Evidence Record

AW Harris Awh 2024 48085 Doc. 120702485

Honorable Michael Gomez 129th Judicial District Court Harris County Civil Courthouse 201 Caroline, 10th Floor Houston Texas 77002

Type
document
Pages
5
Lines
248
SHA-256
080811478adc

DISTIL analysis

DISTIL Run
Profile
Standard
Version
1
Doc Type
Legal correspondence to court
Total Nodes
39
Node Legend
Entity (ENT)
Event (EVT)
Claim (CLM)
Anchor (ANC)
Omission (OMI)
Tension (TEN)
Tell (TEL)
Inference (INF)
Hypothesis (HYP)
Stage 1
Index
Orientation · No nodes
Document Classification
Legal correspondence to court Plaintiff's counsel (Bell Nunnally) Post-judgment collection litigation, Harris County Texas May 22, 2025
attorney_letterjudicial_correspondenceenforcement_proceedingsreceivership_requested
Analytical Frame
Creditor enforcement action with allegations of debtor misrepresentation and asset dissipation
Analytical Summary
This is a letter from plaintiff's counsel David Walton to Judge Michael Gomez in a post-judgment enforcement action where Atlantic Wave Holdings and Secure Community LLC are attempting to collect against Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt. The letter responds to a May 20, 2025 filing by judgment debtors and accuses them of a pattern of misrepresentation to multiple courts regarding stays of execution, supersedeas bonds, and plans to interplead funds. The letter documents three specific alleged misrepresentations: an October 2024 false claim that execution had been stayed in Virginia, an April 2025 representation to federal court about posting a supersedeas bond that was never filed, and a May 2025 claim about planning to pay $1.4 million into Virginia court registry without any actual motion filed. Counsel argues these misrepresentations, combined with a history of asset dissipation including $38 million in September 2023, multiple other creditor judgments, and recently increased credit lines, justify immediate appointment of a receiver to preserve assets including an expected $20 million payment from Huntington Ingalls Industries.
Key Points
  • Cyberlux falsely represented to Texas court in October 2024 that execution of judgment had been stayed in Virginia
  • Cyberlux represented to federal court in April 2025 intent to post supersedeas bond but never filed motion
  • Cyberlux claims plan to pay $1.4 million into Virginia court registry but has filed no motion as of May 21, 2025
  • Cyberlux dissipated $38 million in September 2023
  • Multiple creditor judgments pending including $1.6 million Thin Air Gear judgment in Colorado
  • Cyberlux increased credit line from $7 million to $12.3 million in April 2025 after defaulting
  • Atlantic Wave seeks receiver to preserve expected $20 million payment from Huntington Ingalls Industries
Stage 2
Core — Entities, Events, Claims
26 nodes
ENT-001
Entity
Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC
Plaintiff creditor entity seeking to enforce judgment against Cyberlux Corporation
Page 1 — I represent Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC, and Secure Community, LLC (Atlantic Wave) in the above-referenced action
ENT-002
Entity
Secure Community, LLC
Co-plaintiff creditor entity with Atlantic Wave Holdings in judgment enforcement action
Page 1 — I represent Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC, and Secure Community, LLC (Atlantic Wave) in the above-referenced action
ENT-003
Entity
Cyberlux Corporation
Judgment debtor corporation subject to collection enforcement and multiple creditor claims
Page 1 — Cause No. 2024-48085, Atlantic Wave Holdings PLC, et al. v. Cyberlux Corporation, et al., 129th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas
ENT-004
Entity
Mark D. Schmidt
Individual judgment debtor along with Cyberlux Corporation
Page 1 — filed by Judgment Debtors Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt (Cyberlux)
ENT-005
Entity
David A. Walton
Attorney representing plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings and Secure Community at Bell Nunnally law firm
Page 1 — I represent Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC, and Secure Community, LLC (Atlantic Wave) in the above-referenced action
ENT-006
Entity
Judge Michael Gomez
Judge presiding over case in 129th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas
Page 1 — Honorable Michael Gomez 129th Judicial District Court Harris County Civil Courthouse
ENT-007
Entity
Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII)
Entity from which Cyberlux is expected to receive payment exceeding $20 million
Page 2 — the substantial sum of money (in excess of $20 million) Cyberlux is in position to receive any day now, from Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII)
ENT-008
Entity
Thin Air Gear, LLC
Creditor with judgment against Cyberlux Corporation pending entry in Colorado federal court
Page 2, 3 — a $1,631,221.32 judgment in favor of Thin Air Gear, LLC, is now pending entry by the Colorado federal court in Thin Air Gear, LLC, v. Cyberlux Corporation. (Case No. 1:25-cv-00805, Doc. 18, filed May 16, 2025
ENT-009
Entity
Robert Berleth
Proposed receiver in the receivership motion
Page 2 — the proposed [receivership] order does not stateOr even suggest, that Atlantic Wave or [the receiver Robert] Berleth intend to seize (.S. government property.
ENT-010
Entity
J. Chapman Petersen
Affiant providing testimony about Cyberlux's failure to file motions in Virginia court
Page 2 — (Affidavit of J. Chapman Petersen, signed May 21, 2025, attached as Exhibit 1, II 7-9,)
EVT-001
Event
Amended Final Order and Judgment entered June 2023
Judgment entered against Cyberlux in Virginia in June 2023, later domesticated in Texas in July 2024
Page 2 — The Judgment was entered against Cyberlux in June of 2023 (and domesticated in Texas in July of 2024)
EVT-002
Event
October 28, 2024 hearing misrepresentation
During October 28, 2024 hearing, Cyberlux counsel Penneti represented to court that execution of judgment had been stayed in Virginia, which was false
Page 1, 2 — MR. PENNETI: That's correct. (October 28, 2024, Hearing Transcript at 8:8-18.) But that was a misrepresentation because no such stay of execution was requested or has been granted.
EVT-003
Event
April 25, 2025 federal court representation
Cyberlux represented to Texas federal court intention to pay supersedeas bond amount into court
Page 2 — Then, in April of 2025, Cyberlux represented to the Texas federal court it intended to "pay into the appropriate court an amount that is a supersedeas bond." (Case No. 4:25-cv-01689, Doc. 5, filed April 25, 2025, pp. 11-12.)
EVT-004
Event
May 20, 2025 letter to court
Cyberlux filed letter dated May 20, 2025, claiming plan to pay $1.4 million into Virginia court registry
Page 1 — write to address the letter dated May 20, 2025, filed by Judgment Debtors Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt (Cyberlux)
EVT-005
Event
September 2023 asset dissipation
Cyberlux dissipated $38 million in September 2023
Page 3 — Considering the prior dissipation of $38 million in September of 2023 by Cyberlux
EVT-006
Event
April 2025 credit line increase
Cyberlux amended its line of credit in April 2025, increasing limit from $7 million to $12.3 million after defaulting on the agreement
Page 3 — Cyberlux "amend[ing] its line of credit increasing the limit under the agreement [from $7 million] to $12.3 million" in April 2025 after defaulting on the agreement which is "collateralized by the accounts receivable, inventory and other assets related to the specific purchase orders [from government customers]."
EVT-007
Event
May 14, 2025 Second Remand Order
Court issued Second Remand Order finding that proposed receivership order does not suggest intent to seize U.S. government property
Page 2 — (Notice of Second Remand Order, dated May 14, 2025, Ex. 2, pp. 5-6) (finding that "the proposed [receivership] order does not stateOr even suggest, that Atlantic Wave or [the receiver Robert] Berleth intend to seize (.S. government property.")
EVT-008
Event
May 16, 2025 Thin Air Gear judgment
Colorado federal court judgment in favor of Thin Air Gear for $1,631,221.32 pending entry against Cyberlux
Page 2, 3 — a $1,631,221.32 judgment in favor of Thin Air Gear, LLC, is now pending entry by the Colorado federal court in Thin Air Gear, LLC, v. Cyberlux Corporation. (Case No. 1:25-cv-00805, Doc. 18, filed May 16, 2025
EVT-009
Event
May 21, 2025 affidavit by J. Chapman Petersen
J. Chapman Petersen signed affidavit on May 21, 2025, confirming Cyberlux has not filed motion to interplead funds or notice of appearance in Virginia court
Page 2 — (Affidavit of J. Chapman Petersen, signed May 21, 2025, attached as Exhibit 1, II 7-9,) Cyberlux's smoke screen tactics should not divert attention from the actual issues
EVT-010
Event
May 22, 2025 letter to court
David Walton sent letter to Judge Gomez responding to Cyberlux's May 20 letter and requesting prompt court intervention including receiver appointment
Page 1 — May 22, 2025 VIA EFILE.TXCOURTS.GOV Honorable Michael Gomez 129th Judicial District Court
CLM-001
Claim
False representation about Virginia stay of execution
Atlantic Wave claims Cyberlux falsely represented in October 2024 that execution of judgment had been stayed in Virginia when no such stay was requested or granted
Page 1, 2 — MR. PENNETI: That's correct. (October 28, 2024, Hearing Transcript at 8:8-18.) But that was a misrepresentation because no such stay of execution was requested or has been granted.
CLM-002
Claim
Misleading federal court statement about supersedeas bond
Atlantic Wave claims Cyberlux made misleading statement to federal court about posting supersedeas bond but never filed motion for such bond under any applicable law
Page 2 — Indeed, another misleading statement because Cyberlux has made no effort to file a motion for supersedeas bond whether under Texas supersedeas law, federal supersedeas law, or any other law of a competent jurisdiction.
CLM-003
Claim
False claim about planning to pay $1.4 million into Virginia court
Atlantic Wave claims Cyberlux misled court by stating plan to pay $1.4 million into Virginia court registry without filing any motion or notice of appearance as of May 21, 2025
Page 2 — Yet again Cyberlux misleads this Court because, as of May 21, 2025, Cyberlux has not filed a motion to interplead any funds into the Virginia court's registry, much less filed a notice of appearance in the action pending in Fairfax County, Virginia. (Affidavit of J. Chapman Petersen, signed May 21, 2025, attached as Exhibit 1, II 7-9,)
CLM-004
Claim
Cyberlux in default under settlement agreement
Atlantic Wave claims Cyberlux is in default under the settlement agreement for lack of payment among other reasons
Page 2 — that is, Cyberlux is in default under the settlement agreement for lack of payment (Ex. 1c[9] 4-6), among other reasons
CLM-005
Claim
Cyberlux owes multiple creditors many millions of dollars
Atlantic Wave claims Cyberlux owes several creditors including Atlantic Wave many millions of dollars
Page 2 — Cyberlux owes several creditors, including Atlantic Wave, many millions of dollars
CLM-006
Claim
Cyberlux expected to receive over $20 million from HII
Atlantic Wave claims Cyberlux is in position to receive substantial sum exceeding $20 million from Huntington Ingalls Industries any day
Page 2 — the substantial sum of money (in excess of $20 million) Cyberlux is in position to receive any day now, from Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII)
Stage 3
In Situ — Quotations, Tells, Tensions, Questions
8 nodes
QUO-001
Quotation
Court colloquy on Virginia stay
Direct transcript quotation from October 28, 2024 hearing where court asked if judgment enforcement was stayed in Virginia and counsel Penneti confirmed incorrectly
Page 1 — THE COURT: Has it been stayed? I mean has it been stayed in Virginia? MR. PENNETI: Those -- all those litigations, yes, the stay has occurred in Virginia. There's no -- the collection - there's no activity in the collection suit. Then you've got the three other lawsuits. THE COURT: So the enforcement of this judgment that they domesticated has been stayed in Virginia? MR. PENNETI: That's correct.
QUO-002
Quotation
Cyberlux characterization of Atlantic Wave's narrative approach
Plaintiff's counsel characterizes defendant's approach to factual accuracy
Page 1 — As shown throughout this case and further confirmed by Cyberlux's May 20 letter, Cyberlux does not let factual accuracy get in the way of its narrative.
TLL-001
Tell
Pattern of misrepresentation across multiple courts
The letter systematically documents three sequential alleged misrepresentations to different courts spanning October 2024 to May 2025, building a narrative of deceptive conduct
Page 1, 2 — In October of 2024, Cyberlux represented to this Court that a stay of execution... But that was a misrepresentation... Then, in April of 2025, Cyberlux represented to the Texas federal court... Indeed, another misleading statement... Now, in May of 2025, Cyberlux represents to this Court... Yet again Cyberlux misleads this Court
TLL-002
Tell
Escalating urgency regarding asset preservation
The letter builds urgency by connecting historical asset dissipation to current financial arrangements and imminent large payment
Page 3 — Considering the prior dissipation of $38 million in September of 2023 by Cyberlux, among other questionable actions, there is a good faith basis to believe that Cyberlux will continue to take active steps to frustrate the recovery of monies... Cyberlux "amend[ing] its line of credit increasing the limit under the agreement [from $7 million] to $12.3 million" in April 2025 after defaulting
TEN-001
Tension
Government property seizure vs. asset freeze distinction
Ongoing dispute over whether receivership constitutes attempt to seize government property versus freezing non-exempt debtor assets
Page 2 — Cyberlux continues to raise the government property issue that has already been discussed ad nauseum and resolved. Again, Atlantic Wave is not attempting to seize government property, but rather it is focused on freezing non-exempt assets of Cyberlux
TEN-002
Tension
Competing creditor claims on limited assets
Multiple creditors including Atlantic Wave and Thin Air Gear seeking recovery from Cyberlux's assets creating competitive pressure
Page 2, 3 — The other concern that elevates the risk of unjustified dissipation of assets by Cyberlux are the number of other creditor claims against Cyberlux... a $1,631,221.32 judgment in favor of Thin Air Gear, LLC, is now pending entry
QST-001
Question
Timeline discrepancy in interpleader claims
Why has Cyberlux had 22 months since Virginia judgment or 9 months since Texas domestication to interplead disputed funds but still has not done so as of May 21, 2025?
Page 2 — The Judgment was entered against Cyberlux in June of 2023 (and domesticated in Texas in July of 2024), so Cyberlux had over 22 months to interplead any disputed monies into the Virginia court registry (or over 9 months to interplead such monies into the Texas court registry). And Cyberlux still has nof interpleaded any monies into any court registry. (Ex. 1, II 1-3.)
QST-002
Question
Purpose of credit line increase during default
What is the business justification for Cyberlux increasing its secured credit line from $7 million to $12.3 million in April 2025 after defaulting on the agreement and while facing multiple creditor judgments?
Page 3 — Cyberlux "amend[ing] its line of credit increasing the limit under the agreement [from $7 million] to $12.3 million" in April 2025 after defaulting on the agreement which is "collateralized by the accounts receivable, inventory and other assets related to the specific purchase orders [from government customers]."
Stage 4
Interpretive — Inferences, Omissions, Patterns
5 nodes
INF-001
Inference
Pattern suggests intentional delay tactics
The sequence of unfulfilled representations about stays, bonds, and interpleader across multiple courts over seven months suggests deliberate strategy to delay enforcement rather than good faith procedural errors
Page 1, 2 — As shown throughout this case and further confirmed by Cyberlux's May 20 letter, Cyberlux does not let factual accuracy get in the way of its narrative... Cyberlux's smoke screen tactics should not divert attention from the actual issues
INF-002
Inference
Credit line increase as asset protection maneuver
Increasing secured credit line after defaulting may represent attempt to encumber assets with priority security interests ahead of judgment creditors
Page 3 — Cyberlux "amend[ing] its line of credit increasing the limit under the agreement [from $7 million] to $12.3 million" in April 2025 after defaulting on the agreement which is "collateralized by the accounts receivable, inventory and other assets related to the specific purchase orders [from government customers]."
INF-003
Inference
HII payment as liquidation event justifying immediate receiver
The imminent receipt of over $20 million from HII combined with multiple competing creditors and history of asset dissipation creates urgent need for receiver before funds can be dissipated
Page 2, 3 — the substantial sum of money (in excess of $20 million) Cyberlux is in position to receive any day now, from Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII)... Atlantic Wave respectfully requests the Court's prompt intervention, including but not limited to the appointment of a receiver.
OMI-001
Omission
No explanation for $38 million dissipation
Letter references prior dissipation of $38 million in September 2023 but provides no detail about circumstances, recipients, or business justification
Page 3 — Considering the prior dissipation of $38 million in September of 2023 by Cyberlux, among other questionable actions
OMI-002
Omission
No response to government property distinction
Letter does not engage with Cyberlux's substantive arguments about why receivership may affect government property, only dismissing concern as repetitive
Page 2 — Cyberlux continues to raise the government property issue that has already been discussed ad nauseum and resolved... Indeed, Cyberlux's blindly obsessive repetition of the same argument does not change the facts.

Extracted text

5 pages · 9814 characters

AW Harris Awh 2024 48085 Doc. 120702485 — Formatted Extract

Type: document
Filing Header

BN

BELLNUNNALLY ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS

5/22/2025 3:28 PM Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County David A. Envelope No. 101174598 TEL: 214.74PM: Angelica Rodriguez FAX: 214.740.5745 Filed: 5/22/2025 3:28 PM DWALTON@BELLNUNNALLY.COM

May 22, 2025

VIA EFILE.TXCOURTS.GOV

Honorable Michael Gomez 129th Judicial District Court Harris County Civil Courthouse 201 Caroline, 10th Floor Houston Texas 77002

RE: Cause No. 2024-48085, Atlantic Wave Holdings PLC, et al. v. Cyberlux Corporation, et al., 129th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas.

Dear Judge Gomez:

I represent Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC, and Secure Community, LLC (Atlantic Wave) in the above-referenced action and write to address the letter dated May 20, 2025, filed by Judgment Debtors Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt (Cyberlux). As shown throughout this case and further confirmed by Cyberlux's May 20 letter, Cyberlux does not let factual accuracy get in the way of its narrative.

Amended Final Order and Judgment. In October of 2024, Cyberlux represented to this Court that a stay of execution of theAmended Final Order and Judgment (Judgment) had been granted:

THE COURT: Has it been stayed? I mean has it been stayed in Virginia?

MR. PENNETI: Those -- all those litigations, yes, the stay has occurred in Virginia. There's no -- the collection - there's no activity in the collection suit. Then you've got the three other lawsuits.

THE COURT: So the enforcement of this judgment that they domesticated has been stayed in Virginia?

MR. PENNETI: That's correct. (October 28, 2024, Hearing Transcript at 8:8-18.)

But that was a misrepresentation because no such stay of execution was requested or has been granted. Then, in April of 2025, Cyberlux represented to the Texas federal court it

intended to "pay into the appropriate court an amount that is a supersedeas bond." (Case No. 4:25-cv-01689, Doc. 5, filed April 25, 2025, pp. 11-12.) Indeed, another misleading statement because Cyberlux has made no effort to file a motion for supersedeas bond whether under Texas supersedeas law, federal supersedeas law, or any other law of a competent jurisdiction. Now, in May of 2025, Cyberlux represents to this Court that it is "planning" to pay $1.4 million into the registry of the Virginia court. Yet again Cyberlux misleads this Court because, as of May 21, 2025, Cyberlux has not filed a motion to interplead any funds into the Virginia court's registry, much less filed a notice of appearance in the action pending in Fairfax County, Virginia. (Affidavit of J. Chapman Petersen, signed May 21, 2025, attached as Exhibit 1, II 7-9,) Cyberlux's smoke screen tactics should not divert attention from the actual issues-that is, Cyberlux is in default under the settlement agreement for lack of payment (Ex. 1c[9] 4-6), among other reasons, and Cyberlux owes several creditors, including Atlantic Wave, many millions of dollars.

Receivership Order. Cyberlux continues to raise the government property issue that has already been discussed ad nauseum and resolved. Again, Atlantic Wave is not attempting to seize government property, but rather it is focused on freezing non-exempt assets of Cyberlux, for example, the substantial sum of money (in excess of $20 million) Cyberlux is in position to receive any day now, from Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII). And the proposed receivership order, is consistent with that focus. (Notice of Second Remand Order, dated May 14, 2025, Ex. 2, pp. 5-6) (finding that "the proposed [receivership] order does not stateOr even suggest, that Atlantic Wave or [the receiver Robert] Berleth intend to seize (.S. government property.") Indeed, Cyberlux's blindly obsessive repetition of the same argument does not change the facts.

Dissipation of Assets Cyberlux contends that Atlantic Wave should "have no real concern whatsoever" about Cyberlux's conduct because it is "planning" to pay $1.4 million into the registry of the Virginia court. The Judgment was entered against Cyberlux in June of 2023 (and domesticated in Texas in July of 2024), so Cyberlux had over 22 months to interplead any disputed monies into the Virginia court registry (or over 9 months to interplead such monies into the Texas court registry). And Cyberlux still has nof interpleaded any monies into any court registry. (Ex. 1, II 1-3.) Thus, Cyberlux's purported plan to interplead funds is merely a hollow distraction.

The other concern that elevates the risk of unjustified dissipation of assets by Cyberlux are the number of other creditor claims against Cyberlux, e.g., as discussed in Atlantic Wave's letters, filed April 9 and May 15, 2025. Since those letters, a $1,631,221.32 judgment in favor of Thin Air Gear, LLC, is now pending entry by the Colorado federal court in Thin Air Gear, LLC, v. Cyberlux Corporation. (Case No. 1:25-cv-00805, Doc. 18, filed

May 16, 2025, attached as Exhibit 2.) Considering the prior dissipation of $38 million in September of 2023 by Cyberlux, among other questionable actions, there is a good faith basis to believe that Cyberlux will continue to take active steps to frustrate the recovery of monies due to its creditors, including Atlantic Wave. One such step was Cyberlux "amend[ing] its line of credit increasing the limit under the agreement [from $7 million] to $12.3 million" in April 2025 after defaulting on the agreement which is "collateralized by the accounts receivable, inventory and other assets related to the specific purchase orders [from government customers]." (Atlantic Wave Letter to Court, filed May 19, 2025, at Ex. A, pp. 44-46.) These other creditors' claims show the necessity of a receivership to preserve the status quo and minimize any risk of dissipation of assets by Cyberlux.

Cyberlux's deliberate conduct is not only frustrating efforts to recover monies due and owed to Atlantic Wave, but also needlessly increasing attorney fees and costs and taking up valuable time of the courts. Atlantic Wave respectfully requests the Court's prompt intervention, including but not limited to the appointment of a receiver.

Very truly yours, Bank A. Wallen

David A. Walton

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on May 22, 2025, a true and correct copy of this document was served on all parties of record via electronic service from the court's ECF system for registered users, in accordance with Rule 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

By: /s/ David A. Walton

Automated Certificate of eService

This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Jemisha Gandhi on behalf of David Walton Bar No. 24042120 jgandhi@bellnunnally.com Envelope ID: 101174598 Filing Code Description: No Fee Documents

Filing Description: Letter to Court regarding Reply to Cyberlux Response Status as of 5/22/2025 3:38 PM CST

Case Contacts

Name

BarNumber

Email

TimestampSubmitted

Status

David A.Walton

dwalton@bellnunnally.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

LaDonna Arey

LArey@bellnunnally.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Sandra Meiners

smeiners@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Travis Vargo

tvargo@vargolawfirm.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Roxanna Lock

rlock@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Shawn Grady

shawn@gradycollectionlaw.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Jeff Brown

jbrown@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Bernadette Martin

bernadette@gradycollectionlaw.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Records Department

Records@bellnunnally.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Hannah Petrea

hpetrea@bellnunnally.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Michael Poynter

mpoynter@vargolawfirm.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Laurie DeBardeleben

Idebardeleben@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Micah Jackson

mjackson@berlethlaw.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Sheli Davis

sdavis@berlethlaw.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Katharine Clark

kclark@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Lena Brasher

lbrasher@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Frankie Huff

fhuff@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Alex Pennetti

apennetti@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Edward W.Gray, Jr.

EGray@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Tristian Harris

tharris@berlethlaw.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Corinne Martin

cmartin@berlethlaw.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Hannah Fischer

hfischer@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Automated Certificate of eService

This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Jemisha Gandhi on behalf of David Walton Bar No. 24042120 jgandhi@bellnunnally.com Envelope ID: 101174598 Filing Code Description: No Fee Documents

Filing Description: Letter to Court regarding Reply to Cyberlux Response Status as of 5/22/2025 3:38 PM CST

Case Contacts

Hannah Fischer

hfischer@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Jocelin A. Tapia

jtapia@thompsoncoburn.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Greg Nieman

gnieman@bellnunnally.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Jemisha Gandhi

jgandhi@bellnunnally.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

David M.Keithly

dkeithly@mortensontaggart.com

5/22/2025 3:28:07 PM

SENT

Unofficial Copy Office of Marido Burgess District Clerk

Original source file

No source file is attached yet. The record is ready for the PDF/media link when the attachment importer is connected.
File
aw-harris-awh-2024-48085-doc-120702485.pdf
Source UID
source:080811478adce002680589290abea780536eefdcd3e7c3ac32eb1222901bc29f
Full SHA-256
080811478adce002680589290abea780536eefdcd3e7c3ac32eb1222901bc29f