This website does not belong to Drs. Anita Nevyas-Wallace, Herbert Nevyas, or Nevyas Eye Associates!

This website is to show the deficiencies of following Federal standards, protocols, and regulations BEFORE, DURING, and AFTER an FDA sanctioned investigational study.

The following letters are from the FDA to Drs. Herbert Nevyas and Anita Nevyas-Wallace throughout their investigational study, and after their study was terminated. Despite continued deficiencies as noted below, the FDA kept granting the Nevyases Approvals for their study. Based on documents received during my med mal and the current Nevyas v. Morgan lawsuits, I believe the Nevyases constantly misrepresented themselves and their study to both Schullman Associates (the Nevyases IRB), the FDA, and the courts:

All BLUE font on this page designate links to documents which should open in new window.

Again and again and again, but the doctors claimed numerous times under oath they’ve never done anything to violate any FDA rules, regulations, or protocols:


Nevyas Eye Associates 6/5/12

Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993

June 5, 2012



Herbert J. Nevyas, M.D. Medical Director Nevyas Eye Associates Two Bala Plaza PL-33 333 E. City Avenue Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004-1501

Dear Dr. Nevyas:

During an inspection of your firm located in Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, on March 19-28, 2012, an investigator from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determined that your firm is a medical device user facility that is subject to the statutory reporting requirements of the Medical Device Reporting (MDR) regulation, found at Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 803.

The ophthalmic laser used at your facility to perform Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis procedures is a medical device under Section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), 21 U.S.C. § 321(h), because it is intended for the use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions or in the cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease, or to affect the structure or function of the body.

Our inspection revealed that this device is misbranded under section 502(t)(2) of the Act, 21 U.S.D. § 352(t)(2), in that your firm failed or refused to furnish material or information respecting the device that is required by or under section 519 of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 360i, and 21 CFR Part 803 – Medical Device Reporting. Significant violations include, but are not limited to, the following:

Failure to develop, maintain, and implement written MDR procedures, as required by 21 CFR 803.17. For example, the investigator asked the medical director and refractory consultants if the facility had written MDR procedures and they confirmed that they did not and did not know what events would be considered serious injuries and reportable to manufacturers. The investigator reviewed some of the adverse events identified in the assignment guidance with them and they confirmed that these types of events have occurred at their facility. They explained that they inform their patients through the consenting process that they may have vision-threatening complications following the surgery.

We reviewed your firm’s response dated April 2, 2012, and concluded that it is not adequate because it did not include a copy of your firm’s MDR procedures. Your firm should take prompt action to correct the violations addressed in this letter. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action being initiated by the FDA without further notice. These actions include, but are not limited to, seizure, injunction, and civil money penalties. Also, federal agencies may be advised of the issuance of Warning Letters about devices so that they may take this information into account when considering the award of contracts.

Please notify this office in writing within fifteen business days from the date you receive this letter of the specific steps your firm has taken to correct the noted violations, as well as an explanation of how your firm plans to prevent these violations, or similar violations, from occurring again. Include documentation of the corrections and/or corrective actions (including any systemic corrective actions) that your firm has taken. If your firm’s planned corrections and/or corrective actions will occur over time, please include a timetable for implementation of those activities. If corrections and/or corrective actions cannot be completed within fifteen business days, state the reason for the delay and the time within which these activities will be completed. Your firm’s response should be comprehensive and address all violations included in this Warning Letter.

Your firm’s response should be sent to: Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Surveillance and Biometrics, MDR Policy Branch, White Oak Building 66, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Room 3208, Silver Spring, Maryland 20993. Refer to the Unique Identification Number #306398 when replying. If you have any questions about the contents of this letter or wish to discuss MDR reportability criteria or schedule further communications, please contact: MDR Policy Branch at (301) 796-6670 or by email at MDRPolicy@fda.hhs.gov.

Finally, you should know that this letter is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of the violations at your firm. It is your firm’s responsibility to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations administered by FDA. The specific violations noted in this letter and in the Inspectional Observations, Form FDA 483, issued at the close of the inspection, may be symptomatic of serious problems in your firm. Your firm should investigate and determine the causes of the violations and take prompt actions to correct the violations and bring the device into compliance. Sincerely yours, /S/ Steven D. Silverman Director Office of Compliance Center for Devices and Radiological Health


Nevyases were issued an FDA483:

PAGE 1There was no documentation to show that the CI notified the IRB about all amendments, changes of significant deviations to the protocol [per IRB requirements] prior to implementation. For example, the FDA granted your firm an increase in the number of subjects you could treat with your investigational device on Jan. 20, 1999. IRB. Annual Review dated 7/29/00 does not indicate the IRB knew about population increase. The IRB did not approve the population increase until. August 28, 2000, 20 months later.

The firm is not complying with the Investigator Agreement which was signed and dated by the Clinical Investigator at the beginning of the Clinical Study.

There was a lapse of IRB approval for the protocol: NEV-97-001 from 8/3/2000 until 8/29/2000 according to IRB, lapse notices and the IRB annual reapproval letter.


April 2002

IDE Deficiencies Request Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 11. You must still provide responses to deficiencies 1, 2, 3, and 5 froth our letter of February 6, 2002. 2. You did not provide the requested information in your response to deficiency 4.

PAGE 24. In response to deficiency 8, you have indicated how you will verify your current accountability for visits that have already past. After your internal audit is complete and you have more insight as to the reasons for any problems with accountability, please directly address the original issue outlined in previous deficiency 8: please describe how you intend to improve subject follow-up and data reporting during the rest of the course of your IDE study.

PAGE 3 – Attachment: In a reply to Dr. Morris Waxler, FDA’s Chief Medical Device Examiner, Dr. Herbert Nevyas states “Since the close of business on July 28, 1997, neither I nor anyone else has used the laser. I certify that, unless and until FDA approves the IDE application for that device, neither I nor anyone else will use the laser to treat patients. I have notified all of my employees, as well as anyone with access to the laser, that the laser may not and will not be used until there is an approved IDE in effect for that laser. I declare that to the best of my knowledge the foregoing is true and correct.”

February 2002

Nevyases Deviations and discrepancies continue almost 5 years into their study – Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1Please address the following, questions and concerns with regard to this submission, which also applied to the previous, delinquent, annual report as outlined in FDA’s letter of April 10, 2001, and for which we never received a response:

PAGE 25. Please provide tables (similar to those requested for initial treatments) and narrative summarizing the results of the IDE substudy of enhancements for 25 subjects/50 eyes that had undergone treatment prior to implementation of the IDE, and of the data from enhancements performed for eyes enrolled under the IDE. Please provide separate analyses for the first enhancement, second enhancement, etc.

PAGE 31. Please note that, based on the stability analyses you have provided in this submission, we do not agree that the time point of stability is at 12 months postoperatively as you have indicated, and, in fact, may be earlier for some of the indications.


August 2001

Supplement Disapproval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1We regret to inform you that your supplement is disapproved and you may not implement the change in your investigation. Our disapproval is based on the following deficiencies: 1. An important function of the software in the device is to control the beam delivery hardware (iris size, slot movement, synchronizing iris/slot with laser pulses, etc.) in the creation of an ablation pattern. This area, however, is not discussed at all in the Software Requirement Specifications document.

PAGE 2The deficiencies identified above represent the issues that we believe need to be resolved before your IDE application can be approved.


July 2001

Disapproval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed the supplement to your investigational device exemptions (IDE) application proposing two new clinical protocols to evaluate the spherical ablation algorithm. We regret to inform you that your supplement is disapproved and you may not implement the change in your investigation. Our disapproval is based on the following deficiencies which, unless otherwise specified, relate to both protocols:

PAGE 23. You have not provided in your protocol the methodology for performing any of the clinical evaluations. For each clinical evaluation, please specify the testing procedures and instruments that will be used, including the lighting conditions and charts you will use to measure distance vision and near vision, etc.

PAGE 37. Your protocol states that subjects must have a best spectacle corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) of at least 20/40 in each eye in order to be enrolled in the study. Please be advised that while we find this criteria acceptable for subjects with high myopia (>7 D MRSE), in order for subjects with low myopia (< 7 D MRSE) to be enrolled, we recommend a BSCVA of at least 20/25 in each eye. Please revise your protocol accordingly, or justify not doing so.

PAGE 421. The Conclusion section of the consent form stares, “There is always a possibility of one or more late complications That were not known or anticipated at the time of this writing (1997).” It also states, “LASIK is investigational surgery and as such, it has not yet been completely and exhaustively studied by the FDA and medical researchers in this country.” Please update the consent form as necessary in keeping with current knowledge including the additions previously mentioned. Please revise the second statement to Improve its accuracy: LASIK is no longer investigational, it has never (page 5) been studied by the FDA, and the FDA does not regulate LASIK, only the devices used for the procedure.

PAGE 528. There are discrepancies in the way you refer to the protocols throughout the submission. For example, in the Introduction you refer to the new protocols as NEV-97-002 (Myopia/Myopic Astigmatism) and NEV-97-003 (Hyperopia/Hyperopic Astigmatism). However, the myopia protocol itself has been labeled with the protocol number NEV-01-002. To avoid confusion, please make all necessary revisions in any future submission to correct such discrepancies.

PAGE 6With respect to the profiles of your ablated PMMA samples:

PAGE 7The deficiencies identified above represent the issues that we believe need to be resolved before your IDE application can be approved. In developing the deficiencies, we carefully considered the relevant statutory criteria for Agency decision-making as well as the burden that may be incurred in your attempt to respond to the deficiencies.

PAGE 834. Please be advised that for possible future pre-market approval, although 300 eyes total are needed to support overall safety, data from approximately 125 eyes are needed to support each indication for which approval is being sought.

April 2001

Request Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1Please address the following questions/concerns, as well as provide the information requested in the tables enclosed with this letter.

PAGE 28. With regard to your future PMA submission, you have indicated that only subjects treated with the “new centration technique” will be included in the PMA, and that you have selected the eyes treated between 2/19/98 and 11/22/99 as the cohort to support the safety and effectiveness of the device. We would like to clarify that data from all subjects treated. under the IDE should be included in the PMA. The main PMA cohort on which the decision of the safety and effectiveness of the device will mainly rest may be limited to all eyes treated with the new centration technique, but not to only those enrolled during a given period of time, as you appear to have suggested.


January 2001

Letter from the FDA to Nevyases Re: Non-Response To Request:

PAGE 1The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval of your investigational device exemptions (IDE) application on August 7, 1997. As part of your responsibilities as sponsor of a significant risk device investigation, you are required to submit a progress report to FDA and to all reviewing institutional review boards (IRBs) on at least a yearly basis. We have not received a response to FDA’s November 10, 1999 request for additional information regarding your August 1998 — August 1999 annual progress report (enclosed).


November 1999

Request Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 11. Please separate IDE subjects from pre-IDE subjects in all of your tables, or report only on IDE subjects.


January 1999

Deviations of Nevyas Eye Associates, As Stated In Letter from the FDA dated 01/07/99:

PAGE 1Our review of the inspection report submitted by the district revealed deviations from Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, (21 CFR), Part 812 – Investigstional Device Exemptions and Part 50 – Protection of Human Subjects and Section 520(g) of the Act. The deviations noted during the inspection were listed on form FDA-483, “Inspectional Observations,” which was presented to and discussed with you at the conclusion of the inspection.

PAGE 2Use of the Summit laser at your Marlton, New Jersey site for off-label procedures is not included in your IDE protocol. Moreover, enhancements approved under your IDE do not include hyperopic procedures. It is therefore considered a protocol violation to retreat subjects of your IDE study using the Summit laser and performing hyperopic LASIK.

PAGE 3While your Marlton, New Jersey site has a Summit laser, the advertisement does not specify a location. Future advertisements should specify the location(s) of approved lasers, as the enclosed advertisement would not be appropriate for soliciting subjects for your IDE study. All promotional materials designed to solicit participants or to inform subjects about the IDE study need to be approved by the reviewing IRB.

Approval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 01/20/99:

PAGE 1Please be aware of the following: In Table 1-1, the data appear to be quite scattered, with some subjects actually increasing in sensitivity during glare (e.g., see BC & CB at 3 cycles per degree (CPD)), while others are severely compromised (see ZM). In order to reduce variability in the data in the contrast sensitivity study, the person administering the test should have experience in this test and the subjects should be well trained prior to testing.

PAGE 2We continue to be concerned that your ablation is likely to have multifocal properties, which means some light will be out of focus even at the best focal plane.

December 1998

Approval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:



Nevyases’ Co-Investigators  (dated 10/01/98)

I started some time ago to contact the doctors on this LIST the Nevyases sent to the FDA, as being co-investigators. Three of those contacted who responded have never even heard of the Nevyases.

September 1998

Approval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:



July 1998

“Conditional” Approval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1FDA cannot approve your request as proposed because you have not shown stability of manifest refraction, and you have not presented sufficient detail for your hyperopic retreatment. FDA will conditionally approve, however, an expansion to include myopia and myopic astigmatism retreatments at this time.

PAGE 2This approval is being granted on the condition chat, within 45 days from the date of this letter, you submit your agreement to: 1. conduct the investigation within the modified limit, i.e., retreatment for myopia or myopic astigmatism only; 2. extend the minimum time between the initial operation and the retreatment to 3 months; and, 3. retreat only eyes which are “white and quiet” and in which refractive stability has been documented with two manifest refractions taken at least 30 days apart at less than 1 diopter of—change, confirmed by topography.,


May 1998

Approval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 05/14/98 Re: Contrast Sensitivity & Increased ‘Subjects’:

PAGE 1 – ‘Conditional’ approval for substudy and increase of ‘subjects’.

PAGE 2We acknowledge your request in your original IDE (dated March 18, 1997) to conduct a study at one site with 400 eyes low myopia and 590 eyes high myopia for each of two investigators (single site total of 1980 eyes or 990 subjects). We believe that adequate safety information has been provided to allow the initiation of your study with a small expansion of an additional 75 subjects (150 eyes). We will allow you to expand to the full number of subjects for this study (990) after you have received approval of supplements addressing the following deficiency from our letter of October 3, 1997 (enclosed). No additional expansions of your IDE will be granted until supplements containing the following information are approved:

PAGE 3You should also give serious consideration to the following items which are considered essential for the analysis of your data for the purposes of determining safety and effectiveness for a future PMA application: Deficiencies 5 through 16, excluding deficiency 14, in our letter of October 3, 1997.

April 1998

Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 04/01/98 Re: Pre Market Approval (PMA):

PAGE 1 – Offers suggestions from the FDA should the Nevyases submit their PMA.


January 1998

Approval Review Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1In your “Substudy for Same-Day Versus Different Day LASIK Treatment for Fellow Eyes”: a. Please revise your informed consent document rider for same day surgery to state that the second eye will be rescheduled if there is a complication or an adverse event with the first eye.

PAGE 2Your statement in the rider to the informed consent document that “…There have been no failures or malfunctions of the Willis Excimer Laser”, should be removed or altered. It may unduly influence potential same day fellow eye surgery candidates into believing that the Nevyas Excimer Laser cannot fail. FDA recommends that you remove this statement or alter it to read: “There have been no failures or malfunctions of the Nevyas Excimer Laser to date.”



The following pages are an Investigator Agreement issued by the FDA to a Sponsor/Investigator of an investigational study.  Nevyas refused to sign…

PAGE 1 – Investigator agreement signed by Anita Nevyas-Wallace

PAGE 2 – Investigator agreement signed by Herbert Nevyas

PAGE 3 – “I informed Mr. Kane, that Mr. Sullivan told me that the excimer laser that he would build, is considered a custom device and would not be regulated by the FDA. Mr. Sullivan completed the assembly of the laser in the fall of 1995, and the first patient was treated (using LASIK) in January 1996.

PAGE 4 – “I did not maintain any written records of the design specifications, nor did I receive any written design specifications from Mr. Sullivan.

PAGE 5 – “This patient is not part of the patient population included in my IDE submission. I have treated a total of 252 patients, from January 1996 to the present date (6/30/97),

PAGE 6 – “I affirm that the information on this and the previous pages, is accurate, to the best of my ability. I have read, but would not sign this affidavit.

View ALL PAGES pdf document.

December 1997

Approval Review Letter from the FDA to Nevyases:

PAGE 1The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed the supplement to your investigational device exemptions (IDE) application. Your application remains conditionally approved because your supplement adequately addressed only deficiency 2 cited in our October 3, 1997 letter.

This approval is being granted on the condition that, within 45 days from the date of this letter, you submit information correcting the following deficiencies.

PAGE 2You are reminded that prior to a request for expansion beyond 150 subjects, you should provide adequate responses to deficiencies 5 16 in our letter of October 3, 1997.

View ALL PAGES pdf document.

October 1997

Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 10/03/97:

PAGE 1We acknowledge receipt of your institutional review board (IRB) approval (supplement 3). Supplement 4 responds to our conditional approval letter of August 7, 1997 and requests: an increase crease in treatment range from -6.75 ID to -22 ID; approval to study simultaneous bilateral treatment; and, approval to retreat approximately 125 patients previously treated with this laser prior to IDE approval.

PAGE 2Requests for additional subjects for enhancements for prior clinical patients will be evaluated as additional data is submitted to support stability of the procedure.

PAGE 3You agree that you will not perform retreatment procedures for subjects initially treated under this IDE. Retreatment (enhancement) for subjects initially treated under this IDE is appropriate only after your preliminary data demonstrate safety and indicate the time point of stability of the procedure. You may begin retreatment procedures only after FDA has approved your retreatment study plan and data to support stability.

PAGE 4PAGE 5PAGE 6PAGE 7PAGE 8PAGE 9PAGE 10 – Deficiencies listed.


View ALL PAGES pdf document.

August 1997

‘Conditional’ Approval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 08/07/97:

PAGE 1Your application is conditionally approved because you have not adequately addressed deficiency #2 cited in our May 8, 1997 disapproval letter.

Also, we are in receipt of your certification (Amendment 4 received August 1, 1997) that you have not used the laser as of the close of business on July 28, 1997, and that you will not use the laser unless and until FDA approves the IDE applic2tion for your device

PAGE 2This approval is being granted on the condition that, within 45 days from the date of this letter, you submit information correcting the following deficiencies.

PAGE 3 – Deficiencies listed.

PAGE 4 – Deficiencies listed.

PAGE 5We have enclosed the guidance document entitled “Sponsor’s Responsibilities for a Significant Risk Device Investigation” to help you understand the functions and duties of a sponsor.

View ALL PAGES pdf document.

July 1997

Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 07/29/97 to cease using Laser:

PAGE 1FDA is aware that a number of physicians are using lasers for refractive surgery to treat patients even though there is no PMA or IDE in effect for their lasers. Based on the results of our investigations, we believe that you are currently using your laser to treat patients.

PAGE 2Accordingly, on July 28, 1997, we called you to notify you that use of your excimer laser to treat patients would violate the Act and requested that, if you are presently using the laser to treat patients, you immediately cease doing so.

Nevertheless, FDA does intend to consider any use of your laser to treat patients after the close of business July 28, 1997 unless and until the agency approves an IDE for your device to be grounds for disapproval of your IDE.

PAGE 3We also want you to know that if FDA approves your IDE application, you would be able to use your laser to perform only specific procedures on a limited number of subjects to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of your laser for those procedures. Studies conducted under such an IDE would be subject to all IDE regulations. See 21 C.F.R. Part 812. For example, you would be prohibited from promoting and commercializing the laser, and from representing that the device is safe and effective.

View ALL PAGES pdf document.

May 1997

IDE Disapproval Letter from the FDA to Nevyases dated 05/08/97:

PAGE 1The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed your investigational device exemptions (IDE) application. We regret to inform you that your application is disapproved and you may not begin your investigation. Our disapproval is based on the deficiencies listed below.

PAGE 2 – Deficiencies listed.

PAGE 3Please explain the low effectiveness and safety outcomes achieved in your prior clinical studies and specify what steps you are taking to improve your results. Your refractive and visual outcomes were reported at one month as: MSRE for low myopes, < 57% were within ID and < 35% were within 0.5D; less than 60% achieved BUCVA > 20/40; complication and adverse events occurred in > 2% of the cases.

PAGE 4Please provide your agreement (or justification for not agreeing) that retreatments done to improve refractive outcome are NOT considered as treatment failures, whereas retreatments done to achieve resolution of an adverse event ARE considered as treatment failures.

PAGE 5Your description of study procedures, examination conditions and techniques is not adequate. Please provide a detailed description of each procedure, test and instrument to be used in the study.

PAGE 6For your follow-up visit schedule, the text on page 20 of the protocol appears to be inconsistent with the chart on page 43 of the protocol. In addition, please justify your statement on page 20 that measurement of corneal topography will be at the discretion of the investigator.

View ALL PAGES pdf document.

Because this website is not owned by the Nevyases or Nevyas Eye Associates and includes their names, the National Arbitration Forum should read THIS SECTION before they involve themselves again.

420 thoughts on “HOME

  1. Pingback: cheap ray bans

  2. Pingback: true religion mens ricky relaxed straight fit jean in lake view

  3. Pingback: coach handbags

  4. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet

  5. Pingback: ray ban wayfarer

  6. Pingback: oakley sunglasses

  7. Pingback: giubbotti woolrich uomo

  8. Pingback: Oakley Sunglasses Wholesale

  9. Pingback: womens oakley sunglasses

  10. Pingback: oakley sunglasses wholesale

  11. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet

  12. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses outlet

  13. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses sale

  14. Pingback: oakley sunglasses cheap

  15. Pingback: oakley womens sunglasses

  16. Pingback: cheap ray bans

  17. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet online

  18. Pingback: oakley sunglasses for women sale

  19. Pingback: Ray Ban Sunglasses

  20. Pingback: ray ban sale

  21. Pingback: ray ban outlet online

  22. Pingback: oakley sunglasses wholesale outlet

  23. Pingback: cheap ray ban sunglasses

  24. Pingback: cheap ray bans glasses online

  25. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses outlet

  26. Pingback: oakley sunglasses discount

  27. Pingback: oakley sunglasses wholesale distributor

  28. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses sale

  29. Pingback: oakley sunglasses

  30. Pingback: oakley outlet

  31. Pingback: ray ban sale

  32. Pingback: Oakley Sunglasses Outlet

  33. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses outlet

  34. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet

  35. Pingback: oakley sunglasses sale

  36. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  37. Pingback: ray ban outlet stores

  38. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses cheap

  39. Pingback: ray ban sale discount

  40. Pingback: ray ban outlet

  41. Pingback: ray ban aviator sunglasses for men

  42. Pingback: oakley sunglasses sale discount

  43. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses outlet

  44. Pingback: Nike free run 3.0

  45. Pingback: ray ban outlet

  46. Pingback: coach factory online outlet

  47. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  48. Pingback: coach outlet online

  49. Pingback: cheap michael kors bags

  50. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  51. Pingback: coach outlet store online

  52. Pingback: oakley sunglasses cheap

  53. Pingback: coach outlet online

  54. Pingback: cheap ray bans

  55. Pingback: coach factory

  56. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet

  57. Pingback: michael kors handbags

  58. Pingback: ray ban wayfarer

  59. Pingback: coach factory outlet online

  60. Pingback: michael kors handbags

  61. Pingback: coach factory online

  62. Pingback: cheap oakley sunglasses outlet

  63. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  64. Pingback: ray ban outlet

  65. Pingback: coach factory online

  66. Pingback: cheap michael kors handbags

  67. Pingback: michael kors handbags

  68. Pingback: ray ban aviators sale

  69. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet

  70. Pingback: cheap oakley sunglasses

  71. Pingback: oakley glasses

  72. Pingback: michael kors purses on sale

  73. Pingback: Coach Factory

  74. Pingback: cheap ray ban sunglasses

  75. Pingback: cheap oakleys

  76. Pingback: coach factory outlet

  77. Pingback: coach outlet stores

  78. Pingback: oakley sunglasses

  79. Pingback: ray ban aviator

  80. Pingback: ray bans

  81. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses outlet

  82. Pingback: coach outlet

  83. Pingback: michael kors outlet store

  84. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  85. Pingback: coach factory outlet

  86. Pingback: coach factory

  87. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  88. Pingback: cheap ray bans

  89. Pingback: michael kors outlet online sale

  90. Pingback: oakley sunglasses wholesale

  91. Pingback: oakley sunglasses wholesale

  92. Pingback: cheap ray ban sunglasses

  93. Pingback: coach factory store

  94. Pingback: michael kors outlet store

  95. Pingback: oakley sunglasses outlet

  96. Pingback: cheap ray ban sunglasses

  97. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses

  98. Pingback: ray ban sale

  99. Pingback: oakley sunglasses

  100. Pingback: cheap ray bans

  101. Pingback: coach outlet store

  102. Pingback: coach factory outlet

  103. Pingback: cheap oakleys

  104. Pingback: michael kors outlet

  105. Pingback: fifa 16 coins

  106. Pingback: Brazilian Virgin Hair

  107. Pingback: smart balance wheel

  108. Pingback: Ray Ban Sunglasses Outlet

  109. Pingback: Oakley Mens Sunglasses

  110. Pingback: Discount Oakley Sunglasses

  111. Pingback: mens nike free trainer 5.0 cross training shoes review

  112. Pingback: nike free womens gold

  113. Pingback: csgo skins best

  114. Pingback: csgo

  115. Pingback: Wholesale Oakley dispatch ii sunglasses matte black fire iridium outlet

  116. Pingback: http://www.osp-ua.info/ist/forum/topic/361.html

  117. Pingback: anastrozole sales

  118. Pingback: CYNTHIA

  119. Pingback: lebron shoes

  120. Pingback: kobe shoes

  121. Pingback: kd shoes

  122. Pingback: Curry 2.5

  123. Pingback: nb shoes

  124. Pingback: purchase clomid

  125. Pingback: gucci indy replica

  126. Pingback: ebuuc.cn

  127. Pingback: 2019

  128. Pingback: floxshop

  129. Pingback: cphwph

  130. Pingback: yogadesfemmes

  131. Pingback: preloxlady

  132. Pingback: bidmani

  133. Pingback: myachingoa

  134. Pingback: brickolino

  135. Pingback: nomoreash

  136. Pingback: tubetotext

  137. Pingback: lahtacentr

  138. Pingback: denverbsm

  139. Pingback: clojuregames

  140. Pingback: lroyroofing

  141. Pingback: verdantbi

  142. Pingback: laraguzova

  143. Pingback: casamentosweb

  144. Pingback: xpressvod

  145. Pingback: katasuto

  146. Pingback: gbhuren

  147. Pingback: lumalender

  148. Pingback: assistobot

  149. Pingback: glplawyers

  150. Pingback: ncloanguy

  151. Pingback: fintecsales

  152. Pingback: checkmyvape

  153. Pingback: checkmyprices

  154. Pingback: giraffehubi

  155. Pingback: ozoessaouira

  156. Pingback: psychedelicsf

  157. Pingback: questoffine

  158. Pingback: nunbori

  159. Pingback: getbizbuilder

  160. Pingback: streakmedia

  161. Pingback: juniorensea

  162. Pingback: amarthur

  163. Pingback: coatsfrance

  164. Pingback: linexcanton

  165. Pingback: atuttogossip

  166. Pingback: aberturasdh

  167. Pingback: buyggmotors

  168. Pingback: philipelara

  169. Pingback: podcastboyz

  170. Pingback: mesmertronic

  171. Pingback: affluentadvisors

  172. Pingback: ihavewed

  173. Pingback: divaadiamante

  174. Pingback: emoizmir

  175. Pingback: parasolphoto

  176. Pingback: seitaitaotao

  177. Pingback: seansinjin

  178. Pingback: womens nike baltimore ravens 25 tavon young white vapor untouchable limited player nfl jersey

  179. Pingback: cremontana

  180. Pingback: charleyscafe

  181. Pingback: divyangshop

  182. Pingback: thecarolinatc

  183. Pingback: gbwpvqyg

  184. Pingback: sarkariresurt

  185. Pingback: hieuphamdmd

  186. Pingback: lampenloft

  187. Pingback: thehodostore

  188. Pingback: perokokbijak

  189. Pingback: dhvwolje

  190. Pingback: bgattis

  191. Pingback: facommobiles

  192. Pingback: shanibazaar

  193. Pingback: wsphotel

  194. Pingback: rentalloka

  195. Pingback: offleaseford

  196. Pingback: jknets

  197. Pingback: rvandco

  198. Pingback: california love womens hat

  199. Pingback: heslaatours

  200. Pingback: carrollgrp

  201. Pingback: daddeaze

  202. Pingback: tomtaylorblog

  203. Pingback: super max perfect jordan 6 negro infrarojo

  204. Pingback: killersandbox

  205. Pingback: bigbigk

  206. Pingback: getmovedin

  207. Pingback: kareokiparty

  208. Pingback: pennphone

  209. Pingback: mcmartial

  210. Pingback: clandessdiner

  211. Pingback: cheapcoatsfr

  212. Pingback: gamtola

  213. Pingback: kobe 9 naranja and verde

  214. Pingback: albainmaz

  215. Pingback: ywutube

  216. Pingback: lebosmartlipo

  217. Pingback: xhlvwang

  218. Pingback: blue jays 2 troy tulowitzki red flexbase authentic collection canada day stitched mlb jersey

  219. Pingback: borumdeluxe

  220. Pingback: nike hyperrev 2015 orange 2015 mens

  221. Pingback: flfireexpo

  222. Pingback: donatelia

  223. Pingback: leodinhdesign

  224. Pingback: getlightwave

  225. Pingback: beatsbybros

  226. Pingback: hotelfuat

  227. Pingback: femmedeguinee

  228. Pingback: brendonrush

  229. Pingback: pecanfirewood

  230. Pingback: nartaky

  231. Pingback: betascgx

  232. Pingback: oktoberfestmn

  233. Pingback: senegalreview

  234. Pingback: ray ban wayfarer glasses price

  235. Pingback: funkymediamx

  236. Pingback: postanje

  237. Pingback: haerinonghyup

  238. Pingback: financepure

  239. Pingback: aesqmed

  240. Pingback: ray ban justin uk ipad

  241. Pingback: ventarium

  242. Pingback: housemykonos

  243. Pingback: donggeomdo

  244. Pingback: caveduperreux

  245. Pingback: myshinnies

  246. Pingback: nike air max zero rift blue screen

  247. Pingback: dopeslimezz

  248. Pingback: destinyrail

  249. Pingback: shahsmkj

  250. Pingback: oqibo

  251. Pingback: eyesocal

  252. Pingback: funfunkaar

  253. Pingback: cynshq

  254. Pingback: yankaripark

  255. Pingback: ericaamadori

  256. Pingback: safeonproject

  257. Pingback: stephbenzer

  258. Pingback: nike zoom lebron soldier 12

  259. Pingback: mennns nike shox deliver gr氓 gul

  260. Pingback: ztsurfboards

  261. Pingback: erickasouza

  262. Pingback: thefarmergirl

  263. Pingback: tuartonline

  264. Pingback: vaccinebuynet

  265. Pingback: ralph lauren herre shirt polos flag t

  266. Pingback: rapamateur

  267. Pingback: asics gel quantum blanc

  268. Pingback: yenrof

  269. Pingback: jeffersonshine

  270. Pingback: beledimuebles

  271. Pingback: mbesthetics

  272. Pingback: goseecreate

  273. Pingback: burkkinc

  274. Pingback: terrystorar

  275. Pingback: kvinners nike air max 1 lilla rosa

  276. Pingback: sixseconddiet

  277. Pingback: prada 1347 handbags in camel

  278. Pingback: duranerdogan

  279. Pingback: boosnbrews

  280. Pingback: isampled

  281. Pingback: trulsbakken

  282. Pingback: chipcolley

  283. Pingback: paulabandura

  284. Pingback: agichipay

  285. Pingback: jishnuguha

  286. Pingback: nike kyrie 1 colorway lebron james

  287. Pingback: pvktechinfo

  288. Pingback: nike air max tailwind 7 kvinders gr氓 s酶lv

  289. Pingback: foneandlone

  290. Pingback: atlantaaiport

  291. Pingback: karmacanix

  292. Pingback: air jordan melo violet hommesthe verte

  293. Pingback: 54 elite shaq thompson carolina panthers youth jersey road white

  294. Pingback: oldoyopark

  295. Pingback: kosahudson

  296. Pingback: rot converse dam盲nner

  297. Pingback: yeezy boost 750 bl氓 ivy

  298. Pingback: instanalo

  299. Pingback: gnstaffing

  300. Pingback: sunbeltsaves

  301. Pingback: nike kwazi finish line

  302. Pingback: tvpchicago

  303. Pingback: scottdepot

  304. Pingback: cheap air jordan 14 mens blue

  305. Pingback: bringussocial

  306. Pingback: khzrubber

  307. Pingback: omegaspark

  308. Pingback: buditrek

  309. Pingback: atppest

  310. Pingback: nfl womens nike new york jets 23 terrence brooks ash backer pullover hoodie

  311. Pingback: nike kd 8 gr酶nn oransje

  312. Pingback: oreyabogados

  313. Pingback: pmisaltriver

  314. Pingback: nike kobe 11 flyknit mens silver

  315. Pingback: jessiebridges

  316. Pingback: dam盲nner ralph lauren pony beige grau

  317. Pingback: alaskanuber

  318. Pingback: coderfinca

  319. Pingback: slim fit long sleeve polo shirts for m忙nd

  320. Pingback: maschio nike air presto 4d dark blu gituttio

  321. Pingback: itlooksohot

  322. Pingback: cacikvideo

  323. Pingback: talentbschool

  324. Pingback: gandoff

  325. Pingback: hrubinlaser

  326. Pingback: notbore

  327. Pingback: nike roshe run white

  328. Pingback: mens nike pittsburgh steelers 53 maurkice pouncey elite black impact nfl jersey

  329. Pingback: hugandpups

  330. Pingback: prohaarklinik

  331. Pingback: nike air max svart hvit leopard

  332. Pingback: air max 2015 men 2015 white black

  333. Pingback: powersurefuel

  334. Pingback: oshkoshtower

  335. Pingback: geripatarimai

  336. Pingback: mandydugan

  337. Pingback: bitcashgram

  338. Pingback: vegashideas

  339. Pingback: lbclubmitu

  340. Pingback: nvusforex

  341. Pingback: adidas ace 15.1 blanc

  342. Pingback: pickwickcrc

  343. Pingback: nike air presto 11.5

  344. Pingback: ksjfifgmif

  345. Pingback: mwsuperstore

  346. Pingback: trendwaching

  347. Pingback: nike air jordan 1 retro og

  348. Pingback: maracamp

  349. Pingback: nike roshe two flyknit oro grigio

  350. Pingback: jupickuplines

  351. Pingback: nike jordan 6 schwarz 2014

  352. Pingback: jolyjulie

  353. Pingback: grossavind

  354. Pingback: barn adidas light up sko hvit svart

  355. Pingback: compressmyjs

  356. Pingback: nike zoom kobe venohombreson 4 negro

  357. Pingback: bibleofpeace

  358. Pingback: stackdotnet

  359. Pingback: eryasaat

  360. Pingback: androidsmith

  361. Pingback: nike hyperdunk 2014 tout noir

  362. Pingback: orlando magic adidas nba layup flex cap

  363. Pingback: sguerradesign

  364. Pingback: rmmassage

  365. Pingback: synthcourses

  366. Pingback: illustrateh

  367. Pingback: zeneventsja

  368. Pingback: nike lebron soldier 10 gul gr酶nn

  369. Pingback: pokersurga

  370. Pingback: ankaralimnet

  371. Pingback: findatrans

  372. Pingback: bon march茅 nike air presto femmes rouge

  373. Pingback: aidas boost clima chill lilla gul

  374. Pingback: clarencelax

  375. Pingback: rcnspecials

  376. Pingback: startnimble

  377. Pingback: klarinetto

  378. Pingback: jcwjrlaw

  379. Pingback: soundsofbuzz

  380. Pingback: air jordan retro 11 magic buckle nero rosso

  381. Pingback: herre nike roshe run triangle alle orange

  382. Pingback: pompaolipanas

  383. Pingback: shopteamcubs

  384. Pingback: kvinners nike flyknit lunar 2 gul bl氓

  385. Pingback: ortzproducts

  386. Pingback: nike air max 2014 silver

  387. Pingback: aspenmedisys

  388. Pingback: sabiscareer

  389. Pingback: onlinne

  390. Pingback: adidas zx 700 negro rojo

  391. Pingback: strongtowercf

  392. Pingback: chieao

  393. Pingback: klarinettino

  394. Pingback: rollaname

  395. Pingback: marieluwasche

  396. Pingback: adidas nmd runner alle hvid

  397. Pingback: drjennieward

  398. Pingback: adidas originals tubular runner r酶d

  399. Pingback: lakehyundai

  400. Pingback: tabletopsport

  401. Pingback: onlysidekick

  402. Pingback: attivopizza

  403. Pingback: hapeid

  404. Pingback: midwestnd

  405. Pingback: karenconti

  406. Pingback: gardensbyruth

  407. Pingback: aterisrail

  408. Pingback: michael kors purses online canada

  409. Pingback: mrtuckshop

  410. Pingback: floraroja

  411. Pingback: femmes under armour curry 4 noir

  412. Pingback: wapkaa

  413. Pingback: air jordan retro 7 hare 8.5

  414. Pingback: nike 銉娿偆銈?銇畁ike 銈汇儍銉堛偄銉冦儣 2 銈点偆銈?銈广偊銈с儍銉堛儜銉笺偒銉?銈搞儳銈兗銉戙兂銉?銈般儸銉?銉°兂銈恒伄

  415. Pingback: johnshoots

  416. Pingback: prformusic

  417. Pingback: shoppula

  418. Pingback: salvatore ferragamo belt size 32

  419. Pingback: kingsroomlv

  420. Pingback: san francisco giants baby hat

Leave a Reply