Case: 22-1829 Document: 00117992552 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2023 Entry ID: 6558799 United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

CORPORATION, a/k/a Cofina; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT

LLC, as servicer for the GDB Debt Recovery Authority; CANTOR-KATZ COLLATERAL MONITOR LLC, as Collateral Monitor for the GDB Debt Recovery Authority, Creditors - Appellees.

Appellees Assured Guaranty Corporation, Nuveen Asset Management, Finca Matilde, Inc., AmeriNational Community Services, LLC, Ambac Assurance Corporation, Assured Guaranty Municipal Corporation, Pedro R. Pierluisi-Urrutia, Puerto Rico Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority, MAPFRE-PRAICO Insurance Company, National Public Finance Guarantee Corporation, Cantor-Katz Collateral Monitor LLC, Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and Franklin Advisers, Inc. failed to file a brief and therefore will not be heard at oral argument except by permission of the court.

cc: Hermann D. Bauer-Alvarez, Timothy W. Mungovan, Raul Castellanos-Malave, Luis Francisco Del-Valle-Emmanuelli, Carla Garcia-Benitez, Ubaldo M. Fernandez, Chantel L. Febus, Stephen L. Ratner, John E. Roberts, Mark David Harris, Martin J. Bienenstock, Ehud Barak, Michael Luskin, Stephan E. Hornung, Michael A. Firestein, Lary Alan Rappaport, Steven O. Weise, Maja Zerjal, Jeffrey W. Levitan, Brian S. Rosen, Emanuel Rier-Soto, Steve Y. Ma, John E. Mudd, Manuel Fernández-Bared, Linette Figueroa-Torres, Douglas Buckley, Nayda Perez-Roman, Luis C. Marini-Biaggi, Peter M. Friedman, John J. Rapisardi, Carolina Velaz-Rivero, Maria Jennifer DiConza, Matthew P. Kremer, José A. Sánchez Girona, Isabel M. Fullana-Fraticelli, Eduardo Juan Capdevila-Diaz, Heriberto Burgos Pérez, Ricardo F. Casellas-Sánchez, Diana Pérez-Seda, Howard Robert Hawkins Jr., Mark C. Ellenberg, Casey J. Servais, Thomas J. Curtin, William J. Natbony, Eric Pérez-Ochoa, Luis A. Oliver-Fraticelli, Gregory Silbert, Jonathan D. Polkes, Kelly Diblasi, Robert Berezin, Israel Fernández Rodríguez, Juan J. Casillas-Ayala, Luc A. Despins, Juan C. Nieves González, Georg Alexander Bongartz, María E. Picó, Martin A. Sosland, James E. Bailey III, Adam Michael Langley, Roberto Cámara-Fuertes, Sonia E. Colón-Colón, Atara Miller, Dennis F. Dunne, Grant R. Mainland, John Joseph Hughes III, Arturo J. García-Solá, Alejandro

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Nos. 20-cv-03785, 20-cv-4287 The Honorable Algenon L. Marbley

Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: Name of counsel: Jason A. Forge Case Name: In re FirstEnergy Corp. Sec.

Litig., et al. Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, Plaintiffs-Respondents Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, Amalgamated Bank, City of Irving Supplemental Benefit Plan, and Wisconsin Laborers' Pension Fund Name of Party makes the following disclosure: Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation?

If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome?

If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest:

None of these elements suggests that attorney-client privilege exists only in instances involving litigation.

Leo E. Strine, Jr., The Dangers of Denial: The Need for a Clear- Eyed Understanding of the Power and Accountability Structure Established by the Delaware General Corporation Law, 50 Wake Forest L. Rev.

When deciding whether to charge a corporation criminally, federal prosecutors must consider “the corporation’s willingness to cooperate, including” identifying “potential wrongdoing by its current and former employees, directors, officers, and agents” and “the corporation’s timely and voluntary self-disclosure of wrongdoing.” Justice Manual § 9-28.300; see also §§ 9-28.700, 9-28.900.

Similarly, for certain categories of cases, DOJ’s official “Corporate Enforcement Policy” creates significant incentives—a presumption of declination of prosecution—for a company that voluntarily “self-discloses” misconduct, gives DOJ “full cooperation,” and undertakes “timely and appropriate remediation,” Justice Manual § 9-47.120—all of which, again, as a practical matter, requires some form of an internal investigation.

That standard is unsupported by case law, which establishes that the privilege applies to any confidential communication made to seek or provide legal advice no matter what initially motivated an investigation.

Leo E. Strine, Jr., The Dangers of Denial: The Need for a Clear-Eyed Understanding of the Power and Accountability Structure Established by the Delaware General Corporation Law, 50 Wake Forest L. Rev.