Upon the reading andfiling ofthe Affirmation ofAndrew A. Ruffino dated July 3, 2024, and the exhibit attached thereto, and upon the Stipulated Confidentiality Order approved by the Court in this action (NYSCEF Doc. 206), in the application of JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan

07/22/2024 Chase Bank, N.A., and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (collectively, the “JPMorgan Defendants”) for a sealing order pursuant to 22 NYCRR 216.1 to seal certain documents (the “Documents’”) identified in the table below,all electronically filed underrestricted status in connection with the JPMorgan Defendants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212,filed July 2, 2024 (see NYSCEFDoc.

1833), and uponall other papers and proceedingsin this action,it is hereby ORDEREDthat any party show cause before this Court at IAS Part 53, Room 238, New York County Courthouse, 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, on the [4 ““ day of Alug Vvst 2024at_ 2:00 Qm__, oras soonthereafter as counsel maybeheard, why an order should not be entered granting the JPMorgan Defendants’ application for a sealing order pursuant to 22 NYCRR 216.1 to seal permanently the Documents electronically filed in connection with the JPMorgan Defendants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212; and it is further ORDEREDthat service and publication by NYSCEF of a copy of this Order, together with the papers upon whichit is based, shall be deemed goodandsufficient service upon anyparty; andit is further ORDEREDthat opposition papers, if any, shall be filed by NYSCEF on or before Tely ZS ZO2ZY ; and it is further ORDEREDthat no appearance shall be necessary unless opposition papersare filed in connection with this Order to Show Cause; andit is further ORDEREDthat, pending the hearing and/or determination ofthis sealing application, the County Clerk is directed to restrict access, other than to the staff of the Clerk of the Court, counsel for any current party to this action, and the current parties to this action, to the documentslisted below:

Exhibit 17 to Affirmation of Andrew A. Ruffino July 2, 2024 Email dated April 24, 2009 (ICE-00001013) Email dated November 16, 2012 (ICE-00012296) JS.C.

Exhibit 18 to Affirmation of Andrew A. Ruffino July 2, 2024 ne eeear pecan ee .Hon.

Uponthe Stipulated Confidentiality Order (NYSCEF Doc. 206) and the accompanying Affirmation of F, Franklin Amanat dated July 2, 2024, and good cause having been shown,it is hereby: ORDEREDthat Defendants Bank of America Corporation; Bank of America N.A.

; Banc of America Securities LLC; Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., BOFA Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings, Inc.; and Merrill Lynch & Co.(collectively referred to as “BAML”) appear in IASPart 53 of this Court, in the New York State Supreme Court Building located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, before the Honorable Andrew Borrok, J.S.C., on the 1... day of , 2024 at7_00 a.m./gDP, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, and show cause why an Order should not be entered granting Plaintiff the followingrelief: Ordering that the New York County Clerk be directed, upon service on him (at 60 Centre Street, Room 141B) of a copy of this Order with Notice of Entry, to file under seal (1) the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment as to NYFCA

07/22/2024 Liability against All BAML Defendants (NYSCEF No. 2166); and (2) the Exhibits to the Affirmation of F. Franklin Amanat Chernov Affirmation in Support of Said Motion (NYSCEF Nos. 2168 to 2250); and further Ordering the County Clerk to separate those documents from the balance ofthe file in this action, and to restrict said documents from all except the Parties hereto, their counsel, and Court personnel, and to thereafter, or until further order of this Court, deny access to said documents to anyone(otherthan the staff of the Clerk or the Court), except for counsel of record for any party hereto and any party; and further Ordering Plaintiff, in accordance with Section 202.5 of the Uniform Civil Rules of the Supreme and County Court, to file redacted versions of these materials upon entry of the Court’s order; and further Ordering that service upon the County Clerk shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the “E-Filing” page on the Court’s website at the address www.nycourts/gov/supctmanh).

It is further ORDEREDthat service upon counsel for Defendants of a copy of this Order, together with the papers upon which it is based, by electronic means so as to be received on or before Svty Z3 , 2024, shall be deemed good and sufficient service; and it is further ORDEREDthat Counselshall file proof of service by Lely Zz Ge__, 2024; anditis further 2024.

ORDEREDthat opposition papers, ifany, shall be served on or before AlugustB.

Upon the Stipulated Confidentiality Order (NYSCEF Doc. 206) and the accompanying Affirmation of F, Franklin Amanat dated July 2, 2024, and good cause having been shown, it is hereby: ORDEREDthat Defendants MorganStanley Smith Barney LLC; Morgan Stanley; Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC; MorganStanley Bank, N.A.

; Morgan Stanley Capital Services Inc.; and Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc (collectively referred to as “MS’) appear in IAS Part 53 of this Court, in the New York State Supreme Court Building located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, before the Honorable Andrew Borrok, J.S.C., on the Ls day of A. ofa SE, 2024 at 2&) am/fm, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, and show cause why an Order should not be entered granting Plaintiff the followingrelief: Ordering that the New York County Clerk be directed, upon service on him (at 60 Centre Street, Room 141B) of a copy of this Order with Notice of Entry, to file under seal (1) the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment as to NYFCA

07/22/2024 Liability against All Morgan Stanley Defendants (NYSCEF No.1785); and (2) the Exhibits to the Affirmation ofF.

1787 through 1832); and further Ordering the County Clerk to separate those documents from the balanceofthe file in this action, and to restrict said documents from all except the Parties hereto, their counsel, and Court personnel, andto thereafter, or until further order of this Court, deny access to said documents to anyone (other than the staff of the Clerk or the Court), except for counsel of record for any party hereto and any party; and further Ordering Plaintiff, in accordance with Section 202.5 of the Uniform Civil Rules of the Supreme and County Court, to file redacted versions of these materials upon entry of the Court’s order; and further Ordering that service upon the County Clerk shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the “E-Filing” page on the Court’s website at the address www.nycourts/gov/supctmanh).

Dated: ORDEREDthat opposition papers,ifany, shall be served on or before Aw aS f- f, 7) 1S) 2 1 Entered:

At IASPart 53 of the Supreme Court ofthe State of New York, held in and for the County of New York, at the New York County Courthouse, 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, on the if day of July , 2024.

STATE OF NEW YORK exrel.

Uponthe Stipulated Confidentiality Order (NYSCEF Doc. No. 206), the accompanying Affirmation ofAaron M. Saykin, dated July 2, 2024, and good cause having been alleged, it is hereby: ORDEREDthatPlaintiff-Relator Edelweiss Fund, LLC, appear and show cause in IASPart 53 of this Court, in the courthouse located at 60 Centre Street, New York, before the HonorableAndrew Borrok, J.S.C., on the ft-”say of A.o fesf 2024 at2:00 amJ/gm), or as soon thereafter as courisel may be heard, why an Order should not be entered granting M&T the followingrelief: Ordering that the Clerk of the Court is directed, upon service on him or her (60 Centre Street, Room 141B) of a copy ofthis order with notice of entry, to seal Exhibit 28 to the Affirmation ofAaron M. Saykin in Support of M&T’s Motion for Summary Judgment (NYSCEF Doc. 1757), consisting of excerpts from Plaintiff-Relator’s September 15, 2023 Expert Report of Professor S. Ilan Guedj (“Exhibit 28”), and to separate this document and keep it separate from the balanceof thefile in this action, andto restrict said documentfrom all except the parties, their counsel, and Court personnel; and further Ordering that thereafter, or until further order of the Court, the Clerk of the Court shall deny access to the said document to anyone(other than thestaff of the Clerk or the Court) except for counsel of record for any party of this case and any party; and further Ordering that service upon the Clerk of the Court shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Proceduresfor Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the “E-Filing” page on the Court’s website at the address www.nycourts/gov/supctmanh); andit is further

ORDEREDthat, pending the hearing on this Order to Show Cause,the unredacted Exhibit 28 will remain temporarily under seal, accessible only to the parties, their counsel of record, and authorized Court personnel; and it is further ORDEREDthat service upon counselfor Plaintiff-Relator of a copy of this Order, together with the papers upon whichit is based, by electronic meansso as to be received on or before Je{7 23 , 2024, shall be deemed good and sufficient service; and it is further ORDEREDthat Counsel shall file proofofservice by Jef7 Z b, 2024; andit is further ORDEREDthat opposition papers, if any, shall be served on or before Aage dé, 2024.

Andrew Borrok

At IAS Part 53 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of New York, at the New York County Courthouse, 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, on the ____ day of ___________, 2024

) STATE OF NEW YORK, ex ) )

Upon the Stipulated Confidentiality Order (NYSCEF Doc. 206) and the accompanying Affirmation of Joel A. Chernov, dated July 2, 2024, and good cause having been shown, it is hereby: ORDERED that Defendant M&T Bank (hereinafter referred to as “M&T”) appear in IAS Part 53 of this Court, in the New York State Supreme Court Building located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, before the Honorable Andrew Borrok, J.S.C., on the _____ day of ___________, 2024 at ___:___ a.m./p.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, and show cause why an Order should not be entered granting Plaintiff the following relief: Ordering that the New York County Clerk be directed, upon service on him (at 60 Centre Street, Room 141B) of a copy of this Order with Notice of Entry, to file under seal (1) the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to NYFCA Liability against M&T (NYSCEF No. ___); and (2) the Exhibits to the Affirmation of Joel A. Chernov, dated July 2, 2024, in support of said motion (NYSCEF Nos. _____ to ______); and further Ordering the County Clerk to separate those documents from the balance of the file in this action, and to restrict said documents from all except the Parties hereto, their counsel, and Court personnel, and to thereafter, or until further order of this Court, deny access to said documents to anyone (other than the staff of the Clerk or the Court), except for counsel of record for any party hereto and any party; and further Ordering that service upon the County Clerk shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the “E-Filing” page on the Court’s website at the address www.nycourts/gov/supctmanh).

It is further ORDERED that service upon counsel for Defendants of a copy of this Order, together with the papers upon which it is based, by electronic means so as to be received on or before _____________, 2024, shall be deemed good and sufficient service; and it is further ORDERED that Counsel shall file proof of service by _______________, 2024; and it is further ORDERED that opposition papers, if any, shall be served on or before ______________, 2024.

Entered: ________________________ Hon.

JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., et al., Hon.

Commercial Division IAS Part 53 Motion Seq.

Upon the Stipulated Confidentiality Order (NYSCEF Doc. 206) and the accompanying Affirmation of Joel A. Chernov, dated July 2, 2024, and good cause having been shown, it is hereby: ORDERED that Defendant J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, J.P. Morgan Securities, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., and JPMorgan Chase & Co (hereinafter referred to as “JPM”) appear in IAS Part 53 of this Court, in the New York State Supreme Court Building located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, before the Honorable Andrew Borrok, J.S.C., on the _____ day of ___________, 2024 at ___:___ a.m./p.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, and show cause why an Order should not be entered granting Plaintiff the following relief: Ordering that the New York County Clerk be directed, upon service on him (at 60 Centre Street, Room 141B) of a copy of this Order with Notice of Entry, to file under seal (1) the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to NYFCA Liability against JPM (NYSCEF No. 2062); and (2) the Exhibits to the Affirmation of Joel A. Chernov, dated July 2, 2024, in support of said motion (NYSCEF Nos. 2063 to 2077 and 2080 to 2157); and further Ordering the County Clerk to separate those documents from the balance of the file in this action, and to restrict said documents from all except the Parties hereto, their counsel, and Court personnel, and to thereafter, or until further order of this Court, deny access to said documents to anyone (other than the staff of the Clerk or the Court), except for counsel of record for any party hereto and any party; and further Ordering that service upon the County Clerk shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the “E-Filing” page on the Court’s website at the address www.nycourts/gov/supctmanh).

It is further ORDERED that service upon counsel for Defendants of a copy of this Order, together with the papers upon which it is based, by electronic means so as to be received on or before _____________, 2024, shall be deemed good and sufficient service; and it is further ORDERED that Counsel shall file proof of service by _______________, 2024; and it is further 2024.

ORDERED that opposition papers, if any, shall be served on or before ______________, Dated: ______________________ Entered: ________________________ Hon.

Discovery has been an ongoing struggle in this five-and-a half-year-old qui tam case, with the current episode of the saga being the defendants’ motion to compel the plaintiff/relator and the State of Delaware to provide “straightforward, responsive answers” to a number of interrogatories and requests to admit.

Ga. Oct. 19, 2022)(“... the drafters of the Rules provided a logical, straightforward process that should be easily navigable by good lawyers without extensive hand-holding by the Court, so that discovery can be conducted efficiently, expeditiously, and without unnecessary expense.”); Williams v. Ests.

For example, the CVS Pharmacy, Omnicare, and Coram 30(b)(6) deponents each confirmed that these entities lacked automated software controls, during extended periods of time, to prevent the submission of claims for prescription drugs prescribed by excluded providers.

It reminds one of the plaintiffs’ arguably petulant – pardon the dysphemism – retort (continued...) Worse, rather than actually provide the material facts to support that assertion, the relator sends the reader to three documents and excerpts from two depositions.

if they are only interested in the ‘list of employees,’ as their motion suggests, then it would be a simple task for someone on their clerical staff to take a highlighter marker to the response and notate the names of listed individuals.” One supposes that the defendants – and, yet again, the court – could do some sifting and digging with the plaintiffs’ answer and get to what plaintiffs now tell us is the real find.

ERIC PASSMAN and ISHMAEL ALVARADO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-11711-LJL

COMES NOW, Adam J. Levitt of DiCello Levitt LLP, an attorney for Plaintiffs in the above-entitled matter and moves this court, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 1.4, to withdraw Farzin Franklin Amanat as counsel of record.

Mr. Amanat entered his appearance as attorney for Plaintiffs on October 20, 2021.

Plaintiffs continue to be represented by attorneys from DiCello Levitt LLP (including myself), Zigler Law Group, LLC, and Keller Postman LLC.

For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Court grant the Motion to Withdraw Farzin Franklin Amanat.