Court filing
Exhibit 39 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 567-10, 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
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2025-10-17 |
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 567-10 · 2025-10-17 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
HX 39
FILED
PROVISIONALLY
UNDER SEAL WITH
REDACTIONS
PURSUANT TO
STIPULATED
PROTECTIVE ORDER
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34120
Page 1 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
SAN DIEGO DIVISION
4
5
IN RE BANK OF AMERICA ) Case No.
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT ) 21-MD-02992 LAB-MSB
6
BENEFITS LITIGATION )
________________________________)
7
)
)
8
)
This Document Relates to )
9
All Actions )
)
10
)
________________________________)
11
12
13
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
14
VIDEO-RECORDED DEPOSITION OF GREG REGAN
15
16
Monday, May 19, 2025
17
San Francisco, California
18
19
20
21
22
23
Stenographically Reported By:
24
Hanna Kim, CLR, CSR No. 13083
25
Job No. 7289038
Page 1
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34121
Page 2 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
BY MR. RIFFEE:
2
Q. Did you review the circumstances of any of
3
the particular plaintiffs or proposed class members
4
to assess whether they actually were harmed in that
5
amount, that they actually incurred a 20 percent APR 11:03:21
6
or -- or similar interest rate?
7
MS. CHAN: Objection.
8
THE WITNESS: No. My objective was to
9
develop an understanding of the class and identify
10
the harms that -- that I observed and those harms 11:03:34
11
that were alleged, and attempt to quantify that
12
harm on -- on a class-wide basis so that damages
13
could be reasonably measured in the aggregate. And
14
doing that at the individual level, I concluded,
15
would not yield a result that could be reasonably 11:03:56
16
extrapolated. So my -- my objective was to look at
17
the class as a whole and attempt to identify a
18
method to measure damages on a class-wide basis?
19
BY MR. RIFFEE:
20
Q. In any of those cases, did you review on 11:04:10
21
an individual level or a sample to assess whether,
22
in fact, any persons in -- in your proposed classes,
23
or plaintiffs, actually incurred borrowing costs
24
at -- at a -- at that interest rate or at a similar
25
interest rate? 11:04:26
Page 45
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34122
Page 3 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
MS. CHAN: Objection.
2
THE WITNESS: Do you mind just reading the
3
question back? I just lost when you were reading.
4
Sorry.
5
BY MR. RIFFEE: 11:04:34
6
Q. Sure.
7
In any of those cases, did you review --
8
A. You can ask a different question.
9
Q. Sure. Yeah, no.
10
In any of those cases, did you review any 11:04:47
11
information concerning the actual plaintiffs or a
12
sample of the actual plaintiffs or proposed classes
13
to see -- to check your work to see if they actually
14
did appear to have incurred borrowing costs at or
15
near the -- the interest rate that you were using to 11:05:04
16
calculate your damages at the 20 -- for example, a
17
20 percent APR?
18
MS. CHAN: Objection. Compound, assumes
19
facts.
20
THE WITNESS: Every case is unique, and so 11:05:18
21
certain instances lend themselves -- for example, a
22
small group of plaintiffs or a individual plaintiff
23
or company, then that type of analysis is possible;
24
where here, a large group of plaintiffs exist, the
25
approach that I performed was to analyze the most 11:05:37
Page 46
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34123
Page 4 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
common harm and attempt to identify a cost that most
2
reason- -- reasonably captured that harm.
3
BY MR. RIFFEE:
4
Q. In past cases where you've used a compound
5
interest rate to assess potential borrowing costs, 11:05:57
6
was there ever an instance where you didn't review
7
information concerning your proposed class or set of
8
plaintiffs to -- sorry -- to verify that some of
9
them actually incurred the borrowing costs that you
10
were assuming in your methodology? 11:06:18
11
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague. Compound.
12
THE WITNESS: I -- I'm certain there have
13
been. I think that what I attempted to do in this
14
instance was to identify attributes of the consumers
15
and develop an understanding of common economic 11:06:36
16
circumstances confronting that type of consumer at
17
the particular time at issue, and associate that
18
with the process to identify the interest rate I
19
used to measure the harm.
20
BY MR. RIFFEE: 11:06:56
21
Q. Okay. In this case, you don't know
22
whether any particular class member actually
23
incurred the -- the 20 percent APR interest that you
24
calculate in your methodologies; correct?
25
MS. CHAN: Objection. 11:07:11
Page 47
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34124
Page 5 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
THE WITNESS: I believe the -- given the
2
nature of the class, that it -- that type of harm
3
was -- was incurred by individual consumers. And
4
that conclusion's consistent with Dr. East and
5
Dr. Levine's findings. 11:07:25
6
BY MR. RIFFEE:
7
Q. Have you reviewed any evidence to confirm
8
that even one single proposed class member actually
9
themselves incurred interest at, at least a
10
20 percent interest rate? 11:07:36
11
MS. CHAN: Objection.
12
THE WITNESS: It's my expectation that
13
there are consumers that experience costs that
14
exceed that. The objective of illustrating my
15
analysis using a 20 percent rate was to identify a 11:07:49
16
median type of harm that was incurred by consumers
17
and measure it in that -- in that way.
18
BY MR. RIFFEE:
19
Q. That wasn't -- that wasn't my question.
20
So I understand that's your expectation, 11:08:03
21
but did you review any evidence to confirm that
22
anyone actually did -- in the proposed classes or
23
any of the -- the class plaintiffs actually incurred
24
borrowing costs at a 20 percent interest rate or
25
higher? 11:08:16
Page 48
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34125
Page 6 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague.
2
THE WITNESS: I did not do it at an
3
individual level because I didn't have data to
4
indicate that that outcome would be reasonably
5
extracted to the population as a whole. So what I 11:08:35
6
did was to develop my understanding of the overall
7
population of consumers.
8
BY MR. RIFFEE:
9
Q. And that was based on your research and --
10
and information generally, but not specific to 11:08:45
11
the -- the actual class members; correct?
12
MS. CHAN: Objection.
13
THE WITNESS: It was my research regarding
14
the typical type of harm incurred by members of the
15
proposed class. 11:08:58
16
BY MR. RIFFEE:
17
Q. Have you ever been retained, prior to this
18
case, to calculate damages concerning the denial of
19
unauthorized transaction claims?
20
A. I -- I don't believe so. 11:09:09
21
Q. Have you ever been retained to calculate
22
damages concerning an account freeze or similar
23
restriction placed on a financial account that
24
prevented an accountholder from accessing the funds
25
in that account? 11:09:41
Page 49
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34126
Page 7 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
hear you, Counsel.
2
MS. CHAN: Sorry. Confusing.
3
THE WITNESS: I think I understand your
4
question. But I'm implementing, through the bank's
5
data, my understanding of the allegation. So as -- 11:51:15
6
I'm not opining about the nature of the conduct.
7
BY MR. RIFFEE:
8
Q. Sure.
9
A. But I am applying my understanding of the
10
conduct to do the analysis. 11:51:27
11
Q. Thank you. That -- that was my -- the
12
intent of my question. Thank you.
13
And your -- the damages, methodologies --
14
or at least the damages sought -- your understanding
15
of the damages sought, that's described in the table 11:51:42
16
that you have here on page 4 and 5?
17
A. Yes.
18
Q. And if you could turn back to -- I guess
19
it's all on page 3. At the top of page 3, there's a
20
chart. This is your understanding of the proposed 11:52:05
21
class definitions in this case; right?
22
A. Yes.
23
Q. Did you have any input into how these five
24
proposed classes would be defined?
25
A. I don't know if I can answer that question 11:52:16
Page 69
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34127
Page 8 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
other than responding to data-related questions as
2
to what was available on -- on given dates.
3
Q. Are you relying entirely on counsel for
4
these definitions?
5
A. I am. 11:52:40
6
Q. Did you have any input into who would be
7
included in each proposed class, other than
8
reviewing and -- and conducting data analysis based
9
on the data provided to you from Bank of America?
10
MS. CHAN: Objection. Ambiguous. 11:52:58
11
THE WITNESS: It was my goal to implement
12
my understanding of these definitions in terms of
13
identifying proposed class members.
14
BY MR. RIFFEE:
15
Q. Did you have any input regarding who would 11:53:13
16
be excluded from each class -- or each proposed
17
class, other than by conducting an analysis of the
18
data that was provided to you by Bank of America?
19
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague and
20
ambiguous. 11:53:28
21
THE WITNESS: I would consider input in
22
terms of understanding who was excluded for purposes
23
of the remediation plan, then reading the
24
interrogatories and, I think, you know, Mr. Martin's
25
declaration, for example, to develop an 11:53:45
Page 70
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34128
Page 9 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
cardholders based on instruction from counsel;
2
correct? The -- the cardholders that are described
3
here in footnote 10.
4
A. I think, ultimately, that's a fair
5
characterization. 11:55:29
6
Q. Do you have an understanding of why this
7
criteria is being used to exclude cardholders from
8
plaintiffs' proposed classes?
9
MS. CHAN: Objection.
10
THE WITNESS: I don't think I can have a 11:55:45
11
complete understanding because it appears to reflect
12
some negotiations between the bank and its
13
regulators, but I have a general understanding of
14
the -- of the aim to exclude individuals suspected
15
of engaging in fraudulent conduct. 11:55:58
16
BY MR. RIFFEE:
17
Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether these
18
exclusion criteria described in footnote 10 are
19
appropriate for the purposes of your damages
20
methodologies? 11:56:15
21
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague. Beyond
22
scope.
23
THE WITNESS: I -- I didn't form an
24
opinion on that topic, but I don't see it as
25
unreasonable to make these exclusions. 11:56:24
Page 72
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34129
Page 10 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
13
And, ultimately, it would be the objective to
14
exclude all such accounts or claims.
15
BY MR. RIFFEE: 11:57:09
16
Q. Sitting here today, do you know if you've
17
excluded all such accounts and claims from your
18
damages analyses, in particular Schedule 1 of your
19
report?
20
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague. 11:57:21
24
BY MR. RIFFEE:
25
Q. And your ability is limited by the -- or 11:57:33
Page 73
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34130
Page 11 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 77
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34131
Page 12 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 78
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34132
Page 13 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 79
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34133
Page 14 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 80
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34134
Page 15 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
4
MS. CHAN: Objection. Misstates
5
testimony. 12:08:48
6
BY MR. RIFFEE:
7
Q. Or that's what you stated here in your
8
class certification reply; correct?
9
MS. CHAN: Objection. Misstates
10
testimony. Mischaracterizes report. 12:08:55
Page 82
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34135
Page 16 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 83
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34136
Page 17 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
18
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague. Compound.
19
THE WITNESS: Well, I'd have to see what
20
data became available to allow me to conduct that 12:11:50
21
analysis and even ascertain whether it should be
22
applied more broadly. But not knowing what that
23
analysis might look like, if the bank simply added
24
these card alias IDs to its list of excluded
25
accounts, then I would use that data to exclude 12:12:10
Page 84
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34137
Page 18 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
12
MS. CHAN: Objection. Beyond scope.
13
THE WITNESS: That wasn't the nature of my
14
assignment.
15
BY MR. RIFFEE: 12:26:14
16
Q. You're just drawing on information
17
provided by Bank of America in its interrogatory
18
responses; correct?
22
Q. Okay. But you don't -- you don't have an
23
understanding, and you haven't reviewed anything to
24
determine what, if anything, ED did -- EDD did to
25
verify those claims? 12:26:39
Page 96
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34138
Page 19 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
MS. CHAN: Objection. Asked and answered.
2
Beyond scope.
3
THE WITNESS: That was not the nature of
4
my assignment.
5
BY MR. RIFFEE: 12:26:49
15
BY MR. RIFFEE: 12:27:22
16
Q. Are you aware that there are reports of
17
significant unauthorized transaction claims fraud,
18
sometimes referred to as double-dipping, that
19
occurred during the proposed class periods?
20
MS. CHAN: Objection. Assumes facts. 12:27:33
21
Misleading. Outside scope.
22
THE WITNESS: I'd have to look at how
23
double-dipping was characterized in the document,
24
but I'm aware of claims of fraudulent activity
25
occurring. 12:27:53
Page 97
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34139
Page 20 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
cardholder was damaged at the time of, in this case,
2
the claim denial; and until the time at which the
3
cardholder was compensated for that damage, he or
4
she remained damage. But that that amount that the
5
bank has paid is essentially a partial payment of 01:41:21
6
the judgment that reduces those damages.
7
Q. Okay. So if we could turn back to page 4
8
and the chart where you include the class
9
definitions -- sorry, Paragraph 4, page 3, the chart
10
where you include the class definitions. 01:41:47
11
So for the claim denial class, you
12
understand that it's defined by plaintiffs to
13
include all -- EDD cardholders who notified Bank of
14
America of an unauthorized transaction on their
15
prepaid debit card account and had that claim denied 01:42:07
16
because -- based on the use of indicator 1 of the
17
claim fraud filter; correct?
18
A. Yes.
19
Q. So the alleged conduct at issue is Bank of
20
America's use of the claim fraud filter, and 01:42:26
21
specifically indicator 1.
22
Is that consistent with your
23
understanding?
24
A. Yes.
25
Q. So in a but-for world, but for Bank of 01:42:32
Page 114
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34140
Page 21 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
America's use of indicator 1 of the claim fraud
2
filter to deny those cardholders' claims, the
3
cardholder would have been reimbursed by the Bank of
4
America for the amount of the alleged unauthorized
5
transactions included in their claims; right? 01:42:51
6
A. Yes.
7
Q. Would you agree that if a cardholder's
8
account was credited for the full amount of the
9
alleged unauthorized transactions, they are then in
10
the same place that they would have been in the 01:43:04
11
but-for world, at least with respect to the
12
principal amount of their claim?
13
A. Measured today, that would be a reasonable
14
outlook. But what I'm talking about is the damage
15
occurred at the time of the claim denial, and that 01:43:21
16
person was damaged until the amount of the claim
17
being refunded to the individual's account.
18
Q. Okay. The only difference between the
19
card -- cardholder in the actual world where they
20
have been reimbursed for their claim amount and in 01:43:36
21
the but-for world is the timing of when they
22
received the credit; right?
23
MS. CHAN: Objection.
24
BY MR. RIFFEE:
25
Q. Or the delay in -- in the receipt of -- of 01:43:46
Page 115
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34141
Page 22 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
the principal amount of their claim?
2
MS. CHAN: Objection.
3
THE WITNESS: The -- the difference is,
4
again, the events that occurred on the date of the
5
claim denial at that point in time, the cardholder 01:43:58
6
did not know if or when the bank would refund the
7
amount of that claim to that person's account.
8
During that period of time, in my view, the
9
individual incurred consequential damages in the
10
form of the time value of money. 01:44:20
11
And, later, the bank has at least
12
partially paid that consumer; that amount would be
13
offset to reduce the amount of damages, but doesn't
14
change the fact that the individual had been damaged
15
during the preceding period of time. 01:44:33
16
BY MR. RIFFEE:
17
Q. Okay. And we'll talk about it in a bit.
18
But you -- you have attempted to calculate
19
consequential damages, which you say is the time
20
value of money. Have you also attempted to 01:44:46
21
calculate damages based on the time any cardholder
22
spent or the steps they took to get their -- their
23
claims reimbursed?
24
MS. CHAN: Objection. Ambiguous.
25
THE WITNESS: In -- in part, the customer 01:44:55
Page 116
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34142
Page 23 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
Q. Okay. Did you review any of the proposed
2
class members' credit card balances -- revolving
3
balances to determine whether they, in fact, had
4
revolving balances at the time they were without
5
access to their funds? 03:15:59
6
A. I did not attempt to do an individual
7
analysis because I did not have data that would
8
allow me to make a reasonable extrapolation. So I
9
studied the characteristics of the population of
10
proposed class members and looked at the 03:16:09
11
information, including the studies and data that I
12
highlighted in Paragraphs 40 to 43 of Exhibit 1, in
13
reaching my conclusion that the cost of borrowing
14
was the most appropriate way to measure
15
consequential harm. And the most common way in 03:16:32
16
which consumers were borrowing during this period of
17
time was on a credit card, and I used a median
18
applicable credit card rate, all of which struck me
19
as an appropriate methodology to measure damages.
20
Q. And you also did not review any of the 03:16:56
21
proposed class members' credit card balances or --
22
or statements to determine whether they, in fact,
23
actually relied on a credit card or used credit
24
cards to cover any funds that they may not have been
25
able to access during this period; right? 03:17:13
Page 171
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34143
Page 24 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
A. I did not review individual credit card
2
statement balances.
3
Q. And each of these studies -- none of them
4
are specific -- that you relied on in your report
5
and cited in your report, none of them are specific 03:17:24
6
to this particular set of proposed class members;
7
correct?
8
MS. CHAN: Objection. Ambiguous.
9
THE WITNESS: Actually, I think that, for
10
example, the Department of Labor study of 03:17:33
11
unemployment benefit recipients in California in
12
which -- I think it was 97 percent of consumers
13
surveyed said that those benefits were important to
14
be able to meet their then-current financial needs.
15
I think there was a CFPB study I cited reaching 03:17:53
16
similar conclusions, along with the bank's testimony
17
that these were vulnerable people that were
18
withdrawing their funds upon receipt. And that's
19
consistent with, for example, the study from the
20
Federal Reserve cited in Paragraph 42 of my report, 03:18:12
21
that the consequence of not having those funds
22
available was incurring costs of borrowing.
23
So those studies, I think, were targeted.
24
They were aligned with the specific class of people
25
that I'm trying to measure damages for. 03:18:29
Page 172
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34144
Page 25 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
BY MR. RIFFEE:
2
Q. You haven't done that to date; right?
3
A. I understand that's a small population of
4
people, and I don't have a reasonable basis to think
5
that their circumstances are representative of the 03:30:31
6
class as a whole, which is much larger.
7
Q. Do you know if any particular cardholder
8
in plaintiffs' proposed classes even had a credit
9
card during the period when they were without access
10
to the claim amount or the funds in their account? 03:30:53
11
A. It's my understanding -- I think we just
12
went through this a few moments ago -- from -- from
13
counsel as well as from looking at Mr. Stango's
14
report that certain of the individuals did -- did
15
have credit cards during the time period. 03:31:10
16
Q. Are you aware that other individual
17
plaintiffs and certain class member -- or
18
class representatives testified that they did not
19
have a --
20
THE COURT REPORTER: Counsel, slowly. 03:31:18
21
MR. RIFFEE: I'm sorry.
22
BY MR. RIFFEE:
23
Q. Are you aware that other individual
24
plaintiffs or class plaintiffs testified that they
25
did not have a credit card during the pandemic or 03:31:27
Page 183
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34145
Page 26 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
during the period when they were without access
2
to -- to certain funds?
3
MS. CHAN: Objection. Asked and answered.
4
THE WITNESS: I -- I am aware of that.
5
And my analysis doesn't necessitate that every 03:31:37
6
single class member had a credit card. My
7
assessment is that credit card borrowing was the
8
most common form of borrowing during the period of
9
time, and the cost of borrowing on a credit card is
10
an appropriate approximation of the consequential 03:31:53
11
harm experienced by class members.
12
BY MR. RIFFEE:
13
Q. Okay. But when your methodology is
14
calculating consequential damages for each proposed
15
class member, your methodology is necessarily 03:32:04
16
assuming that each of them incurred the same
17
interest rate of 20 percent APR, as if they had a
18
credit card; correct?
19
MS. CHAN: Objection.
20
THE WITNESS: It's assuming that 03:32:14
21
20 percent cost of borrowing is a median cost, which
22
necessarily understates the typical average cost,
23
because a mean, for example, would incorporate the
24
impact of outliers that borrowed on -- on payday
25
loans or other factors that we can observe in the 03:32:32
Page 184
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34146
Page 27 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
pandemic and received unemployment insurance tended
2
to earn less than the median wage.
3
What steps, if any, did you take to verify
4
that members of the proposed claim denial, credit
5
rescission, account freeze or EMV chip classes, in 03:36:17
6
fact, earned less than the median wage?
7
A. I think we've gone through this a large
8
number of times. I'm looking at a group of
9
California individuals in a specific period of time,
10
2020 and 2021 generally, that incurred a loss of 03:36:37
11
employment and obtained unemployment insurance. If
12
I said loss of unemployment -- I'm -- I think I did.
13
Loss of employment -- and attempting to gauge the
14
circumstances of that group -- group of people. And
15
based upon the data available to me, collectively, 03:37:01
16
it indicated that these individuals were -- were
17
vulnerable, including by the fact that they earn
18
than less than the median wage, and that was
19
consistent with my observations of the testimony of
20
the bank's representatives, that these people were 03:37:17
21
under significant financial duress at this moment in
22
time.
23
Q. Did you review any data regarding the
24
actual wage that the proposed class members earned
25
prior to becoming unemployed? 03:37:35
Page 188
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34147
Page 28 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 189
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34148
Page 29 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
9
Q. Again, you have not reviewed any data for
10
these proposed class members showing what their wage 03:39:34
11
actually was prior to becoming unemployed, or what
12
their available savings or checking account or
13
alternative -- alternative income sources were at
14
the time they were without their funds; correct?
15
MS. CHAN: Objection. Asked and answered. 03:39:53
16
THE WITNESS: I have not reviewed specific
17
information for individual plaintiffs, but rather
18
I'm looking at the population of impacted
19
cardholders and gathering data to indicate what
20
their circumstances were in the moment that the harm 03:40:07
21
was incurred.
22
BY MR. RIFFEE:
23
Q. Okay. Do you agree that each of the
24
proposed class member's fact and circumstances would
25
be different? 03:40:18
Page 190
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34149
Page 30 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague.
2
THE WITNESS: I think the individual
3
plaintiffs are reflective of some portion of the
4
class as a whole, which is what the data I'm using
5
is designed to indicate. 03:40:41
6
BY MR. RIFFEE:
7
Q. Some of the proposed class members would
8
have received higher than the median wage prior to
9
applying for unemployment benefits; right?
10
Do you dispute that? 03:40:55
11
MS. CHAN: Objection.
12
THE WITNESS: Can -- can you repeat that?
13
BY MR. RIFFEE:
14
Q. Sure.
15
Would you agree that some of the proposed 03:40:59
16
class members received higher than the median wage
17
prior to applying for unemployment benefits?
18
A. I don't have all their data in front of
19
me. That sounds reasonable.
20
Q. Okay. Do you speak -- dispute reports -- 03:41:15
21
are you aware of reports that higher-income
22
individuals were able to and did collect
23
unemployment income during the pandemic, including
24
millionaires?
25
MS. CHAN: Objection. 03:41:28
Page 191
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34150
Page 31 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
THE WITNESS: The millionaire point is
2
in -- a complete outlier, though people earning
3
above the median wage were able to collect
4
unemployment benefits.
5
BY MR. RIFFEE: 03:41:40
6
Q. And sticking with Paragraph 42, you note
7
that one of the bases for your assumption is that --
8
or that they relied on credit card -- increased
9
credit card utilization, is that -- looking at the
10
top of page 18, "Many families have little to no 03:42:08
11
financial cushion," and you cite a Federal Reserve
12
study for that.
13
Would you agree that there's a
14
considerable variation across households in the
15
amount of liquid savings or available cash they may 03:42:26
16
have for unanticipated expenses?
17
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague.
18
THE WITNESS: I don't know what you mean
19
by "considerable variability," but the study does
20
indicate that there are categories of financial 03:42:35
21
cushion that consumers do have.
22
BY MR. RIFFEE:
23
Q. Okay. But would you agree that there is
24
variability across households in the amount of
25
liquid savings or cash that they may have for 03:42:46
Page 192
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34151
Page 32 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
unanticipated expenses?
2
A. I will agree with that. The study at
3
issue here is looking at -- at all consumers, so
4
it's not sufficiently tailored to the population of
5
individuals that are impacted by the wrongful claim 03:43:00
6
denial. But it's informative to the overall level
7
of data we have regarding these consumers.
8
Q. Did you review any data or information
9
regarding the proposed class members or class
10
plaintiffs to assess whether or not they had 03:43:22
11
adequate savings to cover expenses while they -- a
12
time -- during the time when they were without their
13
claim amount or their account balance, such that
14
they wouldn't need to borrow or increase their
15
credit card utilization? 03:43:38
16
A. Can you read it one more time?
17
Q. Did you review any data or information
18
regarding the proposed class members or class
19
plaintiffs to assess whether or not they had
20
adequate savings to cover expenses during the time 03:43:53
21
when they were without their claim amount or their
22
account balance, such that they wouldn't need to
23
borrow or increase their credit card utilization?
24
MS. CHAN: Objection. Compound.
25
THE WITNESS: My process was to look at 03:44:06
Page 193
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34152
Page 33 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
21
Q. Okay. But you yourself -- you did not
22
review any data to assess the financial cushion that
23
these individual proposed class members or their
24
families had or their withdrawal patterns; right?
25
MS. CHAN: Objection. Asked and answered. 04:06:12
Page 210
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34153
Page 34 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
THE WITNESS: I determined that the data
2
from individuals was not deep enough. It was not --
3
I didn't have enough data to be able to substantiate
4
a conclusion that that information could be
5
reasonably extrapolated. 04:06:31
6
BY MR. RIFFEE:
7
Q. Does your methodology consider whether
8
proposed class members or class representative --
9
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, can you
10
start that over?
11
MR. RIFFEE: Yeah. I apologize. I'm
12
starting to get too fast.
13
BY MR. RIFFEE:
14
Q. Does your methodology consider whether
15
proposed class members or class representatives 04:06:43
16
could have or did borrow or receive gifts from
17
friends or fam- -- friends or family to cover the
18
value of the claim amount or the account balance
19
that they may have been without for a period of
20
time? 04:06:58
21
MS. CHAN: Objection. Compound.
22
THE WITNESS: Yes. This analysis, it does
23
accomplish that. It does consider that there can be
24
an attendant cost of borrowing in that fashion that
25
you just described. And looking at the available 04:07:19
Page 211
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34154
Page 35 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
financial cushions and how consumers would
2
responsible to that particular situation, in my
3
view, this methodology best supported what a typical
4
class member would do. And in my opinion, based
5
upon review of Ms. East's and Mr. Levine's, they -- 04:07:35
6
they reached similar conclusion.
7
BY MR. RIFFEE:
8
Q. Is it your opinion that the attendant
9
costs of an individual who borrows, for example, a
10
thousand dollars from their grandfather to cover 04:07:46
11
their rent during the period when they're without
12
funds, that that -- the cost of that could be
13
measured by a 20 percent interest rate, as you
14
calculate in your report?
15
A. In your hypothetical, the grandfather 04:08:00
16
could have charged an interest rate to that
17
individual. I know if I borrow money from my dad,
18
he charges me interest.
19
So it could very well accomplish that
20
objective. 04:08:11
21
Q. But you don't know if they did; right?
22
A. Again, that's why I didn't base my
23
analysis on the hypothetical implications of an
24
individual situation, but rather looked to the class
25
as a whole and developed an expectation of what the 04:08:23
Page 212
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34155
Page 36 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
reasonable behavior would be.
2
MR. RIFFEE: Let's do Tab 26 as Exhibit 9.
3
THE COURT REPORTER: 26.
4
MR. RIFFEE: Yes, please.
5
(Regan Deposition Exhibit 9 was marked for 04:08:43
6
identification.)
7
MR. RIFFEE: Thank you.
8
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
9
BY MR. RIFFEE:
10
Q. I've marked as Exhibit 9 supplemental 04:08:51
11
interrogatory responses provided by Plaintiff
12
Lindsey McClure.
13
And I assume that you have not reviewed
14
this before either; correct?
15
A. I have not. 04:09:10
Page 213
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34156
Page 37 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
regarding the likely actions of the individuals but
2
for the claim denial or account freeze.
3
Q. If you could turn to Paragraph 51 of your
4
report.
5
You write in the first sentence, "In my 04:33:39
6
opinion, these calculations are reasonable and
7
conservative because the median duration of the
8
claim denial was 87 days. The duration indicates
9
that the impacted cardholders' ability to repay
10
their existing balance would have been constrained 04:33:58
11
during this time."
12
Did you also calculate the median duration
13
of the freeze period for the account freeze class?
14
A. Yes.
15
Q. Do you recall what that was? 04:34:05
16
A. I recall that it was longer. I identify
17
that in the report.
18
Q. It looks like in Paragraph 82 you
19
explained how you did the calculation for an
20
individual cardholder. But you believe in your 04:34:35
21
report it also contains the median number of days
22
that the account freeze proposed class was without
23
funds?
24
A. I use a different statistic in the body of
25
Paragraph 83. 04:34:55
Page 221
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34157
Page 38 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
Q. Okay.
2
A. Indicating 72 percent of the account
3
freeze -- accounts were frozen for more than
4
30 days.
5
Q. Which would mean that 28 percent of the 04:35:09
6
accounts was frozen for less than 30 days?
7
A. Yes. If you give me a second. I want to
8
say I presented this data.
9
Q. Looking at Paragraph 83.
10
So for the 28 percent of EDD accounts that 04:35:45
11
were frozen for less than 20 -- or less than
12
30 days, you still calculated consequential damages
13
for each of those accounts, assuming that they
14
borrowed at a 20 percent interest rate; correct?
15
A. Yes. 04:36:06
16
Q. How long is a typical credit card billing
17
cycle?
18
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, billing
19
cycle?
20
MR. RIFFEE: Billing cycle. 04:36:18
21
THE WITNESS: Approximately 30 days.
22
BY MR. RIFFEE:
23
Q. Okay. And how long does a credit
24
cardholder typically have to pay their bill once
25
it's been issued? 04:36:28
Page 222
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34158
Page 39 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
A. Approximately 10 to 15 days, something
2
like that.
3
Q. You think their credit card payment after
4
a bill is issued -- that they have 10 to 15 days to
5
submit a payment, on average? 04:36:40
6
A. I have to look -- I have to look at the
7
typical term, but I -- somewhere in that order of
8
magnitude. Maybe up -- 20-something days.
9
Q. Would you agree that if a consumer's
10
without access to -- to funds for a week, they may 04:36:54
11
choose to use a credit card as a substitute for
12
their funds, they would be able to make a credit
13
card payment as they ordinarily would when it came
14
due at the end of their billing cycle, once they
15
regained those funds, within a week? 04:37:15
16
MS. CHAN: Objection. Incomplete
17
hypothetical.
18
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, can you say --
19
BY MR. RIFFEE:
20
Q. Yeah. 04:37:33
21
Would you -- from a -- from an economist's
22
perspective, if an individual was without funds for
23
one week and they choose to use a credit card in
24
that one week, not knowing if they were going to get
25
the funds get, then all of a sudden they get the 04:37:44
Page 223
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34159
Page 40 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
funds back a week later, the but-for cause of any
2
interest that they may incur is not -- would not be
3
the fact they didn't have funds for a week, because
4
they would have had the funds in time to pay off
5
that credit card by the time the statement became 04:37:57
6
due?
7
MS. CHAN: Objection. Incomplete
8
hypothetical.
9
THE WITNESS: To the extent that the
10
consumer's balance wasn't revolving, that would 04:38:07
11
be -- that could be the case.
12
But my analysis doesn't assert that a
13
credit card was used in every transaction. It's
14
assuming that the most common form of borrowing was
15
on a credit card, and the cost of borrowing in that 04:38:21
16
situation was 20 percent.
17
BY MR. RIFFEE:
18
Q. Okay. But your analysis does assert that
19
every individual, even if they had -- were without
20
funds in their account for 30 days or less -- 04:38:34
21
without accounts for 2 weeks or less -- or funds in
22
their account for 2 weeks or less, less than a
23
typical credit card billing cycle, that your
24
methodology would calculate the but-for
25
consequential damages to be the 2-week period when 04:38:51
Page 224
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34160
Page 41 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
they were without funds in their account; is that
2
correct?
3
A. Yes, because the consumer was harmed when
4
the bank withheld their funds during that period of
5
time. They might have borrowed on a credit card. 04:39:06
6
They might have reduced consumption or foregone some
7
other element that they did not choose to have to
8
encumber as a result of the harm that was incurred.
9
And I think that Dr. -- Ms. -- Ms. East
10
and Mr. Levine measure harm similarly. They -- they 04:39:20
11
indicate that the cost would be higher in those
12
particular circumstances.
13
So I think that the measurement of harm
14
during that period of time is -- is consistent with
15
doing so at 20 percent. 04:39:33
16
Q. But the methodology that you propose in
17
your report and that you use to calculate
18
consequential damages for each of the classes, other
19
than the customer service class, assumes that each
20
borrowed at a 20 percent interest rate; correct? 04:39:45
21
MS. CHAN: Objection.
22
THE WITNESS: As a way of measuring the
23
harm. There are other ways in which the harm could
24
have been incurred that were even more expensive,
25
based upon my analysis of Ms. -- Ms. East and 04:39:58
Page 225
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34161
Page 42 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
There are other costs incurred that we've
2
discussed. If a consumer had to forego buying
3
groceries for a week or had to delay a medical
4
procedure, there -- there are costs attendant to
5
that, that this measurement can be used to quantify 04:41:59
6
the harm experienced by the consumer. And in that
7
regard, I'm relying upon the analysis of Ms. --
8
Ms. East and Mr. Levine.
9
Q. So you believe that your methodology is
10
also proposing the costs of -- of -- or your 04:42:14
11
consequential damages also calculate medical
12
expenses?
13
MS. CHAN: Objection. Misstates
14
testimony.
15
THE WITNESS: This is a conservative 04:42:20
16
measurement because those other types of instances
17
are associated with greater rates of harm. And so
18
this median credit card rate of interest
19
appropriately captures class-wide damages on an
20
aggregate basis. 04:42:40
21
MR. RIFFEE: All right.
22
Let's mark as Exhibit 10, Tab 13.
23
THE COURT REPORTER: 13?
24
MR. RIFFEE: Yes.
25
(Regan Deposition Exhibit 10 was marked 04:42:54
Page 227
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34162
Page 43 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
purposes of calculating the cost of delayed benefits
2
concentration harm here; right?
3
A. Yes.
4
Q. Sorry. It's hard to read with the green.
5
And then you estimate that approximately 05:06:14
6
56 million of EDD benefits that EDD tried but was
7
unable to deposit to accounts that were frozen based
8
solely on application of its claim fraud filter --
9
that -- that's the total that the bank rejected.
10
And the basis of that is cited in footnote 115; 05:06:31
11
right?
12
A. Yes.
13
Q. Do you know whether that $56 million of
14
benefits payments -- whether that was intended
15
solely for individuals that you've identified for -- 05:06:47
16
to be in the proposed account freeze class, or
17
whether it would be -- it may be broader and include
18
people who are excluded from that class either by
19
the definition or as you've applied the exclusions?
20
A. My recollection is it's broader, though I 05:07:06
21
think I can figure that out.
22
Yes. My recollection is it's broader.
23
Q. Then in Paragraph 84, you say that, "The
24
cost of delayed benefits can be calculated using the
25
common methodology for all account freeze 05:07:37
Page 246
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34163
Page 44 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
members" -- "account freeze class members based on
2
the amount of each class member's biweekly benefit
3
payment and the length of the delayed receipt of
4
their subsequent benefit payments."
5
Did you actually do those calculations in 05:07:49
6
your report?
7
A. I did a calculation of the amounts using
8
the average data available to me. I did not do the
9
specific calculations at the individual level
10
because the data wasn't available to me. 05:08:10
11
Q. And that's data showing each
12
proposed class -- account freeze class member's
13
biweekly payment period; right?
14
A. Yes.
15
Q. Do you believe that Bank of America or EDD 05:08:23
16
have that data?
17
Or do you know if Bank of America and --
18
or EDD have that data?
19
A. It -- it was my understanding that that
20
data is available. I don't know if Bank of America 05:08:36
21
has it as well as EDD, or some combination thereof.
22
And I'm reluctant -- I shouldn't -- can't speculate
23
because I know that I haven't seen the EDD
24
deposition transcript.
25
Q. So sitting here today, you haven't 05:08:52
Page 247
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34164
Page 45 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
received or reviewed data showing each member's
2
biweekly payment period; correct?
3
A. That's correct.
4
Q. You -- do you -- you also don't have data
5
showing the length of the delayed receipt of each 05:09:06
6
proposed account freeze class member's benefits
7
payments; correct?
8
A. That's correct, that I do not have that
9
data.
10
Q. Do you know if EDD or Bank of America has 05:09:18
11
that information available for each of the proposed
12
account freeze class members?
13
A. It -- it's my assumption that that data is
14
available.
15
Q. Okay. Do you -- would you agree that the 05:09:30
16
amount of time between when EDD would have credit --
17
credited a cardholder's account -- prepaid debit
18
card account and when the benefits checks actually
19
reached the cardholder will vary by cardholder?
20
MS. CHAN: Objection. 05:09:59
21
THE WITNESS: Without the data, I don't
22
think I can conclusively answer that question, which
23
is why I'm looking for the data on the length of the
24
delayed receipt.
25
BY MR. RIFFEE: 05:10:16
Page 248
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34165
Page 46 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
Q. How would EDD's data show the amount of
2
time it actually took for the check that was sent by
3
EDD if their benefits were converted to a check --
4
the amount of time between when it was send and when
5
it was actually received by the -- by the 05:10:31
6
cardholder?
7
MS. CHAN: Objection.
8
THE WITNESS: I don't know that EDD's data
9
would have that, but I think that that data could be
10
estimated by the reasonable time of -- in post. 05:10:40
11
BY MR. RIFFEE:
12
Q. Okay. Would you agree that that would
13
vary by cardholder, the amount of time that it would
14
actually take a mailed check to -- to reach them or
15
be accessed by them? 05:10:50
16
MS. CHAN: Objection.
17
THE WITNESS: I think any degree of
18
variability would be minimal and could be
19
appropriately estimated using -- using a median.
20
BY MR. RIFFEE: 05:11:09
21
Q. Do you have any data available to you or
22
have you reviewed any data to assess the median
23
amount of time that it would take for EDD to mail a
24
check to a cardholder and for a cardholder to
25
actually receive that check? 05:11:26
Page 249
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34166
Page 47 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
A. Can -- sorry. Can you repeat that?
2
Q. Sure.
3
Do you cite any data or have you -- in
4
your report or have you considered any data that
5
would allow you to assess the median amount of time 05:11:34
6
that it would take for EDD to mail a check and a
7
cardholder to actually receive that check?
8
A. I believe that data is readily
9
ascertainable.
10
What -- what I have hypothesized here 05:11:52
11
is -- I need to look at the data that is actually
12
available, and it may be the case that the
13
estimation is made based upon the time at which the
14
check was sent by EDD to the consumer impacted by
15
the account freeze. I'd have to look at the data 05:12:12
16
that becomes available.
17
Q. Okay. But, again, sitting here today,
18
you -- you don't have access to that data, so you
19
haven't done the -- the actual calculations; you
20
just have an estimate in your report; correct? 05:12:20
21
A. At this time I'm relying on estimates
22
based upon the bank's data.
23
Q. Your cost of delayed benefits calculations
24
for the account freeze class, it assumes that every
25
single member of the proposed account freeze class 05:12:35
Page 250
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34167
Page 48 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
was continuing to receive or would have continued to
2
receive unemployment benefits during the period when
3
their account was frozen; correct?
4
A. For those that had a delay longer than --
5
than 50 -- 30 days, yes. 05:12:53
6
Q. Did you do anything to verify that all of
7
the proposed account freeze class members were still
8
eligible for and receiving additional EDD benefits
9
payments at the time of or immediately after their
10
account was frozen? 05:13:10
11
A. No. It's absent the data regarding the
12
actual payment activity. It's an assumption.
13
Q. Okay. Would you agree that it's possible
14
some of the proposed account freeze class members
15
were no longer receiving ED- -- ED- -- EDD benefits 05:13:48
16
during -- when their account was frozen perhaps
17
because they became employed and were no longer
18
eligible?
19
A. It is possible.
20
A different way to test for that would be 05:14:02
21
to look at the -- the bank's data regarding the
22
mediation -- remediation plan and its efforts to
23
measure the -- the cost of the delayed benefits on
24
a -- on a claimant basis. But -- but that is an
25
assumption in my analysis, absent receipt of data 05:14:16
Page 251
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34168
Page 49 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
THE WITNESS: Can you clarify what you
2
mean by --
3
BY MR. RIFFEE:
4
Q. Sure.
5
Do you intend to offer a legal opinion in 05:45:29
6
this case as to whether or not any of the -- or
7
disgorgement should be made available to the claim
8
denial class members based on their claims?
9
A. No. My calculations assume that
10
disgorgement is an available remedy. 05:45:46
11
Q. In Paragraph 61, at the end of the
12
paragraph you say, "If the bank had not denied
18
And then you cite in footnote 85
19
Mr. Chestnut's testimony, which you say is described
20
above earlier in your report. 05:46:17
Page 262
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34169
Page 50 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Page 263
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34170
Page 51 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
So your opinion is that Bank of America
2
was earning float revenue on the credits that may
3
have been issued but for the denial of those claims
4
based on the claim fraud filter; right?
5
A. I think I understood your question. 05:50:30
6
Can you say it again?
7
Q. Sure.
8
So your opinion is that Bank of America
9
was earning float revenue on the credits that may
10
have been issued but for the denial of those claims 05:50:43
11
based on the fraud claim filter; is that right?
12
A. That's right.
13
Q. Okay. Would you agree that once those
14
credits were paid to claim denial class members,
15
they became losses to Bank of America? 05:50:53
16
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague.
17
THE WITNESS: Yes, they became a cost to
18
Bank of America.
19
BY MR. RIFFEE:
20
Q. Okay. And does your disgorgement and 05:51:05
21
calculation of the bank's profits consider whether
22
or not the bank's fraud losses would outweigh the
23
float revenue that you believe Bank of America may
24
have accrued prior to accrediting the accounts?
25
A. Maybe I just didn't understand the 05:51:26
Page 266
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34171
Page 52 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
question. I'm sorry to make you repeat it, but --
2
Q. Of course.
3
A. -- if you could.
4
Q. For the purposes of your disgorgement
5
calculations and the profits that you believe Bank 05:51:36
6
of America obtained, do you consider the profits
7
that you calculated relative to the fraud losses
8
that Bank of America incurred once it reimbursed
9
each of the claim denial class members for the --
10
the full value of their claims? 05:51:56
11
A. I do not offset fraud losses. I think I
12
described that the way in which a disgorgement
13
calculation is prepared is, plaintiff identifies the
14
relevant revenue stream, and to the extent there's
15
additional cost to be deducted at that point, those 05:52:12
16
are identified by -- by the bank or by the
17
defendant's expert, and then I make an analysis of
18
that. I have -- I have not seen a quantification of
19
those costs to be deductible.
20
Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether or 05:52:26
21
not the -- the fraud losses or the costs that the
22
bank incurred to recredit, reimburse the proposed
23
claim denial class members should off- -- offset the
24
profits you calculated?
25
MS. CHAN: Objection. Vague. 05:52:43
Page 267
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34172
Page 53 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
THE WITNESS: I'd have to think about
2
that. And I would have anticipated that Mr. Stango
3
would -- would have addressed that particular point.
4
So I can't answer as I sit here.
5
BY MR. RIFFEE: 05:52:57
6
Q. Your calculation of float revenue profits
7
for the claim denial class begins the date the claim
8
was denied; right?
9
A. Yes, based on my understanding of the
10
wrongful conduct being the application of the claim 05:53:09
11
fraud filter.
12
Q. So there's no offset or account for the
13
ten-day period that EFTA or Regulation E would have
14
allowed for Bank of America to issue a provisional
15
credit but for the claim fraud filter; correct? 05:53:27
16
MS. CHAN: Objection.
17
THE WITNESS: That's correct, based upon
18
my assumption regarding the date of the harmful act.
19
BY MR. RIFFEE:
20
Q. All right. 05:53:54
21
If you could turn to Paragraph 72 of your
22
report, where you discuss the disgorgement of
23
profits for the credit rescission class.
24
Is your calculation of the float revenue
25
profits that you attribute to the proposed 05:54:07
Page 268
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34173
Page 54 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
Q. And here you assume -- or, actually,
2
strike that.
3
We discussed earlier and you testified
4
earlier that one of your basis for your assumptions
5
for the cost of delayed benefits payments' 05:55:27
6
consequential damages is that you understand that
7
while the account freeze class members' accounts
8
were frozen, their benefits, to the extent they were
9
still receiving benefits, would've been converted to
10
checks; right? 05:55:46
11
A. Yes.
12
Q. And you agree that while those accounts
13
were frozen, those amounts that were converted to
14
check, they were no longer being deposited by EDD
15
into the prepaid cardholders' debit card accounts; 05:55:58
16
right?
17
A. Yes.
18
Q. Those benefits would have been rejected --
19
at least your understanding is that those benefits
20
would have been rejected; right? 05:56:13
21
A. That's my understanding.
22
Q. So would you agree or you understand that
23
Bank of America was not receiving -- did not receive
24
float revenue on the additional benefits that were
25
rejected and converted to -- to checks? 05:56:25
Page 270
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34174
Page 55 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
A. Yes.
2
Q. Does your disgorgement methodology attempt
3
to account for offset for any additional float
4
revenue that Bank of America would have accrued on
5
additional EDD benefits loads to the proposed 05:56:42
6
account -- freeze class members' accounts had they
7
not been frozen during this time?
8
A. No. I don't think that's a proper way to
9
do it.
10
Q. Why not? 05:56:53
11
A. Because a disgorgement is an accounting
12
for the actual profits that the entity earned during
13
the period of time. And that's conceptual profits
14
related to monies that the bank didn't earn because
15
of its harmful act practice. 05:57:08
16
Q. So it's your view that even though but for
17
the alleged conduct -- if the bank would have earned
18
more in float revenue but for its alleged conduct
19
based on the continued benefits loads, that it's
20
still appropriate to disgorge any profits that it 05:57:27
21
obtained based on the frozen account balances?
22
MS. CHAN: Objection. Assumes facts.
23
THE WITNESS: The methodology to compute
24
disgorgement, again, focuses on actual profits, what
25
was the actual benefit that the defendant obtained 05:57:48
Page 271
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34175
Page 56 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
MR. RIFFEE: Of course.
2
BY MR. RIFFEE:
3
Q. Do you understand that he disputes that
4
Mr. Minnucci's proposed industry-average ASA is an
5
appropriate benchmark for Bank of America's claims 06:09:48
6
call center during the proposed customer service
7
class period?
8
A. That's my recollection.
9
Q. Do you have any reason to dispute Mr.
10
Opinion -- Mr. Hindle's opinion? 06:10:02
11
MS. CHAN: Objection. Beyond scope.
12
THE WITNESS: Mr. Minnucci offered a
13
rebuttal report of the Hindle opinions. Mr. Hindle
14
also mischaracterized a few things on my opening
15
report. So I'm deferring to Mr. Minnucci to address 06:10:17
16
Mr. Hindle's criticisms; and until that's resolved,
17
I'm relying upon Mr. Minnucci.
18
BY MR. RIFFEE:
19
Q. Do you have any independent reason to rely
20
on Mr. Minnucci over Mr. Hindle? 06:10:32
21
MS. CHAN: Objection. Beyond the scope.
22
THE WITNESS: I've been asked to assume
23
that Mr. Minnucci's analysis is reliable.
24
BY MR. RIFFEE:
25
Q. If you go to paragraph 93, you note that 06:10:52
Page 282
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34176
Page 57 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
"these figures can be multiplied by the applicable
2
minimum wage or other reasonable metric to calculate
3
the total value of class members' lost time."
4
Have you proposed or did you -- do you
5
intend to propose another metric, other than the 06:11:14
6
applicable minimum wage, to calculate the total
7
value of proposed customer service class members'
8
lost time?
9
A. I -- I have not proposed an alternative
10
metric. And it's my recollection that Mr. Levine 06:11:29
11
applies -- opines that the minimum wage is an
12
appropriate metric to utilize for purposes of the
13
type of calculation proposed in this section.
14
Q. And you're relying on Mr. Levine for that
15
opinion; is that right? 06:11:51
16
A. I am, and my experience calculating
17
damages, in which I express the opinion that this
18
would be an appropriate methodology to calculate
19
damages.
20
Q. So you do intend in this case to offer an 06:12:04
21
opinion yourself that the minimum wage -- the
22
applicable California minimum wage is an appropriate
23
measure for the lost time of these proposed customer
24
service class period -- class members; is that
25
right? 06:12:23
Page 283
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34177
Page 58 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
A. I don't know what I'm going to be asked to
2
opine on if this matter goes to trial.
3
I would envision that Mr. Levine would
4
talk about the suitability of that rate and I would
5
talk about how to identify and implement that rate. 06:12:36
6
Q. Okay. So -- but sitting here today, and
7
based on the scope of your March 4 report, you have
8
not offered an opinion as to whether you believe the
9
California minimum wage is an appropriate measure
10
for the total value of class members' lost time; 06:12:54
11
you're relying on Mr. Levine for that opinion. Is
12
that right?
13
A. (Witness reviews.)
14
Yes, it's my expectation that I'm going to
15
rely upon Mr. Levine to offer -- offer this 06:13:23
16
testimony.
17
Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether or
18
not wait times for a consumer call center should be
19
recoverable?
20
MS. CHAN: Objection. Ambiguous. 06:13:46
21
Calls for legal --
22
BY MR. RIFFEE:
23
Q. Sure. Let me restate.
24
Do you have an opinion as to whether or
25
not consumers should be able to recover damages 06:13:51
Page 284
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34178
Page 59 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
based solely on wait times for a -- a call center?
2
MS. CHAN: Objection. Calls for legal
3
conclusion.
4
THE WITNESS: I don't have an opinion on
5
that. I think the trier of -- trier of fact will 06:14:03
6
reach its conclusion.
7
BY MR. RIFFEE:
8
Q. Do you agree that actual damages are meant
9
to reflect what would happen in a -- in a but-for
10
world, but for the alleged conduct? 06:14:20
11
A. As a general matter, yes.
12
Q. And as defined, or at least as -- as EDD
13
unemployment benefits recipients, your assumption is
14
that most of the proposed customer service class
15
members were unemployed during the proposed customer 06:14:35
16
service class period between September and November,
17
correct, of 2020?
18
A. That's my understanding.
19
Q. And your other damages methodologies, in
20
particular your cost of delayed benefits for the 06:14:50
21
account freeze class members, assume that they were
22
unemployed during this period; right?
23
A. Yes.
24
Q. And by definition, if they were
25
unemployed, they were not receiving minimum wage or 06:15:02
Page 285
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34179
Page 60 of 62
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
1
any wage during the period when they may have called
2
the bank's customer service call center; correct?
3
A. That's my general understanding.
4
Q. So but for the time they spent on hold, do
5
you have any reason to believe that the proposed 06:15:16
6
class members would have earned minimum wage or some
7
other wage during the period when they were on hold?
8
MS. CHAN: Objection.
9
THE WITNESS: I don't know that that's the
10
sole basis for Mr. Levine's opinion. In fact, I 06:15:30
11
think he is expressing an opinion about the lost
12
value of that time to the consumer and that
13
something more valuable could've been do -- been
14
done than waiting on a phone -- on a hold on a
15
customer service call. 06:15:47
16
BY MR. RIFFEE:
17
Q. Is it your opinion that every person that
18
calls a call center and is put on hold is entitled
19
to damages for the amount of time they're on hold?
20
MS. CHAN: Objection. Hold. 06:15:58
21
THE WITNESS: It depends upon the
22
circumstances of the situation. But I don't -- I'm
23
not aware of data indicating that the impact of
24
consumers wanted to be spending 80 minutes on a
25
call, to recover funds that have been taken from 06:16:07
Page 286
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34180
Page 61 of 62
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
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
I, Hanna Kim, a Certified Shorthand
Reporter, do hereby certify:
That prior to being examined, the witness
in the foregoing proceedings was by me duly sworn to
testify to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth;
That said proceedings were taken before me
at the time and place therein set forth and were
taken down by me in shorthand and thereafter
transcribed into typewriting under my direction and
supervision;
I further certify that I am neither
counsel for, nor related to, any party to said
proceedings, not in anywise interested in the
outcome thereof.
Further, that if the foregoing pertains to
the original transcript of a deposition in a federal
case, before completion of the proceedings, review
of the transcript [X] was [] was not requested.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto
subscribed my name.
Dated:
June 4, 2025.
ft-
Hanna Kim, CLR, CSR No. 13083
Veritext Legal Solutions
Calendar-CA@veritext.com 866-299-5127
Page 322
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 567-10 Filed 10/17/25 PageID.34181
Page 62 of 62File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.casd.709615.567.10.pdf
- Size
- 386,397 bytes
- SHA-256
- ed1355d8406724f38347ed3b41c3d40501973e00746fa92e64eeb9e56b633748
- Original
- PACER (login required)