Court filing
[Redacted] Exhibit 1 — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 159-3, N.D. Cal. No. 3:21-cv-01418)
Filed February 6, 2023 in Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation; one of 127 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2023-02-06 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC · Doc. 159-3 · 2023-02-06 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
EXHIBIT 1
(Redacted)
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 1 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 1
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
2
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
3
-------------------------
CAT BROOKS and RASHEED :
4
SHABAZZ, individually :
and on behalf of all :
5
others similarly situated:
:
6
Plaintiff, :
-vs- :Case No.
7
:3:21-cv-1418-EMC
THOMSON REUTERS :
8
CORPORATION, :
:
9
Defendants. :
-------------------------
10
11
C O N F I D E N T I A L
12
_ _ _
13
OCTOBER 11, 2022
14
_ _ _
15
16
Videotaped deposition of RAN
17
KIVETZ, Ph.D., taken via ZOOM, commencing
18
at 11:09 a.m., on the above date, before
19
Margaret M. Reihl, RPR, CRR, CCR.
20
21
22
GOLKOW LITIGATION SERVICES
877.370.3377 ph | 917.591.5672 fax
23
Deps@golkow.com
24
25
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 2 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 2
1
APPEARANCES:
2
GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP
3
BY: AMY M. ZEMAN, ESQUIRE
ANDRE M. MURA, ESQUIRE
4
EZEKIEL S. WALD, ESQUIRE
1111 Broadway, Suite 2100
5
Oakland, California 94607
(510) 350-9700
6
amz@classlawgroup.com
amm@classlawgroup.com
7
zsw@classlawgroup.com
Representing the Plaintiff
8
9
PERKINS COIE LLP
BY: HAYDEN SCHOTTLAENDER, ESQUIRE
10
500 N. Akard Street, Suite 3300
Dallas, Texas 75201
11
(214) 965-7724
hschottlaender@perkinscoie.com
12
Representing the Defendant
13
ALSO PRESENT:
14
Ingrid Rodriguez, Videographer
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 3 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 26
1
A. That varies over time, has varied
2
over time.
3
Q. What is it currently?
4
A. Currently, the majority of my
5
confidential consulting is in the context of
6
litigation or potential litigation or adversarial
7
proceedings.
8
Q. And how long has that been the
9
case?
10
A. I -- I don't know exactly, but a
11
few years, several years.
12
Q. And that work is all done within
13
Kivetz & Associates, correct?
14
A. Currently, yes.
15
Q. Since 2015; is that accurate?
16
A. I believe so, as far as I recall.
17
Q. What's the annual revenue of Kivetz
18
& Associates?
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 4 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 27
3
Q. What was the revenue on your last
4
tax reporting period?
5
A. I have not yet filed 2021, at least
6
not my personal tax returns. I don't recall the
7
revenues. I just don't recall them now.
8
Q. Do you recall approximately how
9
much the revenue was in your last completed tax
10
reporting?
11
A. I don't recall now. I don't want
12
to guess, and I, again, ask that this be marked
13
confidential. This is confidential financial
14
information that I do not share with anyone except
15
who I am required to by law.
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 5 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 28
6
Q. Do you recall approximately how
7
much the net income was for Kivetz & Associates
8
during the last tax reporting period that was
9
completed?
16
Q. When were you retained in this
17
matter; rather, when was Kivetz & Associates
18
retained in this matter?
19
A. I don't recall exactly. That would
20
be reflected in the engagement letter. I'm trying
21
to recall as best as I can now. That's why I'm
22
pausing. It would have been in 2022, but I cannot
23
recall now.
24
Q. Who approached you to invite you to
25
become involved in this matter?
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 6 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 40
1
Q. Let's cabinet to within, say, the
2
last two years. Does that work for you?
3
MR. SCHOTTLAENDER: Objection,
4
form.
24
Q. Are you being compensated on an
25
hourly basis in this case?
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 7 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 41
1
A. Yes.
2
Q. What is your hourly rate?
3
A. $1,000.
4
Q. How long has that been the case?
5
MR. SCHOTTLAENDER: Objection,
6
form.
7
THE WITNESS: I don't recall, but
8
maybe -- I don't recall, maybe a year,
9
maybe since 2022, it depend -- yeah, it's
10
the best answer -- the best estimate I can
11
give you.
12
BY MS. ZEMAN:
13
Q. Have you submitted invoices for
14
your work in this case?
15
A. Yes.
16
Q. Approximately how much have you
17
invoiced for this case so far?
21
Q. How many invoices have you sent in
22
for this case?
23
A. I don't recall. I'm not sure. My
24
best estimate is maybe a couple, but it might be
25
three. I mean, I just don't recall. My
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 8 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 191
1
their major concerns and the results of that are
2
reported in Figure 4 in my report or Figure 2 of
3
the same NTIA report.
4
Q. So just to be clear, does Figure 4
5
on page 43 then show the results of the single
6
follow-up question?
7
A. My understanding is that, exactly
8
what I said, that the question that the results
9
are shown for in Figure 1, you know, that Dr.
10
Turow chose to cite only that is that 73% -- or
11
just one second, that 73% or nearly three-quarters
12
express major concerns about online privacy and
13
security risks, but there was a follow-up question
14
to understand, what are these -- you know, what
15
are these concerns, what type of online privacy.
16
That could mean different things. In fact, it
17
does mean very different things to different
18
people, and that's what we see in Figure 4.
19
Q. How is the follow-up question,
20
whose data is then depicted in Figure 4, how is
21
the follow-up question phrased?
22
MR. SCHOTTLAENDER: Objection,
23
form.
24
MS. ZEMAN: I'll clarify on the
25
basis of the objection.
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 9 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 194
1
A. When I analyzed Dr. Turow's
2
reliance on this report and what I think is his
3
inaccurate representation or actually just wrong,
4
diametrically opposed representation to what the
5
survey actually does show when I analyze that and
6
when I wrote multiple pages in my report about
7
that, I had this NTIA survey article in front of
8
me, and I knew everything that I could know about
9
it Dr. Turow put it into the evidence and relied
10
on it, and I knew as much as I can.
11
It was not a memory test when I
12
evaluated Dr. Turow's reliance on this document.
13
It was not a memory test when I analyzed this
14
document and relied on it in the way I am relying
15
on it in my report, and now you are, with all due
16
respect, asking me for a memory test, and I've
17
already testified several times that if you just
18
give me this report, I will be able to answer
19
definitively these questions.
20
Q. As you sit here right now, do you
21
know whether the survey defined each of those
22
terms that show up on Figure 4?
23
A. Sorry, I thought I just answered
24
this exact question, but maybe it's getting late
25
in the day.
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 10 of 11
Confidential - Ran Kivetz, Ph.D.
Golkow Litigation Services
Page 249
1
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
2
I, MARGARET M. REIHL, a
3
Registered Professional Reporter,
4
Certified Realtime Reporter, Certified
5
Court Reporter, Certified LiveNote
6
Reporter, do hereby certify that the
7
foregoing is a true and accurate
8
transcript of the testimony as taken
9
stenographically, by and before me,
10
remotely, via Zoom, to the best of my
11
ability, and on the date hereinbefore set
12
forth.
13
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am
14
neither a relative nor employee nor
15
attorney nor counsel of any of the parties
16
to this action, and that I am neither a
17
relative nor employee of such attorney or
18
counsel, and that I am not financially
19
interested in the action.
20
21
22
-------------------------------------------------
Margaret M. Reihl, RPR, CRR, CLR
23
CCR License #XI01497
NCRA License #047425
24
25
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 159-3 Filed 02/06/23 Page 11 of 11File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cand.374304.159.3.pdf
- Size
- 272,822 bytes
- SHA-256
- 5e380a691937d2dd9c47c18ea4868bc39aea88690d6bc0516f5bd151a94e0ffb
- Original
- PACER (login required)