PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q ATLANTA Corporate Headquarters 3945 Lakefield Court Suwanee, GA 30024 (770) 866-3200 FAX (770) 866-3259 TEM Analysis of Historical 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder Sample for Amphibole Asbestos Expert Report William E. Longo, Ph.D, Mark W. Rigler, Ph.D and Materials Analytical Services, LLC February 16, 2018 – Rev. #1 WWW.MASTEST.COM PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q ATLANTA Corporate Headquarters 3945 Lakefield Court Suwanee, GA 30024 (770) 866-3200 FAX (770) 866-3259 TEM Analysis of Historical 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder Sample for Amphibole Asbestos Index of Revisions Date 3/15/18 Revision Fixed typographical errors in Section 1 WWW.MASTEST.COM EXHIBIT: TEM Analysis of Historical 1978 Johnson?s Baby Powder Sample For Amphibole Asbestos Expert Report February 16, 2018?Rev. #1 Chain of Custody TEM Post Separation Talc Analysis M68233-001 TEM Post Separation Talc Analysis M68233-002 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Analysis of Historical 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder Sample for Amphibole Asbestos Overview This report describes the procedures and methodology used to analyze two samples from a historical 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder (JBP) container that was provided to MAS from The Lanier Law Firm for the presence of amphibole asbestos fibers or bundles. The two separate samples from the 1978 JBP container, that arrived at MAS on Friday 2/9/2018, consisted of two 50 ml plastic centrifuge tubes that were labeled JBP084 06A1 and JBP084 06A2 by Alliance Technologies. The total weight of the two JBP samples (talc & centrifuge tubes), as reported by Alliance Technologies, was 58.7 grams and 57.9 grams, respectively. The two 1978 JBP samples were given MAS laboratory tracking number M68233-001 for sample # JBP084 06A1 and M68233-002 for sample # JBP084 06A2. The 1978 JBP talc product that was analyzed for this report were sent to MAS, LLC by the Lanier Law Firm. The provided information shows that Alliance Technologies LLC., received the historical 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder container on 1/19/2018 from the law firm of Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLP where they were requested by Jack N. Frost to prepare two 2 oz. sample aliquots for two parties. On 1/24/2018, Shannon Tully of The Lanier Law Firm received one set of 2oz sample aliquots and the other set was given to Nina Trovato of the Orrick, Herrington, Sutcliffe LLP Law Firm. See chain-of-custody information and photographs of the 1978 JBP container in Section 2 of this Report. According to the information supplied with these two samples, they were collected from a 2/8/1978 historical JPB container that was supplied by Johnson & Johnson, lot number 113J and bottle/container identification number JBP084. Since the amount of possible amphibole content of the 1978 JBP talc product was expected to be at trace levels (0.1% or less), it was recognized that this analysis would require the use of an analytical transmission electron microscope (ATEM) as described in our previous August 2017 report. ATEM is the only analytical method with the appropriate sensitivity for this type of trace mineral analysis as it can positively identify Page 2 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q potential fibrous amphibole structures by energy dispersive x-ray analysis (EDXA) for mineral fiber chemistry and crystalline structure information by selective area electron diffraction (SAED). Additionally, the ATEM provides good fibrous morphology information that can eliminate obvious non-asbestiform particulates. It was conservatively estimated by Blount that for every 1,000 amphibole particles present, there would be 1,000,000 talc particles.1 This large number of talc-toamphibole structure ratio, coupled with TEM filter preparation overloading issues, reduces the probability of detecting any trace amounts of fibrous amphibole structures that may be present in the talc sample by ATEM analysis. In the past, this type of ATEM analysis usually involved the examination of many hundreds of TEM grid openings, thus requiring many hours of TEM instrumentation time. Reducing the amount of talc particles, as compared to potential amphibole structures during sample preparation, would increase the amphibole sensitivity in the ATEM. It also increases the efficiency of the analyst by eliminating the need to examine many hundreds of TEM grid openings. One method of talc-to-amphibole separation can be done through the use of heavy liquid density separation during the sample preparation stage, as previously described by A. M. Blount.1, 2 Using the Blount talc density heavy liquid preparation method for these samples, our ATEM analysis showed that for the two 1978 JPB product samples analyzed for this report were found to contain detectable amounts of amphibole asbestos (ferroanthophyllite). The two samples had an amphibole asbestos concentration range of between 7,240 fibers/gram to 22,100 fibers/gram. According to Alliance Technologies, the total weight of talc inside the 1978 JBP container was 458.7 grams. Using the concentration of amphibole asbestos fibers found by MAS in the two samples, then the total amount of amphibole (ferro-anthophyllite) asbestos fibers/bundles in the 1978 JBP container, is expected to range approximately between 3,321,000 to 10,137,000 amphibole asbestos fibers/bundles. No chrysotile fibers/bundles were found in the two 1978 JPB talc samples we analyzed. A more detailed description for the lack of chrysotile fiber findings, if chrysotile were, in fact, present in these two samples, can be found in the Discussion and Conclusion Section of this report. Fibrous Talc A.M. Blount “Amphibole Content of Cosmetic and Pharmaceutical Talcs”, Environ. Health Perspectives, Vol. 94, 1991, pp. 225-230. 2 Process Mineralogy IX: The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, 1990, A.M. Blount “Detection and Quantification of Asbestos and Other Trace Minerals in Powdered Industrial-Mineral Samples”, pp. 557570. 1 Page 3 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q In addition to the ferro-anthophyllite asbestos amphiboles, one of the samples (M68233002) was observed to contain trace amounts of fibrous talc. A full quantitative TEM analysis of the fibrous talc, in the one sample, was not performed at this time. Only a semi-quantitative analysis was done in the ATEM based on grid opening estimation. The fibrous talc estimation was trace amounts for this one sample. Materials and Methods Sample Log-In Procedure As stated above, the two 1978 JMP talc samples that were analyzed by MAS for this report, were received from The Lanier Law Firm on February 9, 2018 and assigned MAS laboratory tracking number M68233. The breakdown of the two 1978 JBP samples are as follows: J&J Sample Number MAS Sample Number Sample Description JBP084 06A1 M68233-001 JBP084 06A2 M68233-002 50 ml centrifuge tube containing talc 50 ml centrifuge tube containing talc Date Samples Received at MAS 2/9/2018 2/9/2018 Sample Preparation The received JBP talc sample in the centrifuge containers were weighed on a Sartorius Research Balance and the weight recorded. For samples M68233-001 & 002, 1.0341g 0.8934g of the talc (Sartorius Research Balance) was removed from each of the centrifuge containers respectively, with laboratory spatula, then placed in a 15 ml scintillation vial. The scintillation vials were then placed in a Fisher Scientific Iso-temp muffle furnace Model #650 at 400oF for a minimum of 4 hours to remove any organic material associated with the talc. Photographs of each of the JBP centrifuge containers can be found in Sections 3 and 4 of this Report. Approximately 25mg (Sartorius Research Balance) from the muffled talc sample aliquot was placed into a labeled Eppendorf micro-centrifuge tube (MC T) (Premium 1.5mL MCT Graduated Tubes Cat. No. 05-408-12). Approximately 1.2 ml of Heavy Liquid (Lithium heteropolytungstates solution, GeoLiquids, Inc., Cat. No. LST010 density 2.85 g/cc) was added to the MCT containing the talc samples prepped and mixed with a disposable mixing rod for 10 to 20 seconds. The combined JBP talc and LST heavy liquid samples were placed into a vacuum desiccator (JEOL EMDSC-U10A) to remove air bubbles for 15 minutes prior to centrifugation at a pressure of approx. 8 torr. Page 4 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q The MCT sample tubes were then placed in an Eppendorf micro-centrifuge (Model No. 5415D) set at 9,000 RPM for total of 90 minutes at room temperature. After removal of the MCT tubes from the centrifuge, they were flash frozen in liquid nitrogen, and the MCT tip was immediately removed with a pre-cleaned 6 inch steel cleaver into a clean 45 mL flat bottom disposable centrifuge tube. Figure 1 shows the cut area on the MCT tip. Figure 1: Cut Line for Removal of MCT Tip Red line is showing cut area on MCT tip Deionized water was added to the centrifuge tube to bring the volume to approximately 45 ml. The 45 ml centrifuge tube was capped and inverted by hand 5 times to distribute the collected material in the bottom of the MCT tip. The 45 ml mixture was then immediately and continuously filtered onto a 25mm Mixed Cellulose Ester (MCE) filter with a 0.22µm pore size (Millipore). After the mixture was filtered, the excess heavy liquid was washed through the filter with the addition of approximately 100 ml of deionized water. The prepared MCE filter was placed in a new disposable plastic 47mm petri dish and allowed to dry at ambient room temperature in a HEPA hood for a minimum of 2 hours. The processed MCE filter samples were directly prepared onto TEM 100 µm size grid openings (2 for analysis and 1 for archive) using the standard TEM AHERA filter preparation protocol.3 3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1987. Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act, 40 CFR Part 763, Appendix A to subpart E. USEPA, Washington, D.C. Page 5 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q Process Laboratory Blanks For the two samples that were prepared by the heavy liquid method, one process laboratory blank was run with this set of samples. The process blank MCE filter was prepared in the same exact same manner as the three GBH-DP talc samples (heavy liquid, filtration on MCE filters etc.) but without any talc material. For the TEM analysis, 100 grid openings were analyzed for the process blank. ATEM Amphibole Analysis Procedure JEOL 1200EX TEMs equipped with either a Noran or an Advanced Analysis Technologies (light element) energy dispersive x-ray analyzer (EDXA) were employed for this analysis. TEM samples were analyzed at a screen magnification of 20,000X amphibole fibers or bundles with substantially parallel sides and an aspect ratio of 5:1 or greater, and at least 0.5 µm in length were counted as per standard TEM fiber counting rules, such as AHERA asbestos structure sizing rules as one example. Positive identification of amphibole asbestos requires EDXA for mineral chemistry conformation and selected area electron diffraction (SAED) for each amphibole type. Counting Rules For this analysis, 100 grid openings were analyzed for each of the two 1978 JBP samples. The 100 grid opening counts were split evenly between two grids. All amphibole asbestos fibers/bundles that met the above-stated size criteria were recorded on the MAS TEM structure count bench sheets for each sample. Length and width of each amphibole fiber/bundle was recorded and identified. Every amphibole asbestos fiber or bundle that were identified and counted by the analyst required observation of an EDXA spectra matching the mineral chemistry for that particular amphibole and a SAED amphibole pattern. EDXA spectra and SAED patterns are recorded/saved for each asbestos amphibole fiber or bundle found in the sample. Also, photographs were taken of the amphibole fibers/bundles found from each of the three samples. Fibrous Talc Estimation The two 1978 JBP samples were also evaluated for presence of fibrous talc during the TEM analysis. A quantitative analysis of the number of fibrous talc particles was not done at this time. However, a semi-quantitative estimate of the number of fibrous talc particles present in four random grid openings was scored as follows: Page 6 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q 1) Abundant : (>11 fibrous talc particles) 2) Common: (4 to 10 fibrous talc particles) 3) Trace: (1 to 3 fibrous talc particles) This estimation was based on the talc fibers/bundles having at least a 5:1 aspect ratio, at least 0.5µm in length and substantially parallel sides. One representative talc fiber or bundle was recorded (EDXA, SAED & photographed) for each of the two samples that contained fibrous talc. Results The results for the two 1978 JBP samples are shown in Tables 1 through 3. Table 1 shows a summary of both samples that were analyzed with the amount of fibrous amphibole asbestos per gram of talc found for each sample. The amphibole asbestos per gram of talc concentration ranged from 7,240 fibers/bundles per gram to concentration of 22,100 fibers/bundles per gram. Tables 2 and 3 provide the summary of findings for each of the 2 samples that were analyzed concerning the identification for the type amphibole asbestos found and if the asbestos fibers were either a fiber or bundle. Length and width dimension, aspect ratio, and average aspect ratio for each sample are also provided. The laboratory process blank run with this set of three samples were found to be negative for any asbestos or talc fibers and particles. All of the analytical data and photographs can be found in Sections 2, 3 and 4 of this report. This data includes sample TEM count sheets, EDXA spectra, SAED micrographs and TEM photo-micrographs of the fibrous asbestos amphiboles found for each sample. Table 1. Summary of Analytical Results for Historical 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder Container Date of Analysis Sample ID Sample Description Amphibole Concentration Fibers/Bundles per gram 2/15/2018 M68233-000 Process Blank *N/D 2/14/2018 M68233-001 2/14/2018 – 2/15/2018 M68233-002 White - fine grained homogeneous powder White - fine grained homogeneous powder *No amphibole asbestos structures detected Page 7 of 11 7,240 22,100 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q Table 2. TEM Asbestos Fiber Data for 1978 Historical JBP Container M68233 Str. # Length (µm) Width (µm) Aspect Ratio Asbestos Type -001 6.8 0.9 7.6 Ferro-anthophyllite Average Aspect Ratio: 7.6 Table 3. TEM Asbestos Fiber Data for 1978 Historical JBP Container M68233 Str. # Length (µm) Width (µm) Aspect Ratio Asbestos Type -001 25.7 0.7 36.7 Ferro-anthophyllite -002 16.4 2.6 6.3 Ferro-anthophyllite -003 7.6 0.5 15.2 Ferro-anthophyllite Average Aspect Ratio: 19.4 Fibrous Talc Only Sample M68233-002 was positive for fibrous talc that was estimated to be at trace levels according to the criteria that was described above. Page 8 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q Discussion and Conclusions Using the Blount preparation method for the direct TEM analysis of approximately 25mg of talc sample onto a 25mm MCE filter, did not cause any significant overloading of the TEM grids with talc particles or fibers. The overall TEM grid particle loading was estimated at approximately 15 to 20%. This consisted of talc particles (samples M68233001 & 002) and fibrous talc in sample M68233-002 only, as well as amphibole asbestos, in the two 1978 historical JPB samples. If the same weight of talc (approx. 25mg) had been directly filtered onto a 25mm MCE filter, all of the TEM sample preparations would have been too severely overloaded for analysis. These sample preparations, along with the heavy liquid method, demonstrated the utility of the Blount method by demonstrating the enhanced increase of analytical sensitivity of the TEM analysis for the presents of amphibole asbestos. It also increased the analyst efficiency without any overloading issues. The Blount method used a weight concentration of about 60mg of talc for the reported PLM analysis, which is not as sensitive to talc overloading issues as is the TEM. Our use of 25mg, instead of 60mg, was because at that weight concentration, the TEM grids were too overloaded to analyze. Using the Blount heavy liquid sample preparation method, we were able to detect fibrous amphiboles in both of the samples collected from the 1978 historical JBP container. The fibrous asbestos amphiboles found were anthophyllite with an elevated iron content or ferro-anthophyllite. As anticipated and discussed below, chrysotile was not found and it was not expected to be found in the two 1978 JBP talc samples. There is only one known commercial asbestos-containing product that uses anthophyllite as an added ingredient is Haveg polymeric pipe that is only used at industrial chemical plants that deal with very caustic chemical process. Additionally, there are no commercial amphibole mines in North America, and either anthophyllite or ferro-anthophyllite is not routinely analyzed at trace levels by typical commercial TEM laboratories. For these reasons, it can be stated that: 1) there are no background air levels of anthophyllite or ferro-anthophyllite that could have interfered with or contaminated our 1978 JBP talc sample analysis4,5 and 2) for the one set of the two 1978 JBP talc R.J. Lee, D.R. Van Orden, “Airborne Asbestos in Buildings”, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 50 (2008) pp. 217-225. 5 R.F. Dodson, M.F. O’Sullivan, D.R. Brooks and J.R. Bruce, “Asbestos Content of Omentum and Mesentery in Nonoccupationally Exposed Individuals”, Toxicology and Industrial Health, 2001: 17: pp. 138-143. 4 Page 9 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q samples that were prepared and analyzed at this laboratory, a process laboratory blank was prepared simultaneously with the 1978 JPB samples to determine if there was any cross-contamination. When the process laboratory blank was analyzed by TEM, no asbestos, including either anthophyllite or ferro-anthophyllite fibers or bundles were found. Therefore, it can be stated, that there was no cross-contamination during the laboratory sample preparation of the two 1978 talc samples we analyzed. This heavy liquid method is specific to the asbestos tremolite series, and as anticipated, chrysotile was not detected. The reason for this is that the heavy liquid solutions (LMT & LST) used for talc separation process had a density of 2.84 to 2.85 g/cm 3. Therefore, any minerals with a similar density or lower would not be separated by this method such as chrysotile, which has a density of between 2.5 to 2.6 g/cc.6 The density of anthophyllite ranges from 2.85 to 3.2 g/cm 3. This range of densities is primarily due to the addition of iron (Fe) to the chemical structure. For example, anthophyllite is part of a solid solution series with a chemical formula of Mg7Si8O22(OH)2 to approximately Fe2Mg5Si8O22(OH)2. Without Fe being present, the density would be at the lower end of the density gradient of 2.85 g/cm3. Again, since anthophyllite is a solid solution series, the amount of iron atoms that can be substituted into the molecular formula of anthophyllite depends on the iron content of the surrounding rock. This iron atom substituted could be 0, 1, 2 or higher which accounts for the range of anthophyllite densities described here. With an anthophyllite density of approximately 2.85 g/cm 3, which is the same as the heavy liquid used, one would not expect separation of this type of anthophyllite from the talc particles using the Blount method and they would not be detected by our analysis. Therefore, by using the Blount talc separation method, the lack of detection for anthophyllite and chrysotile in the 1978 JBP samples we analyzed was anticipated, but not taken as a negative result for either low density anthophyllite or chrysotile asbestos. Anthophyllite was never identified in any of the heavy liquid separation analyses reported in the Blount papers either, as only tremolite was described. As discussed above, fibrous ferro-anthophyllite was found in the two samples collected from the 1978 JPB container had a much higher iron content than is typically seen at our laboratory for iron-containing anthophyllite. This higher iron content would increase the density to the degree necessary for heavy liquid separation as compared to no iron or low iron anthophyllite as shown by our analysis. The ferro-anthophyllite could also be 6 Manual of Mineralogy, Twenty-First Edition, Revised, Cornelis Klein and Cornelius S. Hurlbut, Jr., John Wiley and Sons, 1999. Page 10 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q called chesterite (polymorph of anthophyllite) as described by D.R. Veblen for talc samples he analyzed from Chester, Vermont.7 As stated above, the samples we analyzed is reported to have been collected from a 1978 historical bottle of Johnson’s Baby Powder. This 1978 time frame indicates that the source of the talc used by Johnson & Johnson in their Baby Powder products was from Vermont mines. With the non-iron containing anthophyllite (density of 2.85 g/cm3) and chrysotile asbestos (density of between 2.5 to 2.6 g/cc), which is either lower or the same as the heavy liquid used, one would not expect separation of this type of anthophyllite or chrysotile from the talc particles using the Blount method and, therefore, should not be detected by our analysis. However, in both samples, platy talc particles were found as well as trace amounts of fibrous talc in sample M68233-002. Theoretically, due to the density of talc particles and fibers, they should be eliminated from the TEM sample by the heavy density method. The finding of both talc particles and fibers demonstrates that the Blount method is not 100% efficient for complete separation of the talc. Since the Blount method is not 100% efficient for talc, then it would stand to reason that it would not be 100% efficient for the complete removal of either low iron anthophyllite or potentially chrysotile. The finding of either low iron anthophyllite or chrysotile would indicate a significant concentration of these types of asbestos in the sample. As described above, the results of this analysis showed that one of the 1978 JBP talc samples (M68233-002) contained trace amounts fibrous talc as compared to the platy talc that was found in each of the two samples reported here. It has been reported by others that fibrous talc is a geological metamorphic transformation of anthophyllite to fibrous talc.8,9 Based on the results of our analysis, it can be stated, that individuals who used 1978 Johnson’s Baby Powder would have, more likely than not, been exposed to fibrous amphibole asbestos. D.R. Veblen, P.R. Buseck & C.W. Burnham, “Asbestiform Chain Silicates” Science, 198: pp.359-365, 1997. 8 D.R. Veblen & C.W. Burnham, “New Biopyriboles Chester, Vermont: I. Descriptive Mineraology”, American Mineraologist, 63: 1000-1009, 1978. 9 R.L. Virta, “The Phase Relationship of Talc and Amphiboles in a Fibrous Talc Sample, Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 8923, United States Department of the Interior, 1985. 7 Page 11 of 11 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q ______________________ __________ MAS, LLC. CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY CLIENT: Lanier Law MAS JOB: M68233 CONTACT: Jason S. Goldstein, Esq. LOGIN DATE: 2/9/2018 PHONE: (212) 421-2800 SUBMITTED BY: Shannon Carroll-Lanier La CLIENT JOB NAME: Jody Ratcliff Case TRANSPORT: FedEx 7714 4234 3824 CLIENT JOB#: 14-1852 RECEIVED BY: Wanda Thorpe CLIENT DOC(S): CONDITION: COC OK FAX NUMBER: MAS LOCATION: Lanier Consulting 20180015-01B Method JBP084 sample 06 Consulting 20180015-01A Results 25.5+33.2 g JBP084 sample 06B > Orrick Consulting 27.8+30.1 g Approved By: 20180015 Page 1 of 1 DISCLAIMER:  Alliance Technologies, LLC's total liability shall be limited to a refund which will not exceed the sales price of  services rendered.   Unless specified as cGMP, the analytical data in this report are to be used for exploratory and  development studies only and are NOT intended for product release. PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q Johnson’s Baby Powder Sampling / R20180015 Prepared for: Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLP Florham Park, NJ February 5, 2018 www.alliancetechgroup.com info@alliancetechgroup.com 732.355.1234 (ph) PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q www.alliancetechgroup.com 9 Deer Park Drive ~ Suite B Monmouth Jct., NJ 08852 info@alliancetechgroup.com Client & Sample Information Client: Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLP 600 Campus Drive Florham Park, NJ 07932 Requestor: Jack N. Frost, Jr. Study: Johnson’s Baby Powder Sampling LIMS #: 20180015 One (1) bottle of Johnson’s Baby Powder was delivered in person on 19 January 2018 for subsampling using a cone and quartering method to prepare two 2oz sample aliquots. The sample was stored at room temperature unopened and was photographed (Figure 1) and logged into a laboratory information management system (LIMS) designated as sample 20180015-01 (Table I). Sub-samples removed from this bottle were subsequently identified and labeled as aliquots “A” or “B.” Table I: Sample Designations LIMS # Client ID Description # 20180015-01 JBP084 sample 06 Johnson’s Baby Powder 1 20180015-01A JBP084 sample 06A Talc powder 2 20180015-01B JBP084 sample 06B Talc powder 2 Two objectives for obtaining 2 sub-samples from this bottle of baby powder were to 1) maintain the sample integrity by preventing contamination and 2) create two representative samples for two parties. To minimize contamination of the powder by foreign particulates, the sample splitting was performed in an enclosed plexiglass glove box purged with dry nitrogen (AirGas) to create a positive pressure in the box. To produce two representative samples from this powder, a “cone and quarter” method was employed to divide the sample evenly into the clientCONFIDENTIAL - R20180015 BABY POWDER SAMPLING 24JAN2018 REV1.DOCX - THE ANALYTICAL DATA IN THIS REPORT ARE TO BE USED FOR EXPLORATORY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR PRODUCT RELEASE PG 2 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q www.alliancetechgroup.com 9 Deer Park Drive ~ Suite B Monmouth Jct., NJ 08852 info@alliancetechgroup.com requested 2oz (~56.6g) portions. This methodology is described in several publications including the chapter USP 40 <1097> Bulk Powder Sampling Procedures. Sample splitting was performed on 24 January 2018 in the presence of the following individuals at the laboratories of Alliance Technologies, LLC, 9 Deer Park Dr. Suite B, Monmouth Junction, NJ 08852. Andrew M. Karp Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Four Times Square, New York, NY 10036 Nina Trovato Orrick, Herrington, Sutcliffe LLP 51 West 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 Shannon Tully The Lanier Law Firm 126 E. 56th St., 6th Fl. Tower 56 New York, NY 10022 The sample splitting was performed by Edward Witlicki, Ph.D. (Senior Scientist, Alliance Technologies) under the supervision of Scott Tittle (Laboratory Manager, Alliance Technologies) and Jonathan Chun, Ph.D. (Principal, Alliance Technologies) and began with a determination of the total powder weight by weighing the unopened bottle on a top-loading balance (Mettler PJ6000, S/N K56113, Last Cal. 17Mar2017, Next Cal. 17Mar2018) then the empty bottle after the contents were poured out. The net weight of the bottle contents (Sample 20180015-01) was found to be 408.8 g (14.4 oz) before sampling. The entire contents of the bottle were placed on an aluminum foil lined plastic tray and formed into a cone then split into quarters using stainless steel spatulas. The cone and quarter procedure was repeated until samples could be dispensed into 50mL metal free centrifuge tubes (VWR P/N 89049-174). Two tubes were filled with the baby powder and labeled as 20180015-01A1 and 20180015-01B1, but due to the density of the powder, a second tube was required to contain the target 56.6g (2.0oz) of sample. A second set of tubes was labelled 20180015-01A2 and 20180015-01B2. The actual weights were recorded (Table II) and the net weight of the two aliquots were 58.7g (2.07oz) for aliquot “A” and 57.9g (2.04oz) for aliquot “B.” CONFIDENTIAL - R20180015 BABY POWDER SAMPLING 24JAN2018 REV1.DOCX - THE ANALYTICAL DATA IN THIS REPORT ARE TO BE USED FOR EXPLORATORY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR PRODUCT RELEASE PG 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q www.alliancetechgroup.com 9 Deer Park Drive ~ Suite B Monmouth Jct., NJ 08852 info@alliancetechgroup.com The remaining powder was returned to the original sample bottle and had a net weight of 286.9g (10.1oz). The re-sealed sample bottle was returned to room–temperature storage after sample splitting. The two Sample “A” tubes were relinquished to counsel from the Lanier Law Firm and the two Sample “B” tubes were relinquished to counsel from Orrick, Herrington, Sutcliffe, LLP. CONFIDENTIAL - R20180015 BABY POWDER SAMPLING 24JAN2018 REV1.DOCX - THE ANALYTICAL DATA IN THIS REPORT ARE TO BE USED FOR EXPLORATORY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR PRODUCT RELEASE PG 4 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q www.alliancetechgroup.com 9 Deer Park Drive ~ Suite B Monmouth Jct., NJ 08852 info@alliancetechgroup.com Figure 1: Sample 20180015-01 A B C D E F CONFIDENTIAL - R20180015 BABY POWDER SAMPLING 24JAN2018 REV1.DOCX - THE ANALYTICAL DATA IN THIS REPORT ARE TO BE USED FOR EXPLORATORY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR PRODUCT RELEASE PG 5 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q www.alliancetechgroup.com 9 Deer Park Drive ~ Suite B Monmouth Jct., NJ 08852 info@alliancetechgroup.com LIMS # 20180015-01 Before Sampling 20180015-01 After Sampling Total Wt (Sample + Container) (g) Table II: Sample Weights Tare Wt Wt of Sample (Container) (g) (g) Wt of Sample (oz) Total Sample Wt (oz) 458.7 49.9 408.8 14.4 14.4 336.8 49.9 286.9 10.1 10.1 20180015-01A1 14.5 40.0 25.5 0.90 20180015-01A2 14.4 47.6 33.2 1.17 20180015-01B1 14.4 42.2 27.8 0.98 20180015-01B2 14.4 44.5 30.1 1.06 2.07 2.04 © Alliance Technologies, LLC 2018 - Reproduction of this report in its entirety is permitted. No portions of this report may be reproduced, transmitted, or removed without the written permission of Alliance Technologies. All Rights Reserved. CONFIDENTIAL - R20180015 BABY POWDER SAMPLING 24JAN2018 REV1.DOCX - THE ANALYTICAL DATA IN THIS REPORT ARE TO BE USED FOR EXPLORATORY AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR PRODUCT RELEASE PG 6 Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing Marketing JBP083 JBP084 JBP085 JBP094 JBP096 JBP110 JBP118 JBP173 JBP208 JBP212 JBP213 JBP241 JBP282 Department Sample Name Number Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Johnson's baby powder Label 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978 Date (Year) on Container or Wrapping 3 1/4" x 2 3/4" x 7 3/4" 2 3/4" x 2 1/2" x 6 3/4" 3 1/4" x 2 3/4" x 7 3/4" 3 1/2" x 3" x 8" 3" x 2 1/2" x 7" 2 1/2" x 2" x 7 3/4" 1 3/4" x 1 1/2" x 4 3/4" 2 1/4" x 2" x 6 1/4" 3 1/4" x 2 1/2" x 8 1/4" 2 1/4" x 2" x 6 1/4" 2 1/4" x 2" x 6 1/4" 1 3/4" x 1 1/2" x 4 3/4" 1 3/4" x 1 1/2" x 4 3/4" 24 oz. 14 oz. 24 oz. 24 oz. 14 oz. 14 oz. 4 oz. 9 oz. 24 oz. 9 oz. 9 oz. 4 oz. 4 oz. Three quarters full Full Full Three quarters full Full Full Full Three quarters full Empty Half full Full Full Full Approximate Dimensions Container Approx. Contents of (Width x Depth x Height or Volume Container Diameter x Height ) (oz./g.) Created for Purposes of Litigation Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Plastic bottle Medium Inventory of Johnson's baby powder Product Samples from 1978 talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance talc, fragrance Ingredients Listed Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Made in U.S.A. Information re: Place Made PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q EXHIBIT: P-0382 A-Q M68233 - 001 po1onn1: 04 JBPUEM gamptc UOA 1 /23/201812:46:42 PM EXHIBIT: P-0382 A-Q M68233 - 001 I EXHIBITPLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-001 Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 G. O. in microns = 0.02520 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening A4-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 E10 F1 F2 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 15% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 1 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-001 Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 G. O. in microns = 0.02520 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 B4-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 G5 G6 G7 G8 Str./Asb. Type NSD F/Ferro-Anth NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # 1 Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 15% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 6.8 0.9 7.6 X X 2 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-001 Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 G. O. in microns = 0.02520 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening G9 G10 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Org. Sample Wt. 0.02520 Percent of Orig. Post Separation Wt. Of Sample Analyzed Filter size Number of Structures Counted Structures per Gram of Sample Grid Box # Sample Wt. Post HL Separation NA 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 15% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED g NA (%) 0.00013816 201.1 g mm² 1 Str. Detection Limit 2.17E+04 Str./g Str./g Analytical Sensitivity 7.24E+03 Str./g 7.24E+03 MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 EDS 3 of 3 EXHIBIT: Realtime: 103.4 Liuetime: 99all J-I JJIJ LIA0.00 1.28 2.56 3.34 5.12 6.40 ?.63 3.96 10.24 Energi,I Quantitative Results for Ferru-Anthophullite Analysis: Thin Film Method: Standardless Acquired14-Feb-2018.100.0 Kek-I @10 e'v'fchannel Element Magnesium Silicon Iron Total EXHIBIT: 2 2676 Diffraction 500m 2114/2018 EXHIBIT: in?. 8? M68233-OO1-001 (6.8 um 0.9 um) 2/14/2018 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-001 Grid Box # Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Str. # Grid Opening MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 Str./Asb. Type NSD No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 15% G.O.s Counted 100 G. O. in microns = 0.02520 8584 Area Examined mm² Length 1.103 Width Ratio SAED No fibrous talc observed. EDS 1 of 1 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-000 Anthony Keeton 2/15/2018 G. O. in microns = NA Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening A3-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7 G8 G9 G10 H1 H2 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 1% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 1 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-000 Anthony Keeton 2/15/2018 G. O. in microns = NA Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 B3-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 H1 H2 H3 H4 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 1% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 2 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-000 Anthony Keeton 2/15/2018 G. O. in microns = NA Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10 J4 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 1% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 3 of 3 EXHIBIT: P-0382 A-Q M68233 - 002 002 I 20180015-01A 1\ IRPOPJ . INKLL 018 12:46:42 PM EXHIBIT: 3 0) on I EXHIBITPLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-002 Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 - 2/15/2018 0.02480 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening A5-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 I1 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD B/Ferro-Anth NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD B/Ferro-Anth NSD F/Ferro-Anth NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # 1 2 3 Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 G. O. in microns = 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 20% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 25.7 0.7 36.7 X X 16.4 2.6 6.3 X X 7.6 0.5 15.2 X X 1 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-002 Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 - 2/15/2018 0.02480 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 J6 J7 B5-A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 B1 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 G1 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 G. O. in microns = 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 20% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 2 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-002 Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 - 2/15/2018 0.02480 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7 G8 G9 G10 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Org. Sample Wt. 0.02480 Percent of Orig. Post Separation Wt. Of Sample Analyzed Filter size Number of Structures Counted Structures per Gram of Sample Grid Box # Sample Wt. Post HL Separation NA G. O. in microns = 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 20% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED g NA (%) 0.00013596 201.1 g mm² 3 Str. Detection Limit 2.21E+04 Str./g Str./g Analytical Sensitivity 7.35E+03 Str./g 2.21E+04 MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 EDS 3 of 3 EXHIBIT: Realtime: 131.0 Liuetime: 128.? I I I I 299 Ct-u 2.56 3.84 5.12 6.40 ?.68 8.96 10.24 0.00 1.28 Energi,I Quantitative Results for Ferru-Anthophullite Analysis: Thin Film Method: Standardless Acquired15-Feb-2018.100.0 Kek-I @10 e'v'i'channel Element Magnesium Silicon Iron Total EXHIBIT: 2 2685 M68233-OO2-001 Diffraction 500m 2115/2018 EXHIBIT: A (25.7 um 34 0.7 um) 315/2018 EXHIBIT: Realtime: 142.9 Liuetime: 139.3 I I I I 331 Ct-u 2.56 3.84 5.12 6.40 ?.68 8.96 10.24 0.00 1.28 Energi,I Quantitative Results for Ferru-Anthophullite Analysis: Thin Film Method: Standardless Acquired15-Feb-2018.100.0 Kek-I @10 e'v'i'channel Element Magnesium Silicon Iron Total EXHIBIT: 2 2691 M68233-002-002 Diffraction 500m 2/15/2018 EXHIBIT71.11@120 TM ?3 16.4 um 2.6 um) 2/ 150018 -. EXHIBIT: Realtime: 105.? Liuetime: 1020.00 1.28 2.56 3.84 5.12 6.40 168 8.96 10.24 Energi,I Quantitative Results for Ferru-Anthophullite Analysis: Thin Film Method: Standardless Acquired15-Feb-2018.100.0 Kek-I @10 e'v'fchannel Element Magnesium Silicon Iron Total EXHIBIT: 2 2698 M68233-002-003 Diffraction 500m 2/15/2018 EXHIBIT: M88233-002-003 7.6 um 0.5 um] 2515/2018 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-002 Grid Box # Anthony Keeton 2/14/2018 - 2/15/2018 0.02480 Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Str. # Talc #1 Grid Opening D5-B9 Str./Asb. Type Fibrous Talc MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 20% G.O.s Counted 100 G. O. in microns = Area Examined mm² Length 11 1.103 Width Ratio SAED 1.3 8.5 X Fibrous Talc observed. Trace throughout. EDS X 1 of 1 Ct-u EXHIBIT: Realtime: 200.9 Liuetime: 195.? M68233-002-Talc 0.00 1.28 2.56 3.34 5.12 6.40 ?.63 3.96 10.24 Energi,I Quantitative Results for. Analysis: Thin Film Method: Standardless Acquired14-Feb-2018.100.0 Kek-I @10 e'v'i'channel Element Magnesium Silicon Iron Total EXHIBIT: 2 2684 M68233-002-Talc #1 Diffraction 500m 2/14/2018 EXHIBIT: #1 11.0 um 1.3 um) 2/14/2018 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-000 Anthony Keeton 2/15/2018 G. O. in microns = NA Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening A3-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7 G8 G9 G10 H1 H2 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 1% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 1 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-000 Anthony Keeton 2/15/2018 G. O. in microns = NA Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 B3-B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 H1 H2 H3 H4 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 1% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 2 of 3 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT: P-0382_A-Q TEM Structure Count Sheet Project/ Sample No. Analyst: Date of Analysis Initial Weight(g) Analysis Type M68233-000 Anthony Keeton 2/15/2018 G. O. in microns = NA Post separation talc analysis Scope No. Accelerating Voltage 100 KV 2 Screen Magnification 20 KX Grid Opening H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6 I7 I8 I9 I10 J4 Str./Asb. Type NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD NSD Str. # Grid Box # MAS, LLC. Suwanee, GA 30024 8584 No. of Grids Counted 2 Length Width G. O. Area 105 105 11025 105 105 11025 Grid Acceptance Yes Average 11025 Loading% 1% G.O.s Counted 100 1.103 Area Examined mm² Length Width Ratio SAED EDS 3 of 3