Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Bofa Ca Unemployment In re: Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation — S.D. Cal., No. 21-md-02992 Exhibit 37 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 350-38, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)

Court filing

Exhibit 37 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 350-38, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)

Filed October 24, 2024 in In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation; one of 1415 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
Filed2024-10-24

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 350-38 · 2024-10-24 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

EXHIBIT 37 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11327 
Page 1 of 7

 
 
PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO  
BANA’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 
1 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
Joshua B. Swigart (SBN: 225557) 
Josh@SwigartLawGroup.com 
SWIGART LAW GROUP, APC 
2221 Camino del Rio S, Ste 308 
San Diego, CA  92108 
Telephone: (866) 219-3343 
Facsimile: (866) 219-8344 
 
 
 
Liasson Counsel for Internal Plaintiffs  
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
IN RE BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 
 
PLAINTIFF ANN PEREZ’S 
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO 
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.’S FIRST 
SET OF INTERROGATORIES, 
REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS AND 
REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS 
 
 
This Document Relates to All Actions 
Judge: 
Hon. Larry Alan Burns 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11328 
Page 2 of 7

 
PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO  
BANA’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 
11 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the Preliminary Statement and General 
Objections. 
Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory as compound and counting as multiple 
distinct interrogatories.  Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory as unduly 
burdensome to the extent that it seeks information that is more readily accessible to 
or already in the possession, custody, or control of Defendant, including because to 
the extent any portion of these Requests are relevant, the information requested has 
been or may be incorporated into the payment schedules required by the 
CFPB/OCC Remediation Plan. Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory 
because Defendant and Plaintiff’s experts have superior knowledge as to best 
practices for identifying unauthorized transactions as suspicious.  
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Plaintiff responds 
as follows:  Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the transaction at issue in this 
matter was unauthorized. Plaintiff also refers Defendant to the documents in 
Defendant’s possession and control, Plaintiffs’ First Amended Master 
Consolidated Complaint, the Preliminary Injunction in this case and the facts and 
evidence supporting the Preliminary Injunction, the Consumer Financial Protection 
Bureau Consent Order of July 14, 2022, and Plaintiffs’ document production. 
INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 
State the principal facts RELATING TO whether YOUR PERSONAL 
INFORMATION was compromised, including whether YOUR PERSONAL 
INFORMATION, wallet, CARD, or cellphone were ever stolen, and whether YOU 
were notified by a THIRD PARTY (e.g. government agency, employer, merchant, 
website) that YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION may have been compromised. 
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the Preliminary Statement and General 
Objections. 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11329 
Page 3 of 7

 
PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO  
BANA’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 
12 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory as vague and ambiguous to the extent it 
asks “whether YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION was compromised” and on 
the ground that it is overbroad, not proportional to the needs of this case, and 
ambiguous as to the included time period. Plaintiff further objects to this 
Interrogatory on the ground that it requests information regarding cell phones, 
wallets and notifications by a THIRD PARTY about potential compromises of 
Plaintiff’s PERSONAL INFORMATION that is unrelated to the claims made by 
Plaintiff and it is therefore overbroad and not proportional to the needs of this case. 
Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory as compound and counting as multiple 
distinct interrogatories.   
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Plaintiff responds 
as follows:   
Plaintiff’s personal information was obtained without authorization with 
respect to the transaction at issue. Plaintiff received an EDD Debit Card with a 
magnetic stripe (but no EMV chip) to access benefits. Through the course of his 
relationship with Bank of America Plaintiff suffered at least one unauthorized 
transaction on Plaintiff’s account.  Each unauthorized transaction was timely 
reported to Bank of America.  
In March 2020, Plaintiff applied for and started receiving CA EDD 
unemployment benefits at $174.00 (one hundred seventy-four dollars) weekly. 
Between March and September of 2020, all transactions on her Bank of America 
EDD account were fraudulent. The total amount of these transactions was 
$14,000.00 (fourteen thousand dollars). September 20 and 21, 2020, Plaintiff 
called Bank of America to inform them that she never received her Bank of 
America EDD. Bank of America told her that they sent it to her in May 2020. In 
December 2020, Bank of America sent her a denial letter. The letter stated that the 
Bank was freezing her account due to fraud and that her claim had been denied. At 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11330 
Page 4 of 7

 
PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO  
BANA’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 
13 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
this time, her account had $4,700.00 (four thousand seven hundred dollars) locked 
in it. Finally, in April of 2021 her account was unfrozen. 
INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 
State the principal facts RELATED TO all YOUR CLAIMS, including the 
date of the CLAIM, the manner in which the CLAIM was submitted or 
communicated to BANA, IDENTIFYING all TRANSACTIONS included in the 
CLAIM, the interest YOU believe YOU are entitled to and the basis for that belief, 
IDENTIFYING the PERSON YOU believe made the transaction, whether YOU 
knew a TRANSACTION subject to a CLAIM was authorized by YOU or by 
someone with authority to use YOUR CARD or ACCOUNT, and the information 
provided to BANA about the disputed TRANSACTION (including but not limited 
to any DOCUMENTS or COMMUNICATIONS provided to BANA). 
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the Preliminary Statement and General 
Objections. 
Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory as vague and ambiguous to the extent it 
asks “whether YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION was compromised” and on 
the ground that it is overbroad, not proportional to the needs of this case, and 
ambiguous as to the included time period. Plaintiff further objects to this 
Interrogatory on the ground that it requests information regarding cell phones, 
wallets and notifications by a THIRD PARTY about potential compromises of 
Plaintiff’s PERSONAL INFORMATION that is unrelated to the claims made by 
Plaintiff and it is therefore overbroad and not proportional to the needs of this case. 
Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory as compound and counting as multiple 
distinct interrogatories.   
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Plaintiff responds 
as follows:   
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11331 
Page 5 of 7

 
PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO  
BANA’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 
103 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 56: 
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the Preliminary Statement and General 
Objections as if expressly set forth herein. 
Plaintiff objects to this Request as overbroad and unduly burdensome to the 
extent “all DOCUMENTS” seeks documents that are neither relevant to any claim 
or defense in this action, nor proportional to the needs of this case. Plaintiff also 
objects to this request as unduly burdensome to the extent that it seeks information 
that is not in Plaintiff’s possession, custody or control, is public, in the possession 
of third parties, or is more readily accessible to or already in the possession of 
Defendant. 
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Plaintiff will 
produce non-privileged, responsive documents in Plaintiff’s possession, custody, 
or control that are located after a reasonable search, to the extent such documents 
exist.  Discovery and investigation are ongoing and Plaintiff reserves the right to 
supplement Plaintiff’s production. 
 
 
Dated:  January 18, 2024 
SWIGART LAW GROUP, APC 
 
By:   /s/ Joshua B. Swigart 
 
 
JOSHUA B. SWIGART 
 
 
 
Liasson Counsel for Individual Plaintiffs  
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11332 
Page 6 of 7

In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LBS-MSB 
VERIFICATION 
 
I, ________________________, declare: 
I am one of the individual Plaintiffs in the above-entitled action, and I have been 
authorized to make this verification. 
I have read the foregoing responses to: 
1. RESPONSE TO BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS 
FOR ADMISSIONS 
2. RESPONSE TO BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.’S FIRST SET OF 
INTERROGATORIES 
I know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those 
matters which are therein stated on information and belief, and, as to those matters, I believe 
them to be true. 
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 
foregoing is true and correct. 
Executed in the State of California on _______________. 
 
 
________________________ 
 
 
 
 
Zoho Sign Document ID: 2B9B108F-RPZCSWQ3B35GH50QZH_LTDW03VL2DFJHA0_XT3WXMXM
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 350-38     Filed 10/24/24     PageID.11333 
Page 7 of 7
Ann Perez
Jan 18 2024 13:47 PST

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.350.38.pdf
Size
367,267 bytes
SHA-256
5a395636976f42715217872f1e5bc6dd3706e72910392a0a6341e947e7fc0040
Our copy
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.350.38.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top