Case3:13-cr RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page1 of 7 DEFENDANT INFORMATION RELATIVE TO A CRIMINAL ACTION -IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT. 0 Petty.

Similar documents
Case3:14-cr SI Document1 Filed03/18/14 Page1 of 21. NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA r/. " y - V VENUE: SAN FRANCISCO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

PLEA AGREEMENT THOMAS QUINN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case 7:14-cr RAJ Document 1 Filed 06/25/14 Page 1 of 5 SEALED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION

3. \5"'- C (-- ~ '3-1JJ-t\ 18 U.S.C. 981(a)(l)(C) 18 U.S.C. 981(a)(2) 18 U.S.C U.S.C. 2461

Case 1:16-cr GPG Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. Judges PLEA AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COUNT 1 (Conspiracy) THE DEFENDANTS

SEALED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT BOWLING GREEN NO. 21 U.S.C. 846

x : : : : : : : : : : x COUNT ONE (Conspiracy to Commit Bribery) The United States Attorney charges:

United States District Court Northern District of California

Case3:11-cr WHA Document40 Filed08/08/11 Page1 of 10

Case 1:05-cr PAS Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2005 Page 1 of 8 SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT

Case 5:14-cr Document 589 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 15273

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE. JUDGMENT IN A CRIMINAL CASE (For Offenses Committed On or After November 1, 1987)

Attorneys for the United States UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case 2:15-cr FMO Document 52 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:295

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

r.; Name of bisfr19 Gourt, and/& JudgeIMagistrate Location - ;<,.' v ;-,. T, I,<,. '!,;ic G DEFENDANT - U.S ' :: Petty I ) JOHN JOSEPHCOTA Felony

Case 2:06-cr DDP Document 92 Filed 10/03/2008 Page 1 of 8. United States District Court Central District of California

authorization for such export, in violation of Title 22, U.S.C. 2778(b)(2) & 2778(c) and Title

Case 3:11-cr DRD Document 22 Filed 03/15/11 Page 1 of 14

INDEMNITOR APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT

Case 8:09-cr CJC Document 54 Filed 05/18/12 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:143

PLEA AGREEMENT RIGHTS OF DEFENDANT

MARYLAND BAIL BOND APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT (Please answer each question in full. Please print answers)

LIMITED OFFICIAL USE

50.1 Mail Fraud 18 U.S.C something by private or commercial interstate carrier] in carrying out a

United States District Court

Mail and Wire Fraud: An Abridged Overview of Federal Criminal Law

0 82UTHtrisguS OF FL~RIDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT

Case 9:19-cr RKA Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2019 Page 1 of 5

1. From at least in or about June 2006, up to and

BAIL BOND APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT - DEFENDANT

Case 1:09-cr GBL Document 27 Filed 05/06/2009 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ) ) ) INDICTMENT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA. -ooo

Corporate Administration Detection and Prevention of Fraud and Abuse CP3030

MEMORANDUM OF LAW NON-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURES

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR. EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER (Executive Order of Removal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT

INDEMNITOR APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. 18 u.s.c. 981, 982, 1001, 1014 I 1028A, 1343, 1503 I 1519, 1957 and 2; 28 u. s.c.

2:17-cv SJM-RSW Doc # 1 Filed 05/26/17 Pg 1 of 21 Pg ID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 8:07-cr AG Document 141 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:2159. United States District Court Central District of California

People v. Evanson. 08PDJ082. August 4, Attorney Regulation. Following a default sanctions hearing pursuant to C.R.C.P (b), the Presiding

H 5695 SUBSTITUTE A ======== LC001230/SUB A/2 ======== S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D

Case 2:12-cr TJS Document 11 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

5 CRWIINAL NO. H

Families Against Mandatory Minimums 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C

Case 2:13-cr TJH Document 59 Filed 03/17/15 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:280. United States District Court Central District of California

Case 8:15-cr JLS Document 59 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:300 United States District Court Central District of California

Case: 4:07-cr RGK-RGK Document #: 176 Date Filed: 08/21/09 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

I am proud to share with you one of the great wins of anybody s legal career.

2:13-cr GCS-PJK Doc # 9 Filed 11/05/13 Pg 1 of 19 Pg ID 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION.

United States District Court Southern District of Florid a

Case 2:08-cr DDP Document 37 Filed 10/19/2009 Page 1 of 5. United States District Court Central District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Southern District of Florida Miami Division

United States District Court

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

Case 2:19-cr RGD-RJK Document 3 Filed 02/07/19 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Case 4:13-cr DLC Document 1 Filed 04/18/13 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA GREAT FALLS DIVISION

STATE OF NEW JERSEY Division of Gaming Enforcement VENDOR REGISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE FORM

INFORMATION ABOUT ORDERS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE

Case 8:06-cr DOC Document 43 Filed 02/08/2008 Page 1 of 5. United States District Court Central District of California

Case 8:07-cr CJC Document 50 Filed 12/18/12 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:213. United States District Court Central District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

2:18-cr DCN Date Filed 11/14/18 Entry Number 3 Page 1 of 7

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA EXTRA SESSION 1994 H 1 HOUSE BILL 144. February 14, 1994

SUPERIOR AND DISTRICT COURT DIVISIONS ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER

:nue.&..crimes and Criminal Procedure Sections 2_314 and 2315

On March 27, 2008, Scott Shields ("Shields" or. pleaded guilty to one count of Conspiracy to Fraudulently Obtain

United States District Court

Model Annotated Corporate Plea Agreement Last Updated 12/20/2013 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT [XXXXXXX] DISTRICT OF [XXXXXXXXX] ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:18-cr JPS Filed 03/12/18 Page 1 of 16 Document 3

Case 1:12-cr LMB Document 128 Filed 01/25/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 929. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Eastern District of Virginia

Small Business Lending Industry Briefing

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, ) v. ) No CR-W-FJG. Defendant.

United States District Court Western District of Kentucky PADUCAH DIVISION

POLICY STATEMENT. Topic: False Claims Act Date Effective: 10/13/08. X Revised New Section: Corporate Compliance Number: 10.05

Case 8:16-cr JLS Document 59 Filed 05/04/18 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:269 United States District Court Central District of California

Case 1:19-cr RBK Document 1 Filed 03/13/19 Page 1 of 31 PageID: 1

APPLICATION FOR ACCELERATED REHABILITATIVE DISPOSITION

Case 3:10-cr FDW Document 3 Filed 04/07/10 Page 1 of 7

FEDERAL STATUTES. 10 USC 921 Article Larceny and wrongful appropriation

Case 1:18-cr NGG Document 14 Filed 04/19/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 61. COUNT ONE (Sex Trafficking - Jane Does 1 and 2)

United States District Court

PETITION FOR EXPUNGEMENT OF CONVICTION OR DIVERSION Pursuant to K.S.A

Case 3:06-cr AWT Document 4 Filed 11/22/06 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

DePaul Law Review. DePaul College of Law. Volume 9 Issue 2 Spring-Summer Article 23

Transcription:

AO 257 (Rev. 6/78 DEFENDANT INFORMATION RELATIVE TO A CRIMINAL ACTION -IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT BY 0 COMPLAINT [gj INFORMATION 0 INDICTMENT,----OFFENSE CHARGED Count One: 15 U.S.C. 1 -Bid Rigging Count Two: 18 U.S.C. 1349- Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud 0 SUPERSEDING 0 Petty 0 Minor 0 Misdemea nor Name..of DistrictC.i:ru;t, and/or Judge/Magistrate Location < ' / ' ' No'RTHJ;:RN DfSl:RICT OF CALIFORNIA /. '<~,/,/ '-...,~ S~fRANCJ$CO DIVISION i DEFENDANT - U.S ----''--T~.~---.*--.------------, t Robert William/>,. [g] Felony DISTRICT COURT NUMBER PENALTY: Maximum Terms for count 1: (1 10 years prison; (2 fine of S 1 million; (3 3 years supervised release; (4 $200 special assessment; and (5 Restitution. Maximum Terms for Count 2: (1 30 years. ~ r't RS prison; (2 fine of S 1 million; (3 5 years supervised release; (4 $200.,_. Bt---- r-t._.j------1r:.ihc::iii--t!_.----------' special assessment; and (5 Restitution IW PROCEEDING Name of Complaintant A~ncy, or Person (&Title, if any Federal Bureau of Investigation 0 D D person is awaiting trial in another Federal or State Court, give name of court this person/proceeding is transferred from another district per (circle one FRCrp 20, 21, or 40. Show District this is a reprosecution of charges previously dismissed which were dismissed on motion of: D U.S. ATIORNEY D DEFENSE this prosecution relates to a D pending case involving this same defendant prior proceedings or appearance(s D before U.S. Magistrate regarding this defendant were recorded under Name and Office of Person Furnishing Information on this form Name of Assistant U.S. Attorney (if assigned D U.S. Attorney [EJ } } SHOW DOCKET NO. MAGISTRATE CASE NO. Christina M. Wheeler, D.O.J. Other U.S. Agency DEFENDANT IS NOT IN CUSTODY Has not been arrested, pending outcome this proceeding. 1 [gl If not detained give date any prior "- summons was served on above charges.,: 2 D Is a Fugitive 3 D Is on Bail or Release from (show District IS IN CUSTODY 4 D On this charge 5 D On another conviction 6 D Awaiting trial on other charges } D Federal D State If answer to (6 is "Yes", show name of institution Has detainer D Yes been filed? D No } lf"yes" give date filed DATE OF Month/Day/Year ARREST Or... if Arresting Agency & Warrant were not DATETRANSFERRED " TO U.S. CUSTODY " r-------------- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS PROCESS: 0 SUMMONS [gj NO PROCESS* 0 WARRANT If Summons, complete following: D Arraignment D Initial Appearance Defendant Address: Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page1 of 7 Bail Amount: Month/Day/Year D This report amends AO 257 previously submitted * Where defendant previously apprehended on complaint, no new summons or warrant needed, since Magistrate has scheduled arraignment Comments: Date/Time: Before Judge: --------

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page2 of 7 PENALTY SHEET Individual: Robert Williams 15 U.S.C. 1- Bid Rigging (Count 1 Maximum Penalties: 1. A term of imprisonment of 10 years 2. A fine of $1 million, or two times the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater 3. A period of supervised release of not more than 3 years 4. $100 special assessment per count ($100 5. Restitution 18 U.S.C. 1349- Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud (Count 2 Maximum Penalties: 1. A term of imprisonment of 30 years 2. A fine of $1 million 3. A period of supervised release of not more than 5 years 4. $100 special assessment per count ($1 00 5. Restitution

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 f9 20 21 22 JEANE HAMILTON (CSBN 157834 ALBERT B. SAMBAT (CSBN 236472 DAVID J. WARD (CSBN 239504 CHRISTINA M. WHEELER (CSBN 203395 MANISH KUMAR (CSBN 269493 MICAH L. WYATT (CSBN 267465 LIDIA MAHER (CSBN 22253 E. KATE PATCHEN (NYRN 41204634 U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division 450 Golden Gate A venue Box 36046, Room 10-0101 San Francisco, CA 94102 christina.wheeler@usdoj.gov Telephone: ( 415 436-6660 Attorneys for the United States UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROBERT WILLIAMS, /.c., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT /;, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Defendant. SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION.!y 1:-~~ 0., (,. ' ~., <-:2 CR ~ Cti3No. 38 8 INFORMATION VIOLATIONS: 15 U.S.C. 1- Bid Rigging (Count One; 18 U.S.C. 1349- Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud (Count Two RS 23 The United States of America, acting through its attorneys, charges: 24 ROBERT WILLIAMS, 25 the defendant herein, as follows: 26 BACKGROUND 27 1. At all times relevant to this Information, when California homeowners defaulted 28 on their mortgages, mortgage holders could institute foreclosure proceedings and sell the INFORMATION- ROBERT WILLIAMS- 1

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page4 of 7 1 properties through non-judicial public real estate foreclosure auctions ("public auctions". These 2 public auctions were governed by California Civil Code, Section 2924, et seq. Typically, a 3 trustee was appointed to oversee the public auctions. These public auctions usually took place at 4 or near the courthouse of the county in which the properties were located. The auctioneer, acting 5 on behalf of the trustee, sold the property to the bidder offering the highest purchase price. 6 Proceeds from the sale were then used to pay the mortgage holders, other holders of debt secured 7 by the property, and, in some cases, the defaulting homeowner (collectively, "beneficiaries". 8 COUNT ONE: 15 U.S.C. 1- Bid Rigging (San Mateo County 9 THE COMBINATION AND CONSPIRACY 10 2. Beginning as early as October 2009 and continuing until in or about December 11 2010, the defendant, ROBERT WILLIAMS, and co-conspirators entered into and engaged in a 12 combination and conspiracy to suppress and restrain competition by rigging bids to obtain 13 selected properties offered at public auctions in San Mateo County in the Northern District of 14 California, in unreasonable restraint of interstate trade and commerce, in violation of the 15 Sherman Act, Title 15, United States Code, Section 1. 16 3. The charged combination and conspiracy consisted of a continuing agreement, 17 understanding, and concert of action among the defendant and co-conspirators to suppress 18 competition by agreeing to refrain from or stop bidding against each other to purchase selected 19 properties at public auctions in San Mateo County at non-competitive prices. 20 4. For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and 21 conspiracy, the defendant and co-conspirators did those things that they combined and conspired 22 to do, including, among other things: 23 a. agreeing not to compete to purchase selected properties at public auctions 24 in San Mateo County; 25 b. designating which conspirator would win the selected properties at the 26 public auctions for the group of conspirators; and 27 c. refraining from or stopping bidding for the selected properties at the 28 public auctions. INFORMATION- ROBERT WILLIAMS- 2

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page5 of 7 1 5. Various entities and individuals, not made defendants in this Count, participated 2 as conspirators in the offense charged and performed acts and made statements in furtherance 3 thereof. 4 TRADE AND COMMERCE 5 6. During the period covered by this Information, the business activities of the 6 defendant and co-conspirators that are the subject of this Information were within the flow of, 7 and substantially affected, interstate trade and commerce. For example, beneficiaries located in 8 states other than California received proceeds from the public auctions that were subject to the 9 bid-rigging conspiracy. 10 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 11 7. The combination and conspiracy charged in this Information was carried out, in 12 part, in the Northern District of California, within the five years preceding the filing of this 13 Information. 14 ALL IN VIOLATION OF TITLE 15, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1. 15 COUNT TWO: 18 U.S.C. 1349- Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud (San Mateo County 16 THE CONSPIRACY 17 8. Beginning as early as October 2009 and continuing until in or about December 18 2010 in San Mateo County in the Northern District of California, the defendant, ROBERT 19 WILLIAMS, and co-conspirators did willfully and knowingly combine, conspire, and agree with 20 each other to violate Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341, namely, to knowingly devise 21 and intend to devise and participate in a scheme and artifice to defraud beneficiaries, and to 22 obtain money and property from beneficiaries by means of materially false and fraudulent 23 pretenses, representations, and promises. 24 9. The objects of the conspiracy were to fraudulently acquire title to selected 25 properties sold at public auctions in San Mateo County, to make and receive payoffs, and to 26 divert money to conspirators that would have gone to the beneficiaries. 27 II 28 II INFORMATION- ROBERT WILLIAMS- 3

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page6 of 7 1 10. Various entities and individuals, not made defendants in this Count, participated 2 as co-conspirators in the offense charged and performed acts and made statements in furtherance 3 thereof. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MEANS AND METHODS 11. For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged conspiracy, the defendant and co-conspirators did those things that they conspired to do, including, among other things: a. negotiating payoffs with one or more conspirators not to compete; b. in some instances, falsely participating in foreclosure auctions to create the appearance that they were bidding competitively when, in fact, they were not; 11 12 13 beneficiaries; c. d. purchasing the selected properties at public auctions at suppressed prices; paying conspirators monies that otherwise would have gone to the 14 e. taking steps to conceal the fact that monies were diverted from the 15 beneficiaries to the conspirators; 16 f. making and causing to be made materially false and misleading statements 17 on records of public auctions that trustees relied upon to distribute proceeds from the public 18 auction to the beneficiaries and convey title to properties sold at the public auction; and 19 g. causing the suppressed purchase price to be reported and paid to the 20 beneficiaries. 21 12. For the purpose of executing the scheme and artifice to defraud and attempting to 22 do so, the defendant and co-conspirators knowingly used and caused to be used the United States 23 Postal Service and private or commercial interstate carriers. For example, trustees used the 24 United States mail and private or commercial interstate carriers to transmit the Trustee's Deeds 25 Upon Sale and other title documents to participants in the conspiracy. These mailings were 26 foreseeable to the defendant in the ordinary course of business. 27 II 28 II INFORMATION~ ROBERT WILLIAMS~ 4

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1 Filed06/18/13 Page7 of 7 1 2 13. JURISDICTION AND VENUE The combination, conspiracy, and agreement to violate Title 18, United States 3 Code, Section 1341 charged in this Information was carried out, in part, in the Northern District 4 of California, within the five years preceding the filing of this Information. 5 ALL IN VIOLATION OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1349. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 @:2-=-- Scott D. Hammond Deputy Assistant Attorney General ~1/LJM1,v Phillip Chie. Warren 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Director of Criminal Enforce nt d,l United States Department of Justice Antitru~t D vision ~ Attorney for the United States Acting Under Authority Conferred by 28 U.S.C. 515 INFORMATION- ROBERT WILLIAMS- 5 Jeane Hamilton Albert B. Sambat David J. Ward Manish Kumar Micah L. Wyatt Lidia Maher E. Kate Patchen Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division

Case3:13-cr-00388-RS Document1-1 Filed06/18/13 Page1 of 1 United States District Court Northern District of Californi3t,. / /,, 'v'( ' CRIMINAL COVER SHEET. 1,; ~. '1 0. ;> <:.',? Instructions: Effective January 3, 2012, this Criminal Cover Sheet must be completed ad~ sjtblnitted, along with the Defendant Information Form, for each new criminal case. Please place this form on top oftliie Dfirendant Information Form... Case Name: Case Number: USAv. Robert Williams CR 13 388 Rs Total Number of Defendants: Is This Case Under Seal?.f 2-7 8 or more Yes No.f Does this case involve ONLY charges under 8 U.S.C. 1325 and/or 1326? Venue (Per Crim. L.R. 18-1: Yes No.{ SF.f OAK SJ Is this a death-penalty-eligible RICO Act gang case? Assigned AUSA (Lead Attorney: Yes No.{ Christina M. Wheeler Comments: Date Submitted: June 18, 2013 December 2011 PRINT