From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 3:00 PM To: Brad Edwards Subject: Re: sorry, my understanding was a ratio at the supreme .=C2 and money held for quite a while, the fourth we ag=eed is likely to rule as it has recently. the dersh case, will=undoubtably involve me, ( they are acting in their own interest, so =ou and i are clear, I take no responsiblity for their attacks . )=C2 and be at a minumum time consuming for you, and not without ri=k. I think it in our joint interest to resolve both, but understand =f you think we are too far apart. I am willing to come and sit on th= 6th. your call. On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Brad Edwards If you look at our discussions we have just taken a long road back to =he beginning. That is exactly what I said from the outset I did not want t= do. Before we continued I laid out some basic conditions and thought we h=d a general agreement on those things so that it was not a waste. I am having a very difficult tim= understanding why the two of us have no progressed things beyond this poi=t. I don't see a personal meeting helping if the fundamentals are not =n place. Sent from my iPhone On Sep 25, 2015, at 8:39 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected] <mailto:jeevacation@g=ail.com> wrote: i am always optimistic and you and i both do not lik= email On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Brad Edwards c: <mailto > wrote: Do you see a point at this point? Sent from my iPhone On Sep 25, 2015, at 8:02 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected] <mailto:jeevacation@g=ail.com» wrote: are we still on for the 6th/ please note EFTA_R1_01603847 EFTA02485435