the Professional Services Charge Exception only applies to Damages relating to fees or charges for Professional Services. In contrast, the PPE excludes coverage for Damages and Claims Expenses relating to'any profit or remuneration. Therefore, the broader PPE would not be rendered superfluous if the Professional Services Charge Exception were applied to third-party losses. Moreover, coverage under the policy would not be illusory because the policy would still provide coverage for judgments, awards, surcharges, and settlements that do not fall within any of the exceptions to Damages, as well as all Claims Expenses where the PPE or another exclusion is not implicated. See ACE Capital Ltd. v. Morgan Waldon Ins. Mgmt., LLC, 832 F.Supp.2d 554, 572 (W.D.Pa.2011) (applying Pennsylvania law) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, applying the Professional
holding that an insurance policy providing that the insurance company would pay all reasonable expenses incurred by the insured at our request emphasis omitted did not establish an agreement that the insurer would cover attorney fees and costs to the insured in a declaratory action holding that an insurance policy is only illusory where it would not pay benefits under any reasonably expected set of circumstances and is not illusory simply because of a potentially wide exclusion internal quotations omitted holding that it is not holding that an insurer had no duty to defend in the absence of any cause of action amounting to a potentially covered offense under the  insurance policy holding that under georgia law a holder of a master insurance policy is an agent of the insurance company and not the insurer