Message-ID: <12900548.1075845065786.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 04:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: mark.haedicke@enron.com
To: andrew.edison@enron.com
Subject: Re: Letter to Timothy D. Bourn.DOC
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Mark E Haedicke
X-To: Andrew Edison
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Mark_Haedicke_Oct2001\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: HAEDICKE-M
X-FileName: mhaedic.nsf

We need to address both issues unless there is some compelling reason not 
to.  Mark



	Andrew Edison@ENRON
	06/06/2001 09:19 AM
		 
		 To: Joseph Deffner/Enron@EnronXGate, W David Duran/Enron@EnronXGate, Charles 
Ward/Enron@EnronXGate, Lisa Mellencamp/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brad 
Alford/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E 
Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Letter to Timothy D. Bourn.DOC

Attached is a draft arbitration demand our outside counsel has prepared on 
the confidentiality issue only.  For what it is worth, outside counsel does 
have some concerns with just arbitrating the confidentiality issue. First, 
they raise the possibility that by only raising the confidentiality issue, we 
might be waiving the guaranty assignability issue. To try to prevent this 
argument, you will note that we have put preservation language in the 
arbitration statement of claim.  We will need to do some additional legal 
research to make sure that would do the trick.  Second, outside counsel tends 
to think the two claims together (confidentiality and the guarantee 
assignability) work better together.  Let's talk soon.


 - Letter to Timothy D. Bourn.DOC