Document gbqzBqR9kbgD8bzrBD3XYjqMa

JESUS AMPORO LEAL, et al. Plaintiffs, v. OWENS CORNING, et aL, Defendants. NO. 98-04000-F IN THE DISTRICT COURT NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS 214" JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEFENDANT REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY'S PRELIMINARY DESIGNATION OF EXPERT WITNESSES Defendant Reynolds Metals Company ("Reynolds"), by counsel, pursuant to the Courfs Scheduling Order, designates the following expert witnesses whom it may call to testify at the trial of this matter: 1. Peter J. Barrett, M.D. 300 Boylston Street Suite 714 Boston, Massachusetts 02116-3923 (617) 426-2110 Dr. Barrett is an expert radiologist and certified B-reader whom Reynolds may call at the trial of this matter to testify regarding his expert analysis of certain x-rays and medical records of Plaintiff Scott. Dr. Barrett may testify as to his review of the Plaintiffs medical records and conclusions reached from this review as set forth in his report attached as Exhibit "A" hereto. Dr. Barrett is expected to testify that the x-rays of Mr. Scott do not demonstrate any evidence of exposure to asbestos. Specifically, with respect to Plaintiff Scott, Dr. Barrett will testify that the x-rays show that there are no pleural plaques or fibrosis on Mr. Scott's lungs, and no evidence of l asbestosis. He will testify that, in his opinion, Mr. Scott has no asbestos-related disease. Additionally, Dr. Barrett will testify that there is no relationship between Mr. Scott's carcinoma of the colon and his exposure to asbestos. Dr. Barrett further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiffs, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 2. Jerome F. Wlot, M.D. Department of Radiology 222 Piedmont Avenue Suite 2100 Cincinnati, Ohio 45219 - Dr. Wiot is an expert radiologist and certified B-reader whom Reynolds may call at the trial of this matter to testify regarding his expert analysis of certain x-rays and medical records of Plaintiff Scott. Dr. Wiot may testify as to his review of Plaintiffs' medical records and conclusions reached from this review. Dr. Wiot is expected to testify that the x-rays of the Plaintiff do not demonstrate exposure to asbestos. Specifically, the x-rays of the Plaintiff shows that there are no pleural plaques or fibrosis on Plaintiffs lungs, and no evidence of asbestosis. He will testify that, in his opinion. Plaintiff Scott does not have an asbestos-related disease. Dr. Wiot further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiffs, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 2 3. Hans Weill, M.D. 755 Hearthstone Drive Basalt, Colorado 81621-2135 (970) 927-9321 Dr. Weill is a pulmonary specialist whom Reynolds may call at the trial to offer expert testimony regarding any and all medical issues in this matter. Dr. Weill's opinions may be based on his specialized knowledge, education, training and experience, as well as his review of any and all pleadings, transcripts of depositions to be taken in this matter and any and all medical records, x-rays and other documents to be produced in discovery. Dr. Weill is expected to testify regarding the medical condition of Plaintiff Scott, and as to the issues of causation - or lack thereof - between any alleged exposure to asbestos fibers and the medical condition of the Plaintiff, including Plaintiffs allegation that his colon cancer was caused by asbestos exposure, to the extent such evidence is admitted in the Plaintiffs case in chief. Dr. Weill further may testify generally concerning the history of scientific knowledge, research and study of exposure to asbestos and its effects on the human body; as to all medical state of the art issues; as to his expert opinion as to levels of asbestos exposure required to cause disease and the basis for such opinions; as to exposure to asbestos in regard to development of respiratory diseases; and, as to the effects, or lack thereof, of exposure to various types of asbestos fibers. Dr. Weill further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiff, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 3 4. Gail Diane Stockman, M.D. Longview Pulmonary Consultants Medical Plaza 703 East Marshall Street, Suite 4002 Longview, Texas 75601 (903) 753-0787 Dr. Stockman is an expert pulmonologist whom Reynolds may call at the trial of this matter to offer expert opinion testimony as to any and all medical issues in the case. Dr. Stockman's opinions may be based on her specialized knowledge, education, training and experience, as well as her review of any and all pleadings, transcripts of depositions to be taken in this matter and any and all medical records, x-rays and other documents to be produced in discovery. Dr. Stockman's opinions also may be based on a medical examination of the Plaintiff. Dr. Stockman is expected to testify regarding the medical condition of Plaintiff Scott and that he is not suffering from an asbestos related disease and that his past colon cancer, if the court allows evidence of such cancer, was not related to exposure to asbestos and as to the issues of causation - or lack thereof - between any alleged exposure to asbestos fibers and his medical condition. Dr. Stockman further may testify generally concerning the history of scientific knowledge, research and study of exposure to asbestos and its effects on the human body; as to all medical state of the art issues; as to her expert opinion as to levels of asbestos exposure required to cause disease and the basis for such opinions; as to exposure to asbestos in regard to development of respiratory diseases; and, as to the effects, or lack thereof, of exposure to various types of asbestos fibers. Dr. Stockman further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiffs, and the import of any exhibit 4 introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 5. Kathryn Ann Hale, M.D. Baylor College of Medicine Pulmonary Section 6550 Fannin St., Suite 1236 Houston, Texas 77030 (713) 790-2076 Dr. Hale is an expert pulmonologist whom Reynolds may call at the trial of this matter to offer expert opinion testimony as to any and all medical issues in the case. Dr. Hale's opinions may be based on her specialized knowledge, education, training and experience, as well as her review of any and all pleadings, transcripts of depositions to be taken in this matter and any and all medical records, x-rays and other documents to be produced in discovery." Dr. Hale's opinions also may be based on a medical examination of the Plaintiff. Dr. Hale is expected to testify regarding the medical condition of Plaintiff Scott and that he is not suffering from an asbestos related disease and that his past colon cancer, if the court allows evidence of such cancer, was not related to exposure to asbestos and as to the issues of causation - or lack thereof - between any alleged exposure to asbestos fibers and his medical condition. Dr. Hale further may testify generally concerning the history of scientific knowledge, research and study of exposure to asbestos and its effects on the human body; as to all medical state of the art issues; as to her expert opinion as to levels of asbestos exposure required to cause disease and the basis for such opinions; as to exposure to asbestos in regard to development of respiratory diseases; and, as to the effects, or lack thereof, of exposure to various types of asbestos fibers. 5 Dr. Hale further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiffs, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 6. William G. Hughson, M.D., Ph.D. University of California Center for Occupational Disease Control 200 West Arbor Drive San Diego, CA 92103-8800 (619) 294-6001 Dr. Hughson is the Director of the Occupational Health Center and an Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Hughson's opinions may be based on his specialized knowledge, education, training and experience, as well as his review of any and all pleadings, deposition transcripts, any and all medical records, x-rays and other documents produced in this litigation. Dr. Hughson may testify as to any and all medical issues, including those in the area of pulmonology, occupational medicine, epidemiology, state-of-the art and asbestos disease. He is expected to testify regarding the medical condition of Plaintiff Scott, and as to the issues of causation - or lack thereof between any alleged exposure to asbestos fibers and his medical condition, including Plaintiffs allegation that his colon cancer was caused by asbestos exposure, to the extent such evidence is admitted in the Plaintiffs case in chief. Dr. Hughson further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiff, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 6 7. Jack E. Petersen, P.E., Ph.D., CIH Petersen Associates Industrial Hygiene Consultants 2830 Via Viejas Oeste Alpine, California 91901 (619) 445-9668 Dr. Petersen is a certified industrial hygienist whom Reynolds may call at the trial of this matter to offer expert testimony generally as to industrial hygiene state of the art. He may testily as to his review of documents provided to him regarding Reynolds* corporate history and knowledge pertaining to asbestos, documents produced by Plaintiffs in this litigation, and published and unpublished reports. He may testify about his knowledge of the composition and asbestos content, if any, of the products to which Plaintiff Scott allegedly was exposed. He also may testify about the working environment of reduction and alumina plants and the potential exposure risks from differing activities in general, and of the Reynolds San Patricio and Sherwin plants in particular, including the potential for Plaintiff to have been exposed to harmful levels of asbestos fibers. He will testify that Plaintiff Scott was not exposed to such harmful levels, and certainly not the levels required to produce an asbestos-related lung cancer. He further may testify generally about applicable governmental standards, standard industrial hygiene practices, principles and methodologies of the time and the history and use of threshold limit values. He may testify to industrial state-of-the-art issues in general and as to how they relate to the industrial hygiene practices of the Reynolds' San Patricio and Sherwin plants. Dr. Petersen further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiffs, and the import of any exhibit 7 introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 8. J. Leroy Balzer, Ph.D. 408 Horse Trail Court Walnut Creek, California 94595 (510) 274-1413 Dr. Balzer is an expert in industrial hygiene, occupational and environmental health and safety, forensic science and state-of-the art. Reynolds may call Dr. Balzer as an expert witness to testify, either live or by deposition, in any or all of these fields. He has personal knowledge of some facts, but is also an expert based upon his specialized knowledge, skill and training. ^ He may testify as to his review of documents provided to him regarding Reynolds' corporate history and knowledge pertaining to asbestos, documents produced by Plaintiff Scott in this litigation, and published and unpublished reports. Dr. Balzer is familiar with the workings of reduction and alumina plants and the potential for exposure to occupational hazards, including asbestos fibers. He may testify about his knowledge of the composition and asbestos content, if any, of the products to which Plaintiff Scott allegedly was exposed. He also may testify about the working environment of reduction plants and the potential exposure risks from differing activities in general, and of the Reynolds San Patricio and Sherwin plants in particular,Including the potential for Plaintiffs to have been exposed to harmful levels of asbestos fibers. He further may testify generally about applicable governmental standards, standard industrial hygiene practices, principles and methodologies of the time and the history and use of threshold limit values. He may testify to industrial state-of-the-art issues in general and as 8 to how they relate to the industrial hygiene practices of the Reynolds San Patricio and Sherwin plants. Dr. Balzer further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiff, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 9. William L. Dyson, Ph.D., CIH 1022 Jefferson Road Greensboro, North Carolina (910) 665-0847 Dr. Dyson is an industrial hygienist and an industrial hygiene consultant who will testify at the trial as an expert regarding general industrial hygiene standards and related issues, threshold values, permissible exposure limits and/or other documentary evidence relevant to the defense of Plaintiffs' claims regarding damages and causation. He may testify, if relevant, specifically about the history of industrial and scientific knowledge, research and study of exposure to asbestos and its effects on the human body, as to all state of the art issues; as to his expert opinion as to safe levels of asbestos exposure and the basis for such opinions; as to exposure to asbestos in regard to development of respiratory diseases; and, as to the effects of exposure to various types of asbestos fibers. He is expected to testify, based on his review of relevant documents and other evidence, that Plaintiff Scott was not exposed to harmful levels of asbestos at any Reynolds facility, and that Reynolds complied with the appropriate standard of care. Specifically, he will testify that a review of the deposition testimonies, work history sheets, employment records, and the documents related to the specific work being performed by Plaintiffs shows 9 that, within a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, Plaintiffs should not have been exposed to harmful levels of airborne asbestos fibers while on Reynolds' premises. He will testify that the records of such work show no harmful asbestos exposure. Dr. Dyson is also expected to analyze Plaintiff Scott's entire work history and the specific jobs Plaintiff Scott performed, and discuss the potential for harmful exposure to airborne asbestos fibers. Dr. Dyson further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiff, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 10. Elliot Hinkes, M.D. 301 North Prairie Avenue, Suite 311 Inglewood, California 90301 (301) 674-0050 Dr. Hinkes is a board-certified oncologist whom Reynolds may call as an expert witness at the trial of this matter to provide testimony regarding any and all medical issues in the case. His testimony may include, but is not limited to, the nature of asbestos and asbestos-related diseases generally; the nature and extent of any asbestos-related disease or injury which Mr. Scott may have or have had; the history of evolution and knowledge of asbestos-related diseases; the incidence of colon cancer among various kinds of workers exposed to asbestos, and to offer the opinion that exposure to asbestos is not a causally related colon cancer; causation; and, asbestos medicine in general. Dr. Hinkes' expert opinions may be based on his specialized knowledge, education, training and experience, as well as his review of any and all pleadings, transcripts of depositions, any and all medical records, x-rays and other documents produced in this litigation. 10 Dr. Hinkes further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiffs or by any codefendant, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 11. Robert N. Sawyer, M.D. Entek Environmental and Technical Services, Inc. 1724 5th Avenue Troy, New York 12180 Dr. Sawyer is a specialist in the field of asbestos exposure, risk assessment, and safety whom Reynolds may call at the trial to offer expert testimony regarding any and all issues concerning asbestos in this matter. Dr. Sawyer's opinions may be based on his specialized ' knowledge, education, training and experience, as well as his review of any and all pleadings, transcripts of depositions to be taken in this matter, and any and all records, analyses, diagnoses, reports, x-rays, surveys and other documents to be produced in discovery. Dr. Sawyer is expected to testify regarding health issues associated with asbestos. It is further expected that he will testify regarding the levels of asbestos exposure, if any, from various types of products, as well as the amount of asbestos exposure, and the fiber type necessary to cause or contribute to the formation of various types of asbestos-related diseases. He may testify that Mr. Scott was not exposed to harmful levels of asbestos from products at Reynolds' Sherwin and San Patricio facilities. Dr. Sawyer further may testify generally concerning the history of scientific knowledge, research and study of exposure to asbestos and its effects on the human body; as to all medical state of the art issues; and as to his expert opinion as to levels of asbestos exposure required to 11 cause disease and the basis for such opinions. Additionally, Dr. Sawyer will testify that there is no relationship between carcinoma of the colon and exposure to asbestos. Dr. Sawyer further may address any other matters raised by any expert who testifies at trial, including expert witnesses called by the Plaintiff or any codefendant, and the import of any exhibit introduced as evidence, or any items prepared for use or used for demonstrative purposes by any witnesses. 12. Reynolds reserves the right to offer as an expert witness any of the physicians, nurses or other medical and/or psychological professionals who have either treated or diagnosed Mr. Scott or consulted with any such treating professional. 13. Any and all expert witnesses identified by Plaintiffs or any codefendant. 14. Reynolds reserves the right to designate additional expert witnesses for rebuttal or any other purpose. n Witnesses Capable of Offering Both Lay and Expert Testimony 1. Homer M. Cole Reynolds Metals Company 6601 West Broad Street Richmond, VA 23230 Homer Cole is the Corporate Director of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology at Reynolds Metals Company. He has been an industrial hygienist at Reynolds since 1972. He is familiar with the workings of reduction plants and the potential for exposure to occupational hazards, including asbestos fibers. He performed industrial hygiene surveys at the San Patricio plant and may testify regarding such surveys as well as other factual matters based on his personal experience and knowledge. Mr. Cole will testify as a factual witness, but because he qualifies as an expert, he may offer expert testimony in the fields of industrial hygiene, occupational and environmental health and safety, state-of-the art, governmental regulations of 12 workplace exposures, threshold limit values, the measurement of occupational asbestos exposures as well as other potential occupational hazards, respiratory protection, and proper work practices. 2. Ronald Benton Reynolds Metals Company 6601 West Broad Street Richmond, VA 23230 Mr. Benton is Manager of Industrial Hygiene and Safety Services at Reynolds Metals Company. He has been an industrial hygienist at Reynolds since 1974. He performed industrial hygiene surveys at the San Patricio plant and may testify regarding such surveys as well as other factual matters based on his personal experience and knowledge. Mr. Benton may testify as a factual witness, but because he qualifies as an expert, he may offer expert testimony in the fields of industrial hygiene, occupational and environmental health and safety, state-of-the art, governmental regulations of workplace exposures, threshold limit values, the measurement of occupational asbestos exposures as well as other potential occupational hazards, respiratory protection, and proper work practices. 13 3. E. Claiborne Irby, M.D. Reynolds Metal Company 11-1/2 Tapoan Road Richmond, VA 23226 Dr. Irby is the retired Corporate Medical Director for Reynolds Metals Company. He held that position from 1977 until his retirement in 1992. He began with Reynolds in 1959 as a staff physician. He may be called as a factual witness but because he qualifies as an expert, he may offer expert testimony in the fields of occupational medicine, state of the art, governmental regulations, and medical issues in general as they may relate to occupational asbestos exposures. REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY John D. Epps (Texas Bar. No. 00796079) HUNTON & WILLIAMS 951 East Byrd Street Riverfront Plaza, East Tower Richmond, Virginia 23219 (804) 788-8200 (804) 788-8218 (facsimile) R. Clay Hoblit (Texas Bar No. 09743100) CHAVES, GONZALES & HOBLIT, L.L.P. 2000 Frost Bank Plaza 202 North Carancahua Corpus Christi, Texas 78470 (512) 888-9392 (512) 888-9187 (facsimile) 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on June Aj 2000, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument is being served by facsimile and certified mail, return receipt requested, on the following Plaintiffs counsel: Stephanie A. Finch, Esq. Baron & Budd, P.C. The Centrum, Suite 1100 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue Dallas, Texas 75219 All other counsel may call my assistant, J" pleading. 1 to obtain a copy of this 15 Peter J. Barrett, MD, FACR 300 Boylston Street, Suite 71-4 Boston, Massachusetts 02116-3923 April 19, 2000 Hunton & Williams Riverfront Plaza, East Tower 951 East Byrd Street Richmond, VA 23219-4074 Attn: Raymond Geoffrey, Esq. Re: Russell D. Scott Dear Mr. Geoffroy: I will summarize below my review of the chest x-rays on Mr. Scott. (Please also see the separately submitted "B" reader forms.) I will then review the clinical data. The first standard chest x-ray series which is available for interpretation is dated May 9, 1988, and is a quality 1 two-view copy examination. There are no small parenchymal opacities to suggest asbestosis, nor are there any pleural plaques which would indicate significant prior asbestos exposure. There is mild cardiomegaly and chronic obstructive lung disease as well as an old post-tuberculous exposure granuloma located in the left mid lung field laterally. On September 25,1989, a repeat good-quality two-view chest x-ray examination shows again the normal status of the lung parenchyma and of the pleural surfaces. There has really been very little significant interval change. On the chest x-rays of July 30,1991, there is still nothing to suggest pneumoconiosis. There are no pleural plaques, and the granulomata and the C.O.P.D. are the same. In 1996 and 1997 additional chest x-ray studies show that other than a mild increase in Mr. Scott's left ventricular cardiac size, there has been no significant interval change. The final standard chest x-ray examination, of May 8,1998, is also a copy examination with a slight degree of overpenetration. There is no evidence of any significant change. There is only mild cardiomegaly, as noted before. The clinical data extends from 1989 through 1999. In 1989 he was diagnosed as having a carcinoma of the colon, and he underwent a sigmoid resection and extensive chemotherapy. Apparently he has done quite well since that time. During that hospitalization there were no rales heard on auscultation of his lungs, but he was noted to be a former smoker who had been employed as a plumber, pipefitter, and welder for Teleohone: <6171 426-2110 / Fax: (617) 426-6416 Hunton & Williams Re: Russell D. Scott Aprii 19, 2000 Page 2 a number of years. The chest x-ray reports noted granulomata and cardiomegaly but no other abnormalities. Other than several podiatric problems, there were no other significant findings. Yearly from 1990 through 1994 he was evaluated with chest x-rays and CTs of the abdomen as well as with physical examinations. There was no evidence of any recurrence of his colonic neoplasm, nor was there any evidence of any findings to suggest asbestosis or significant prior asbestos exposure. Only the granuloma, a small abdominal aortic aneurysm, a right renal cyst, and dear lung fields were noted. Similarly, from 1995 through 1997 he was troubled with diabetes mellitus and high blood pressure as well as cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive airways disease, but there was nothing to suggest asbestosis or significant prior asbestos exposure by any of the treating radiologists. Pulmonary function tests have shown mixed obstructive and restrictive disease, undoubtedly due to his prior smokinghabit. Unlike all of the treating radiologists, one physitian, performing an examination spedfically for the possibility of prior asbestos exposure in 1997, raised the question of small parenchymal oparities but without pleural plaques. It should be stated that such findings are inconsistent with a diagnosis of asbestosis and that these "parenchymal findings" were not seen at the time of my review of these chest x-rays, nor were they present by the reports of any other physicians throughout the entire clinical record. From 1998 through 2000 additional chest x-rays and physical examinations noted the presence of mild hypothyroidism, contact dermatitis, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive lung disease, and systemic hypertension as well as dear lung fields and only chronic airways disease. There has been nothing clinically or radiographically to suggest pneumoconiosis or significant prior asbestos exposure. In conclusion, by review of the multiple chest x-rays and the clinical records it is dear that Mr. Scott has nothing to suggest asbestosis or significant prior asbestos exposure clinically, radiographically, or by pulmonary function test. Virtually all of the treating radiologist* and physidans have noted the presence of his colonic cancer, chronic lung disease, systemic hypertension, and cardiovascular disease, as well as diabetes mellitus, but they have described nothing to suggest any type of pneumoconiosis or significant prior asbestos exposure. He was a former cigarette smoker who was employed for many years as a plumber, pipefitter, and welder. It is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that there is nothing radiographically or clinically to suggest pneumoconiosis or significant prior asbestos Hunton & Williams Re: Russell D. Scott April 19, 2000 Page 3 exposure. It is also well known from the preponderance of the medical literature that there is no relationship between carcinoma of the colon and prior asbestos exposure. Sincerely, Peter J. Barrett, M.D. PJB:cn atlanta. Georgia BANGKOK. THAILAND BRUSSELS. BELGIUM CHARLOTTE. NORTH CAROLINA hong kong KNOXVILLE. TENNESSEE LONDON. ENGLAND Luis J. Ferreira E-Mail: lferreira@Hunton.com Hunton 8c Williams Rivehfbont Plaza. East Tower 951 EAST BYHD STREET Richmond. Virginia 23219-4074 TELEPHONE (8041 7SS-8200 Facsimile (804) 788-8218 June 30, 2000 MCLEAN. VIRGINIA MIAMI. FLORIDA NEW YORK. NEW YORK NORFOLK. VIRGINIA RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA WARSAW. POLAND WASHINGTON. DC File No.: 50684.56 Direct Dial: (804) 788-8336 Stephanie A. Finch, Esq. Baron & Budd, P.C. The Centrum, Suite 1100 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue Dallas, Texas 75219 Re: Jesus Amporo Leal, et al. v. Owens Corning, et al. Dear Stephanie: Enclosed please find Defendant Reynolds Metals Company's Preliminary Designation of Expert Witnesses, complete with attached exhibit A. We regret that this attachment was erroneously omitted from the version sent to your office on June 29, 2000, and apologize for any inconveniences. Defense counsel are being notified of this pleading by copy of this letter and will be furnished copies upon request. Sincerely yours. Luis Ferreira Paralegal LJF/mh Enclosure cc: All Known Counsel of Record (via facsimile and U.S. mail w/o encl.)