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 14L — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-45, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)

Court filing

14L — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-45, 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. 591-45 · 2025-10-17 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

DX 14.L
REDACTED VERSION OF 
DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO 
BE SEALED PURSUANT TO 
STIPULATED 
PROTECTIVE ORDER 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41790 
Page 1 of 15

www.aptusCR.com I 866.999.8310 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41791 
Page 2 of 15
Videotaped Deposition of
Anne Holt
January 08, 2025
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation

·1· · · · · · · UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
·2· · · · · · ·SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
·3
·4· ·IN RE BANK OF AMERICA· · · · · · ·Case No.
·5· ·CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT· · · · · ·3:21-md-02292
·6· ·BENEFITS LITIGATION· · · · · · · ·-GPC-MSB
·7· ·____________________________________/
·8
·9
10
11
12· · · · · ·VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF ANNE HOLT
13· · · · · · · · Charlotte, North Carolina
14· · · · · · · · · · ·January 8, 2025
15· · · · · · · · · · · · 10:07 a.m.
16
17
18
19
20· ·Reported by:· Karen K. Kidwell, RMR, CRR
21· ·Job Number:· 10155338
22
23
24
25
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41792 
Page 3 of 15
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Page 1

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41793 
Page 4 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41794 
Page 5 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41795 
Page 6 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41796 
Page 7 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41797 
Page 8 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41798 
Page 9 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41799 
Page 10 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41800 
Page 11 of 15

Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41801 
Page 12 of 15

·1· ·back and forth commenting on what's happening on the
·2· ·call, right?
·3· · · · ·A.· ·It looks like we're on a call, yeah.
·4· · · · ·Q.· ·And the third line down, you say, "this
·5· ·claims 'filter' isn't 100 percent, i don't see why we
·6· ·can't just say we suspect fraud, State said no."
·7· · · · · · · Do you see that?
·8· · · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · · ·Q.· ·So the claims falter -- the claims filter
10· ·was not 100 percent, correct?
11· · · · ·A.· ·No fraud strategy is 100 percent.
12· · · · ·Q.· ·So the claims filter was not 100 percent,
13· ·correct?
14· · · · ·A.· ·Correct.
15· · · · ·Q.· ·And you knew that before September 28th,
16· ·correct?
17· · · · ·A.· ·Definitely.
18· · · · ·Q.· ·GFC knew that before September 28th?
19· · · · ·A.· ·Definitely, which is why there were
20· ·controls put in place, to recourse.
21· · · · ·Q.· ·Was there anyone who worked on the project
22· ·that you were aware of who did not know that?
23· · · · ·A.· ·No.
24· · · · ·Q.· ·The claims filter flagged accounts that
25· ·GFC felt were suspicious, correct?
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41802 
Page 13 of 15
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Page 274
YVer1f

·1· · · · ·Q.· ·Can you turn to page -- or to Exhibit 286,
·2· ·please?
·3· · · · ·A.· ·Got it.
·4· · · · ·Q.· ·Earlier counsel asked whether you had just
·5· ·started working on this particular logic at the time
·6· ·that this slide was being sort of shared back and
·7· ·forth over a weekend.· Do you remember that?
·8· · · · ·A.· ·Yes.
·9· · · · ·Q.· ·Was that weekend the first time that you
10· ·started to work on logic for claims filtering?
11· · · · ·A.· ·No.
12· · · · ·Q.· ·How long had you been working on it?
13· · · · ·A.· ·We -- from the e-mail, which I believe was
14· ·early September, when we had evidence that
15· ·individuals were card-cracking or double-dipping.
16· · · · ·Q.· ·You said that this -- this particular
17· ·slide or some version of it -- I don't want to
18· ·mischaracterize what you said -- was presented in a
19· ·meeting.· Do you know that for sure?
20· · · · ·A.· ·I believe it was.· When you say this
21· ·version or another version, that kind of trips me up
22· ·a little bit.
23· · · · ·Q.· ·So you don't know whether there was a
24· ·version of this -- which version might have been
25· ·presented at a meeting?
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41803 
Page 14 of 15
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Page 293
YVer1f

·1· ·STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
·2· ·COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG
·3
·4· · · · · · · I, Karen K. Kidwell, RMR, CRR, in and for
·5· ·the State of North Carolina, do hereby certify that
·6· ·there came before me on Wednesday, January 8, 2025, the
·7· ·person hereinbefore named, who was by me duly sworn to
·8· ·testify to the truth and nothing but the truth of her
·9· ·knowledge concerning the matters in controversy in this
10· ·cause; that the witness was thereupon examined under
11· ·oath, the examination reduced to typewriting under my
12· ·direction, and the deposition is a true record of the
13· ·testimony given by the witness.
14· · · · · · · I further certify that I am neither attorney
15· ·or counsel for, nor related to or employed by, any
16· ·attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto or
17· ·financially interested in the action.
18· · · · · · · This the 19th day of January, 2025.
19
20
21· · · · · · · · · · · · ______________________________
· · · · · · · · · · · · · Karen K. Kidwell, RMR, CRR
22· · · · · · · · · · · · Notary Public #19971050142
23
24
25
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 591-45     Filed 10/17/25     PageID.41804 
Page 15 of 15
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Anne Holt
In Re Bank of America CA Unemployment Benefits Litigation
www.aptusCR.com
Page 298

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.591.45.pdf
Size
154,279 bytes
SHA-256
3ecd85124b28ff24aa429b39eadb720fa98ee1a3c5e49ddf82129ea656ad3a38
Our copy
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.591.45.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
  1. 14K — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-44, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  2. 14N — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-47, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  3. 14O — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-48, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  4. 14O1 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-49, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  5. 14P — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-50, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  6. 14F — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-39, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  7. 14Q — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-51, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  8. 14R — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-52, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  9. 14D — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-37, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  10. 14R1 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-53, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  11. 14C2 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-36, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  12. 14S — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-54, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  13. 14C1 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-35, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  14. 14C — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-34, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  15. 14U1 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-57, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  16. 14AG — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-32, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same case · 2025-10-17
  17. 14AF — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-31, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  18. 14Y — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-61, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  19. 14Z — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-62, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17
  20. 14AD — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 591-29, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)same docket · 2025-10-17

Part of: In re: Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation — S.D. Cal., No. 21-md-02992 · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · Pandemic unemployment insurance · Lender and platform litigation · 2025 · Court filings

Back to top