NIH Hid Public Comments Package — page 63

OD) [E] nate (NIH/OD) [E] Lankford, ie, Amanda I have attached a document of all of the examples Plaintiffs included. Could you please investigate the following: 1. Check each example on Facebook and Instagram, to the extent possible, to confirm that NIH's filters did indeed hide these comments. I reviewed all of the examples myself against the Facebook/Instagram filter lists to ensure at least one word in each example is on the filter lists, and inserted a comment where there are discrepancies. 2. Where I inserted a comment where there are discrepancies, please respond to the comments to let me know whether you think the filters did capture these terms, whether they were manually hidden by NIH or whether you think Facebook or Instagram's own filters may have been in effect. As far as timing, the DOJ wants to submit our edits to the proposed stipulation of facts on Wednesday or Thursday at the latest to allow time for some back and forth with the plaintiffs before the deadline. Please let me know if you can get back to me on this by COB tomorrow. I apologize for the continued short turn around time. The stipulation is likely our only opportunity to get the facts in the record. I'd also like to schedule a quick call with the key decision maker and the person who has the most comprehensive knowledge of the facts to review the facts presented and ensure there are no other key facts that might be useful to include. I can provide a copy of the draft fact stipulation in advance, or review a summary of the facts with you during the call. Thank you, Sarah J. Imhoff, JD, MHSA Senior Attorney Office of the General Counsel Public Health Division, NIH Branch (direct) @nih.gov This e-mail message is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain information that is protected, privileged, or confidential, and it should not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive such information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately. From: Kern, Anna (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Sent: Monday, December 6, 2021 6:31 PM To: Imhoff, Sarah (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Cc: Spruill, Crystal (NIH/OD) [C] < @nih.gov>; Prince, Scott (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Lankford, David (NIH/OD) [E] < @od31tm1.od.nih.gov>; Myles, Renate (NIH/OD) [E] < @mail.nih.gov>; Fine, Amanda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Polimeni, Lydia (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Subject: RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information Hi Sarah, Since there were quite a few questions and requests for screenshots, we have compiled our responses in the attached word doc. Our answers to your questions are highlighted in yellow. Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the responses. We have two main questions for you and DOJ: 1. Can the chief policy maker just be NIH or do we have to name a specific person? We'd prefer to not name a specific person given the history of PETA sharing people's personal information with their supporters. OGC- David Lankford and I- would like to know the ultimate NIH decision-maker for this lawsuit. The person's name will not be given to Plaintiffs and is for our own internal coordination purposes only.