From:' (NY) (FBI)" < To: ' (USANYS)" Subject: RE: case records scanning Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 14:33:19 +0000 Importance: Normal I got your voice message last night, I tried your desk, give me a call when you get a chance. To SSA - FBI New York On Jul 15, 2019 8:08 PM, " (USANYS)" < wrote: This all makes sense, thanks very much. Please let us know when the discs are sent? And I guess also when the hard copy dots are sent (and whether you were able to locate the images that were not scanned). Thanks again. From: (IMD) (FBI) < Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 04:10 To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) < :.; (USANYS) <I I>; N. (NY) (FBI) < > Subject: RE: case records scanning > (NY) (FBI) Please see my responses below. From: MANN [mailto: Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2019 3:56 PM To: (IMD) (FBI) an; Cc: (USANYS) .c > N. (NY) (FBI) < Subject: RE: case records scanning (NY) (FBI) < (USANYS) < That's great, thanks very much for all your and your team's work and for the update. That makes sense regarding the lAs, thanks. With respect to the images that were not scanned, is there any way to flag them in the original hard copies somehow, so that we can easily find them and refer to them when the hard copy documents are sent back to New York? Just to avoid needing to try to flip through all the original documents to find them. Let me check and see if a notation was made as to where these images were located or if I can readily/easily find them in output. Regarding the discs, I'm not sure I totally understand — when you say four copies each, were there just four discs total? Or possibly I'm just misunderstanding the explanation. And related, is it right that those discs were not processed (just copied) so we'll need to look at those separate for our review? Sorry I should have been clearer. We just copied the discs — not processed and made four copies each which is our standard. The thought being when we burn output we always give a complete set that