoring the records.

Vendors (providers) are provided an opportunity to correct any deficiencies.

Dr. Appiah’s agency corrected any deficiencies that may have been

discovered during Baggett’s visits. (Baggett dep. pgs. 10, lines 15-23; 12,

lines 1-20; 19, lines 11-19).

20. Baggett reported her findings to her supervisor, Gary Mitchell, by way of

a form. (Baggett dep. p. 14, lines 8-12).

21. Program analysts monitor the various contracts for compliance. (Ward p.

27, lines 12-23).

22. In February of 2005 foster care agencies that wanted to accept foster care

children first had to send a letter of intent to DHR. They then could send in

questions regarding foster care and these questions were answered at a

conference. Following the conference RFP’s were released to the interested

vendors. An RFP is the Request for Proposal released February 28, 2005 by

DHR. An RFP is an “invitation for qualified vendors to submit a response

or to offer their services to the state based on the requirements of the

document”. Dr. Appiah submitted a response for the Camellia Therapeutic

Foster Care Agency in a timely manner. (Wilson dep. p. 11; Stewart dep.

pgs. 9-10; Appiah aff; Exhibit 2, Feb. 28, 2005 RFP.).

23. Starr Stewart was over the RFP process. (Ward dep. p. 16, lines 15-18).

24. Starr Stewart is the director of policy planning and research. Steward’s

responsibilities include coordinating procurement for services for children

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 24
and families, working on various service oriented type projects, and posting

policies online and ensuring accuracy of the policies. (Sterwart dep. p. 8).

25. Stewart worked with divisions to develop and issue RFP’s. She

coordinated and facilitated vendor conferences when needed. Stewart also

coordinated the evaluation of RFP’s. (Steward dep. pgs. 9, ones14-23; 10

lines 1-2).

26. Dr. Appiah submitted a proposal for Camellia Foster Care Agency, LLC.

He attended the conference held in Montgomery for question and answer

session with DHR. (Appiah aff., Exhibit 4, Camellia Foster Care Agency

RFP).

27. Joyce Wilson was asked by Gary Mitchell to participate in the evaluation

process. She had nothing to do with drafting the RFP and does not know

who did. (Wilson dep. pgs 12-13).

28. Even though Wilson participated in the evaluation process, she could not

recall how many evaluators were involved in this particular process.

According to Wilson all of the evaluators met in the same room, but worked

independently and had no interaction. (Wilson dep. p. 14, lines 7-17).

29. Wilson was instructed not to evaluate Roman numeral one, Mandatory

Requirements. She does not know who scored Roman numeral one. Wilson

did not have anything to do with drafting the document used in scoring the

RFP’s and does not know who did. She was instructed to stop the

evaluation process after Roman numeral ten. She does not know who

evaluated Section XI. (Wilson dep. pgs. 15; 18, lines 10-23).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 24
30. Section ten involved compensation. Wilson does not know who did score

that section. Wilson did not sign nor did she date the evaluation document

used in the evaluation process. (Wilson p. 16).

31. Wilson gave Camellia Foster Care Agency a very low score. Under the

scoring process a proposal that scored below 800 would not be awarded a

contract. There were five evaluators who each scored the RFP’s

individually. They scored at least thirteen (13) proposals over a two day

period. Each evaluator signed in and out on a Scoring sign in/out Sheet.

(Exhibit 13). The five scores were then averaged for the final score given to

each agency that submitted a proposal. There was a wide discrepancy

between the individual scores indicating lack of objective criteria for

scoring. The scoring was very subjective. For example, Camellia’s high

score was 932 and the low score given by Joyce Wilson was 495. (Ward

dep. pgs. 40, lines 8-12; 41, lines 9-17; Exhibit 3, Scoring Sheets for

Camellia).

32. Joyce Wilson was the evaluator giving Camellia Therapeutic Foster Care

Agency the lowest score, 495. Wilson gave Dr. Appiah’s agency ten out of

a possible twenty-five points for Roman numeral two. She arrived at that

figure by multiplying “forty times twenty-five, so that was ten

points....forty percent”. When asked where she got the forty percent she

responded, “That was the score.” (Wilson dep. p. 19).

33. Wilson testified that she found several grammatical errors in Dr. Appiah’s

proposal. She could not recall whether she found grammatical errors in

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 24
other proposals. A review of Dr. Appiah’s response reflects that he drafted

a well constructed, well organized, grammatically correct document. Dr.

Appiah is from South Africa and speaks with an accent, but that did not

affect the writing of this document. Wilson states on the scoring sheet that

Dr. Appiah “did not give length of time with agency”. Dr. Appiah states

under History portion that Camellia was “founded in 2000 by Dr. Appiah”

and incorporated on January 15, 2002. Section A of the guidelines issued by

DHR on February 28, 2005, does not request the length of time with the

agency. Dr. Appiah provides a very thorough description of the services

provided by the vendor, as part of the History section. Wilson takes points

away from Dr. Appiah for not including treatment in his mission statement.

The instructions for Mission Statement from the guidelines provided by

DHR state: “Provide a brief statement regarding the goals of the

Organization or its’ mission statement.” (Wilson dep. p. 20, Exhibit 2,

Exhibit 9).

34. Wilson states that “references listed here” as her comment by Section II.

C. Management Structure. Dr. Appiah lists under Section II. 7

Qualifications and the Experience of the Vendor a list of service references

which he was required by DHR to do. It seems that perhaps Wilson is

confusing that section with another section that requests references, Section

X. Dr. Appiah named ten (10) references, DHR supervisors with whom he

has worked, just as the instructions indicated. None of his references were

called. Also, other proposals that listed references in this section were

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 24
apparently not penalized, since they scored above 800 and were awarded

contracts. (Appiah aff., Exhibit 4; Exhibit 9; Exhibit 10).

35. When comparing proposals submitted for the 2005 RFP, it is noted that

some of the agencies awarded contracts charged higher rates than Camellia

Therapeutic Foster Care Agency. (Exhibits 10 and 4).

36. Children and Families First of Alabama states in its RFP that it offers “no

current operating programs because the agency is in the process of applying

for licensure as a Child Placing Agency. (Exhibit 10).

37. Wilson took points away from Camellia’s proposal in Section III A for not

addressing the training of staff. Training is addressed in another section.

However, it is noteworthy that other agencies did not address training in

Section III. A and were awarded contracts. One example is the Children and

Families First of Alabama. (Exhibits 10 and 15).

38. When asked how she arrived at forty percent Wilson responded, “I don’t

know.....That was what I felt it scored.” (Wilson dep. pgs. 20, lines 7-23;

33, lines 1-4).

39. Wilson responded to questions from her own handwritten notes during her

deposition that she had written the morning of her deposition.

Q: Can you tell me when you wrote those notes?

A: Today.

Q: Okay. Can you be sure those notes reflect your thinking in 2005?

A: As sure as anybody.

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 24
Q: Okay. But I’m asking you specifically about those notes.

A: These would reflect my thinking when I scored the

document.(Wilson dep. pgs. 20, lines 20-23; Exhibit 9).

40. In addition to poor grammar, Wilson alleges that Dr. Appiah’s

organization of the proposal did not follow the scoring instrument. She

further alleges that Dr. Appiah stated in his proposal that “DHR did the

initial treatment plan” and that, according to Wilson, is incorrect. Wilson

alleges that the initial treatment plan is “done by the therapeutic agency”.

However, Dr. Appiah is quite accurate according to the Therapeutic Foster

Care Manual published and posted on DHR’s website. (Wilson dep. pgs.

21-22; 37, lines 4-12; Exhibit 1).

41. Wilson also counted off for the following: Regarding Section 6 Target

Area: There is a maximum of fifty (50) points if service is proposed as

statewide. Wilson gave Camellia a score of twenty (20). Wilson stated in

deposition that her reason for not giving the maximum score is because Dr.

Appiah should have stated a reason for selecting to accept foster care

children in Russell, Montgomery, Madison, Mobile, Jefferson, and Dallas

counties, since he did not specify that he could accept foster care children

statewide. Wilson admits that none of the vendors offer services statewide.

(Wilson pgs. 44- 46). Alabama Mentor makes this statement for Section E

Target Area: “Alabama Mentor proposes to proved services to children in

need of Therapeutic Foster Care in the following regions:

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 24
Region 3 (Autauga, Dallas, Lowndes, Montgomery, Wilcox, Crenshaw,

Butler and Conecuh Counties)

Region 6 (Jefferson, Shelby, Chilton, Talladega, Clay, Randolph and

Cleburne Counties)” (Exhibit 6) Similar language is found in other agencies that

were awarded contracts by DHR on the basis of their RFP proposals. (Exhibits 5,

7, and 8).

42. Wilson gave Dr. Appia’s proposal a low score in the section regarding

references. Out of a possible fifty (50) points, he was given only twenty

(20). Wilson states in her deposition that Dr. Appiah did not name

references in all six counties where he had offices, only four, and he only

named DHR officials. The RFP did not state that references had to be from

all counties where offices were located. Youth Villages only listed six

references and Wilson awarded it forty-five points out of a possible fifty

(50). (Wilson pgs. 51-52; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 15; Appiah Aff.).

43. Some contracts were awarded to foster care agencies that did not yet have

offices in the state of Alabama, no staff, and no license. For example,

National Mentor Agency d/b/a Alabama Mentor stated in its RFP that it had

“potential office space in Montgomery and Birmingham”. This agency was

granted a contract. The Executive Director of National Mentor Agency was

a resident of Atlanta, GA, at the time his proposal was submitted. (Appiah

aff; Exhibit 6).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 24
44. Youth Villages was given a contract without going through the RFP

process in January 2005. In February Youth Villages submitted a proposal

and was awarded seventy additional foster care children. (Appiah aff.;

Exhibit 5, Youth Villages RFP).

45. The Therapeutic Foster Care Proposal submitted by Camellia Therapeutic

Foster & Adoption Agency, LLC is professionally written. It responds

completely and fully to each category required by the Therapeutic Foster

Care for Children manual issued February 28, 2005. It was timely

submitted and signed. According to the Scoring Instrument (Exhibit 9) and

the Request for Proposals issued by DHR on February 28, 2005 guidelines

(Exhibit 2), Camellia’s responses included all required information.

46. It appears from the documents provided by Defendant DHR to Plaintiff

Camellia Therapeutic Foster Care and Adoption Agency, and Dr. Joseph

Appiah, through discovery, that the Children and Family First Agency was

omitted from the original list of agencies that scored 800 or above, but later

added as an agency that was awarded a contract. (Exhibits 11 and 12).

47. There were only two African-American owned agencies who submitted

proposals for the February 2005 RFP issued by Alabama Department of

Human Resources. Camellia Therapeutic Foster Care and Adoption Agency

and Seraaj. It is the understanding of Dr. Appiah, chairman of the Camellia

agency that Defendant did not want to award a contract to Seraaj, but did so

after members of the Black Caucus intervened. Renee Lyles observed that

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 24
African-American owned agencies were treated differently than Caucasian

agencies. (Appiah aff.; Lyles aff.).

48. A comparison of Wilson’s scoring of Alabama Mentor and Youth Villages

to Camellia’s shows a wide discrepancy. A comparison of the three

proposals shows very little difference in the amount and quality of

information. (Exhibits 14, 15, 3, 4, 5, 6,7, and 8).

49. Dr. Appiah submitted two proposals in 2006 and was again denied,

because of a low score. Dr. Appiah responded to an RFP for Foster Care

Recruitment Services in Mobile and Jefferson Counties. Camillia

Therapeutic Foster Care Agency was the only agency that had the facility

and staff in both Mobile and Jefferson Counties to offer those services.

DHR denied Camillia the contract and offered a contract to Family in

Transition, a new contractor with no staff to perform the services. Another

RFP was issued for Crisis Stabilization Services March 28, 2006, and due

May 9, 2006. Camellia agency was the only agency that qualified. DHR

issued a Statement of Cancellation. (Appiah aff.; Exhibit 20).

50. Dr. Appiah is very passionate about his involvement with foster care

children. He has taken children that nobody else wanted and made a

positive difference in the life of those children. (Appiah aff.).

51. Nothing in the February 28, 2005 RFP states that the cut off score is 800

for awarding contracts. (Exhibit 2; Appiah aff.)

52. All of Dr. Appiah’s hard work and the good will that he had established

with his foster parents, the foster care children, and the communities where

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 24
he served were lost. He lost income. He lost all of his offices, except for

the one in Phoenix City, AL. Dr. Appiah has been damaged financially and

emotionally by the actions of DHR

III.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD OF REVIEW

A party seeking summary judgment always bears the initial responsibility of

informing the district court of the basis for its motion and identifying those portions of

the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together

with affidavits, if any, which it believes demonstrates the absence of a genuine issue of

material fact. Celotex Corporation v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S. Ct. 2548 (1986),

material fact. Celotex Corporation v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S. Ct. 2548 (1986), 91

L.Ed. 2d. 265 (1986), citing, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc. Rule 56(c). A fact is material if, under

applicable substantive law, it might affect the outcome of the case. Anderson v. Liberty

Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 2510, 91 L.Ed. 2d. 202 (1986). It is

genuine if the record, taken as a whole, could lead a rational trier of fact to find for the

non-moving party. Tipton v. Bergrohr GMBH-Siegen, 965 F. 2d 994, 998 (11th Cir.

1992). This Court considers the evidence and all inferences drawn in the light most

favorable to the non-moving party. Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 90 S. Ct.

1598, 1608, 26 L. Ed. 2d 142 (1970); Hairston v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Co., 9 F. 3d

913 (11th Cir. 1993).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 24
IV.

LEGAL ARGUMENT

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and For summary judgment is Due to be Dismissed

for improper pleading.

Rule 10(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures sets out the form of pleadings.

The rule provides the following:

Every pleading shall contain a caption setting forth the name of the court,

the title of the action, the file number, and a designation as in rule 7(a). In the

complaint the title of the action shall include the names of all parties, but in other

pleading it is sufficient to state the name of the first party on each side with an

appropriate indication of other parties. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 10(a).

Plaintiff contends that Defendant has failed to comply with the

requirements of the rule. The caption of defendant’s motion does not

identify the proper Defendant in this cause of action. Further, Defendant

makes arguments which are not relevant to the cause of action related to

improper defendants which were cited in the caption of Defendant’s

motion. As such, Defendant’s motion should be dismissed as its caption

is in direct contradiction with the requirements of Rule 10(a) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Plaintiff’s Claims Against Defendant are Proper Under the Construction of Title VI

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as Amended

Sec. 2000d-7 provide in pertinent part that:

(1) A State shall not be immune under the Eleventh Amendment of the

Constitution of the United States from suit in Federal Court for violation of

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 [29U.S.C.794], title IX of the

Education Amendments of 1972 [20 U.S.C.1681 et seq.] the Age

Discrimination Act of 1975 [42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.], title VI of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.], or the provisions of any other

Federal statute prohibiting discrimination by recipients of Federal financial

assistance. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d-7).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 24
In United States v. City of Yonkers, that Court rejected the sovereign

immunity argument by the State. Instead the court concluded that not only does

the plain language of Section 200d-7 defeat the States assertion, but also:

Nothing in the legislative history of Title VI compels the conclusion that

an entity must be a ‘program’ or ‘activity’ to be a Title VI defendant... We

therefore hold that the State of New York can be sued under Title VI as long as it,

along with those of its agencies receiving federal financial assistance, is alleged to

have been responsible for a Title VI violation. (United States v. City of Yonkers,

880 F.Supp, 212, (S.D.N.Y. 1995) vacated and remanded on other grounds.

As such, Plaintiff contends that the law is clear that the Eleventh

Amendment does not act to bar claims made by Plaintiff against this Defendant in

accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In Accordance With The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Has

Stated A Cause Of Action For Which Relief Can Be Granted

Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide 1) that to state a

claim plaintiff must merely state a cause of action which contains a

short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the courts

jurisdiction depends, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the

claim needs no new grounds of jurisdiction to support it. 2) Plaintiff must

also show that he is entitled to relief. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

8(a).

Further, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides the relief to

which Plaintiff may be entitled. In pertinent part the statute provides:

(2) In a suit against a State for a violation of a statue referred to in paragraph (1),

remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for such

a violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a

violation in the suit against any public or private entity other than a State. (42

U.S.C. Section 2000d(7)(a)(2).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 24
Defendant further contends that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of

action in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights act of 1964. More

specifically Defendant contends that Plaintiff has not alleged intentional

discrimination, and that as such, Plaintiff’s claim fails.

The statutory language of Title VI is designed to prevent intentional

discrimination, and agency Title VI regulations prohibit conduct that has an

“unjustified discriminatory effect. (Emphasis ours. Guardians Ass’n v. Civil

Serv. Comm’n 463 U. S. 582 (1983) and Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287, 293

As such, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint states a cause of action which is

in accordance with Title VI, for which relief is available and can be

granted. Further, Plaintiff contends that Defendant’s Supplemental

Jurisdictional claim is without merit as Title VI provides the conduit

through which Plaintiff is entitled to pursue this claim against the Alabama

Department of Human Resources. Therefore, it is Plaintiff’s contention that Ex

Parte Young would not apply in this matter as the federal statute provides the

available remedies to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s Pleading are Sufficient to Allege Claim for Due Process

Pursuant to the plain language of Title VI Plaintiff should have been

awarded a hearing. He made numerous requests and all were denied. Plaintiff

requested an appeal to Susan Ward, Page Walley, to the Board of Directors,

Governor Riley, and Administrative Law Judge Honorable Bill Predergrast. Dr.

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 24
Appiah exhausted all administrative remedies prior to filing a lawsuit. (Appiah

aff.).

Punitive Damages is an available remedy In Accordance with the

language of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

In a suit against a State for a violation of a statue referred to in paragraph

(1), remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for

such a violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a

violation in the suit against any public or private entity other than a State. (42

U.S.C. Section 2000d(7)(a)(2). Plaintiff per the statutory language has all

remedies available that are available to any public or private entity. As such,

plaintiff contends that punitive damages are an available and necessary remedy

against the Alabama Department of Human Resource in this matter.

Plaintiff has established a Cause of action in accordance with the

McDonald Douglas requirements

Prima Facie Case

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination

based on race, color, or national origin, etc., under any program or

activity, which receives Federal financial assistance. 42 U.S.C. Sec.2000d. As

such, Title VI bars intentional discrimination. Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S.

287,293 (1985). Further Title VI specifically directs and authorizes Federal

agencies to enact “rules, regulations or orders of general applicability” that will

provided for the objective of the statute to be achieved. 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1 A

significant number of federal agencies have followed this directive and have

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 24
adopted regulations that forbid recipients of federal monies from utilizing criteria

or methods of administering their programs that have the effect of discrimination.

As such, the Supreme Court has held that these regulations may validly

prohibit practices having a disparate impact on protected groups, even if

the actions or practices are not intentionally discriminatory. Alexander v.

Choate, 469 U.S. at 292-94; Elston v. Talladega County Bd of Education,

997 F.2d 1394, 1406 (11th Cir. Reh’g denied, 7 F.3d 242 (11th Cir. 1993).

Given the Court’s holding Plaintiff may prove claims of discrimination under the

theory of disparate impact/effects. Under this theory a recipient in violation of an

agency’s regulation uses a neutral procedure or practice that has a disparate

impact on individuals or a particular race, color or national origin and such

practice lacks a substantial legitimate justification. Larry P. v. Riles, 793 F. 2d

969,983 9th Cir . 1984. As such, Title VI disparate impact claims are analyzed

using principles very similar to the principles utilized in analyzing Title VII

disparate impact claims. Young v. Montgomery county (Ala.) Bd. Of Educ., 922

F. Supp.544, 549 (m.D. Ala. 1996). A number of other cases recognize the

validity of Title VI disparate impacts claims. See Villanueva v. Carere, 85 F.

3d481 (10th Cir. 1996); Branches of NAACP v. Georgia, 775 F. 2d 1403(11th Cir.

1985).

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 24
The Department of Justice regulations specifically provide the following:

2 A recipient, in determining the type of disposition, services, financial aid,

benefits, or facilities which will be provided under any such program, or the

class of individuals to whom, or the situations in which, such will be provided

under any such program, or the class of individuals to be afforded an

opportunity to participate in any such program, may not, directly or through

contractual or other arrangements, utilize criteria or methods of administration

which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because

of their race, color, or national origin, or have the effect of defeating or

substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program

as respects individuals of a particular, race, color, or national origin.

28C.F. R. Section 42.104(b)(2. (emphasis ours).

In the case at bar, the February 2005 Request for Proposal, as written and

scored by the Alabama Department of Human Resources, was discriminatory in

nature. The 2005 RFP was neutral on its face, but had a significant disparate

impact effect on the Plaintiff in this matter who is African-American, who is

from South Africa and who speaks with a distinct accent.

Further, DHR did not provide an objective standard to be followed by those it

enlisted to score the respective responses to the RFPS.

Plaintiff contends that its response to the request for proposal submitted by

plaintiff to the Alabama Department of Human Resources was as good or better than any

of the other proposals submitted for consideration. To support this contention Plaintiff

submitted his proposal in a very timely fashion; it is undisputed that it conformed to all

of the requirements outlined in DHR’s RFP; and he attended the conference held in

Montgomery for a question and answer session with DHR, concerning the RFP before

submitting the proposal; It is also note worthy to mention that Plaintiff was a current

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 24
contractor for the Alabama Department of Human Resources when he was required to

submit a response to the RFP in an effort to continue his program. Further, Plaintiff who

had contracted with the department for a period of years had been monitored for his

program work and was within compliance with agency standards at the time that he

submitted his response to the RFP. The department was familiar with Dr, Appiah, as he

had been investigated for alleged non-compliance and cleared of any wrong doing by

both the Alabama Attorneys General Office and the Alabama Department of Human

Resources.

As stated in the facts there were five evaluators who graded each of the

proposals, and their scores were averaged to reach the final score. As to Plaintiff, there is

a high score of 932 and a low score of 495. Joyce Wilson was the evaluator providing

the lowest score to Plaintiff. During Wilson’s deposition when questioned about how she

arrived at the low score Wilson was very vague and replied that she did not know how or

why she arrived at the score for Plaintiff. (Wilson Deposition pg.19).

PRETEXT

Since Plaintiff has successfully established a prima facie case of discrimination,

under the McDonnell Douglas test, the burden shifts to the Defendant to articulate some

legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for Plaintiff’s failure to be awarded the contract.

Bass v. Board of County Commissioners, 256 F. 3d 1095, 1104 (11th Cir. 2001). If an

employer meets that burden then the plaintiff must establish that defendant’s proffered

reasons are pretextual. Id. In order to show pretext, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the

proffered reason was not the true reason for the adverse decision. The plaintiff may

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 24
succeed in doing this either directly, by persuading the Court that a discriminatory reason

more likely motivated the Defendant, or indirectly by showing that the Defendant’s

proffered explanation is unworthy of credence. Texas Dept. Of Community Affairs v.

Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 256, 101 S. Ct. 1089, 1095 (1981).

Plaintiff may defeat summary judgment concerning the issue of pretext if he has

demonstrated such “weaknesses, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherencies, or

contradictions in the defendant’s proffered legitimate reasons for its actions that a

reasonable fact finder could find them unworthy of credence.” Combs v. Plantation

Patterns, 106 F. 3d 1519, 1538 (11th Cir. 1997). There is substantial evidence which

would lead a reasonable jury to conclude that Defendant’s proffered “legitimate” reasons

for failing to award Plaintiff a contract are not worthy of credence.

In offering alleged legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for failing to award

Plaintiff a contract in response to the RFP, Defendant relies upon the subjective scoring

of an instrument that has no objective criteria for measurement. Only three proposals

were submitted by African-American agencies. All three had been servicing foster care

children prior to the February 2005 RFP. Only one was awarded a contract out of

thirteen contracts awarded. There does exist an alternative non-discriminatory practice

and that is: all of the agencies submitting proposals could not have been awarded

contracts, especially when considering that some of the contracts were awarded to

agencies that charged more money than the Camellia agency did and that there are many

children who are in need service. (Exhibit 10 )

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 24
The evidence also shows that Plaintiff’s state claims are meritorious, as Defendant

intentionally and maliciously interfered with its existing business.

CONCLUSION

Because Plaintiff has produced substantial evidence establishing a prima facie

case and that Defendant’s reasons for not awarding a contract to Plaintiff were pretextual, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is due to be denied.

s/Kathryn Dickey

Law Offices of Kathryn Dickey

322 Alabama Street

Montgomery, AL 36104

(334) 262-0728

(334) 265-7696 fax

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 20, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the

following: Honorable James Long

/s/ Kathryn Dickey

Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-2 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-3 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-3 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-3 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 53 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 54 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 55 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 56 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 57 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 58 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 59 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 60 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 61 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 62 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 63 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 64 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 65 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 66 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 67 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 68 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 69 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 70 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 71 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 72 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 73 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 74 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 75 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 76 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 77 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 78 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 79 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 80 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 81 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 82 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 83 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 84 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 85 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 86 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 87 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 88 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 89 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 90 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 91 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 92 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 93 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 94 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 95 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 96 of 96
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-5 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-6 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 34
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 53 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 54 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 55 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 56 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 57 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 58 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 59 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 60 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 61 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 62 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-7 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 63 of 63
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-8 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 52
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 53 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 54 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 55 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 56 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 57 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 58 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 59 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 60 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 61 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 62 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 63 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 64 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 65 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 66 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 67 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-9 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 68 of 68
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 53 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 54 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 55 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 56 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 57 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 58 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 59 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 60 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 61 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-10 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 62 of 62
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 53 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 54 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 55 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-11 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 56 of 56
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-12 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-12 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-12 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-12 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-12 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-12 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 25 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 26 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 27 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 28 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 29 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 30 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 31 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 32 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 33 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 34 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 35 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 36 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 37 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 38 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 39 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 40 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 41 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 42 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 43 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 44 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 45 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 46 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 47 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 48 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 49 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 50 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 51 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 52 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 53 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 54 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 55 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 56 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 57 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 58 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 59 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 60 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 61 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 62 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 63 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 64 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 65 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 66 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 67 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 68 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 69 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 70 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 71 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 72 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-13 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 73 of 73
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-14 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 1
ase 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-15 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-16 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-16 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-16 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-17 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-17 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-17 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-17 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-17 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-17 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-18 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-18 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-18 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-18 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-18 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-18 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 14 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 15 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 16 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 17 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 18 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 19 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 20 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 21 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 22 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 23 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-19 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 24 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-20 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-20 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-20 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-20 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-20 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-20 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-21 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-21 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-21 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-21 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-21 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-21 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 6
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-22 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-23 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-24 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-25 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-26 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-26 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-26 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-26 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-26 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-27 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00735-MHT-CSC Document 40-28 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 13 of 13