Clerk of the Court USS. District Court Northern District of Ohio United States Courthouse 1716 Spielbusch Avenue Toledo, OH 43604 Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 10-MD-2196 Judge Jack Zouhary Chris Andrews, Pro se Objector Supplement to Objection, Fee and Expense Date of Faimess Hearing; December 15, 2015 at 10:00 am. Courtroom 204 Page 1 of 51This supplement is a breakdown of the fee petition submitted by Class Counsel. Objector sent the Miller firm three emails requesting dialogue and answers about the following issues and those raised in the declaration but they were all ignored. The real lodestar using local rates per court rules is approximately $10,333,400 vs. $39,209,034 claimed. (See attached “Exhibit 1” which are twenty four pages taken out of their fee petition) This is a breakdown per firm and per person. This breakdown below will follow the twenty five pages Exhibit | if the Court wishes to follow along and reference those documents with this document at the same time. If Class Counsel didn’t like the rates in this area they should have bowed out of the litigation long ago and not have attempted to defraud the class by knowingly using non local rates. This painfully inaccurate and excessive fee and expense driven settlement request represents tens of millions of dollars in overcharges to the class which appears to have been designed and implemented from the beginning of the case which has sold the class out in the settlement. The expenses also claimed seem ludicrous so these false requests make some of the firms clearly and convincingly unfit to represent the class going forward so they should be dismissed without fees or expenses once the settlement is rejected based on the material pending issues. Unless the issues pointed out in the objection are corrected they render the settlement invalid under Rule 23 and applicable case law in this district and circuit let alone the “Feefraudgate” in this case that dooms this approval. The Page 2 of 51objector will deconstruct the fee for each firm and lawyer which shows some serious misconduct issues with many of the lawyers and those that falsely swore to the accuracy of the data. Generally, a reasonable hourly rate is calculated by reference to the prevailing market rates in the relevant community, Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 895 (1984); Gonter v. Hunt Valve Co., 510 F.3d 610, 618 (6th Cir. 2007). Lamar Adver. Co. v. Charter Twp. of Van Buren, 178 F. App’x. 498, 501-02 (6th Cir. 2006), ” Gratz v. Bollinger, 353 F. Supp. 2d 929, 948 (E.D. Mich.) As referenced in the objection the cross check should be calculated to validate the percentage of fee requested which is does not and misses by a light year. The relevant community is Toledo Ohio, or northwest as shown in the “Ohio State Bar Association, The Economics of Law Practice in Ohio for 2013”. The objector uses the attached pages 39-43, exhibits 46,47,48,49 and 50 (Exhibit 2) which the lawyers all know they were required to utilize but intentionally chose not to. Objector has not included all seventy pages of the report to save the Court time but the link is below for easy confirmation of the information. The hourly rates have been reconfigured correctly for Court to use and they clearly show fraudulent intent. The Economics of Law Practice in Ohio in 2013 - Ohio State ... Page 3 of 51https://www.ohiobar.org/NewsAndPublications/Documents/OSBA_EconOfLawPr acticeOhio.pdf Attps://www.ohiobar.org/2013econstudy If a partner is in the top 75% they bill out at $300 an hour. For those in the top 95% the rate tops out at $400 an hour. The objector split the difference and came up with: Partner’s rate is revised to $350 an hour which puts them all in the top 85% percentile which, based on the errors in the settlement and this fee fraud, they clearly are not. A reasonable person or business would not pay any more than this, Associates are billed out at a revised rate of $225 an hour which puts them all at the top 97%. Paralegals are billed out at $120 an hour which equal out to all of them being in the top 95%. © Most firms provided no cv on their firm or individuals billed out so for example two year associates are billed out like ten, twenty and thirty year partners . © They also intentionally and impermissibly billed non lawyers into the lodestar, clearly unethical at the least and not a simple “oops”. Page 4 of 51‘© Time spent preparing the declaration and/or pertaining to the joint fee petition appears to be included for many firms which is unfair and should be stricken. © It appears some lawyers are being claimed as partners that are not due to the attorney having no equity in the firm which is done solely for fraud purposes. © Member, partner and sharcholder appear to have various meanings. © Some lawyers have expired and maybe no valid licenses when they billed the class, © How much work was performed after preliminary approval when the deal was essentially done? This needs to be reviewed and the time divided up by say four tranches (time) over the course of the litigation, © Class Counsel has not listed who was an attorney but no longer employed. + The firms have not shown evidence as to whom each firm claims to represent so retainer agreements needs to be disclosed and reviewed by the objector and the Court for each claimed named plaintiff. Breakdown of the Miller firm’s lodestar and expenses: This from the sworn Miller fee petition: Page 5 of 51.10. “The total number of hours reasonably expended on this litigation by my firm from inception to September 28, 2015 is 35,084.25 hours. We include time through September 28, 2015 because of the ongoing responsibility and continuing work relating to the Claims Administration. We intend to supplement out time and expenses shortly before the hearing scheduled for December 15, 2015. The total lodestar for my firm at historical rates through September 28, 2015 is $17,245,026.50.” The gall and greed of Class Counsel and other firms has crossed the line. The Miller fee application does not provide a job description for each person which is used to intentionally mask the fact that the firm employs only five attomeys making it appear to be bigger than it is to justify the unwarranted amount of hours fraudulently billed to the class at the Inca fee rate they are using to fleece the fund. There are no partners except him but yet he has billed out twenty five lawyers with some employed full time at other law firms that have billed the class for literally millions of dollars. This is fraud by omission, violates duty of candor to the Court and violates ABA rules regarding fraud by lawyers in litigation. (See attached Exhibit 3, fourteen page article titled Duty of Candor....”. © Ifthey are working full time someplace else how is another full time job billing the class possible? © How can they billing the class $600 an hour while moonlighting? Page 6 of 51© How are these outside firms tied into these fees? Is this a unique way to defraud the class? © Would the Miller firm pay the lawyer a discounted amount then pocket the difference or pay the firm without the lawyer even knowing he was billed out? Did the Miller firm actually hire these firm/lawyers or is it all a mirage? Time sheets are required. This appears to be fraud on the class and the Court and the duty of candor to the Court has gone out the window. This entire fee should be struck along with other firm’s that engaged in this apparent $30 million wire and financial fraud misconduct scheme. (The total average hourly rate for all firms is an incredible $513.00 an hour with the Miller firm set to gouge the class again for more fees and expenses after this petition). Miller’s hourly rates claimed are laughable at $491.00 an hour. Using the local rates as required, the hourly rates alone are fraudulently inflated for the Miller firm by $241 an hour rate or about 50%, this is not a simple error. The actual hourly rate is not $491.00 an hour but actually $250 an hour. ($491 - $241= $250). Take the $250 inflated hourly fee multiplied by the 35,084 inflated hours claimed is an $8,771, 000 overcharge just on the hourly rates alone. Page 7 of 51If Miller’s hours are also inflated by same 50 % amount as the hourly rates are then clearly it is not 35,084 hours reasonably incurred but 16,840 hours x $250 hour is $4,210,000 for the true and accurate lodestar vs $17, 245,026 claimed for a total of $13,035,026 overcharge just for this one firm. This is false fee swearing at a minimum. Again from the Miller fee petition; 12. My firm incurred and/or has become obligated to pay a total of $2,530,480.79 in unreimbursed expenses, all of which were reasonable and necessary for the prosecution of this litigation. Ifall amounts requested have approved by the Court will some be forgiven if not awarded and is any invoice contingent on approval? They cannot be trusted, it’s an organized conspiracy based on similar overcharges with other firms and their moa, Need receipts for each category: Copies, 160,000 made at .10 a copy? Nonsense. Expert costs, prove it. Already paid or if pending does the balance get forgiven if the Court awards less? Need receipts. $116, 000.00 for relativity hosting? What? Need paid receipts. Page 8 of $1Miller’s lawyers and non licensed lawyers are as follows: Kathleen Boychuck attomey for nine years, billed out at $355 hour for $1,463,452.00. Matthew Szot no practice from 2010 on, then 2 years human rights Chicago billed the class at $685 hour for $2,401,336.00, no way, fraud. Alex Shage 4300 hrs billed out for $2 million doesn’t even work there, full time, employee at another firm during the litigation, fraud by omission, Embezzlement? Is mother firm OK with this? The class is being defrauded. Misleading and deceiving misconduct. Violation candor to the Court. Andrew Kanter has his own firm and working for Miller at same time or solo? Billing the class at $450 hour for $1,300,000,00 million for allegedly 3100 hours of “work”. The class is being defrauded. Misleading and deceiving misconduct. Fraud by omission, not disclosed. Violation candor to the Court. Mary Jane Fait works for a different firm. Works full time at Wolf, job status intentionally hidden, fraud. Shouldn’t the check go to the firm and not the lawyer individually? Embezzlement? Is mother firm OK with this? The class is being defrauded, Misleading and deceiving misconduct, Fraud by omission, not disclosed, violation candor to the Court. Page 9 of 51ADRC database nationwide Oct 16, 2015 ARDC Lawyer Search Results from the ARDC database last updated as of October 16, 2015 at 9:00:00 AM: for the following terms: Last Name: status: All Lawyers billed out by Miller Firm Jorge Ramirez no bar listing $220 hour for $179,000.00! Licensed but not Miller employee so what is she? $325 hour for $323,000.00 Melody Forrester, no license listed, billed class for $366,000.00 Jamie Huston billed $225 hour for $227,000.00 Stacy Bond has own practice, no Miller past employment, fraud, not disclosed. Violation of candor to the Court. Billing out at $450 hour for $953,000.00 is licensed in Illinois. She is a solo attorney and not entitled to bill at this rate. Attorney Law Office of Stacy Bond 2012 — Present (3 years) Page 10 of 54Attorney seeking new opportunities in commercial and consumer transactional practice, Next, Nicholas Graves $275 hour for $325,000.00 Michelle Clayton inactive license, no address Alex Shrage NY licensed but not in Illinois, not employee, not of counsel. NY mother firm know? Why is check attorney billed out and not the Sarkissian firm? When does he have time to do all work and usurious rates? Fraud by omission. [iinois Registration [Not authorized to practice law as attomey is not currently Status: registered with ARDC - Last Registered Year: 2011 | —_ ee 4300 hrs billed at $450 hour is $1,900,000.00 million. ‘The description below comes from Linkedin. Senior Counsel 2010 ~ Present (5 years)Greater New York City Area Page 11 of 51Counsel executives in day-to-day operations, decision-making and daily legal issues. Manage and handle the oversight and execution of all legal matters, including employment law, international trade, privacy law and intellectual property law. Draft, review and negotiate a wide range of agreements, including employment agreements, partnership agreements, promotion agreements, advertising agreements, media buy agreements, talent agreements, creative services agreements, technology service agreements, advertising agreements, statements of work, vendor agreements, non-disclosure agreements, releases and intellectual property licenses. Review and comment upon third party agreements, Coordinate patent, trademark and freedom to operate searches. Draft articles of incorporation and company procedures and guidelines in compliance with federal and New York State laws. Advise on strategic planning for the realization of company goals and objectives including, the acquisition of new clients and a broadening of the company’s digital presence. Develop, implement and manage the internal digital records database. Secure external financing for affiliates. Select and manage outside counsel and supervise staff. Brian Kay, active license but registered address is Home Brands Group, LLC 421 West Alameda Drive Tempe, AZ 85282-2045 redo bathrooms? When did he bill class, in what capacity and when? Page 12 of 51Andrew Kanter no Ilinois license listing, billing at $450 hour for $1,400,000.00 million not employee. The Law Office of Andrew Cantor - Home www,cantor-law.com/ ‘The legal team at The Law Office of Andrew Cantor is at your service. We offer reliable advice and counsel in legal matters concerning a variety of disciplines. 4132 3rd St #7, San Francisco, CA 94124 (415) 500-5849 Andrew Szot Where did he practice before Miller? ‘There is only three plus years of real practicing? Billing $685 an hour like a thirty year partner at a top tier firm in New York. HeGreater Chicago Area Law Practice Education 1. University of Michigan Law School View Andrew's Full Profile Background Summary Andy Szot litigates matters throughout the U.S., including actions involving antitrust violations, fraud, violations of the federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin. Truth-in-Leasing statute, and claims brought pursuant to the federal False Claims Act (qui tam actions). His legal work has been recognized by his peers, who selected him as an Ilinois Rising Star for three consecutive years starting in 2010. Mr. Szot received his B.A. in History, with distinction, from the University of Michigan and his law degree from the University of Michigan Law School in 2000. He is a member of the Illinois State Bar, the Bars of the U.S, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, and the Federal Trial Bar for the Northern District of Illinois, Page 14 of 52Before entering law school, Mr. Szot spent a year teaching disadvantaged students as an AmeriCorps service volunteer, From June 2012 to June 2014, he served as co-chair of the Human Rights Committee of the Chicago Bar Association, Presently, Mr. Szot serves on the Advisory Board of Art Works Projects for Human Rights, and is a member of the legal advisory team for the creation of The Prosecutors-A Documentary Film, which concerns sexual violence in conflict. Representative Cases: Antitrust: Representing certified classes in In re: Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litig. (N-D. OH) and in re: Evanston Northwestern Healthcare Corporation Antitrust Litig. N°. IIL) Helped managed strategic and day-to-day litigation and settlement efforts in In Re: Potash Antitrust Litig. (II) (N.D. IIL.) an in In re: Flonase Antitrust Litig, (E.D. PA). Motor Vehicle Act: Managing putative class actions in Mervyn v. Nelson Westerberg, et al. (N.D. Page 15 of 51IIL), Mervyn v. Ace World Wide Moving & Storage Co,, Inc., et al. (N.D. IIL), and Stampley v. Altom Transport, Inc. Qui Tam: Representing whistleblower/relator in Standish v, The Brilliance Academy of Math And English, et al. (N.D. Ul.) Experience Attorney Miller Law LLC January 2012 —Present (3 years 10 months)Chicago Skills + Class Actions +* Commercial Litigation + Courts + Appeals + Fraud + Antitrust Page 16 of 51+ Employment Law + Competition Law + Trials + Legal Advice Education University of Mi 1 Juris Doctor 1998 — 2000 Page 17 of 51University of Michigan B.A., with distinction 1992 — 1997 Detroit Country Day School 1989 — 1992 Ricky Amaro, no Illinois license listing billing at $190 hour for $48,000.00? There is a Randolph James Amaro, Jr. Are they the same person? Evidence needed. LAWYER SEARCH: ATTORNEY'S REGISTRATION AND PUBLIC DISCIPLINARY RECORD ARDC Individual Attorney Record of Public Registration and Public Disciplinary and Disability Information as of October 16, 2015 at 9:00:00 AM: Page 18 of 51Court: February 25, 2015 Registered Business [The Amaro Law Firm | Address: 2500 E Te Jester Blvd, Suite 525 Houston, TX 77008- 1365 Registered Business (713) 864-1941 Phone: Full Licensed Name: —_|Randolph James Amaro, | In Full Former name(s): {None | | Date of Admission as Lawyer by Illinois Supreme Illinois Registration Status: Active and authorized to practice law -Last | Registered Year: 2015 [Malpractice Insurance: Page 19 of 51 In annual registration,attomey reported that (Current as of date of | 1 registration; | he/she has malpractice ‘consult attorney for '|coverage i further information) John Clayton, no Illinois license listing. There is a John Robert Clayton Enterprise Recovery Systems 2400 Wolf Rd Ste 200 Westchester, IL 60154-5625. 815) 459- 8440, same person? | | by Illinois Supreme Court: | November 7, 2002 Illinois Registration Status: Not authorized to practice law as attorney is not currently registered with ARDC and has not demonstrated required MCLE compliance John H. Clayton is listed but dead as is John Herman Clayton Jr. Logan Mare $350 hour, no Illinois license listing and none for Marc Logan either. Emily Jakobeit no Illinois license listing. Karen Fineran no Illinois license listing $425 hour for $97,000.00 Page 20 of 51.Michael Tarringer no Illinois license listing $525 hour for $180,000.00 Mary Jane Fait billing class at $815 an hour! To read full opinion, please visit: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/custom/Documents/ESQ/ Netflix%20appellate.pdf Panel: Richard C. Tallman and Johnnie B Raylingson, Circuit Judges, and Raymond J. Dearie, Senior District Judge Argument Date: February 6, 2015 Date of Issued Opinion: July 31, 2015 Docket Number: 12-17045 Decided: Affirmed the district court in granting Netflix’s 12(6)(6) motion Case Alert Author: Brian D. Shapiro Counsel: Rachele R. Rickert (argued), Francis M. Gregorek, Betsy C. Manifold, and Marisa C. Livesay, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLC, San Diego, California; Mary Jane Fait and theodore B. Bell, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLC, Chicago, Illinois, for Plaintifts-Appellants. Page 21 of 51Keith E. Eggleton (argued), Rodney G. Strickland, Jr., Brian M. Willen, and Jessica L. Snorgrass, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Palo Alto, California, for Defendant- Appellee. Author of Majority Opinion: Judge Dearie Circuit: Ninth Circuit Case Alert Supervisor: Professor Glenn Koppel (Fa Licensed Name: [Mary Jane Edelstein Fait | J |Full oo i mae Mary Jane Edelstein Date of Admission as Lawyer oe cee by Illinois Supreme Court: May 3, 1982 | Registered Business Address: " [Law Offices of Mary Jane Fait PLLC | | | 115 LaSalle Street Suite 2910 | ||Chicago, IL 60603-4050 ‘|(253) 761-0116 ‘Active and authorized to practice law | ~ Last Registered Year: 2016 Page 22 of 51‘Malpractice Insurance: In annual registration, attorney (Current as of date of registration; | ‘reported that he/she has malpractice | consult attorney for further information) |coverage Dena Robinson no listing $250 hour for $141K? Law firm of Kerger Hartman $360 hour for partner, close enough to $350! Experts $7,500.00? Assessment $6,000.00? Travel need receipts Copies need receipts Law firm of Sterns Weaver Miller ect. located in Florida. No cv for lawyers, 2 year associate gets to bill like 10 year associate? Multi media? $26,000.00 need receipts. Page 23 of 51Matthew Dates how long there? Nothing on web? Matthew Dates admitted 9/2011 billing class at $525 hour for $2.5 million no way, something is not right. Maria A. Fehretdinov below is a shareholder? Attorney for seven years and is at firm for only two years. How much equity was put in? Shareholder for fee billing only in reality? Fraud? Need evidence. https://www.linkedin.com/pub/maria-arhancet-fehretdinov/48/126/609 Maria Arhancet Fehretdinoy Shareholder at Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A. Miami, Florida Law Practice 1. Latham & Watkins, Previous 5 DC Court of Appeals Page 24 of 51Education 1. Georgetown University Law Center Background Experience Shareholder March 2013 — Present (2 years 8 months)Miami/Fort Lauderdale Arca Maria Fehretdinov is a Shareholder in the Litigation Department. Her practice focuses on complex litigation matters at the trial and appellate levels in both federal and state courts in the United States and abroad, Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Fehretdinov worked at a large international law firm in the District of Columbia. She also served as a law clerk for Judge Stephen H. Glickman in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Additionally, she worked at the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, Office of International Affairs. Ms. Fehretdinov is a member of the American Bar Association, the National Page 25 of 51.Hispanic Bar Association, the Florida Association for Women Lawyers and the Junior League of Mii CE Associate i. A native of Uruguay, she is fluent in Spanish. Latham & Watkins ‘August 2008 — March 2013 (4 years 8 months)Washington D.C. Metro Area Law Clerk DC Court of Appeals August 2007 — August 2008 (1 year 1 month)Washington, DC Harold D. Moorefield not listed in Florida bar, Sam O. Patmore admitted 2/2005 billing at $525 hour same as Mr. Dates, way to Veronica De Zayas four years billing at $350 an hour. Page 26 of 51Molly Bowen graduated two years ago $350 hour! Ryan Thornton three years lawyer $300 hour. Caroline Geist-Benitez no listing Florida bar anywhere? $275 hour. Giselle Gutierrez. has no listing Florida bar. Joseph Onorati lawyer 4 years $300 hour, high. Litigation fund amount Travel $69K ? Westlaw $8K ? Copy $15,000 equals 150,000 copies, need receipts. Eric Barton Nio Wagstaff & Cartmell, LLP in Kansas City, Missouri. Reps one individual. 5777 brs $1.6 million historical now 1.9 million 13 hours listed only, can’t review, no work listed. No Alania K Davis listed for $377,000.00. Middle initial different. Page 27 of 51.No Ramsey Olinger listed for $528,000.00. David Barclay two years attorney $350 hour. Mallory Nemmers no listing billing at $250 hour. Ashley Dopita (attorney) no listing $250 hour. Law firm of Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP. 6 lawyers $350-$550 in 5 years? Dustin “Of Counsel” Kolbe $650 hour? No way! Law firm of Dickerson Wright 48 lawyers and non lawyers 8880 hours for $3,500,000.00 and $731,000.00 in expenses is way high. Scott Perez associate promoted to partner from $4002??? to $600 an hour for all the work $628,000,000.00 ! Lawyer as of 1-2014, Page 28 of 51Tracee Duthie OC ))f Counsel? ) $600 hour for $111,000.00. Thomas Isaacs promoted associate to partner billed all the hours at the partner rate of $600 an hour! $185,000.00 lawyer as of 1-2014 Member and partner used interchangeably Shapiro is partner but Perez is member both billed as partners? No Scott Roberts listed as partner ! Thacker is member. Martin Holmes Tennessee member $600 hour ha! No. http://www.dickinson-wright.com/our- people/listing?firstName&lastName=calhounéctitle&office&practice&barAdmissi on Leslie A.F. Calhoun billed as partner @600 hour is just an “Of Counsel, fraud! From their their website: Leslie A. F. T: 734 + Appellate : 623-1624 Salbeun Ann Arbor Commercial & Business Of Counsel Email Me Litigation Page 29 of $4vCard + Workouts, Restructurings & Foreclosures John E. Anderson ten years, member $600 an hour Not! Estes member, $700 hour? Zinn $650 hour? No Joseph Mckinney, associate $300 hour ten years? No Julie Johnson listed license, nothing. hitp:/Awww.dickinson-wright.com/our- people/listingfirstName& lastName=Lusardi&title&office&practicesbarAdmissio a Michael Lusardi associate on petition says member website? Michael J. Lusardi Member No Adam Wenner associate billed out $128,000.00 Page 30 of 51No Christopher Allen associate. No Iannettoni associate. Are they real? http://www.dickinson-wright.com/our- people/listing?firstName&lastName=V itzchaki&title&office&practice&barAdmis sion Doron Yitzchaki (A) but member on website Doron Yitzchaki No Natalie Priest Yaw license (A) Jonathan R. Patton (A) no listing license. Joseph K. McKinney Associate ten years associate, $300 hour. Page 31 of 51Kelly M. Telfeyan Member but billed as associate? Ten years. Autumn L. Gentry Member ten years attomey billed associate. Robert C. Bigelow (A) not listed Bojan Lazic (A) no listing Karolyn A. Bignotti (A) no list Grant, Adam D. (P) says member on website Max Aidenbaum lawyer one year associate billing at $300 Hour! Dickinson Wright PLLC 500 Woodward Ave Ste 4000 Detroit, MI 48226-5403 Map It Contact Details Page 32 of Ste-Mail: maidenbaum@dickinsonwright.com vCard Electronic Business Card Sections: Young Lawyers Michigan Licensed: 11/20/2014 Law School: University of Michigan Law School Year Graduated: 2014 Carmen L. Doris no listing in MI BAR, works Lansing office, Not Lawyer? Carmen Dorris Associate Attorney at Dickinson Wright PLLC Lansing, Michigan Area Law Practice Education 1. Michigan State University College of Law Michigan State University College of Law 2010 - 2013 Page 33 of 51.Christian Ohanian lawyer 4 years billing $300 hour with Dickerson 4 years, No Mi Bar listing! University of North Carolina School of Law No listing in North Carolina Bar either Juris Doctor 2008 — 2011 Co-Chair of RISE (Young Lawyers) Committee Federal Bar Association, Eastern District of Michigan Chapter August 2015 — Present (3 months)Greater Detroit Area Benjamin M. Sobezak licensed four years billing $300 hr for $350,000.00 high. Michigan Licensed: 1/28/2010 Education Se Page 34 of 51Wayne State U: Ly Doctor of Law (J.D.), 3.84 2006 — 2009 State Bar of Michigan Admitted Starting 2009? - United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan Admitted Starting 2009? American Bar Association Admitted Starting 2009? Detroit Metropolitan Bar Association Admitted Starting 20092 Page 35 of 51Oakland County Bar Association Admitted Starting 2009? Summary Tam a fourth-year associate at Dickinson Wright, PLLC. My practice is focused in the areas of ERISA and other insurance litigation, real-estate litigation and class action defense Something is not right. Julie Johnston says 18 years lawyer billing $300 hour but lawyers with 1-4 years bill at same and many dollars higher rate. Why? Julie Johnston Attomey at Dickinson Wright PLLC Greater Nashville Area Page 36 of 51Law Practice Previous 1. Weiss & Eason Education 1. Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center No listing in Tennessee bar, Michigan bar or Louisiana Bar Education Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center JSD. 1994 — 1997 First Name: Te Last Name: jonnston City: Page 37 of 51Sort By: © ascending” descending Search Results No Records Found! Wade Fink lawyer less than year billing at $300 an hour? NO. Address Dickinson Wright PLLC 500 Woodward Ave Ste 4000 Detroit, MI 48226-5403 Map It Contact Details Phone: (313) 223-3120 e-Mail: wfink@dickinsonwright.com Web: http://www.dickinsonwright.com vCard Electronic Business Card Sections: Young Lawyers, Criminal Law Page 38 of 51.Michigan Licensed: 11/17/2014 Need receipts for experts, assessments, copies 80,000.00 they made 800,000 copies at. $.10 a copy telephone, computer $39,000.00 need paid receipts. SUSAN Bernstein law firm one lawyer $138 for copies, telephone conference Document services OK. ADEMI & O'REILLY LLP in Wisconsin $600 hour? Don’t think so. Lawyers are not listed on their website billed out $283,000.00 some not licensed in that state. Their math is also wrong. DAVID J. SYRIOS 3.5 9.1 165.9 5.0 3.0 $450.00 186.50 $ 82,808.00 is licensed and works at Ratheon in Texas? Where was work performed? Rate too high. COREY M. MATHER 1.1 9.8 43.5 35.7 2.4 $405.00 92.50 $ 36,924.50 Billing at $405 an hour way too high. License inactive valid when billed class? Page 39 of 51Atty. Corey M. Mather 516 N Spruce St Traverse City Ml 49684-1442 Phone: (231) 668-4549 Email: artisanlaw@gmail.com ‘Member ID: 1046210 Graduation Year: 2005 Languages: English Law School: University of Wisconsin Law School ‘WI Admission: 10/04/2005 License Status: Good Standing Member Type: Inactive JOHN D. BLYTHIN 2.3 3.4 2.5 9.5 $450.00 17.70 $ 7,562.50 SARAH GEENAN 313.6 $415.00 313.60 $ 128,584.00 No listing MARK ELDRIDGE 1.8 20.7 0.9 3.5 $325.00 26.90 $ 8,697.50 graduated in 2014 billing way high! DENISE L. MORRIS is lawyer at firm, one year billing at $325 too high, Atty. Denise Louise Morris ‘Ademi & O'Reilly LLP Cudahy, WI Page 40 of 51Blythin, eldridge, morris are listed in bio in fee petition but not on website! !!!!!!1!!! Past or contract attorneys? Fee $580K — the 132k? need evidence. Assessments 124,000.00, experts5,000.002 Need receipts!!! “My firm incurred a total of $45,439.15 in unreimbursed expenses, all of which were reasonable and necessary for the prosecution of this litigation. Of this amount, $28,000.00 was for assessment payments for common litigation expenses or direct payments to experts or other vendors made at the request of Lead Counsel, and an additional $17,439.15 was for non-common litigation expenses incurred by my firm, such as travel, meals and lodging, copying, legal research, telephone, and so forth, A summary of those expenses by category is attached as Exhibit 4” Need receipts. LYNCH STERN THOMPSON LLP Justin Kaplan not listed on website billing at $220 an hour. Justin D. Kaplan works here, left firm? When? What was job status at time? Page 41 of 51.| Parikh Law Group, LLC | 150 S.-Wacker Drive Suite 2600 Chicago, IL 60606-4202 (312)-725-3476 | Assessments $28,000.00, experts $7000.00 Travel $6000.00, made 22,000 copies made? Need receipts. Total alleged expenses combined for all firms are broken down per category. This needs to be reviewed with receipts required. Total expert’s $2,015,468.00. Relativity document hosting $116,291.00. Travel, hotel, meals $200,028.00. Research/Westlaw/Pacer $102,948.00. Reproduction/copies $50,359.00. At $.10 per page counsel made $500,000 copies? Postage $10,827.00 If each next day air envelope that can be filled to bursting cost $20 that equals 541 packages sent. If Priority Mail (two-three day delivery) was Page 42 of 51used filling envelope bursting at $5.95 per envelope counsel could have sent 1804 packages. It’s simply not believable without evidence just like entire fee and expense claim, Litigation fund $2,225,577 .00 was this actually paid, pending or fake? The high on meth document discovery review illusion: Allegedly 3.9 million documents were needed to be reviewed to reach this settlement? Any documents should have been converted to electronic form which would be stored in one or more databases for easy search and retrieval. All the work has already been done for our counsel and given to them on a silver platter. This was supposed to be a slam dunk gift from the class action gods above but it’s anything but. The class should not have to pay for duplicative work product. Were they all were computerized and tagged making search very easy for anyone to see? Or did Counsel code them all? Our counsel seems to have done it the hard and expensive way, page by page for the class at $531 an hour for 73,810 hours a gluttonous amount of overcharge. If counsel reviewed and analyzed millions of pages as they claim at 1 minute each that’s a lot of pages and time. If one page a minute is reviewed for each of the 3.9 million documents that would be 3.9 million minutes divided by 60 minutes in an hour is 65,000 hours multiplied by $531 hours is $34, 515,000. It is not believable in this day and age that it was all Page 43 of 51needed for this awful result. Control + F on the keyboard is a wonderful tool if one knows how to and chooses to usc it. It appears class council engaged in a lot of coding or were the documents they reviewed already had some pre-supplied objective coding included? How many hard copy documents did they review vs. electronic? All counsel really did was do pass one and most likely never did a pass two on the documents which we know the government and defendant already did. Class Counsel didn’t need to do all that document review that to get this result. A paralegal could have done a pass one review. Class Counsel attomeys and especially the contract lawyers hired by some class counsel overbilled for first-tier document review and objective coding. As most commonly used, “first pass” document review is a document review generally employed by organizations producing documents or overseeing the production of documents, or by receiving firms choosing a broad selection of documents for production, in which: (1) “responsive” documents are distinguished from non- responsive documents; (2) confidential documents are distinguished from non- confidential documents; and (3) privileged documents are distinguished from non- privileged documents. Page 44 of 51Such “first pass” review is little more than a series of blunt, mechanistic “yes/no” decisions concerning responsiveness, confidentiality, and privilege. There is no evaluation of the content or meaning of the document involved, let alone its probity or utility with respect to the claims and allegations at issue in the litigation. No such review work was done — or, indeed, could have been done — by project- specific attorneys here since they worked solely to review and evaluate the documents already produced by Defendants and third parties after Defendant and third parties themselves had conducted such “first pass” reviews, and were primarily tasked to prepare for and possibly take depositions of Defendants and third parties. It is generally contemplated that such a “first pass” document review will be followed by a “second pass” document review which typically involves a more detailed evaluation of documents previously-identified to be important, more detailed “issue coding” of the legal and factual issues to which those documents speak, and the selection and analysis of the most important documents for use in witness or expert depositions. Class counsel clearly worked longer but not smarter than they could have. A substantial amount of those hours were not needed by the class with the other investigations uncovering the critical evidence like guilty pleas. Incredible, these Page 45 of 51people have no shame and could care less about the class members and their losses come second. As for expenses according to the attached NERA 2014 summary page 34 for class actions in the securities arena over a 17 year period. (Exhibit). http://www.nera.com/publications/archive/2015/recent-trends-in-securities- class-action-litigation--2014-full-y.html, The 41 page report is on the right side of the page. For the years 2011-2013 the average expenses for a case this size was 1.2% The costs to the class are equal to 3.5 % of the gross settlement fund at $151 million, not net cash $131 million which is 300% higher than normal. Red flags are flying. Class Counsel initially indicated the expenses were $8.2 million which would represented a 545% higher than normal overcharge before the reduction down to $5,200,000.00 that is now claimed. Our counsels’ have incurred much higher costs on behalf of the class which indicates all is not right and the expenses need to be reviewed. There is no other chart available that uses consumer class actions with a breakdown in expenses like in this report. The objector requests a copy. These numbers seem appropriate to determine what an average amount of expenses were incurred to be used as a guide when looking at expenses in this case which appear to be extraordinary high and without foundation. Page 46 of 51Fig 34 on page 34 shows the average fee to be 18% and the expenses 1.2%, But in this particular case Class Counsel “piggybacked” off of a lot of work performed by others which should have dramatically reduced expenses and the fees billed but obviously there was much wasted “work” to run the bill up. The issues with fee fraud overbilling should reduce the fee to 10% of the $131 million not $151 million which the balance is just a promise, Fee should be $13.1 million maximum. The true lodestar comes in at a bit over $10 million. Deletions for class counsel who are dismissed due to fraud are in order and/or reduction for the attempted fraud should bring the fee award in the future, after all issues are fixed, to under $10 million. The settlement with all the issues, not even counting the fee fraud plan implemented from the beginning of the case, is not yet ready for prime time approval. Fee Shenanigans By Liaison And Class Counsel Voids The Approval Class Counsel continue to claim that there is no harm and no foul in this case but the plethora of devastating evidence in the record shows there are a multitude of material and meritorious issues in the stipulation and release making the settlement unapprovable, Class Counsel also abandoned the class by designing and implementing a fraudulent plan to loot the settlement fund by treating it as their own personal piggy bank in this collusively constructed settlement. They engaged in and fabricated a $30 million artificial hourly rate inflation fee scheme, up to a Page 47 of 5150% artificial hour inflation scheme and hid the true job status of many people who billed the class. Partners are listed and billed out in title only in the fee petitions for example but their lack of equity-holding status makes them in reality just an associate so their false partner artificially inflated non local billing rates defrauds the class. Plaintiff's scheme sold out the class and shortchanged its recovery, Their goal was not the most efficient and responsible stewardship to the class nor was billing judgment ever exercised, just a scheme to pillage the fund with the class the biggest losers in this "fox guarding the hen house” deal. Class Counsel’s multitude of violations of their fiduciary duty of undivided loyalty to the entire class is grounds for a finding of inadequacy, cause for their dismissal, reversal of the deal and sanctions in this case. The objector has shown clear and convincing evidence that many Class Counsel engaged in a coordinated scheme to plunder funds from the settlement fund by engaging in fraud by inflating fees to the class then falsely swearing to it (28 U.S.C. Code §1746, Unsworn Declarations Under Penalty Of Perjury) along with wire ftaud because the fee petitions were sent from multiple states to the Court using computers and electronic means to get the filings there, Class Counsel’s egregious misconduct has fatally contaminated this settlement making them unfit to represent the class going forward because they fell off the truth wagon a long time ago. They should be removed without fees or expenses, Page 48 of 51sanctioned $3 million per firm and recommend they never are allowed to be lead or co-lead counsel in any class action ever again, To some this all up: The fee and expense request is too large given the work performed by the attorneys’, it’s too large given class counsels’ risk of non recovery and it also fails the lodestar cross check. Based on actions to date that Class Counsel has engaged in they are guilty of: © Using computers and telephone lines that cross state lines in this conspiracy to commit these violations and scheme to defraud the objector, class and the Court. Making a false declaration in their fee petition that the petition itself was accurate and met requirements for rates in the district where the settlement took place. © Guilty of willful dishonesty by inflating the hourly rates by 50% or $20,000,000.00 which is a criminal overcharge to the class. Guilty of outright fraud, fraud by omission and misrepresentation, a mortal sin in defendant's profession. © Guilty of enabling a wire fraud through the use of the phone system in the call to the health care agency and to cach other that crossed state lines. Guilty of willful misconduct. Page 49 of Si© Guilty of wrongful conduct. * Violation duty of candor. © Guilty of reckless conduct. * Guilty of willful breach of legal duty. T certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. ) 7 Lag/ Executed on November 02, 2015. y sol 7 Chris Andrews, Pro se Objector PO Box 530394 Livonia, MI 48153-0394 Telephone 248-635-3810 Email: caaloa@gmail.com Page 50 of 51Proof of Service Thereby certify that on November 02, 2015 I sent by USPS Priority Mail this document to the Clerk of the United States Court and sent copies to counsel of record via first class mail. Executed on November 02, 2015 i Christopher Andrews PO Box 530394 Livonia, MI 48153-0394 Telephone 248-635-3810 Email: caaloa@gmail.com Pro se Appellant Page S1.of 54Case: 1:10-md-02196-32. Doc # a Filed: 09/30/15 24 of 26, PagelD #: 91630 LER LAW LLC Timekeeper Marvin A. Miller Matthew E, Van Tine Loti A, Fanning Jorge Ramirez Anne Jewell Andrew Szot Anne Skallerup Kathleen Boychuck Melody Forrester Jammie Huston Stacy Bond Dustin Worker Nicholas Graves Michelle Clayton Alex Shrage rian nay Andrew Kanter Ricky Amaro John Clayton Logan Mare Emily Jakobelt Karen Fineran Michael Tarringer Mary Jane Fait Dena Robinson fnane Foam ft Hours ‘Rate Teal kevpre fee as assem 13 oe : VW 3505.6 685 2,401,336.00 fre amo eo pseu Mae ms mao mmnyn SSseme 128 on. aso sso60000 4foemk = SUR 2385 600 1,431,000.00 ostnan S38 9349 325 303,042.50 QT 136 4122.4 355 1,463,452.00 5G 10k 1e3 O cara 525 366,397:50 8295 foe "1590N9 10105 22s 22736280 nes 450 206.6 250 13976 ms 32934000 1 350 ‘250.00 279705 450 4933,672.50 tos 20 29,825.00 31087 450 1,308,915.00 255 180 28,450,00 1588.2 350 714,690.00 223 350 11,805.00 2 355 7810.00 2302 ms 5.00 3405 525 2.50 02 a5 “763.00 5678 250 141,950 aie s.21s.6s0 44h B50pyzd Mb Svereats ae PAS 3 S08 <8, VB) DFO Me V6 z >natvdrsa ~*panpdtous mann freon 51 gh if hapare Ay epost] a8 93 035016 gotCase: 1:10-me 02196-JZ Doc #: 1908-2 Filed: 09/30/15 26 of 26. PagelD #: 91632 POLYURETHANE FOAM ANTIRUSE5 A MPENSES - INCEPTION eMtBee 2035 Relativity Hosting 8 116,291.32 % Litigation Fund Contribution 3 220,000.00 % Travel, Hotel, Meals $ 120,168.49 4 Reproduction $ 16,825.75 % Online Legal Research 3 32,237.62 ‘Transcripts/Court Reporters $ 5,659.10 Outside Copying Charges 3 4,783.98 3 Forensic Services 3 5,498.68 Attorney Costs (Dolphin, Dacosta) — § 27,689.50 9 Mediation Services 8 22,160.45, Hard Drives and Outside ITServices —§ 3,167.07. Printing Suy +eme Court Briefs 3 119152 3 Warehouse Retrieval & Reshelving §—§ 1,458.34 % Overnight Deivery/Postage 3735.28 3 Service of Process $ 1,644.50 Hing Fees $ 352.00 Electronic Fling/Docket Charges $ 261.39 Telephone/Fax Charges $ cass TOTAL $ 2,830,480.79[TINE REFORT: Con ugh Sty 2015 Tay | | es [Ss [Si OTST Be ees seafarers fee ae ae ee ey ee é — eee Eg — aay 56H Sesovey ate te ind Peg vas Four Curae H0e160 798 ¥ qlabed “Zr H OTCase: 1:104 02196-JZ Doc #: 1908-3 Filed: 08/30/15 12 of 12, PagelD #: 91644 POLYURETHANE ANTITRUST LITIGATION ‘WKerger & Hartman EXPENSE REPORT-inception through July 31, 2015 Categorie Monthly Expenses Cumulative Expenses Assessments/Liti Fund $6,000.00 [Computer Research/Lexis/ Westlaw | $980.79] [Court Reporters/Transeripy Video ~ 34,017.65 [Expos Consuftanis/Professional Facsimile Transmission 2/507.40} $2.20] [Filing/Witness Fees $350.00} [Travel/Meals/Hotejs/ Transportation __ ~$8.511.09] [Photo copies/Roproduction $24) $2,451.05] Postage $1,314.87] Telephone. [TOTAL EXPENSES: $17.20] $34,134.98]Case: 1:30-md-02196-12 Doe #: 1908-4 Filed: 09/30/15 20 of 23, PagsID # e166 TNS BDH RB systeCARE AAD MI RRP BP 2 fA Hid AUPE od ABS SBGL SPLAT chs Bin RAMCIH HistBhO” Client: 38257 - THE PARKER COMPANIES from inception 08/31/35, code [Amount Description EPO $3,687.55] Deposition Charges FEDEX $1,316.56] Federal Express Charges | Fe $0.00] filing Fees Charges meas $2,715.30] Working meals MEALS $11.22] Meals-Firm Meetings MILEAGE $248.40] Mileage NISC $10.00) iscellaneous [ONLINE $9,274.87) Online Research sis 466,19 [Outside Imaging Services foses_—_| $1,041 577.50]titigation Cost Fund PARKING $1,065 00)Parking Charges PHONE $249.49] Telephone Charges PHOTO. 592, 00|Phatocopy Charges PUBLICA, $172.78|Publication Charges Iseancn 3239.74 |Search Fees frRavel 363,492.78 Travel Expenses lwes: '$8,045.74Westtavi Charges Ico.or_!__ $775.00]Calor Copies Char con | '$249.81|Conference calls cory $15,200.50| Photocopy Charges FAK 35.00|Fax Charges ons $5,336.08) Telephone charges IsrreW. 5372.00] Scanning black/white to POF lsereo '$100.00|C0 Charges [srreQu '3375,00| Technology Equipment Charges SFTOCR '$15.81/OCR Charges: POF or ti [SeTPARK $30.00/Parking Charges [SeTPRIN $7,124.00)Printing Charges Si 1598065]Case; 1:10-md-02196-JZ Doc if: 1908-5 Filed: 09/30/15 14 of 14. PagelD #: 91681 POLYURETHANE ANTITRUST LITIGATION WAGSTAFF CARTMELL LLP. EXPENSE REPORT nception through July 31, 2015 Categories: ‘Monthly Expenses [Assessments/Litigation Fund ‘$75,000.00 [Computer Research/Lexis/ Westlaw $798.53] [Court Reporters/Transeripe/V der $367,000.00 36,368.08] $2,860.60} | expertyConsultants/ Professional Services 7,80 [Facsimile Transmission Filing’ Witness Fees I af $15.00] jiavelf Meals/Ho.els’ Panspuaiton SRE Photocopies/Reproduction Postage, BZA Telephone [TOTAL EXPENSES: $401,201.26Case: 1:10-md-02196-JZ Doc #; 1908-6 Filed: 09/30/15 17 of 20, Pagel #: 91698 1 Liideatiion {ND 219 rect Purchaser Action Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Dustin L.. Schubert in Support of Award of Attorneys? Fees, Reimbursement of Expenses, and Award of Incentive Payments to Class Representatives Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP Lodestar Summary from Inception through July 31, 2015 ‘Timekeeper ‘Title Hours Rate Lodestar at Historical Rates Robert C. Setuver | Senior Partner | 2011256 | 2011: seu | $4,480.00 35cm 100 2012:0.7 | 2012; $800 | $560.00 aye 2nr3: 109 | 2013:8850 | sors00 1 J 39/57 201497 | 2014: 8850 | s824s00 ff 339" aaisas | 20158900 | sarsooo ff /99T 304 $25,700.00 Willem F. Jonekheer Partner 2011:76 | 20118650 | s4o4000 P3F°AL 260 201313 | 2013:$700 | $910.00 wT 2014:0.5 | 2014: $700 $350.00 Ay 2015.01 | 2015: $730 $75.00 Bo 95 $6,275.00 Dustin L. Schubert Partner aie: | oss | ssisso | 95° M30 2012: 114.1 | 2012:$390 | 344,499.00 SIRS 2013: 250.7 | 2013: $500 | $125,350.00 G75 2014: 148.8 2015:63.9 | 2015: 8550 | $35,145.00 586.6 8 $500 $74,400.00 / Saewe / L 579.00 i Miranda P. Kolbe Of Counsel 201103 | 2011: $650 sisson AS HeyCase: 1:10-md-02196-JZ Doe #: 1908-6 Filed: 09/30/15 18 of 20. PagelD #: 91699 $6,369.00 Jackie Zaneri_ | Paralegal (former) 2013: san.on 2014:07 | 2014: $200 $140.00 09 - $180.00 Totals 11640 $505,512.00 Timekeeper Title Hours Rate Historical Rates Nosh M. Schubert Associate anis:sk4 | 2013:s400 | 923,360.00 | QASHE/S 2ois:12 | 2014: s400 3680.00 35 EE i 60.1 $24,040. 00 EE Jason Pikler Associate (former) 2011: 2.3 2011: $380 ($874.00 SIE 2013299 | 2013:5450 | sizassco [6708 32.2 $14,329. Christian Anderson | Contract Attorney | 2014: 21 a 2014 sao | 45 | oe TMG 058 Lauren DeGirolamo | Contract Attorney | 2014: 140.0 346,200.00 a 2 4soe Shanti Michaels Contract Attorney, 2014: 19.3 | 4343 gnc ote 34 4334003Case: 1:10-md-02196-JZ Doc #: 1908-6 Filed: 09/30/15 20 of 20. PagelD # 91701 Inre: Polyurethane Foun Ant Litigation. AD Ob. MDL. Indirect Purchaser Class Action 295-52) EX 3 to the Declaration of Dustin L. Schubert in Support of Award of Attorneys’ Fees, Reimbursement of Expenses, and Award of Ince Payments to Class Representatives ‘chubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP Unreimbursed Li ation Expenses Expense Category Totals Assessments / Litigation Fund Payments $72,000.00 Legai Research ~ Pacer and Westlaw $4,534.20 E-Discovery Document Database $494.00 ‘Travel / Meals / Transportation $295.00 Photocopies / Reproduction $19.40 Postage $18.25 ‘Telephone $132.71 Expense Totals $77,493.56