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 33 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 565-9, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)

Court filing

Exhibit 33 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 565-9, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)

Filed October 17, 2025 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
Filed2025-10-17

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 565-9 · 2025-10-17 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

HX 33
FILED 
PROVISIONALLY 
UNDER SEAL WITH 
REDACTIONS 
PURSUANT TO 
STIPULATED 
PROTECTIVE ORDER
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33319 
Page 1 of 21

1
               UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
              SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
2
                     SAN DIEGO DIVISION
3
 Civil Action No. 21-MD-02992-GPC-MSB
 ____________________________________________________________
4
 IN RE:  BANK OF AMERICA CALIFORNIA
5
 UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS LITIGATION
 ____________________________________________________________
6
7
      VIDEO DEPOSITION OF CHLOE NOEL EAST, Ph.D.
8
                      May 15, 2025
 ____________________________________________________________
9
10
 APPEARANCES:
 ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS:
11
           CAROLINE HUNSICKER, ESQ.
           CONNIE K. CHAN, ESQ. (via remote)
12
           Altshuler Berzon LLP
           177 Post Street, Suite 300
13
           San Francisco, California  94108
           Phone:  415-421-7151
14
           Email:  chunsicker@altshulerberzon.com
           Email:  cchan@altber.com
15
16
           and
           JOSHUA B. SWIGART, ESQ. (via remote)
17
           ILANA PLATKIEWICZ, ESQ. (via remote)
           Swigart Law Group, APC
18
           2221 Camino Del Rio S, Suite 308
           San Diego, California  92108
19
           Phone:  866-219-3343
           Email:  josh@swigartlawgroup.com
20
           Email:  ilana@swigartlawgroup.com
21
22
23
24
25
Page 1
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33320 
Page 2 of 21

1
 connection to individuals who are receiving UI reporting     09:27AM
2
 an unauthorized charge on their AT -- an unauthorized        09:27AM
3
 charge at an ATM on their account that includes their UI     09:27AM
4
 benefits.                                                    09:27AM
           
   
  
            
 
            
 
     
 
                                
           
   
      
 
  
         
 
       
12
           Q.   Now, I just -- I just want to clarify for     09:28AM
13
 purposes of the record.                                      09:28AM
14
                Are you referring to they were denied         09:28AM
15
 access to all of their benefits by Bank of America or they   09:28AM
16
 were denied benefits in connection with a claim as to an     09:28AM
17
 unauthorized charge at the ATM?                              09:28AM
18
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Confusing.        09:28AM
19
           A.   My understanding is that they were denied     09:28AM
20
 the benefits that were in connection with the                09:28AM
21
 unauthorized charge.                                         09:28AM
22
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  Okay.  And what is your role   09:28AM
23
 in this case to the best of your understanding?              09:28AM
24
           A.   I was asked to provide expert information     09:28AM
25
 about the financial situation of UI recipients and how       09:28AM
Page 22
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
I 
I 
I 
I 
I 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33321 
Page 3 of 21

1
 important UI is for individuals who are receiving it as      09:28AM
2
 well as the harms that will be caused as a result of         09:29AM
3
 denying some UI benefits and the -- and to provide an        09:29AM
4
 estimate of the cost faced by class members as a result      09:29AM
5
 of this denial.                                              09:29AM
6
           Q.   And just for clarifying the record, by "UI"   09:29AM
7
 you mean unemployment insurance.                             09:29AM
8
           A.   Yes.  Thank you.                              09:29AM
9
           Q.   Much shorter.                                 09:29AM
10
                And what you just testified to, that --       09:29AM
11
 that was the assignment you were given in connection with    09:29AM
12
 this case; is that accurate?                                 09:29AM
13
           A.   Yes.                                          09:29AM
14
           Q.   Okay.  Let's mark as Exhibit 2 your expert    09:29AM
15
 report.  Have you seen this document before?                 09:29AM
16
                (Exhibit Number 2 was marked.)                09:30AM
17
           A.   Yes.                                          09:30AM
18
           Q.   Does this accurately reflect your opinions    09:30AM
19
 in this case?                                                09:30AM
20
           A.   Yes.                                          09:30AM
21
           Q.   Since -- what is the date of that report?     09:30AM
22
           A.   The date is March 4, 2025.                    09:30AM
23
           Q.   As you sit here today, do you have anything   09:30AM
24
 you would like to change or amend from your report?          09:30AM
25
           A.   No.                                           09:30AM
Page 23
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33322 
Page 4 of 21

1
           Q.   Do you intend to offer any additional         09:30AM
2
 opinions beyond what's contained in your report?             09:30AM
3
           A.   Not as I sit here today, no.                  09:30AM
4
           Q.   So as you sit here today, the report,         09:30AM
5
 Exhibit 2, in front of you, accurately reflects your         09:30AM
6
 opinions that you intend to offer as of today in this        09:30AM
7
 case?                                                        09:30AM
8
           A.   Yes.  Although I did review the two           09:30AM
9
 rebuttal reports by the Bank of America experts and have     09:31AM
10
 some thoughts based on those reports that may come up        09:31AM
11
 today as well.                                               09:31AM
12
           Q.   Well, just for purposes of the record,        09:31AM
13
 let's put in the designations first and then I will          09:31AM
14
 clarify which reports you reviewed just so we can get that   09:31AM
15
 clear.                                                       09:31AM
16
           A.   Uh-hmm.                                       09:31AM
17
           Q.   So let's do Plaintiffs' Supplemental Expert   09:31AM
18
 Designation as Exhibit 3.  Have you seen this document       09:31AM
19
 before?                                                      09:31AM
20
                (Exhibit Number 3 was marked.)                09:31AM
21
           A.   Yes.                                          09:31AM
22
           Q.   Does this accurately reflect your retention   09:31AM
23
 by Plaintiffs?                                               09:31AM
24
           A.   Yes.                                          09:32AM
25
           Q.   Okay.  What's the date of this designation?   09:32AM
Page 24
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33323 
Page 5 of 21

1
 about this deposition?                                       09:58AM
2
           A.   Several times.  I don't remember the dates    09:58AM
3
 but several times over the last month or so.                 09:58AM
4
           Q.   Okay.  Okay.  Now, looking at exhibit --      09:58AM
5
 strike that.                                                 09:58AM
6
                Looking at Exhibit 2, Appendix B, have you    09:58AM
7
 reviewed any documents that have been filed and served in    09:59AM
8
 this case in connection with your expert report?             09:59AM
9
           A.   The only case documents I reviewed are the    09:59AM
10
 ones listed under case materials except for the ones         09:59AM
11
 since -- on and since March 4, 2025.                         09:59AM
12
           Q.   And when you say except for the ones on and   09:59AM
13
 since March 4, 2025, are you referring to the expert         09:59AM
14
 reports that we've otherwise introduced today?               09:59AM
15
           A.   Yes.  Thank you.                              09:59AM
16
           Q.   Have you referred -- have you reviewed any    09:59AM
17
 additional documents pertaining to this case in connection   09:59AM
18
 with your representation of Plaintiffs in this action?       09:59AM
19
           A.   No.                                           09:59AM
20
           Q.   Have you reviewed the complaint in this       09:59AM
21
 case?                                                        10:00AM
22
           A.   No.                                           10:00AM
23
           Q.   Have you reviewed any motions that were       10:00AM
24
 filed in this case?                                          10:00AM
25
           A.   No.                                           10:00AM
Page 38
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33324 
Page 6 of 21

1
           Q.   Any discovery responses?                      10:00AM
2
           A.   No.                                           10:00AM
3
           Q.   Any deposition transcripts?                   10:00AM
4
           A.   No.                                           10:00AM
5
           Q.   Are you aware that this litigation is         10:00AM
6
 proceeding as a class action?                                10:00AM
7
           A.   Yes.                                          10:00AM
8
           Q.   And what is your understanding as to that?    10:00AM
9
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Vague.            10:00AM
10
           A.   Can you clarify the question?                 10:00AM
11
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  Is this a case in which        10:00AM
12
 representatives are seeking to represent a class of          10:00AM
13
 individuals?                                                 10:00AM
14
           A.   Yes, that's my understanding.                 10:00AM
15
           Q.   So in your materials considered at            10:00AM
16
 Appendix B, who provided you with the materials that are     10:00AM
17
 listed here?                                                 10:00AM
18
           A.   If you're referring to the case materials,    10:00AM
19
 that came to me from Plaintiffs' counsel.                    10:01AM
20
           Q.   Did you request these materials?              10:01AM
21
           A.   No.  They were provided to me for             10:01AM
22
 background information for preparing my report.              10:01AM
23
           Q.   Did you request any additional materials      10:01AM
24
 besides those provided to you under case materials?          10:01AM
25
           A.   No.                                           10:01AM
Page 39
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33325 
Page 7 of 21

1
 well as the 2024 Peter Ganong, et al. paper.                 11:18AM
2
           Q.   Okay.  And then in addition to the CARES      11:18AM
3
 Act, are you familiar with the Pandemic Unemployment         11:19AM
4
 Assistance Program?                                          11:19AM
5
           A.   Yes.                                          11:19AM
6
           Q.   What is that program?                         11:19AM
7
           A.   I believe, if I'm remembering correctly,      11:19AM
8
 this is the $300 supplement that was issued beginning in     11:19AM
9
 January 2021.                                                11:19AM
10
           Q.   And to the extent it's your understanding     11:19AM
11
 that it is an additional supplement that was issued, would   11:19AM
12
 that include -- would that increase a -- would that check    11:19AM
13
 increase a recipient's liquidity?                            11:19AM
14
           A.   Yes, it would increase the recipient's        11:19AM
15
 liquidity although, again, the evidence that I reviewed      11:19AM
16
 suggests that it's not drastically changing households'      11:19AM
17
 finances and that they're still in a difficult financial     11:20AM
18
 situation.                                                   11:20AM
19
           Q.   Likewise, are you familiar with the Federal   11:20AM
20
 Pandemic Unemployment Compensation Program?                  11:20AM
21
           A.   I am forgetting the details of that one.      11:20AM
22
           Q.   I'm representing that it initially provided   11:20AM
23
 an additional 600 per week.                                  11:20AM
24
                To the extent I make that representation      11:20AM
25
 and UI benefits supplements for up to four months, does      11:20AM
Page 76
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33326 
Page 8 of 21

1
 that refresh your recollection as to that program?           11:20AM
2
           A.   Yes.  Thank you.                              11:20AM
3
           Q.   Is it your understanding that that program    11:20AM
4
 would increase the check recipient's liquidity?              11:20AM
5
           A.   Yes.  This increase would increase the UI     11:20AM
6
 recipient's liquidity.                                       11:20AM
7
                And again, all the statistical analyses       11:20AM
8
 that I've done and the literature that I've reviewed         11:20AM
9
 suggests that households still remain in a difficult         11:21AM
10
 financial situation overall.                                 11:21AM
11
           Q.   Likewise, are you aware of the Pandemic       11:21AM
12
 Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program?                 11:21AM
13
           A.   I'm forgetting the -- the details of that     11:21AM
14
 one as well.  If you could remind me, please.                11:21AM
15
           Q.   If I could represent to you that it           11:21AM
16
 provided an additional 13 weeks of UI benefits between       11:21AM
17
 March 29, 2020, and December 26, 2020, and then it was       11:21AM
18
 subsequently reinstated, does that refresh your              11:21AM
19
 recollection as to additional benefits that were provided    11:21AM
20
 under this program?                                          11:21AM
21
           A.   Yes.  Thank you.                              11:21AM
22
           Q.   Is it your understanding as to whether that   11:21AM
23
 would, in fact, increase the recipients of that program's    11:21AM
24
 liquidity?                                                   11:21AM
25
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Vague.            11:21AM
Page 77
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33327 
Page 9 of 21

1
           A.   Relative to not having any unemployment       11:21AM
2
 insurance benefits, having more unemployment insurance       11:22AM
3
 benefits would increase the household's liquidity.           11:22AM
4
 Although again, I did not see any evidence of big changes    11:22AM
5
 in household finances and households are still in a          11:22AM
6
 difficult financial situation.                               11:22AM
7
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  Are you aware of the           11:22AM
8
 COVID-Related Tax Relief Act of 2020?                        11:22AM
9
           A.   I'm forgetting the details of that one.       11:22AM
10
           Q.   To clarify, it provided -- does it refresh    11:22AM
11
 your recollection if I state that it provided an             11:22AM
12
 additional $600 for eligible individuals and up to $600      11:22AM
13
 for qualifying children under the age of 17?  Does that      11:22AM
14
 refresh your recollection?                                   11:22AM
15
           A.   Yes, it does.                                 11:22AM
16
                Can I ask a follow-up question?  Can you      11:22AM
17
 remind me of the timing of that one?                         11:22AM
18
           Q.   The date of that one.  Plot twist.  Hold on   11:22AM
19
 a second.  January 2021.                                     11:22AM
20
           A.   Okay.  Perfect.                               11:23AM
21
           Q.   I believe it was enacted in late December     11:23AM
22
 2020.                                                        11:23AM
23
           A.   Thank you.  That does refresh my memory.      11:23AM
24
           Q.   And in your opinion, would recipients of      11:23AM
25
 those additional funds, would that increase their            11:23AM
Page 78
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33328 
Page 10 of 21

1
 liquidity?                                                   11:23AM
2
           A.   Yes, that would increase their liquidity.     11:23AM
3
                Although all the data that I analyzed and     11:23AM
4
 the literature that I reviewed suggests that it doesn't      11:23AM
5
 increase their liquidity by enough to get them out of        11:23AM
6
 their difficult financial situation.                         11:23AM
7
           Q.   Are you also familiar with the American       11:23AM
8
 Rescue Plan Act of 2021?                                     11:23AM
9
           A.   Yes.                                          11:23AM
10
           Q.   So would it be accurate to say that it        11:23AM
11
 provided payments of up to $1400 to eligible individuals,    11:23AM
12
 $2800 for married couples filing jointly, and $1400 for      11:24AM
13
 qualifying dependents?                                       11:24AM
14
           A.   I don't remember those numbers off the top    11:24AM
15
 of my head but that sounds reasonable to me.                 11:24AM
16
           Q.   And would those additional funds that were    11:24AM
17
 provided to those recipients, would that increase their      11:24AM
18
 liquidity?                                                   11:24AM
19
           A.   It would increase their liquidity.            11:24AM
20
                Although, the data that I reviewed and the    11:24AM
21
 literature that I reviewed suggests that it would not        11:24AM
22
 increase their liquidity to a point to get them out of       11:24AM
23
 their difficult financial situation.                         11:24AM
24
           Q.   Are you also familiar with the Golden State   11:24AM
25
 Stimulus Program?                                            11:24AM
Page 79
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33329 
Page 11 of 21

1
           A.   I do not remember the details of that one.    11:24AM
2
           Q.   If I represented to you that California       11:24AM
3
 offered two rounds of stimulus payments to low-income        11:24AM
4
 individuals during the pandemic, does that refresh your      11:24AM
5
 recollection?                                                11:24AM
6
           A.   Yes.                                          11:24AM
7
           Q.   Would recipients of those additional funds,   11:24AM
8
 would that increase their liquidity through receipt of       11:25AM
9
 those funds?                                                 11:25AM
10
           A.   Yes.                                          11:25AM
11
                Although all the data that I analyzed and     11:25AM
12
 the literature that I reviewed suggests that households      11:25AM
13
 still remain in a difficult financial situation.             11:25AM
14
           Q.   And are you familiar with the fact that       11:25AM
15
 California had a statewide moratoria on disconnection of     11:25AM
16
 essential services for nonpayment and waiver of fees for     11:25AM
17
 late payments during the COVID era?                          11:25AM
18
           A.   Yes.                                          11:25AM
19
           Q.   What impact would that have on an             11:25AM
20
 individual household's liquidity?                            11:25AM
21
           A.   Hypothetically, that program could reduce     11:25AM
22
 household expenses.                                          11:25AM
23
                Although, all the data that I reviewed and    11:25AM
24
 the literature that I've reviewed suggests that              11:25AM
25
 households remain in a difficult financial situation.        11:25AM
Page 80
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33330 
Page 12 of 21

1
           A.   Well, for this analysis, I was focused on     01:58PM
2
 getting a sense about what are the borrowing options         01:58PM
3
 available to UI recipients to get a sense about the          01:58PM
4
 borrowing costs, and so I wanted to include different        01:58PM
5
 types of potential borrowing.                                01:58PM
6
           Q.   Did you include individuals who marked by     01:58PM
7
 selling something?                                           01:58PM
8
           A.   Yes.                                          01:58PM
9
           Q.   And why did you include those by selling      01:58PM
10
 something who marked that as their response?                 01:58PM
11
           A.   So for this -- for selling something,         01:58PM
12
 while it isn't a source of borrowing exactly, it is a,       01:58PM
13
 sort of, financial mechanism that people use to deal with    01:58PM
14
 changes in their finances.  So it seemed important to --     01:58PM
15
 to think about that as a potential option as well.           01:58PM
16
           Q.   And so for purposes of understanding your     01:58PM
17
 opinion, you are offering the interest rate of               01:59PM
18
 20.8 percent as a representative interest rate; is that      01:59PM
19
 accurate?                                                    01:59PM
20
           A.   Yes.                                          01:59PM
21
           Q.   And is that 20.8 percent interest rate        01:59PM
22
 applicable to all classes?                                   01:59PM
23
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Confusing.        01:59PM
24
           A.   All classes or all class members or...        01:59PM
25
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  All -- all -- I guess we       01:59PM
Page 133
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33331 
Page 13 of 21

1
 will start with all classes.  So all of the claimed denial   01:59PM
2
 class, the credit rescission class.  Would you say that      01:59PM
3
 the 20.8 percent is applicable to all different proposed     01:59PM
4
 classes as you understand them?                              01:59PM
5
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Confusing.        01:59PM
6
           A.   I would say it's applicable to the claim      01:59PM
7
 denial, the credit rescission and the account freeze         01:59PM
8
 classes that we were discussing earlier.                     01:59PM
9
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  And it is your opinion that    01:59PM
10
 the 20.8 percent is representative to all individuals        01:59PM
11
 within each of those classes.                                02:00PM
12
           A.   It is my opinion that we can use              02:00PM
13
 20.8 percent as a representative number of the cost faced    02:00PM
14
 by class members, yes, in all three classes.                 02:00PM
15
           Q.   So to the extent you look at, for instance,   02:00PM
16
 the account freeze class, would your opinion change based    02:00PM
17
 on the balance of the account at the time it was frozen?     02:00PM
18
           A.   No, it would not.                             02:00PM
19
           Q.   What if the balance was negative?  Would      02:00PM
20
 that impact your opinion?                                    02:00PM
21
           A.   No, it would not because I'm focused on       02:00PM
22
 the most common response and the cost of the most common     02:00PM
23
 response.                                                    02:00PM
24
           Q.   So would your opinion change if 12,000 of     02:00PM
25
 the accounts were frozen for less than one week?             02:01PM
Page 134
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33332 
Page 14 of 21

1
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Calls for         02:01PM
2
 speculation.                                                 02:01PM
3
           A.   It's hard to say given that I haven't seen    02:01PM
4
 any data that suggests that that's the case.                 02:01PM
           
   
  
   
 
    
 
                                    
           
   
            
           
   
     
 
             
           
   
                                           
           
   
        
 
                                      
                
  
  
         
 
                                                 
           
   
      
 
  
      
 
      
 
               
20
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  So even for a claim of less    02:02PM
21
 than $5, you would still use the credit card borrowing       02:02PM
22
 20.8 percent interest rate.                                  02:02PM
23
           A.   Yes.  Because the 20.8 is representative      02:02PM
24
 of the cost faced by the majority of class members.  And     02:02PM
25
 some will have slightly higher amounts and some will have    02:02PM
Page 135
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
I 
■ 
I 
I 
I 
■ 
I 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ -
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
■ 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33333 
Page 15 of 21

1
 slightly lower amounts but my goal is to provide a           02:02PM
2
 representative number that can be applied to -- to all       02:02PM
3
 class members.                                               02:02PM
           
   
         
 
     
 
        
 
                                               
                
  
  
       
 
                                                       
           
   
                              
11
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  Is it your opinion that        02:02PM
12
 those individuals would have taken on credit card debt?      02:02PM
13
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Calls for         02:02PM
14
 speculation.                                                 02:02PM
15
           A.   Again, my method is not trying to identify    02:02PM
16
 which individuals would turn to credit card borrowing but    02:03PM
17
 rather that most individuals returned to credit card         02:03PM
18
 borrowing or some method that's more expensive than          02:03PM
19
 credit card borrowing.                                       02:03PM
20
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  But most is not all;           02:03PM
21
 correct?                                                     02:03PM
22
           A.   Correct.                                      02:03PM
23
           Q.   I can turn to more data.                      02:03PM
24
                So I understand you previously referenced     02:03PM
25
 the Pulse data?                                              02:03PM
Page 136
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
I 
I 
I 
I 
I 
I 
■ 
■ 
■ 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33334 
Page 16 of 21

1
 loss of benefits to $5 or if it is a permanent loss          02:11PM
2
 because UI benefits have ended, they've expired, your        02:11PM
3
 opinions are the same?                                       02:11PM
4
           A.   Yes, my opinions are the same.  Because       02:11PM
5
 part of the value of UI benefits is that they're paid in     02:11PM
6
 a timely manner because individuals need the benefits in     02:11PM
7
 order to cover their spending needs.  And so whether or      02:11PM
8
 not it's temporary, my opinions don't change.                02:11PM
9
           Q.   And the amount that is lost, your opinions    02:11PM
10
 don't change; is that --                                     02:11PM
11
           A.   Correct.  Uh-hmm.                             02:11PM
12
           Q.   Do you know whether any class                 02:11PM
13
 representative here turned to expensive methods of           02:11PM
14
 borrowing when a portion of their UI benefits were halted?   02:11PM
15
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Outside the       02:11PM
16
 scope of the report.                                         02:11PM
17
           A.   I have seen information in the expert         02:11PM
18
 report of McCrary that indicates that.                       02:11PM
19
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  And you understand that the    02:12PM
20
 class representatives are seeking to represent the class?    02:12PM
21
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Calls for a       02:12PM
22
 legal conclusion.                                            02:12PM
23
           A.   I do understand that, although it is          02:12PM
24
 outside the area of my expertise.                            02:12PM
25
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  Did you review any materials   02:12PM
Page 141
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33335 
Page 17 of 21

1
 that pertained to the class representatives in connection    02:12PM
2
 with your report?                                            02:12PM
3
           A.   No, I did not, because I was focused on       02:12PM
4
 getting a large and representative sample of UI              02:12PM
5
 recipients in California.                                    02:12PM
6
           Q.   So for purposes of the record, you didn't     02:12PM
7
 review any of their interrogatory responses or written       02:12PM
8
 discovery responses.                                         02:12PM
9
           A.   Correct.                                      02:12PM
10
           Q.   None of the documents that they produced.     02:12PM
11
                MS. HUNSICKER:  Objection.  Vague.            02:12PM
12
           Q.   (By Ms. Brys)  Did you review the documents   02:12PM
13
 that they produced in this case?                             02:12PM
14
           A.   I did not.                                    02:13PM
15
           Q.   Did you review any of the deposition          02:13PM
16
 testimony that the class representatives provided?           02:13PM
17
           A.   No.                                           02:13PM
18
           Q.   And so you didn't consider any of the class   02:13PM
19
 representatives' responses or materials or documents in      02:13PM
20
 forming your opinion in this case.                           02:13PM
21
           A.   There's some sort of overall statistics       02:13PM
22
 that were included in the expert report of Victor Stango     02:13PM
23
 that I reviewed in preparing my report, but I did not        02:13PM
24
 review any individual level data on class members, no.       02:13PM
           
   
     
Page 142
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
■ 
■ 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33336 
Page 18 of 21

1
 the principal amount that they were denied.                  03:36PM
2
           Q.   And the principal amount in this case for     03:36PM
3
 the account freeze class related to their denied --          03:36PM
4
 delayed benefit payments would be what?                      03:36PM
5
           A.   The amount of benefits that they were         03:37PM
6
 denied access to.                                            03:37PM
7
           Q.   And is it your understanding that those       03:37PM
8
 ongoing benefits were received right away?                   03:37PM
9
           A.   No, it's not my understanding.                03:37PM
10
           Q.   What is your understanding of when they       03:37PM
11
 were received, if at all?                                    03:37PM
12
           A.   It's my understanding that there was a        03:37PM
13
 delay, but I don't have a good sense about the exact         03:37PM
14
 length of that delay.                                        03:37PM
15
           Q.   Okay.  Can you go to Paragraph 10(F) of       03:37PM
16
 your report, please.                                         03:37PM
17
                Your opinion here says, In my opinion, the    03:37PM
18
 average credit card interest rate of 20.8 percent is an      03:37PM
19
 appropriate figure to use to calculate the cost to class     03:37PM
20
 members resulting from denial of access to their             03:37PM
21
 principal claim amounts and frozen account balances.         03:37PM
22
                Can you explain what you mean by that,        03:37PM
23
 please?                                                      03:37PM
24
           A.   Yes.                                          03:37PM
25
                So in my report, I review research and        03:38PM
Page 176
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33337 
Page 19 of 21

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 
conduct my own analysis to come up with the 20.8 credit 
03:38PM 
card interest rate as appropriate, if anything, 
03:38PM 
underestimate of the cost faced by class members. 
And 
03:38PM 
because my report is focused on providing this interest 
03:38PM 
rate that will lead to an aggregate damages calculation, 
03:38PM 
the important thing is that the 20.8 percent is 
03:38PM 
representative of a large -- large number of class 
03:38PM 
members, and so there might be some class members that 
03:38PM 
have slightly lower interest rates that they face or 
03:38PM 
slightly higher interest rates that they face. 
But when 
03:38PM 
applying this average measure to the entire class and 
03:38PM 
aggregating up, it will be just as good as taking those 
03:38PM 
slightly lower or slightly higher and aggregating all of 
03:38PM 
those up. 
It will be -- it will lead to the same 
03:39PM 
estimate. 
03:39PM 
Q. 
When you say "just as good," what do you 
03:39PM 
mean by that? 
03:39PM 
A. 
I mean it will lead to the same estimate 
03:39PM 
of the aggregate damages. 
03:39PM 
Q. 
Okay. 
Are all -- are all proposed class 
03:39PM 
members individuals in California who received UI benefits 
03:39PM 
in 2020 or 2021? 
A. 
Yes. 
All proposed class members are UI 
recipients in California who received benefits during 
2020 or 2021, which is why my analysis of the SIPP data 
Veritext Legal Solutions 
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127 
03:39PM 
03:39PM 
03:39PM 
03:39PM 
Page 177 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33338 
Page 20 of 21

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 
CERTIFICATE OF COURT REPORTER 
I , DEANNA BAYSINGER, a Registered Professional 
Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of 
Colorado, commissioned to administer oaths, do hereby 
certify that previous to the commencement of the 
examination, the witness was duly sworn by me to testify 
the truth in relation to matters in controversy between 
the said parties ; that the said deposition was taken in 
stenotype by me at the time and place aforesaid and was 
thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me ; and that 
the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of my 
stenotype notes thereof . 
That I am not an attorney nor counsel nor in 
any way connected with any attorney or counsel for any of 
the parties to said action nor otherwise interested in the 
outcome of this action . 
My commission expires : 
November 8, 2026 . 
DEANNA BAYSINGER 
Registered Professional Reporter 
Notary Public, State of Colorado 
Veritext Legal Solutions 
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127 
Page 182 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 565-9     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.33339 
Page 21 of 21

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.565.9.pdf
Size
724,401 bytes
SHA-256
fef09f068a086e85b7984a9af61dd348b27ca161b929c44245bc2d7d4c11c1f2
Our copy
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.565.9.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top