I. INTRODUCTION

1. I prepared an opinion in the above referenced case, dated June 11, 2009. In that opinion, I indicated my qualifications and attached a complete CV. I incorporate that information by reference and will not repeat it here other than to mention, in the attached footnote, publications that have appeared since 2009.1

2. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, counsel for Railroad Development Corporation (“Claimant” or “RDC”), has asked that I study the Respondent’s Counter-Memorial, dated October 5, 2010, and indicate any disagreements or other observations which I might have with respect to the Respondent’s comments on my opinion. As I am not a witness of fact, I have again assumed the truth of the factual allegations in the Claimant’ Request for Arbitration (“Request”) “insofar as they are not incredible, frivolous or vexatious;”2 I have also reviewed the Claimant’s additional statement of facts, dealing with issues in contention between the parties. None of the Claimant’s factual allegations can, in my judgment, plausibly be so characterized as incredible, frivolous or vexatious.

3. In my first opinion, I concluded that the Government of Guatemala violated the rights of RDC and FVG to which they are entitled under Chapter Ten of the DR-CAFTA and customary international law. Specifically, I concluded that Guatemala has: