Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-1407Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. NO. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 484-450-0144 Fax: 484-450-0153 Attorney for Roshanak Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, : Court of Common Pleas : Cumberland County : No. TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter judgment against the defendant(s), Kurosh Sharif, in accordance with the attached certified copy of the judgment entered in the Kindly Assess Damages As Follows: Amount of Judgment Interest @ 5.5% per from 10/29/01 To March 1, 2002 Total Due $ 606,117.00 $ 13,890.18 $ 620,007.18 Lee M. Herman, Esquire Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 484-450-0144 Fax: 484-450-0153 Attorney for Roshanak Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh : Court of Common Pleas : Cumberland County : No. CERTIFICATION I, Lee M. Herman, Esquire, hereby certify as follows: 1. I am the attorney for the plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. 2. This action is based on a foreign judgment duly entered by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County - Family Part entered in Docket No. FM-18-473-96 as is set forth in the certified copy of the judgment which is attached hereto. 3. Plaintiff is Roshanak Sharif, whose address is c/o Richard Yusem, Somerville, NJ, 08876. 4. Defendant is Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, whose address is 654 E. Jersey Street, Suite 2E, Elizabeth, PA 07206. 5. The aforementioned foreign judgment was entered pursuant to an action by Plaintiff against Defendants for Defendants' failure to pay outstanding monies owing on an account at the defendant's NJ location where the contract was entered into and failure to pay outstanding monies owing on an account at the defendant's NJ location where the contract was entered into and where defendant(s) have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the State of NJ. 6. To the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the above-mentioned judgment is valid, enforceable and unsatisfied to date. Sworn to and Suscrih~d this ~ day of/~/~2002':?-7-- Lee M. Herman Attorney for Plaintiff ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff, VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant. SUPERIOR:COURTi[~.~O~_]NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION-FAMILY PART S OM~i~ ii C~N~ ! ! Ob CIVIL ACTION EXEMPLIFICATION I, John N. Condelli, Family Division Manager sUperior, Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, the same being a Cou~t.'6f '!Record, do hereby certify the foregoing is a true copy of .an Ame~dedlFinal Judgment of Divorce entered on October 29, 2001 !'~ , ~ ~y the Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, Judge of the Superi;~]i. Co~t ~gf New Jersey. ~'i~-~'~i IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand ~d the seal of said Court at Somerville, this 7~-day of 2002. /q'J~ N.' ~ond~ll~i, Family  DivisionMan ager I, Thomas H. Dilts, Presiding Judge of the Family Division, Superior Court of New Jersey, do hereby certify that John N. Condelli, whose name is subscribed to the above certificate, was, at the date thereof, and now is the Family Division Manager, Superior Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, that foregoing attestation is in proper form, that the seal thereto annexed is the seal of said Court, and that the signature of the said John N. Condelli, is in his own proper handwriting. WITNESSmy hand at Somervill~i~this~th day of Feb ry, 2002. THOMAS H. DILTS, Presiding Judge Superior Court !-;-r;F:;!VED/FILED 2001 OCT 30 A 11: 2q' S(Ji:Ei;l;;h OF NEW ,JERSEY gOLIHTY OF SOHERSET 4ILLET and HERMES, ESQS 204 East Main Street P.O. BOX 390 Somerville, New Jersey (908) 595-1212 Attorneys for Plaintiff 08876 ROSHANAK SHEIK}{-SHARIF, Plaintiff, v. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant. :SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION:FAMILY PART :SOMERSET COUNTY :DOCKET NO. FM-18-473-96 Civil Action AMENDED JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE T~{IS MATTER, having come before the Court in the presence of Francis X. Hermes, Esq., attorney for and with the plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif and in the presence of the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh for only part of the trial testimony, and his counsel, Robert A. Franco, Esq. before the Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, P.J.F.P. and the Court having heard and considered the Complaint and proofs, and it appearing that the plaintiff and defendant were married on August 20, 1987 and the plaintiff having pleaded and proved a cause of action for divorce, and the plaintiff having been a bona fide resident of this State for more than one year next )receding the commencement of this action, and jurisdiction having acquired over~?~_parties pursuant to the Rules of Court; IT IS on thi ~day of October, 2001; ORDERED AND ADJUDGED and such Court, by virtue of the power ~nd authority of this Court, and of the acts of Legislature in such case provided, does hereby ORDER AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, and the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, be ~ivorced from the bonds of matrimony and the parties, and each of them, be freed and discharged from the obligations thereof, and that the marriage between the parties is hereby dissolved; and it is further ORDERED as follows: 1. The plaintiff is hereby awarded a Judgment for ~ support for 66 months, from March, 1996 through August 31, 2001 in the amount of $750.00 per week being the amount of unallocated ~ lite support which the Court determines the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh should have paid the plaintiff (That is, $1,750.00 less $1,000.00 he was ordered to pay each week). This support payment shall be non-taxable to the plaintiff and non-deductible by the defendant. The amount of this Judgment f°r ~ ~ite support is $212,850.00; 2. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $173,425.00 representing the educational costs for the parties, children which should have been paid by the defendant if the Court had been provided with the defendant,s actual income; 3. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and ~gainst the defendant in the amount of $81,033.00 as his share of )laintiff,s counsel fees. The defendant is entitled to a credit for any monies paid by him toward Mr. Hermes' counsel fees. 4. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $62,619.00 representing the expert witness fees .for Richard S. Yusem, Esq. and Mr. Thomas S Wagner. The Court determines that 75% of this amount is deemed allocable to support of the plaintiff and the parties' children and shall be non-dischargeable in bankruptcy; 5. With respect to Equitable Distribution, Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the sum of $76,190.00. This represents the $100,000.00 that the Court determines that the plaintiff is entitled to as her ~ of the increase in the value of the defendant's medical practice less the $23,810.00 previously awarded to and paid to the plaintiff by this Court's order of June 15, 2001; 6. All of these Judgments except No. 5 above represent support or fees incurred in connection with obtaining support. All of these amounts will be entered as a Judgment and the total of these amounts will be subject to collection by the Somerset County Probation Department except No. 5 above. Collection shall be by wage withholding. Collection by the Somerset County Probation Department shall be in accordance with paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of this Judgment. 7. The Court finds that effective January 1, 2002 the \ defendant shall be required to pay the sum of $500.00 per week toward the amount of these Judgments. The plaintiff shall have the right to collect these amounts as any other judgment holder and she is not restricted to this Court ordered wage garnishment. 8. The Court determines that there will be an arrears on the $1,700.00 per week support because the Court is making it effective September 1, 2001. All arrears on child support, including the $3,500.00 owed on October 5, 2001 and the arrears from September 1, 2001 to October 31, 2001 shall be paid in a lump sum by October 31 2001 by the defendant or a warrant will issue for his arrest; 9. The Court finds that the present level of life insurance on defendant's life in the sum of $1,000,000.00 is adequate to meet the needs of the parties' children. The plaintiff is hereby authorized to receive from these insurance proceeds the amount that she is owed on the Judgment of Divorce and the balance would be held for the benefit of the parties' children. The plaintiff shall be made the owner of the policy and named primary beneficiary of this policy with the parties' children as secondary beneficiaries. This change of ownership and named beneficiary status shall be accomplished by November 15, 2001 or an order for the arrest of the defendant will be issued upon request of plaintiff's counsel; 10. The Court's order for $1,700.00 support commences as of September 1, 2001 and the additional $500.00 per week toward arrears shall commence January 1, 2002. Therefore, from September 1, 2001 the defendant's weekly support obligation shall be in the amount of $1,700.00. After January 1, 2002 that amount shall be 52,200.00 per week; 11. The defendant shall continue to keep health insurance for the children and fully cooperate to allow the plaintiff to obtain continued coverage under the provisions of COBRA, provided that she ~oes so at her own expense; 12. The defendant shall )rescription and dental treatment maintain hospitalization, insurance for the parties' children and shall pay 92.98 percent of any unreimbursed expenses incurred on behalf of the children for hospitalization, medical, )rescription and dental treatment after the plaintiff pays the first $250.00 per child, per year; 13. The Final Domestic Violence order entered in this case shall continue in full force and effect; 14. The present parenting time shall be handled as set forth in the Court's orders of Noven~ber 19, 1999 and October 4, 2001 and the Court's previous orders with respect to the defendant's non- consumption of alcohol before and during parenting time shall continue in full force and effect. If the defendant is found to violate this directive, the plaintiff is invited to bring an Order to Show Cause for the Court to suspend future parenting time, )rovided the application is made in a timely fashion; 15. As of September 1, 2001 the defendant is required to pay ~he educational expenses of the children and the plaintiff shall supply the defendant with these itemized costs for this and each school year; 16. The Court hereby awards payment to Kalman A. Barson, CPA the sum of $7,938.00 for his services rendered as a Court appointed receiver for the defendant's medical practice and to Thomas S. Wagner in the sum of $29,792.00 for his services as a Court appointed receiver for defendant,s medical practice. Both these amounts are hereby entered as judgments against the defendant's medical practice, Kurosh Sharif, M.D., P.A., and not against the defendant personally; and it is further ORDERED that a copy of the Court's decision and Child Support Guidelines is hereby attached hereto addressing all issues raised by the parties in this matter. Counsel for the plaintiff shall )rovide a true copy of this Amended Judgment.._l~f Divorce to the ~ )merest County Probation Department and ~----~-IL'~A~-~-- ~=~=~u~nu S counse~within 2 days of the receipt of same. Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, P.J.F.P. Ce,~tified to be a Tr~ John N. Condelli NOTES PINS CALENDAR SHERIFF'S RETURN CASE NO: 2002-01407 p COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND SHEIKH-SHARIF ROSHANAK VS SHARIF-ZADEH KUROSH CPL. MICHAEL BARRICK REGULAR Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, says, the within SUBPOENA XACT UNITED HEALTHCARE INSUPJtNCE COMPANy Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of who being duly sworn according to law, was served upon the WITNESS at ~355:00 HOURS, at 1800 CENTER STREET CAMP HILL, PA 17011 SALLY MCCOY, LEGAL a true and attested copy of SUBPOENA on the 14t~ day of August , 2002 by handing to together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff,s Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 10.35 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 38.35 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ~/~ day of ~,.~,~3" ~zO~ A.D. P~o~honotary So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 08/15/2002 LEE M HERMAN LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, Plaintiff, VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, Defendant. 205724 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 02-1407 MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 TO AID IN THE EXECUTION OF A JUDGMENT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THIS COURT: Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, by and through her attorneys, Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C., hereby files a Motion for a Court Order to permit discovery in aid of execution of a judgment and in support thereof respectfully represents to the Court as follows: 1. The Plaintiffherein is Roshanak Sharif, whose address is c/o Richard Yusem, Somerville, New Jersey 08876. 2. The Defendant herein is Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh whose address is 22 Stone Ridge Lane, Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920. 3. On October 30, 2001, an Amended Judgment in Divorce for spousal support, child support, and equitable distribution was issued by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Somerset County, Docket No. FM- 18-473-96. See Copy of Judgment attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 4. On March 22, 2002, this judgment in the amount of $620,007.18 was entered against the Defendant in this Court pursuant to a duly filed Praecipe and Certification. See Copy of Praecipe attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 5. To date, this judgment has not been satisfied. 6. Plaintiff believes that Defendant has been hiding assets, and, therefore, she is seeking further discovery in aid of execution. 7. Shortly after the judgment was entered in this Court, Plaintiff served a defendant herein with a Notice of Intent to Serve a Subpoena upon Xact United Healthcare Insurance Co. via certified mail. 8. Defendant herein filed no objections to the subpoena. 9. Plaintiff then served the subpoena upon Xact, United Healthcare Insurance Co. See copy of subpoena and Sheriff's Return of Service attached hereto as Exhibit "C" 10.' From a review of a 1099 issued to Defendant in 1998, Plaintiff believes that Defendant was paid substantial sums for rendering medical services for the United Healthcare Insurance Company and that he deposited said funds into a bank account. See copy of 1099 attached hereto as Exhibit "D." 11. Plaintiff has no information about the location where Defendant deposited these funds, and she needs this information to facilitate tracing Defendant's assets in aid of execution. 12. By letter dated August 29, 2002, Plaintiff's counsel received a response to the United Healthcare Insurance Company subpoena from Alvina M. Osman, FOIA Coordinator, HGSAdministrators, in which Ms. Osman stated, on behalf of the federal agency, that it would "decline to produce the Medicare records requested by your firm's subpoena duces teem." See Copy of letter attached hereto aw Exhibit "E." 13. This Court has competent jurisdiction to grant Plaintiff relief in aid of execution of a valid judgment. 2 14. CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Intermediary, will not release full and complete copies of its payment checks to Defendant and other requested unless it is provided with an order of a court of competent jurisdiction. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif respectfully requests that this Honorable Court entered the attached proposed discovery order so that Plaintiff may proceed with execution on the judgment against Defendant. LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. Dated: September 10, 2002 BY: L M.~EHE~AN, ESQUIRE Attorneys for Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, Plaintiff, VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, Defendant. 205724 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 02-1407 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 TO AID IN THE EXECUTION OF A JUDGMENT Plaintiff Roshanak Sharif and Defendant Kurosh Sharif~Zadeh were parties to a bitter divorce in which Defendant attempted to avoid paying support obligations and failed to pay equitable distribution share to Plaintiff. On October 30, 2001, an Amended Judgment in Divorce for spousal support, child support, and equitable distribution was issued by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Somerset County, Docket No. FM-18-473-96. See Exhibit "A." On March 22, 2002, this judgment in the amount of $620,007.18 was entered against the Defendant in this Court pursuant to a duly filed Praecipe and Certification. See Exhibit "B." To date, this judgment has not been satisfied, and the Defendant has tried to avoid making any payments.. Plaintiff believes that Defendant has been hiding assets, and, therefore, she is seeking further discovery in aid of execution of the judgment. Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 3117(a), "[P]laintiff at any time after judgment, before or after the issuance of a writ of execution, may, for the purpose of discovery of assets of the defendant, take the testimony of any person, including a defendant or a garnishee, upon oral examination or written interrogatories as provided by the rules relating to Depositions and Discovery." In addition pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 3118(a)(6), this court may grant other such relief as deemed necessary and appropriate as supplementary relief in aid of execution upon appropriate motion and hearing. Shortly after the judgment was entered in this Court, Plaintiff served Defendant with a Notice of Intent to Service a Subpoena upon Xact. Defendant filed no objections to the subpoena. Thereafter, Plaintiff directed the Sheriffof Comberland County to serve a subpoena upon Xact, United Healthcare Insurance Co. pursuant to Pa. P.C.4009.22. See Exhibit "C" From a review ora 1099 issued to Defendant in 1998, Plaintiff believes that Defendant was paid substantial monies for rendering medical services by United Healthcare Insurance Company. Plaintiff has no information about where Defendant deposited these funds, and she needs this information to facilitate tracing Defendant's assets in aid of execution. See copy of 1099 attached hereto as Exhibit "D." By letter dated August 29, 2002, Plaintiff's counsel received a response to the United Healthcare Insurance Company subpoena from Alvina M. Osman, FOIA Coordinator, HGSAAdministrators in which Ms. Osman stated, on behalf of the federal agency, that it would "decline to produce the Medicare records requested by your firm's subpoena duces teem." See Exhibit "E." This Court has competent jurisdiction to grant Plaintiff relief in aid of execution ora valid judgment. In Moore v. United States Postal Service, 609 F.Supp. 681 (D.C.N.Y. 1985), the court found that a subpoena regarding husband's finances that was prepared by the attorney for the wife in a divorce action was an order by a court of competent jurisdiction under 5 U.S.C. 522a(b)(11). Accordingly, the United States Post Office where the defendant husband worked was obligated to comply with the subpoena. 5 The court found that a court order from a state court was sufficient to fit within the exceptions to the federal Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act, and that an order from a federal court was not necessary. The same result was reached in In Re Tucker, 689 A.2d 1214, 1216 (D.C.App. 1997), in which the court states as follows: "In Tootle v. Seaboard Coast Liner Co., 468 S.2d 237 (Fla. App., 5th Dist. 1984), the court held that Section 552a (b)(11) represented a "broad exception" to the prohibitions contained in the Act, and that this exception should be "strictly construed in favor of disclosure, especially in this type of situation where a state court rules on discovery matters in a state court trial." Id. At 239 (emphasis added). Therefore, it is clear that the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas is a court of competent jurisdiction for purposes of issuing an order regarding the enforcement of a subpoena directed to CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in aid of execution of a judgment. In addition, it must be noted that Plaintiff is not seeking the disclosure of any private information about personnel actions related to Defendant. Plaintiff is merely seeking copies of payment records necessary to aid in execution of a judgment. It must be noted that the Defendant has not objected to the issuance of this subpoena. CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Intermediary, will not release full and complete copies of its payment checks to Defendant and other requested information unless it is provided with an order of a court of competent jurisdiction. As a result of this refusal to honor a duly issued subpoena, Plaintiff has no choice but to apply to this court for relief. Therefore, in conclusion, based on the points and authorities presented, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court entered the attached proposed discovery order so that Plaintiff may proceed with execution on the judgment against Defendant. Respectfully submitted, LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LE~M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE Attorneys for Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Shari£ Dated: September 10, 2002 7 VERIFICATION Lee M. Herman, Esquire hereby states that: I am the attorney for the Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif; and that I am authorized to make this Verification on behalf of Plaintiff. I verify that the statements set forth in the foregoing Motion for Court Order are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief; I understand that these statement are made subject to the Penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~ Lee M. Herman, Esquire Dated: September 10, 2002 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that service of the within Motion for Court Order was mailed by first class mail September I0, 2002 to the party and entity mentioned below: Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh 25 Stone Ridge Lane Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920 Alvina M. Osman FOIA Coordinator HGSAAdministrator P.O. Box 890089 Camp Hill, PA 17089-0089 LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. By:H~~E' Lee M. eman, squire Attorneys for Plaintiff EXHIBIT "A" TO: OFFICE OF THE PROTHONOTARY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh 654 E. Jersey Street, Elizabeth, PA, 07206. Suite 2E Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh NOTICE Pursuant to Rule 236 of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, you are hereby notified that a Judgment has been entered against you in the above proceeding as indicated below. Judgment by Default XXX Money Judgment Judgment in Replevin Judgment for Possession Judgment on Award of Arbitration Judgment on Verdict .Judgment on Court.Findings IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS NOTICE, PLEASE CALL: ATTORNEY: LEE M. HERMAN at this telephone number: 484-450-0144 Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 484-450-0144 Fax: 484-450-0153 Attorney for Roshanak Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, : Court of Common Pleas : : Cumberland County : : No. TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter judgment against the defendant(s), Kurosh Sharif, in accordance with the attached certified copy of the judgment entered in the Kindly Assess Damages As Follows: Amount of J~dgme~t Interest @ 5.5% per from 10/29/01 To March 1, 2002 Total Due $ 606,117.00 $ 13,890.18 $ 620,007.18 Lee M. Herman, Esquire Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 484-450-0144 Fax: 484-450-0153 Attorney for Roshanak Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh : Court of Common Pleas : Cumberland County : No. CERTIFICATION I, Lee M. Herman, Esquire, hereby certify as follows: 1. I am the attorney for the plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. 2. This action is based on a foreign judgment duly entered by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County - Family Part entered in Docket No. FM-18-473-96 as is set forth in the certified copy of the judgment which is attached hereto. 3. Plaintiff is Roshanak Sharif, whose address is C/O Richard Yusem, Somerville, NJ, 08876. . 4. Defendant is Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, whose address is 654 E. Jersey Street, Suite 2E, Elizabeth, PA 07206. 5. The aforementioned foreign judgment was entered pursuant to an action by Plaintiff against Defendants for Defendants' failure to pay outstanding monies owing on an account at the defendant's NJ location where the contract was entered into and failure to pay outstanding monies owing on an account at the defendant's NJ location where the contract was entered into and where defendant(s) have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the State of NJ. 6. To the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the above-mentioned judgment is valid, enforceable and unsatisfied to date. Sworn to and Suscrik~ed this ~'/~ day of ~/~002 Lee M. Herman Attorney for Plaintiff ' Not-.=. r[~i Seal Utlda Laspina, Notar., '* '.,c Marple Twp., Del~,~: ..,~unty COmmission Exp, es ;Sept. 22, 2003 EXHIBIT "B" ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff, VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant. SUPERIOR COURT 'O~-!NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION-FAMILY PART SOMERSET C©ONTYi'.: ~b : : DOCKET NO. FM,18~473-96 .- : CIVIL ACTION EXEMPLIFICATION : .- : I, John N. Condelli, Family Division Manager Superior Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, the same being a Court of Record, do hereby certify the foregoing is a true copy of an A/ne~ed Final Judgment of Divorce entered on October 29, 2001 .'-., .~ ~y the Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, Judge of the superi~r.i. Co~t .'gf New Jersey. the seal of said Court at Somerville, this 2002. / ~Jb~ N.. ~o_nd~ll~i, Family DivisionNanager I, Thomas H. Dilts, Presiding Judge of the Family Division, Superior Court of New Jersey, do hereby certify that John N. Condelli, whose name is subscribed to the above certificate, was, at the date thereof, and now is the Family Division Manager, Superior Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, that foregoing attestation is in proper form, that the seal thereto annexed is the seal of said Court, and that the signature of the said John N. Condelli, is in his own proper handwriting. WITNESSmy hand at Somerville_._ ~this~th day of Feb ry, 002. THOMAS H. DILTS, Presiding Judge Superior Court .... ZI]Ol OCT 30 A II-' OF' ~ E ',~' L;:3L!i-iT Y 0.,: SOt'iERSET and HERMES, ESQS 204 East Main Street P.O. BOX 390 Somerville, New Jersey (908) 595-1212 Attorneys for Plaintiff 08876 ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff, v. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant. :SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION:FAMILY PART :SOMERSET COUNTY :DOCKET NO. FM-18-473-96 Civil Action AMENDED JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE TI{IS F~ATTER, having come before the Court in the presence of Francis X. Hermes, Esq., attorney for and with the plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif and in the presence of the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh for only part of the trial testimony, and his counsel, Robert A. Franco, Esq. before the Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, P.J.F.P. and the Court having heard and considered the Complaint and proofs, and it appearing that the plaintiff and defendant were married on August 20, 1987 and the plaintiff having pleaded and )roved a cause of action for divorce, and the plaintiff having been a bona fide resident of this State for more than one year next preceding the commencement of this action, and jurisdiction having acquired over~_parties pursuant to the Rules of Court; IT IS on thi ~ay of October, 2001; ORDERED AND ADJUDGED and such Court, by virtue of the power ~nd authority of this Court, and of the acts of Legislature in su~ case provided, does hereby ORDER AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, and the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, be divorced from the bonds of matrimony and the parties, and each of them, be freed and discharged from the obligations thereof, and that the marriage between the parties is hereby dissolved; and it is further ORDERED as follows: 1. The plaintiff is hereby awarded a Judgment for ~ support for 66 months, from March, 1996 through August 31, 2001 in the amount of $750.00 per week being the amount of unallocated pendent~ _lite support which the Court determines the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh should have paid the plaintiff. (That is, $1,750.00 less $1,000.00 he was ordered to pay each week). This support payment shall be non-taxable to the plaintiff non-deductible by the defendant. The amount of this Judgment for ~ .lite support is $212,850.00; 2. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $173,425.00 representing the educational costs for the parties, children which should have been )aid by the defendant if the Court had been provided with the defendant,s actual income; 3. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and ~gainst the defendant in the amount of $81,033.00 as his share of plaintiff,s counsel fees. The defendant is entitled to a credit for any monies paid by him toward Mr. Hermes' counsel fees. 4. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $62,619.00 representing the expert witness fees for Richard S. Yusem, Esq. and Mr. Thomas S Wagner. The Court determines that 75% of this amount is deemed allocable to support of the plaintiff and the parties' children and shall be non-dischargeable in bankruptcy; 5. With respect to Equitable Distribution, Judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the sum of $76,190.00. This represents the $100,000.00 that the Court determines that the plaintiff is entitled to as her portion of the increase in the value of the defendant's medical practice less the $23,810.00 previously awarded to and paid to the plaintiff by this Court's order of June 15, 2001; 6. All of these Judgments except No. 5 above represent ~upport or fees incurred in connection with obtaining support. Ali of these amounts will be entered as a Judgment and the total of these amounts will be subject to collection by the Somerset County Probation Department except No. 5 above. Collection shall be by wage withholding. Collection by the Somerset County Probation Department shall be in accordance with paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of this Judgment. 7. The Court finds that effective January 1, 2002, the defendant shall be required to pay the sum of $500.00 per week toward the amount of these Judgments. The plaintiff shall have the right to collect these amounts as any other judgment holder and she is not restricted to this Court ordered wage garnishment. 8. The Court determines that there will be an arrears on the $1,700.00 per week support because the Court is making it effective September 1, 2001. Ail arrears on child support, including the $3,500.00 owed on October 5, 2001 and the arrears from September 1, 2001 to October 31, 2001 shall be paid in a lump sum by October 31, 2001 by the defendant or a warrant will issue for his arrest; 9. The Court finds that the present level of life insurance on defendant's life in the sum of $1,000,000.00 is adequate to meet the needs of the parties' children. The plaintiff is hereby authorized to receive from these insurance proceeds the amount that she is owed on the Judgment of Divorce and the balance would be held for the benefit of the parties' children. The plaintiff shall be made the owner of the policy and named primary beneficiary of this policy with the parties' children as secondary beneficiaries. This change of ownership and named beneficiary status shall be accomplished by November 15, 2001 or an order for the arrest of the defendant will be issued upon request of plaintiff's counsel; 10. The Court's order for $1,700.00 support commences as of September 1, 2001 and the additional $500.00 per week toward arrears shall commence January 1, 2002. Therefore, from September 1, 2001 the defendant's weekly support obligation shall be in the amount of $1,700.00. After January 1, 2002 that amount shall be $2,200.00 per week; 11. The defendant shall continue to keep health insurance for the children and fully cooperate to allow the plaintiff to obtain continued coverage under the provisions of COBRA, provided that she does so at her own expense; 12. The defendant shall prescription and dental treatment maintain hospitalization, insurance for the parties, children and shall pay 92.98 percent of any unreimbursed expenses incurred on behalf of the children for hospitalization, medical, prescription and dental treatment after the plaintiff pays the first $250.00 per child, per year; 13. The Final Domestic Violence order entered in this case shall continue in full force and effect; 14. The present parenting time shall be handled as set forth in the Court's orders of November 19, 1999 and October 4, 2001 and the Court's previous orders with respect to the defendant's non- consumption of alcohol before and during parenting time shall continue in full force and effect. If the defendant is found to violate this directive, the plaintiff is invited to bring an Order to Show Cause for the Court to suspend future parenting time, provided the application is made in a timely fashion; 15. As of September 1, 2001 the defendant is required to pay the educational expenses of the children and the plaintiff shall supply the defendant with these itemized costs for this and each school year; 16. The Court hereby awards payment to Kalman A. Barson, CPA the sum of $7,938.00 for his services rendered as a Court appointed receiver for the defendant,s medical practice and to Thomas S. IWagner in the sum of $29,792.00 for his services as a Court appointed receiver for defendant's medical practice. Both these amounts are hereby entered as judgments against the defendant's nedical practice, Kurosh Sharif, M.D., P.A., and not against th( defendant personally; and it is further ORDERED that a copy of the Court's decision and Child Support Guidelines is hereby attached hereto addressing all issues raised by the parties in this matter. Counsel for the plaintiff shall )rovide a true copy of this Amended Judgment..~f~i~r~ to ~e et County Probation Department and defendant's co;u~n~e ~wi~th~i~n 2 days of the receipt of same. Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, P.J.F.P. Certified to be a Tru~ COlE John N. Condelli EXHIBIT "C" Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif 2057: Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif v Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOCKET NO. 02-1407 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Xact, United Healthcare Insurance Co. Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: ALL DOCUMENTS AND ALL REPORTS IN YOUR POSSESSION REGARDING: Legible copies of the front and back sides of all checks paid to Dr. Kuros] Sharif-Zadeh from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control Nbr. 222241854; Tax ID Nbr. 22-2241854. Records of any and all payments made by you to Dr. Kurosh Sharif-Zade] from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control Nbr. 222241854 Tax ID Nbr. 22-2241854; at the law offices of Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C., 2050 West Chester Pike, Havertowm PA 19083. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling yo~ to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: SHERIFF' S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2002-01407 P COMMONWRALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND SH~,I KH- SHARI F ROSHANAK VS SHARIF- ZADEH KUROSH CPL. MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law says, the within SUBPOENA was served upon XACT UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY the WITNESS at 1800 CENTER STREET , at 1355:00 HOURS, on the 14th day of August , 2002 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 SALLY MCCOY, LEGAL a true and attested copy of SUBPOENA by handing to together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 10.35 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 38.35 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A.D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 08/15/2002 LEE M HERMAN Prothonotary EXHIBIT "D" EXHIBIT "E" Medicar( Part B P.O. Box 890089 Camp Hill, PA 17089-0089 August 29, 2002 Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 Dear Mr. Herman: Re: Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif This is in response to the subpoena duces tecum, received August 14, 2002, initiated by your firm, for certain Medicare records in our possession. The Department of Health and Human Services regulation at 45 C.F.R. Part 2 states, among other things, that the Department will treat subpoena duces tecum for records in its possession as requests under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Because the records the subpoena seeks are in a Privacy Act system of records, the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) precludes release of those records except pursuant to a written authorization to release signed by the subject(s) of the records or unless the Freedom of Information Act requires release of the records or a court of competent jurisdiction orders release. Regarding the latter condition of disclosure, for purposes of the Privacy Act, a court of competent jurisdiction is a FEDERAL COURT, only. Review of this matter indicates that your firm has not presented a written authorization to release the records signed by the subject(s) of the records. Moreover, your firm's subpoena is not an order of a court of competent jurisdiction, and 45 C.F.R. Part 2 requires us to treat the subpoena duces tecum as a Freedom of Information Act request. Further, the Freedom of Information Officer for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has determined that the requested records are exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by exemption (b)(6) of that Act. Exemption (b)(6) permits the withholding of information about individuals in personnel and medical files and similar files, when the disclosure of such information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Based upon the foregoing, we respectfully decline to produce the Medicare records requested by your firm's subpoena duces tecum. ::ftGS ADMINISTRATORS A ClV~ CONI~a~Ti'ED CARRIER 0amp Hill, PA 17089 www.hgs,a.c:om Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. August 29, 2002 Page Two If you have any reason to disagree with this decision, you may appeal. Your appeal should be mailed, within 30 days of the date of this letter, to the Deputy Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Room C5-16-03, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. Please mark your envelope "Freedom of Information Act Appeal," and enclose a copy of this letter. Sincerely yours, Alvina M. Osman FOIA Coordinator HGSAdministrators cc: Lee J. Jackson, CMS Sally McCoy, Highmark Legal /3208650240 SEAL BY THE COURT: Prothonotary ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : 02-1407 CIVIL : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 IN AID OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT ORDER AND NOW, this / ? * day of September, 2002, a rule is issued upon CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, to show cause why the relief requested in the within motion ought not to be granted. This rule returnable twenty (20) days after service. Service is authorized, inter alia, on the FOIA coordinator of riGS Administrators. BY THE COURT, ess, J. .M. Nh(?,' C~ ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF~ Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBEItI.AND COUNTY, PENNA. oa-x4o7 CML CIVIL ACTION - LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On September 27, 2002, I served a copy of the Order In Re: Motion for Court Order Pursuant to PA.R.C.P. 3117 in Aid of Execution of Judgment upon: Alvina M. Osman FOIA Coordinator HGSAdministrators Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services P.O. Box 890089 Camp Hill, PA 17o89-oo89 by United States Mail, first class postage prepaid. Lee M. Herman LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, Plaintiff; vs. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, Defendant. COUR. T OF COMMON PLEAS OF CU1V[BERLAND COUNTY, PA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 02-1407 MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 TO AID IN THE EXECUTION OF A JUDGMENT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THIS COURT: Plaintiff' Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, by and througih her attorneys, Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C., hereby files a Motion for a Court Order to permit discovery in aid of execution ora judgment and in support thereof respectfully represents to the Court as follows: 1. The Plaintiff`herein is Roshanak Sharif, whose address is c/o Richard Yusem, Somerville, New Jersey 08876. 2. The Defendant herein is Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh whose address is 22 Stone Ridge Lane, Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920. 3. On October 30, 2001, an Amended Judgment in Divorce for spousal support, child support, and equitable distribution was issued by tE~e Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Somerset County, Docket No. FM-18-473-96. See Copy of Judgment attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 4. On March 22, 2002, this judgment in the amount of $620,007.18 was entered against the Defendant in this Court pursuant to a duly filed Praecipe and Certification. See Copy of Praecipe attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 5. To date, this judgment has not been satisfied. 6. Plaintiff believes that Defendant has been hiding assets, and, therefore, she is seeking further discovery in aid of execution. 7. Shortly after the judgment was entered in this Court, Plaintiff` served a defendant herein with a Notice of Intent to Serve a Subpoena upon Xact United Healthcare Insurance Co. via certified mail. 8. Defendant herein filed no objections to the subpoena. 9. Plaintiff then served the subpoena upon Xa(l, United Healthcare Insurance Co. See copy of subpoena and Sheriff's Return of Service attached hereto as Exhibit "C" 10. From a review of a 1099 issued to Defendant in 1998, Plaintiff` believes that Defendant was paid substantial sums for rendering medical services for the United Healthcare Insurance Company and that he deposited said funds into a bank account. See copy of 1099 attached hereto as Exhibit "D." 11. Plaintiff has no information about the location where Defendant deposited these funds, and she needs this information to facilitate tracing Defendant's assets in aid of execution. 12. By letter dated November 7, 2002, Gilbert Kunkin, DMD, MPH, Acting Regional Administrator of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), formerly known as the Healthcare Financing Administration (HCFA) refused to honor the Subpoena as is set forth in the attached Exhibit "E" indicating "the requested records are exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act". In addition, the letter indicates that the agency considers a Court of competent .jurisdiction to be a Federal Court only. (Emphasis and original) 13. This Court has competent jurisdiction to grant Plaintiffreliefin aid of execution ora valid judgment. 14. CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Intermediary, will not release full and complete copies of its payment checks to Defendant and other requested unless it is provided with an order of a court of competent jurisdiction. 15. There is currently pending a similar Motion before this Court against HGSAdministrators, who is also a self-contractor for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. WHEREFORE, PlaintiffRoshanak Sheikh-Sharif respectfully requests that this Honorable Court entered the attached proposed discow,~ry order so that Plaintiff may proceed with execution on the judgment against Defendant. LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. LEE'. M. HLkltMAN, ESQUIRE Attorneys for Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Dated: November 17, 2002 LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Shafif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, : Plainfifl~ : VS. : Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, : Defendant. COUR. T OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 02-1407 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 TO AID IN THE EXECUTION OF A JUDGMENT PlalntiffRoshanak Sharif and Defendant Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh were parties to a bitter divorce in which Defendant attempted to avoid paying support obligations and failed to pay equitable distribution share to Plaintil~ On October 30, 2001, an Amended Judgment in Divorce for spousal support, child support, and equitable distribution was issued by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Somerset County, Docket No. FM-18-473-96. See Exhibit "A." On March 22, 20(12, this judgment in the amount of $620,007.18 was entered against the Defendant in this Court pursuant to a duly filed Praecipe and Certification. See Exhibit "B." To date, this judgment has not been satisfied, and the Defendant has tried to avoid making any payments.. Plaintiffbelieves that Defendant has been hiding as:sets, and, therefore, she is seeking further discovery in aid of execution of the judgment. Pursuant to Pa.R. CP. 3117(a), "[P]laintiffat any time after judgment, before or a~er the issuance ora writ of execution, may, for the purpose of discovery of assets of the defendant, take the testimony of any person, including a defendant or a garnishee, upon oral examination or written interrogatories as provided by the rules relating to Depositions and Discovery." In addition pursuant to Pa.R. CP. 3118(a)(6), this court may grant other such relief as deemed necessary and appropriate as supplementary relief in aid of execution upon appropriate motion and hearing. Shortly after the judgment was entered in this Court, Plaintiff served Defendant with a Notice of Intent to Service a Subpoena upon Xact. Defendant filed no objections to the subpoena. Thereafter, Plaintiff` directed the Sheriff` of Comberland County to serve a subpoena upon Xact, United Healthcare Insurance Co. pursuant to Pa. P.C.4009.22. See Exhibit "C" From a review ora 1099 issued to Defendant in 1998, Plaintiff believes that Defendant was paid substantial monies for rendering medical services by United Healthcare Insurance Company. Plaintiff has no information about where Defendant deposited these funds, and she needs this information to facilitate tracing Defendant's assets in aid of execution. See copy of 1099 attached hereto as Exhibit "D." By letter dated November 7, 2002, Gilbert Kunkin, DMD, MPH, Acting Regional Administrators for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) declined to provide the information indicating that the Center did not consider the present Court a Court of competent jurisdiction. See attached Exhibit "E". This Court has competent jurisdiction to grant Plaintiffreliefin aid of execution of a valid judgment. In Moore v. United States Postal Service, 609 F.Supp. 681 (D.C.N.Y. 1985), the court found that a subpoena regarding husband's finances that was prepared by the attorney for the wife in a divorce action was an order by a court of competent jurisdiction under 5 U.S.C. 522a(b)(11). Accordingly, the United States Post Office where the defendant husband worked was obligated to comply with the subpoe, na. The court found that a court order from a state court was sufficient to fit within the exceptions to the federal Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act, and that an order from a federal court was not necessary. The same result was reached inlnRe Tucker, 689 A.2d 1214, 1216 (D.C.App. 1997), in which the court states as follows: "In Tootle v. Seaboard Coast Liner Co., 468 S.2d 237 (Fla. App., 5th Dist. 1984), the court held that Section 552a (b)(11) represented a "broad exception" to the prohibitions contained in the Act, and that this exception should be "strictly construed in favor of disclosure, especially in this type of situation where a state court rules on discovery matters in a state court trial." Id. At 239 (emphasis added). Therefore, it is clear that the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas is a court of competent jurisdiction for purposes of issuing an order regarding the enforcement of a subpoena directed to CMS Centers for Medicare: and Medicaid Services in aid of execution of a judgment. In addition, it must be noted that Plaintiff is not seeking the disclosure of any private information about personnel actions related to Defendant. Plaintiff is merely seeking copies of payment records necessary to aid in execution of a judgment. It must be noted that the Defendant has not objected to the issuance of this subpoena. CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Intermediary, will not release full and complete copies of its payment checks to Defendant and other requested information unless it is provided with an order of a court of competent jurisdiction. As a result of this refusal to honor a duly issued subpoena, Plaintiff has no choice but to apply to this court for relief. Therefore, in conclusion, based on the points and authorities presented, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court entered the attached proposed discovery order so that Plaintiff may proceed with execution on the judgment against Defendant. Respectfully submitted, LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C LEE M. AN, ESQUIRE Attorneys for Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Dated: November 17, 2002 VERIFICATION Lee M. Herman, Esquire hereby states that: I am the attorney for the Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif; and that I am authorized to make this Verification on behalf of Plaintiff: I verify that the statements set forth in the foregoing Motion for Court Order are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief; I understand that these statement are made subject to the Penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. {}4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. 'kd Lee M. Herman, Esquire Dated: November 19, 2002 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that service of the within Motion for Court Order was mailed by first class mail November 20, 2002 to the party and entity mentioned below: Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh 25 Stone Ridge Lane Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920 Tracy McCullum Medicare Part B Coordination Department Empire Medical Services New Jersey Operations 300 Park Avenue Harrisburg, PA 17111 Gilbert Kinken, DMD, MPH Acting Regional Administrator Centers for Medicare & Medicade Services (CMS) Region II Federal Building 26 Federal Plaza New York, NY 10278 LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. Lee M. F[ernan, Esquire Attorneys for Plaintiff ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff, vs. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant. SUPERIOR COURT 'O'~NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION-FAMILY PART SOM~.R~ET DOCKET NO. FM'18-473-96 CIVIL ACTION EXEMPLIFICATION I, John N. Condelli, Family Division Manager Superior Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, the same being a Court of Record, do hereby certify the foregoing is a true copy of an A/nen~ded Final Judgment of Divorce entered on October 29, 2001 , .~ .b.y the Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, Judge of the Superi-Or Coe~t 9f New Jersey. i~{- ' '}~ ~ 'l IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand ~d affixed the sea of said Court at Somervine, this day of 2002. Division ~Manager I, Thomas H. Dilts, Presiding Judge of the Family Divisiona~ Superior Court of New Jersey, do hereby certify that JQhn N. Condelli, whose name is subscribed to the above certificate, was, at the date thereof, and now is the Family Division Manager, Superior Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, that foregoing attestation is in proper form, that the seal thereto annexed is the seal of said Court, and that the signature of the said John N. Condelli, is in his own proper handwriting. WITNESS my hand at Somerville, this~th day of Feb~ry~2002. THC,MAS H. DILTS, Presiding Judge Superior Court 2001 0C[ ]:0 A 11: 2q 4ILLET and HERMES, ESQS 204 East Main Street P.O. BOX 390 Somerville, New Jersey (908) 595-1212 Attorneys for Plaintiff 08876 ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff, v. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant. :SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CH]~NCERY DIVISION:FAMILY PART :SOMERSET COUNTY :DOCKET NO. FM-18-473-96 Civil Action AMENDED JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE THIS MATTER, having come before the Court in the presence-of Francis X. Hermes, Esq., attorney for and with the plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif and in the presence of the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh for only part of the trial testimony, and his ~ounsel, A. Franco, Esq. before the Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, P.J.F.P. and the Court having heard and considered the Complaint and proofs, and it appearing that the plaintiff and defendant were married on August 20, 1987 and the plaintiff having pleaded and proved a cause of action for divorce, and the plaintiff having been a bona fide resident of this State for more than one year next )receding the commencement of this action, and jurisdiction havi~g been acquired ove~ t~_parties pursuant to the Rules of Court; IT IS on thi~day of October, 2001; ORDERED AND ADJUDGED and such Court, by virtue of the power ~nd authority of this Court, and of the acts of Legislature in such case provided, does hereby ORDER AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, and the defendant, Kuro~h Sharif-Zadeh, be divorced from the bonds of matrimony and the parties, and each of them, be freed and discharged from the obligations thereof, and that the marriage between the parties is hereby dissolved; and it is further ORDERED as follows: 1. The plaintiff is hereby awarded a Judgment for ~ support for 66 months, from March, 1996 through August 31, 2001 in the amount of $750.00 per week being the amount of unallocated penden_______tq l_ite support which the Court determines the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh should have paid the plaintiff~ (That is, $1,750.00 less $1,000.00 he was ordered to pay each week). This support paYme~ shall be non-taxable to the plaintiff and non-deductible by the defendant. The amount of this Judgment for ~ li___tq support is $212,850.00; 2. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $:173,425.00 representing the educational costs for the parties, children which should have been ipaid by the defendant if the Court had been provided with the defendant,s actual income; 3. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $81,033.00 as his share of )laintiff's counsel fees. The defendant is entitled to a credit for any monies paid by him toward Mr. Hermes' counsel fees. 4. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $62,619.00 representing the expert witness fees for Richard S. Yusem, Esq. and Mr. Thomas S Wagner. The Court determines that 75% of this amount is deemed allocable to support of the plaintiff and the parties, children and shall be non-dischargeable in bankruptcy; 5. With respect to Equitable Distribution, Judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the sum of $76,190.00. This represents the $100,000.00 that the Court determines that the plaintiff is entitled to as her portion of the increase in the value of the defendant's medical practice less the $23,810.00 previously awarded to and paid to the plaintiff by this Court's order of June 15, 2001; 6. Ail of these Judgments except No. 5 above represent support or fees incurred in connection with obtaining support.. Ail of these amounts will be entered as a Judgment and the total of these amounts will be subject to collection by the Somerset County Probation Department except No. 5 above. Collection shall~be b~ wage withholding. Collection by the Somerset County Probation Department shall be in accordance with paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of this Judgment. 7. The Court finds that effective January 1 2002, the defendant shall be required to pay the sum of $500.00 per week toward the amount of these Judgments. The plaintiff shall have the right to collect these amounts as any other judgment holder and she is not restricted to this Court ordered wage garnishment. 8. The Court determines that there will be an arrears on the $1,700.00 per week support because the Court is making it effective September 1, 2001. Ail arrears on child support, including the $3,500.00 owed on October 5, 2001 and the arrears from September 1, 2001 to October 31, 2001 shall be paid in a lump sum by October 31, 2001 by the defendant or a warrant will issue for his arrest; 9. The Court finds that the present level of life insurance on defendant,s life in the sum of $1,000,000.00 is adequate to meet the needs of the parties' children. The plaintiff is hereby authorized to receive from these insurance proceeds the amount that she is owed on the Judgment of Divorce and the balance would be held for the benefit of the parties' children. The plaintiff shall be made the owner of the policy and named primary beneficiary of this policy with the parties' children as secondary beneficiaries. This change of ownership and named beneficiary status shall be accomplished by November 1S, 2001 or an order for the arrest of the defendant will be issued upon request of plaintiff,s counsel; 10. The Court's order for $1,700.00 support commences as of September 1, 2001 and the additional $500.00 per week toward arrears shall commence January 1, 2002. Therefore, from September 1, 2001 the defendant's weekly support obligation shall be in the amount of $1,700.00. After January 1, 2002 that amount shall be $2,200.00 per week; 11. The defendant shall continue to keep health insurance for the children and fully cooperate to allow the plaintiff to obtain continued coverage under the provisions of COBRA, provided that she does so at her own expense; 12. The defendant shall maintain hospitalization, prescription and dental treatment insurance for the parties, children and shall pay 92.98 percent of any unreimbursed expenses incurred on behalf of the children for hospitalization, medical, )rescription and dental treatment after the plaintiff pays the $250.00 per child, per year; 13. The Final Domestic Violence order entered in this case shall continue %n full force and effect; 14. The present parenting time shall be handled as set forth in the Court's orders of November 19, 1999 and October 4, 2001 and the Court's previous orders with respect to the defendant,s non- consumption of alcohol before and during parenting time shall continue in full force and effect. If the defendant is found to violate this directive, the plaintiff is invited to bring an Order to Show Cause for the Court to suspend future parenting time, )rovided the application is made in a timely fashion; 15. As of September 1, 2001 the defendant is required to pay the educational expenses of the children and the plaintiff shall supply the defendant with these itemized costs for this and each school year; _ 16. The Court hereby awards payment to Kalman'A. Barson, CPA the sum of $7,938.00 for his services rendered as a Court appointed receiver for the defendant,s medical practice and to Thomas S. Wagner in the sum of $29,792.00 for his services as a Court appointed receiver for defendant's medical practice. Both these amounts are hereby entered as judgments against the defendant's medical practice, Kurosh Sharif, M.D., P.A., and not against th defendant personally; and it is further ORDERED that a copy of the Court's decision and Child Support 3uidelines is hereby attached hereto addressing all issues raised by the parties in this matter. Counsel for the plaintiff shall ~e a true copy of this Amended Judgment,~f~i%vorce to the ~et County ~ a~ aezenaann,s coun's ith~n Probation Department ..... ~1, ~~A 2 days of the receipt of same. eAw Honorable Thomas H. Dilts, P.J.F.P. certified to be a Tr~ Cole John N. Condelli / TO: OFFICE OF THE PROTHONOTARY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh 654 E. Jersey Street, Elizabeth, PA, 07206. Suite 2E Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif vs. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh NOTICE Pursuant to Rule 236 of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, you are hereby notified that a Judgment has been entered against you in the above proceeding as indicated below. Judgment by Default XXX Money Judgment Judgment in Replevin Judgment for Possession Judgment on Award of Arbitration Judgment on Verdict Judgment on Court Findings IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS NOTICE, ATTORNEY: LEE M. HERMAN PLEASE CALL: at this telephone number: 484-450-0144 Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. NO. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 484-450-0144 Fax: 484-450-0153 Attorney for Roshanak Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif vs. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, : Court of Common Pleas : Cumberland County : : No. TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter judgment against the defendant(s), Kurosh Sharif, in accordance with the attached certified copy of the judgment entered in the Kindly Assess Damages As Follows:~ Amount of J~dgme~t Interest @ 5.5% per from 10/29/01 To March 1, 2002 Total Due $ 606,117.00 $ 13,890.18 $ 620,007.18 Lee M. Herman, Esquire Lee M. Herman, Esquire, BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike Havertown, PA 19083 484-450-0144 Fax: 484-450-0153 Attorney for Roshanak Sharif 205724 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh : Court of Common Pleas · Cumberland County : : No. CERTIFICATION I, Lee M. Herman, Esquire, hereby certify as follows: 1. I am the attorney for the plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. 2. This action is based on a foreign judgment duly entered by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County - Family Part entered in Docket No. FM-18-473-96 as is set forth in the certified copy of the judgment which is attached hereto. 3. Plaintiff is Roshanak Sharif, whose address is~ C/O Richard Yusem, Somerville, NJ, 08876. 4. Defendant is Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, whose address is 654 E. Jersey Street, Suite 2E, Elizabeth, PA 07206. 5. The aforementioned foreign judgment was entered pursuant to an action by Plaintiff against Defendants for Defendants' failure to pay outstanding monies owing on an account at the defendant's NJ location where the contract was entered into and failure to pay outstanding monies owing on an account at the defendant's NJ location where the contract was entered into and where defendant(s) have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the State of NJ. 6. To the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the above-mentioned judgment is valid, enforceable and unsatisfied to date. Sworn to and Suscrik~ed this ~'~ day of ~/~t~002 Notary Lee M. Herman Attorney for Plaintiff I Not~ riai Seal [~'lda Laspina, Nora,',," ,,,c Marple Twp. Del~- -,-,unty Corem ssion Expires ~epL ~.~ Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 2050 West Chester Pike I lavertown, PA 19083 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif 205T Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif v Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA DOCKET NO. 02-1407 SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OR THINGS FOR DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO RULE 4009.22 TO: Xact, United Healthcare Insurance Co,. Within twenty (20) days after service of this subpoena, you are ordered by the court to produce the following documents or things: ALL DOCUMENTS AND ALL REPORTS IN YOUR POSSESSION REGARDING: Legible copies of the front and back sides of all checks paid to Dr. Kurost Sharif-Zadeh from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control Nbr. 222241854; Tax ID Nbr. 22-2241854. b. Records of any and all payments made by you to Dr. Kurosh Sharif~Zadel from 1997 to the present; ,OMB No. 1545-0115; Control Nbr. 222241854; Tax ID Nbr. 22-2241854; at the law offices of Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C., 2050 West Chester Pike, Havertown, PA 19083. You may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. You have the right to seek in advance the reasonable cost of preparing the copies or producing the things sought. If you fail to produce the documents or things required by this subpoena within twenty (20) days after its service, the party serving this subpoena may seek a court order compelling ym to comply with it. This subpoena was issued at the request of the following person: CASE NO: 2002-01407 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND SHEIKH- SHARI F ROSHANAK VS SHARIF-ZADEH KUROSH CPL. MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law. says, the within SUBPOENA was served upon XACT b~ITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMP~NY the WITNESS at 1800 CENTER STREET , at 1355:00 HOURS, on the 14th day of August , 2002 CAMP HILL, PA 17011 SALLY MCCOY, LEGAL a true and attested copy of SUBPOENA by handing to together with and at the same time directing Her attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 10.35 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 38.35 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this day of A.D. So Answers: R. Thomas Kline o8/15/ oo2 LEE M HERMAN L~:---' Deputy Prothonotary DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Health Care Financing Administration Refer to DBHPP:BSPB:TMC Region II Federal Building 26 Federal Plaza New York NY 10278 November 7, 2002 Mr. Lee Herman Law Offices of Lee M. Herman 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, Pennsylvania 19063 Dear Mr. Herman: Re: 22002NEWY0727 Dr. Kurosh SharifZadeh This is in response to the subpoena duces tecum, initiated by your firm, for certain Medicare records in our possession. The Department of Health and Human Services regulation at 45 C.F.R. Part 2 states, among other things, that the Department will treat subpoenas duces tecum for records in its possession under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Because the records the subpoena seeks are in a Privacy Act system of records, the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) precludes release of those except pursuant to a written authorization to release signed by the subject(s) of the records or unless the Freedom of Information Act requires release of the records or a court of competent jurisdiction orders release. Regarding the latter condition of disclosure, we advise that, for purpose of the Privacy Act, this agency considers a court of competent jurisdiction to be a Federal Court only. Review of this matter indicates that your firm has not presented a written authorization to release the records signed by the subject(s) of the records. Moreover, we cannot interpret your firm's subpoena as an order of a court of competent jurisdiction since 45 C.F.R Part 2 identifies a subpoena duces tecum as a Freedom of Information Act request. Further, the Freedom of Information Officer for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has determined that the requested records are exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Infom~ation Act by exemption (b) (6) of the Act. The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) was renmned to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). We are exercising fiscal restraint by exhausting our stock of stationery. Exemption (b) (6) permits the withholding of personnel and medical files and similar files, the disclosure of which constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Based upon the foregoing, we respectfully decline to produce the Medicare records requested by your firm's subpoena duces tecum. If you have reason to disagree with this decision, you may appeal. Your appeal should be mailed, within 30 days of the date of this letter, to the Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer, The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Room N2-19-25, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. Please mark your envelope "Freedom of Information Act Appeal," and enclose a copy of this letter. We trust we have been of assistance to you. Should you have any questions, please contact Ms. Debbie Fried at (212) 264-8132. Sincerely, Gilbert Kunken, DMD, MPH Acting Regional Administrator cc: FOIA Officer, CMS ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaimiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CIVIL · CIVIL ACTION - LAW' MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 IN AID OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT ORDER AND NOW, this ! ;- ° day of December, 2002, a rule is issued on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to show cause why the relief requested in the within motion ought not to be granted. This rule returnable twenty (20) days after service. BY THE COURT, K~~. Hess, J. LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERM2XN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 61o/325-97oo Fax: 61o/325-97o7 Attorney for Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, Plaintiff, VS. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, Defendant. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 02-14o7 205724 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that on January ao, 2003, I served a copy of the Rule to Show Cause in re: Motion for Contempt Order pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 3117 in Aid of Execution of Judgment by forwarding same by certified mail, return receipt requested, upon the following: Certified Mail: 7OOl 194o oooo ooo5 88oo Traey McCullum Medicare Part B Coordination Department Empire Medical Services New Jersey Operations 300 Park Avenue Harrisburg, PA 17111 Certified Mail: 7OOl 194o oooo oo05 8817 Gilbert Kinken, DMD, MPH Acting Regional Administrator Centers for Medicare & Medicade Services (CMS) Region II Federal Building 26 Federal Plaza NewYork, NY 10278 LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. By: ~ Lee M. Herman, Esquire Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, ) Defendant. ) ) MSP ANSWER Civil Docket No. 02-1407 SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. § 3117 IN All) OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT Defendant, Tommy G. Thompson, the Secretary of the 'United States Department of Health and Human Services, by his attorney, in response to plaintiff's motion, hereby moves for an order denying plaintiff's motion, and in support, states as follows: 1. Plaintiff seeks to compel the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS"), to comply with a subpoena to produce records pertaining to Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh. 2. Pursuant to Federal regulation, a subpoena duces tecum seeking records of CMS is considered a request under the Freedom of Information Act. 45 C.F.R. § 2.1 and § 2.5. The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a applies to records that are about individuals. 3. The Privacy Act precludes the disclosure of individuals' records without the consent of the subject individual. 45 C.F.R. § 5b.9. Further, the records requested by plaintiff would be exempt from disclosure under Exemption six of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6), which exempts from disclosure records whose release would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Some of the information frequently withheld under Exemption six include earning records, claim files and other personal information maintained by CMS. 45 C.F.R. § 5.67(c). Plaintiff seeks the release of"payment records" for Mr. Sharif-Zadeh, which would clearly fall within parameters of FOIA's Exemption six. As such, the release of these records is prohibited by the federal Privacy Act under 5 U.S.C. § 552a. This federal statute carries substantial criminal penalties for unauthorized release of information. 4. The doctrine of sovereign immunity precludes the state court from exercising jurisdiction to compel CMS to produced the records requested by plaintiff, and also denies it the authority to review and set aside the CMS's decision and the federal regulations under which it is made. Boron Oil Co. v. Downie, 873 F.2d 67 (4th Cir. 1989). An action against a federal agency or official will be treated as an action against the sovereign if "the judgment sought would expend itself on the public treasury or domain, or interfere with the public administration, or if the effect of the judgment would be to restrain the Government from acting, or compel it to act." Portsmouth Redevelopment & Housing Authority v. Pierce, 706 F.2d 471,473 (4th Cir. 1983), quoting Dugan v. Rank, 372 U.S. at 620, 83 S.Ct. at 1006. 5. The state court does not have authority to override HHS's Touhy~ regulations. To do so would be a violation of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. Boron Oil Co. v. Downie, 873 F.2d 67. "Congress has expressly limited Administrative Procedure Act review to the federal courts, and a state court's assertion of the power of judicial review over federal agencies ~ See United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1962). Touhy regulations govern the production of agency records and the testimony of government employees in a deposition or trial. Federal courts have repeatedly upheld the validity of Touhy regulations. directly contravenes 5 U.S.C. § 702." Id at 71. "[P]roperly promulgated agency regulations implementing federal statutes have the force and effect of federal law which state courts are bound to follow. See Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281,295-96, 99 S.Ct. 1705, 1714-15, 60 L.Ed.2d 208 (1979)." Id._:. WHEREFORE, the Secretary denies that plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested and respectfully requests that the Court deny plaintiff's motion. Respectfully Submitted, James C. Newman Chief Counsel By: Lyn~ Assistant Regional Counsel CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on January 30, 2003, I caused true copy of the foregoing Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. § 3117, to be mailed via prepaid, first-class mail, to: Lee M. Herman, Esquire 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, Pennsylvania 19063 Lynda R. Dennis, Esquire Assistant Regional Counsel U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the General Counsel, Region III Public Ledger Building, Suite 418 150 S. Independence Mall West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3499 ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaimiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COLrNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 IN AID OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT ORDER AND NOW, this //'~ day of March, 2003, argument on the within motion is set for Thursday, April 2, 2003, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA. Lee M. Herman, Esquire For the Plaintiff BY THE COURT, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh . . Defendant G~c~ ~ _3- l I- 03 Lynda R. Dennis, Esquire Assistant Regional Counsel U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of General Counsel, Region III ublic Ledger Building, Suite 418 150 S. Independence Mall West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3499 :rlm IlAR 0 4 2003 LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE I.D. No. 27570 200 East State Street, Suite 306 Media, PA 19063 610/325-9700 Fax: 610/325-9707 Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, : Plaintiff, : vs. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, : Defendant. : Attorney for Plaintiff ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF 205724 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 02-1407 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW CONTRA RESPONSE OF SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR COURT ORDER The Secretary of Health and Human Services ( hereinafter "HHS Secretary"), a representative of non-party federal agency, has not filed a motion to quash Plaintiff's subpoena or a motion for a protective order. Instead, the HHS Secretary argues in its brief that it cannot produce the requested payment records to Defendant Dr. Sharif-Zadeh because the records are protected under the Privacy Act., or, in the alternative, that a state court has no jurisdiction over a federal agency. The HHS Secretary has not specified any agency-specific basis to prohibit the disclosure of the requested records. The HHS Secretary's contentions are not supported in exception contained in 5 USCS § 552a (b)(11) of The Privacy Act, which provi6es, in relevant portion, as follows: (b) Conditions of Disclosure. No agency shall disclosure any record which is contained in a system of records by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of the individual to whom the record pertains, unless disclosure of the record would be-- (11) pursuant to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction. A state court is not excluded in this statute as a court of competent jurisdiction empowered to obtain records under this exception to Privacy Act. The sovereign immunity analysis of Boron Oil Co. v. Downie, 873 F.2d 67 (4th Cir. 1989) that is raised by the HHS Secretary as a shield to producing the records is not applicable here. Therefore, a subpoena or order of this court for records is enforceable against the HHS Secretary. See In Re Tucker, 689 A.2d 1214,1215 (D.C.App. 1997) ("Unlike other provisions of the Privacy Act and of the Freedom of Infol~nation Act (FOIA), see pp. 1216-17 & n.4, infra, Section 552a (b)(11) does not speciify that the required order must be issued by a federal court, and there is no reason to read into the statute such a limitation which does not appear in its text.") In her subpoena, Plaintiff is seeking information Defendant' s assets in the form of payment records that HHS through a medical intermediary paid to defendant for the provisions of medical services. The release of these records will serve the public interest by permitting Plaintiff to enforce a legally obtained judgment. So, whether this court utilizes the balancing test of need for disclosure versus potential harm from disclosure in Perry v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 734 F.2d 1441, 1447 (11th Cir. 1984), cert. denied 469 U.S. 1108 (1985) or the relevancy test under the broad provisions of Pa.R.C.P. 3117 permitting discovery of assets in aid of execution, disclosure is permitted. See Laxalt v. C.K. McClatchy, 809 F.2d 885 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (interpreting federal rules but clearly applicable to state rules of discovery). The disclosure of the payment records will clearly aid Plaintiff in the discovery of Defendant's hidden assets and may lead to other relevant evidence regarding his assets. By objecting to enforce~nent of this subpoena, the HHS Secretary is serving to assist Defendant in hiding his as. sets from Plaintiff and to prejudice her rights to collect on a judgment. 2 Therefore, in conclusion, based on the points and authorities presented, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court issue an Order against the Secretary Of Health And Human Services directing him to comply with Plaintiff' s subpoena and to produce the requested payment records. Respectfully submitted, LEE; M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE, P.C. BY: LEE M. HERMAN, ESQUIRE Attorneys for Plaintiff Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif Dated: February 21, 2003 ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 IN AID OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT ORDER AND NOW, this ! ,,t day of April, 2003, our order of March 11, 2003, is amended to provide that the correct date for argument on the motion is Thursday, April 10, 2003, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA. BY THE COURT, Lee M. Herman, Esquire For the Plaintiff Hess, J. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh Defendant Lynda R. Dennis, Esquire Assistant Regional Counsel U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of General Counsel, Region III Public Ledger Building, Suite 418 150 S. Independence Mall West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3499 XU\/L{)?,..',-i .(: ::; j ::', .!Z ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SI[AP, IF, Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 IN AID OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT BEFORE HESS, J: ORDER AND NOW, this //a'~ day of July, 2003, upon consideration of plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif's Motion for Court Order pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 3117 to Aid in the Execution of a Judgment, and any response thereto, it is hereby ordered and decreed that said motion is granted. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this order, the CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, must comply with the provisions of the subpoena that was duly served upon it on August 14, 2002, by producing the following documents or things at the law offices of Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C., 200 East State Street, Suite 306, Media, PA 19063, at a mutually convenient time: All Documents and all Reports in your possession Regarding: a. Legible copies of the front and back sides of all checks paid to Dr. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control No. 222241854; Tax ID No. 22-2241854. b. Records of any and all payments made by you to Dr. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control No. 222241854; Tax ID No. 22-2241854. Or, in the alternative, CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or things requested by this subpoena, together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. Nothing herein shall prevent CMS from imposing a reasonable charge upon the plaintiff for the copying of the aforementioned documents. BY THE COURT, ~L~e M. Herman, Esquire For the Plaintiff ../I~ josh Sharif-Zadeh Defendant ~Lynda R. Dennis, Esquire Assistant Regional Counsel U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of General Counsel, Region III Public Ledger Building, Suite 418 150 S. Independence Mall West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3499 K¢itess,5~ iRKS -//.,'0-3 :rim ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF, Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN RE: MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 3117 IN AID OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT BEFORE HESS, J. OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif, and the defendant, Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh, were divorced on October 30, 2001. (PlaintifFs Motion for Court Order, para. 3.) An amended judgment in divorce for spousal support, child support and equitable distribution was issued by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County. (Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order, para. 3.) On March 22, 2002, a judgment in the amount of $620, 007.18 was entered against the defendant pursuant to a duly filed praecipe. (Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order, para. 4.) To date, this judgment has not been satisfied. (Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order, para. 5.) The plaintiff alleges that the defendant, a doctor, has hidden assets. This is based on her review of a 1099 issued to the defendant in 1998. (Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order, para. 10.) The 1099 indicates that the defendant was paid substantial stuns for rendering medical services to CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS is located in Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. (N.T. at 10.) CMS is a Medicare intermediary and a 02-1407 CIVIL subcontractor to the United States government. The plaintiff believes that the defendant deposited checks from CMS into a bank account and she wishes to review the front and back of the checks paid to the defendant by CMS to determine where the checks were deposited. (N.T. at 18.) The plaintiff served the defendant with Notice of Intent to Serve a Subpoena on CMS and the defendant made no objection. (Plaintiff's Motion for Court Order, paras. 7 and 8.) The plaintiff then served a subpoena on CMS, who forwarded the subpoena request to the regional office of the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Alvina M. Ossman, FOIA Coordinator, replied by letter to plalntiW s counsel on behalf of the federal agency. Ossman's letter stated that CMS refused to honor the subpoena and that the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. Section 522a) precluded release of the requested records. Aetna U.S. Healthcare was served with a similar subpoena which they honored. (N.T. at 4..) The plaintiff has sought an order compelling CMS's compliance with the subpoena in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 3117. This court issued a rule on CMS to show cause why that relief should not be granted. The Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services replied on behalf of CMS. The Secretary's position is that this court does not have the power to grant the requested order. The federal Privacy Act states that no agency of the federal government shall disclose any records pertaining to an individual unless that imlividual files a written request to have the records disclosed. See 5 U.S.C.A. Section 552a(b). However, the statute contains twelve exceptions, one of them being where disclosure is "pursuant to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction." 5 U.S.C.A. Section 552(b)(11). The U.S. 2 02-1407 CIVIL Department of Health and Human Services, through its counsel, has argued that in order for a court to be of' competent jurisdiction ' it must be a federal court. We disagree. ..... · ' 552a(b)(11), "A court of competent junsdmt~on as that term ~s used m Section may include a court other than the United States District Court." I_n Re Tucker, 689 A.2d 1214, 1215 (D.C. 1997.) In Tucker the Office of Bar Counsel moved for an order directing the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to produce materials relevant to an attorney disciplinary hearing. Tuckeh 689 A.2d at 1214. Counsel for the FBI advised Bar Counsel that it could not lawfully make the records available without the order of a court of competent jurisdiction. I_4d. The defendant contended that the District of Columbia Court of Appeals was not a court of competent jurisdiction because it was not a United States District Court. Id. In determining that the court was, in fact, a court of competent jurisdiction the Tucker court noted that other provisions in both the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act specifically required that the order come from a federal court. 552a(b)(11) does not specify that the order must come from a federal court. The Tucker court found no reason to read into the statute a limitation that does not exist in the text. I__d. at 1215. The same result was reached in Moore v. United States Postal Service, 609 F.Supp. 681,682 (E.D.N.Y. 1985). The District Court of Eastern New York held that a subpoena issued to the Postal Service from a New York state court constituted an order from a "court of competent jurisdiction. In Tootle v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co., 468 So.2d 237,240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985) the District Court of Appeals of Florida held that a state trial court's order fit within the 3 02-1407 CIVIL exception to the Federal Privacy Act for disclosures pursuant to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction. In Tootle, the plaintiff in a personal injury case petitioned for a writ of certiorari to quash an order compelling the deposition of a psychologist who examined him for the Social Security Administration. Tootle, 468 So.2d at 238. The Tootle court held that 552a(b)(11) should be strictly construed in favor of disclosure, especially in the type of situation where a state court rules on discovery matters in a civil trial. Id. at 239. The HHS Secretary also argues that the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity precludes the state court from exercising jurisdiction to compel CMS to produce the records requested by the plaintiff. (Secretary of Health and Human Services' Response to Plaintiff's Motion, para.4.) The HHS Secretary correctly states that an action against a federal agency or official will be treated as an action against the sovereign when the judgment sought restrains the Government from acting or compels it to act. Portsmouth Redevelopment & Housing Authority v. Pierce, 706 F.2d 471,473 (4th Cir. 1983) (citing Dugan v. Rank, 372 U.S. at 620, 83 S.Ct. at 1006.) While it is true that an order from this court would compel CMS to act, it must be noted that CMS is a private company. CMS is merely a subcontractor to the United States Government. Compelling CMS to comply with the subpoena is not the same as compelling the government to act. Therefore, enforcement of the subpoena will not violate the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity. The HHS Secretary also argues that enforcement of the subpoena would be a violation of the Supremacy Clause. (Secretary of Health and Human Servi. ces' Response to Plaintiff' s Motion, para.5.) The Secretary contends that CMS is following properly promulgated agency regulations. Properly promulgated agency regulations implementing federal statutes have the force and effect of federal law which state courts are bound to follow. Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 4 02-1407 CIVIL 441 U.S. 281,295-96, (1997). CMS, however, is not a United States Government Agency. It is a subcontractor to the government. The plaintiff is not attempting to override a government agency's regulations but merely attempting to enforce discovery on a private company. The Privacy Act does not specify the standard by which discovery may be ordered and there has been some disparity among the courts on the appropriate standard. Compare, e.g. ~Perry v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 734 F.2d 1441, 1447 (11th Cir. 1984) (courts must balance need for disclosure against potential harm from disclosure), cert denied, 469 U.S. 1108, 105 S.Ct. 784, 83 L.Ed.2d. 778 (1985); with Laxalt v. McClatchy, 809 F.2d 885,888 (D.C. Cir.1987) (standard for court order is the same as usual discovery standard.) It is unnecessary to apply the .Perry.standard because the Third Circuit has assumed the Laxalt standard is to be used in Privacy Act controversies. See Miskiel v Equitable Life Assurance Society of the U.S., 1999 WL 95998 (E.D.P.A. 1999).l Since the standard to be used in this case is the usual discovery standard, Pa.R.C.P. 3117(a) is the applicable rule. Rule 3117(a) provides in pertinent part: Plaintiff at any time after judgment, before or after the issuance of a writ of execution, may, for the purpose of discovery of assets of the defendant, take the testimony of any person, including a defendant or a garnishee, upon oral examination or written interrogatories as provided by the rules relating to Depositions and Discovery. The prothonotary of the county in which the judgment has been entered or of the county within this Commonwealth where the deposition is to be taken, shall issue a subpoena to testify. Pa.R.C.P. 3117(a), 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Plaintiffs are not restricted to obtaining discovery from defendants or garnishees, but may seek discovery from any person who may have information ~ Even were we to apply a balancing test, it is clear, in this case, that the need for disclosure far outweighs any potential harm to the defendant or anyone else. 02-1407 CIVIL regarding the location of assets of the judgment debtor. _Painewebber, Inc. v. Devin_, 658 A.2d 409,413 (Pa. Super. 1995). It is obvious that CMS may have information regarding the location of assets of the defendant. Thus under Pa.R.C.P. 3117(a), the plaintiff is entitled to the requested discovery. ORDER AND NOW, this 16 ~ day of July, 2003, upon consideration of plaintiff, Roshanak Sheikh-Sharif s Motion for Court Order pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 3117 to Aid in the Execution of a Judgment, and any response thereto, it is hereby ordered and decreed that said motion is granted. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this order, the CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, must comply with the provisions of the subpoena that was duly served upon it on August 14, 2002, by producing the following documents or things at the law offices of Lee M. Herman, Esquire, P.C., 200 East State Street, Suite 306, Media, PA 19063, at a mutually convenient time: All Documents and all Reports in your possession Regarding: a. Legible copies of the front and back sides of all checks paid to Dr. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control No. 222241854; Tax ID No. 22-2241854. b. Records of any and all payments made by you to Dr. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh from 1997 to the present; OMB No. 1545-0115; Control No. 222241854; Tax ID No. 22-2241854. Or, in the alternative, CMS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may deliver or mail legible copies of the documents or things requested by this subpoena, 02-1407 CIVIL together with the certificate of compliance, to the party making this request at the address listed above. Nothing herein shall prevent CMS from imposing a reasonable charge upon the plaintiff for the copying of the aforementioned documents. BY THE COURT, t/Lee M. Herman, Esquire For the Plaintiff ~l~urosh Sharif-Zadeh Defendant ~/.ynda R. Dennis, Esquire Assistant Regional Counsel U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of General Counsel, Region III Public Ledger Building, Suite 418 150 S. Independence Mail West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3499 :rim 7 ^UO 1 8 003 ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CWIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAl, TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMES NOW, Thomas A. Marino, United States Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, by Mark E. Murrison, Assistant United States Attorney, on behalf of Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services ("HI-IS") and, specifically, I-IHS component, the Centers for Medicare a~td Medicaid Services ("CMS"), and respectfully gives notice that the attached Notice of Removal has been filed with the Clerk of Court of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS A. MARINO United States Attorney MARK E. MORRI[SON / t ~ Assistant U.S. Attorney Federal Building - Room 217 228 Walnut Street P.O. Box 11754 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 221-4482 Dated: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania August 14, 2003 EXHIBIT 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ROSHANAK SHEIKIt-SHARIF Plaintiff KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH Defendant (Electronically Filed) CIVIL NO. NOTICE OF REMOVAL COMES NOW, Thomas A. Marino, United States Attomey for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, by Mark E. Morrison, Assistant United States Altomey, on behalf of Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") and, specifically, HHS component, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), and respectfully notices the removal of the above-captioned matter from the Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, to this Court under the provisions of Title 28, United States Code, Section 1446 (a) and (c), and respectfully represents: 1. On August 14, 2002, a subpoena was served upon the United States Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"). 2. The Acting Regional Administrator of CMS, by letter response dated November 7, 2002, declined to produce the Medicare records requested citing the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 522a. 3. Said letter responsed also notified Plaintiff's Counsel that his request for records required a written authorization to release signed by the subject of the records or an order from a court of competent jurisdiction was required before records could be released. 4. After motions practice, an order was obtained from the Curabefland County Court of Common Pleas, dated July 16, 2003, compelling CMS to comply with provisions of the subpoena duces tecum issued August 14, 2002. 5. Removal of this subpoena process is appropriate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). 6. This Notice of Removal is timely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). WHEREFORE, notice is respectfully given that the above-captioned matter is removed to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Permsylvania. Dated: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania August 14, 2003 Respectfully submitted, THOMAS A. M,MRINO United States At~:omey /s/Mark E. Morrison MARK E. MOR/RISON Assistant U.S. Attorney Federal Building - Room 217 228 Walnut Street P.O. Box 11754 Harrisburg, PA 17108 (717) 221-4482 PA 43875 mark.e.mordson~usdoj.gov UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF Plaintiff KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH Defendant (Electronically Filed) CIVIL NO .. _CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL The undersigned hereby certifies that she is an employee in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and is a person of such age and discretion to be competent to serve papers. That this 14th day of August, 2003, she served a copy ofl:he attached NOTICE OF REMOVAL by electronic means and/or by placing said copy in a postpaid envelope addressed to the person hereinafter named, at the place and address stated below, which is the last known address, and by depositing said envelope and contents in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania to: Lee M. Herman, Esq. 200 East State St., Stc. 306 Media, PA 19063 Dated: May 12, 2003 s/Phyllis M. Mitchell PHYLLIS M. MITCHELL Supervisory Legal Assistant Pennsylvania Middle District Version 1.0 Civil and Miscellaneous Initial Pleadings 3:02-at-06000 Plaintiff v. Defendant h~ps:#ec£parnd'uscou~s.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?94949622924804 U.S. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvauia Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was received from Mort/son, Mark entered on 8/14/2003 at 5:05 PM CDT and filed on 8/14/2003 Case Name: Plaintiff v. Defendant Case Number: 3;02-at-6000 Filer: Document Number: 9._~9 Docket Text: Notice of Removal Case Title: Roshanak Sheikh-Sharifv. Kurosh Sharif-Zadeh;. (Attachments: # (1) Civil Cover Sheet)(Morrison, Mark) The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp ID=I027698419 [Date=8~14~2003] [FileNumber=239485_0] [82db 116729dSIb623~9f06d4358d062dS0dd8963286c2c84356790183124a33aec23 c60d7ec67353306dafbf06bec64f3561 b0b230ac02d87101 df790d781 f79]] Document description:Civil Cover Sheet Original ~ename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp ID=I027698419 [Date--8/14/2003] [FileNumber=239485_l] [ac49889eg010389e82-4cf68daSd4ecfbd2a3 e8ce4629c6e23f710a574cb0efbd 1959 eb2edtb9ec8b6f00589f91945176cfffdda 1 d45de7e8e864014523d70To2]] 3:02-at-6000 Notice will be electronically mailed to: 3:02-at-6000 Notice will not be electronically mailed to: I ofl 8/14/2003 5:11 PM ROSHANAK SHEIKH-SHARIF Plaintiff VS. KUROSH SHARIF-ZADEH Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-1407 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW .CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY' MAIL The undersigned hereby certifies that she is an employee in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and is a person of such age and discretion to be competent to serve papers. That this 14th day of August, 2003, she served a copy of the attached NOTICE OF REMOVAL by placing said copy in a postpaid envelope addressed to the person hereinafter named, at the place and address stated below, which is the last known address, and by depositing said envelope and contents in the United States Mail at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania to: Lee M. Herman, Esq. 200 East State St., Ste. 306 Media, PA 19063 Dated: August 14, 2003 PHYI/~.. IS M. MITCI~Ii~LL Supeffcisory Legal Assistant