Dr Z

Joseph Zernik, PhD PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750; Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net Blog: http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

Digitally signed by Joseph Zernik DN: cn=Joseph Zernik, o, ou, email=jz12345@e arthlink.net, c=US Date: 2010.06.11 20:00:20 +03'00'

10-06-010 Complaint filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), in re: Compelling evidence of deceptive business practices, fraud and extortion in operations of Countrywide and Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), directly involving President/CEO Brian Moynihan, violation of banking regulations and fraud in certifications pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002)
“Our limited involvement in this matter was entirely proper Our entirely proper.”
Attorney Jenna Moldawsky, Bryan Cave, LLP, referring to her own fraudulent, unauthorized, extortionist appearances in court on behalf of Countrywide. October 22, 2007 (35)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Instant complaint is simultaneously filed with Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and respective Committees of the US Congress by a fraud victim and shareholder of Bank of America Corporation. The case at hand (2004-this date) originally involved merely real estate fraud, as opined by the highest reputation fraud experts. The initial fraud was small-scale fraud - at less than $2.0 millions. However, by 2010 – it involves the highest levels of management in Bank of America, US banking regulators, law enforcement, and inquiries by US Congress on such agencies. Moreover, evidence inherent in the case demonstrated the large-scale fraud on the US taxpayer in disintegration of underwriting, “sound banking principles”, and both internal and external audit at Countrywide and Bank of America. It provides unique insights into US financial infrastructure, banking regulation. The fraud was initiated in 2004 by low-level Countrywide personnel: Convicted felon – Jae Arre LLOYD (formerly Timothy Lloyd Morrow) – doubling as Countrywide “Loan Originator”, and Maria MCLAURIN – San Rafael Branch Manager. By December 2006 Dr Joseph Zernik uncovered the fraud, and with it – documented the large-scale funding of government-backed uniform residential loan applications (1003s) in Countrywide with no underwriting at all. In January 2007, the first complaint was filed with FBI alleging large-scale fraud on the US government and shareholders by Countrywide, and projecting losses in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Such predictions came true a year later – with Countrywide’s collapsed. By June 2007 direct involvement of Angelo MOZILO– then CEO, and Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer was documented. In response – Countrywide initiated in July 2007 a campaign of alleged harassment, intimidation, retaliation, and extortion through employment of a large law firm, which to this date falsely appears in court, under the false designation of “Non Party”. From July 2008 to December 2008, Timothy MAYOPOULOS - then General Counsel halted such conduct after the takeover of Countrywide by Bank of America. However, Brian MOYNIHAN – today Bank of America President – resumed it immediately upon ouster of Mr MAYOPOULOS in December 2008. Direct involvement of Brian MOYNIHAN was further documented starting December 20, 2009. Moreover, starting January 2010, as President, Brian MOYNIHAN signed periodic SEC reports certifying no fraud in Bank of America operations, as well as disclosures pursuant to Basel II banking accords, Pillar III. The pattern of conduct as a whole is alleged as fraud, deceptive business practices, and extortion. Additionally, violations are alleged of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) relative to reporting requirements by corporate counsel, certifications by corporate officers, and review of complaints by the Audit Committee. Additional allegations include fraud on shareholders, on banking regulators, on US taxpayers, and on the international banking community. Furthermore, the published Bank of America Code of Ethics and Outside Counsel Procedures are alleged as fraudulent representations. Most alarming – regardless of provisions enacted in the Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), the pattern of conduct of most senior corporate officers and their relationship with both inside and outside corporate counsel is alleged as the core of the violations, and therefore, reflects on various other past and ongoing actions against Bank of America. The case as a whole provides unique insights into US financial infrastructure, banking regulation, and law enforcement, and with it – prevailing risk levels during the current protracted banking crisis.

Page 2/34 A. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary

June 11, 2010

TOC

……………………. A. Table of Contents ……………………. B. Complaints Filed With Office Of The Comptroller Of The Currency (OCC) ……………………. C. Complaints Filed with SEC ……………………. D. Layperson’s Introduction ……………………. E. Specific Claims Against Bank Of America Corporation And Its President Brian Moynihan …………………….
1.

1 2 3 3 3 5

2006 - this date - fraud in production of banking records in response to legal subpoenas. ……………………. 5 2. 2006- to this date – obstruction of justice by Countrywide Legal Department and in-house counsel Todd Boock and the Office of General Counsel of Bank of America. ……………………. 6 3. 2007 – this date - obstruction of justice and extortion pertaining to appearances by counsel who was/is not authorized as counsel of record in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) and Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) with “no communications with client clause” ……………………. 7 4. 2007 – this date – obstruction and extortion in appearances under false party designations of “Non Party” and “Interested Person”. ……………………. 8 5. 2008-2009 – obstruction and extortionist in filing of motions for OSC contempt and sanctions. ……………………. 9 6. 2008-2009 - money laundering/ monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. ……………………. 9 7. 2008 - this date - failure to comply with Bank of America’s own Outside Counsel Procedures ……………………. 10 8. 2008 – to this date - fraud by Brian Moynihan and others pertaining to reporting duties and certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307 in periodic reports to SEC and disclosures to investors. ……………………. 12 9. 2010 - fraud by Brian Moynihan and others pertaining to reporting duties and certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302 in the Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, and the annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010. ……………………. 12 10. 2010 – fraud by Brian Moynihan and others pertaining to reporting duties and certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §906 in the quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, and the annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010. ……………………. 14 11. 2010 - Fraud by Brian Moynihan and others in disclosures pursuant to Basel Accords (Revised Framework, June 2004) , Pillar III, particularly pertaining to duties and obligations in Pillar I: ……………………. 16

F. Conclusions ……………………. G. Links To Records …………………….
1. 2. 3. Overviews ……………………. Detailed Reviews ……………………. Records in Chronological Order ……………………. 19 18 18

17

18

Page 3/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

B. COMPLAINTS FILED WITH OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY (OCC) 1. September 29, 2009 - First complaint against Bank of America – OCC Case #00971981 Complaint (Case #00971981) was filed on with US Office of Comptroller of the Currency alleging fraud by Countrywide and later – Bank of America. The allegations pertained to ongoing false appearances of counsel on behalf of Bank of America in the Los Angeles, California courts, under the false party designation of “NON PARTY”, in what was alleged as extortion under the guise of legal action. Furthermore, as part of such conduct Bank of America engaged in alleged money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. On January 8, 2010, Brian Moynihan - President/CEO provided a response to on the Case #00971981. (95, 96) 2. February 3, 2010 - Second - pending complaint against Bank of America - Case #01070442 - The January 8, 2010 response, together with additional evidence of Bryan Moynihan’s direct involvement in the fraud and extortion during his tenure, starting December 10, 2008, as Bank of America General Counsel, was the basis for the second complaint. (101, 104, 106) No response was ever received by Bank of America. Nevertheless, on May 10, 2010, the Office of Comptroller of the Currency provided its response on this case to the Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California. (125) The Comptroller’s response included a cover letter bearing Case #01070442 in the subject line, but no response on the case itself. Request was consequently filed with Office of Comptroller of the Currency for an honest, valid response on Case #01070442. (126, 127) 3. June 11, 2010 – Third - instant complaint against Bank of America – Case # to be assigned - Further evidence was more recently discovered, including, but not limited to alleged fraud and false certifications in periodic reports by Brian Moynihan – of no fraud in Bank of America operations. C. COMPLAINTS FILED WITH SEC Numerous complaints were filed with SEC starting 2007. Of particular notes are complaints filed directly with Mary L Schapiro starting January 2010. (98, 105, 111) Regardless, a reasonable person, upon review of the evidence is likely to conclude that SEC never issued a complaint number on any of the complaints, and never investigated any of them at all. Moreover, correspondence with attorneys at SEC, where representations were made that all such complaints were logged and archived, were followed by SEC refusal to disclose the dates and reference numbers of pervious complaints by Dr Zernik. Such representations by attorneys for SEC are likely to be false representations at best. (88)

D. LAYPERSON’S INTRODUCTION Most honest persons are likely to have difficulty in understanding the range of convoluted schemes employed by Countrywide and Bank of America described in instant complaint. Therefore, a layperson’s introduction is provided below: 1. REAL ESTATE FRAUD - Under Samaan v Zernik Countrywide, and Bank of America after it, were key perpetrators in a real estate fraud and banking fraud, which was opined by fraud experts second to none – James Wedick – (36) FBI veteran, who was decorated by US Congress, FBI Director, and US Attorney General, and Robert Meister – renowned fraud expert. The case involved no foreclosure, no bankruptcy, and no default on mortgage of any kind. Regardless, Dr Zernik was forced to leave his home under illicit threat of force, the property was taken for private use. Fraud in conveyance of title was committed in December 2007, ~$1.8 millions were collected in the purported sale of the property, but Dr Zernik was never compensated to this date in one penny for his residence.

Page 4/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

2. HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION, RETALIATION - Once Dr Zernik exposed the fraud and filed complaints with law enforcement, an extortionist retaliation campaign was initiated by Countrywide, and later continued by Bank of America. The campaign entailed the fraudulent employment of one of the worlds largest law firms to harass, intimidates, and retaliate against Dr Zernik. 3. FALSE PARTY DESIGNATION SCHEME - In civil litigations of the Superior Court one finds at minimum “Plaintiff” and “Defendant”. However, there is NO such party designation as “Non Party". Countrywide and Bank of America have been filing papers for 2.5 years under party designation "NON PARTY". Think about it as if in a football game, a third team appeared on the field, assisting one of the two legitimate teams in the game, and was listed on the scoreboard as "NON TEAM". 4. FALSE COUNSEL SCHEME - Attorneys appeared on behalf of Countrywide and Bank of America in courts, without being legally authorized to appear on behalf of their clients. As routine part of such schemes Countrywide was documented in the Case of Borrower Parsley in US Bankruptcy Court in Texas (9) as retaining such false counsel with "no communications with client clause.” Think about it as hiring a hit man, with a written contract never to contact the client once the hit man is hired, hoping to maintain deniability regarding conduct of the hit man that way. 5. PRODUCING OF FABRICATED BANKING RECORDS - The collapse of Countrywide in January 2008 was unrelated to the performance of its loan portfolios. Instead - it was the market's reaction to the publication by the New York Times, that Countrywide was caught in the Case of Borrower Hill in Pennsylvania, filing "Recreated Letters" as evidence. (37) Filing of false and deliberately misleading records was also part of the practices documented in Case of Borrower Parsley. (9) However, in the case described below, Countrywide produced hundreds of false banking records, (19) which documented in great detail the non-existent underwriting of residential mortgages already in 2004 – creating liabilities to the US government, which is the foundation of the current crisis. 6. OBSTRUCTION AND EXTORTION – Bank of America published a Code of Ethics, which promised to “do the right thing”, and Outside Counsel Procedures, which stated that outside counsel must be authorized to appear on behalf of Bank of America in a give caption, must not engage in obstructionist conduct, and must report to the General Counsel on conduct involving fraud that they may become aware of. The evidence provided here shows the exact opposite conduct. 7. WHY DO THEY BOTHER? - Angelo MOZILO – then Countrywide CEO, Sandor SAMUELS – then Countrywide Chief Legal Officer, today – Bank of America Associate General Counsel, and Brian MOYNIHAN – today Bank of America President, were all documented as directly involved in the alleged racketeering. The alleged racketeering is executed by one of the world’s largest law firm – Bryan Cave, LLP, through its Los Angeles branch and its Managing Partner – Jeff MODISETT - former State of Indiana Attorney General, and white-collar crime expert. • • Why would such people get involved in such scheme on a petty property of ~$1.8 millions? Why would Bank of America continue an extortion scheme, initiated in 2004, and going on now for its 6 year? The answer is two fold: • • In 2004 lower level personnel initiated the scheme as part of a routine: Jae Arre LLOYD – a convicted felon – doubling as Countrywide’s “Loan Originator” and Maria MCLAURIN - Branch Manager. (52, 124) In 2007 the scheme was derailed and Dr Zernik directly addressed Angelo MOZILO and Sandor SAMUELS in requests to stop the fraud being perpetrated. The campaign of intimidation, harassment,
th

Page 5/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

retaliation, and extortion was initiated as a response, in an attempt to cover it up and permanently silence Dr Zernik. 8. WHY DOES IT MATTER? After all, prior to its collapse, Countrywide engaged in similar practices across the United States. (9, 37) However, alleged extortion under Samaan v Zernik is continuing by now into its 6 year. In the meanwhile: • • • In January 2008 Countrywide collapsed and was taken over by Bank of America Corporation, which was supposed to comply with the law. In May 2009 in response to a current crisis, US Congress passed the Fraud Enforcement Enhancement Act (2009), on top of Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) – passed in response to a previous corporate fraud crisis. In January 2010 Kenneth Lewis III, President of Bank of America, stepped down in anticipation of his then pending prosecution for securities fraud. Brian Moynihan was appointed as his replacement, as President of Bank of America - to ensure investors and the public at large of integrity of Bank of America operations. • Since January 2008 and to this date, FBI, SEC, and US banking regulators repeatedly promised US Congress and the international community to "shore up" US banking regulation and investigate any criminality that was involved in the current financial crisis. • Since early 2008 and to this date the US taxpayer has footed various bailout measures, which would end up costing trillions of dollars, over $200 billions to Bank of America alone. Regardless of the measures above, the complaint documents ongoing conduct at Bank of America, alleged as fraud and extortion, and fraud in certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) by President of the Bank, continuing to this date, (108, 123) while concerns at home and abroad persist regarding integrity, or lack thereof, in operations at Bank of America Corporation and risk levels in the US financial system. The case also documents the refusal of SEC and banking regulators to provide the US Congress and people of the US with the true facts pertaining to alleged and opined criminal conduct that caused the current banking crisis. In the wake of the current banking crisis, the case should be seen as reflecting the state of banking, banking regulation, and law enforcement in the US, and with it risk levels to the US economy.
th

E. SPECIFIC CLAIMS AGAINST BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION AND ITS PRESIDENT BRIAN MOYNIHAN 1) 2006 - this date - fraud in production of banking records in response to legal subpoenas. a. Between August 2006 and April 2007 Countrywide Legal Department produced records a total of five (5) times in response to legal subpoenas (19). Such response included hundreds of false and deliberately misleading banking records. (15,17,18) b. The records also documented a large-scale fraud on investors and the US government - alleged routine fraud in underwriting of residential loan applications (1003s). c. The records also documented the routine retroactive fabrication of residential loan applications files.

d. The conduct as a whole also documented the disintegration of effectual internal or external audit at Countrywide as early as 2004. e. Refusal of Bank of America to this date to allow its Audit Committee to review and respond on complaints filed pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), alleging fraud by management, particularly relative to “Six Key Records” (85,15,17,18, 53) reflect disintegration of effectual internal audit at Bank of America Corporation, continued to this date.

Page 6/34 f.

June 11, 2010

TOC

In January 2010 office of President/CEO Brian Moynihan responded under OCC Case #00971981 on allegations of fraud in Countrywide’s subpoena production, by stating: “Unfortunately, because our records do not reflect that you are currently a Bank of America customer we will not be able to discuss the loan to which, we believe you are referring, nor will any information be disclosed with regard to this account.” Such response is alleged as ongoing conduct amounting to fraud and obstruction of justice.

Claim1A: Countrywide engaged as early as 2004 in a large-scale fraud on the US government and on shareholders, by funding uniform residential loan applications (1003) with no authorized underwriting at all. Claim1B: Countrywide engaged as early as 2004 in a large-scale fraud on the US government and on shareholders, by retroactively constructing loan application files, through fax/wire fraud and failure to authenticate banking records as required by UETA. Claim1C: Bank of America’s conduct in refusing to permit its Audit Committee to review and answer on complaint filed by a whistle blower, alleging fraud in banking records including, but not limited to the “Six Key Records”, and also alleging fraud by management, including but not limited to Sandor Samuels and Angelo Mozilo, amounted to continuation of such fraud, and also violations of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). Claim2D: The January 2010 response by office of Brian Moynihan, on OCC Case #00971981 amounted to continuation of the fraud in and of itself. Claim2E: Bank of America effectively proceeds with financial institution fraud to this date, by refusing to authenticate or repudiate as fraud in Countrywide’s “Six Key Records”.

2) 2006- to this date – obstruction of justice by Countrywide Legal Department and in-house counsel Todd Boock and the Office of General Counsel of Bank of America. a. Between August 2006 and April 2007 Countrywide Legal Department produced a total of five (5) times hundreds of false and deliberately misleading banking records in response to legal subpoenas. (19) b. In February 2007 Countrywide Legal Department repeated the fraud in response to legal subpoenas, even after the fraud in the previous production was protested in the January 2007 repeat subpoena. c. In March 2007 Meet and Confer (20, 21) in-house counsel Todd Boock refused to produce the records, which were requested in previous subpoenas and in meet and confer letter. He claimed that Countrywide had no internal audit reports, no external audit reports, and no pipeline reports. d. In March 2007 Meet and Confer, in house counsel Todd Boock refused to produce the requested email correspondence. (20) e. In April 2007 Countrywide Legal Department repeated the fraud in response to legal subpoena of records, even after the fraud in previous subpoena productions, was protested in the March 2007 Meet and Confer. f. In June 2007 response to subpoena for deposition of Countrywide’s employees, and even of a former employee, in- house counsel Todd Book responded with extortionist threats against Dr Zernik. g. In June 2007, CEO Angelo Mozilo and Chief Legal Counsel Sandor Samuels refused to respond on requests directly forwarded to them, to stop fraud by Countrywide. (24) h. In July 2007, in-house counsel Todd Boock filed a declaration in court claiming no deception in Countrywide’s subpoena productions. i. In response to requests directly filed in June 2007 with CEO Angelo Mozilo and Chief Legal Officer Sandor Samuels - to stop the fraud being perpetrated, (23) Countrywide initiated a campaign of retaliation, harassment, intimidation, and extortion through fraudulent court appearances of Bryan Cave, LLP (see below).

Page 7/34 j.

June 11, 2010

TOC

In 2008 in house counsel Todd Boock repeatedly refused to communicate with Dr Zernik, at a time that Dr Zernik was repeatedly informed by office of Timothy Mayopoulos that Todd Book was the ONLY one authorized to communicate on the matter. (65)

k.

In 2008 in house counsel Todd Boock repeatedly directed Dr Zernik to communicate on the matter with Bryan Cave, LLP, while Dr Zernik was repeatedly informed by office of Timothy Mayopoulos that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to communicate on the matter.

l.

Bank of America, refuses since 2008 to allow its Audit Committee to review and respond on complaints alleging fraud in subpoena productions and fraud by management.

m. The January 2010 response by office of Brian Moynihan, likewise, refused to respond on any of the allegations of fraud, providing false and deliberately misleading responses instead. Claim2A: In repeating the production of fraudulent banking records in its February 2007 response to legal subpoenas, which explicitly protested the fraud in previous production of records, Countrywide engaged in obstruction of justice. Claim2B: Statements made by in-house counsel Todd Boock in March 2007 Meet and Confer, that Countrywide had no internal audit reports, no external audit report, no pipeline reports, and refusal to produce such records in response to legal subpoena constituted further conduct of obstruction of justice. Claim2C: The March 2007 refusal of in-house counsel Todd Boock to produce email correspondence requested in legal subpoena, likewise – constituted further obstruction of justice. Claim2D: The April 2007 subpoena production by Countrywide, repeating the same fraudulent records previously produced , even after fraud was protested in the Meet and Confer, amounted to further obstruction of justice. Claim2E: The June 2007 issuance by in-house counsel Todd Boock of threats in response to subpoenas for depositions amounted to further obstruction of justice and extortion. Claim2F: The June 2007 refusal of Angelo Mozilo and Sandor Samuels to respond on requests to stop the fraud being committed by Countrywide amounted to further obstruction of justice. Claim2G: The July 2007 declaration of in-house counsel Todd Book of no deception in Countrywide’s response to legal subpoenas of records amounted to part of the fraud and also obstruction of justice. Claim2H: The 2008 refusal of in-house counsel Todd Boock to communicate with Dr Zernik at a time that office of Bank of America General Counsel Timothy Mayopoulos instructed Dr Zernik that Todd Book was the ONLY one authorized to communicate on the matter, amounted to further obstruction of justice and extortion. Claim2I: The 2008 in-house counsel Todd Boock’s conduct in directing Dr Zernik to communicate with counsel who was not authorized by Bank of America amounted to additional obstruction of justice and extortion. Claim2J: The 2008-9 Refusal of Bank of America to allow its Audit Committee to review and respond on whistleblower complaint of fraud in banking records and fraud by management amounted to additional obstruction of justice. Claim2K: The January 2010 Responses of Brian Moynihan’s office on OCC Case #00971981amounted to further obstruction of justice.

3) 2007 – this date - obstruction of justice and extortion pertaining to appearances by counsel who was/is not authorized as counsel of record in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) and Zernik v Connor et al (2:08cv-01550) with “no communications with client clause” a. In June 2007 requests were directly forwarded to Angelo Mozilo and Sandor Samuels, (23,24) to stop the fraud being committed by Countrywide. Countrywide, Angelo Mozilo, and Sandor Samuels refused to respond on such requests. b. Within days after such requests, a campaign of retaliation, intimidation, harassment and extortion was initiated, executed through false appearances of attorneys from Bryan Cave, LLP, one the world’s largest law firm, and its Los Angeles Branch. (25, 27-32) c. Starting July 2007 and to this date, Bryan Cave, LLP has been engaged by Countrywide, and later Bank of America to false court appearances and false communications as unauthorized counsel. The series of email

Page 8/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

communications by John Amberg, (33) provides evidence of such conduct under the caption of Samaan v Zernik:

i. October 2, 2007 - when asked to explain the nature of his conduct, and whether he was authorized to
appear as counsel of record, Attorney John Amberg responds: "We decline to get further involved in this matter. I am sorry, but I cannot help you." (33)

ii. On October 15, 2007, on the same questions, he stated: "Our law firm continues to represent Countrywide,
its subsidiaries, and employees. There has been no change in status." Such statement is deemed fraud, since Bryan Cave, LLP was never authorized as counsel of record for Countrywide or Bank of America in the caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400). (33)

iii. On November 7, 2008 John Amberg wrote: "We continue to represent Countrywide and are counsel of
record." At the same period, the office of General Counsel of Bank of America, under the leadership of Timothy Mayopoulos, repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized by Bank of America to represent Bank of America or appear in any matter related to Dr Zernik. (33)

iv. On August 28, 2009, John Amberg wrote to Dr Zernik to direct all communications for Bank of America to
him, not to Bank of America in-house counsel, as instructed by the Office of Bank of America General Counsel Timothy Mayopoulos. The Office of the General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that the ONLY counsel authorized to communicate in such matters was in-house Counsel Todd Boock, and that Bryan Cave, LLP was not authorized in the matter at all. (33) d. Such appearances by false counsel, who was not authorized as counsel of record, with “no communications with client” – a pattern of extortionist conduct by Countrywide Financial Corporation/ BAC, which was documented in other courts as well. (9) However, Countrywide made promises in Court in March 2008 to stop such conduct. (9) Regardless Countrywide, and Bank of America continue such conduct to this date. e. Between July 1, 2008 (takeover of Countrywide by Bank of America) and December 10, 2008 (ouster of Timothy Mayopoulos by Bank of America) such conduct was prohibited by office of Timothy Mayopoulos, General Counsel. However, within 24 hours after appointment of Brian Moynihan as General Counsel, such conduct was resumed (December 11, 2008) f. In his January 2010 response to OCC Case #00971981, Bank of America and Brian Moynihan refused to answer of allegations of false appearances by Bryan Cave, LLP, instead providing a false and deliberately misleading response: “…please contact our outside counsel, John Amberg and Jenna Moldawsky at Bryan Cave LLP.” No mention was made of authorization as counsel of record in the particular matter of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles and/or Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California. Claim3A: The June 2007 refusal by Angelo Mozilo and Sandor Samuels to respond on requests to stop fraud amounted to obstruction of justice. Claim3B: Court appearances of Bryan Cave, LLP, while not authorized as counsel of record in the caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), continuing to this date, amount to obstruction. and extortion. Claim3C: October 2007 to August 2009 email communications by John Amberg, Bryan Cave, LLP, were part of campaign of obstruction and extortion. Claim3D: Continuation of appearances by counsel who is not authorized as counsel of record, to this date, amounted to extortionist conduct, in violation of promises Countrywide made in the Texas court, as recorded in the Hon Jeff Bohm Memorandum Opinion.

Page 9/34 June 11, 2010 TOC Claim3E: Resumption of extortionist conduct on December 11, 2008, after it had been prohibited during the tenure of Timothy Mayopoulos as General Counsel, is likely to be found upon investigation and discovery to have been personally permitted by Brian Moynihan – then General Counsel, today – President/CEO. Claim3F: The January 2010 response to OCC Case #00971981by Bank of America and CEO/President Brian Moynihan, referring Dr Zernik to communicate with Bryan Cave, LLP, while refusing to state that Bryan Cave, LLP was authorized as Counsel of Record in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) amounted to continuation of the obstruction and extortion related to Bryan Cave, LLP, and provided additional evidence directly tying Brian Moynihan to such extortionist conduct. 4) 2007 – this date – obstruction and extortion in appearances under false party designations of “Non Party” and “Interested Person”. a) For over 2.5 years Countrywide Financial Corporation, and later Bank of America Corporation have appeared in Samaan v Zernik at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, under the false party designation of “Non Party”, while the Los Angeles Superior Court interchangeably designated them “Plaintiff”, “Defendant”, “Cross-Defendant”, “Intervenor”, “Real Party in Interest”, etc, all with no legal foundation at all. (Overview in #2, and numerous other records below, where title states “Non Party”) b) Sandor Samuels then Countrywide Financial Corporation Chief Legal Officer, and today Bank of America Associate General Counsel, filed papers under the false party designation of “Interested Person” under the same caption. (38) Such conduct by Countrywide Financial Corporation was brought to a halt from July 1, 2008 (takeover of Countrywide Financial Corporation by Bank of America Corporation) to December 10, 2008 (ouster of Timothy Mayopoulos as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation), but was resumed on December 11, 2008 – less than 24 hours after the appointment of Brian Moynihan as BAC General Counsel. (66-69) Furthermore, in January 2010, the office of Brian Moynihan, by then BAC President/CEO provided false and deliberately misleading responses on the matter to the US Office of Comptroller of the Currency (Complaints #00971981). (95,96 ) Claim4A: Appearances of counsel and filing of papers under party designation of “NON PARTY” – for Bank of America and Countrywide before it, amounted to obstruction and perversion of justice, as well as extortion. (numerous papers linked below) Claim4B: Appearances of counsel and filing of papers under party designation of “INTERESTED PERSON” – for Sandor Samuels, then Chief Legal Counsel of Countrywide amounted to obstruction and perversion of justice, as well as extortion. (38)

5) 2008-2009 – obstruction and extortionist in filing of motions for OSC contempt and sanctions. a) As part of such extortionist conduct, Bryan Cave, LLP, claimed that a “Protective Order” existed, which prohibited Dr Zernik from requesting Bank of America, and Countrywide before it to address fraud, opined by fraud experts perpetrated against Dr Zernik by Bank of America and Countrywide before it. b) No such “Protective Order” was ever produced by Countrywide, Bank of America, or Bank of America Audit Committee, in disregard of repeated requests. (85) c) As part of such extortionist conduct, Bryan Cave, LLP, filed in court a motion for OSC contempt and sanctions against Dr Zernik on behalf of Countrywide, for approaching Countrywide in requests to stop the fraud being committed. (45.47.48.49) As part of such extortionist conduct Dr Zernik was threatened with jailing. d) As part of such extortionist conduct, Bryan Cave, LLP, filed in court a motion for OSC contempt and sanctions against Dr Zernik on behalf of Bank of America, for approaching the office of General Counsel Timothy

Page 10/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

MAYOPOULOS and learning directly from that office that Bryan Cave, LLP was engaging in conduct that was never authorized by his office. (69,74-77,79,82,83) e) In communications with former member of the Bank of America Audit Committee- General Tommy Franks, General Franks likewise, refused to respond on any questions regarding integrity of Bank of America conduct in this matter, under the claim that Bank of America’s “legal team” informed him that a “Restraining Order” (87) prohibited Dr Zernik from communicating with him. Claim 5A: Bryan Cave, LLP’s claim that a “Protective Order” existed, which prohibited Dr Zernik from requesting Bank of America, and Countrywide before it to address fraud, opined by fraud experts, being committed by Countrywide and Bank of America against him amounted to obstruction, perversion of justice and extortion. Claim 5B: Refusal of Bryan Cave, LLP, Countrywide, Bank of America, and the Bank of America Audit Committee to ever produce the purported “Protective Order” were all part of extortionist conduct. Claim 5C: The 2008 filing of the Motion for OSC Contempt and Sanctions on behalf of Countrywide while Bryan Cave, LLP was not authorized as counsel of record in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) amounted to extortion. Claim 5D: The 2008 filing of the Motion for OSC Contempt and Sanctions on behalf of Bank of America while Bryan Cave, LLP was not authorized as counsel of record in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) amounted to extortion. Claim 5E: The 2009 claim by General Tommy Frank former member of the Bank of America Audit Committee that a “Restraining Order” prohibited Dr Zernik from communicating with General Tommy Franks was further part of such extortion. 6) 2008-2009 - money laundering/ monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. a) November 19, 2008 and November 24, 2008 letters (63,64) by Bryan Cave, LLP and David Pasternak, respectively, documented demands for payments of $7,500 by Bryan Cave, LLP, while not authorized as counsel of record for Countrywide in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), and collection of such funds, derived from conduct opined by fraud expert second to none, James Wedick, as “fraud being committed.” b) The April 8, 2008 letter (48-51) by Bryan Cave, LLP and David Pasternak, respectively, documented demands for payments of $16,170 by Bryan Cave, LLP, while not authorized as counsel of record for Bank of America in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), and collection of such funds, derived from conduct opined by fraud expert second to none, James Wedick, as “fraud being committed.” Claim 6A: Demand and collection of payment of $7,500 by Bryan Cave, LLP, on behalf of Countrywide, while not authorized as counsel of record for Countrywide in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) amounted to money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Claim 6B: Demand and collection of payment of $16,500 by Bryan Cave, LLP, on behalf of Countrywide, while not authorized as counsel of record for Countrywide in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) amounted to money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct.

7) 2008 - this date - failure to comply with Bank of America’s own Outside Counsel Procedures: The Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures (7) state:
II. Relationship with the Legal Department and Other Law Firms … In all cases, outside counsel must obtain prior approval from a Department attorney before incurring significant fees or expenses on a matter, initiating action seeking extraordinary remedies or relief sought on Bank of America’s behalf, undertaking representation involving any possible conflict of interest; or proceeding with any matter entailing a significant legal, regulatory, precedential or reputational risk to Bank of America.

The Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures (7) state:
III. Engagement of Outside Counsel A. General Engagement Policy The procedures to engage outside counsel vary with the nature of the legal matter

Page 11/34
and/or the supported line business. In all cases, the retention of a law firm to provide legal services to Bank of America must be documented with a Legal Matter Number (“LMN”). Before commencing work on a matter, outside counsel should ensure that an LMN has been obtained.

June 11, 2010

TOC

The Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures states: (7)
B. Litigation Philosophy 1. Advocacy Bank of America, while maintaining strong advocacy positions, seeks to facilitate the cost-effective resolution of claims. 2. High Ethics Outside counsel representing Bank of America is expected at all times to maintain the highest ethical standards. Coercive, dilatory or obstructive tactics are not to be used.

The Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures states: (7)
D. Relationship with Legal Department 1. Principal Legal Contact The law firm will be advised at the time of the engagement who the Principal Legal Contact is. The law firm will be responsible for assuring that the Principal Legal Contact is informed of all significant issues that arise in connection with the matter.

The published Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures states: (7)
H. Compliance with Section 307 of Sarbanes-Oxley If outside counsel reasonably believe that material violation of law may have occurred, is occurring or is about to occur, as set forth in Section 307 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the SEC Rule promulgated there under (17 CFR 205), outside counsel must notify the General Counsel and the appropriate Legal Department attorney. This notice may be in any form, but should conspicuously state that it is being made under Section 307 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Collection of eight (8) email notices by Brian Moynihan, dated December 20, 2009 to March 10, 2010, provides evidence that Mr Moynihan was personally informed in these matters. (90) Claim7A: Ongoing appearances of Bryan Cave, LLP with no Legal Matter Number (LMN) ever issued in matters of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) are in violation of Bank of America published Outside Counsel Procedures. Claim7B: Ongoing appearances of Bryan Cave, LLP with no Legal Matter Number (LMN) ever issued in matters of Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) were in violation of Bank of America published Outside Counsel Procedures. Claim7C: Filing by Bryan Cave, LLP of motion OSC Contempt and serious sanctions on behalf of Bank of America without approval by office of the General Counsel “prior to initiating action seeking extraordinary remedies” was in violation of Bank of America published Outside Counsel Procedures. Claim7D: Conduct of attorneys Jenna Moldawsky and John Amberg, purporting to appear on behalf of Bank of America, during the tenure of Brian Moynihan and others as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation was in violation of Bank of America published Outside Counsel Procedures, including, but not limited the “Relationship with Legal Department and Other Law Firms”. Claim7E: Conduct of attorneys Jenna Moldawsky and John Amberg, purporting to appear on behalf of Bank of America, during the tenure of Brian Moynihan and others as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation was in violation of Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures, including, but not limited the “General Engagement Policy”. Claim7F: Conduct of attorneys Jenna Moldawsky and John Amberg, purporting to appear on behalf of Bank of America, during the tenure of Brian Moynihan and others as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation was in violation of the Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures, including, but not limited the “Litigation Philosophy”. Claim7G: Conduct of attorneys Jenna Moldawsky and John Amberg, purporting to appear on behalf of Bank of America, during the tenure of Brian Moynihan and others as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation was in violation of the Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures, including, but not limited the “Relationship with Legal Department.” Claim7H: Conduct of attorneys Jenna Moldawsky and John Amberg, purporting to appear on behalf of Bank of America, during the tenure of Brian Moynihan and others as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation was in violation of the Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures, including, but not limited the “Compliance with Section 307 of Sarbanes-Oxley.”

Page 12/34 June 11, 2010 TOC Claim7G: The published Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures must be deemed fraud on investors, on banking regulators, and on the public at large, since Bank of America never intended to abide by such policies after the ouster of Mr Timothy Mayopoulos as General Counsel, and appointment of Brian Moynihan to replace him in that position. 8) 2008 – to this date - fraud by Brian Moynihan and others pertaining to reporting duties and certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307 in periodic reports to SEC and disclosures to investors. The Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) § 307 states [underlines added – jz]:
SEC. 307. RULES OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ATTORNEYS. Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall issue rules, in the public interest and for the protection of investors, setting forth minimum standards of professional conduct for attorneys appearing and practicing before the Commission in any way in the representation of issuers, including a rule— (1) requiring an attorney to report evidence of a material violation of securities law or breach of fiduciary duty or similar violation by the company or any agent thereof, to the chief legal counsel or the chief executive officer of the company (or the equivalent thereof); and (2) if the counsel or officer does not appropriately respond to the evidence (adopting, as necessary, appropriate remedial measures or sanctions with respect to the violation), requiring the attorney to report the evidence to the audit committee of the board of directors of the issuer or to another committee of the board of directors comprised solely of directors not employed directly or indirectly by the issuer, or to the board of directors.

Collection of eight (8) email notices by Brian Moynihan, dated December 20, 2009 to March 10, 2010, provides evidence that Mr Moynihan was personally informed in these matters. (90) No reporting was found pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) § 307 from the period during which Brian Moynihan and others served as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation. Claim8: Conduct of Brian Moynihan and others as General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation, in failing to report fraud and extortion conducted by Bryan Cave, LLP and others in Bank of America Corporation under Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) violated the Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307. 9) 2010 - fraud by Brian Moynihan and others pertaining to reporting duties and certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302 in the Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, and the annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010. The Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, includes Exhibit 31(a), signed by Brian Moynihan: Certification pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302. (123) The certificate in Exhibit 31(a) states:
Exhibit 31(a) Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for the Chief Executive Officer I, Brian T. Moynihan, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Bank of America Corporation (the registrant); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial

Page 13/34

June 11, 2010
reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. Date: May 7, 2010 /s/ Brian T. Moynihan Brian T. Moynihan Chief Executive Officer and President

TOC

The annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010, includes Exhibit 31(a), signed by Brian Moynihan: Certification pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302. (123) The certificate in Exhibit 31(a) states:
Exhibit 31(a) Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for the Chief Executive Officer I, Brian T. Moynihan, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bank of America Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. Date: February 26, 2010 /s/ Brian T. Moynihan Brian T. Moynihan Chief Executive Officer

Page 14/34 The Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302 (a)(4) states [underlines added – jz]:

June 11, 2010

TOC

SEC. 302. CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINANCIAL REPORTS. (a) REGULATIONS REQUIRED.— … (5) the signing officers have disclosed to the issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function)— (A) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the issuer’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and (B) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal controls; ,,, Collection of eight (8) email notices by Brian Moynihan, dated December 20, 2009 to March 10, 2010, provides evidence that Mr Moynihan was personally informed in these matters. (90) Claim9A: Brian Moynihan was fully aware of fraud by management holding reporting duties being committed, at least since late December 2009. Therefore, certifications of Brian Moynihan as CEO of Bank of America Corporation in the annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010, was in violation of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302. Claims9B: Brian Moynihan was fully aware of fraud by management holding reporting duties being committed, at least since late December 2009. Therefore, certifications of Brian Moynihan as CEO of Bank of America Corporation in the Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, were in violation of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302. 10) 2010 – fraud by Brian Moynihan and others pertaining to reporting duties and certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §906 in the quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, and the annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010. The Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, includes Exhibit 31(a), signed by Brian Moynihan: Certification pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §302. (123) The certificate in Exhibit 31(a) states: The Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, includes Exhibit 32(a), signed by Brian Moynihan: Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. (123) The certificate in Exhibit 32(a) states:
Exhibit 32(a) Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, Brian T. Moynihan, state and attest that: 1. I am the Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America Corporation (the registrant). 2. I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: • the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the registrant for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the periodic report) containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and • the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented.

Page 15/34
Date: May 7, 2010 /s/ Brian T. Moynihan Brian T. Moynihan Chief Executive Officer and President

June 11, 2010

TOC

The 2010 annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2009, (123) includes Exhibit 32(a), signed by Brian Moynihan: Certification pursuant to 18 USC §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002). The certificate in Exhibit 32(a) states:
Exhibit 32(a) CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Brian T. Moynihan, state and attest that: (1) I am the Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America Corporation (the “Registrant”). (2) I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that • the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the “periodic report”) containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and • the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented. Name: /s/ Brian T. Moynihan Title: Chief Executive Officer Date: February 26, 2010

The Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §906 states [underlines added – jz]:
SEC. 906. CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINANCIAL REPORTS. (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1349, as created by this Act, the following: ‘‘§ 1350. Failure of corporate officers to certify financial reports (a) CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS.—Each periodic report containing financial statements filed by an issuer with the Securities Exchange Commission pursuant to section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) shall be accompanied by a written statement by the chief executive officer and chief financial officer (or equivalent thereof) of the issuer. ‘‘(b) CONTENT.—The statement required under subsection (a) shall certify that the periodic report containing the financial statements fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act pf 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer. ‘‘(c) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—Whoever— ‘‘(1) certifies any statement as set forth in subsections (a) and (b) of this section knowing that the periodic report accompanying the statement does not comport with all the requirements set forth in this section shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; or ‘‘(2) willfully certifies any statement as set forth in subsections (a) and (b) of this section knowing that the periodic report accompanying the statement does not comport with all the requirements set forth in this section shall be fined not more than $5,000,000, or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.’’. (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘1350. Failure of corporate officers to certify financial reports.’’.

Collection of eight (8) email notices by Brian Moynihan, dated December 20, 2009 to March 10, 2010, provides evidence that Mr Moynihan was personally informed in these matters. (90)

Page 16/34 June 11, 2010 TOC Claim10A: Brian Moynihan was fully aware of fraud by management holding reporting duties being committed, at least since late December 2009. Therefore, certifications of Brian Moynihan as CEO of Bank of America Corporation in the annual reporting (10Q) for the period ending December 31, 2009, published February 26, 2010, were in violation of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §906. Claim10B: Brian Moynihan was fully aware of fraud by management holding reporting duties being committed, at least since late December 2009. Therefore, certifications of Brian Moynihan as CEO of Bank of America Corporation in the Q-1 quarterly reporting (10Q) for the period ending March 31, 2010, published May 7, 2010, were in violation of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §906. 11) 2010 - Fraud by Brian Moynihan and others in disclosures pursuant to Basel Accords (Revised Framework, June 2004) , Pillar III, particularly pertaining to duties and obligations in Pillar I: As part of Basel II, Pillar III disclosures, for MBNA Canada, period ending December 31, 2009, Bank of America stated: (94)
7. Operational Risk Operational Risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems, or from external events. The Bank takes a comprehensive approach to risk management. Risk planning is integrated with strategic, financial, customer and associate planning so that goals and responsibilities are aligned across the Bank. Risk is managed in a systematic manner by focusing on the bank as a whole and managing risk across all operations. This approach requires each associate and line of business to be engaged and work as a team in the risk management process. The foundation of the Bank’s risk governance is individual accountability. Identifying and managing risk and reward is every associate’s job. Compliance is at the core of the Bank’s cultural values and is a key component of the Bank’s risk management discipline. This culture of accountability and compliance requires that all associates comply with all relevant laws, regulations, ethical standards and internal policies and procedures. The Board is responsible for overseeing the Bank’s governance framework and ensuring that appropriate policies have been implemented to manage operational risk. Senior business executives in conjunction with chief compliance and risk management executives are responsible for development policies, processes, procedures and risk management framework on a bank-wide basis, as well as for directing, reviewing and approving specific business line-area operational risk policies. Operational and Compliance Risk Management working in conjunction with senior business executives have developed tools and appropriate methodologies to help manage and monitor risk. Business unit managers and associates in conjunction with risk managers are responsible for identifying, measuring, mitigating and monitoring all operational risks in each business area, both existing and emerging. They also ensure that unit-specific policies, procedures and staff are effective and sufficient to manage operational risk and that business controls are consistent with company-wide requirements. The Bank’s measurement processes include a variety of measures, tools, processes and methodologies both quantitative and qualitative in nature. These risk measures assess the likelihood, impact and detectability, and other criteria on both inherent and residual risk basis. These indicators and tools provide assessment and direction of risk and potential changes. Operational and compliance risk reporting exists at a number of levels from the Board, executive and senior management, line of business management and Legal, Compliance, Risk, Technology, Human Resources and other support partners. The type and frequency of operational and compliance risk reporting vary depending on the risk. Loss event data is captured monthly through bank-wide operational loss event process and is reported to the Board and senior management on a quarterly basis. Operational risk event types captured include; internal fraud, external fraud, employment practices / workplace safety, clients products and business practices, damage to physical assets, business interruption / system failures and execution, delivery and process management. Comprehensive information about these types of risk events is collected by operational risk management and includes data regarding amount, occurrence, discovery date, business area, root cause analysis, risk drivers. Analysis of operational risk event data helps us to understand our risks, provide historical perspective of our risk experience, and help us establish basis for measuring the Bank’s operational risk exposure. The Bank reviews and analyses information concerning operational loss experience that have occurred at other credit card providers and financial institution. The fraud and credit losses experience is shared with the Bank by the Canadian Banker’s Association and Master Card Canada. In line with the OSFI Capital Adequacy Ratio guidelines, the Bank has adopted the basic indicator approach for operational risk under the Basel II pillar I framework. The operational risk is calculated by applying a 15% factor to the Bank’s average gross income over a three year period resulting in a capital charge of $1,765 million as at December 31, 2009.

The Basel II, Pillar III disclosures, for MBNA Canada, period ending December 31, 2009, as published online by Bank of America Corporation were unsigned. However, discovery is likely to show that such disclosures were published under the tenure of Brian Moynihan as President./CEO, subject to his authority. The Basel Accords (Revised Framework, June 2004), Pillar III states:
Part 4: The Third Pillar – Market Discipline I. General considerations

Page 17/34

June 11, 2010
A. Disclosure requirements 808. The Committee believes that the rationale for Pillar 3 is sufficiently strong to warrant the introduction of disclosure requirements for banks using the Framework. Supervisors have an array of measures that they can use to require banks to make such disclosures. Some of these disclosures will be qualifying criteria for the use of particular methodologies or the recognition of particular instruments and transactions. B. Guiding principles 809. The purpose of Pillar 3 ─ market discipline is to complement the minimum capital requirements (Pillar 1) and the supervisory review process (Pillar 2). The Committee aims to encourage market discipline by developing a set of disclosure requirements which will allow market participants to assess key pieces of information on the scope of application, capital, risk exposures, risk assessment processes, and hence the capital adequacy of the institution. The Committee believes that such disclosures have particular relevance under the Framework, where reliance on internal methodologies gives banks more discretion in assessing capital requirements. 810. In principle, banks’ disclosures should be consistent with how senior management and the board of directors assess and manage the risks of the bank. Under Pillar 1, banks use specified approaches/methodologies for measuring the various risks they face and the resulting capital requirements. The Committee believes that providing disclosures that are based on this common framework is an effective means of informing the market about a bank’s exposure to those risks and provides a consistent and understandable disclosure framework that enhances comparability.

TOC

The Basel Accords (Revised Framework, June 2004), Pillar I states [underline added –jz]: Part 2: The First Pillar ─ Minimum Capital Requirements …
5. Corporate governance and oversight … Effectiveness of monitoring systems 495. The bank must be able to monitor both the quality of the receivables and the financial condition of the seller and servicer. In particular: The bank must (a) assess the correlation among the quality of the receivables and the financial condition of both the seller and servicer, and (b) have in place internal policies and procedures that provide adequate safeguards to protect against such contingencies, including the assignment of an internal risk rating for each seller and servicer. The bank must have clear and effective policies and procedures for determining seller and servicer eligibility. The bank or its agent must conduct periodic reviews of sellers and servicers in order to verify the accuracy of reports from the seller/servicer, detect fraud or operational weaknesses, and verify the quality of the seller’s credit policies and servicer’s collection policies and procedures. The findings of these reviews must be well documented. The bank must have the ability to assess the characteristics of the receivables pool, including (a) over-advances; (b) history of the seller’s arrears, bad debts, and bad debt allowances; (c) payment terms, and (d) potential contra accounts. The bank must have effective policies and procedures for monitoring on an aggregate basis single-obligor concentrations both within and across receivables pools. The bank must receive timely and sufficiently detailed reports of receivables ageings and dilutions to (a) ensure compliance with the bank’s eligibility criteria and advancing policies governing purchased receivables, and (b) provide an effective means with which to monitor and confirm the seller’s terms of sale (e.g. invoice date ageing) and dilution.

Collection of eight (8) email notices by Brian Moynihan, dated December 20, 2009 to March 10, 2010, provides evidence that Mr Moynihan was personally informed in these matters. (90) Q11: Brian Moynihan was fully aware of fraud by management holding reporting duties being committed, at least since late December 2009. Therefore, disclosures of Bank of America on December 31, 2009 were false representations relative to duties and obligations pursuant to Basel Accords, Pillar III, and also pertaining to requirements provided in Pillar I regarding adequate controls for fraud prevention.

F. CONCLUSIONS Combined, compelling evidence was provided of the ongoing (June 2010) involvement of Bank of America and its most senior management in fraud scheme initiated by Countrywide Financial Corporation (2004), continuing now into its sixth year. Such fraud scheme, which was initiated by lower level employees and a convicted felon, doubling as a “loan originator” was indefatigably buttressed by the most senior management of both Countrywide and Bank of America, with the exception of a short period (July-December 2008) – under Timothy Mayopoulos as General Counsel of Bank of

Page 18/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

America. A pattern of conduct was documented of violations of various laws and banking regulations and widespread fraud in operations – from underwriting to the office of general counsel. Of particular concern should be the pattern of employment of both inside and outside counsel to perpetrate such alleged violations of the law. In addition, the evidence documented today’s President of Bank of America, Brian MOYNIHAN – as a central figure in such conduct, starting from the day of his appointment as General Counsel following the abrupt dismissal of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel on December 10, 2008 – an event that was subject of various investigations. Additional direct involvement of Brian MOYNIHAN was documented starting December 20, 2009. Moreover, starting January 2010 as President, Brian MOYNIHAN signed periodic SEC reports certifying no fraud in Bank of America operations, as well as disclosures pursuant to Basel II Pillar III banking accords. The pattern of conduct as a whole is alleged as fraud, deceptive business practices, and extortion. Additionally, violations are alleged of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), relative to reporting by corporate counsel, certifications by corporate officers, and review of complaints by the Audit Committee. Additional allegations include fraud on shareholders, on banking regulators, on US taxpayers, and on the international banking community. Furthermore, the published Bank of America Code of Ethics and Outside Counsel Procedures are alleged as fraudulent representations. Most alarming – regardless of provisions enacted in the Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), the pattern of conduct of corporate officers in their relationship with inside and outside corporate counsel is alleged as the core of the violations, and therefore, reflects on various other past and ongoing actions against Bank of America. Therefore, the case as a whole demonstrated large-scale fraud on the US taxpayer in underwriting, disintegration of “sound banking principles” and both internal and external audit. It provides unique insights into US financial infrastructure, banking regulation, and law enforcement, and with it – prevailing risk level during the current banking crisis. It provides unique insights into US financial infrastructure, banking regulation, and law enforcement, and with it – prevailing risk levels during the current protracted banking crisis.

G. LINKS TO RECORDS 1. Overviews 1) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25576863/ 10-01-22 English, Castellano, Francais, Deutsch - Per TV journalist’s request - Third Grade Presentation: Court Corruption and Banking Regulation 2) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32175661/ 08-01-24 Overview: Countrywide in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400)

The record, filed at the California Court of Appeals, 2nd District, attempted to provide in 2007 an overview of the level of involvement of Countrywide at the litigation at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Such involvement is alleged the core of the fraud and extortion by Countrywide in the case at hand. Such involvement was described by Attorney Jenna Moldawsky as “limited” and “nothing improper”.

3) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29712101/ 10-01-07 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Register of Actions (California civil docket) with a preface
The Register of Actions with its introductory preface is alleged as sufficient evidence for indictment of Countrywide, Bank of America, and their senior management of racketeering.

4) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24990634/ 10-01-09 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Case Summary
The case summary is not a formal court record, but it is the only record which the court provides the public access to on a routine basis. It too includes sufficient evidence of the nature of Countrywide and Bank of America’s conduct in litigation where their designation as Plaintiff, Intervenor, Cross Complainant, and Non Party were changing by the day.

5) http://www.scribd.com/doc/28127571/ 10-03-09 Bank of America Beyond Financial Recklessness Corruption of the Courts 6) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32173783/ 09-01-27 Bank of America Code of Ethics
The published Code of Ethics of Bank of America Corporation is alleged as a fraudulent representation to shareholders and the public at large.

7) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27932516/ 08-12-11 Bank of America Outside Counsel Procedures
The published Outside Counsel Procedures of Bank of America Corporation is alleged as a fraudulent representation to shareholders and the public at large. The published procedures declare a litigation philosophy that prohibits appearance of unauthorized counsel, prohibits obstructionist litigation practices, and requires compliance with Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307 relative to reporting by counsel of fraud and other violations of the law.

8) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30983560/ 10-05-06 UETA Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Wikipedia)

Page 19/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

A fundamental violation is alleged in Countrywide and Bank of America operations - refusal to comply with UETA – the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. Both institutions refused to authenticate banking records. Moreover, the Countrywide production in response to legal subpoena documented routine circumvention of Countrywide’s published policies and procedures regarding fax transmissions, which amounted to alleged wire fraud by and against a financial institution across state lines – routine false representation of fax transmissions origin and dates, in order to retroactively construct loan application files.

2. Detailed Review 9) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25001966/ 08-03-05 Case of Borrower William Allen Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #248 Judge Jeff Bohm’s Memorandum Opinion rebuking Countrywide’s litigation practices
“…During several hearings over the past year, the Court received evidence on a wide range of misconduct beyond this initial misrepresentation. The parties are a mortgage loan servicer and its two law firms: (I) Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (Countrywide), the loan servicer for Fannie Mae, the mortgagee of the Debtor's home loan; … Their collective conduct caused this Court to issue two Show Cause Orders. This Memorandum Opinion discusses how their actions in the case at bar have shown a disregard for the professional and ethical obligations of the legal profession and judicial system.” The memorandum opinion was based in part on a year long study of Countrywide’s litigation practices in courts across the United States by the US Trustee. The memorandum opinion described in detail the routine filing in court of false and deliberately misleading records as evidence. Moreover, it described in detail the practice of retaining large law firms to appear, while not authorized as counsel of record, with “no communications with counsel clause”. The memorandum states that senior Countrywide management promised the court to cease such practices. Regardless, Countrywide, and Bank of America in its footsteps, continue such practices in the Los Angeles Courts to this date.

10) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30987439/ 09-04-02 Case of Borrower William Allen Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #256 Dr Joseph Zernik’s Notice #1
Verified Notice to the Hon Jeff Bohm Pursuant to March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion (Dkt #248), stating: "The Court will continue to verify that its trust [in Countrywide ceasing its fraudulent litigation practices in courts across the US - JZ] is well placed".

11) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30988075/ 09-04-15 Case of Borrower William Allen Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #257 Dr Joseph Zernik’s Notice #2
Verified Notice to the Hon Jeff Bohm Pursuant to March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion (Dkt #248), stating: "The Court will continue to verify that its trust [in Countrywide ceasing its fraudulent litigation practices in courts across the US - JZ] is well placed". Notice #2 provided short overview of the conduct of Countrywide in the Los Angeles Court, alleged as violation of promises made to the Hon Jeff Bohm.

12) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31145180/ 09-05-08 Case of Borrower William Allen Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #258 Dr Joseph Zernik’s Notice #3
Verified Notice to the Hon Jeff Bohm Pursuant to March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion (Dkt #248), stating: "The Court will continue to verify that its trust [in Countrywide ceasing its fraudulent litigation practices in courts across the US - JZ] is well placed". Notice #2 provided short overview of the conduct of Countrywide in the Los Angeles Court, alleged as violation of promises made to the Hon Jeff Bohm. Notice #3 provided detailed evidence of Countrywide’s conduct, and refusal of its management to address the fraud perpetrated in the Los Angeles Court.

13) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31145711/ 09-05-08 Case of Borrower William Allen Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #259 Dr Joseph Zernik’s Notice #3 Exhibit A
Verified Notice to the Hon Jeff Bohm Pursuant to March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion (Dkt #248), stating: "The Court will continue to verify that its trust [in Countrywide ceasing its fraudulent litigation practices in courts across the US - JZ] is well placed". Notice #2 provided short overview of the conduct of Countrywide in the Los Angeles Court, alleged as violation of promises made to the Hon Jeff Bohm. Notice #3 provided detailed evidence of Countrywide’s and Bank of America’s conduct, and refusal of the Audit Committee of Bank of America to investigate complaints pertaining to the fraud perpetrated in the Los Angeles Court.

14) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31149956/ 09-05-08 Case of Borrower William Allen Parsley (05-90374) Dkt #260 Dr Joseph Zernik’s Notice #3 Exhibit B
Verified Notice to the Hon Jeff Bohm Pursuant to March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion (Dkt #248), stating: "The Court will continue to verify that its trust [in Countrywide ceasing its fraudulent litigation practices in courts across the US - JZ] is well placed". Notice #2 provided short overview of the conduct of Countrywide in the Los Angeles Court, alleged as violation of promises made to the Hon Jeff Bohm. Notice #3 provided detailed evidence of Countrywide’s and Bank of America’s conduct, and refusal of the Audit Committee of Bank of America to investigate complaints pertaining to the fraud perpetrated in the Los Angeles Court.

3. Specific Records in Chronological Order (Each record is provided online with a short introductory paragraph) 15) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29714059/ 04-09-27 Opinion Letter by Fraud Expert Robert Meister re Countrywide’s Uniform Residential Loan Applications (1003) by Nivie Samaan
Uniform Residential Loan Applications were and are the foundation for lending of government-backed mortgages. Robert Meister, a renowned US fraud expert opined regarding forgery in Samaan’s 2004 Loan Application, filed with Countrywide. Samaan herself, in 2006 deposition admitted that no loan broker ever filed the application. Instead, she and her husband, a convicted felon, doubling as Countrywide “loan originator” jointly prepared and filed the loan application. Needless to say, by law, a loan broker is required to certify the applications and all records prior to submission, moreover, a person is prohibited from filing a loan application for self, even if licensed as a loan broker. The evidence, e.g. #16 below, demonstrated such alleged fraud on a financial institution, Countrywide, was committed with full collusion by Countrywide. Bank of America refused to review complaints in this matter filed with the Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). (see #90) Therefore, the loan applications and their underwriting documented also disintegration of audit at Bank of America.

16) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25695526/

Page 20/34 June 11, 2010 TOC 04-09-27 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 Nivie Samaan Fraudulent Uniform Residential Loan Applications (1003) and their fraudulent underwriting by Countrywide.
See also #15. The loan applications were never filed by a loan broker, as required by law. No certification of records was ever received by Countrywide. Furthermore, the data in the loan application was false and deliberately misleading on all relevant details, from employment, to income and assets, to marital status. Therefore, it is alleged as mortgage fraud and financial institution fraud. In addition, records were received by Countrywide through unauthenticated, anonymous fax transmissions, in order to cover up the fact that they were received from Samaan and her husband, a convicted felon doubling as a “loan originator”, instead of being transmitted by the loan broker. Furthermore, such wire/fax scheme was employed by Countrywide in order to construct retroactively loan application files. Such conduct is alleged as violation of UETA, and also a wire/fax fraud across state lines, against a financial institution. A reasonable person would conclude that underwriting at Countrywide was in violation of any conceivable “sound banking principles.” Moreover, in Meet and Confer in March 2007, in response to specific requests for records (see # 20), Countrywide in-house counsel Todd Boock claimed that no internal or external audit existed in Countrywide in this matter, even after the records were purportedly reviewed by the Legal Department as part of 4 consecutive legal subpoenas for records. Therefore, the loan applications also document the disintegration of internal and external audit in Countrywide as early as 2004. Finally, a reasonable person, upon review of the records would conclude that conduct of Countrywide and Bank of America since 2004, and to this date relative to the loan applications documented the central role of in-house counsel in the alleged fraud, in violation of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307, pertaining to conduct of corporate counsel. Bank of America refused to review complaints in this matter filed with the Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). (see #90) Therefore, the loan applications and their underwriting documented also disintegration of audit at Bank of America.

17) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25694599/ 04-10-26 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s Fraud in Underwriting Letter produced in response to legal subpoena of records – paper filed in Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01914) Dkt #44
The fraudulent October 26, 2004 Underwriting Letter, (see also fraud expert opinion letter #18) was filed in court first in November 2006, misrepresented as an October 14, 2004 Underwriting Letter. It was repeatedly filed in court afterwards, even after fraud expert opinion on the letter was issued. See separately fraud expert opinion by Robert Meister. The fax was considered a key fraud records. It was an invalid, unverified letter. It was marked in the header as faxed on October 26, 2004, and it was marked in its body as printed on October 26, 2004, but Countrywide repeatedly filed declarations that it was a valid October 14, or mid-October 2004 Underwriting Letter. Starting June 2007 Angelo MOZILO – then President/CEO and Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer of Countrywide were personally requested to address the alleged fraud in this record. Conduct of Countrywide and Bank of America relative to this letter documented disintegration of internal and external audit. Bank of America refused to review complaints in this matter filed with the Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). (see #90) Therefore, the loan applications and their underwriting documented also disintegration of audit at Bank of America.

18) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29714470/ 04-10-26 Opinion Letter of Fraud Expert Robert Meister re Countrywide October 26 2004 Underwriting Letter Oct 26 s
The fraudulent October 26, 2004 Underwriting Letter, (see also fraud expert opinion letter #18) was filed in court first in November 2006, misrepresented as an October 14, 2004 Underwriting Letter. It was repeatedly filed in court afterwards, even after fraud expert opinion on the letter was issued. See separately fraud expert opinion by Robert Meister. The fax was considered a key fraud records. It was an invalid, unverified letter. It was marked in the header as faxed on October 26, 2004, and it was marked in its body as printed on October 26, 2004, but Countrywide repeatedly filed declarations that it was a valid October 14, or mid-October 2004 Underwriting Letter. Starting June 2007 Angelo MOZILO – then President/CEO and Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer of Countrywide were personally requested to address the alleged fraud in this record. Conduct of Countrywide and Bank of America relative to this letter documented disintegration of internal and external audit. Bank of America refused to review complaints in this matter filed with the Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). (see #90) Therefore, the loan applications and their underwriting documented also disintegration of audit at Bank of America.

19) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31676831/ 07-02-08 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s Records produced in response to legal subpoena
Some of the records were opined upon by fraud expert Robert Meister (see #15, 18). Moreover, the production of records is alleged as fraud in its entirety, since it created retroactive loan application files and fraudulent loan underwriting history (see #16), Furthermore, it documented alleged fax/wire fraud against a financial institution across state lines as a routine practice in Countrywide. Such fraudulent records were repeatedly produced 5 times between August 2006 and April 2007, and Countrywide refused to stop the fraud even after the fraud was pointed out the Legal Department. Conduct of Countrywide and Bank of America relative to this letter documented disintegration of internal and external audit. Bank of America refused to review complaints in this matter filed with the Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). (see #90) Therefore, the loan applications and their underwriting documented also disintegration of audit at Bank of America.

20) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32214868/ 07-03-16 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s letter to Countrywide in Meet Confer re fraud in Countrywide response to legal subpoena of records
The record requested among other records the internal and external audit records pertaining to Samaan’s loan applications, the pipeline reports, and email correspondence of Maria McLaurin, Branch Manager pertaining to the loan application. Countrywide refused to produce any of the records. Countrywide in-house counsel claimed that no internal or external audit existed, and likewise – that no pipeline report existed pertaining to the applications. Later (see #21) filed a declaration claiming no deception in Countrywide response to the legal subpoena for records.

21) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31272986/ 07-06-06 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 Non Party Countrywide’s in-house Counsel Todd BOOCK declaration in re: Discovery s
As part of Meet and Confer Dr Zernik requested (see #20) among other records the internal and external audit records pertaining to Samaan’s loan applications, the pipeline reports, and email correspondence of Maria McLaurin, Branch Manager pertaining to the loan application. Countrywide refused to produce any of the records. Countrywide in-house counsel claimed that no internal or external audit existed, and likewise – that no pipeline report existed pertaining to the applications. Later (see #21) filed a declaration claiming no deception in Countrywide’s response to the legal subpoena for records.

Page 21/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

22) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32214681/ 07-06-20 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bet Tzedek s web pages featuring Sandor SAMUELS’ campaign against fraud
While Countrywide was engaged in fraud at the courtroom (see #15-21) and fraud against the US taxpayer, Sandor Samuels – then Chief Legal Officer, served a President of Bet Tzedek – a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. As such, Mr Samuels advertised on the web a major campaign against fraud in Southern California, particularly against housing fraud. The Los Angeles Consumer Bureau, likewise, referred Dr Zernik to Bet Tzedek, as experts on housing fraud. Therefore, Dr Zernik approached Mr Samuels (see #23) in letter hand delivered to him at the offices of Bet Tzedek. Within 24 hours, the web pages of Bet Tzedek advertising the campaign against fraud were removed from the web, and within a week Countrywide initiated a campaign of retaliation, harassment and intimidation (see all records by Moldawsky and Bryan Cave, LLP, below).

23) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32214434/ 07-06-22 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Letter Hand Delivered to Sandor SAMUELS in his capacity as President of Bet Tzedek at the offices of Bet Tzedek
See also #22. While Countrywide was engaged in fraud at the courtroom (see #15-21) and fraud against the US taxpayer, Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer, served a President of BET TZEDEK – a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. As such, Mr SAMUELS advertised on the web a major campaign against fraud in Southern California, particularly against housing fraud. The Los Angeles Consumer Bureau, likewise, referred Dr Zernik to Bet Tzedek, as experts on housing fraud. Therefore, Dr Zernik approached Mr SAMUELS (see #23) in letter hand delivered to him at the offices of BET TZEDEK. Within 24 hours, the web pages of BET TZEDEK advertising Mr SAMUELS” campaign against fraud were removed from the web, and within a week Countrywide initiated a campaign of retaliation, harassment and intimidation (see all records by Moldawsky and Bryan Cave, LLP, below). Today, Mr SAMUELS is Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation.

24) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32214017/ 07-06-25 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s first email to Angelo MOZILO and Sandor SAMUELS asking them to stop court fraud by Countrywide
See also #22, 23. While Countrywide was engaged in fraud at the courtroom (see #15-21) and fraud against the US taxpayer, Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer, served a President of BET TZEDEK – a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. As such, Mr SAMUELS advertised on the web a major campaign against fraud in Southern California, particularly against housing fraud. The Los Angeles Consumer Bureau, likewise, referred Dr Zernik to Bet Tzedek, as experts on housing fraud. Therefore, Dr Zernik approached Mr SAMUELS (see #23) in letter hand delivered to him at the offices of BET TZEDEK. Within 24 hours, the web pages of BET TZEDEK advertising Mr SAMUELS” campaign against fraud were removed from the web, and within a week Countrywide initiated a campaign of retaliation, harassment and intimidation (see all records by Moldawsky and Bryan Cave, LLP, below). Today, Mr SAMUELS is Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation.

25) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25001457/ 07-07-03 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 Countrywide Notice of Ex Parte application for a Protective Gag Order initiating false representation and extortionist actions by Bryan Cave LLP
See also #22, 23. While Countrywide was engaged in fraud at the courtroom (see #15-21) and fraud against the US taxpayer, Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer, served a President of BET TZEDEK – a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. As such, Mr SAMUELS advertised on the web a major campaign against fraud in Southern California, particularly against housing fraud. The Los Angeles Consumer Bureau, likewise, referred Dr Zernik to Bet Tzedek, as experts on housing fraud. Therefore, Dr Zernik approached Mr SAMUELS (see #23) in letter hand delivered to him at the offices of BET TZEDEK. Within 24 hours, the web pages of BET TZEDEK advertising Mr SAMUELS” campaign against fraud were removed from the web, and within a week Countrywide initiated a campaign of retaliation, harassment and intimidation (see all records by Moldawsky and Bryan Cave, LLP, below). Today, Mr SAMUELS is Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation. Of note, the letter failed to include a signature of counsel for Countrywide, or for that matter – counsel in and of itself. Later, Atty Moldawsky wrote “Our limited involvement in this matter was entirely proper.” October 22, 2007

26) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31273341/ 07-07-06 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Attorney Richard Green False Filing on Behalf of Dr Zernik
In response to initiation of a campaign of extortion by Countrywide, Attorney Richard Green (Marker and Green, LLP) refused to file an opposition in court. Dr Zernik then informed Attorney Green that if he failed to file such opposition, Dr Zernik will file on himself. At the end, Dr Zernik prepared the opposition, and Mr Green attached to it a fraudulent declaration bearing false case caption. Later, Dr Zernik discovered that Mr Richard GREEN was a central figure in another real estate case, alleged as the prototype of real estate fraud at the Los Angeles Superior Court – Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) See also: http://www.scribd.com/doc/26837352/

27) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31273767/ 07-07-06 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s Extortionist Fax by John Amberg Bryan Cave LLP
See also #22, 26. While Countrywide was engaged in fraud at the courtroom (see #15-21) and fraud against the US taxpayer, Sandor SAMUELS – then Chief Legal Officer, served a President of BET TZEDEK – a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. As such, Mr SAMUELS advertised on the web a major campaign against fraud in Southern California, particularly against housing fraud. The Los Angeles Consumer Bureau, likewise, referred Dr Zernik to Bet Tzedek, as experts on housing fraud. Therefore, Dr Zernik approached Mr SAMUELS (see #23) in letter hand delivered to him at the offices of BET TZEDEK. Within 24 hours, the web pages of BET TZEDEK advertising Mr SAMUELS” campaign against fraud were removed from the web, and within a week Countrywide initiated a campaign of retaliation, harassment and intimidation (see all records by Moldawsky and Bryan Cave, LLP, below). Today, Mr SAMUELS is Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation. Of note, the letter failed to include a signature of counsel for Countrywide, or for that matter – counsel in and of itself.

28) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25002347/ 07-07-06 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s ex parte application for protective/gag order
The ex part application, which followed request by Dr Zernik to Sandor SAMUELS, President of Bet Tzedek, to stop fraud in the courtroom, signaled the initiation of extortionist campaign by Countrywide. Among conduct of Dr Zernik that Countrywide attempted to gag – speaking with a retired judge, speaking with a former Countrywide senior underwriter, whose job was eliminated in early 2005 after she object to mortgage fraud at Countrywide,

Page 22/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

speaking with a rabbi in his chambers. The appearance itself was conducted in a dark courtroom, off the record and off the calendar. Countrywide falsely designated itself “Non Party”, while the court falsely designated it on that day “Plaintiff”. The record provided here was later eliminated from court records in the file of Samaan v Zernik. Here, Dr Zernik’s copy is presented. See also #22-27.

29) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25001786/ 07-07-06 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s Letter - false representation of Bryan Cave LLP as counsel and attempt to gag speech
See #22-28. The ex part application, which followed request by Dr Zernik to Sandor SAMUELS, President of Bet Tzedek, to stop fraud in the courtroom, signaled the initiation of extortionist campaign by Countrywide. Among conduct of Dr Zernik that Countrywide attempted to gag – speaking with a retired judge, speaking with a former Countrywide senior underwriter, whose job was eliminated in early 2005 after she object to mortgage fraud at Countrywide, speaking with a rabbi in his chambers. The appearance itself was conducted in a dark courtroom, off the record and off the calendar. Countrywide falsely designated itself “Non Party”, while the court falsely designated it on that day “Plaintiff”. The record provided here was later eliminated from court records in the file of Samaan v Zernik. Here, Dr Zernik’s copy is presented.

30) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31275295/ 07-07-09 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide extortionist letter by John Amberg Bryan Cave LLP
See also #22-29. The ex part application, which followed request by Dr Zernik to Sandor SAMUELS, President of Bet Tzedek, to stop fraud in the courtroom, signaled the initiation of extortionist campaign by Countrywide. Among conduct of Dr Zernik that Countrywide attempted to gag – speaking with a retired judge, speaking with a former Countrywide senior underwriter, whose job was eliminated in early 2005 after she object to mortgage fraud at Countrywide, speaking with a rabbi in his chambers. The appearance itself was conducted in a dark courtroom, off the record and off the calendar. Countrywide falsely designated itself “Non Party”, while the court falsely designated it on that day “Plaintiff”. The record provided here was later eliminated from court records in the file of Samaan v Zernik. Here, Dr Zernik’s copy is presented.

31) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31275506/ 07-07-23 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s extortionist Proposed Protective Order by Atty Jenna Moldawsky, Bryan Cave LLP
See also #22-30 The proposed order was never signed, never entered, never noticed. Instead, it was marked “Denied” by handwriting. Regardless, Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation continue to this day their extortionist campaign under the guise of “protective” or “restraining” order against Dr Zernik, purported preventing him from asking Bank of America to address the fraud being committed – as opined by fraud experts second to none.

32) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32177086/ 07-08-01 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s letter by Atty Moldawsky in Re Extortionist Appearance August 1 2007 and Extortionist Filings in Opposition to Zernik
Such appearance was conducted in the court of Judge John Segal. Later, in a verified statement, Judge Segal claimed that Countrywide never appeared before him in court.

33) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32178107/ 07-10-02 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 Countrywide s Attorney John Amberg Extortionist False Representations s
See #22-32 above. The record provides a series of email communications by Attorney John Amberg, alternatively claiming to represent Countrywide and Bank of America, or refusing to communicate on their behalf.

34) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25696545/ 07-10-22 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s letter by Bryan Cave LLP in re Fraudulent appearance on July 6 2007
When asked to explain the fraudulent appearance of July 6, 2007, Attorney Jenna Moldawsky fraudulently wrote: “Our limited involvement in this matter was entirely proper.” As documented in instant complaint, such involvement was never limited, and it continues to this date.

35) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32175382/ 07-11-02 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide Extortionist Notice of Ruling of Non Existent Protective Order.
To this date, no copy of a signed, entered order was produced by Countrywide and/or Bank of America. Regardless, Countrywide and Bank of America to this date base their extortionist conduct on fraudulent claims of existence of such valid, effectual protective or restraining order, purportedly prohibiting Dr Zernik from demanding that Bank of America address the ongoing fraud. Bank of America refused to address the matter as part of complaints filed with its Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). See #22-34. See also #90, 93.

36) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24991238/ 07-12-17 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Attorney David Pasternak’s Grant Deeds opined as fraud by Fraud Expert James Wedick
The alleged and opined fraud and extortion by Countrywide, continued to this date by Bank of America Corporation culminated in grant deeds issued by Attorney David PATERNAK on December 17, 2007 on Dr Zernik’s residence. The July 29, 2008 Opinion Letter by veteran FBI agent, James Wedick, re-affirmed Dr Zernik's allegations of real estate fraud perpetrated by Countrywide and others. Mr Wedick had been commended by Congress, by FBI Chief, and by U.S. Attorney General for his achievements in

Page 23/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

law enforcement. Mr Wedick was asked to examine two sets of Grant Deed issued by Attorney David PASTERNAK on Dr Zernik’s property Mr Wedick opined [italics in the original –jz]: "...immediate investigation should be instituted in an effort to ascertain the circumstances behind any fraud being committed so that appropriate local, state, and federal authorities can be notified, including the appropriate court."

37) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25003494/ 08-01-08 Case of Borrower Hill (01-22574) Countrywide’s “Recreated Letters” and a Transcript in US Bankruptcy Court, Pittsburgh PA
It should be recalled that the collapse of Countrywide Financial Corporation in January 2008 was not the outcome of performance of its loan portfolios. Instead, it was the market’s response to the publication in the New York Times, on January 8, 2008, that Countrywide filed in court three “Recreated Letters” as evidence. See also the March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm regarding similar conduct of Countrywide in courts across the United States. In Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) such conduct continues to this date.

38) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25697594/ 08-01-11 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Non Party Countrywide’s Sandor SAMUELS’ Notice of “Interested Person”. Since July 2007 Countrywide appeared in court under the fraudulent party designation “Non Party”. Bank of America continues such conduct to this date. In January 2008 Sandor SAMUELS, then Chief Legal Counsel of Countrywide and today Associate General Counsel of Bank of America, filed a paper under the fraudulent party designation of “Interested Person”. The fraudulent appearance of January 11, 2008 placed together three Bet Tzedek former officers in collusion:
a) b)

c) BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. 39) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25698500/ 08-01-14 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide Bryan Cave LLP Cease and Desist Letter s
Part of an extortionist campaign executed through fraudulent counsel representations. See also #22-32 above.

Sandor SAMUELS – former President David PASTERNAK – former President Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer.

40) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25699255/ 08-02-04 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Bank of America Corporation - Dr Zernik’s first letter to officers and directors of Bank of America re Countrywide’s fraud and alleged extortion in the Los Angeles Courtroom.
Dr Zernik sent such letter soon after the announcement of take over of Countrywide by Bank of America. See also #42 below.

41) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31275752/ 08-02-08 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s Opposition to Countrywide’s Extortionist Motion for Sanction and OSC Contempt
Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: d) Sandor SAMUELS – former President e) David PASTERNAK – former President f) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California.

42) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25710550/ 08-02-15 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s Reply on motion for OSC contempt and sections
Such motions are founded on alleged fraud relative to existence of a “protective” or “restraining” order, which had never been signed, entered, noticed, or produced. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: g) Sandor SAMUELS – former President h) David PASTERNAK – former President i) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above.

43) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25699500/

Page 24/34 June 11, 2010 TOC 08-02-18 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 “Non Party” Bank of America‘s President Kenneth Lewis response to Dr Zernik Re alleged extortionist conduct by Countrywide
See also Dr Zernik’s letter, #39. To this date Bank of America continues such conduct, through direct involvement of Brian Moynihan, its current President.

44) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31276157/ 08-02-29 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik s Filing: Countrywide in Samaan v Zernik
By that date, Countrywide had been falsely designated 12 different party designations, filed thousands of papers in court, filed motion for OSC contempt that led to threat of jailing of Dr Zernik. Regardless, Countrywide and Bank of America continue to this date their conduct under the fraudulent party designation of “Non Party”.

45) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31276414/ 08-03-07 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s Attorney Moldawsky, Bryan Cave LLP, Extortionist Notice to Appear in Motion for OSC Contempt and Sanctions.
Such extortionist conduct continues to this date with direct involvement of Bank of America’s current President Brian Moynihan. See also #22-32 above.

46) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24749864/ 08-03-06 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) PACER Dkt #005 Plaintiff Dr Zernik’s Ex Parte Application for a Temporary Restraining Order on Judge Terry Friedman Los Angeles Superior Court
The application came following Judge Terry Friedman’s threat of jailing Dr Zernik. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: j) Sandor SAMUELS – former President k) David PASTERNAK – former President l) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

47) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31276727/ 08-03-07 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Countrywide’s Attorney Moldawsky, Bryan Cave LLP, extortionist Reply on extortionist Motion for Sanctions Contempt
See also #22-32 above.

48) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25711902/ 08-03-07 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s Bryan Cave LLP Letter to Pasternak demanding pay of $16,170.
Like all other judgments and order in Samaan v Zernik such judgment was never entered, as required by California Code of Civil Procedures §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Such judgment was issued by Judge Terry Friedman, who presided for over almost two years in Samaan v Zernik with no assignment order, as required by law. Regardless, Countrywide demanded and collected from Attorney David PASTERNAK $7,500 based on such fraudulent representations, in what is alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: m) Sandor SAMUELS – former President n) David PASTERNAK – former President o) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

49) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31276813/ 08-03-11 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) extortionist Judgment on Motion for OSC Contempt by Countrywide
Like all other judgments and orders in Samaan v Zernik such judgment was never entered, as required by California Code of Civil Procedures §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Such judgment was issued by Judge Terry Friedman, who presided for over almost two years in Samaan v Zernik with no assignment order, as required by law. Regardless, Countrywide demanded and collected from Attorney David PASTERNAK $7,500 based on such fraudulent representations, in what is alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: p) Sandor SAMUELS – former President q) David PASTERNAK – former President r) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California.

Page 25/34
See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

June 11, 2010

TOC

50) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25707414/ 08-03-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s purported Order to Show Cause alleged fraud and extortion
Like all other judgments and orders in Samaan v Zernik such judgment was never entered, as required by California Code of Civil Procedures §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Such judgment was issued by Judge Terry Friedman, who presided for over almost two years in Samaan v Zernik with no assignment order, as required by law. Regardless, Countrywide demanded and collected from Attorney David PASTERNAK $7,500 based on such fraudulent representations, in what is alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: s) Sandor SAMUELS – former President t) David PASTERNAK – former President u) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

51) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32177254/ 08-04-08 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s Attorney Moldawsky Extortionist Letter to Pasternak Alleged Money Laundering $16,170
Like all other judgments and orders in Samaan v Zernik such judgment was never entered, as required by California Code of Civil Procedures §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Such judgment was issued by Judge Terry Friedman, who presided for over almost two years in Samaan v Zernik with no assignment order, as required by law. Regardless, Countrywide demanded and collected from Attorney David PASTERNAK $7,500 based on such fraudulent representations, in what is alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: v) Sandor SAMUELS – former President w) David PASTERNAK – former President x) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

52) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30971372/ 08-04-17 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) Dkt #038 Countrywide’s San Rafael Branch Manager Maria McLaurin’s False Declarations under Samaan v Zernik (SC087400)
The records filed at the US District Court, Los Angeles included three declarations and a letter, all alleged as fraud on the court. Such declarations were inherently contradictory and defied logic. It is alleged that no reasonable person, upon review of the matter could deem such declaration as anything but fraud on the court.

53) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30974313/ 08-04-17 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) Dkt #045 Countrywide’s Fraudulent Real Estate Contract Record
The record, filed at the US District Court, Los Angeles, analyzed the various levels of alleged and opined fraud in the document. Such document was also defined as one of six key records, which were filed as part of complaints with Bank of America Audit Committee, as part of complaints pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). The Bank of America Audit Committee to this date refused to respond on the complaints. See also #89.

54) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30971554/ 08-04-17 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) Dkt #046 Inexplicable under Assumption of Honesty Sustain Register of Actions (California civil docket) in Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) The Register of Actions listed Countrywide Home Loans, Inc under fraudulent party designation of “Real Parties in Interest”. 55) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30766354/ 08-05-27 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) Dkt #062 First Amended Complaint
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

56) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30971869/

Page 26/34 June 11, 2010 TOC 08-06-30 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) Dkt #073 Countrywide’s MOZILO and SAMUELS’ False Motion to Dismiss
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

57) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30972278/ 08-06-30 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) Dkt #074 False Declaration of Jenna Moldawsky for Countrywide’s MOZILO and SAMUELS
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

58) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305080/ 08-06-30 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) US District Court, Los Angeles Bank of America’s Moldawsky False Certificate of Interested Parties s
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

59) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305205/ 08-08-18 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) US District Court, Los Angeles, Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky’s Extortionist Motion to Dismiss
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

60) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305210/ 08-08-18 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Los Angeles, Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky’s False Certificate of Service
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

61) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305212/ 08-08-18 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Los Angeles, Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky’s Extortionist Proposed Order to Dismiss
The complaint provided details of the fraud – alleged and opined – by Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation. In such complaint, Countrywide and Bank of America again engaged in false counsel appearances – with no certification as Counsel of Record. Moreover, Countrywide and Bank of America failed to ever file corporate disclosures. For details of the scheme of appearances by unauthorized counsel with “no communications with client clause” see Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm #9.

62) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305218/ 08-11-12 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky, Bryan Cave LLP, Extortionist Letter Re Purported Violations of non-existent Protective Order
To this date, no copy of a signed, entered order was produced by Countrywide and/or Bank of America. Regardless, Countrywide and Bank of America to this date base their extortionist conduct on fraudulent claims of existence of such valid, effectual protective or restraining order, purportedly prohibiting Dr Zernik from demanding that Bank of America address the ongoing fraud. Bank of America refused to address the matter as part of complaints filed with its Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). See #22-36. See also #90, 93.

63) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305223/ 08-11-19 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bank of America’s Bryan Cave LLP - Extortionist Letter to Pasternak demanding pay of $7,500 - Alleged Money Laundering and Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from Prohibited Conduct.

Page 27/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

Like all other judgments and order in Samaan v Zernik such judgment was never entered, as required by California Code of Civil Procedures §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Such judgment was issued by Judge Terry Friedman, who presided for over almost two years in Samaan v Zernik with no assignment order, as required by law. Regardless, Countrywide demanded and collected from Attorney David PASTERNAK $7,500 based on such fraudulent representations, in what is alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: y) Sandor SAMUELS – former President z) David PASTERNAK – former President aa) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

64) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32176579/ 08-11-24 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Attorney David Pasternak’s payment of $7,500to Attorney Moldawsky on behalf of Bank of America – alleged Money Laundering
Like all other judgments and order in Samaan v Zernik such judgment was never entered, as required by California Code of Civil Procedures §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Such judgment was issued by Judge Terry Friedman, who presided for over almost two years in Samaan v Zernik with no assignment order, as required by law. Regardless, Countrywide demanded and collected from Attorney David PASTERNAK $7,500 based on such fraudulent representations, in what is alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct. Such motions represented collusion of three former BET TZEDEK senior officers: bb) Sandor SAMUELS – former President cc) David PASTERNAK – former President dd) Terry Friedman - former Executive Officer. BET TZEDEK is a prominent Jewish charity in Los Angeles, providing free legal services. In 2007, while Countrywide was engaged in fraud in the courtroom, as opined by fraud experts second to none, BET TZEDEK’s then President Sandor SAMUELS advertised a campaign against fraud in Southern California. See also #22-32 above. See also #63.

65) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32216783/ 08-12-09 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 Countrywide s in house counsel Todd Boock’s refusal to respond December 2008 to March 2009 and prevent courtroom fraud
Such conduct was inherent to the scheme of false appearances by counsel, as detailed in the March 5, 2008 Memorandum Opinion of the Hon Jeff Bohm (see #9)

66) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305225/ 08-12-11 Samaan v Zernik SC087400 Bank of America Moldawsky Bryan Cave LLP extortionist ex parte notice
Such conduct represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time.

67) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27932293/ 08-12-11Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bryan Cave LLP Notice of Ex Parte Appearance on Behalf of “Non Party” Countrywide Home Loans Inc
Such conduct represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time.

68) http://www.scribd.com/doc/28004338/ 08-12-11 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s Notice to Bank of America officers in re Dec 11, 2008 resumption of false Bryan Cave LLP appearances at the Los Angeles Superior Court for “Non Party” Countrywide.
Such conduct represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

69) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27932188/ 08-12-15 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Fraudulent “Non Party” Countrywide’ Ex Parte Application for a Short Notice Hearing on Motion for OSC Contempt and Sanctions
Such conduct represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time.

Page 28/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

70) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305226/ 08-12-28 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik Notice to Attorney Moldawsky in Re: Winning the Pinocchio Award
Such conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

71) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305227/ 08-12-29 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s Letter to “Non Party” Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky in Re Withdraw or Authenticate s
Such conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

72) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305229/ 08-12-29 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s Notice to Attorney Moldawsky Re Extortionist Conduct s
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

73) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305232/ 08-12-29 Dr Zernik’s Letter to Attorney Moldawsky in Re Reporting Duties Per Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

74) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305078/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky, Bryan Cave LLP, Notice of Extortionist Motion for Sanctions OSC Contempt v Dr Zernik
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

75) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25700960/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Countrywide’s purported Order to Show Cause contempt and for sanctions
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

76) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305100/

Page 29/34 June 11, 2010 TOC 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s Paper in Re “Non Party” Bank of America’s Extortionist Motion for Monetary Sanctions Contempt
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

77) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305079/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Bank of America Moldawsky Extortionist First Supplemental Declaration
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

78) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305085/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky’s Extortionist Second Supplemental Declaration
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

79) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305245/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky, Bryan Cave LLP, Notice of Motion Sanctions Contempt v Dr Zernik
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

80) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305287/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non-Party” Bank of America’s Moldawsky Extortionist Notice of Non Opposition
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

81) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305249/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Bank of America Moldawsky Extortionist Notice of Ruling s
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

82) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305288/ 09-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s Paper in Re “Non Party” Bank of America’s Extortionist Motion for Monetary Sanctions Contempt
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time.

Page 30/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

83) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305292/ 09-02-17 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) “Non Party” Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky Extortionist Notice to Appear in Bench Trial Re Contempt
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

84) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31305102/ 09-02-17 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bank of America’s Attorney Moldawsky’s Extortionist Declaration in Re Service of Notice to Appear
Conduct by Attorney Moldawsky and Bank of America represented the resumption of extortionist conduct by Bank of America following the ouster of Timothy MAYOPOULOS as General Counsel and his replacement by Brian Moynihan – today – Bank of America President. Furthermore, Countrywide no longer existed as a corporate entity in itself at that time. During the tenure of General Counsel Timothy MAYOPOULOS such conduct was halted, and the office of Bank of America General Counsel repeatedly informed Dr Zernik that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear or communicate on its behalf. Only in-house Attorney Todd BOOCK was authorized. However, Attorney Todd BOOCK fraudulently claimed the opposite. See also #64.

85) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25286689/ 09-04-17 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Bank of America - List of six key records alleged or opined as fraud submitted in complaint to Bank of America Audit Committee
Such complaints were repeatedly filed with Bank of America Audit Committee pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). To this date, the Audit Committee refuses to respond on such complaints. Therefore, the case also documented the disintegration of internal audit at Bank of America, and fraud on shareholders.

86) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32177788/ 09-08-28 Bank of America – fraudulent, extortionist letter by Attorney John Amberg – directing Dr Zernik to address all Bank of America Communications to him
The letter is alleged as integral to the alleged fraud in employment of unauthorized counsel, with “no communications with client clause” – as detailed in Memorandum Opinion by the Hon Jeff Bohm. See #9.

87) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30971136/ 09-09-04 Bank of America - correspondence with General Tommy Franks former member of Bank of America Audit Committee in Re: Integrity or lack thereof in Bank of America operations
The correspondence provided additional evidence of the disintegration of Internal Audit at Bank of America Corporation.

88) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32902031 09-10-11 SEC Dr Zernik’s repeat request for log of complaints filed with SEC against Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation
Numerous complaints were filed with SEC starting 2007. Of particular notes are complaints filed directly with Mary L Schapiro starting January 2010. (97, 104, 110) Regardless, a reasonable person, upon review of the evidence is likely to conclude that SEC never issued a complaint number on any of the complaints, and never investigated any of them at all. Moreover, correspondence with attorneys at SEC, where representations were made that all such complaints were logged and archived, were followed by SEC refusal to disclose the dates and reference numbers of pervious complaints by Dr Zernik. Such representations by attorneys for SEC are likely to be false representations at best. ()

89) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25179824/ 09-11-24 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Attorney David Pasternak’s Final Report and Declaration w Bookmarks
Attorney David PASTERNAK continues to this date his appearances under the false designation of “Receiver”. No order for his appointment as “Receiver” was ever entered by the court, as required by California Code of Civil Procedure §664 to make it “effectual for any purpose”. Attorney David PASTERNAK filed in December 2007 grant deed on Dr Zernik’s property, which were opined as fraud by Fraud Expert James Wedick (See #63). Whereas California Code requires distribution of any proceeds from sale of property by court within 30 days, Attorney Pasternak holds to this date hundreds of thousands of dollars, alleged as property derived from prohibited conduct, and engaged in various transactions with parties including Countrywide and Bank of America Corporation alleged as money laundering. Regardless of the “Final Report” Dr Zernik was never compensate for one penny for his residence, taken for private use, as part of such fraud. The record as a whole is alleged as fraud – none of the exhibits included in the record were authenticated, and therefore, none were admissible as evidence. In filing such false and deliberately misleading records, Attorney PASTERNAK attempted to create a false and deliberately misleading litigation history.

Page 31/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

It should be noted that Attorney David PASTERNAK is former President of the Los Angeles Bar Association, former Member of the California Judicial Council, and former President of BET TZEDEK. David PASTERNAK is also a personal friend of both Sandor SAMUELS – Associate General Counsel of Bank of America Corporation and former President of BET TZEDEK, and Terry FRIEDMAN – former Executive Director of BET TZEDEK. The three former senior officers of BET TZEDEK are alleged as colluders in extortion. See also #63.

90) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32312304/ 09-12-20 “Read” Notices by Bank of America President Brian Moynihan on messages informing him on conduct that is claimed as subject to reporting duties pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002)
It is alleged upon discovery it would be found that Brian Moynihan was directly involved in conduct alleged as fraud and extortion as early as December 10, 2008 – the date of his appointment as General Counsel, following the ouster of Mr Timothy MAYOPOULOS. Regardless, Mr Moynihan was fully documented starting December 20, 2009. Regardless he signed certifications pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) stating no fraud in operations. Such conduct by Mr Moynihan is also alleged as fraud on shareholders of Bank of America Corporation.

91) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24681508/ 09-12-29 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08 cv 01550) CM/ECF Request and Response in attempt to gain access to records of US District Court, Los Angeles
After numerous requests pursuant to First Amendment rights and Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978), Dr Zernik finally gained access to records in his own case. The records documented that none of the minutes, orders, and judgment in the case were authenticated by the court as required to make them effectual for any purpose. See also #91, 92

92) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24681397/ 10-01-01 Zernik v Connor (2:08 cv 01550) CM/ECF Table Summary of NEFs in Zernik v Connor et al based on copies provided by Clerk on December 29 2009
After numerous requests pursuant to First Amendment rights and Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978), Dr Zernik finally gained access to records in his own case. The records documented that none of the minutes, orders, and judgment in the case were authenticated by the court as required to make them effectual for any purpose. See also #90, 92

93) http://www.scribd.com/doc/24731943/ 10-01-02 Zernik v Connor (2:08 cv 01550) Table Summary of NEFs based on records served by the court
After numerous requests pursuant to First Amendment rights and Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978), Dr Zernik finally gained access to records in his own case. The records documented that none of the minutes, orders, and judgment in the case were authenticated by the court as required to make them effectual for any purpose. See also #91, 92

94) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32219320/ 09-12-31 Bank of America MBNA Canada – Disclosure pursuant to Bank II Accord, Pillar III
Such disclosures, issued under the tenure of Brian Moynihan as President, are alleged as fraud on shareholders, on regulators, and on the international banking community.

95) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27932890/ 10-01-08 Bank of America Response letter by office of President CEO Brian Moynihan to Office of Comptroller of the Currency on Dr Zernik’s Complaint, Case #00971981 as faxed to OCC
The response is alleged as additional evidence of direct involvement of Brian Moynihan in fraud on Dr Zernik, on shareholders, and on regulators. See additional information under “Complaints filed with OCC”

96) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27932742/ 10-01-08 Bank of America’s Response letter by office of President CEO Brian Moynihan to Office of Comptroller of the Currency on Dr Zernik’s Complaint, Case #00971981 as mailed to Dr Zernik
The response is alleged as additional evidence of direct involvement of Brian Moynihan in fraud on Dr Zernik, on shareholders, and on regulators. See additional information under “Complaints filed with OCC”

97) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25038136/ 10-01-10 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s notice to Bank of America, Bryan Cave LLP, and Associate General Counsel Sandor Samuels of Bank of America’s Reporting Requirements pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) §307.
Additional evidence of fraud on shareholders of Bank of America Corporation under the Presidency of Brian Moynihan.

98) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25145795/ 10-01-12 Dr Zernik’s Correspondence with Mary L Schapiro SEC Chair, Bailey Deputy Comptroller of the Currency, and Brian Moynihan – Bank of America President regarding alleged fraud by Bank of America and Brian Moynihan.
The evidence documented repeated complaints to SEC and banking regulators regarding conduct of Bank of America Corporation, even after repeated promises by regulators to US Congress to “shore up” US banking regulation.

99) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25213149/

Page 32/34 June 11, 2010 TOC 10-01-13 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Dr Zernik’s request addressed to Attorney David Pasternak to access court records to Inspect and copy
David Pasternak had responded to a previous request to inspect the Journal of his notary public with a threat of force. Access to court records is denied to this date, in disregard of First Amendment rights and ratified International Law – Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

100) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25294161/ 10-01-15 Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) Proposed Review Standard for Office of Controller of the Currency in Review of Complaint against Bank of America.
Bank of America failed to produce any records at all in response to complaints, instead submitting letter including narrative by unauthorized personnel, which was alleged as fraud in and of itself. See also #94. 95.

101) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29648909/ 10-01-15 Dr Zernik’s Response to President Moynihan Letter of Jan 8 2010 re OCC complaint #00971981
Bank of America failed to produce any records at all in response to complaints, instead submitting letter including narrative by unauthorized personnel, which was alleged as fraud in and of itself. See also #94. 95.

102) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25445659/ 10-01-19 Addendum to Complaint to Inspector General, US Dept of Justice re: Refusal to protect Los Angeles County residents against alleged racketeering.
Conduct of Bank of America and Countrywide before it at the Los Angeles Courts was alleged as racketeering, and equal protection was requested pursuant to the US Constitution and ratified International Law.

103) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25847011/ 10-01-26 Dr Zernik’s request addressed to Bank of America’s President Brian Moynihan to provide public papers in SEC v BAC (1:09-cv-06829).
The evidence indicated that in litigation of SEC v BAC at the US District Court, NYC, orders and judgments were issued by the court, which were never authenticated, and therefore, were never effectual for any purpose. The court itself denied access to the records, in disregard of First Amendment rights. Therefore, requests were filed with Brian Moynihan and SEC to allow access to such public records. It is alleged that the litigation, which was the hallmark of banking regulation in the wake of the current crisis, was only pretense, but never an effectual court action. Both Bank of America and SEC to this date refuse to allow access to such records, which are public records by law.

104) http://www.scribd.com/doc/26250414/ 10-01-27 US Office of Comptroller of the Currency Case #00971981 Bank of America’s Response on the Complaint
The response by Brian Moynihan and Bank of America Corporation was alleged as fraud in its own sake, and was subject of the following complaint filed with the Comptroller. See also section: Complaints filed with OCC.

105) http://www.scribd.com/doc/26182464/ 10-01-31 Letter to SEC Chair Mary Schapiro Re Complaints Against Bank of America Corporation and Brian Moynihan
The evidence documented that SEC failed to accept and investigate any of the numerous complaints filed since 2007 against Bank of America Corporation.

106) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29649904/ 10-02-02 Second complaint against Bank of America filed with US Office of Comptroller of the Currency
The response by Brian Moynihan and Bank of America Corporation on Case #00971981 was alleged as fraud in its own sake, and was subject of the following complaint filed with the Comptroller. See also section: Complaints filed with OCC.

107) http://www.scribd.com/doc/26416550/ 10-02-05 Repeat Request for Ed O Keefe General Counsel, and Brian Moynihan – President, Bank of America Corporation to report Sandor Samuels to the Audit Committee for fraud by Management.
Requests were filed pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002) for reporting fraud by management to the Audit Committee. Failure of the Audit Committee of Bank of America to respond on any complaints documented disintegration of Internal Audit at Bank of America Corporation. See also correspondence with General Tommy Franks, former member of the Audit Committee, #87.

108) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32260743/ 10-02-26 BANK OF AMERICA CORP DE Form 10 K Received 02/26/2010 07 51 53
Periodic reports filed by Bank of America Corporation included certifications by Brian Moynihan as CEO, pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), which are alleged as fraud on both regulators and shareholders.

109) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29660111/ 10-03-04 Dr Zernik’s Clarifications Filed with US Department of Justice Inspector General re Complaint against Kenneth Melson and Kenneth Kaiser

Page 33/34

June 11, 2010

TOC

In response to Congressional Inquiry in 2008 by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator, and the Hon Diane Watson, Congresswoman, senior US Department of Justice officers filed responses, which are alleged as fraud on US Congress, and refusal to provide equal protection pursuant to the US Constitution and ratified international law.

110) http://www.scribd.com/doc/27937374/ 10-03-06 Dr Zernik’s request filed with President/CEO Brian Moynihan to Disclose His Own Fraud to the Audit Committee
Request was filed pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002). Conduct of Bank of America and its Audit Committee are alleged as violations of Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), and fraud on regulators and shareholders.

111) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29653973/ 10-03-06 Complaint filed with SEC Chair Mary Schapiro against Brian Moynihan Bank of America President CEO and former General Counsel
The evidence indicates that SEC refused to accept and investigate any of the numerous complaints filed against Countrywide and Bank of America since 2007.

112) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29653627/ 10-03-06 Bank of America Addendum to Complaint, Case #1070442 filed with Office of Comptroller of the Currency against Brian Moynihan Bank of America President
Office of the Comptroller so far failed to respond on the complaint, in disregard of Inquiry by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California.

113) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29653428/ 10-03-06 Complaint against US Office of Comptroller of the Currency Filed With Eric Thorson Inspector General of US Department of the Treasury.
No response on the complaint was received so far.

114) http://www.scribd.com/doc/28012578/ 10-03-08 Dr Zernik’s request for Brian Moynihan’s disclosure to the Bank of America Audit Committee of Fraud by Management
Refusal and failure of Bank of America to report to the Audit Committee, or respond on complaints filed with the Audit Committee documented disintegration of Internal Audit at Bank of America.

115) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29647939/ 10-03-11 Senator Dianne Feinstein’s follow up inquiry with US Office of Comptroller of the Currency Re Bank of America Corporation , Case #1070442
In disregard of inquiries by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, the Comptroller failed to respond on the complaint.

116) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29674620/ 10-04-09 Non Response by Office of US Comptroller of the Currency on Complaint against Bank of America Corporation and Brian Moynihan Alleging Conduct that Amounted to Racketeering s 117) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29815326/ 10-04-12 Request filed with Senator Christopher Dodd – Chair of the Senate’s Banking Committee to issue inquiry on Office of Comptroller of the Currency and US Dept of Justice Inspector General Re Alleged Racketeering by Bank of America and Brian Moynihan 118) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29817680/ 10-04-12 Request filed with Senator Carl Levine – Chair of the Senate’s Investigations Subcommittee to issue an inquiry on Office of Comptroller of the Currency and US Department of Justice 119) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29818001/ 10-04-12 Request filed with Senator Patrick Leahy – Chair of the Senate’s Judiciary Committee for inquiry on Office of Comptroller of the Currency and US Department of Justice 120) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29818332/ 10-04-12 Request Congressman John Conyers Chair House Judiciary Committee Inquiry on Office of Comptroller of the Currency and US Department of Justice 121) http://www.scribd.com/doc/29815861/ 10-04-12 Request Congressman Barney Frank Chair House Financial Services Committee Inquiry on Office of Comptroller of the Currency DOJ IG re Bank of America 122) http://www.scribd.com/doc/30979882/

Page 34/34 June 11, 2010 TOC 10-05-05 Chairs of US Congress Committees of the Judiciary and Banking Are Requested to Join Senator Feinstein’s Inquiries on Comptroller of the Currency 123) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32256751 10-05-07 BANK OF AMERICA CORP DE Form 10Q Received 05 07 2010 07 49 51 s
Periodic reports filed by Bank of America Corporation included certifications by Brian Moynihan as CEO, pursuant to Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), which are alleged as fraud on both regulators and shareholders.

124) http://www.scribd.com/doc/31725728/ 10-05-21 Complaint Filed with FBI Against Maria McLaurin – Branch Manager, Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), and Jae Arre Lloyd a Convicted Felon and Loan Originator. 125) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32133208/ 10-05-25 Letter received from Senator Feinstein’s office, May 10, 2010, including letter by US Office of Comptroller of the Currency purported as response on complaint, Case #1070442.
The Comptroller’s response was a non response at all. It included a cover letter naming the Case number, and an attachment which failed to address the same complaint. Bank of America itself never responded on Case #1070442 either. See also #125.

126) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32135449/ 10-05-28 Request for Senator Feinstein’s Help in Obtaining a Verified Valid Response by Office of Comptroller of the Currency on Case #01070442
See also #124.

127) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32139631/ 10-05-28 Letter to John Dugan – Request for an honest, valid response on complaint against Bank of America pending Before Comptroller of the Currency
Bank of America Corporation failed to respond on OCC Case #01070442. Regardless, in response to Congressional Inquiry by the Hon Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, OCC provided a response that was no response at all. A cover letter listed Case #01070442 in its subject line, but no further response on the specific complaint was provided.

128) http://www.scribd.com/doc/32218189/ 10-05-30 Bank of America Investor Relations Anti Money Laundering Policy
The published Anti Money Laundering Policy is alleged as fraud in representation to investors and the public at large. Evidence provided in specific records in instant complaint documented conduct alleged as money laundering and monetary transactions in property derived from prohibited conduct.