Case 1:17-mc-00151-LPS Document 1215 Filed 07/05/24 Page 1 of 5 PagelD #: 29657 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE in the case of:
CRYSTALLEX INTERNATIONAL CORP, Plaintiff, v Case BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF 1:17-CV-00151-LPS VENEZUELA, :
Defendant.
Mr. Ivan Freites and the Lead Plaintiff in Case 1:23-CV-00989-JLH** The Honorable Leonard P. Stark United States District Court for the District of Delaware J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building 844 N King St Unit 18 Wilmington, DE 19801-3570 Re: Opposition to Crystallex International Corporation's Response to Ivan Freites' Motion for Relief from Judgment and Request for Sealed Filing of Supplement (D.1.1214) Case No.
17-mc-151-LPS Honorable Judge Stark, We, Mr. Ivan Freites and the Lead Plaintiff in Case 1:23-CV-00989-JLH, are writing in opposition to Crystallex International Corporation's response to our Motion for Relief from Judgment and Request for Sealed Filing of Supplement, docketed as D.|. 1200. As directly involved parties, we find the arguments presented by Crystallex to be legally unsubstantiated and procedurally deficient.
Case 1:17-mc-00151-LPS Document 1215 Filed 07/05/24 Page 2 of 5 PagelD #: 29658 Firstly, Crystallex's assertion that Mr. Freites (and presumably the Lead Plaintiff in **989 as well) lacks standing due to his non-party status overlooks the substantive interests he possesses concerning the outcome of the judgment. The Supreme Court in Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880, 893 (2008), clearly states that while generally non-parties are not bound by judgments, there are exceptions, particularly when the non-party has a significant interest in the litigation. Mr.
Freites has articulated such an interest, as his claims potentially impact the allocation and satisfaction of the Venezuelan assets under dispute.
Furthermore, Crystallex's invocation of the one-year limitation under Rule 60(c)(1) is misapplied.
Rule 60(b) permits relief from a judgment for reasons including fraud, newly discovered evidence, or any other reason that justifies relief. The time constraints of Rule 60(c)(1) should not bar the consideration of substantial justice, especially given the potential implications of the new evidence we have presented regarding Jose Ignacio Hernandez's involvement with the Venezuelan Government under Interim President Juan Guaido.
We bring to your attention that the documentation of the presumed fraud against a number of creditors goes far beyond Hernandez and mounts to a presumed conspiracy against thousands of small creditors, creditors that it is known to this court by recognition of the president of the Junta Administradora Ad-Hoc de PDVSA, Mr. Horacio Medina, came amount of over twenty billion USD in the case of workers wronged by CITGO and PDVSA.
We have reason to believe that Mr. Horacio Medina and a number of other top officers of the interim government of Juan Guaid6é have coordinated to defraud said creditors during the last year, in addition to the Hernandez issues brought to the court in 2020 by Jorge Alejandro Rodriguez. Information on the issue will be brought to the court if and when this Honorable Court grants leave to file the sealed information as prayed in D.1.1200.
Moreover, Crystallex's reliance on stale public records to dismiss the significance of our claims fails to address the substance of the allegations. The fact that Mr. Hernandez's dual roles have been public knowledge does not mitigate the potential conflict of interest and its impact on the integrity of the expert testimony and subsequent judgment. It is essential that the court examines these claims meticulously to preserve judicial propriety and fairness.
This evidence is of paramount importance and directly impacts the integrity of the current judgment and the rights of all parties involved.
Case 1:17-mc-00151-LPS Document 1215 Filed 07/05/24 Page 3 of 5 PagelD #: 29659 In addition to the procedural arguments, our motion highlights critical factual allegations that warrant the court's attention:
1. **Procurador Especial and Conflicts of Interest**: José Ignacio Hernandez, acting as Procurador Especial, failed to disclose his conflicts of interest and misled the Venezuelan National Assembly into decisions favoring Crystallex and other litigants against the Republic of Venezuela. This role presents a clear conflict of interest that cannot be justified in the light of fairness and justice.
2. **Misrepresentation and Omission of Material Facts**: Hernandez did not disclose his prior engagements and conflicts of interest, leading to significant legal missteps, including the improper appointment of board members to PDVSA and its subsidiaries, which were used as alter ego evidence by Crystallex in court.
3. **PDVSA's Debt and Mismanagement**: Under the interim government's ad hoc board, PDVSA acknowledged debts exceeding $20 billion to over twenty thousand small creditors, many of whom are former workers fired by PDVSA and CITGO and persecuted in violation of their human rights. The ad hoc board's mismanagement further exacerbated the financial instability of the state-owned enterprise.
4. **Conspiracy to Defraud Creditors**: Evidence suggests a conspiracy involving high-ranking officials and external entities to defraud creditors through manipulation of legal processes and strategic misinformation, specifically against small creditors.
**It is crucial to highlight that new recent evidence in a conspiracy to defraud creditors will be filed once the Judge grants leave for Sealed Filing.** The evidence to be presented to the court includes detailed documentation of these issues, as well as additional evidence submitted by Jorge Alejandro Rodriguez and the Letter to Judge Stark dated October 12, 2023, addressing the undisputed debt owed by the defendants to workers and union leaders persecuted for political reasons.
In conclusion, we urge the court to give due consideration to our motion. The principles of fairness and justice necessitate a thorough review of our claims and the purported new Case 1:17-mc-00151-LPS Document 1215 Filed 07/05/24 Page 4 of 5 PagelD #: 29660 evidence. Denying this opportunity based on procedural technicalities and speculative arguments as presented by Crystallex undermines the equitable administration of justice.
Respectfully, Mr. Ivan Freites ' Lead Plaintiff in Case 1:23-CV-00989-JLH cc: All Counsel of Record Case 1:17-mc-00151-LPS Document 1215 Filed 07/05/24 Page 5 of 5 PagelD #: 29661 *sanqoeid Adeaud sno Uo si[eJ2P Jo} woo'sdn ysl, d9 81/8 pOSTLT + CRYSTALLEX INTERNATIONAL CORP, Plaintiff, v Defendant.
BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC of VENEZUELA; = Case 4:17-CV-00151-LPS Opposition to D.1.1214 ane '