Motion to Request the Court to Consider Plaintiffs Daubert Motion — In re BofA Unemployment Litigation (Dkt. 607)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 607 · 2026-01-07 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

PLS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONSIDER DAUBERT CHALLENGE; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-
GPC-MSB 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (SBN 36324) 
jcotchett@cpmlegal.com 
BRIAN DANITZ (SBN 247403) 
bdanitz@cpmlegal.com 
KARIN B. SWOPE (Pro Hac Vice) 
kswope@cpmlegal.com 
VASTI S. MONTIEL (SBN 346409) 
vmontiel@cpmlegal.com 
CAROLINE A. YUEN (SBN 354388) 
cyuen@cpmlegal.com 
COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP 
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 
Burlingame, CA 94010 
Telephone: (650) 697-6000 
Fax: (650) 697-0577 
MICHAEL RUBIN (SBN 80618) 
mrubin@altber.com 
STACEY M. LEYTON (SBN 203827) 
sleyton@altber.com 
CONNIE K. CHAN (SBN 284230) 
cchan@altber.com 
JAMES BALTZER (SBN 332232) 
jbaltzer@altber.com 
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP 
177 Post Street, Suite 300 
San Francisco, CA 94108 
Telephone: (415) 421-7151 
Fax: (415) 362-8064 
Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class  
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
IN RE BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
 
PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION 
TO REQUEST THE COURT TO 
CONSIDER PLAINTIFFS’ DAUBERT 
MOTION TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN 
OPINIONS OF VICTOR STANGO IN 
CONNECTION WITH DEFENDANT’S 
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION 
 
Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 
Ctrm:  2D (2nd Floor) 
 
 
This Document Relates to All Actions 
 
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 607     Filed 01/07/26     PageID.43277     Page
1 of 4

 
Pls.’ Unopposed Motion to Consider Daubert Challenge; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
1 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
On October 17, 2025, pursuant to this Court’s previous general scheduling orders, 
Plaintiffs filed Daubert motions to exclude certain testimony of Victor Stango (ECF 571) 
and Carl Pry (ECF 574). On December 9, 2025, this Court denied those Daubert motions 
“without prejudice,” on the ground that they did “not appear to be related to the pending 
motion for partial summary judgment.” ECF 597.  
Plaintiffs maintain that their Daubert motion to exclude certain testimony of Stango 
(ECF 571) directly relates to Defendant’s pending motion for partial summary judgment 
(which was filed the same day as Plaintiffs’ Daubert motions and was therefore not 
referenced in Plaintiffs’ motion). The Bank’s summary judgment brief and its Separate 
Statement of Undisputed Material Facts both rely on Stango’s opinion that, “as a matter of 
economic fact,” the payments the Bank made to class members eliminated any actual and 
EFTA treble damages that might otherwise be available to those class members. Bank SJ 
Mot. at 17; see also SUF ¶173. That is the same opinion that Plaintiffs sought to exclude 
in their Daubert motion on the ground that it impermissibly offers a legal conclusion 
beyond the scope of Stango’s purported economic expertise, ECF 571 at 1-8, and because 
it is not supported by the sources upon which Stango relies, ECF 571 at 1, 8-9. The Bank 
disagrees with those assertions. 
Given the Bank’s reliance on Stango’s opinion in its pending motion for partial 
summary judgment within the meaning of the Court’s Local Rule, Plaintiffs request that 
the Court reconsider its order denying Plaintiffs’ Daubert motion to exclude certain 
testimony of Stango (ECF 571) without prejudice, and allow the motion to be noticed for 
and considered at the currently scheduled April 17, 2026 motions hearing.  
Plaintiffs and Defendant have conferred and Defendant does not oppose Plaintiffs’ 
request. If Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion is granted, the parties have conferred and propose 
that Defendant be given until February 5, 2026 to submit any opposition to Plaintiffs’ 
Daubert motion to exclude certain testimony of Stango (ECF 571), and that Plaintiffs be 
given until February 20, 2026 to submit any reply.  
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 607     Filed 01/07/26     PageID.43278     Page
2 of 4

 
Pls.’ Unopposed Motion to Consider Daubert Challenge; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
2 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Respectfully submitted, 
Dated:  January 7, 2025  
 
COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP 
 
By:  /s/ Brian Danitz 
 
 
JOSEPH W. COTCHETT  
BRIAN DANITZ  
KARIN B. SWOPE  
VASTI S. MONTIEL 
CAROLINE A. YUEN 
 
Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class  
 
 
Dated:  January 7, 2025  
 
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP 
 
By:  /s/ Michael Rubin  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
MICHAEL RUBIN  
STACEY M. LEYTON  
CONNIE K. CHAN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JAMES BALTZER 
 
Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class  
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 607     Filed 01/07/26     PageID.43279     Page
3 of 4

 
Pls.’ Unopposed Motion to Consider Daubert Challenge; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
3 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION 
Pursuant to section 2(f)(4) of the Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and 
Procedures Manual, I, Michael Rubin, attest that the other signatories listed, and on whose 
behalf this filing is submitted, concur in the filing content and have authorized this filing. 
 
Dated: January 7, 2026  
 
/s/ Michael Rubin  
 
      Michael Rubin 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 607     Filed 01/07/26     PageID.43280     Page
4 of 4

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.607.0.pdf

Size

130,645 bytes

SHA-256

05f2fd510fb68b04ec76496b84f63096c4fe8888a4086b2b0001673be966e91a

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.607.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)