Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

Case: 16-2274 Document: 00117296346 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/01/2018 Entry ID: 6173896

June 1, 2018 Y. Frank Ren


BY ECF T +1 617 951 9155

F +1 617 261 3175
Margaret Carter, Clerk
Office of the Clerk
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse
1 Courthouse Way, Suite 2500
Boston, MA 02210

Re: Hayden et al. v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A et al., Appeal No. 16-2274

Dear Madam Clerk:

This firm represents Defendants-Appellees HSBC Bank USA, N.A. as Trustee for Wells Fargo
Asset Securities Corporation Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-
PA3 (“HBUS”) and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) in the above-referenced
appeal. This letter serves as Wells Fargo’s response to your May 18, 2018 letter advising the
parties that Judge Barron recently discovered a financial interest in Wells Fargo that would have
required his recusal under Canon 3C(1)(c) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges and
28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4) while the appeal was pending.

Judge Barron’s recently discovered financial interest in Wells Fargo should have no impact on
the Court’s August 8, 2017 decision summarily affirming the district court’s order granting HBUS
and Wells Fargo's motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for several
reasons. First, according to your May 18, 2018 letter, Judge Barron was not aware of any
financial interest in Wells Fargo until last month (May 2018). As a result, Judge Barron could
not have participated in the case in a biased manner because his unknown conflict could not
have impacted his decision-making process in any way. Second, the Court summarily affirmed
the district court ruling based upon sound and correct legal reasoning, meaning that the
outcome would be the same before any panel. Third, the majority of the panel was and remains
impartial, and there is no reason to question or disturb their decision

If, however, the Court determines that some further review or action is necessary, the remaining
members of the Panel should review the decision and determine whether any reconsideration or
other action is warranted. The parties should be allowed to respond to the other party’s
submission under the May 18, 2018 letter and be allowed to make additional submissions if
further substantive review is undertaken.

Thank you.


T +1 617 261 3100 F +1 617 261 3175 klgates.com
Case: 16-2274 Document: 00117296346 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/01/2018 Entry ID: 6173896

Very truly yours,

/s/ Y. Frank Ren

Y. Frank Ren

cc: Glenn F. Russell (via ECF)

Sean R. Higgins (via ECF)