Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Subject: Re: 100M Mask Order

Subject: Re: 100M Mask Order

Date
2021-05-20

Source document: Subject: Re: 100M Mask Order; document type: Email chain (6 pages, text layer clean), Confidential.

Full text

EXHIBIT 107
Case 1:20-cv-00658-LMB-IDD     Document 150-23     Filed 05/20/21     Page 1 of 6 PageID#
3841

a

EXHIBIT g
Defendant's 28 M
From:
John Thomas
Sent:
Friday, April 10, 2020 12:28 PM PDT
To:
Wong, Michael@DGS
BCC:
Ethan Bearman; ethan@blueflame.agency
Subject:
Re: 100M Mask Order
Dear Michael,
I know it's been a while since we have had these conversations but at no time did you and I
discuss providing anything other than the model numbers you suggested were approved for the
state of California. You are correct that our sales sheet did offer 3M masks along with 11
other models at that time in addition to 3M masks (3M's were listed at $6.89 per mask) but our
discussion was never related to the 3M brand. I was clear that we were only focusing on the
approved brands you said California was looking to procure. I have reviewed all of our
correspondence both via email and text and at no time was 3M mentioned as a desired
manufacturer or model.
Here are the four non-3M models we discussed:
DTC 3B
DTX 3X
L-288
SEKURA-321
Are these still the approved models that California is looking for? Are there any others that are
now approved? We offer other FDA approved models as well.
As a side note 3M's N95 masks are four digits including some examples like 1860, 8210, 1870.
I appreciate the clarification as we want to be crystal clear on what you need and what we can
provide. Relating to price and to be fully transparent, the current quote for the above models we
discussed is likely to fluctuate again very soon. I can honor this current pricing estimate only for
another 24 hours without a commitment from the State.
Hope this helps clarify what we can provide. Please let me know if I can answer any other
questions or if you want to do a quick phone call to go over this in more depth. I'm sure you are
swamped with a million emails these days.
Kindest regards,
John
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 10:13 AM Wong, Michael@DGS <Michael.Wong@dgs.ca.gov> wrote:
John,
CONFIDENTIAL
BFM000109726
exhibitsticker.com
EXHIBIT
Defendant's 28
Case 1:20-cv-00658-LMB-IDD     Document 150-23     Filed 05/20/21     Page 2 of 6 PageID#
3842

The original sale sheet sent to me on March 23, 2020 listed 3M N95 masks specifically.
Moreover, in an email to my colleague on March 20, 2020, you indicated that you have
specifically 3M brand N95 masks. All of our conversations and correspondence were
predicated on the products being 3M brand. We must be absolutely certain on the goods we are
purchasing if we execute an order.
Respectfully,
Aka tial,
Contracts Administrator
Phone: 916-441-9619
Email: Michael.Wonqadds.ca.gov
PROCUREM NT
Beware of Fraudulent Activity! — DGS has recently been made aware of fraudulent Purchase Orders and Spoof emails issued to
the vendor community. Always confirm the validity of any Purchase Order by contacting the agency making the request. Do not
process any order that appears suspicious. Do not click on any hyperlinks from a suspicious email. A list of State agency contact
information is provided on the DGS website located at http://www.cids.ca.dovIod/Prodrams/Deledated.aspx. Be vigilant by
confirming valid State of California emails and phone numbers at htt s://cold. ovo s.ca. ovI. Vigilance is everyone's
responsibility. For more information please visit hitp://www.das.ca.aov/pd/Home/FRAUDALERT.aspx.
From: John Thomas <john@blueflame.agency>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 8:43 AM
To: Wong, Michael@DGS <Michael.Wong@dgs.ca.gov>
Subject: Re: 100M Mask Order
ON: This email originated from a NON-State email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you are certain of the sender's authenticity.
Dear Michael,
CONFIDENTIAL
BFM000109727
Case 1:20-cv-00658-LMB-IDD     Document 150-23     Filed 05/20/21     Page 3 of 6 PageID#
3843

To clarify, at no point did we suggest that we could supply 100 million 3M manufacturer brand
masks We only discussed sending 100 million of California's approved models of N95 masks
I have attached the original invoice which delineated the models we agreed to provide. Here is a
screenshot of that invoice below:
Regarding the price of the approved models we can provide, pricing is volatile in today's
market. Due to high global demand for masks and the raw materials to make masks our pricing
changes every 24 hours from our manufacturer. This is why such a significant deposit is
required so that we can lock in your price for the full order. It has been more than two weeks
since the original price we discussed and demand for this product has only increased causing
the manufacturer's cost to skyrocket. This is one of the main reasons I was urging the state to
follow through on their original transaction.
We truly do want to provide critical PPE to my home state and this is of a high priority to us but
we are going to run into another pricing increase if the State decides to wait much longer. There
is not a single PPE item we can supply that has not seen a price increase from two weeks ago.
If you need further clarification I am more than happy to discuss via phone or on a call with
your executives.
Thank you for your effort on this.
CONFIDENTIAL
BFM000109728
Case 1:20-cv-00658-LMB-IDD     Document 150-23     Filed 05/20/21     Page 4 of 6 PageID#
3844

Sincerely,
John
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 8:03 AM Wong, Michael@DGS <Michael.Wong dgs.ca.gov> wrote:
Hi John,
Just to recap from our call yesterday, we originally had a quote for 3M N95 masks for $4.76,
but I think you mentioned yesterday that the masks are not 3M. Can you please clarify? I
have to brief my executives on why we would be paying more for non-3M masks
Respectfully,
/144ad
Contracts Administrator
Phone: 916-441-9619
Email: Michael.Wondadds.ca.gov
Beware of Fraudulent Activity! - DGS has recently been made aware of fraudulent Purchase Orders and Spoof emails issued
to the vendor community. Always confirm the validity of any Purchase Order by contacting the agency making the request. Do
not process any order that appears suspicious. Do not click on any hyperlinks from a suspicious email. A list of State agency
contact information is provided on the DGS website located at htts://www.dgs.ca.gov/pci/Programs/Delegated.aspx. Be vigilant
by confirming valid State of California emails and phone numbers at httos://cold.00vops.ca.00v; Vigilance is everyone's
responsibility. For more information please visit httb://www.dds.cadovIr)d/Home/FRAUDALERT.asbx.
CONFIDENTIAL
BFM000109729
Case 1:20-cv-00658-LMB-IDD     Document 150-23     Filed 05/20/21     Page 5 of 6 PageID#
3845

John Thomas
President
Blueflame Strategies
c. (818) 636-6522
e. john@blueflame.agency
John Thomas
President
Blueflame Strategies
c. (818) 636-6522
e. john6blueflame.agency
CONFIDENTIAL
BFM000109730
Case 1:20-cv-00658-LMB-IDD     Document 150-23     Filed 05/20/21     Page 6 of 6 PageID#
3846

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.vaed.477405.150.23.pdf
Size
494,394 bytes
SHA-256
ebed2968cc5ea81df057d30d79caac41c379c1ec5299f3b67f53322fa13309da
Our copy
gov.uscourts.vaed.477405.150.23.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top