Free Motion to Compel - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ANAHEIM GARDENS, et alo, Plaintiffs,
No. 93-655C Judge Robert H. Hodges, Jr.

THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

ALGONQUIN HEIGHTS, et al., Plaintiffs, No. 97-582C Judge Robert H. Hodges, Jr. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.
PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, Plaintiffs Anaheim Gardens, et al. and Algonquin Heights, et al. ("Plaintiffs"), by their attorneys Nixon Peabody LLP, make the following general and specific objections to the "Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories" (collectively, "Interrogatories" and individually, each an "Interrogatory") propounded by Defendant, The~United States. GENERAL OBJECTIONS 1. Plaintiffs object to the Interrogatories that attempt to elicit documents or

information that are or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine, and any other legally cognizable privilege or protection from disclosure.

10224249.2

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 2 of 17

Inadvertent disclosure of any privileged or protected information shall not be a waiver of any claim or privilege or protection. 2. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory that is vague, ambiguous, irrelevant to

the claim of ripeness, overbroad, calculated to cause undue burden and expense, and/or that seeks information outside the scope of permissible discovery. 3. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory that seeks information not within its

possession, custody, or control. 4. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory that seeks documents or information

within Defendant's knowledge and possession or to which Defendant has equal access. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory that contains terms or phrases that are undefined. 6. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory that is unlimited in time or otherwise

not limited to a reasonable time frame relevant to this litigation. 7. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory to the extent that discovery is ongoing

in this matter, and it may not yet be in possession of all information necessary to respond in full to the Interrogatory. ]n this event, Plaintiff will supplement its answer at the appropriate time. 8. Plaintiffs object to each Interrogatory including the instructions and

definitions thereto that impose discovery obligations that exceed the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims. The foregoing Genera] Objections are incorporated by reference within each of its answers and all answers are made subject to, and without waiving, those General Objections, whether or not specifically reiterated in the answers themselves.

2

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 3 of 17

INTERROGATORY 1: Identify every owner, including general partners and limited partners, current and former, who invested in each of the Subject Properties. For each owner indicate their ownership interest, the period of time for which that ownership interest was held, and any other Subject Property in which that owner invested. Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory on the ground that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it requests information from 1969 through to the present. Plaintiffs further object to this interrogatory, because it does not seek information relevant to the ripeness issue, and because the information requested constitutes confidential business information of the owners of the Subject Properties. INTERROGATORY 2: For each Subject Property, describe in detail all actions taken pursuant to the ELIHPA including, but not limited to, whether you submitted a notice of intent to HUD, the date upon which any notice of intent was submitted to HUD, whether you submitted a plan of action to HUD, the date upon which any plan of action was submitted to HUD, the date upon which any submitted plan of action was approved or rejected by HUD, and the date upon which funding for any approved plan of action was provided by HUD. RespQnse: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory to the extent that it asks for a detailed description of "all actions." This portion of the interrogatory is ambiguous, vague, overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff also objects with respect to inquiries concerning approval or rejection of plans of actions: HUD routinely approved, conditionally approved, rejected and/or rejected and

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 4 of 17

later approved plans of action. Without waiving these objections, Plaintiffs' further respond as reflected on the charts attached hereto as Exhibit A. INTERROGATORY 3: For each Subject Property, describe in detail all actions taken pursuant to the LIHPRHA including, but not limited to, whether you submitted a notice of intent to HUD, the date upon which any notice of intent was submitted to HUD, whether you submitted a plan of action to HUD, the date upon which any plan of action was submitted to HUD, the date upon which any submitted plan of action was approved or rejected by HUD, and the date upon which funding for any approved plan of action was provided by HUD. Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory to the extent that it asks for a detailed description of "all actions." This portion of the interrogatory is ambiguous, vague, overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff also objects with respect to inquiries concerning approval or rejection of plans of actions: HUD routinely approvedl conditionally approved, rejected and/or rejected and later approved plans .of action. Without waiving these objections, Plaintiffs' further respond as reflected on the charts attached hereto as Exhibit A. INTERROGATORY 4: For each Subject Property, describe in detail all communications between you and HUD relating to the possible prepayment of the property's Government-insured mortgage. Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory as ambiguous, vague, overly broad and unduly burdensome. This request potentially encompasses 37 years of "all communications." To the extent the interrogatory seeks detailed information about oral communications, given the breadth

4

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 5 of 17

and vagueness of the request, it is more appropriately addressed in a deposition, and is not a proper subject for an interrogatory. To the extent there have been such communications, and those communications are written communications in the possession of Plaintiffs, they have previously been provided as part of the Plaintiffs' rolling document production. INTERROGATORY 5: For each Subject Property, state the date upon which you contend that HUD reached a final decision regarding the application of ELIHPA to the Subject Property and state all facts upon which you base your contention. Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory on several grounds. First, the meaning of the term "final decision" is vague and ambiguous. There were multiple points of decision in the course of the process and because of modifications, and supplements made throughout the process by both the Plaintiffs and the Government, we cannot respond as to what the "final decision" date was in the process. To the extent Plaintiffs possess information about the date of final approval of the plans of action for the subject properties, that information is included in the charts attached as Exhibit A. Additionally, this information is information that should reside in the Government's possession. Accordingly, to the extent that information is provided to Plaintiffs in the Government's document production, Plaintiffs will supplement the response to this interrogatory. Further, the interrogatory is overly broad and unduly burdensome. INTERROGATORY 6: For each Subject Property, state the date upon which you contend that HUD reached a final decision regarding the application of LIHPPd-IA to the Subject Property and state all facts upon which you base your contention.

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 6 of 17

Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory on several grounds. First, the meaning of the term "final decision" is vague and ambiguous. There were multiple points of decision in the course of the process and because of modifications and supplements made throughout the process by both the Plaintiffs and the Government, we cannot respond as to what the "final decision" date was in the process. To the extent Plaintiffs possess information about the date of final approval of the plans of action for the subject properties, that information is included in the charts attached as Exhibit A. Additionally, this information is information that should reside in the Government's possession. Accordingly, to the extent that information is provided to Plaintiffs in the Government's document production, Plaintiffs will supplement the response to this interrogatory. Further, the interrogatory is overly broad and unduly burdensome. INTERROGATORY 7: For each Subject Property, if you contend that applying to prepay pursuant to the Preservation Statutes was futile, state all facts upon-which you base your contention. Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory on the ground that it calls for a legal conclusion and opinion. Further, Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory on the ground that it is vague, overly broad and unduly burdensome. INTERROGATORY 8: For each request for admission to which you responded with anything other than an unqualified admission, describe in detail the basis for your answer.

6

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 7 of 17

Response: Plaintiffs object to this interrogatory on the ground that it is overly broad and burdensome because it requires a detailed explanation of unqualified denials; To the extent an admission was denied, the basic factual information supporting that denial is included in the charts attached as Exhibit A.

As to Objections Dated: January I__%, 2007 Respectfully submitted:

401 Ninth Street, N.W., Suite 900 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 585-8000 Counsel for the Plaintiffs

7

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 8 of 17

EXHIBIT A

100 Centre Street 1550 Beacon Street Algonquin Heights

Yes Yes Yes

12/28/90 12/00/90 12/00/90 and June 1992

No No Yes

N/A N/A
10/22/92

N/A

N/A
Approved in HUD letter dated 9/28/94, amended by subsequent undated HUD letter

N/A N/A
Unknown at this time

a, naheim Gardens Beaumont/Thetford III

No Yes

N/A
12/00/90 and 6/5/92 12/27/90 and 6/5/92 N/A N/A N/A

N/A
Yes

N/A
12/22/93

N/A
Rejected in HUD letter dated 12/18/94

N/A Unknown at this time As of 11/1/94 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time N/A
N/A

Brandy Hill Brookside Manor Buckman Gardens Calico Court (d/b/a Crab Point)/Thetford IV Cedar Gardens Chauncy House Cherry Branch (Kimberly Gardens) Chowan CourffThefford IV
Coleridge Road/Thetford III

Yes

Yes

12/8/93 N/A N/A N/A

No

No
No

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Unknown at this time
Yes

Approved in HUD letter dated 9/27/94 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Unknown at this time

No No
No

N/A N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A N/A
Unknown at this time

Columbus Court/Thetford IV Countrytowne Apartments Creekside Terrace Cromwell Court Dolly Ann Apts. Emory Grove (Willow Creek) First Landmark

Unknown at Unknown this time at this time Yes 12/00/90 and 6/5/92 Unknown at Unknown at this this time time N/A No
No

7/7/94
Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time
N/A
N/A Approved in HUD letter dated 9/27/94 N/A

N/A
N/A
Yes

N/A
N/A

N/A

Yes

12/27/90 and 6/2/92 N/A 12/21/90 N/A

11/12/92 N/A N/A
N/A

As of 11/1/94 N/A N/A N/A

No Yes

N/A
No

No

N/A

N/A N/A

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 9 of 17

-2-

Florin Meadows I

Yes ~

7/12/89 and 5/18/92

Yes

9/1/89 and 7/22/94

Florin Meadows

Yes

5/15/90 and 5/18/92

Yes

Foothill Forest Glen Forest Glen II Fort Heath Franklin Court/Thetford IV Garrison Forest Olenreed/Glenarden L.P. Glenarder~Glenreed L.P. Glendale Court/Thetford IV Glenview Gardens Halawa View Hardee Street/Thetford lll Henry Street/Thetford III Holiday Town/Theiford III Holiday Town lI/Thetford W Holloway Court/Thefford III Icem~relee Street/Thetford Ill Indian Head Manor Jefferson Court!Thetford IV Jewel Lake Villa ]

No No No Yes
No

N/A N/A N/A 12/10/90 N/A N/A 2/00/90 12/00/90 2/00/90 N/A N/A 12/00/90 & 6/5/92 12/00/90 and 6/5/92 12/00/90 12/00/90 2/00/90

N/A N/A N/A
Yes

No Yes Yes Yes No No
Yes ' Yes

N/A N/A
No No No

Yes Yes
Yes Yes

N/A N/A Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

Yes Yes No

12/00/90 No and 6/5/92 2/28190 No 2/00/90 No NIA N/A

1989 POA Rejected in HUD letter dated 7/I 6/91 and 1994 POA Approved in HUD letter dated 9/27/94 5/!5/90 and 1990 POA 7/22/94 Rejected in HUD letter dated 7/16/91 and 1994 Approved in HUD letter dated 9/27/94 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1/16/95 Unknown at this time N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Unknown at Unknown at this time this time Unknown at Unknown at this time this time Unknown at Unknown at this time this time Unknown at Unknown at this time this time Unknown at Unknown at this time this time N/A N/A N/A
N/A

Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time

N/A N/A N/A Unknown at this time N/A N/A N/A

N/A
N/A N/A

N/A
Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time
Unknown at this time

N/A N/A
N/A

N/A

N/A N/A N/A

N/A

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 10 of 17

-3-

Jewel Lake Villa II
Jodani

Johnson Court/Thefford III Kings Grant

No No Yes Yes

N/A N/A
12/00/90 6/5/92

N/A

N/A
No Yes

N/A N/A N/A
11/12/92

N/A

N/A

N/A N/A
Approved in HUD letter dated 12/30/94 N/A

N/A N/A
As of 4/1/95

Leader House
Long Drive I/Thetford IV

Market North I/Thetford IV Market North II/Thetford IV Metro West Millbank Court/Thetford II1

No No No No No Yes

N/A

N/A N/A
N/A N/A
12/00/90 and 6/5/92

N/A N/A
N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A N/A

N/A
N/A

N/A N/A
N/A

N/A
Yes

Mi'ilwood TownhomesLMid.. City Milwood Apts/Biafora Napa Park New Amsterdam Oakwood Ave/Thefford IV Oakwood Ave II/Thetford IV Ontario Townhouses Palomar
Parthenia Manor

No No Yes No Yes

N/A N/A
12/29/90

N/A
No

N/A 12/00/90 Unknown at and 6/5/92 this time

N/A N/A N/A Unknown at Denied Unknown at this time Preliminary this time Approval in HUD letter dated 9/24/93; Preliminary Approval subsequently granted, but the date is unknown at this time. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time N/A Unknown at Unknown at this time this time N/A
N/A

Peachtree Court/Thetford IV
Person Court/Thetford Ill

Pine Crest

Unknown at Unknown Unknown at this time at this this time time No N/A N/A No N/A N/A Yes Unknown No at this time Unknown at Unknown Unknown at this time at this this time time Yes 12/00/90 Unknown at this time No N/A N/A

Unknown at this time N/A N/A N/A
Unknown at this time

N/A
Unknown at this time

N/A N/A N/A Unknown at this time

Unknown at Unknown at this time this time N/A N/A

Unknown at this time
N/A

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 11 of 17

-4-

Raleigh North/Thetford III River Falls/Thetford Ill Riverside Village Rock Creek Terrace San Tomas Sierra Vista Silverlake Village Southg,ate/Thetford IV
St..Georg~,,s Plaza

Yes

12/00/90 and 6/5/92 12/00/90 12/12/90 and 6/5/92

Yes

8/13/93 N/A 9/1/93

Yes
Yes

No Yes

Approved in HUD letter dated 4/25/94 N/A Approved in HUD letter dated 9/27/94

Unknown at this time N/A

As of 1111194
N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Unknown at this time

Stewarts Creek/Thefford IV Su Casa Por Cortez Suburbia Fairfax

No No No No Yes No No No No No No No Yes

N/A N/A
N/A N/A 12/00/90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A

N/A N/A N/A
No

N/A N/A

N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12/22/93

N/A N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A
N/A

suehar
Tower West Town & Country I & II .... Tucker Street/Thefford

N/A N/A N/A N/A
Yes

N/A
N/A

12/00/90 and 6/5/92

Denied Preliminary Approval in HUD letter dated 2/18/94; subsequent approval not known at this time
N/A

Victorian Arms Waipahu Tower .Washington Plaza Washington Street (d/b/a Deanswood)/Thetford III Young Avenue/Thetford IIl

No

,,,

Yes Yes

N/A N/A 12/28/90 12/00/90 12/00/90

N/A

N/A

N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A
No
No

N/A
N/A N/A

N/A
N/A

No

N/A

N/A

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 12 of 17

-5-

100 Centre Street

Yes

Unknown at Yes this time

1550 Beacon Street Algonquin Heights Anaheim Gardens

Yes

6/5/92 N/A 7/20/92

Yes

N/A
Yes

Yes

Conditionally Approved in HUD letter dated 9/27/95 Unknown at Unknown at this time this time N/A N/A Approved in 5/18/94 HUD letter dated 1/31/95 3/21/95

Approval letter states no funds available Unknown at this time N/A HUD letter dated 6/29/95 stating no funds available

BeaumontiThetford IIII Brandy Hill Brookside Manor Buckman Gardens

No No Yes

N/A

N/A 12/23/94 4/12/93

N/A N/A
Yes

N/A
N/A 6/12/96 3/23/95

Yes

Yes

N/A N/A Approved in HUD letter dated 8/12/96 Conditionally Approved in HUD letter dated 9/30/95
Unknown at this time

N/A
N/A Unknown at this time Unknown at this time
Unknown at this time

Calico Court (d/b/a Crab Point)/Thefford IV Cedar Gardens

Yes Yes

6/5/92 2/22/91 and 10/20/92

Yes

1/4/95

by

Yes Plan of 4/15/95 Action filed Purchaser

HUD letter dated 6/15/95 refers to a 5/12/95 approval date of the nonprofit Purchaser's Plan of Action

Chauncy House

Yes

10/19/93

Yes

8/10/95

Unknown at this time

HUD letter dated 6/15/95 no funds available; HUD letter dated 6/22/95 reaffirmed no funds; appears funds not provided as of 10/24/95 letter from HUD addressing request to prepay As of 9/26/97

Cherry Branch (Kimberly Gardens)

Yes

12/22/94

Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time

Unknown at this time

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 13 of 17

-6-

Chowan Court/Thefford IV Coleridge Road!Thetford III Columbus CourtJThetford IV
Countrytowne Apartments

Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time this time this time
NO

N/A N/A Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time Yes 5/4/94 Yes~
Yes

N/A Unknown at this time 4/16/96

N/A

Unknown at this time N/A
Unknown at this time

Creekside Terrace

Unknown at Yes this time

Unknown at this time Unknown at this time On or about Approved in 1 / 19/94 HUD letter based on dated HUD letter 10/11/94
confirming receipt

Unknown at this time
Unknown at this time

Cromwell Court Dolly Ann Apts.
Emory Grove (Willow Creek)

No Yes

N/A 1/26/95

N/A
Yes

N/A
5/21/96
2/15/96

N/A
Approved in HUD letter dated 7/12/96 Approved in HUD letter dated 7/23/96 Unknown at this time N/A
N/A Unknown at this time

N/A
Unknown at this time

Yes

4/6/94 and 8/8/94
8/8/94 6/17/92
6/17/92

Yes

Unk~aown at this time Unknown at this time N/A N/A Unknown at this time Unknown at this time
Unknown'at this time

First Landmark Florin Meadows I Florin Meadows II Foothill Forest Glen ]
Forest Glen II

Yes Yes Yes
Yes

Yes No No Yes Yes

9/5/95
N/A N/A 2/10/94

5/8/92 l/30/95
1/30/95

Yes

6/14/96 6/13/96 N/A
1/16/95 2/3/95

Yes

Yes

Fort Heath Franklin Court/Thetford IV Garrison Forest

No
Yes

N/A "6/5/92 Unknown at this time
11/13/92 11113192

N/A
Yes Yes

Approved in HUD letter dated 8/2/96 Approved in HUD letter dated 8/2/96 N/A
Unknown at this time

N/A
Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

Yes

Glenarden/Glenreed L.P. Glenreed/Glenarden L.P.

Yes

Yes

12/22/95 12/22/95

Approved in HUD letter dated 10/17/95 Approved in HUD letter dated 7/12/96
Approved in HUD letter dated 7/12/96

unknown at this time Unknown at this time

Yes

Yes

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 14 of 17

-7-

Glendale Court/Thefford IV Glenview Gardens

Yes
Yes

6/5/92
12/802

Yes
Yes

12/23/94 4/26/96

Unknown at this time Conditionally Approved in HUD letter dated 7/11/96

Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time

Halawa View Hardee Street/Thefford HI

Yes

12/31/92

Yes

Unknown at .... Approved in this time HUD letter
dated 7/1/96 Unknown at ....... Conditionally this time Approved in HUD letter dated 3/3/96 Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at Unknown at this time this time Unknown at Unknown at this time this time 12/]4/95 Unknown at this time ] 0/10/95 Approved by
HUD in letter dated 7/23/96

Unknown at this time
Per 3/3/96 HUD letter, no funding available
Unknown at this time

Henry Street/Thetford II1
Holiday Town/Thefford III

Holiday Town II/Thefford IV Holloway Court/Thefford III lcemorelee Street/Thetford HI Indian Head Manor
Jefferson Court/Thetford IV

Unknown at Unknown at Yes, based this time this time on 3/3/96 HUD approval letter Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time tl~is time this time Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time Yes 0/4194 Yes
Yes

Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time
Unknown at this time

6/5/92 6/5/92

Yes

Yes

Jewel Lake Villa I Jewel Lake Villa I1
Jodani Johnson CourtJThefford lit Kings Grant

Yes

6/12/92 6/12/92 N/A 6/5/92 12/27/90

Yes
No Yes Yes

On or about Approved by 6/17/94 HUD in letter dated 12/22/94 as supplemented in letter dated 3/16/95 Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this lime Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time N/A N/A N/A Yes 1/16/95 Unknown at
Yes

Unknown at this time

this time
No

N/A

N/A

Unknown at this time Unknown at this time N/A Unknown at this time N/A

0245849.

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 15 of 17

-8-

Leader House

Yes

5/3/93

Yes

t0/28/96

Approved in HUD letter dated 2/12/97

Long Drive I/Thetford IV Market North I/Thetford IV Market North II/Thefford IV Metro West

Yes
Yes

6/5/92 6/5/92 6/5/92 10/1/92

Y-es Yes

Millbank CourtJThetford III

Millwood Townhomes/Mid City

No Yes

N/A
9/3/92

Milwood Apts/Biafora

Yes

5/8/92

Napa Park New Amsterdam

Yes

6/5/92 5/3/93

Yes

Unknown at this time Unknown at Yes 10121/94 this time Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time 8/29/94 Approved in Yes HUD letter dated 8/4/95 as revised in 12/1/95 letter N/A N/A N/A Approved in Yes 4/22/94 HUD letter dated 10/21/94 Yes On or about Approved as 8/17/93 of 2/24/94 as stated in HUD letter dated 3/4/94 On or about Approved in Yes HUD letter 2/1/95 dated 3/8/95 Approved in Yes 10/28/96 HUD letter dated 2/12/97
Yes

7/21/94

No funding available due to limited budget authority Unknown at this time'
Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

HUD letter dated 9/11/95 stating no funds available N/A Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time No funding available due to limited budget authority N/A
Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

Oakwood Ave/Thetford IV Oakwood Ave ll/Thetford IV
Ontario Townhouses

N/A Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time this time this time 2/28/94 Approved as 7/2/92 Yes Yes
No

N/A

N/A

N/A

Palomar

Yes

7/29/92 and 8/17/92

Yes

1/10/95

of 1/1/95 as stated in HUD letter dated 12/29/94 Approved in HUD letter dated 7/13/95

Unknown at this time

10245849,1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 16 of 17

-9-

Parthenia Manor

Yes~

5/8/92

Yes

On or about Approved effective 8/12/93

Unknown at this time

Peachtree Court/Thetford IV Person CouWThefford III Pine Crest Raleigh North/Thetford III River Falls/Thetford Ill

2/24/94 in HUD letter dated 3/4/94 Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time this time this time N/A N/A N/A No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No N/A ' N/A N/A N/A No Conditionally 8/23/95 6/5/92 Yes Yes
Approved in HUD letter dated I 0/31/95
No Yes

Unknown at this time

N/A N/A N/A Unknown at this time

Riverside Village Rock Creek Terrace San Tomas
Sierra Vista 1

N/A 6/19/92 5/8/92 6/22/92 5/8/92

N/A
Yes

N/A 7/22/94

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Silverlake Village

Yes

Yes

Southgate/Thetford IV

Yes

6/5/92

Yes

N/A Approved in HUD letter dated 1/31/95 Approved in 1 / 17/94 HUD letter dated 9/9/94 9/2/94 Approved in HUD letter dated 1/19/95 Original Approved in date HUD letter unknown at dated 4/27/95 as amended in this time, revised letters dated 11/6/95 and 3/28/95 12/13/95 Conditionally 7/15/94

N/A Unknown at this time
Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time HUD letter dated 9/11/95 stating no funds available, amended 9/20/95 Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

St. George's Plaza

Yes

6/1/92

Stewarts Creek/Thetford IV

Yes

l l/23/94

Approved in HUD letter dated 12/4/95 Approved in Yes 6/4/96 HUD letter dated 7/12/96 and supplemented in HUD letter dated 2/12/97 Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time

Unknown at this time

10245849.1

Case 1:93-cv-00655-MMS

Document 143-2

Filed 02/26/2007

Page 17 of 17

-10-

SU Casa Por Cortez

Yes

6/17/92

Yes

7/15/94

Suburbia Fairfax

Yes

7/10/92

Yes

9/13/95

Conditionally Unknown at this time Approved in HUD letter dated 2/3/95 Conditionally Unknown at this time Approved in
HUD letter dated 6/14/96

Suehar Tower West Town & Country ! & II Tucker Street/Thetford III Victorian Arms

No
Yes

N/A
5/14/92 9/14/93 N/A 7/29/92

N/A

Yes

No Yes

Waipahu Tower Washington Plaza Washington Street (d/b/a Deanswood)/Thetford III Young Avenue/Thetford III

Yes Yes
Yes

4/27/93 8/6/92 6/5/92

Yes

11/23/94

N/A Approved in Yes 3120/95 HUD letter dated 5/18/95 Approved in Yes 1/24/95 HUD letter dated 4/27/95 N/A N/A N/A Conditionally Yes 6/20/94 Approved in HUD letter dated 12/22/94 Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time On or about Unknown at Yes 2/23/95 this time Conditionally Yes 8/28/95 Approved in HUD letter dated 12/7/95 Unknown at Unknown at Unknown at this time this time this time

N/A January1995 Unknown at this time N/A Unknown at this time

Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time Unknown at this time

10245849.1