We represent Non-Party Appellant The Bank of New York Mellon (“BNY Mellon”) in this matter. Oral argument is scheduled for 2 p.m. on Wednesday, February 27, 2013.

February 6, 2013
Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court
United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, NY  10007
 Re:  NML Capital, Ltd., et al. v. Republic of Argentina, No. 12-105(L)
Dear Ms. O’Hagan Wolfe:
We represent Non-Party Appellant The Bank of New York Mellon (“BNY Mellon”) in this matter.  Oral 
argument is scheduled for 2 p.m. on Wednesday, February 27, 2013.  On February 1, 2013, the Court
issued a notice of hearing date allocating 15 minutes of argument time each to Appellees and Appellant
Argentina.  Dkt. 829-1.  The Court’s notice did not, however, mention Appellant BNY Mellon.  We are
advised that the Court did not intend to allocate additional argument time to BNY Mellon specifically
and, at the direction of the calendar clerk, we submit this letter respectfully requesting that the Court
allocate 10 minutes of argument time to BNY Mellon, or another allotment the Court deems appropriate.
BNY Mellon makes this request so that it can address the specific issue related to its unique position in
this controversy—whether the injunctions issued by the district court properly and constitutionally can
be applied to non-party BNY Mellon’s performance of its obligations as indenture trustee.
1
This Court previously granted BNY Mellon’s request for leave to appear as a non-party appellant based
on its direct interests in the injunctive orders on appeal.  Dkt. 544.  Material issues that are before the
Court now—and that were not briefed or decided by the Court previously—concern the district court’s
jurisdiction to enjoin  the conduct of non-party indenture trustee BNY Mellon consistent with due
process, the relevant rule of civil procedure and applicable case law, settled equitable principles, and
affected public interests.
Although Appellant Argentina is interested in how the Court resolves these particular issues, it lacks the
direct stake in their outcome that BNY Mellon possesses, as its briefing demonstrates.  Dkt. 657, 842.
                                               
1
   BNY Mellon has sought the positions of the other parties to this appeal who have been allocated argument time.  Counsel
for Argentina does not oppose this request.  Counsel for all Appellees except Olifant Fund, Limited oppose this request.  
BNY Mellon received no response from counsel for Olifant Fund.
Case: 12-105     Document: 861     Page: 1      02/06/2013      839643      2Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court
February 6, 2013
Page 2
Indeed, the district court’s injunctive orders affirmatively prohibit BNY Mellon from discharging its
duties to bondholders under the relevant indenture.  Allocating specific oral argument time to BNY
Mellon, therefore, will assist the Court in resolving the critical issues relating to the lawfulness of
extending the disputed injunctions to BNY Mellon.
For these reasons, BNY Mellon respectfully requests that the Court make a specific allowance of oral
argument time on February 27 to BNY Mellon.  BNY Mellon requests 10 minutes, or whatever other
allotment this Court deems proper.
Very truly yours,
REED SMITH LLP
By:  /s/ James C. Martin