1. Provide payback of accrued vacation allowance to be taken in 

corresponding consecutive vacation days in a block(s) that is seniority 

respective at his/her domicile per Article 6.1 of the AA/APFA 

Collective Bargaining Agreement, within 13 months following the end 

of the applicable term; or 

2. The APFA will provide the departing National Officer with the 

appropriate Flight Attendant vacation by means of cash reimbursement 

at a rate prorated on the National Officers annual salary for the period 

of APFA vacation allowance owed less applicable state and federal 

taxes. 

 Plaintiff argued that Defendant Ross was paid 14 days of vacation for fiscal year 2017 

which ran from April 2016 and through March 2017. Ross used four vacation days and was entitled 

to be paid out 14 of the remaining 31 days. Ross was paid that amount in 2017. In fiscal year 2018 

Ross was entitled to be paid out an additional 14 vacation days as he used 6 days and should have 

received the maximum 14 days. Ross was also entitled to his end of term vacation which provides 

that he can receive vacation he would have accrued during present and previous year. For bidding 

purposes as a Flight Attendant, he should have received 35 days of vacation. So, the total amount 

Ross should have received in 2018 was 49 days which would have been 35 days for the end of 

term and 14 days maximum payout for fiscal year 2018. This is on top of the 14 days Ross already 

received for fiscal year 2018. 

Plaintiff additionally argued that Ross received 101.44 days paid out in the amount of 

$38,574.68. Part of this payment includes the inflated pay which is the subject of a separate 

violation. Ross was overpaid 52.44 hours of vacation. 

Defendant Ross argued the Ross TA is controlling. Defendant Ross would be paid any and 

all accrued and unused sick and vacation from April 1, 2016 – July 31, 2018. The calculation of 

the unused days was to be paid as though Ross was able to use any of those days while in office 

as President for his remaining 5 months had he not resigned. There was no agreement that these 

days were not to be paid per Policy as the Charging Party insists. An investigation into the payout 

of the Sick and Vacation days paid, brought about by the Charging Party’s allegations, revealed 

Ross was not properly paid all of his accrued and unused Sick days from April 1, 2016 – July 31, 

2018. Ross earned and did not use 18 Sick days in each of the fiscal years April 2016-March 2017 

and April 2017-March 2018. Ross was only paid Per Policy 6.B.3.d Offset/Loss of Sick Time, of 

12 days for each fiscal year. The additional 12 days, (6) days Apr. 2016-2017 and (6) days Apr. 

2017-2018 have still not been acknowledged or paid to Ross in accordance with the Ross TA. The 

value of these lost Sick days, depending on the calculation used, is in excess of $3400 is still owed 

to Ross. 

The arbitrator finds that MEA and SAF is guaranteed to the National Officers to 

compensate them for not working as a Flight Attendant. The TA provides for “Full Salary” 

including benefits. While one can argue that MEA and SAF is a guaranteed benefit, the Policy 

Manual states it is not wages or benefits but rather are expenses as stated in Section 5 of the Policy 

Manual. The TA does not mention MEA and SAF as a benefit but the purpose of providing a 

guaranteed MEA and SAF to the National Officers so they would not suffer monetarily. MEA and 

APPENDIX 134

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 1 of 41 PageID 6812
SAF is a guaranteed expense to be paid monthly to the National Officers. If Defendant Ross did 

not receive the MEA and SAF that he was guaranteed as a National Officer, it would then be 

reasonable to assume that he would suffer monetarily. The TA states he will continue to receive 

his current full salary and benefits. The language regarding benefits in Section 6 of the Policy 

Manual and expenses in Section 5 of the Policy Manual is clear and unambiguous. However, if the 

BOD enters into a TA with an employee to pay his full salary for an additional 5 months without 

working then the TA language would be in conflict with the language over expenses (guaranteed 

MEA and SAF for National Officers) in Section 5 of the Policy Manual. During these five months 

of the TA that Defendant Ross was paid his full salary, no evidence was introduced that Defendant 

Ross worked as a Flight Attendant while receiving guaranteed MEA and SAF. Under normal 

circumstances, expenses are listed in box 1 of a W-2 but they are not considered wages or salary. 

It is therefore, the Opinion of this arbitrator the intent of the TA reached between Attorney Mark 

Richards, Robert Ross and the 2018 BOD was for the purpose of maintaining the “status quo ante” 

for Defendant Ross. Thus, it would be reasonable to conclude Defendant Ross received MEA and 

SAF for the months of March through July 2018 as a guaranteed expense benefit. However, it 

should be noted that MEA and SAF are expenses and are not to be included in or considered with 

his full salary for use in the payout determination of accrued sick and vacation leave. For these 

reasons, the arbitrator is of the Opinion this charge over MEA and SAF should be dismissed. 

With respect to sick and vacation payout, the APFA Board of Directors has determined 

that Defendant Ross was overpaid in the amount of $5,436.47 in 2018. “The Board’s finding was 

based on the results of a review from an independent accounting firm which determined that the 

formula used to determine the daily rate for your sick and vacation payout was incorrect.” Record 

evidence revealed National Treasurer Vasquez admitted he had changed the formula without the 

approval of the BOD or the EC. 

Moreover, it is the arbitrator’s understanding that Defendant Ross has refused to repay 

$5,436.47 to APFA and is presently in litigation to recoup the money owed to APFA. The arbitrator 

finds this is very troublesome in view of the fact that he is a standing Board member and the other 

National Officers have acknowledged the computation of their debt and has either paid their debt 

in full or have arranged to pay off their debt. As National President, Defendant Ross was elected 

to a position of trust with the responsibility of protecting APFA assets. Ross has a Fiduciary duty 

to the membership of the APFA and this arbitrator finds that he has abused this trust. 

It is therefore arbitrator’s Opinion, Defendant Ross has failed and abused his Fiduciary 

Duty. The non-payment of these monies reveals Defendant Ross is not accepting this 

responsibility. Thus, it is this arbitrator’s Opinion that Defendant Ross should be and is hereby 

Ordered to immediately repay the APFA $5,436.47. 

Leasing an Apartment at the Bear Creek Complex 

The APFA provides National Officers two choices for relocating to the Dallas metroplex. 

They can either accept a corporate apartment or they can accept the relocation moving expense 

entitling them up to $10,000 in moving expenses. But they are required to select their choice before 

they move. Here, the record evidence revealed Defendant Ross accepted both choices. Plaintiff 

argued that Defendant Ross leased an apartment at the Bear Creek Complex on June 1, 2016. 

APPENDIX 135

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 2 of 41 PageID 6813
Defendant Ross testified and denied leasing an apartment at the Bear Creek Complex but after 

Plaintiff showed him documentation, Defendant Ross then admitted that he had leased the 

apartment at the Bear Creek Complex for one year to be paid by APFA. 

On Defendant Ross’s weekly report, he claimed that he was house hunting on June 7 and 

8, 2016. Defendant Ross explained that his children’s school in California ended in June 2016. 

Kim Ross, packed household items into pods without furniture because their furniture was too 

large for the South Lake home and was delivered in August 2016. Defendant Ross decided to order 

furniture from Ashley furniture and ordered $3,637.00 worth of furniture on August 13, 2016 with 

the APFA credit card. Defendant Ross denied that he had ordered the furniture for his residence, 

that it was ordered for the corporate apartment because it had no furniture. Documentation was 

presented to Defendant Ross revealing he had the furniture delivered to the South Lake residence 

on August 18 and 25, 2016. Thus, Defendant Ross chose both options for his own personal benefit 

and was not looking out for APFA’s benefit. He also acquired APFA furniture to be moved to his 

his residence per Mike Trapp’s testimony when he was not entitled to do so. As a result of his 

actions, the corporate apartment he leased for his own personal benefit at the Bear Creek Complex 

cost APFA $8,106.13 which is an unnecessary expense for the APFA. 

Thus, it is the arbitrator’s Opinion, that Defendant Ross abused his Fiduciary duty to the 

membership of the APFA and should be assessed the cost of leasing that apartment in the amount 

of $8,106.13. 

 

Conclusion: 

The arbitrator finds that throughout this proceeding, Defendant Ross intentionally and

willfully ignored the provisions of the APFA Policy Manual and thus, has violated and abused his 

fiduciary duty entrusted to him by the APFA membership. Ross’s testimony was inconsistent and 

not forthright. Because Ross abused his position of trust as well as his fiduciary duty to the 

membership of the APFA, he can no longer hold a position of trust with the APFA. Moreover, 

Article VII, Section 1 of the APFA Constitution provides that: 

1. Any member is subject to fine, suspension or expulsion, or suspension from or removal 

from office, for any of the following acts: 

...... 

F. Willful violation of an express Article of this Constitution, or of a proper and express 

written resolution or policy of the Board of Directors or the Executive Committee; 

Here, Defendant Ross has overwhelmingly violated the APFA Policy Manual and APFA 

Constitution. Ross has refused to repay APFA for an inappropriate overpayment in the amount of 

$5,436.47. The Union has been forced to put the matter in collections after Ross refused and is 

now forced to commence a lawsuit against Ross. The policy manual has a procedure for APFA 

representatives to follow if they disagree with the determination on any expenses which is to appeal 

to the APFA Executive Board and Board of Directors per Section 5.B. Ignoring the Board of 

Directors is not an option, especially for a sitting Board member. John Nikides testified that Ross’s 

refusal to repay APFA as a sitting Board member undermines the Union, and the memberships 

faith in its officers. 

APPENDIX 136

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 3 of 41 PageID 6814
Plaintiff argued that Defendant Ross should be expelled from membership. It is the Opinion 

of this arbitrator that Defendant Ross should be prohibited from serving in any official position 

for life within the APFA organization that is set forth and included in the APFA Constitution and 

Policy Manual that is covered or identified. Additionally, if Ross currently holds any official 

position presently, he is to resign said position. This is to bar Ross from any official position for 

life other than that of member.

REMEDY

1. The APFA will hire an Independent Forensic Auditor to audit Robert Ross’ weekly 

reports, monthly reports and APFA credit card charges from April 1, 2016 through July, 

2018 and perform the following tasks: 

Specifically: 

a. The Auditor shall inspect the receipts for the Ross family vacation taken in the 

Grand Canyon in August 2016. Ross claimed all of hotel stays, meals and 

mileage charges as relocation moving expenses when some are for a personal 

vacation. Please determine what costs should not have been claimed as 

relocation moving expenses. Ross is liable for the excess cost and is hereby 

Ordered to repay APFA for all inappropriate charges! 

b. The Auditor shall inspect Ross’ APFA credit card usage for personal and group 

meals and purchases for personal items such as tools, toiletries, bath towels, and 

candy from April 1, 2016 through July 2018 and determine the cost of all 

inappropriate charges. If no documentation was provided to support each 

purchase was a union related business cost, then Ross is liable for all 

inappropriate charges and is hereby Ordered to repay the APFA for all 

inappropriate charges! 

c. The Auditor shall inspect all of Ross’ rental car usage from April 1, 2016 

through October 16, 2016 and determine if these rentals were for union related 

business. the entire cost for. APFA paid for the rental cars but there should be 

documentation to show if it was for union related business. If not, Ross is to be 

assessed the cost of the rental cars during the above period and is hereby 

Ordered to repay APFA for inappropriate rental car usage! 

d. The Auditor shall inspect all of Ross’ claimed mileage from the Sacramento 

Airport to his residence (42 miles) and return (42 miles) as well as all monthly 

parking of his personal car. He claimed $105.00 per month from April 1, 2016 

through July 2016 to park his car at the Sacramento airport. Ross is to be 

assessed the mileage and monthly parking he claimed and Ross is hereby 

Ordered to repay APFA for all of these inappropriate charges! 

2. Ross is hereby Ordered to immediately repay the APFA $5,436.47 per the finding of the 

APFA Board of Directors. An independent accounting firm determined the formula used 

to determine the daily rate assessed for sick and vacation payout was incorrect.

3. Ross is hereby Ordered to repay the APFA $8,106.13 for leasing an apartment at the Bear 

Creek Complex where he had no intention of occupying. 

4. Ross is hereby fined and Ordered to repay the APFA for all of the Arbitrator’s Fee for 

this arbitration.

APPENDIX 137

Specifically:

a. The Auditor shall inspect the receipts for the Ross family vacation taken in the

Grand Cany g on in August 2016. Ross claimed all of hotel stays, meals and y ,

mileag g e charges as relocation movingp p ex enses when some are for a personal

vacation. Please determine what costs should not have been claimed as

relocation moving expenses. Ross is liable for the excess cost and is hereby

Ordered to repay APFA for all inappropriate charges pp p g !

b. The Auditor shall inspect Ross’ APFA credit card usage for p gp ersonal and group

meals and purchases for personal itemssuch as tools, toiletries, , bath towels, and

candy from Ap, g y ril 1, 2016 through July 2018 and determine the cost of all 

inapp p g p pp ropriate charges. If no documentation was provided to support each

purchase was a union related business cost, p then Ross is liable for all 

inapp p g ro riate charges and is hereby Ordered to repay the APFA for all 

inappropriate charges pp p g !

c. The Auditor shall inspect all of Ross’ rental car usage from April 1, 2016 g p,

throug , h October 16, 2016 and determine if these rentals were for union related

business. the entire cost for. APFA paid for the rental cars but there should be p

documentation to show if it was for union related business. If not, Ross is to be ,

assessed the cost of the rental cars during the above period g p and is hereby

Ordered to repay APFA for inappropriate rental car usage p y pp p g !

d. The Auditor shall inspect all of Ross’ claimed mileage from the Sacramento g

Airp () () ort to his residence (42 miles) and return (42 miles) as well as all monthly

parking p of his personal car. He claimed $105.00 p p, er month from April 1, 2016 

through July 2016 to p p ark his car at the Sacramento airport. Ross is to be

assessed the mileag yp g e and monthly parking he claimed and Ross is hereby

Ordered to repay APFA for all of these inappropriate charges!

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 4 of 41 PageID 6815
5. Ross is hereby ordered to repay the APFA the full cost of hiring the Independent Forensic

Auditor.

6. Ross is hereby Ordered to repay $3,637.00 to the APFA for all of the furniture he had

purchased and delivered to his residence located in South Lake, Texas.

7. Ross is prohibited from serving in any official position within the APFA organization

that is set forth and included in the APFA Constitution and Policy Manual that is covered

or identified. If Ross currently holds any official position presently, he is to resign said

position. This is to bar Ross from any official position for life other than that of member.

8. The APFA if it hasn’t done so, must create a separate body of trained forensic

accountants to oversee the annual audit and to create procedures and recommendations to

preclude fraud for the BOD’s review and action to be included within the Policy Manual.

National Officers or Officers who have the authority to extend APFA to credit or use of

an APFA credit card must be held economically responsible. The language created must

be very clear and unambiguous. Training over the LMRDA must be a requirement for all

National Officers or any person who can extend APFA to credit and whom is given an

APFA credit card. These individuals must sign a document declaring and attesting that

they have read and understand their responsibilities in using an APFA credit card or

extending credit to the APFA for rental cars, apartments, etc., and that negligence will not

be tolerated and will be dealt with severe penalties.

9. The arbitrator shall retain jurisdiction over any issue involving this remedy only. Moreover,

if the Independent Auditor determines any monies are due from Ross, that will be the

amount to be assessed or due for repayment to the APFA. The APFA shall either Order

said repayment from Ross or submit the Independent Auditors findings to have this

arbitrator issue a Supplemental Decision and Remedy.

AWARD

The grievance is sustained in part and denied in part.

Issued in San Antonio, Texas the 19th day of March, 2021.

APPENDIX 138

5. Ross is hereby ordered to repay the APFA the full cost of hiring the Independent Forensic

Auditor.

6. Ross is hereby Ordered to repay $3,637.00 to y py , the APFA for all of the furniture he had

purchased and delivered to his resi p , dence located in South Lake, Texas.

7. Ross is p g rohibited from serving in any p official position within the APFA organization

that is set forth and included in the APFA Constitution and Policy Manual that is covered y

or identified. If Ross currently y holds any official p p y, g osition presently, he is to resign said

position p . This is to bar Ross from any official position y p for life other than that of member.

8. The APFA if it hasn’t done so, must create a sep y arate body of trained forensic

accountants to oversee the annual audit and to create procedures and recommendations to p

preclude fraud for the BOD’s review and acti p y on to be included within the Policy Manual.

National Officers or Officers who have the authority to extend APFA to credit or use of

an APFA credit card must be held economically p res onsible. The lang g ua e created must

be very clear and unambiguous. Training over the LMRDA must be a requirement y gg q for all

National Officers or anyp g erson who can extend APFA to credit and whom is given an

APFA credit card. These individuals must sign a document declaring and attesting that

they have read and understand their responsibilities in using an APFA credit card or

extending credit to the APFA for rental cars, apartments, etc. g ,p , and that negligence will not

be tolerated and will be dealt with severe penalties p .

9. The arbitrator shall retain j yg urisdiction over any issue involving this remedy y onl . Moreover,

if the Independent Auditor determines any monies are due from Ross, that will be the

amount to be assessed or due for rep ya ment to the APFA. The APFA shall either Order

said rep ya ment from Ross or submit the Independent p Auditors findings to have this

arbitrator issue a Supplemental Decision and Remedy

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 5 of 41 PageID 6816
11!
11
	1	!1
11

1
	1
1%1

$1
"1

@A

-',.0,+1 @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

A @A

@A


#

1	
1&1 @A

	1
1
1 @A


11 1!1


	111


)*).('.0/1




"1
1!1#11!1
1

1

11111#	1

AA :+%A ;2$%79,*2%$A !;:+37,:?A 32A:+,9A$!?A5%7932!00?A !55%!7%$A;*%2,3A

 !7*;9A=+3A"%,2*A"?A1%A'.79:A$;0?A9=372A$,$A9:!:%A

	 A!1A%1503?%$A!9A!A0,*+:A::%2$!2:A=37/,2*A=,:+A1%7,#!2A,70,2%9

2#A !2$A A 9%7<%$A !9A :+%A !:,32!0A 7%!9;7%7A '47A :+%A 993#,!:,32A 3&

73&%99,32!0A0,*+:A::%2$!2:9AA '831A57,0A A 
A :3A;0?A 

	A A+!<%A5%7932!0A/23=0%$*%A3&A:+%A(#:AA!1AA?%!79A37A30$%7A!2$

3&A93;2$A1,2$A:3A1!/%A:+%9%A9:!:%1%2:9

! ;7,2*A1?A!$1,2,9:7!:,32A3&A1?A$;:,%9A!9A!:,32!0A7%!9;7%7A,:A=!9

1?A 7%95329,",0,:?A :3A 7%<,%=A !00A ,2#31,2*A #+!7*%9A %>5%29%9A !2$

7%#%,5:9A3&A:+%AA!:-32!0A7%9,$%2:
A :A=!9A1?A7%95329,",0,:?A:3

7!,9%A !2?A #32#%72A !2$A )7=!7$A !2?A #+!7*%A 37A7%#%,5:A=,:+A=+,#+A

6;%9:,32%$A !9A :3A =+%:+%7A ,:A =!9A !A <!0,$A ";9,2%997%0!:%$A %>5%29%



APPENDIX 139

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 6 of 41 PageID 6817
! "2L B7L B-$L .5#.G.#D 3L &9=L L 47=$L #$B .3$#L $I;3 5 B.75L ;=07=L B7L

+= 5B.5+L ;;=7G 3L7=L#$5. 3	L

!	 BLB- BLB.4$LL@$=G$#LH.B-L7!$=BL7!L7@@L7@@L @LB-$L B.75 3

=$@.#$5BL7&L	L 5JL "- =+$@L4 #$L !JL7@@L B- BL L <D$@B.75$#

H$=$L "3$ =$#L 5#L 33L<D$@B.75@L=$"B.(1$#	L 5JL7&L7@@@LD5.75L"=$#.B

" =#L "- =+$@L $I;$5@$@L 5#L =$"$.;B@L B- BLL =$G.$H$#L 5#L ;;=7G$#

H$=$L.5L"74;3. 5"$LH.B-LL;73."JL BLB-$LB.4$L7&L ;;=7G 3	

"	 - =+$@L4 #$L!JL7!$=BL7!L7@@L5$G$=L+ G$L=.@$LB7L 5JL@D@;.".75

7&LB-$*CL4.@ ;;=7;=. B.75L7=L!=$ "-L7&L-.@L(1#D". =JL#DBJL7=L"75#D"B

D5!$"74.5+L 5LL7')1"$=LH- B@7$G$=	

#	 5L7=L !7DBL JLL 
L L - #L L"75G$=@ B.75LH.B-L7!$=BL7!

7@@L =$+ =#.5+L 5JL 7DB@B 5#.5+L "- =+$@L B- BL @-7D3#L !$L =$; .#L B7

L	L L.5&9=4$#L -.4LB-$L "- =+$@L4 #$L(:=L -.@L *F=5.BD=$L(:=L B-$

L ; =B4$5BL@-7D3#L !$L =$; .#	L $L DB-7=.K$#L 4$L B7L "75B "B

L; J=733L 5#L- G$LB-$L$I;$5@$@L7&L

	L 

	L#$#D"B.75

(:=L =$BD=5$#L *F=5.BD=$L #$#D"B$#L(?74L -.@L ; J=733L H-."-L L @$5BL 5

$4 .3LB7L; J=733LB7L- G$LB-$@$L*F5#@L#$#D"B$#	

		



E,%6/8L >,EAL

	
	
 






APPENDIX 140

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 7 of 41 PageID 6818
;;		
;;"1;*;.,;4$&2; 5%; :;.!;01&(;;

.41:;6(&;44;.!;92;









	





,,,

$(&+,,
,

+,$"" ''!$#, *% &',


))'(,	, ,


;/-)'- ;73'-#;7'/;8' /;/++7-'5'/-;

APPENDIX 141

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 8 of 41 PageID 6819
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

 FT. WORTH DIVISION 

ROBERT “BOB” ROSS § 

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant § 

 § Case No. 4:22-CV-00343-Y 

 § 

 § 

ASSOCIATION OF 

PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT 

ATTENDANTS, MCGAUGHEY, 

REBER AND ASSOCIATES, INC., 

JULIE HEDRICK, ERIK HARRIS, 

LARRY SALAS, JOSH BLACK 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiff. § 

§ 

EUGENIO VARGAS § 

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant § 

 § Case No. 4:22-CV-00430-Y 

 § 

 § 

ASSOCIATION OF 

PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT 

ATTENDANTS, JULIE HEDRICK, 

ERIK HARRIS, LARRY SALAS, 

JOSH BLACK 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiff. § 

§ 

AFFIDAVIT OF HEIDI MORGAN 

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Heidi 

Morgan, who being by me first duly sworn, did state: 

1. “I am employed as a flight attendant working with American Airlines, Inc. since 

1986, and I am currently serving as APFA Miami Base Vice-President. I have 

personal knowledge of the facts contained herein, I am 21 years or older 

and of sound mind to make these statements. 

APPENDIX 142

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 9 of 41 PageID 6820
a. In 2021, I participated as a representative for Eugenio Vargas’ in his APFA 

disciplinary arbitration hearing brought on behalf of the union by Melissa 

Chinery-Burns and Sandra Lee. I further participated as a representative for 

Nena Martin in her APFA disciplinary arbitration hearing brought on behalf of 

the union by Melissa Chinery-Burns and Sandra Lee. The charges sought 

disciplinary measures against Eugenio Vargas and Nena Martin for their 

participation in the alleged overpayment of Robert “Bob” Ross under his 

Transition Agreement among other charges. 

b. Whilst serving as representative to Nena Martin, I served Erik Harris, APFA 

National Treasurer and APFA custodian of record, with a signed subpoena 

making the following requests: 

“1. Any and all communication between Hal O'Neil, CPA from 

Certified Public Accountants Firm Wood, Stephens & O'Neil, L.L.P. and 

APFA regarding the Ross Transition Agreement. 

2. Any and all internal APFA emails which distributed the 

communications between Hal O'Neil and APFA to the designated 

parties.” (“Confidential Memo Subpoena”). 

c. The initial subpoena was served on April, 20, 2022. It is standard for document 

production to be served in APFA’s Digify Software Program within two to four 

days from the date reflected on the signed subpoena. 

d. An email was deposited into APFA’s Digify Software Program dated April 20, 

2022, wherein Erik Harris forwarded to Margot Nikitas and the four National 

APPENDIX 143

Whilst serving as representative to Nena Martin, I served Erik Harris, APFA

National Treasurer and APFA custodian of record, with a signed subpoena

making the following requests:

“1. Any and all communication between Hal O'Neil, CPA from

Certified Public Accountants Firm Wood, Stephens & O'Neil, L.L.P. and

APFA regarding the Ross Transition Agreement.

2. Any and all internal APFA emails which distributed the

communications between Hal O'Neil and APFA to the designated

parties.” (“Confidential Memo Subpoena”). 

c. The initial subpoena was served on April, 20, 2022. It is standard for document

production to be served in APFA’s Digify Software Program within two to four

days from the date reflected on the signed subpoena. 

d. An email was deposited into APFA’s Digify Software Program dated April 20, 

2022, wherein Erik Harris forwarded to Margot Nikitas and the four National 

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 10 of 41 PageID 6821
Officers an email exchange between Hal O’Neil and Erik Harris to schedule a 

meeting for discussion and review of the Ross Transition Agreement. A true 

and correct copy of this email is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit B-1. 

e. No documents transmitting the Confidential Memo were produced before May 

3, 2022. A true and correct copy of email exchanges made regarding Nena 

Martin’s Arbitration Hearing are attached hereto and marked as Exhibit B-2. 

f. On or about May 3, 2022, I spoke with Erik Harris on a telephone conversation 

about the failure to produce the internal emails distributing the Confidential 

Memo. Erik Harris informed me that he received the Confidential Memo Email

from Hal O’Neil on October 22, 2020, and that upon its receipt on October 22, 

2020, Mr. Harris immediately forwarded the Confidential Memo Email to Julie 

Hedrick, AFPA National President, Josh Black, AFPA National Secretary, 

Larry Salas, AFPA National Vice-President (“APFA National Officers”) 

Margot Nikitas, AFPA General Counsel, and William Osborne, APFA Outside 

Counsel. 

g. In this May 3, 2022 conversation, Erik Harris also stated that upon receipt of

the Confidential Memo Subpoena Mr. Harris resent the Confidential Memo 

Email to the APFA National Officers and to Nikitas on April 20, 2022. Mr. 

Harris further stated that in response to the request for email distribution of the 

Confidential Memo, Nikitas advised Mr. Harris not to produce any internal 

emails. Mr. Harris stated that he followed Nikitas’s legal advice on this matter. 

h. In this May 3, 2022 conversation, Erik Harris further stated that he did not 

disclose the Confidential Memo to the APFA Board of Directors and the APFA 

APPENDIX 144

Officers an email exchange between Hal O’Neil and Erik Harris to schedule a

meeting for discussion and review of the Ross Transition Agreement. A true

and correct copy of this email is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit B-1.

e. No documents transmitting the Confidential Memo were produced before May 

3, 2022. A true and correct copy of email exchanges made regarding Nena

Martin’s Arbitration Hearing are attached hereto and marked as Exhibit B-2.

f. On or about May 3, 2022, I spoke with Erik Harris on a telephone conversation 

about the failure to produce the internal emails distributing the Confidential

Memo. Erik Harris informed me that he received the Confidential Memo Email

from Hal O’Neil on October 22, 2020, and that upon its receipt on October 22,

2020, Mr. Harris immediately forwarded the Confidential Memo Email to Julie

Hedrick, AFPA National President, Josh Black, AFPA National Secretary,

Larry Salas, AFPA National Vice-President (“APFA National Officers”)

Margot Nikitas, AFPA General Counsel, and William Osborne, APFA Outside

Counsel.

g. In this May 3, 2022 conversation, Erik Harris also stated that upon receipt of

the Confidential Memo Subpoena Mr. Harris resent the Confidential Memo

Email to the APFA National Officers and to Nikitas on April 20, 2022. Mr.

Harris further stated that in response to the request for email distribution of the

Confidential Memo, Nikitas advised Mr. Harris not to produce any internal

emails. Mr. Harris stated that he followed Nikitas’s legal advice on this matter.

h. In this May 3, 2022 conversation, Erik Harris further stated that he did not

disclose the Confidential Memo to the APFA Board of Directors and the APFA

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 11 of 41 PageID 6822
Executive Committee, revealing only the spreadsheet attachments, because he 

did not believe the Confidential Memo was relevant to the charges against Ross

and Vargas. 

i. I discovered on the evening of May 3, 2022 that an email dated for April 20, 

2022 (“April 20, 2022 Email”) was deposited into APFA’s Digify Software 

program responsive to the Confidential Memo Subpoena. This email shows that

Mr. Harris received an email from Hal O’Neil dated October 22, 2020

containing the Confidential Memo (“Confidential Memo Email”). Mr. Harris

forwarded the Confidential Memo Email to Julie Hedrick, AFPA National 

President, Josh Black, AFPA National Secretary, Larry Salas, AFPA National 

Vice-President, Margot Nikitas, AFPA General Counsel on April 20, 2022. A 

true and correct copy of the April 20, 2022 email is attached hereto and marked 

as Exhibit B-3. 

j. On or about October 11, 2022, I was served with a subpoena by Robert “Bob” 

Ross on his pending case numbered 22-CV-00343 pending before the Northern 

Texas Federal District Court, wherein Ross sought any documents in my 

possession related to the disciplinary arbitration hearings against Robert “Bob” 

Ross, Eugenio Vargas, or Nena Martin. In response to the subpoena request, I 

delivered a true and correct copy of the April 20, 2022 email exchange, and 

email exchange between Hal O’Neil and Erik Harris. 

APPENDIX 145

Executive Committee, revealing only the spreadsheet attachments, because he

did not believe the Confidential Memo was relevant to the charges against Ross

and Vargas.

i. I discovered on the evening of May 3, 2022 that an email dated for April 20, 

2022 (“April 20, 2022 Email”) was deposited into APFA’s Digify Software

program responsive to the Confidential Memo Subpoena. This email shows that

Mr. Harris received an email from Hal O’Neil dated October 22, 2020

containing the Confidential Memo (“Confidential Memo Email”). Mr. Harris

forwarded the Confidential Memo Email to Julie Hedrick, AFPA National

President, Josh Black, AFPA National Secretary, Larry Salas, AFPA National

Vice-President, Margot Nikitas, AFPA General Counsel on April 20, 2022. A

true and correct copy of the April 20, 2022 email is attached hereto and marked

as Exhibit B-3.

j. On or about October 11, 2022, I was served with a subpoena by Robert “Bob”

Ross on his pending case numbered 22-CV-00343 pending before the Northern 

Texas Federal District Court, wherein Ross sought any documents in my

possession related to the disciplinary arbitration hearings against Robert “Bob”

Ross, Eugenio Vargas, or Nena Martin. In response to the subpoena request, I

delivered a true and correct copy of the April 20, 2022 email exchange, and

email exchange between Hal O’Neil and Erik Harris.

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 12 of 41 PageID 6823
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. 

 ____________________________________ 

 Heidi Morgan 

SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED TO before me on this _____day of July 2023. 

 

____________________________________

Notary Public, State of Florida 

State of Florida 

County of Palm Beach 

31 

This notarial act was an online notarization 

produced a Florida Driver License 

Darien Hernandez Darien

 

APPENDIX 146

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 13 of 41 PageID 6824
1

Margot Nikitas

From: Erik Harris

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 6:19 PM

To: Margot Nikitas; Officers

Subject: FW: Meeting next week?

-- 

Erik Harris Pronouns: he, him, his

National Treasurer

Association of Professional Flight Attendants

Office 817. | Email eharris

The content of this email is intended solely for the recipient(s).

It is not to be shared, forwarded or posted without the author's written consent.

From: Hal O'Neil <oneil

Date: Monday, September 14, 2020 at 1:26 PM 

To: Erik Harris <eharris 

Cc: Chris Thedford <cthedford@ Pam Bush <pbush

Subject: Re: Meeting next week? 

Erik, Chris.......Pam and I can meet this Thursday around 9:00 AM at your office to go over the Bob Ross 

document list. Is this OK? 

Thanks, Hal 

____________________________________ 

Hal O'Neil, CPA 

Wood, Stephens & O'Neil, L.L.P.

6300 Ridglea Place, Suite #318 

Fort Worth, TX 76116

Important/confidential: This communication and any files or documents attached to it are intended only for the use of the 

person(s) or entity to which it is addressed; consequently, it may contain information which is privileged and 

confidential. If you are not the intended recipient(s) of this communication, you are hereby notified that the copying, 

distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication by mistake, 

please notify the sender immediately by electronic mail and destroy all forms of this communication (electronic or paper). 

Thank you.

___________________________________

Any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and 

cannot be used, by the recipient for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed or promoting, marketing or 

recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter(s).

____________________________________

1

APPENDIX 147

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 14 of 41 PageID 6825
2

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:46 PM Erik Harris <eharris wrote: 

Hey HalMy apologies. I’m finally getting a chance to catchup on emails.

Yes, Thursday the 17th will work for us. I will be on vacation, however, the other officers will be available. 

Thanks,

Erik

-- 

Erik Harris

National Treasurer

Association of Professional Flight Attendants

Office | Email treasurer

The content of this email is intended solely for the recipient(s).

It is not to be shared, forwarded or posted without the author's written consent.

From: "oneil@ <oneil

Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 at 3:46 PM 

To: Erik Harris <eharris

Cc: Chris Thedford <cthedford@ Pam Bush <pbush@w

Subject: Meeting next week?

 

2

APPENDIX 148

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 15 of 41 PageID 6826
3

Erik........Last week I responded to your email regarding our review of the Bob Ross documents. Pam and I 

can come out to your office on Thursday morning the 17th to meet with you, Chris and hopefully Margot 

before we begin this process. I just want to make sure all of us are in agreement of what needs to be 

completed before Sept.24th. Will that morning work for you? 

____________________________________

Hal O'Neil, CPA

Wood, Stephens & O'Neil, L.L.P.

6300 Ridglea Place, Suite #318 

Fort Worth, TX 76116

 

Important/confidential: This communication and any files or documents attached to it are intended only for the use of the 

person(s) or entity to which it is addressed; consequently, it may contain information which is privileged and 

confidential. If you are not the intended recipient(s) of this communication, you are hereby notified that the copying, 

distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication by mistake, 

please notify the sender immediately by electronic mail and destroy all forms of this communication (electronic or paper). 

Thank you.

___________________________________

Any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and 

cannot be used, by the recipient for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed or promoting, marketing 

or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter(s).

____________________________________

3

APPENDIX 149

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 16 of 41 PageID 6827
From: Heidi Kidwell

Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2022 6:27 PM 

To: ArticleVII; Nena Martin

Subject: FW: Chinery-Lee v. Martin-- Subpoenas 

 

Josh, 

 

Please forward to the Arbitrator immediately. 

 

Heidi 

 

Arbitrator Armendariz, 

 

After extensive discussions if Chinery and Lee care to dismiss all charges then we will withdraw our 

subpoena requests, but otherwise, the documents are pertinent to our defense in its totality and are 

absolutely necessary. Furthermore, as stated earlier denial of them would place any award issued by 

the arbitrator into question under article 9 section 10 of the FAA to vacate an award. 

 

In addition, Section 102 gives Nena Martin the right to sue for violation of Section 29 U.S.C. 411. Ms 

Nikitas should be reminded that there are criminal and civil penalties for violations of this statute. The 

Pennsylvania Bar will also be noticed of her infringement of a members bill of rights. 

 

Margot Nikitas works for Nena Martin as much as she does Chinery and Lee and we demand the same 

consideration, frankly, more so because we should have complete access to all documents needed to 

exonerate Nena Martin. 

 

This attempt to stifle a members access to information that is pertinent to her case is illegal. 

 

Heidi Morgan 

For 

Nena Martin 

 

From: Heidi Kidwell <heidimorgan65

Date: April 19, 2022 at 5:25:22 PM EDT 

To: ArticleVII <ArticleVII@ Nena Martin <nenarott > 

Subject: RE: Chinery-Lee v. Martin-- Subpoenas

 

Josh, 

 

Please send to the Arbitrator immediately. 

 

Heidi 

 

Arbitrator Armendariz, 

 

APPENDIX 150

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 17 of 41 PageID 6828
The requested documents are absolutely necessary for the totality of our case. They are clarifying 

documents and we are renewing our request for the subpoenaed items. To withhold this information 

from us would be a refusal to provide evidence pertinent and material to the controversy. 

 

Ms. Nikites is showing complete partiality and bias to the charging party. Ms. Martin has rights under 

the Federal Arbitration Act that must not be violated or this award could end up in Federal Court due to 

the prejudice being exhibited when denying our request. 

 

APFA has no right to determine the relevance of our requested documents. 

 

We are renewing our request for these documents. 

 

Heidi Morgan 

For 

Nena Martin 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 

 

From: ArticleVII

Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2022 4:39 PM 

To: Heidi Kidwell; Nena Martin

Subject: FW: Chinery-Lee v. Martin-- Subpoenas 

 

 

 

From: Margot Nikitas <MNikitas

Date: Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 2:49 PM 

To: ArticleVII <ArticleVII

Subject: Chinery-Lee v. Martin-- Subpoenas

Hi Josh, 

 

Please send this email to the Arbitrator with a copy to all parties and their representatives. 

 

Thanks, 

Margot 

 

Arbitrator Armendariz, 

 

APFA is in receipt of your email dated April 18, 2022, stating: “Inform Erik Harris to provide the 

requested documents per the subpoena’s request.” As such, APFA will provide electronic copies of the 

requested documents and there is no need for a conference call to discuss this matter. We are working 

now to provide all of the requested documents. 

 

APFA also is in receipt of the Charging Parties’ email dated April 18, 2022, stating in part: “In light of the 

decisions in the cases of Chinery/Lee vs Ross and Chinery/Lee vs Vargas, we are withdrawing the portion 

of our charges related to Nena Martin’s failure to properly administrate the exit package provided to 

APPENDIX 151

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 18 of 41 PageID 6829
Bob Ross.” Since this claim has been withdrawn, any subpoenaed documents related to the Bob Ross 

Transition Agreement are unrelated and irrelevant to this proceeding and will not be provided. 

 

Finally, APFA respectfully requests that the Arbitrator signed the attached revised protective order 

necessary to protect confidential APFA financial records produced in this proceeding. The revised order 

clarifies that documents are to be returned or permanently deleted within 7 days of the submission of 

post-hearing briefs. 

 

Thank you, 

Margot 

 

Margot A. Nikitas Pronouns: she, her, hers

General Counsel 

Association of Professional Flight Attendants 

1004 W. Euless Boulevard 

Euless, TX 76040 

www.apfa.org

 

Confidentiality Notice: The content of this email message is intended for the confidential use of the intended recipient only. The information 

may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If 

you are not the intended recipient, you have received this email in error, and any further review, dissemination, distribution, copying or 

forwarding of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify me immediately at 817.540.0108 ext. 8108 or by 

return email and then delete this email in its entirety. Thank you.

 

 

 

APPENDIX 152

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 19 of 41 PageID 6830
From: ArticleVII <ArticleVII

Date: April 27, 2022 at 10:02:13 AM EDT

To: Heidi Kidwell <heidimorgan65 Nena Martin <nenarott

Subject: Fwd: Subpoena for documentation

From: Ruben Armendariz <arbruben@

Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 8:38:23 AM

To: ArticleVII <ArticleVII

Subject: Re: Subpoena for documentation 

 

Josh and Margot, 

Please provide the information requested to Ms. Morgan. If you don’t have the info, please state why 

you don’t have the info!

Sent from my iPhone 

Ruben R. Armendariz, Arbitrator

Member: National Academy of Arbitrators

arbruben

On Apr 27, 2022, at 8:20 AM, ArticleVII <ArticleVII wrote:

From: Heidi Kidwell <heidimorgan65

Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 5:08:43 AM

To: Erik Harris <eharris@ >; ArticleVII <ArticleVII@ Nena Martin <nenarott

Subject: FW: FW: Subpoena for documentation 

Josh,

This communication is both for Treasurer Erik Harris and the Arbitrator. I am copying in Erik and request 

you immediately forward to Arbitrator Armendariz.

 

Heidi 

 

 

Erik,

 

On 4/20/22 we requested 2 simple things by legally signed subpoena from our Arbitrator. Today, 

4/27/2, one week later, we have yet to receive those documents which must still be exchanged. This is 

not acceptable.

APPENDIX 153

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 20 of 41 PageID 6831
I would like some simple answers. Do you have these documents prepared to send? If so, why haven’t 

you sent them? Has anyone told you not to release these documents per the subpoena? If so, who? 

For your information Section 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act outlines grounds by which an Award can 

be vacated. Where there was corruption, fraud or undue means. If there is evident partiality, refusing to 

hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy or any other misbehavior by which the rights of 

any party have been prejudiced. 

In all of these situations your department would be a named party in refusing to provide documents 

which were to be released to us. Your department has a duty to fulfill the signed subpoenas and if you 

are being given legal advice to NOT provide them we demand to know so the Arbitrator knows exactly 

what we are dealing with. 

We request an answer today, 4/27/22. If you do not expeditiously provide these documents we will 

consider requesting a delay in hearing which will need to be granted per the F.A.A. because we can 

show sufficient cause by presenting the APFAs refusal to provide subpoenaed documents which are 

pertinent and material to the controversy. 

Thank you, 

Heidi Morgan 

For 

Nena Martin 

Sent from Mail for Windows 

From: ArticleVII

Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 7:07 PM 

To: Heidi Kidwell; Nena Martin

Subject: FW: FW: Subpoena for documentation 

From: Ruben Armendariz <arbruben

Date: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 10:21 AM 

To: ArticleVII <ArticleVII

Subject: Re: FW: Subpoena for documentation

Josh, 

Please forward to Margot to respond to Ms. Morgan. 

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 9:40 AM ArticleVII <ArticleVII@ wrote: 

APPENDIX 154

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 21 of 41 PageID 6832
From: Heidi Kidwell <heidimorgan65

Date: Monday, April 25, 2022 at 9:21 PM 

To: Erik Harris <eharris@ National Treasurer <treasurer@ ArticleVII 

<ArticleVII@ >, Nena Martin <nenarott

Subject: FW: Subpoena for documentation

Josh , 

 

Please forward our communication with APFA National Treasurer Erik Harris to Arbitrator Armendariz. 

 

Heidi 

 

 

 

 

Erik, 

 

As you can see below, 6 days ago we sent you a signed subpoena request for documents pertinent to 

our case. As of the date and time of this email we have yet to receive the requested documents. 

 

Those documents were commanded by the sitting Arbitrator to be presented to us. Per the Federal 

Arbitration Act refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy; or any misbehavior 

by which the rights of the party have been prejudiced can cause an award to be vacated. It is our belief 

your department and/or APFA Legal Counsel is withholding these documents from us intentionally and 

thereby violating a legal subpoena. 

 

We demand this subpoena request be fulfilled immediately, explanation be given as to why there has 

been a delay and immediate intervention by Arbitrator Armendariz to ensure we receive the 

subpoenaed document and the process has integrity as is legally required by the F.A.A. 

Heidi Morgan 

FOR 

Nena Martin 

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 

 

From: Heidi J. Morgan

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 6:53 PM 

To: National Treasurer; nena martin

Subject: Subpoena for documentation 

 

 

Erik, 

 

Please find the attached & signed subpoena for documentation. 

 

APPENDIX 155

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 22 of 41 PageID 6833
Heidi Morgan 

For 

Nena Martin 

 

APPENDIX 156

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 23 of 41 PageID 6834
APPENDIX 157

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 24 of 41 PageID 6835
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 158

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 25 of 41 PageID 6836
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 159

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 26 of 41 PageID 6837
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 160

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 27 of 41 PageID 6838
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 161

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 28 of 41 PageID 6839
APPENDIX 162

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 29 of 41 PageID 6840
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 163

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 30 of 41 PageID 6841
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 164

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 31 of 41 PageID 6842
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 165

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 32 of 41 PageID 6843
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 166

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 33 of 41 PageID 6844
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 167

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 34 of 41 PageID 6845
APPENDIX 168

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 35 of 41 PageID 6846
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 169

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 36 of 41 PageID 6847
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 170

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 37 of 41 PageID 6848
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 171

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 38 of 41 PageID 6849
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 172

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 39 of 41 PageID 6850
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 173

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 40 of 41 PageID 6851
Exhibit B-2 APPENDIX 174

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 239-3 Filed 04/26/24 Page 41 of 41 PageID 6852