eee ees FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court ee ee 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF MACOMB KAREN ANN SPRANGER Case No. 7-4047~- CE Plaintiff, Hon,_ EDWARD A. SERVITTO vs. GOOGLE Inc. Defendant. ze aad: 40 N, Main Street Mt. Clemens, Ml 48043 October26, 2017 Karen A. Spranger, in Pro Per & z 82th Nd 9219021 wahio 2 Inno COMPLAINT AND BRIEF STATED FACTS ARE NO CASE FILE AGAINST PLAINTIFF ONLY AN INVESTIHGATION IS PENDING IN A CASE THAT IS NOT FILED.’ THE SUPPORT AND. FACTUAL EVIDIENCE IS INCLUSIVE IN THE STATEMENT FOLLOWING RELEIF: BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF KAREN SPRANGERS OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA MOTION TO SQUASH SUBPOENA REQUEST FOR EX-PARTE EMERGENCY INJUNCTIVE ORDER MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA |, Statement of Facts 1) On October 19, 2017 at 12:51pm , Karen Spranger (SPRANGER) received an email from her personal Google Inc. (GOOGLE) Gmail account -identified hereafter as karenaspranger @gmail,com -an email from usernotice@gmail.com with the ‘Subject of “[1-4887000019509] Notification from Google” (EXHIBIT A) 1FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court eee ees SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC Service, Submitted, and File 2) On October 19, 2017 at 2:59pm, SPRANGER responded via email back to GOOGLE with the following request for additional information “Please provide me with a complete copy of the legal process submitted by the Macomb County ‘Sheriff's Department. 1 intent fo file my objection. Case 2953-17 is the referenced Sheriff Department case.” (EXHIBIT B) 3) On October 20, 2017 at 11:29am, GOOGLE responded to the SPRANGER request by sending a portable document file ( PDF) attachment heavily redacted subpoena (SUBPOENA -EXHIBIT C) allegedly filed by the Macomb County Sheriff's, Department with the 41-B District Court in Clinton Township, Michigan dated September 19, 2017 4) SUBPOENA -EXHIBIT C lists no pending Case Number. A case number is required. 5) SUBPOENA -EXHIBIT C infers a non existent case of Plaintiff “ People of the State of Michigan” versus Defendant “Karen Ann Spranger”. 6) SUBPOENA -EXHIBIT C does not visibly display the name of the attorney and/or Judicial Clerk/ Judge that signed the SUBPOEN . It is redacted. 7) SUBPOENA -EXHIBIT Cis a copy of the State of Michigan SCAO approved form MC11 Order to Appear/ Produce. 8) The supposed valid legal request from the Macomb County Sheriff Department sent to GOOGLE via fax after a valid authorized signature was entered indicates on 2FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court eee ees SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC Service, Submitted, and File Item 3: “Produce /permit inspection of the following items : Any/all information associated with the e-mail address of KARENASPRANGER@GMAIL.COM . The information is to include, but is not limited to, subscriber information, IP addresses that were logged when the account was created and also last logged into “ 9) On October 23, 2017 at 2:13pm , SPRANGER sent GOOGLE an email which reiterated her intentions to file objections, authorize her personal attorney to receive all future correspondence from GOOGLE regarding the SUBPOENA , and to assert that the subpoéna as processed by GOOGLE is invalid. ( EXHIBIT D) 10) On October 25, 2017 , SPRANGER personally visited the 41-8 District Court and personally spoke with the Court Administrator seeking an unredacted copy of the. ‘SUBPOENA to assess whose authorized signature produced a legal process upon which GOOGLE provided PLAINTIFF SPRANGER only 7 ( seven ) calendar days to produce a“ time stamped court “ document to raise objections to the subpoena. 11) The court administrator did not provide the un-redacted SUBPOENA as there is no pending case of “People of the State of Michigan vs Karen Ann Spranger” ( Emphasis added) 12) As GOOGLE had failed to provide an un-redacted copy of the SUBPOENA and the 41-B District Court DID NOT have a pending case upon which the SUBPOENA could be considered valid, , SPRANGER notifed GOOGLE on October 26, 2017 at.2:28am via 3FILED by Macomb County Circuit Cowt ee eee aN esc e ele ee 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File the karenaspranger@gmail account of her intentions to file a motion to squash the SUBPOENA by filing an action in the 16" Judicial Circuit Court within the 7 (seven ) day time frame asserted by GOOGLE. Discussion of Law 1) Under Michigan Court Rules (MCR) , the SUBPOENA does not comply and is Invalid. In order for an attorney to sign a subpoena, a case must be pending. itis clear that there is no pending case in the 41-8 District Court. 2) MCR 2.506 (A)(1) indicates : “The cout which a matter is pending may by order or subpoena cornmand a party or witness to appear for the purpose of testifying in open court on a date and time certain and from time to time and day to day thereafter until excused by the court, and to produce notes, records, documents, photographs, or other portable tangible things as specified Plaintiff SPRANGER asserts that Defendant GOOGLE Inc. be denied the ability to process an unlawfully issued SUBPOENA. There is no pending case . 3) MCR 2.506 (B)(1) indicates : “A subpoena signed by an attorney of record in the action or by the clerk of the court, in which the matter is pending has the force and effect of an order signed by the judge of that court.” SPRANGER reiterates that her attempts to have GOOGLE provide an.un-redactedFILED by Macomb County Circuit Cowt SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File copy of the SUBPOENA and also acquire a valid un-redacted copy from the 41-B have been denied. SPRANGER avers that GOOGLE is preventing a clean version of the original SUBPOENA to determine whether the signatory of the SUBPOENA is an authorized individual under higan Court Rules. It was GOOGLE that provided ‘SPRANGER with the redacted copy of the SUBPOENA, thus shielding the true identity and factual signatory to whom officially authorized the data request. 4) The SUBPOENA, if not signed by “ an attorney of record in the action “, or “a judge” is not a valid order of the Court since the requirements of MCR 2.506 are unsatisfied. The putative SUBPOENA is illegal and unenforceable. 5) Michigan Codified Law ( MCL) 767 (A)(1) indicates an alternate method of issuance must be signed by a judge in all cases. The SUBPOENA as presented-by GOOGLE to establish the authorized signature of the legal process. SPRANGER protests that GOOGLE is processing an invalid SUBPOENA as there is NO PENDING CASE in the 41-B District Court. 6) Michigan Codified Law ( MCL) 767 (A)(2)(1) allows a prosecuting attorney to petition a district or circuit court to issue a subpoena. Upon information and belief, the SUBPOENA is NOT signed by a judge under MCR 2.506 7) There is nothing visible in the SUBPOENA provided by GOOGLE that satisfies MCL 767 (A)(4)(1)(C) which requires “A statement that the investigative subpoena is Issued pursuant to this section.”eee ees FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court ee ee 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File ‘Summary of Objection Plaintiff Karen Spranger prays for relief from the 16" Judicial Circuit Court to accept Plaintiffs MOTION TO SQUASH SUBPOENA as GOOGLE has processed a redacted invalid and illegal SUBPOENA as there is no pending case in the 41-8 District Court, and hence, the SUBPOENA shall be rejected in its entirety . SPRANGER also seeks reimbursement of all filing and legal costs from GOOGLE for processing an invalid SUBPOENA as defined under Michigan Court Rules and applicable Michigan State Statutes. REQUEST FOR EX-PARTE INJUNCTIVE ORDER |. Statement of Facts 1) GOOGLE Inc. is headquartered in California. The legal address for their Custodian of Records is found on their website as : : Google Legal Investigations Support 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View, CA 94043 2) GOOGLE Inc. notes on their website that they do not accept proof of ser via fax, email, or mail. The exact quotation is : “Google is unable to accept service by email, fax, or regular mail” 3) GOOGLE Inc. failed to ascertain the validity of the SUBPOENA and offered Plaintiff SPRANGER a mere 7 (seven ) days to respond, 6FILED by Macomb County Circuit Cowt SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File 4) SPRANGER asserts her U.S. Constitutional Fourth Amendment Rights which Indicates: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shallnot be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” 5) Defendant GOOGLE Inc. has failed to provide an un-redacted copy of the ‘SUBPOENA to Plaintiff SPRANGER upon request. 6) Defendant GOOGLE Inc. has not offered any information as to why SUBPOENA provided to Plaintiff SPRANGER was redacted. 7) SPRANGER was notified by GOOGLE via email ( EXHIBIT A) the following information: “For more information about how Google handles legal process, view our transparency report at http://www_google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/legalprocess/ The research link for ” What does Google do when it receives a request for user data ?” indicates: “When we receive such a request, our team reviews the request to make sure it satisfies legal requirements and Google's policies. Generally speaking, for us to produce any data, the request must be made in writing, signed by an authorized official of the requesting agency and issued under an appropriate law” (Emphasis added)eee ees FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court SPRANGER. KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File SPRANGER asserts GOOGLE did not make sure the SUBPOENA met State of Michigan legal requirements nor was the SUBPOENA issued under appropriate law. Discussion of Law 1) Michigan Court Rules ( MCR) 3.207(A) Scope of Relief indicates the Court may issue ex parte and temporary orders to any matter within its juris 2) Michigan Court Rules ( MCR ) 3.207(B) Ex Parte Orders ion. (1) Pending the entry of a temporary order, the court may enter an ex parte order if the court is satisfied by specific facts set forth in an affidavit or verified pleading that irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result from the delay required to effect notice, or that notice itself will precipitate adverse action before an order can be issued. Plaintiff SPRANGER avers that the EXHIBITS and facts as outlined in the Brief in Support should clearly indicate to the Court that SPRANGER seeks immediate relief from Defendant GOOGLE Inc. illegitimate processing of a technically flawed subpoena. {2) The moving party must arrange for the service of true copies of the ex parte order on the friend of the court and the other party. SPRANGER is prepared to send a proof of service via FedEx to the GOOGLE Inc. address As noted on their website (3)An ex parte order is effective upon entry and enforceable upon service. ‘SPRANGER prays for relief from the processing of the SUBPOENA until true facts can beeee ees FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court SPRANGER. KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File Gathered from Defendant GOOGLE to substantiate their processing of a data request in which there is NO PENDING CASE. (4) Arex parte order remains in effect until modified or superseded by a temporary or final order. In the interest of judicial economy, SPRANGER seeks an ex parte order against GOOGLE Inc. processing of a putative subpoena. (6) In all other cases, the ex parte order must state that it will automatically become a temporary order if the other party does not file a written objection or motion to modify or rescind the ex parte order and a request for a hearing. The written objection or motion and the request for a hearing must be filed with the clerk of the court, and a true copy provided to the friend of the court and the other party, within 14 days after the order is served. ‘SPRANGER contends that GOOGLE is able to seek redress from the Court by providing a true un-redacted copy of the SUBPOENA presented to SPRANGER on October 19. 2017 and appease the Court that their legal research team willfully intented to follow the laws and court rules of the State of Michigan and adhered to both the Electronic Communication Privacy Act (18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq ) and the Michigan Public Act 478 of 2012 ( Internet Privacy Protection Act) Summary Plaintiff Karen Ann Spranger prays for relief from the Court by granting her request for an ex parte order immediately in order to prevent Defendant GOOGLE from furthereee ees FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File Interfering with her 4% Amendment rights as outlined in the United States Constitution. STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF MACOMB KAREN ANN SPRANGER Case No. 17- Plaintiff, Hon. vs. GOOGLE Inc. Defendant. AFFIDAVIT OF KAREN ANN SPRANGER Comes now Karen Ann Spranger, being first duly sworn, under oath, and states as follows: 1) I received the Google user notification on October 19, 2017 2) | requested from Google a copy of the SUBPOENA on October 20, 2017 3) | received a re-dacted copy of the SUBPOENA 4) | attempted to obtain from GOOGLE an un-redacted copy. 5) | visited the 41-B District Court where NO CASE IS PENDING 6) The 41-B District Court did not have a copy of the SUBPOENA 7) Under information and belief, the SUBPOENA is technically invalid based upon Michigan State Statutes and Michigan Court Rules 8) As the duly elected Macomb County Register of Deeds and Clerk of the 10ee FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court SPRANGER, KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017, Service, Submitted, and File 16" Judicial Circuit Court, | find the Motion to Squash Subpoena and Request for Ex Parte Injunctive Order serves judicial economy 9) | amvwilling to appear in person and testify that the facts outlined in the Brief In Support pleadings factually support my constitutional rights. 10) Upon information and belief, GOOGLE has not researched applicable Federal and State laws regarding internet data privacy in this case. Further Affiant sayeth not Kin G forerge Karen Ann Spranger 40 North Main Street Mount Clemens, Mi 48043 Dated October 26, 2017Seer eee FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court Se eS code ene 10:26°2017 Service, Submitted, and File State/Commonweattn of WLC HICLAN }= couny ot WACOWS. on this the 2G day or__Oatalo /— Aor , before me, ‘ay Month — Maui €. Cunguse . the undersigned Notary Public, ‘Name of Notary | personally appeared KAREN AMAL SPRANGER ‘Name(s) of Signer(s) Clpersonally known to me ~ OR ~ Aproved to me on the basis of satisfactory idence to be the person(s) whiose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same for the purposes therein stated WITNESS my hand and official seal. Sa, MARIE GEORGIOS © Nolary Public - Michigan © Macomb County ‘My éinstn xen 12,2018 Fang nie Coury of Sela “Any Other Required information lace Notary Seal/Stamp Above (Printed Name of Notary, Expiration Date, etc.) INFORMATION IN AREAS 1-4 REQUIRED IN ARIZONA. OPTIONAL IN OTHER STATES. Description of Any Attached Document 1 Tie or Type of Document wren at Rat he Sabian 2Document Date: _\o\ 2G) AO\A __ 3 Number of Pages: _— Lena 4 Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: © 2012 National Notary Associationeee ees ER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court ‘Gmail -[1-4887000019608) N SPRANG 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File ee Karen Spranger [1-4887000019509] Notification from Google 1 message usernotice@google.com Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:51 PM To: usernotice@google.com Dear Google user, Google has received legal process issued by the Macomb County Sherif's Office compelling the release of information related to your Google account. The agency reference number or case number on the legal process Is Police Report No. 2953-17, Unless we promptly receive @ copy of an objection fled with a court of competent jurisdiction, Google may provide responsive documents pursuant to applicabie law, such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. See 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. In most cases, the file-stamped objection must be received by Google within 7 days of the date of this notification. For more information about how Google handles legal process, view our transparency report at hitp:/Awww.google.com! transparencyreport/userdatarequests/legalprocess. Google is not in a position to provide you with legal advice or discuss the substance of the legal process. A copy of the legal process will be provided upon request. If you have other questions regarding this matter, we encourage you to contact an attorney. Please note that we require an emailed statement sent from your account authorizing us to ‘communicate with your attorney about your account, Please reply to this email or contact usernotice@google.com and reference the case Identification number located in the ‘subject line in any further communications regarding this matter. Regards, Google Legal Investigations Support ‘Youreceved his announcement to update you about knportan formation nrgard your Google acount || ©2047 Goopetnc, 1000 Amphitheatre Parkvay, Moura View, Gh 9465, USA 1"eee ees SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court ‘Gmail - Fw: 1-4887000019508 10:26:2017 Service, Submitted, and File Karen Spranger el ee Fwd: [1-4887000019509] Notification from Google ‘message Karen Spranger ‘Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:59 PM To: usernotice@google.com Please provide me with a complete copy of the legal process submitted by the Macomb County Sheriff's Department. | intent to fle my objection . Case 52953-17 isthe referenced Sheriff Department case. — Forwarded message —-—— From: Date: Oct 19, 2017 12:51 PM Subject: [1-4887000018509] Notification from Google To: Ce: |Google Dear Google user, Google has received legal process issued by the Macomb County Sheriffs Office compelling the release of information related to your Google account. The agency reference number or case number on the legal process is Police Report No. 2953-17, Unless we promptly receive a copy of an objection fled with a court of competent jurisdiction, Google may provide responsive documents pursuant to applicable law, such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. See 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. In most cases, the file-stamped objection must be received by Google within 7 days of the date of this, notification, For more information about how Google handles legal process, view our transparency report at htp:/hwww.google..comitransparencyreport/userdatarequests/legalprocess!. Google is not in a position to provide you with legal advice or discuss the substance of the legal process. A copy of the legal process will be provided upon request. If you have other questions regarding this matter, we encourage you to Contact an attorney. Please note that we require an emailed statement sent from your account authorizing us to communicate with your attorney about your account. Please reply to this email or contact usernotice@google.com and reference the case identification number located in the subject line in any further communications regarding this matter. Google Legal Investigations Support | | | | Regards, | | ‘You rocelved his announcement to upto ee G seas ees unainVew, CA B8048, USA htps:imal google.com/malltuty7uix2&ike390ba01 td8jsverKkabhOwhZGg en. &view=pl&soarch=sentAth=1519601859076a4c8simI=1SI360188307... 1/1Sees! KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court Gmail - RE: [1-4887000019509} ee 10:26°2017 Service, Submitted, and File ea Karen Spranger RE: [1-4887000019509] Notification from Google ‘1 message usernotice@google.com Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:29 AM ‘To: Karen Spranger Hello, Attached is a copy of the legal process we recelved for your Google account. Unless we receive a copy of a formal objection, Google may provide responsive documents pursuant to applicable law, such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. See 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. Google is not in a position to provide you with legal advice. if you have other questions regarding the notice, we encourage you to contact an attorney. Please reply to this email or contact usemotica@google.com and reference the case identification number located in the ‘subject line in any further communications regarding this matter. Rogards, ‘Google Legal investigations Suppor yu about important Information In regards te your Google secount. fe Parkway, Mountain Vie, CA S404, USA. | Yourecatad its announcement | ©2047 Googe nc, 1600 Amphi 201709191445_Redacted.paf a 62k 1=18'8a67110498174 ‘npssimal google.com/mallu0/2ui=28ik=e390b9e 11d8|sver=KkobhOwhZGg.en.Aview=ptscarch=inboxtlSees! GLE INC FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court mai - Re: 1-4887000019505] ee 10:26°2017 Service, Submitted, and File Karen Spranger Re: [1-4887000019509] Notification from Google 4 message Karen Spranger Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:13 PM To: usernotice@google.com, "Frank A. Cusumano, Jr." Bec: Joseph Hunt Google: Lett be known that | intend to file objections to the subpoena with the District Court within your allotted time frame by providing a time stamped copy of the “objection fling awaiting judicial review. | am authorizing Google by this email statement that Frank Cusumano Jr.is my legal representative authorized to ‘communicate with Google and send/ receive any records related to User Notice 1-4887000019509 have cc'd Mr. Cusumano in this email authorization. Please include him on any and all future communications between Karen Spranger (karenaspranger@gmall.com) and Google Inc. Please note that Google erred by processing a request for records as the redacted subpoena does not list a case number. There is no case. Google erred on this request as it does not meet the legal standards, Please send me an un- redacted copy of the subpoena so | may review the entire document for clarity and factual signatures. This will fully assist in fortitying my objections protecting my 4th Amendment Constitutional rights under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. (On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:51 PM, wrote: | | | Dear Google user, | Google has received legal process issued by the Macomb County Sheriffs Office compeling the release of information | telated to your Google account. The agency reference number or case number on the legal process is Police Report No, 62953-17. | Unless we promptly receive a copy of an objection fled with a court of competent jurisdiction, Google may provide responsive documents pursuant to applicable law, such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. See 18 U.S.C. | §2701 et seq. In most cases, the file-stamped objection must be recelved by Google within 7 days of the date of this, Notification, I | For more information about how Google handles legal process, view our transparency report at | http:/www.google.comransparencyreportluserdatarequestsilegalprocess | | Google is not in a position to provide you with legal advice or discuss the substance of the legal process. A copy of the legal process will be provided upon request. If you have other questions regarding this matter, we encourage you to contact an attomey. Please note that we require an emailed statement sent from your account authorizing us to ‘communicate with your attorney about your account. Please reply to this email ot contact usernotice@google.com and reference the case Identification number located in the subject line in any further communications regarding this matter. Regards, Google Legal Investigations Support Fo Yoursee tis announcement to update you about important information i regards to your Googe account. (52017 Googla na 1600 Arphnete Para, Maurine Vew, Om 4343, USA tps google com/mai/y0?ui-28ik=e390b90! 1 dBjever=KkobhéwhZGg.en &view=piBsearch=sent&th=16t4a70d0IdbSa7Ssimi=16%4a70dOtSdb... V2Seer eee FILED by Macomb County Circuit Court SPRANGER KAREN ANN VS. GOOGLE INC 10:26:2017 2017-09-18 16:30:30 (6? Service, Submited, and File Svea Exwieit ¢ pope SAO ‘STATE OF MICHIGAN - YLB sUBGlAL DBTRCT SUBPOENA upieiw.cincur| Order to Appoar sndlor Produce ‘ ounry Probate Ta ST Coat Ba a as taper Ne, mph) s36n Sus De Clan Tp M26 (s06) 465.5300 Pia PETESATT [SaaS 2 Poot tte site of mengen xy Rares Aan Sprmger i 1G ae ~ - Dew Deainal =, CProtate In the matter of tite Nane che People ve Sule oligo, TO: Cog AI 0 ities, Mota View CA $4083 ca a YOUARE OROERED: [5.1 to appear personally atte time and pace ete below. Yours be mired apear or ooo and dy day eco The court address above (Other: Bey [pa ie (D2. Testy at tial / examination / hearing. 13. Produceifermi inspection or copying ofthe follaning term, Any/al information nstocited with the enol address ‘ofKARENASPRANGER@GMAIL,COM, The information i to include but vt ited o, rabcrberfaformation, IP rldceane at zr lagged when he pecannt wos eee nd aia lat gga eso (24. Testy as to your esses, and bing with youtho tas std in ine 3 shove Cis. Toety at deposition Je. MeL 800.0104(2), 600.611, oF 600.6118 prohston apse ransfring or doping of property attached 7.06 NOTES roquasing» deters earner nc MCU OBE ETTE, rs rRNEOT Taor mepcena at be ond edge, Para Sober emanate, to advo der ssaihston on be bet eof ie Farm asc be corning. Dobler ase ean ss be scones Erough MCR 2.308 wi noe br ach of calor examinosor er esance oe miepowta byw, FAILURE TO OBEY THE COMMANDS OF THE SUBPOENA OR APPEAR AT THE STATED ‘TIME AND PLACE MAY SUBJ} Caxrto o CO) Sewed [Net served September 19) 7 1kc1t (Goh SUBPOENA, Order io Appear andlor Produee 1 2088000170, 00.8470 e0018, MOR 58 Received Time Sep. 19. 2017 12:30PM No, 0925 ‘