📄 Extracted Text (203 words)
From: ' (USAFLS)"
To: aUSAFLS)" < >, "-(USAFLS)"
Subject: RE: Response to Paul's email?
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:57:37 +0000
Importance: Normal
It is beautiful, as usual. My only correction is the spelling of name. It is
drafted all of the responses that you ask about below and in your other email.
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District ofFlorida
From: (USAFLS)
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 11:38 AM
To: (USAFLS) < >; (USAFLS)
Subject: Response to Paul's email?
and =,
Here's my overlong draft response. I don't love it, and it presently includes everything I think we could, but
might not necessarily want to, say. What do you think about trying to reach out to and
today to confirm that they also had no communications or info concerning the matters addressed in the
supplemental discovery requests?
By the way, I know we were operating under extensions, but did we ever send written responses to either the
supplemental request for admissions or the supplement request for production? If not, should we get that
done soon? Should we also close the loop with former WPB Chief Reiter, even though we have confirmed from
our side that the petitioners' contentions involving him are bogus?
•
EFTA00211052
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
c9cd5f6f184be81706d83c002007fe0ff664de56ea0396a826161bfcaad41d94
Bates Number
EFTA00211052
Dataset
DataSet-9
Document Type
document
Pages
1
Comments 0