Congressional Letter to Cyber Ninja’s

Link to PDF: 2021-07-14.CBM JR to Logan-Cyber Ninjas re Arizona Election Audit


July 14, 2021
Mr. Douglas Logan
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Consultant
Cyber Ninjas Inc.
242 South Washington Boulevard #160
Sarasota, FL 34236
Dear Mr. Logan:
We are writing to request information about Cyber Ninjas’ participation in an “audit” of
nearly 2.1 million ballots cast in Maricopa County, Arizona, in the 2020 election. We are
concerned about your company’s role in this highly unusual effort, given Cyber Ninjas’ apparent
lack of experience in conducting election-related audits; reports that the company engaged in
sloppy and insecure audit practices that compromised the integrity of ballots and voting
equipment and were questioned by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ); and evidence that you
and other individuals funding the audit have sought to advance the “big lie” of debunked voter
fraud allegations in the November 2020 presidential election.
Americans’ right to vote is protected by the Constitution and is the cornerstone of our
democratic system of government. The Committee is seeking to determine whether the privately
funded audit conducted by your company in Arizona protects the right to vote or is instead an
effort to promote baseless conspiracy theories, undermine confidence in America’s elections, and
reverse the result of a free and fair election for partisan gain.
Cyber Ninjas’ Lack of Election Audit Experience
In April 2021, the Arizona State Senate launched an audit of the 2020 election results in
Maricopa County, Arizona. This project was undertaken despite a clear, bipartisan consensus
among county officials and outside experts that the election results were valid, that no significant
fraud occurred, and that the additional audit served no legitimate purpose.
Prior to the State Senate’s highly unusual audit, an official hand-count audit found a
100% match between paper ballots and voting machines. In addition, two nonpartisan firms with
expertise in voting systems examined the voting machines and found no evidence of fraud.
1 Maricopa County Recorder, Maricopa County, Arizona, General Election–November 3, 2020, Hand
Count/Audit Report (Nov. 9, 2020) (online at; Maricopa County, Press Release:Mr. Douglas Logan
Page 2
Describing the State Senate’s additional audit, Stephen Richer, the Republican official in charge
of administering Maricopa County’s elections, stated that there was no “legitimate reason that
would have prompted this audit.”2 All five members of the Maricopa County Board of
Supervisors, four of whom are Republicans, wrote a letter to the State Senate President
describing the State Senate’s audit as a “spectacle that is harming all of us.”3
Nevertheless, the Republican-led State Senate chose to move forward with an additional
audit. Rather than rely on knowledgeable county or state election officials and certified election
experts, they hired a group of private companies led by Cyber Ninjas.4 Cyber Ninjas is a
Florida-based cybersecurity company not federally accredited by the U.S. Election Assistance
Commission to test voting systems.5 Although Cyber Ninjas claims to have been part of prior
election audits in Michigan and Georgia, officials in those states denied that the company
participated in those audits.
6 The Arizona State Senate reportedly received an official offer from
an experienced election auditing company to conduct the review but chose to award the contract
to Cyber Ninjas, even though it does not appear to have submitted an official bid. These actions
raise questions as to how and why this contract was awarded to your company.

Significant questions have also been raised regarding the source of funding for the audit
your company is conducting. According to news reports, Cyber Ninjas offered to complete the
audit work for a fraction of the actual cost. Ken Bennett, a former Arizona Secretary of State
who served as a “liaison” in connection with this audit, stated the amount your company is
Maricopa County Election Forensic Audit Results Released (Feb. 23, 2021) (online at; What’s Behind Arizona’s Bizarre, Haphazard, and Highly
Partisan “Audit” of the 2020 Election, Vox (May 5, 2021) (online at
2 “No Legitimate Reason” for Arizona Audit: Maricopa County’s GOP Recorder, ABC News (May 24,
2021) (online at
3 Letter from Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to Karen Fann, President, Arizona State Senate (May
17, 2021) (online at—FINAL).
4 Arizona Senate Republicans, Press Release: Arizona Senate Hires Auditor to Review 2020 Election in
Maricopa County (Mar. 31, 2021) (online at
5 Experts or “Grifters”? Little-Known Firm Runs Arizona Audit, Associated Press (May 23, 2021) (online
at; Cyber Ninjas, Services (online at (accessed
June 16, 2021); A Cybersecurity Expert Who Promoted Claims of Fraud in the 2020 Election Is Leading the GOPBacked Recount of Millions of Ballots in Arizona, Washington Post (Apr. 16, 2021) (online at; Cyber Ninjas, Statement of Work (Mar. 31, 2021) (online at
6 The Arizona GOP’s Maricopa County Audit: What to Know About It, CBS News (May 9, 2021) (online
7 Fann Passes on Experienced Auditor, Picks Cheapest, Arizona Capitol Times (Apr. 23, 2021) (online at Mr. Douglas Logan
Page 3
charging the Arizona State Senate would not be enough to conduct the full audit and that auditors
“will be accepting outside sources of money, which will not be subject to Arizona’s public
records law.”8
Reports indicate that substantial outside funding has come from partisan dark money
groups. These include Voices and Votes, an organization run by Christina Bobb, a former
Trump Administration appointee and anchor for One America News Network. Another reported
funding source, Fight Back, is a nonprofit run by L. Lin Wood, an attorney who pursued failed
litigation to overturn the 2020 election on behalf of former President Trump, promoted
conspiracy theories linked to QAnon, and called for the execution of former Vice President Mike
Another funder is America Project, run by Patrick Byrne, the former chief executive of, who has also sought to overturn the 2020 election based on unfounded
conspiracy theories.
Cyber Ninjas’ Sloppy and Insecure Audit Practices
Soon after Cyber Ninjas began its work, reports emerged that the company had
mismanaged the audit and engaged in insecure practices that jeopardized the integrity of ballots
and voting machines. According to reports, auditors used equipment that had not been federally
tested or certified and used ultraviolet light—which experts say can cause damage to ballots—to
scan for evidence of fraud.11 Ballots and tabulation machinery were apparently left unsecured,
and reporters were able to enter the site of the audit without permission, getting close to the
ballots and the county’s equipment in a clear lapse of security.
One reporter noticed that auditors were using blue pens during the audit in violation of
Arizona’s own election process manual, which prohibits the use of anything but red pens to
prevent a risk of altering the vote on a ballot.13 A former local election official who was asked
8 Id.
9 See, e.g., Pro-Trump Lawyer Lin Wood’s Claims Against Mike Pence Prompt Calls for FBI, Secret
Service Scrutiny, Newsweek (Jan. 2, 2021) (online at; Pro-Trump Election Conspiracist Lin Wood
Investigated over Possible Illegal Voting, National Public Radio (Feb. 2, 2021) (online at
10 Arizona Ballot Audit Backed by Secretive Donors Linked to Trump’s Inner Circle, The Guardian (June 9,
2021) (online at
11 The Arizona GOP’s Maricopa County Audit: What to Know About It, CBS News (May 9, 2021) (online
at; Arizona Is Holding Yet
Another 2020 Recount. The Company Running It Makes It Even Worse, Slate (May 3, 2021) (online at
12 Security Lapses Plague Arizona Senate’s Election Audit at State Fairgrounds, Arizona’s Family (Apr.
22, 2021) (online at
13 Arizona Is Holding Yet Another 2020 Recount. The Company Running It Makes It Even Worse, Slate
(May 3, 2021) (online at Mr. Douglas Logan
Page 4
by the Arizona Secretary of State to serve as an observer of the audit noted that auditors flagged
ballots as “suspicious” for reasons such as paper weight and texture, apparently searching for
bamboo fibers due to unfounded speculation that fake ballots had been flown in from South
Korea.14 According to this official, “In more than a decade working on elections, audits and
recounts across the country, I’ve never seen one this mismanaged.”15 Maricopa County has
announced that because of security concerns caused by the audit, it will replace all voting
equipment turned over to Cyber Ninjas—potentially costing taxpayers millions of dollars.16
On May 5, 2021, DOJ’s Civil Rights Division wrote to Arizona State Senate President
Karen Fann about the possible violation of federal statutes related to the audit.17 DOJ’s letter
expressed “concerns” regarding Cyber Ninjas’ practices following reports that election materials
“are no longer under the ultimate control of state and local elections officials, are not being
adequately safeguarded by contractors at an insecure facility, and are at risk of being lost, stolen,
altered, compromised or destroyed.18
DOJ also wrote that Cyber Ninjas’ plan to canvass voters door to door to confirm the
identity of certain voters “raises concerns regarding potential intimidation of voters.”19 Senate
President Fann responded to the Department, announcing the suspension of the auditors’
canvassing plans.20
Cyber Ninjas has repeatedly failed to meet its own timeline for the audit and has
repeatedly moved election materials—at one point to accommodate high school graduation
ceremonies—raising questions about the integrity of the process and whether Cyber Ninjas is
merely searching for evidence to support a predetermined result rather than conducting an
impartial audit.21 Your company’s actions also may have introduced significant errors into the
14 I Watched the GOP’s Arizona Election Audit. It Was Worse than You Think, Washington Post (May 19,
2021) (online at
15 Id.
16 Arizona’s Maricopa County Will Replace Voting Equipment, Fearful That GOP-Backed Election Review
Has Compromised Security, Washington Post (June 28, 2021) (online at
17 Letter from Pamela S. Karlan, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division,
Department of Justice, to Karen Fann, President, Arizona State Senate (May 5, 2021) (online at
18 Id.
19 Cyber Ninjas, Statement of Work (Mar. 31, 2021) (online at; Letter from Pamela S. Karlan,
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice, to Karen Fann,
President, Arizona State Senate (May 5, 2021) (online at
20 Letter from Karen Fann, President, Arizona State Senate, to Pamela S. Karlan, Principal Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice (May 7, 2021) (online at
21 Arizona Senate’s Auditors Must Vacate Veterans Memorial Coliseum on May 14, KJZZ (May 5, 2021)
(online at Mr. Douglas Logan
Page 5
audit process. Yesterday, Senate President Fann discussed a potential discrepancy in vote counts
that will require additional time and processes to verify. Outside observers and Republican
county officials have noted that any errors so far observed are likely the result of serious flaws in
Cyber Ninjas’ procedures.
22 One expert previously observed that Cyber Ninjas’ practices
“allowed for a shocking amount of error,” including that “[a]t no point did anyone track how
many ballots they were processing at their station, to ensure that none got added or lost during
handling.”23 Experts have also noted that the work of Cyber Ninjas itself “cannot be audited.”24
Embrace of Election Conspiracy Theories
Your public statements regarding the 2020 presidential election raise serious questions
about your ability to lead impartial work related to the election. Press reports indicate that you
repeatedly alleged on social media that the 2020 presidential election was rigged against former
President Donald Trump, using the “Stop the Steal” hashtag. You also reportedly retweeted a
claim that an audit of the election might show that “Trump got 200k more votes than previously
reported in Arizona.”25
You have confirmed that you are the author of a document posted on the website of
Trump attorney and conspiracy theorist Sidney Powell entitled “Election Fraud Facts & Details,”
which you stated was written to assist U.S. Senators planning to object to the certification of the
Electoral College on January 6.26 The document repeats debunked claims regarding Dominion
Voting Systems, including that the company has origins in Venezuela, was used to rig elections
for deceased President Hugo Chavez, and is owned in part by a Chinese company.27 You were
listed as an expert witness in a Michigan lawsuit alleging election fraud in connection with
22 Fann Says Audit Team, Maricopa Count Have Different Ballot Totals, AZ Mirror (July 13, 2021) (online
23 I Watched the GOP’s Arizona Election Audit. It Was Worse than You Think, Washington Post (May 19,
2021) (online at
24 Retired Election Experts Again Offer Senate a Way to Check Maricopa County Ballot Counts, Arizona
Republic (July 12, 2021) (online at
25 Arizona Senate Hires a “Stop the Steal” Advocate to Lead 2020 Election Audit, Arizona Mirror (Mar. 31,
2021) (online at
26 Election Auditor Wrote “Election Fraud Facts” Report for GOP Senators Who Tried to Overturn the
2020 Election, Arizona Mirror (Apr. 9, 2021) (online at
27 Douglas Logan, Election Fraud Facts & Details (online at (accessed July 12, 2021). This
document was linked on Sidney Powell’s personal website. Sidney Powell, Evidence of Fraud—2020 Election
(online at (accessed July 12, 2021). Mr. Douglas Logan
Page 6
Dominion Voting Systems, but the case was dismissed after the state concluded its own audit
without finding fraud.
Committee’s Requests
The Constitution guarantees the right to vote and empowers Congress to legislate to
protect that right and regulate elections.29 Congress has enacted legislation to safeguard this
right and to ensure that elections are safe, secure, and fairly and impartially administered.30
Congress is also empowered to investigate any conduct that may infringe on this fundamental
31 and the Committee has examined state voting and elections issues on numerous
The Committee is deeply troubled by Cyber Ninjas’ lack of election audit experience; its
reported mismanagement of the audit in Maricopa County, which may have compromised ballots
and election equipment; your own bias and history of embracing conspiracy theories related to
the election; and the private sources of funding that may have further undermined the credibility
and impartiality of this effort. The Committee is particularly concerned that your company’s
actions could undermine the integrity of federal elections and interfere with Americans’
constitutional right to cast their ballot freely and to have their votes counted without partisan
interference. In connection with this investigation, the Committee intends to study the need for
legislative reforms to ensure the right is protected before, during, and after an election and that
third parties do not interfere with this right.
28 Michigan Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Seeking New Audit of Antrim County Vote, One of the Last
Remaining 2020 Legal Challenges, Washington Post (May 18, 2021) (online at; Arizona Ballot Audit Backed by Secretive Donors Linked to Trump’s Inner Circle, The
Guardian (June 9, 2021) (online at
29 U.S. Const., amend. XV (“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”); U.S. Const., art. I, sec. 4 (“The times,
places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the
legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations.”).
30 See, e.g., Help America Vote Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-252; National Voter Registration Act of
1993, Pub. L. No. 103-31; Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, Pub. L. No. 99-410 (1986).
31 See, e.g., Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975) (holding that Congress’s
power to investigate “is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the
32 See, e.g., Committee on Oversight and Reform, Hearing on Voter Suppression in Minority Communities:
Learning from the Past to Protect Our Future, 116th Cong. (Feb. 26, 2020) (examining the results of the
Committee’s investigation of voter suppression allegations in Georgia, Texas, and Kansas); Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform, Hearing on Cyber-securing the Vote: Ensuring the Integrity of the U.S. Election Systems,
115th Cong. (July 24, 2018); Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Information
Technology and Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Affairs, Joint Hearing on Cybersecurity of Voting Machines,
115th Cong. (Nov. 29, 2017).Mr. Douglas Logan
Page 7
For all of these reasons, the Committee requests that Cyber Ninjas produce the following
documents by July 28:
1. Documents sufficient to show all individuals and entities with direct or indirect
ownership interests in, or control of, Cyber Ninjas, including, but not limited to,
officers, board members, and shareholders;
2. Documents sufficient to show all previous clients to which Cyber Ninjas has
provided consulting services related to election audits or election law and a
detailed description of the services provided, the payments received, and the
source of the funds;
3. All documents and communications related to the engagement of Cyber Ninjas
for the Maricopa County audit, including but not limited to the purpose of the
engagement, the scope of work, the role of the company, and the role of other
individuals or entities;
4. All documents and communications related to payment or funding for the
Maricopa County audit, including but not limited to the sources, amounts, terms,
and conditions of such funding and any fundraising efforts;
5. All documents and communications related to conducting the Maricopa County
audit, including but not limited to policies, procedures, audit plans, strategy,
staffing and personnel, and security or integrity problems that arose during the
audit, and any interim or final audit findings;
6. All documents and communications related to the following allegations that have
reportedly been considered by you or your company in connection with the 2020
presidential election:
a. bamboo-laced ballots smuggled in from Asian countries;33
b. watermarks placed on the ballot by the Trump campaign that were visible
with UV lights;
c. machine-marked ballots;35
33 See Arizona Republicans Hunt for Bamboo-Laced China Ballots in 2020 “Audit” Effort, The Guardian
(May 6, 2021) (online at
34 See Cyber Ninjas, UV Lights and Far-Right Funding: Inside the Strange Arizona 2020 Election
“Audit”, The Guardian (May 14, 2021) (online at
35 See I Watched the GOP’s Arizona Election Audit. It Was Worse than You Think, Washington Post (May
19, 2021) (online at Douglas Logan
Page 8
d. errors designed to create fraud in Dominion Voting Systems’ equipment;
e. the involvement of current or former members of the Central Intelligence
Agency in disinformation around election fraud;
7. All documents and communications related to formal or informal complaints
related to the audit received by Cyber Ninjas from any source, including but not
limited to federal, state, or county election officials, Cyber Ninjas employees, or
other individuals;
8. All instructions, directions, training materials, and guidance Cyber Ninjas
employees, consultants, agents, volunteers, or representatives received relating to
the Maricopa County audit; and
9. For the period between November 6, 2020, and the present, all communications
involving you or any Cyber Ninjas employees, consultants, agents, volunteers, or
representatives with:
a. former President Donald Trump;
b. any Trump Administration official;
c. any formal or informal representative of President Trump’s presidential
campaign, legal team, or political action committee;
d. any representative of Voices and Votes, Fight Back, America Project, or
any other funder of the Maricopa County audit;
e. Rudy Giuliani or any of his agents or representatives;
f. Sidney Powell;
g. L. Lin Wood;
h. Patrick Byrne;
36 See Founder of Company Hired to Conduct Maricopa County Election Audit Promoted Election Fraud
Theories, Arizona Republic (Mar. 31, 2021) (online at
37 See Audit Leader Doug Logan Appears in Conspiracy Theorist Election Film, Arizona Mirror (June 26,
2021) (online at Douglas Logan
Page 9
i. Michael Flynn; or
j. Michael Lindell.
The Committee on Oversight and Reform is the principal oversight committee of the
House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under
House Rule X.
An attachment to this letter provides additional instructions for responding to this request.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact Committee staff at (202) 225-
__________________________ __________________________
Carolyn B. Maloney Jamie Raskin
Chairwoman Chairman
Committee on Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Civil Rights and
Civil Liberties
cc: The Honorable James Comer, Ranking Member
Committee on Oversight and Reform
The Honorable Pete Sessions, Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil LibertiesResponding to Oversight Committee Document Requests
1. In complying with this request, produce all responsive documents that are in your
possession, custody, or control, whether held by you or your past or present agents,
employees, and representatives acting on your behalf. Produce all documents that you
have a legal right to obtain, that you have a right to copy, or to which you have access, as
well as documents that you have placed in the temporary possession, custody, or control
of any third party.
2. Requested documents, and all documents reasonably related to the requested documents,
should not be destroyed, altered, removed, transferred, or otherwise made inaccessible to
the Committee.
3. In the event that any entity, organization, or individual denoted in this request is or has
been known by any name other than that herein denoted, the request shall be read also to
include that alternative identification.
4. The Committee’s preference is to receive documents in electronic form (i.e., CD,
memory stick, thumb drive, or secure file transfer) in lieu of paper productions.
5. Documents produced in electronic format should be organized, identified, and indexed
6. Electronic document productions should be prepared according to the following
a. The production should consist of single page Tagged Image File (“TIF”), files
accompanied by a Concordance-format load file, an Opticon reference file, and a
file defining the fields and character lengths of the load file.
b. Document numbers in the load file should match document Bates numbers and
TIF file names.
c. If the production is completed through a series of multiple partial productions,
field names and file order in all load files should match.
d. All electronic documents produced to the Committee should include the following
fields of metadata specific to each document, and no modifications should be
made to the original metadata:
7. Documents produced to the Committee should include an index describing the contents
of the production. To the extent more than one CD, hard drive, memory stick, thumb
drive, zip file, box, or folder is produced, each should contain an index describing its
8. Documents produced in response to this request shall be produced together with copies of
file labels, dividers, or identifying markers with which they were associated when the
request was served.
9. When you produce documents, you should identify the paragraph(s) or request(s) in the
Committee’s letter to which the documents respond.
10. The fact that any other person or entity also possesses non-identical or identical copies of
the same documents shall not be a basis to withhold any information.
11. The pendency of or potential for litigation shall not be a basis to withhold any
12. In accordance with 5 U.S.C.§ 552(d), the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and any
statutory exemptions to FOIA shall not be a basis for withholding any information.
13. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(9), the Privacy Act shall not be a basis for withholding
14. If compliance with the request cannot be made in full by the specified return date,
compliance shall be made to the extent possible by that date. An explanation of why full
compliance is not possible shall be provided along with any partial production.
15. In the event that a document is withheld on the basis of privilege, provide a privilege log
containing the following information concerning any such document: (a) every privilege
asserted; (b) the type of document; (c) the general subject matter; (d) the date, author,
addressee, and any other recipient(s); (e) the relationship of the author and addressee to
each other; and (f) the basis for the privilege(s) asserted.
16. If any document responsive to this request was, but no longer is, in your possession,
custody, or control, identify the document (by date, author, subject, and recipients), and
explain the circumstances under which the document ceased to be in your possession,
custody, or control.
17. If a date or other descriptive detail set forth in this request referring to a document is
inaccurate, but the actual date or other descriptive detail is known to you or is otherwise
apparent from the context of the request, produce all documents that would be responsive
as if the date or other descriptive detail were correct.3
18. This request is continuing in nature and applies to any newly-discovered information.
Any record, document, compilation of data, or information not produced because it has
not been located or discovered by the return date shall be produced immediately upon
subsequent location or discovery.
19. All documents shall be Bates-stamped sequentially and produced sequentially.
20. Two sets of each production shall be delivered, one set to the Majority Staff and one set
to the Minority Staff. When documents are produced to the Committee, production sets
shall be delivered to the Majority Staff in Room 2157 of the Rayburn House Office
Building and the Minority Staff in Room 2105 of the Rayburn House Office Building.
21. Upon completion of the production, submit a written certification, signed by you or your
counsel, stating that: (1) a diligent search has been completed of all documents in your
possession, custody, or control that reasonably could contain responsive documents; and
(2) all documents located during the search that are responsive have been produced to the
1. The term “document” means any written, recorded, or graphic matter of any nature
whatsoever, regardless of how recorded, and whether original or copy, including, but not
limited to, the following: memoranda, reports, expense reports, books, manuals,
instructions, financial reports, data, working papers, records, notes, letters, notices,
confirmations, telegrams, receipts, appraisals, pamphlets, magazines, newspapers,
prospectuses, communications, electronic mail (email), contracts, cables, notations of any
type of conversation, telephone call, meeting or other inter-office or intra-office
communication, bulletins, printed matter, computer printouts, teletypes, invoices,
transcripts, diaries, analyses, returns, summaries, minutes, bills, accounts, estimates,
projections, comparisons, messages, correspondence, press releases, circulars, financial
statements, reviews, opinions, offers, studies and investigations, questionnaires and
surveys, and work sheets (and all drafts, preliminary versions, alterations, modifications,
revisions, changes, and amendments of any of the foregoing, as well as any attachments
or appendices thereto), and graphic or oral records or representations of any kind
(including without limitation, photographs, charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm,
videotape, recordings and motion pictures), and electronic, mechanical, and electric
records or representations of any kind (including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes,
disks, and recordings) and other written, printed, typed, or other graphic or recorded
matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, and whether preserved in
writing, film, tape, disk, videotape, or otherwise. A document bearing any notation not a
part of the original text is to be considered a separate document. A draft or non-identical
copy is a separate document within the meaning of this term.
2. The term “communication” means each manner or means of disclosure or exchange of
information, regardless of means utilized, whether oral, electronic, by document or
otherwise, and whether in a meeting, by telephone, facsimile, mail, releases, electronic 4
message including email (desktop or mobile device), text message, instant message,
MMS or SMS message, message application, or otherwise.
3. The terms “and” and “or” shall be construed broadly and either conjunctively or
disjunctively to bring within the scope of this request any information that might
otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. The singular includes plural number, and
vice versa. The masculine includes the feminine and neutral genders.
4. The term “including” shall be construed broadly to mean “including, but not limited to.”
5. The term “Company” means the named legal entity as well as any units, firms,
partnerships, associations, corporations, limited liability companies, trusts, subsidiaries,
affiliates, divisions, departments, branches, joint ventures, proprietorships, syndicates, or
other legal, business or government entities over which the named legal entity exercises
control or in which the named entity has any ownership whatsoever.
6. The term “identify,” when used in a question about individuals, means to provide the
following information: (a) the individual’s complete name and title; (b) the
individual’s business or personal address and phone number; and (c) any and all
known aliases.
7. The term “related to” or “referring or relating to,” with respect to any given subject,
means anything that constitutes, contains, embodies, reflects, identifies, states, refers to,
deals with, or is pertinent to that subject in any manner whatsoever.
8. The term “employee” means any past or present agent, borrowed employee, casual
employee, consultant, contractor, de facto employee, detailee, fellow, independent
contractor, intern, joint adventurer, loaned employee, officer, part-time employee,
permanent employee, provisional employee, special government employee,
subcontractor, or any other type of service provider.
9. The term “individual” means all natural persons and all persons or entities acting on
their behalf