FOR DAMAGE, INSTRUCTIONS: Please read carefully the instructions on the FORM APPROVED reverse side and supply information requested on both sides of this OMB NO- 1105-0008 INJURY, OR DEATH form. Use additional sheet(s) if necessary. See reverse side for additional instructions. I. Submit to Appropriate Federal Agency: 2. Name, address of claimant, and claimant's personal representative if any. (See instructions on reverse). Number, Street, City, State and Zip code. Secretary of the Air Force Gary Ramsey Dr. Heather Wilson ZIO Trails End 1670 Air Force Pentagon Lavernia, Texas 78121 Washington, DC 20330-1670 3. TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT 4. DATE OF BIRTH 5. MARITAL STATUS 6. DATE AND DAY OF ACCIDENT 7. TIME (AM. OR PM.) MILITARY CIVILIAN 12/28/1974 Married 11/05/2017 Sunday 11:25 AM. 8. BASIS OF CLAIM (State in detail the known facts and circumstances attending the damage, injury, or death, identifying persons and property involved, the place of occurrence and the cause thereof. additional pages if necessary). See Attached Page 9. PROPERTY DAMAGE NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER, IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code). BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROPERTY, NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE DAMAGE AND THE LOCATION OF WHERE THE PROPERTY MAY BE INSPECTED. {See instructions on reverse side). 10. PERSONAL DEATH STATE THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF EACH INJURY OR CAUSE or DEATH, WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THE CLAIM, IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT, STATE THE NAME OF THE INJURED PERSON OR DECEDENT. Claimant Gary Ramsey's mother was Therese Rodriguez, a member of the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs, Texas. Therese Rodriguez was attending the Sunday worship service with her husband, Richard Rodriguez when the couple was shot and killed. Therese Rodriguez suffered physical pain and mental anguish before She died inside the church. Gary Ramsey has suffered grievous mental anguish from the death of his mother and the loss of her society, companionship and affection. ?ll. WITNESSES NAME ADDRESS (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code) Stephen Willeford Johnnie Langendorff Please see additional list attached. 12. (See instructions on reverse). AMOUNT OF CLAIM (in dollars) 12a. PROPERTY DAMAGE 12b. PERSONAL INJURY 12c, WRONGFUL DEATH 12d. TOTAL (Failure to specify may cause forfeiture of your rights). 0.00 CERTIFY THAT THE AMOUNT OF CLAIM COVERS ONLY DAMAGES AND INJURIES CAUSED BY THE INCIDENT ABOVE AND AGREE TO ACCEPT SAID AMOUNT IN FULL SATISFACTION AND FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THIS CLAIM. 138? SIGNATURE OF CLAIMANT (See instructions on reverse side). 13b. PHONE NUMBER OF PERSON SIGNING FORM 14. DATE OF SIGNATURE CIVIL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT FRAUDULENT CLAIM CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS The claimant is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than Fine, imprisonment, or both. (See 18 U.S.C. 287?, 1001,) 55,000 and not more than $10,000. plus 3 times the amount of damages sustained by the Government. (See 31 USC. 3729). Authorized for Local Reproduction NSN 7540-00-634-4046 STANDARD FORM 95 (REV. 2/2007) Previous Edition is not Usable PRESCRISED BY DEPT. OF JUSTICE 95109 28 CFR142 INSURANCE COVERAGE in order that subrogation claims may be adjudicated. it is essential that the claimant provide the following information regarding the insurance coverage of the vehicle or property. 15, Do you carry accident Insurance? I: Yes If yes. give name and address of insurance company (Number. Street. City. State, and Zip Code) and policy number. No 16. Have you ?led a claim with your insurance carrier in this instance. and if so, is it full coverage or deductible? Yes No 17. if deductible. state amount. 0.00 18. If a claim has been ?led with your carrier. what action has your insurer taken or proposed to take with reference to your claim? {It is necessary that you ascertain these facts). 19. Do you carry public liability and property damage insurance? Yes If yes. give name and address of insurance carrier (Number. Street, City. State. and Zip Code), No INSTRUCTIONS Claims presented under the Federal Tort Claims Act should be submitted directly to the "appropriate Federal agency? whose employee(s) was involved in the incident. If the incident involves more than one claimant, each claimant should submit a separate claim form. Complete all items - Insert the word NONE where applicable. A CLAIM SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WHEN A FEDERAL DAMAGES IN A SUM CERTAIN FOR INJURY TO OR LOSS OF PROPERTY. PERSONAL AGENCY RECEIVES FROM A CLAIMANT. HIS DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT. OR LEGAL INJURY. OR DEATH ALLEGED TO HAVE OCCURRED BY REASON OF THE INCIDENT. REPRESENTATIVE. AN EXECUTED STANDARD FORM 95 OR OTHER WRITTEN THE CLAIM MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCY WITHIN NOTIFICATION OF AN INCIDENT, ACCOMPANIED BY A CLAIM FOR MONEY TWO YEARS AFTER THE CLAIM ACCRUES. Failure to completely execute this form or to supply the requested material within The amount claimed should be substantiated by competent evidence as follows: two years from the date the claim accrued may render your claim invalid. A claim is deemed presented when it is received by the appropriate agency. not when it is In support of the claim for personal injury or death. the claimant should submit a mailed. written report by the attending physician. showing the nature and extent of the injury. the nature and extent of treatment. the degree of permanent disability. if any, the prognosis. and the period of hospitalization, or incapacitation. attaching itemized bills for medical. If instruction is needed in completing this form. the agency listed in item #1 on the reverse hospital. or burial expenses actually incurred. side may be contacted. Complete regulations pertaining to claims asserted under the Federal Tort Claims Act can be found in Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations. Part 14. Many agencies have published supplementing regulations. If more than one agency is 0t Ctetme for damage to property, which has been 0" can be economically involved. please state each agency. repaired. the claimant should submit at least two itemized signed statements or estimates by reliable. disinterested concerns. or. if payment has been made. the itemized signed receipts evidencing payment. The claim may be filled by a duly authorized agent or other legal representative. provided evidence satisfactory to the Government is submitted with the Claim establishing express authority to act for the claimant. A claim presented by an agent or legal representative (0) th 0t claims for damage to property t5 ?0t economically repairable. or it must be presented in the name of the claimant. [f the clay-m is signed by the agent the property is lost or destroyed. the claimant should submit statements as to the original legal representative. it must show the title or legal capacity of the person signing and be cost 0f the property, the date 0t purchase. and the value 0t the property. h0th before and accompanied by evidence of hisfher authority to present a claim on behalf of the claimant after the accident Such statements should be by disinterested competent persons as agent. executor. administrator. parent. guardian or other representative. preferably reputable dealers or of?cials familiar the tYPe 0t property damaged. or by two or more competitive bidders, and should be certified as being just and correct. If claimant intends to ?le for both personal injury and property damage. the amount for each must be shown in item number 12 of this form Failure to specify a sum certain will render your claim invalid and may result in forfeiture of your rights. PRIVACY ACT NOTICE This Notice is provided in accordance with the Privacy Act. 5 U.S.C. and B. Principe! Purpose: The information requested is to be used in evaluating claims. concerns the information requested in the letter to which this Notice is attached. C. Routine Use: See the Notices of Systems of Records for the agency to whom you are A. Authority: The requested information is solicited pursuant to one or more of the submitting this form for this information. following: 5 U.S.C. 301. 28 08.0. 501 et seq.. 28 U.S.C. 2671 et seq.. 28 C.F.R. D. Effect ofFai'fure to Respond: Disclosure is voluntary. However. failure to supply the Part 14. requested information or to execute the form may render your claim "invalid." PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE This notice is solely for the purpose of the Papenrvork Reduction Act. 44 U.S.C. 3501. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 6 hours per response. including the time for reviewing instructions. searching existing data sources. gathering and maintaining the data needed. and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information. including suggestions for reducing this burden. to the Director, Torts Branch, Attention: Paperwork Reduction Staff, Civil Division. US. Department of Justice. Washington. DC 20530 or to the Office of Management and Budget. Do not mail completed form(s) to these addresses. STANDARD FORM 95 REV. (22007) BACK CLAIM FOR DAMAGE, INSTRUCTIONS: Please read carefully the instructions on the FORM APPROVED reverse side and supply information requested on both sides of this OMB NO- 1105-0008 INJURY: OR DEATH form. Use additional sheet(s) if necessary. See reverse side for additional instructions. 1. Submit to Appropriate Federal Agency: 2. Name, address of claimant, and claimant's personal representative if any, (See instructions on reverse). Number, Street, City, State and Zip code. Secretary Of the Air Force Ronald Ramsey. Jr. Dr. Heather Wilson PO. Box 2035 1670 Air Force Pentagon Adkins, Texas 78101 Washington, DC 20330?1670 3. TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT 4. DATE OF BIRTH 5. MARITAL STATUS 5. DATE AND DAY OF ACCIDENT 7. TIME (AM. OR PM.) El MILITARY 02/12/1971 Married 11/05/2017 Sunday 11:25 AM. 8. BASIS OF CLAIM (State in detail the known facts and circumstances attending the damage, injury, or death, identifying persons and property involved. the place of occurrence and the cause thereof. Use additional pages if necessary). See Attached Page EL PROPERTY DAMAGE NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER, IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT (Number, Street, City, State, and Zip Code). BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROPERTY, NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE DAMAGE AND THE LOCATION OF WHERE THE PROPERTY MAY BE INSPECTED. (See instructions on reverse side). 10. PERSONAL INJURYIWRONGFUL DEATH STATE THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF EACH INJURY OR CAUSE OF DEATH, WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF THE CLAIM. IF OTHER THAN CLAIMANT, STATE THE OF THE INJURED PERSON OR DECEDENT. Claimant Ronald Ramsey's mother, Therese Rodriguez, was a member Of First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs, Texas. Therese Rodriguez was attending Sunday worship service with her husband, Richard Rodriguez when the couple was shot and killed. Therese Rodriguez suffered physical pain and mental anguish before she died inside the church. Ronald Ramsey has suffered grievous mental anguish from the death of his mother and the loss of her society, companionship and affection. 11. WITNESSES NAME ADDRESS (Number, Street. City, State. and Zip Code) Stephen Willeford Johnnie Langendorff Please see additional list attached. 12. (See instructions on reverse). AMOUNT OF CLAIM (in dollars) 12a. PROPERTY DAMAGE 12b. PERSONAL INJURY 12c. WRONGFUL DEATH 12d. TOTAL (Failure to specify may cause forfeiture of your rights). 0.00 0.00 CERTIFY THAT THE AMOUNT OF CLAIM COVERS ONLY DAMAGES AND INJURIES CAUSED av THE INCIDENT Aaove AND AGREE TO ACCEPT SAID AMOUNT IN FULL SATISFACTION AND FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THIS CLAIM. 13a. SIGNATURE OF CLAIMANT {See instructions on reverse side?). 13b. PHONE NUMBER OF PERSON SIGNING FORM 14. DATE OF SIGNATURE CIVIL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT FRAUDULENT CLAIM CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS The claimant is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than Fine, imprisonment. or both. (See 18 U.S.C. 287, 1001 .) 55,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of damages sustained by the Government. (See 31 U.S.C. 3729). Authorized for Local Reproduction NSN 7540-00-634-4046 STANDARD FORM 95 (REV. 272007) Previous Edition is not Usable PRESCRIBED BY DEPT. OF JUSTICE 05 109 28 CPR 14.2 INSURANCE COVERAGE in order that subrogation claims may be adjudicated. it is essential that the claimant provide the following information regarding the insurance coverage of the vehicle or property. 15. Do you carry accident Insurance? I: Yes If yes. give name and address of insurance company (Number. Street. City. State, and Zip Code) and policy number. No 16. Have you filed a claim with your insurance carrier in this instance, and if so. is it full coverage or deductible? Yes No 17. If deductible. state amount. 0.00 18. If a claim has been ?led with your carrier, what action has your insurer taken or proposed to take with reference to your claim? (It is necessary that you ascertain these facts), 19, Do you carry public liability and property damage insurance? Yes Ifyes. give name and address of insurance carrier (Number. Street. Cit . State. and Zi Code . No it i INSTRUCTIONS Claims presented under the Federal Tort Claims Act should be submitted directly to the "appropriate Federal agency" whose employee(s) was involved in the incident. If the incident involves more than one claimant. each claimant should submit a separate claim form. Complete all items - Insert the word NONE where applicable. A CLAIM SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WHEN A FEDERAL DAMAGES IN A SUM CERTAIN FOR INJURY TO OR LOSS OF PROPERTY. PERSONAL AGENCY RECEIVES FROM A CLAIMANT. HIS DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT. OR LEGAL INJURY. OR DEATH ALLEGED TO HAVE OCCURRED BY REASON OF THE INCIDENT. REPRESENTATIVE. AN EXECUTED STANDARD FORM 95 OR OTHER WRITTEN THE CLAIM MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCY WITHIN NOTIFICATION OF AN INCIDENT. ACCOMPANIED BY A CLAIM FOR MONEY TWO YEARS AFTER THE CLAIM ACCRUES. Failure to completely execute this form or to supply the requested material within The amount claimed should be substantiated by competent evidence as follows: two years from the date the claim accrued may render your claim invalid. A claim is deemed presented when it is received by the appropriate agency, not when it is In support of the claim for personal injury or death. the claimant should submit a mailed. written report by the attending physician. showing the nature and extent of the injury. the nature and extent of treatment. the degree of permanent disability. if any. the prognosis. and the period of hospitalization, or incapacitation. attaching itemized bills for medical. If instruction is needed in completing this form. the agency listed in item #1 on the reverse hospital. or burial expenses actually incurred. side may be contacted. Complete regulations pertaining to claims asserted under the Federat Tort Claims Act can be found in Title 28. Code of Federal Regulations. Part 14, . . Many agencies have published supplementing regulations. If more than one agency is of dams for damage ?0 Pere'b?t Wb'bb has been or can be economically involved, please state each agency. repaired. the claimant should submit at least two Itemized signed statements or estimates by reliable. disinterested concerns. or. if payment has been made. the itemized signed receipts evidencing payment. The Claim may be filled by a duly authorized agent or other legal representative. provided evidence satisfactory to the Government is submitted with the claim establishing express authority to act for the claimant. A claim presented by an agent or legal representative (C) In eurtport of claims for damage to property which is hot economicetlv repairable. or if must be presented in the name of the claimant. f the claim is signed by the agent or the property is lost or destroyed. the claimant should submit statements as to the original legal representative. it must show the titre or legal capacity of the person signing and be cost of the the date of purchase. and the value of the preperty. both before and accompanied by evidence of his/her authority to present a claim on behalf of the claimant after the aCCIdem- statements be by disinterested competent PEFSONS. as agent. executor. administrator. parent. guardian or other representative. preferably reputable dealers 01? familiar With the type 0f PFOPEFW damaged, by two or more competitive bidders. and should be certi?ed as being just and correct. If claimant intends to fiie for both personal injury and property damage. the amount for each must be shown in item number 12 of this form Failure to specify a sum certain will render your claim invalid and may result in forfeiture of your rights. PRIVACY ACT NOTICE This Notice is provided in accordance with the Privacy Act. 5 USE). and B. Principai Purpose; The information requested is to be used in evaluating claims. concerns the information requested in the letter to which this Notice is attached. C. Routine Use: See the Notices of Systems of Records for the agency to whom you are A. Authority: The requested information is solicited pursuant to one or more of the Submitting this form for this information. following: 5 U.S.C. 301. 28 U.S.C. 501 et seq.. 28 U.S.C. 2671 et seq.. 28 C.F.R, D. Effect ofFaiIure to Respond: Disclosure is voluntary. However. failure to supply the Part 14, requested information or to execute the form may render your claim "invalid." PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE This notice is solely for the purpose of the Papenivork Reduction Act. 44 U.S.C. 3501. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 6 hours per response. including the time for reviewing instructions. searching existing data sources. gathering and maintaining the data needed. and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information. including suggestions for reducing this burden. to the Director. Torts Branch. Attention: Papenivork Reduction Staff. Civil Division. US. Department of Justice. Washington. DC 20530 or to the Of?ce of Management and Budget. Do not mail completed formis) to these addresses. STANDARD FORM 95 REV. (2200?) BACK RIDER TO FORM 95 8. The basis ofthis claim is under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1346 and 28 U.S.C. 2671, et seq. This notice of claim is ?led on behalf of claimant Ronald Ramsey, who is the natural child of Therese Joann Rodriguez (?Therese Rodriguez?), deceased. This Claim arises from the tragic shooting death of Therese Rodriguez on Sunday, November 5, 2017, on or about 1 1 :30 am. in the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs located in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Twenty- six individuals were killed in the shooting, including decedent Therese Rodriguez. Twenty others were seriously injured. Simply put, Therese Rodriguez?s death was caused, in whole or in part, by the institutional failures of the United States Department of Defense, including, but not limited to, the United States Air Force Air Force?), in that these entities negligently, recklessly, carelessly and/or egregiously failed to report pertinent criminal arrest, conviction and military discharge information of the shooter into a federal database, as was required, which would have prevented and barred the shooter from purchasing, owning, and/or possessing the firearms, ammunition and body armor that he used in the shooting. Incredibly, and quite frankly tragically, the Department of Defense, the US Air Force, and others, were aware as far back as 1997, and more specifically in at least 2015, that the US Air Force (as well as other branches of the United States military) routinely failed to report such required criminal arrest and conviction information. As a result of an internal review conducted by the InSpector General of the Department of Defense which uncovered these repeated failures, the US Air Force agreed that it would take ?prompt action to ensure? that convicted offenders are properly reported to appropriate federal databases to prevent them from legally purchasing, owning, and/or possessing firearms, ammunition and/or body armor. Despite this notice and call to action, the Department of Defense, Specifically including, but not limited to, the US Air Force, utterly failed in their reporting obligations which was the proximate cause of the decedent Therese Rodriguez?s death. It is undisputed that the perpetrator and sole shooter in this action was former US Air Force member Airman Devin Patrick Kelley (?the shooter?). Upon information and belief, and as the result of a domestic dispute with his former in-laws, the shooter entered the First Baptist Church on the morning of November 5, 2017 dressed in all black, Clad in body armor and armed with a Ruger Semi-Automatic AR-556 ri?e that he purchased from a legal and authorized vendor sometime in April 2016. The shooter killed 26 parishioners and injured 20 others, some critically. Upon leaving the church the shooter was confronted by a good Samaritan who shot the shooter twice once in the leg and once in the chest. The shooter ?ed the scene and was involved in a high-speed car chase. He then took his own life after his car veered off the road. Although the shooter undoubtedly ?pulled the trigger? that resulted in the injuries and death of Therese Rodriguez and others, the failures of the US Air Force, and others, allowed the shooter to purchase, own and/or possess the semiautomatic rifle, ammunition and body armor he used, and it is these failures that were a proximate cause, in whole or in part, of the injuries and death of the decedent. The US military, specifically including the US Air Force, designed and implemented policies, procedures, regulations and/or guidelines that were speci?cally designed to prevent individuals such as the shooter from purchasing, owning and/or possessing ?rearms, ammunition and body armor. It is the failure by the US Air Force to abide by these policies, procedures, regulations and/or guidelines that directly caused this horri?c tragedy. It is undisputed that Airman Kelley was a member of the US Air Force, having been on active duty from 2009 until 2014 and stationed at Holloman Air Force Base located in Otero County, New Mexico. In April 2011 Airman Kelley married Tessa K. Loge, who had an infant son from a previous marriage. It is not disputed that after his marriage, then-Ainnan Kelley was arrested for assault upon his wife and her son, wherein he inflicted serious injuries upon the two, including, but not limited to, fracturing the skull of the infant boy. He was also charged with pointing a loaded gun at his wife, and two counts of threatening his spouse with an unloaded firearm. Upon information and belief, because of these criminal charges a general Court Martial was convened and Airman Kelley was convicted of assault on his wife and her son on November 7, 2012. Due to these convictions Airman Kelley was sentenced to a year in military jail. At that time, he admitted striking the infant boy ?with a force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm?. With respect to the assault against his spouse, Kelley admitted that he ?hit, kicked, choked and pulled the hair? of his wife. The couple were divorced while Kelley served his jail sentence in a naval brig located in San Diego, California. Airman Kelley was also known to have made threats against his superiors in the Air Force as well as to have attempted to smuggle guns onto the base in violation of Air Force regulations and base standard operating procedures. In addition, given the nature of the criminal charges pending against him, in the Spring of 201 2, the Air Force involuntarily committed Ainnan Kelley to the Peak Behavioral Health Services, a mental facility located in Santa Teresa, New Mexico which has a dedicated unit for US military personnel. On June 7, 2012 Airman Kelley jumped a fence and escaped from the mental facility. He was apprehended by local law enforcement later that same day and was returned to the facility to await his court martial. At the time of his apprehension, it was noted by local law enforcement authorities that Kelley was suffering from mental health issues and that he was a ?danger to himself and others?. After capture Kelley was detained at the mental health facility and ordered into pre-trial con?nement while awaiting his court martial. Upon information and belief, during this time Kelley used computers at the facility to attempt to purchase weapons and tactical gear via the internet and have those items shipped to a post of?ce box located in San Antonio, Texas. Upon information and belief, the US Air Force was specifically aware that Kelley attempted to make these fireann purchases while detained at the mental health facility. Eventually, in May 2014, after serving his military prison sentence, the Air Force discharged Kelley with a ?bad conduct discharge? rather than a dishonorable discharge, simply reducing him in Rank to that of El rather than stripping him of his service. Like his prior criminal convictions, the US Air Force utterly failed to enter his ?bad conduct discharge? into federal databases. A ?bad conduct discharge? following court-martial was yet another event that should have disqualified Kelley from purchasing, owning or possessing firearms and ammunition. Due to the foregoing, and most notably his assault arrest and convictions, bad conduct discharge post court-martial and involuntary commitment to a mental facility, the US Air Force, specifically including, but not limited to, the Office of Special Investigations at Holloman Air Force Base and/or the HQ Air Force Security Forces were required to enter his November 2012 criminal arrest and conviction information into certain computerized databases, specifically including, the Criminal Justice Information Systems The CI IS comprises various computer databases, specifically including the National Crime Information Center database, Uniform Crime Reporting, Fingerprint Identification and the IAFIS Program which includes both fingerprint and final criminal disposition data. These databases are computerized databases for ready access by an authorized entity making an inquiry into the background of an individual and for prompt disclosure of information in the system from other criminal justice agencies about crimes and criminals. Speci?cally, the NCIC database is accessed for a number of purposes, and is one such database that is required to be accessed whenever a person seeks to legally purchase certain ?rearms. Certain criminal convictions, speci?cally including those of which Airman Kelley was convicted, are required to be entered into the NCIC and other CJIS-related databases. Had Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest, conviction and/or bad conduct discharge information been entered, as was required by US Air Force policies, procedures, regulations and/or guidelines, Airman Kelley would have been prevented and prohibited from purchasing, owning and/0r possessing ?rearms, ammunition and body armor, Speci?cally including the ?rearm and body armor that he used in the shooting. Signi?cantly, the Department of Defense has promulgated regulations that impose upon the various branches of the military, speci?cally including the US Air Force, certain reporting requirements when a sewiceman is convicted of a crime. See Department of Defense INSTRUCTION Number 5505.11 and subsequent revisions/changes. It is undisputed, and has been readily admitted by the US Air Force in the days following this horri?c tragedy, that Airman Kelley?s convictions and criminal history were required to be entered into the database and/or CJ IS system but for reasons not presently lmown, the Air Force utterly failed in their reporting obligations. It is also undisputed that had the information been entered into these databases by the Air Force at the time of his convictions in and around November 2012, as was required, Airman Kelley would have been prevented, prohibited and barred from purchasing, owning and/ or possessing the ?rearms, ammunition and body armor used in this massacre and this tragedy would not have occurred. The failures of the Department of Defense, specifically including the US Air Force, are not limited to their failure to timely and accurately enter and/or report Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and conviction information into the appropriate computer database in November 2012. In February 2015 the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Defense conducted a comprehensive review ofthe failures of the branches of the US military to and accurately input criminal conviction information into the appropriate computer database, specifically including the database. See Evaluation of Department of Defense Cor-itplianee with Criminal History Data Reporting Requirements, Report Number dated February 12, 2015 (referred to as the Report?). The Report examined the continuing failures of conviction reporting by the US Navy, US Air Force and US Marines. In his Report, the Inspector General recognized that as far back as 1997 the branches of the US military had not consistently submitted the required criminal arrest and conviction information to appropriate federal law enforcement agencies, including criminal information databases. See 1G Report, at p. 12. With respect to the US Air Force, the 2015 study took a sample of convicted individuals from June 2010 through and including October 31, 2012 (as mentioned above, Airman Kelley was convicted in November 2012 just days after the sample period). During this time frame, the Inspector General found that there were 358 criminal convictions of US Air Force personnel that mandated reporting obligations. However, only 248 fingerprint cards were entered into the appropriate database, representing a failure rate of approximately 31%. With respect to ?nal criminal disposition information regarding these 358 convictions, only 245 final dispositions were reported, representing a failure rate of approximately 32%. Due to these alarming failure rates (more than 3 out of 10 failures by the US Air Force to report required criminal arrest and conviction information) the Inspector General made certain recommendations to the branches of the US military, specifically including the US Air Force. The first recommendation was for the US Air Force to submit and enter the missing fingerprint and final criminal disposition information for the missing individuals identified in the sample period into the appropriate computer databases. Upon review of the Inspector General?s Report the US Air Force ?agreed? with this recommendation. Unfortunately, Airman Kelley?s conviction occurred in November 2012, a mere one month outside the sample examined by the Inspector General. The Inspector General also recommended that due to the high failure rate the US Air Force ?take prompt action? to ensure that all arrestee information is properly reported and entered in the various criminal history databases. The US Air Force also specifically ?agreed? with the Inspector General?s recommendation. See 1G Report, at p. 10. Notwithstanding that the US Air Force was specifically aware in 2015 (and likely well before) that on average more than 3 out of IO criminal arrest and conviction information was not reported, and despite their acknowledgement that they would ensure? that such systemic failures were corrected, the US Air Force utterly failed the general public, and more specifically the decedent Therese Rodriguez and her family, by failing to ensure that Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and convictions were properly reported. Despite their specific prior knowledge, the US Air Force utterly and carelessly failed in their reporting obligations which allowed this tragedy to occur and cost the decedent Therese Rodriguez her life. Had the US Air Force done as required, the shooter would not have been able to purchase, own and/or possess the automatic ri?e and body armor that he used to slaughter and injure more than 46 individuals. Claimant?s allegations of negligence are not limited to the fact that the US Air Force?s failures allowed Kelley to purchase, own and/or possess ?rearms. The utterly careless and reckless failures of the US Air Force to satisfy their reporting obligations with respect to Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and convictions resulted in numerous missed opportunities for various local law enforcement agencies to prevent further violence by Kelley. Upon information and belief, after his bad conduct discharge from the military local law enforcement personnel made more than 17 visits to Kelley?s home on allegations ranging from animal cruelty to domestic violence and sexual assault. For example, on or about June 7, 2013, Coma] County, Texas deputies responded to Kelley?s home to investigate a report of ?rape by force? allegedly perpetrated by Kelley. Without information as to Kelley?s prior convictions, deputies investigated the report for months following the report, but no charges were brought once investigators believed Kelley moved to Colorado. Had the infonnation regarding Kelley?s criminal arrest and conviction for domestic violence been entered, as was required, Comal County law enforcement would have been aware of that information and perhaps been able to bring felony charges under the Texas Penal Code against Kelley in 2013. In early 2014, local police in Texas responded to Kelley?s home to investigate reports of domestic abuse of his then girlfriend Danielle Shields, but charges were not pursued after Shields told responding officers the report was the result of a misunderstanding. Had the US Air Force reported Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and convictions for domestic violence, local law enforcement would have had reason to further investigate any claim of misunderstanding and perhaps pursued felony charges under the Texas Penal Code against Kelley in 2014. In August 2014, Colorado law enforcement responded to Kelley?s home to investigate claims of animal cruelty allegedly peipetrated by Kelley, resulting in a standoff with police once Kelley refused to come out of the home. Without information as to Kelley?s prior convictions, law enforcement issued Kelley a citation rather an'esting him. Had Colorado local law enforcement had information regarding Kelley?s violent criminal past, perhaps Kelley would have been arrested and incarcerated in August of 20 4. Had the information regarding Kelley?s criminal arrest and conviction been entered, as was required, local law enforcement personnel would have been aware of that information when they conducted various welfare checks at the shooter?s home in Texas in the months leading up to the shooting. Upon information and belief, local law enforcement also visited the shooter?s home due to domestic assault allegations. Had they known that he was convicted of a prior domestic assault, they may have properly entered the home and seized any weapons that were visible, or pursued felony charges under the Texas Penal Code against Kelley at that time. As with his military convictions, any conviction for domestic violence after he was discharged from the military would have likewise barred, prohibited and/or prevented from purchasing, owning and/or possessing firearms, ammunition and body armor, including the semiautomatic rifle and body armor used in the massacre. Based upon the foregoing, the injuries and death of decedent Therese Rodriguez was caused, in whole or in part, by the negligence, recklessness, and/or carelessness of the United States of America, through the US Air Force, including, but not limited to, in that the US Air Force failed to adhere to the regulations, policies, procedures, and/ 01' guidelines issued by the Department of Defense in failing to report the shooter?s criminal arrest and convictions to appropriate federal law enforcement agencies and databases, as was required, thereby allowing the shooter to purchase the semiautomatic rifle, ammunition and body armor used in the massacre; had the US Air Force complied with their necessary and mandatory reporting requirements, the shooter would have been barred, prohibited and/or prevented from purchasing, owning and/or possessing ?rearms, ammunition and body armor, including the semiautomatic rifle and body armor used in the massacre and thus, the shooting would not have taken place; in that the US Air Force failed to comply with Depaitment of Defense regulations, policies, procedures, and/or guidelines, specifically including, but not limited to, Department of Defense. INSTRUCTION Number 5505.1 1 and subsequent revisions/ changes, thereby allowing the shooter to purchase the firearm, ammunition and body armor used in the shooting; in that the US Air Force failed to correct known deficiencies in its criminal arrest and conviction reporting obligations; in that deSpite its public statements to the contrary the US Air Force failed to adhere or heed the recommendations promulgated by the Inspector General of the Department of Defense concerning its systemic failures to properly report arrest and criminal conviction information; in that the US Air Force failed to comply with its obligations and duties regarding criminal arrest and conviction reporting; in that the US Air Force was specifically aware for years prior to the shooting that it had consistently failed to report required an?est and criminal conviction information and failed to correct these deficiencies; in that the US Air Force failed to appropriately abide by and follow its own internal procedures regarding criminal arrest and conviction information; created a dangerous condition to the public, and specifically to the decedent Therese Rodriguez, by failing to adhere, comply and/ or follow required criminal arrest and conviction information reporting obligations; in that the US Air Force breached the duty of care owed to the public generally, and to the decedent Therese Rodriguez specifically, in that it failed to report required criminal arrest and conviction information; in that the US Air Force failed to discuss their deficiencies with other branches of the US militaly and/or other governmental agencies in an attempt to correct these known de?ciencies; in that the US Air Force unleashed on the public a dangerous individual who had the ability to purchase firearms, ammunition and body armor when he should have been prevented from doing so; and was Otherwise careless, reckless and/or negligent all of which individually and/or jointly, proximately caused, in whole or in part, the subject shooting and the injuries and death of the decedent Therese Rodriguez. The instant notice of claim is filed by and on behalf of claimant, Ronald Ramsey, Jr., the child of the decedent Therese Rodriguez, and on behalf of the decedent?s estate, its heirs, and/or any individual entitled to recover under the applicable damages law, including, but not limited to for wrongful death damages suffered as a result of the death of the decedent as set forth above. Ronald Ramsey, Jr. seeks all wrongful death damages for his losses only under the applicable law, including, but not limited to, all economic and non?economic damages, including the loss of past and future income, support, society, love, grief, consortium, services, guidance, care, comfort, companionship and inheritance of the decedent, loss of life?s pleasures, loss of enjoyment of life, damages for mental anguish and mental pain and suffering, as well as any other damages recoverable under the applicable law. 11. WITNESS: y?J Stephen Willeford, 55, wounded Farida Brown, 73, wounded Rosanna Solis, adult, wounded Joaquin Ramirez, adult, wounded Rihanna Garza (Garcia), 9, daughter of Joann Ward, wounded David Colbath, wounded 0\ PP (J3 WV 19) 20) Kris Workman, wounded Zachary Poston, wounded Johnnie Langendorff, 27, drove Stephen Willeford to catch perpetrator Ms. Terri Smith, 54, Mr. Lorenzo Flores, 56, Kevin Jordan, 30, David Brown, wounded Sue Soto, Ted Montgomery, Sunday school director David Casillas, 55, lives nearby David Flores, 26, son of Lorenzo Flores, witness Inspector General of the United States Air Force in 2014 Various yet identified members of perpetrator?s Chain of Command while on Active Duty in the Air Force. RIDER TO FORM 95 8. The basis ofthis claim is under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 1346 and 28 U.S.C. 2671, et seq. This notice of claim is ?led on behalf of claimant Gary Ramsey, who is the natural child of Therese Joann Rodriguez (?Therese Rodriguez?), deceased. This Claim arises from the tragic shooting death of Therese Rodriguez on Sunday, November 5, 2017, on or about 11:30 am. in the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs located in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Twenty?six individuals were killed in the shooting, including decedent Therese Rodriguez. Twenty others were seriously injured. Simply put, Therese Rodriguez?s death was caused, in whole or in part, by the institutional failures of the United States Department of Defense, including, but not limited to, the United States Air Force Air Force?), in that these entities negligently, recklessly, carelessly and/or egregiously failed to rep01t pertinent criminal arrest, conviction and military discharge information of the shooter into a federal database, as was required, which would have prevented and barred the shooter from purchasing, owning, and/ or possessing the firearms, arrnnunition and body armor that he used in the shooting. Incredibly, and quite frankly tragically, the Department of Defense, the US Air Force, and others, were aware as far back as 1997, and more specifically in at least 2015, that the US Air Force (as well as other branches of the United States military) routinely failed to report such required criminal arrest and conviction information. As a result of an internal review conducted by the Inspector General of the Department of Defense which uncovered these repeated failures, the US Air Force agreed that it would take ?prompt action to ensure? that convicted offenders are properly reported to apprOpriate federal databases to prevent them from legally purchasing, owning, and/or possessing firearms, ammunition and/or body armor. Despite this notice and call to action, the Department of Defense, speci?cally including, but not limited to, the US Air Force, utterly failed in their reporting obligations which was the proximate cause of the decedent Therese Rodriguez?s death. It is undisputed that the perpetrator and sole shooter in this action was former US Air Force member Airman Devin Patrick Kelley (?the shooter?). Upon information and belief, and as the result of a domestic dispute with his former in-laws, the shooter entered the First Baptist Church on the morning of November 5, 2017 dressed in all black, clad in body armor and armed with a Ruger Semi?Automatic AR-556 ri?e that he purchased from a legal and authorized vendor sometime in April 2016. The shooter killed 26 parishioners and injured 20 others, some critically. Upon leaving the church the shooter was confronted by a good Samaritan who shot the shooter twice once in the leg and once in the chest. The shooter fled the scene and was involved in a high?speed car chase. He then took his own life after his car veered off the road. Although the shooter undoubtedly ?pulled the trigger? that resulted in the injuries and death of Therese Rodriguez and others, the failures of the US Air Force, and others, allowed the shooter to purchase, own and/or possess the semiautomatic rifle, ammunition and body armor he used, and it is these failures that were a proximate cause, in whole or in part, of the injuries and death of the decedent. The US military, speci?cally including the US Air Force, designed and implemented policies, procedures, regulations and/or guidelines that were speci?cally designed to prevent individuals such as the shooter from purchasing, owning and/or possessing ?rearms, ammunition and body armor. It is the failure by the US Air Force to abide by these policies, procedures, regulations and/or guidelines that directly caused this honific tragedy. It is undisputed that Airman Kelley was a member of the US Air Force, having been on active duty from 2009 until 2014 and stationed at Holloman Air Force Base located in Otero County, New Mexico. In April 2011 Airman Kelley married Tessa K. Loge, who had an infant son from a previous marriage. It is not disputed that after his marriage, then?Airman Kelley was arrested for assault upon his wife and her son, wherein he in?icted serious injuries upon the two, including, but not limited to, fracturing the skull of the infant boy. He was also charged with pointing a loaded gun at his wife, and two counts of threatening his spouse with an unloaded ?rearm. Upon information and belief, because of these criminal charges a general Court Martial was convened and Airman Kelley was convicted of assault on his wife and her son on November 7, 2012. Due to these convictions Airman Kelley was sentenced to a year in military jail. At that time, he admitted striking the infant boy ?with a force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm?. With respect to the assault against his spouse, Kelley admitted that he ?hit, kicked, choked and pulled the hair? of his wife. The couple were divorced while Kelley served his jail sentence in a naval brig located in San Diego, California. Airman Kelley was also known to have made threats against his superiors in the Air Force as well as to have attempted to smuggle guns onto the base in violation of Air Force regulations and base standard operating procedures. In addition, given the nature of the criminal charges pending against him, in the Spring of 201 2, the Air Force involuntarily committed Airman Kelley to the Peak Behavioral Health Services, a mental facility located in Santa Teresa, New Mexico which has a dedicated unit for US military personnel. On June 7, 2012 Airman Kelley jumped a fence and escaped from the mental facility. He was apprehended by local law enforcement later that same day and was returned to the facility to await his court martial. At the time of his apprehension, it was noted by local law enforcement authorities that Kelley was suffering from mental health issues and that he was a ?danger to himself and others?. After capture Kelley was detained at the mental health facility and ordered into pre?trial confinement while awaiting his court martial. Upon information and belief, during this time Kelley used computers at the facility to attempt to purchase weapons and tactical gear via the internet and have those items shipped to a post office box located in San Antonio, Texas. Upon information and belief, the US Air Force was speci?cally aware that Kelley attempted to make these ?rearm purchases while detained at the mental health facility. Eventually, in May 2014, after serving his military prison sentence, the Air Force discharged Kelley with a ?bad conduct discharge? rather than a dishonorable discharge, simply reducing him in Rank to that of E-l rather than stripping him ofhis service. Like his prior criminal convictions, the US Air Force utterly failed to enter his ?bad conduct discharge? into federal databases. A ?bad conduct discharge? following court-martial was yet another event that should have disqualified Kelley from purchasing, owning or possessing firearms and ammunition. Due to the foregoing, and most notably his assault arrest and convictions, bad conduct discharge post court-martial and involuntary commitment to a mental facility, the US Air Force, specifically including, but not limited to, the Office of Special Investigations at Holloman Air Force Base and/or the HQ Air Force Security Forces were required to enter his November 2012 criminal arrest and conviction information into certain computerized databases, specifically including, the Criminal Justice Information Systems The CJIS compiises various computer databases, specifically including the National Crime Information Center database, Uniform Crime Reporting, Finge1print Identification and the IAFIS Program which includes both fingerprint and final criminal disposition data. These databases are computerized databases for ready access by an authorized entity making an inquiry into the background of an individual and for prompt disclosure of information in the system from other criminal justice agencies about crimes and criminals. Speci?cally, the NCIC database is accessed for a number of purposes, and is one such database that is required to be accessed whenever a person seeks to legally purchase certain ?rearms. Certain criminal convictions, speci?cally including those of which Airman Kelley was convicted, are required to be entered into the NCIC and other CJIS-related databases. Had Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest, conviCtion and/or bad conduct discharge information been entered, as was required by US Air Force policies, procedures, regulations and/or guidelines, Airman Kelley would have been prevented and prohibited from purchasing, owning and/or possessing ?rearms, ammunition and body armor, speci?cally including the ?rearm and body armor that he used in the shooting. Signi?cantly, the Department of Defense has promulgated regulations that impose upon the various branches of the military, speci?cally including the US Air Force, certain reporting requirements when a serviceman is convicted of a crime. See Department Of Defense INSTRUCTION Number 5505.11 and subsequent revisions/changes. It is undisputed, and has been readily admitted by the US Air Force in the days following this horri?c tragedy, that Airman Kelley?s convictions and criminal history were required to be entered into the NCIC database and/or system but for reasons not presently known, the Air Force utterly failed in their reporting obligations. It is also undisputed that had the information been entered into these databases by the Air Force at the time of his convictions in and around November 2012, as was required, Airman Kelley would have been prevented, prohibited and barred from purchasing, owning and/or possessing the firearms, ammunition and body armor used in this massacre and this tragedy would not have occurred. The failures ofthe Department ot?Defense, specifically including the US Air Force, are not limited to their failure to timely and accurately enter and/or report Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and conviction information into the appropriate computer database in November 2012. In February 2015 the Inspector General for the US. Department of Defense conducted a comprehensive review of the failures of the branches of the US military to and accurately input criminal conviction information into the appropriate computer database, specifically including the NC 1C database. See Evaluation of Department of Defense Con'iplirince with Criminal History Data Repor-?tii-ig Requirements, Report Number dated February 12, 2015 (referred to as the Report?). The Report examined the continuing failures of conviction reporting by the US Navy, US Air Force and US Marines. In his Report, the Inspector General recognized that as far back as 1997 the branches of the US military had not consistently submitted the required criminal arrest and conviction information to appropriate federal law enforcement agencies, including criminal information databases. See I Report, at p. 12. With respect to the US Air Force, the 2015 study took a sample of convicted individuals from June 2010 through and including October 31, 2012 (as mentioned above, Airman Kelley was convicted in November 2012 just days after the sample period). During this time frame, the Inspector General found that there were 358 criminal convictions of US Air Force personnel that mandated reporting obligations. However, only 248 fingeiprint cards were entered into the appropriate database, representing a failure rate of approximately 31%. With respect to final criminal disposition information regarding these 358 convictions, only 245 ?nal dispositions were reported, representing a failure rate of approximately 32%. Due to these alarming failure rates (more than 3 out of 10 failures by the US Air Force to report required criminal arrest and conviction information) the Inspector General made certain recommendations to the branches of the US military, Specifically including the US Air Force. The ?rst recommendation was for the US Air Force to submit and enter the missing ?ngerprint and ?nal criminal disposition information for the missing individuals identi?ed in the sample period into the appropriate computer databases. Upon review of the Inspector General"s Report the US Air Force ?agreed? with this recommendation. Unfortunately, Airman Kelley?s conviction occurred in November 2012, a mere one month outside the sample examined by the Inspector General. The Inspector General also recommended that due to the high failure rate the US Air Force ?take prompt action? to ensure that all arrestee information is properly reported and entered in the various criminal history databases. The US Air Force also speci?cally ?agreed" with the Inspector General?s See I Raporr, at p. 10. Notwithstanding that the US Air Force was speci?cally aware in 2015 (and likely well before) that on average more than 3 out of 10 criminal arrest and conviction information was not reported, and deSpite their acknowledgement that they would ensure? that such systemic failures were corrected, the US Air Force utterly failed the general public, and more specifically the decedent Therese Rodriguez and her family, by failing to ensure that Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and convictions were properly reported. Despite their speci?c prior knowledge, the US Air Force utterly and carelessly failed in their reporting obligations which allowed this tragedy to occur and cost the decedent Therese Rodriguez her life. Had the US Air Force done as required, the shooter would not have been able to purchase, own and/or possess the automatic rifle and body armor that he used to slaughter and injure more than 46 individuals. Claimant?s allegations of negligence are not limited to the fact that the US Air Force?s failures allowed Kelley to purchase, own and/or possess ?rearms. The utterly careless and reckless failures of the US Air Force to satisfy their reporting obligations with respect to Airman Kelley?s criminal an'est and convictions resulted in numerous missed opportunities for various local law enforcement agencies to prevent further violence by Kelley. Upon information and belief, after his bad conduct discharge from the military local law enforcement personnel made more than 17 visits to Kelley?s home on allegations ranging from animal cruelty to domestic violence and sexual assault. For example, on or about June 7, 2013, Coma] County, Texas deputies responded to Kelley?s home to investigate a report of ?rape by force? allegedly peipetrated by Kelley. Without information as to Kelley?s prior convictions, deputies investigated the report for months following the report, but no charges were brought once investigators believed Kelley moved to Colorado. Had the information regarding Kelley?s criminal arrest and conviction for domestic violence been entered, as was required, Comal County law enforcement would have been aware of that information and perhaps been able to bring felony charges under the Texas Penal Code against Kelley in 2013. In early 2014, local police in Texas responded to Kelley?s home to investigate reports of domestic abuse of his then girlfriend Danielle Shields, but charges were not pursued after Shields told responding officers the report was the result of a misunderstanding. Had the US Air Force reported Airman Kelley?s criminal arrest and convictions for domestic violence, local law enforcement would have had reason to further investigate any claim of misunderstanding and perhaps pursued felony charges under the Texas Penal Code against Kelley in 2014. In August 2014, Colorado law enforcement responded to Kelley?s home to investigate claims of animal cruelty allegedly perpetrated by Kelley, resulting in a standoff with police once Kelley refused to come out of the home. Without information as to Kelley's prior convictions, law enforcement issued Kelley a citation rather an'esting him. Had Colorado local law enforcement had information regarding Kelley?s violent criminal past, perhaps Kelley would have been arrested and incarcerated in August of 2014. Had the information regarding Kelley?s criminal arrest and conviction been entered, as was required, local law enforcement personnel would have been aware of that information when they conducted various welfare checks at the shooter?s home in Texas in the months leading up to the shooting. Upon information and belief, local law enforcement also visited the shooter?s home due to domestic assault allegations. Had they known that he was convicted of a prior domestic assault, they may have properly entered the home and seized any weapons that were visible, or pursued felony charges under the Texas Penal Code against Kelley at that time. As with his military convictions, any conviction for domestic violence after he was discharged from the military would have likewise barred, prohibited and/or prevented from purchasing, owning and/or possessing firearms, ammunition and body annor, including the semiautomatic rifle and body armor used in the massacre. Based upon the foregoing, the injuries and death of decedent Therese Rodriguez was caused, in whole or in part, by the negligence, recklessness, and/or carelessness of the United States of America, through the US Air Force, including, but not limited to, in that the US Air Force failed to adhere to the regulations, policies, procedures, and/ or guidelines issued by the Department of Defense in failing to report the shooter?s criminal arrest and convictions to appropriate federal law enforcement agencies and databases, as was required, thereby allowing the shooter to purchase the semiautomatic rifle, ammunition and body armor used in the massacre; had the US Air Force complied with their necessary and mandatory reporting requirements, the shooter would have been barred, prohibited and/ or prevented from purchasing, owning and/or possessing firearms, ammunition and body armor, including the semiautomatic ri?e and body armor used in the massacre and thus, the shooting would not have taken place; in that the US Air Force failed to comply with Department of Defense regulations, policies, procedures, and/or guidelines, specifically including, but not limited to, Department of Defense Number 5505.11 and subsequent revisions/changes, thereby allowing the shooter to purchase the ?rearm, ammunition and body armor used in the shooting; in that the US Air Force failed to correct known de?ciencies in its criminal arrest and conviction reporting obligations; in that despite its public statements to the contrary the US Air Force failed to adhere or heed the recommendations promulgated by the Inspector General of the Department of Defense concerning its systemic failures to properly report arrest and criminal conviction information; in that the US Air Force failed to comply with its obligations and duties regarding criminal arrest and conviction reporting; in that the US Air Force was speci?cally aware for years prior to the shooting that it had consistently failed to report required arrest and criminal conviction information and failed to correct these de?ciencies; in that the US Air Force failed to abide by and follow its own internal procedures regarding criminal arrest and conviction information; created a dangerous condition to the public, and speci?cally to the decedent Therese Rodriguez, by failing to adhere, comply and/0r follow required criminal arrest and conviction information reporting obligations; in that the US Air Force breached the duty of care owed to the public generally, and to the decedent Therese Rodriguez speci?cally, in that it failed to report required criminal arrest and conviction information; in that the US Air Force failed to discuss their de?ciencies with other branches of the US military and/or other governmental agencies in an attempt to correct these known de?ciencies; in that the US Air Force unleashed on the public a dangerous individual who had the ability to purchase ?rearms, ammunition and body armor when he should have been prevented from doing so; and was otherwise careless, reckless and/or negligent all of which individually and/or jointly, proximately caused, in whole or in part, the subject shooting and the injuries and death of the decedent Therese Rodriguez. The instant notice of claim is filed by and on behalf of claimant, Gary Ramsey, the child of the decedent Therese Rodriguez, and on behalf of the decedent?s estate, its heirs, and/or any individual entitled to recover under the applicable damages law, including, but not limited to for the survival action as the legal representative of the decedent?s estate and for wrongful death damages suffered as a result of the death of the decedent as set forth above. Gary Ramsey, on behalf of the estate of Therese Rodriguez, seeks all survival action damages for Therese Rodriguez?s losses including, but not limited to pain and mental anguish suffered by Therese Rodriguez before her death as well as any other damages recoverable under the applicable law. Gary Ramsey seeks all wrongful death damages for his losses only under the applicable law, including, but not limited to, all economic and non-economic damages, including the loss of past and future income, support, society, love, grief, consortium, services, guidance, care, comfort, companionship and inheritance of the decedent, loss of life?s pleasures, loss of enjoyment of life, damages for mental anguish and mental pain and suffering, as well as any other damages recoverable under the applicable law. 11. WITNESS: 1) Stephen Willeford, 55, wounded 2) Farida Brown, 73, wounded 3) Rosanna Solis, adult, wounded 4) Joaquin Ramirez, adult, wounded 6) Rihanna Garza (Garcia), 9, daughter of ]oann Ward, wounded 7) David Colbath, wounded 8) Kris Workman, wounded 9) Zachary Poston, wounded 10) Johnnie Langendorff, 27, drove Stephen Willeford to catch perpetrator 11) Ms. Terri Smith, 54, 12) Mr. Lorenzo Flores, 56, 13) Kevin Jordan, 30, 14) David Brown, wounded 15) Sue Soto, 16) Ted Montgomery, Sunday school director 17) David Casillas, 55, lives nearby 18) David Flores, 26, son of Lorenzo Flores, witness 19) Inspector General of the United States Air Force in 2014 20 Various yet identified members of perpetrator?s Chain of Command while on Active Duty in the Air Force.