Exhibit 6: Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel — In re January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation (Dkt. 559-8, S.D. Fla.)
Summary
Exhibit 6 (Document 559-8) in In re January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation, Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the FLSD docket April 28, 2023: a 98-page Report of Daniel R. Fischel dated February 16, 2023. Fischel, President of Compass Lexecon and the Lee and Brena Freeman Professor of Law and Business Emeritus at The University of Chicago Law School, describes Robinhood Markets, Inc. as an online trading platform founded in 2013 whose primary revenue is payment for order flow. The report's final exhibit measures intra-day price changes in the Affected Stocks from the first tightening of purchase restrictions on January 29, 2021 to 8:00 PM that day and states that three of the Affected Stocks increased in price, contrary to what Plaintiffs allege.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Date
- 2023-04-28
Cite this document
“Exhibit 6: Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel (Dkt. 559-8).”
Original at archive.org, dated 2023-04-28. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2023-04-28-covid-era-misc-015749f3-1/
, SHA-256 015749f3c6ed6eca631554b82559a10707f5109a27da0e6e855dc7d40bd440bd.Full text
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 1 of 98
EXHIBIT 6
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 2 of 98
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 21-2989-MDL-ALTONAGA/Damian
In re: JANUARY 2021 SHORT SQUEEZE
TRADING LITIGATION
REPORT OF DANIEL R. FISCHEL
FEBRUARY 16, 2023
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 3 of 98
I. QUALIFICATIONS
1. I am President of Compass Lexecon, a consulting firm that specializes in the
application of economics to a variety of legal and regulatory issues. I am also the Lee and Brena
Freeman Professor of Law and Business Emeritus at The University of Chicago Law School. I
served previously as Dean of The University of Chicago Law School, Director of the Law and
Economics Program at The University of Chicago, and as Professor of Law and Business at The
University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, the Kellogg School of Management at
Northwestern University, and at the Northwestern University Law School.
2. Both my research and my teaching have concerned the economics of
corporate law and financial markets. I have published approximately fifty articles in leading legal
and economics journals and am coauthor, with Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit Court
of Appeals, of the book The Economic Structure of Corporate Law (Harvard University Press,
1991). Courts of all levels, including the Supreme Court of the United States, have cited my articles
as authoritative. My curriculum vitae, which contains a list of my publications, is attached hereto as
Appendix A.
3. I have served as a consultant or advisor on economic issues to, among others,
the United States Department of Justice, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”), the National Association of Securities Dealers, the New York Stock Exchange, the
Chicago Board of Trade, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange,
the New York Mercantile Exchange, the United States Department of Labor, the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, the Resolution Trust Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and
the Federal Trade Commission.
1
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 4 of 98
4. I am a member of the American Economic Association and the American
Finance Association. I am also a former Trustee of the Becker Friedman Institute at the University
of Chicago. I am a former Advisor to the Corporate Governance Project at Harvard University, a
former member of the Board of Directors of the Center for the Study of the Economy and the State
at The University of Chicago, and former Chairman of the American Association of Law Schools’
Section on Law and Economics. I have testified as an expert witness in proceedings in federal and
state courts across the country.
5. I have been assisted by Compass Lexecon’s professional staff. Appendix B
lists materials that I have considered in forming my opinions in this matter.1 My analyses and
opinions are based solely on the work performed by me and those under my direction. Compass
Lexecon bills my time at a rate of $1,750 per hour. My compensation is not contingent on the
outcome of this case.
II. BACKGROUND, ASSIGNMENT AND SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
6. Robinhood Markets, Inc. (“Robinhood”) is an online trading platform founded
in 2013.2 Robinhood offers brokerage services through Robinhood Financial LLC, the customer-
facing introducing broker, and clearing services through Robinhood Securities, LLC, both of which
are registered broker dealers. Robinhood’s trading platform allows customers to “invest
commission-free in U.S.-listed stocks and exchange traded funds (‘ETFs’), as well as related options
and American Depository Receipts—all from their smartphones.”3 In addition to its trading
platform, Robinhood offers additional products and services including a premium subscription
1. I reserve the right to update my analyses and conclusions if additional information is made
available to me.
2. Robinhood Markets, Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021,
(“Robinhood 2021 10-K”), at 5.
3. Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 6.
2
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 5 of 98
service that provides additional features such as professional research and access to investing on
margin.4 The margin investing feature allows customers to borrow money from Robinhood and use
the funds to purchase securities.5
7. Robinhood’s primary source of revenue is “transaction-based” revenue, which
refers to “amounts earned from routing customer orders…to market makers.”6 Robinhood further
explains that “[w]hen customers place orders for options, cryptocurrencies, or equities on our
platform, we route these orders to market makers and we receive consideration from those market
makers. With respect to equities and options trading, such fees are known as payment for order flow
(‘PFOF’) …”7 In addition to transaction-based revenues, Robinhood earns net interest revenues and
other revenues, which include premium subscription fees, among other things.8
8. At the beginning of January 2021, certain stocks began experiencing large
increases in prices and volatility that many market participants acknowledged were unrelated to
news about the companies’ performance and future outlook.9 Many of these stocks were being
prominently discussed by individual investors on social media platforms such as the Reddit online
forum WallStreetBets.10 Given the widespread media attention and discussion on social media,
4. Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 7.
5. Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 7-8.
6. Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 70.
7. Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 70.
8. Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 70-71. In 2021, Robinhood generated $1.8 billion in revenue,
$1.4 billion of which was transaction-based revenue. See Robinhood 2021 10-K, at 73.
9. See Section III for a discussion of market commentary regarding the price increases for the
stocks at issue in this case. These stocks are a subset of the stocks that experienced price
increases in January 2021.
10. See, e.g., “Not Just GameStop: Here Are The Meme Stocks WallStreetBets Traders Are
Pumping Up During This ‘Extremely Erratic’ Reddit Rally,” Forbes.com, January 27,
2021.
3
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 6 of 98
these stocks became known as “meme stocks.”11 Commentators on such forums noted that many of
the stocks were being heavily sold short12 by large institutional investors and viewed the large short
positions as an opportunity to generate a buying frenzy in the stocks and thus create a “short
squeeze.”13 A “short squeeze” occurs when the price of a heavily shorted stock increases, forcing
short sellers who are betting that the stock price will decline to “cover” their short positions by
buying the stock, causing the stock price to rise further.
9. By mid- to late- January 2021, the prices for many of the “meme stocks”
experienced unprecedented increases in prices and volatility, reaching levels that were dramatically
higher than their prices before the run-up. For example, the price of GameStop Corp. (“GameStop”
or “GME”), perhaps the most widely discussed “meme stock,” increased from its opening price of
$19.00 on January 4, 2021, to as high as $380.00 on January 27, 2021, an increase of approximately
1,900 percent.14 Another widely discussed “meme stock” was AMC Entertainment (“AMC”),
whose price increased from its opening price of $2.01 on January 4, 2021 to as high as $20.36 on
January 27, 2021, an increase of approximately 825 percent.15
11. “Not Just GameStop: Here Are The Meme Stocks WallStreetBets Traders Are Pumping Up
During This ‘Extremely Erratic’ Reddit Rally,” Forbes.com, January 27, 2021.
12. A short sale “allows investors to profit from a decline in a security’s price.” In a short sale
transaction “[a]n investor borrows a share of stock from a broker and sells it. Later, the
short-seller must purchase a share of the same stock in order to replace the share that was
borrowed…The short-seller anticipates the stock price will fall, so that the share can be
purchased later at a lower price than it initially sold for; if so, the short-seller will reap a
profit.” Z. Bodie, A. Kane, and A.J. Marcus, Investments, Ninth Edition (McGraw-
Hill/Irwin, 2011), at 79-80.
13. “WallStreetBets Reddit Group: What Is It?” CoinDesk.com, January 28, 2021.
14. Bloomberg L.P. See also Exhibit 1.
15. Bloomberg L.P. See also Exhibit 1.
4
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 7 of 98
10. In response to the large increases in volatility and prices, several brokerages
implemented various risk mitigation measures, including trading restrictions on certain “meme
stocks” in late January 2021. The New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) and National Association
of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations (“NASDAQ”) stock exchange also halted trading for
some of the “meme stocks” due to high volatility at various times during the trading day on January
27 and January 28, 2021.16
11. On January 27, 2021, Interactive Brokers, a brokerage firm providing direct-
access trade execution and clearing services to retail investors and institutions,17 placed restrictions
on options trading in AMC, BlackBerry, Express, GameStop, and Koss.18 On the same date,
Robinhood and Charles Schwab, another brokerage firm that, among other services, provides trading
platforms to manage and trade retail investments,19 announced restrictions related to margin trading
16. For example, the NYSE halted trading in GME three times for a total of 15 minutes on
January 27, 2021 and 19 times on January 28, 2021 for a total of over 92 minutes. Trading
in AMC was halted six times for a total of over 31 minutes on January 27, 2021 and 13
times on January 28, 2021 for a total of approximately 66 minutes. See Regulatory Halts,
available at https://www.nyse.com/trade-halt-historical (last accessed February 16, 2023).
See also e.g., “*AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. CI A (AMC) Halted due to volatility,”
Dow Jones Newswires, January 27, 2021; “*AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. CI A
(AMC) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021; “*GameStop
Corp. Cl A (GME) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 27, 2021;
“*GameStop Corp. Cl A (GME) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones Newswires, January
28, 2021; “*Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (BBBY) Paused due to volatility,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 27, 2021.
17. About the Interactive Brokers Group, available at
https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/general/about/about.php (last accessed February
16, 2023).
18. “Robinhood Blocks Buying in GameStop, AMC, and Others Stocks. Other Brokers Also
Add Guardrails. -- Barrons.com,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 09:34 AM,
stating that (“as of midday on Wednesday [January 27, 2021] Interactive Brokers (IBKR)
put AMC, BlackBerry, Express (EXPR), GameStop, and Koss (KOSS) option trading into
liquidation ‘due to the extraordinary volatility in the markets’…”).
19. Ways to invest with us, available at https://www.schwab.com/invest-with-us (last accessed
February 16, 2023).
5
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 8 of 98
in AMC and GameStop.20 TD Ameritrade, a brokerage firm that was acquired by Charles Schwab
but continued to provide its own trading platform,21 also placed restrictions on GameStop and other
securities, but did not disclose exactly what the restrictions were, stating that it was taking “actions
like increasing margin requirements, or limiting certain types of transactions, like short sales and
those that may involve unlimited risk.”22 Throughout January 27, 2021, Robinhood also reduced
position limits for option contracts for stocks such as GameStop, AMC, Express (“EXPR”), and
Tootsie Roll (“TR”) and late in the day on January 27, 2021, implemented “Position Closing Only”
or “PCO” restrictions for GameStop and AMC options contracts expiring on January 29, 2021.23
This meant that holders of options in those stocks that expired on January 29, 2021 could only sell
their options.24 In the evening of January 27, 2021 on the West Coast, Robinhood imposed $10,000
equity position limits for AMC, Blackberry (“BB”), EXPR, GME, Koss (“KOSS”), and Nokia
(“NOK”).25
12. In the early morning of January 28, 2021, Robinhood received a notice from
the NSCC that Robinhood was required to place $3 billion on deposit with the NSCC to “secure
20. “Trading platforms are limiting trades of GameStop and other companies,” The New York
Times, January 27, 2021, 06:00 PM.
21. TD Ameritrade accounts are moving to Schwab, available at
https://www.tdameritrade.com/why-td-ameritrade/td-ameritrade-charles-schwab.html (last
accessed February 16, 2023).
22. “Ameritrade restricts trading in GameStop, AMC as trading platforms struggle to keep up
with historic volume (GME, AMC),” Business Insider, January 27, 2021, 12:48 PM;
“Robinhood Blocks Buying in GameStop, AMC, and Others Stocks. Other Brokers Also
Add Guardrails. -- Barrons.com,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 09:34 AM.
23. RHMDL00047970.
24. Order, In re: January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation, United States District Court
Southern District of Florida, Case No. 21-2989-MDL-ALTONAGA/Damian, Motion to
Dismiss, August 10, 2022, (“MTD Order”), at 7.
25. RHMDL00047970. The source document shows this event as occurring at 1:34 AM on
January 28, 2021, East Coast time, or 10:34 PM on January 27, 2021, West Coast time.
6
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 9 of 98
completion of unsettled trades in its customers’ accounts.”26 In response to the NSCC’s deposit
requirement, before the markets opened on January 28, 2021, Robinhood implemented equities PCO
restrictions (which meant Robinhood’s customers could sell, but could not purchase stocks) on
AMC, BB, Bed Bath & Beyond (“BBBY”), EXPR, GME, KOSS, NOK, and trivago (“TRVG”).27
13. Plaintiffs allege that placing these securities on PCO status would “limit
customer purchases for certain volatile stocks that had driven the increased deposit requirements.”28
Plaintiffs further allege that “[o]nly because of [Robinhood’s] decision to halt stock purchases in
eight issuers” the NSCC waived $2.2 billion of charges and thus Robinhood was able to meet its
deposit requirements with only an additional $700 million.29
14. Later on January 28, 2021, Robinhood’s CEO Vladimir Tenev appeared on
multiple news outlets to discuss Robinhood’s decision to implement the trading restrictions. He
explained that Robinhood did not put the restrictions in place “at the direction of any market maker
or hedge fund…” but instead “to protect the firm and protect our customers…” due to the various
regulatory capital requirements at play on January 28, 2021.30 Tenev further stated that “[t]here was
26. Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, In re: January 2021 Short Squeeze
Trading Litigation, United States District Court Southern District of Florida, Case No. 21-
2989-MDL-ALTONAGA/Damian, January 17, 2023 (“Complaint”), ¶ 58.
27. RHMDL00047970. The Tootsie Roll PCO restriction was imposed after the markets
opened on January 28, 2021. Robinhood also placed PCO restrictions for option contracts
for AMC, BB, BBBY, EXPR, GME, NOK, TR, and TRVG. The option contracts PCO
restriction for TR and TRVG was placed after the market opened.
28. Complaint, ¶¶ 59-60.
29. Complaint, ¶ 60.
30. “Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev speaks out on decision to restrict trading on GameStop and
other stocks,” CNBC, January 28, 2021 available at
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/01/28/robinhood-ceo-vlad-tenev-on-decision-to-restrict-
trading-on-gamestop.html (last accessed February 16, 2023); see also Complaint, ¶¶ 77-78.
7
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 10 of
98
no liquidity problem” at Robinhood and that the restrictions were “done pre-emptively…[a]nd we’re
doing what we can to allow buying and to remove these restrictions in the morning.”31
15. After the market closed on January 28, 2021, Robinhood removed its PCO
restrictions and placed purchase limits on stocks and options of AMC, BlackBerry, Bed Bath and
Beyond, Express, GME, Koss, Nokia, Tootsie Roll, and trivago.32 The purchase limits meant that
Robinhood account holders could once again purchase shares of these stocks as long as the total
number of shares they held with Robinhood was below the limit. In the afternoon of January 29,
2021, Robinhood tightened these purchase limits for certain stocks.33 For example, after the market
closed on January 28, 2021, Robinhood implemented purchase limits on GME and AMC of 5 and
115 shares, respectively.34 By the end of the day on January 29, 2021, Robinhood had tightened the
purchase limits on GME and AMC to 1 share.35 In the following days, Robinhood relaxed the
purchase limits again (for example, on February 1, 2021 Robinhood relaxed the purchase limits to
350 shares for AMC and 20 shares for GME).36 By the end of the day on February 2, 2021,
purchase limits had been lifted on all stocks except AMC and GME. All purchase limits were
removed by the end of the day on February 4, 2021.37
31. “Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev speaks out on decision to restrict trading on GameStop and
other stocks,” CNBC, January 28, 2021 available at
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/01/28/robinhood-ceo-vlad-tenev-on-decision-to-restrict-
trading-on-gamestop.html (last accessed February 16, 2023); see also Complaint, ¶ 79.
32. RHMDL00047970.
33. RHMDL00047970.
34. RHMDL00047970.
35. RHMDL00047970. See also, Complaint, ¶¶ 84-86.
36. RHMDL00047970.
37. RHMDL00047970. See also, Complaint, ¶¶ 107, 112, 117, and 121.
8
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 11 of
98
16. Plaintiffs’ allegations relate to nine stocks: AMC Entertainment Holdings
(“AMC”), Inc., Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (“BBBY”), BlackBerry Ltd. (“BB”), Express Inc.
(“EXPR”), GameStop Corp. (“GME”), Koss Corp. (“KOSS”), Tootsie Roll Industries Inc. (“TR”),
and American Depositary Shares (“ADR”) of foreign issuers Nokia Corp. (“NOK”) and trivago N.V.
(“TRVG”) (the “Affected Stocks”).38 Plaintiffs seek to certify a class of “persons or entities” who
held the Affected Stocks “as of the close of trading on January 27, 2021, and sold such shares at a
loss between January 28, 2021, and February 4, 2021 (the “Class”).”39
17. Plaintiffs make a series of allegations under sections 9(a) and 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act. In particular, Plaintiffs allege that Robinhood’s implementation of various
trading restrictions in the Affected Stocks between January 28, 2021 and February 4, 2021 (the
“Class Period”), “distorted” the market prices of the Affected Stocks because of Robinhood’s
“domination of the online retail brokerage industry.”40 Plaintiffs further allege that “[w]ith
[Robinhood’s] brazen behavior—picking and choosing over six trading sessions not only which
stocks its customers could purchase but also the total amount of shares in a particular issuer a
customer could hold—Robinhood thumbed its nose at the bedrock principle of our free-market
economy: the price of the stock is set by the law of supply and demand, unfettered by external
controls.”41 Plaintiffs additionally allege that by “completely shutting down, initially, and later
restricting, the demand side of the equation for the nine Affected Stocks…for days rather than just
minutes, Robinhood unlawfully manipulated market prices for the Affected Stocks.”42 Plaintiffs
38. Complaint, ¶ 1.
39. Complaint, ¶ 1.
40. Complaint, ¶¶ 4-5.
41. Complaint, ¶ 6.
42. Complaint, ¶ 7.
9
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 12 of
98
further allege that Tenev’s statements during the Class Period, namely that Robinhood did not
implement its restrictions at the behest of any hedge funds and that Robinhood was not facing a
liquidity crisis, harmed Plaintiffs because they “caused retail investors to reach their own
conclusions [regarding the reasons for the restrictions], exacerbating the market volatility.”43
18. I have been retained by Cravath, Swaine & Moore, counsel for the
Defendants, to assess Plaintiffs’ allegations regarding alleged market manipulation by Robinhood
and to assess whether damages, if any, can be reliably determined on a class-wide basis without
resort to individualized proof.
19. Based on a review of the materials listed in Appendix B and my analysis, I
have reached the following principal conclusions:
Plaintiffs cannot establish that potential Class Members relied on the integrity
of the market prices on a class-wide basis.
Plaintiffs cannot provide a common methodology to calculate damages if any.
20. I elaborate upon and provide the bases for my conclusions in the remainder of
this report.
III. PLAINTIFFS CANNOT ESTABLISH THAT POTENTIAL CLASS MEMBERS
RELIED ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE MARKET PRICES ON A CLASS-WIDE
BASIS
21. As demonstrated below, the extreme price movements and unprecedented
volatility of the Affected Stocks in the pre-Class Period44 were unrelated to company-specific value-
relevant information as, for example, can occur in a short squeeze. This was widely recognized at
the time in the practitioner literature and by market analysts. Moreover, as recognized in the
43. Complaint, ¶¶ 67-68, 77.
44. For the purposes of illustrating trading in the Affected Stocks prior to the Class Period, I
define a pre-Class Period from January 4, 2021 (the first trading day of 2021) through
January 27, 2021.
10
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 13 of
98
economic literature, the artificial prices, that, for example, can occur as a result of a short squeeze,
are by definition necessarily temporary. This has important implications for determining whether
potential Class Members relied on the integrity of the market price in an efficient market on a
class-wide basis.
22. In my experience, plaintiffs in securities fraud class actions can avoid having
to demonstrate actual reliance on the alleged false or misleading statements or other alleged
misconduct on an individualized basis if they can invoke a presumption that they made their
investment decisions by relying on the integrity of the market price in an efficient market. In this
case, however, some, perhaps many potential Class Members in all likelihood made their investment
decisions based on a belief of an inefficient market for reasons unrelated to – and often contrary to –
a belief in the integrity of the market price as reflecting the true value of the Affected Stocks. This
reality makes it impossible for Plaintiffs to demonstrate that potential Class Members are entitled to
the presumption that they relied on the integrity of the market price on a class-wide basis. Whether
potential Class Members did or did not rely on the integrity of the market price in making their
investment decisions can only be determined on an individualized basis.
A. Market Commentary Attributed the Price Increases in the Affected Stocks to
Short Squeezes and Extreme Social Media Driven Enthusiasm
23. The Affected Stocks experienced unusually large price increases during the
pre-Class Period. Exhibit 1 shows the percentage change in prices for each of the Affected Stocks
between January 4, 2021 and January 27, 2021. As the exhibit shows, some of the Affected Stocks
increased dramatically in less than a one-month period. For example, the percentage increases in
GME and AMC’s stock prices between the opening prices on January 4, 2021 and the maximum
trading prices during the pre-Class Period were 1,900 percent and 825 percent, respectively, versus
only a 2.82 percent increase in the S&P 500. Using closing prices, GME and AMC’s stock prices
11
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 14 of
98
increased by 1,915 percent and 890 percent, respectively, versus only a 1.35 percent increase in the
S&P 500.
EXHIBIT 1
Percentage Increase in the Affected Stocks’ Prices
January 4, 2021 – January 27, 2021
2500%
2008%
2000% 1900% 1915%
1718%
1500% 1403%
1000% 890% 922%
825%
500%
329%
281%
200% 193%
145% 145%
68% 99%
44% 41%
0%
AMC BB BBBY EXPR GME KOSS NOK TR TRVG
Open to Max [1] Close to Close [2]
Notes:
[1] Equals the percentage increase between the opening price on January 4, 2021 and the maximum trading price
between January 4, 2021 and January 27, 2021.
[2] Equals the percentage increase between the closing price on January 4, 2021 and the closing price on January 27,
2021.
Source: Bloomberg L.P.
24. The public information available to potential Class Members during the pre-
Class Period emphasized that these skyrocketing stock prices could not be explained by company
fundamentals. Market commentators, for example, attributed the large price increases for the
Affected Stocks to short squeezes and/or extreme social media driven enthusiasm rather than
improved fundamentals for the companies. For example:
12
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 15 of
98
AMC
On January 27, 2021, Dow Jones News Service reported that “AMC Entertainment
Holdings is trading at a new 52-week high on Wednesday, caught up in a strange
euphoria affecting several stocks of downtrodden companies. … The stock joins a
small group of companies that have been caught in a strange push and pull between
professional short sellers, who hold bearish positions, and retail investors using
Reddit forums and Robinhood accounts to buy and encourage others to do so.”45
Bed Bath & Beyond
Similarly, news articles attributed BBBY’s stock price increases to “short bets
backfiring – sending the shares to dizzying heights – ‘non-fundamental market
dynamics are controlling the tape.’”46
Blackberry
On January 27, 2021, the Wall Street Journal reported that “[s]hares of a handful of
firms such as GameStop Corp. and BlackBerry Ltd. have posted triple-digit gains in
recent weeks, part of a frenzy whipped up by individual investors.”47
Express
On January 25, 2021, analysts commented that “[w]e are cautious on shares of
Express, after rocketing 150% in the last two trading days on the heels of retails wider
squeeze-play with most-shorted stocks up +14% versus least-shorted stocks +4% in
the RUA index so far in 2021, coupled with an investor stampede following Will
Meade’s (Twitter personality and former pm) speculative tweet.”48
GameStop
On January 26, 2021, news articles reported that “[p]rofessional investors are
worried: How can financial markets function when stock movements are so obviously
disconnected from fundamentals,”49 and “GameStop has been a darling of Reddit
message board WallStreetBets, where hundreds of posters have been pushing for
purchases of the stock after investors betting against the chain pushed short interest to
45. “AMC Stock Gets Caught in Short Squeeze. Shares Are Up 180%. -- Barrons.com,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 27, 2021, 12:34 PM.
46. “Bed Bath & Beyond Stock Is Rocketing, but Bulls Are Bailing -- Barrons.com,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 27, 2021, 09:49 AM.
47. “GameStop Stock Frenzy: What You Need to Know;…” The Wall Street Journal Online,
January 27, 2021, 05:30 AM.
48. “Cautious on Heels of Squeeze Play Coupled with Stampede Following Speculation,”
Wedbush, January 25, 2021.
49. “The Day-Trading Barbarians at the Gate Won’t Sack Wall Street -- Heard on the Street,”
Dow Jones Newswires, January 26, 2021, 06:25 AM.
13
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 16 of
98
more than 100%. ... GameStop has not released any news to coincide with the
spike.”50
Koss
On January 27, 2021, the Wall Street Journal reported, “Headphone maker Koss has
also joined the party, and its shares jumped 109% premarket,” referring to day traders
“waging a battle against hedge-fund short sellers…”51
Nokia
On January 27, 2021, Barrons.com reported that “[s]hares of the communications
infrastructure supplier Nokia have continued to soar -- one of a growing group of
stocks seeing outsize moves on the back of surging retail trading.”52
Tootsie Roll
On January 27, 2021, Bloomberg reported that “[t]he maker of Tootsie Pops has
spiked to a record as retail traders pour into heavily-shorted stocks fueled by
excitement over GameStop Corp.’s meteoric surge.”53
Trivago
On January 27, 2021, Bloomberg reported that “[t]rivago’s share price has
disconnected from fundamentals, surging over 100% intraday, likely at the hands of
retail investors who made similar bets on AMC and GameStop”54
25. In addition to market participants’ commentary in news articles, equity
analysts’ commentary similarly recognized that the price increases in the Affected Stocks, as can
occur as part of a short squeeze, were artificial. For example:
50. “GameStop stock has another volatile trading day, with more price spikes and trading
hal[t],” Dow Jones Newswires, January 26, 2021, 02:51 PM
51. “GameStop, Microsoft, AMC: What to Watch When the Stock Market Opens Today; A
volley of major earnings reports are due including big tech names like Tesla and Apple,”
The Wall Street Journal, January 27, 2021, 09:21 AM.
52. “Nokia Stock Is Surging. The Company Says It Can’t Explain It -- Barrons.com,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 27, 2021, 03:00 PM.
53. “Tootsie Roll at Record Highs as Shorted Stocks Get Trader Love,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 27, 2021, 10:04 AM.
54. “Trivago Shares Surge as Investors Eye Next AMC, GameStop: React,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 27, 2021, 03:03PM.
14
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 17 of
98
“After surging over 100% year to date as of Jan. 15, very little has changed in GME’s
fundamental story. … We attribute GME’s explosive upside movement to a mega
short squeeze (short interest more than 100% of total float), and we think shares are
primed for a crash in 2021.”55
“Over the past two weeks, GameStop (GME) shares have risen spectacularly on what
media reports describe as a major short squeeze, in part enabled by extreme retail
investor enthusiasm. Since last Jan. 12th GME shares have risen 642% (vs. +1% for
S&P500).”56
“BBBY is up ~73% through the first ~15 trading days of 2021, without any
meaningful change in the retail environment or fundamentals of the business (versus a
month ago)… With the environment roughly the same, the recent stock surge is more
a result of a short squeeze against highly shorted retail names (see GME and
AMC).”57
“We are cautious on shares of Express, after rocketing 150% in the last two trading
days on the heels of retails wider squeeze-play.”58
“Retail investors driving shares: Press reports indicate that AMC’s recent rally
(+110% YTD) has been driven by retail investors buying shares in order to trigger a
short squeeze.”59
26. This widespread public commentary available to potential Class Members
acknowledging and publicizing the artificially high prices for the Affected Stocks makes it a virtual
certainty that there are potential Class Members who made their investment decisions in an attempt
to profit from these artificial price movements. This is the opposite of a belief in the integrity of the
market price. As a result, reliance on the integrity of the market price cannot be determined on a
55. “GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 23, 2021.
56. “The gravity of GME’s earnings will likely weigh on shares again; PO to $10; Reit U/P,”
BofA Securities, January 27, 2021.
57. “Taking a Breather For Now; Downgrading to Market Perform,” Raymond James, January
26, 2021.
58. “Cautious on Heels of Squeeze Play Coupled with Stampede Following Speculation,”
Wedbush, January 25, 2021.
59. “AMC Gets its $1b: Management Sees Liquidity into 2H21 After Odeon Financing and
Equity Raise,” Credit Suisse, January 26, 2021.
15
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 18 of
98
class-wide basis and individualized inquiry is necessary.60
B. Economic Literature along with Market Commentary Recognize That Market
Manipulations Such as Short Squeezes Cause Temporary Artificial Price
Increases Followed by a Return to Lower Prices
27. The academic literature recognizes that short squeezes are a form of “market
manipulation.”61 For example, Putniņŝ (2012) states, “‘Corners’ and ‘squeezes’ are techniques in
which the manipulator secures a controlling position in the supply of an asset and/or derivative
contract. The manipulator then uses this position to manipulate the price by exploiting investors that
need the underlying asset to close out short positions.”62 Harris (2003) further comments,
“[s]queezers are parasitic traders because they design trading strategies that profit only when they
can exploit other traders. Their manipulations make prices less informative, and their trades greatly
increase transaction costs for other traders.”63
60. The class is defined as investors who sold at a loss. See Complaint, ¶ 1. In order for the
class to consist entirely of investors who sold at a loss, it necessarily follows that many, if
not all, potential class members purchased at the inflated prices resulting from the short
squeeze and/or other social media driven enthusiasm. There is a high likelihood that these
potential Class Members did not purchase based on a belief in the integrity of the market
price.
61. T.J. Putniņŝ, “Market Manipulation: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Surveys 26, No. 5
(2012): 952-967, at 956.
62. T.J. Putniņŝ, “Market Manipulation: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Surveys 26, No. 5
(2012): 952-967, at 956.
63. L. Harris, Trading and Exchanges – Market Microstructure for Practitioners (Oxford
University Press, 2003), at 256. Another article states that if a heavily shorted stock
experiences a price increase for any reason, “it can quickly turn into a buying frenzy as the
short sellers trip over one another to buy the shares…Panic-buying begets more panic-
buying, egged on by speculators who know the situation the short sellers are in and actively
try to put the screws to them. This is a short squeeze in action. And it’s exactly what
happened in the shares of GameStop.” See “What Exactly Is a Short Squeeze?”
Kiplinger.com, June 11, 2021 available at:
https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/602165/what-exactly-is-a-short-squeeze (last
accessed February 16, 2023).
16
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 19 of
98
28. The artificial prices caused by short squeezes are temporary and tend to be
unrelated to company news, performance or prospects. As one commentator noted, “short squeezes
are not based on company fundamentals. Rather they are driven by human behavior and technical
factors.” The article references a study of short squeezes between 2008 and 2021 and notes that
“[s]hort squeezes typically don’t last long…The average short squeeze in this data set lasted
approximately 12 days from the onset to the peak,” and that “[w]hen a short squeeze eventually
exhausts itself, the stock price typically declines by -50% within the next 3-4 days.”64
29. Market commentary during the Class Period also emphasized that the short-
term artificial price increases of the Affected Stocks were predictably followed by price decreases.
For example:
“It is difficult to predict the day-to-day moves of GME shares but they are down 81%
from highs and several factors that we believe have been instrumental in increasing
share price (such as daily volume, short interest and online conversations) appear to
be turning. …In our view, one of the major causes (along with very high short interest
and trading volumes) for GME’s share price increase is increased participation by
retail investors which appears to have been exacerbated by social media platforms
such as Twitter and Reddit. While still high on a relative or historic basis, GME
mentions on Reddit (including on the wallstreetbets forum), short interest, and trading
volumes have all declined significantly from recent peaks over the past several days.
This has corresponded with a drop in GME’s share price which is now $92.41 as of
the market close on February 3rd, from an intraday high of $483 on January 28th.”65
“The wild run-up of trades popular with Reddit crowds is starting to come crashing
down. GameStop Corp. sank 34% in U.S. pre-market trading, extending a 31%
plunge on Monday. AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. slid 25% and Express Inc.
lost 18% … The speculative activity hatched online has captivated global markets,
drawing attention from U.S. politicians and overwhelming brokerages around the
world. Now, the speculative tide is turning. ‘The short squeeze momentum met its
inevitable end,’ said Mark Taylor, a sales trader at Mirabaud Securities. ‘It seems
reasonably clear that as the cheerleading and rage against the machine dies down, the
man on the street is left holding the bag again.’ In GameStop, short interest plunged
64. “When Will The Ride End? Analyzing GameStop Short Squeeze By Looking At History,”
Seeking Alpha, February 1, 2021, 10:35 AM.
65. “When fundamentals still appear on the sidelines, what other factors matter,” BofA
Securities, February 4, 2021.
17
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 20 of
98
to 53% of the available shares, from more than 140% just last month, according to
data from financial analytics firm S3 Partners.”66
“Traders have cited a few reasons for the recent GameStop mania calming down. The
first is a rapid reduction in the number of shares being shorted, meaning fewer
investors are betting on the video-game company’s stock to fall. That has removed a
lot of the fuel for the recent ‘short squeeze’ that sent the stock soaring as bearish
investors were forced to buy back. …the shares they had sold short at higher prices to
minimize their losses.”67
30. The virtually certain awareness of many potential Class Members of the
temporary nature of market manipulations such as short squeezes as well as market commentary
attributing the Affected Stocks’ price declines during the Class Period to the end of short squeezes
again demonstrates that reliance on the integrity of the market price cannot be determined on a class-
wide basis but requires individualized inquiry.
C. The Disconnect between Analysts’ Price Targets for the Affected Stocks and the
Highest Trading Prices of the Affected Stocks Further Demonstrates That It Is
Unreasonable to Presume Potential Class Members Relied on the Integrity of the
Market Price
31. Throughout the pre-Class Period analyst price targets remained well below the
Affected Stocks’ skyrocketing market prices. The level of target prices would have indicated to
market participants that analysts not only did not expect prices to continue to increase, but they
expected price decreases in the near future. This disconnect further indicates that potential Class
Members may not have relied on the integrity of the market prices when making their investment
decisions.
32. A sell-side equity analyst’s target price reflects that analyst’s prediction of a
company’s stock price, often 12 months in the future. Presumably, if analysts believed that the price
66. “Reddit day trader plays sours as GameStop, silver, AMC plunge,” Al Jazeera, February 2,
2021.
67. “Calmer Trading Eases Nerves on Wall Street,” Dow Jones Newswires, February 4, 2021,
09:36 AM.
18
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 21 of
98
increases in the Affected Stocks during the pre-Class Period reflected expectations for improved
performance and higher cash flows in the future, they would have increased their target prices
accordingly. Exhibit 2 shows that during the pre-Class Period the actual peak prices for the
Affected Stocks were between 1.4 and 11.5 times higher than the maximum target prices for the
Affected Stocks. For example, the highest price target for GME was $33.00, while GME’s highest
closing stock price between January 4, 2021 and January 27, 2021 was $380, or 11.5 times higher
than the highest price target. Thus, analysts agreed with other market participants that the price
increases were not due to company-specific value-relevant information. This is further evidence that
many potential Class Members were likely aware of the artificial prices at the time of their purchases
and therefore did not rely on the integrity of the market price.
EXHIBIT 2
Highest Stock Price/Equity Analysts’ Price Target
January 4, 2021 – January 27, 2021
14
12 11.5 x
10 9.3 x
8
Multiple
6
3.7 x
4
2.9 x
2 1.4 x
0
AMC BBBY EXPR GME TRVG
Notes: Each multiple is calculated as the high price of the daily session for each company from January 4 to January 27,
2021, divided by the maximum analyst price target as per Capital IQ from January 4 to January 27, 2021. Sponsored
ADR data for BlackBerry Ltd and Nokia Oyj are not available through Capital IQ. Analyst coverage data for Tootsie
Roll and Koss target prices are not available through Capital IQ.
Sources: Capital IQ, Bloomberg L.P.
19
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 22 of
98
D. Plaintiffs Cannot Establish That the Affected Stocks Traded in an Efficient
Market
33. Plaintiffs in this case allege that they will rely upon the presumption of
reliance established by the “fraud-on-the-market doctrine,”68 which requires that the Affected Stocks
traded in an efficient market, i.e., that stock prices quickly reflect all publicly available company
information that is relevant to the value of the company. Plaintiffs further contend that they will
demonstrate that “the Affected Stocks were traded in efficient markets” in part because “unexpected
material news about the Affected Stocks was rapidly reflected in and incorporated into each
company’s stock price during the Class period.”69 The economic evidence is to the contrary.
34. The key test for determining whether a market is efficient is establishing that
there is a “cause and effect” relationship between movements in stock prices and revelation of
unexpected corporate events or financial releases.70 The Affected Stocks fail this test because price
increases during the period leading up to the Class Period were not associated with, and cannot be
explained by, company-specific value-relevant information.
68. Complaint, ¶ 134.
69. Plaintiffs also state that the Affected Stocks traded in an efficient market because “[i] the
Affected Stocks were liquid and traded with moderate to heavy volume during the Class
Period; [ii] the Affected Stocks were traded on national exchanges such as the NASDAQ
and NYSE, … [iii] were covered by analysts…[iv] unexpected material news about the
Affected Stocks was rapidly reflected in and incorporated into each company’s stock price
during the Class period.” Complaint, ¶ 134.
70. This is referred to as factor five in the Cammer factors. The Cammer factors are a
well-known method used by courts to determine market efficiency. The “cause and effect”
test in factor 5 is generally considered the most important factor among the Cammer factors
(examples of other Cammer factors include (1) existence of “average weekly trading
volume … in excess of a certain number of shares;” (2) “significant number of securities
analysts followed and reported on the company’s stock;” (3) existence of “numerous
market makers;” (4) “the company was entitled to file an S-3 Registration Statement in
connection with public offerings…;”) See Cammer v. Bloom, 711 F. Supp. 1264-1301
(D.N.J. 1989), at 1285-87. On market efficiency, generally, see also e.g., E.F. Fama,
“Efficient Capital Markets: II,” The Journal of Finance 46, No. 5 (1991): 1575-1617.
20
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 23 of
98
35. To test whether the stock price increases for the Affected Stocks were
associated with the release of new, value-relevant company-specific information, and thus whether
the Affected Stocks traded in an efficient market, we performed an “event study.”71 An event study
is a widely accepted empirical analysis that: (1) identifies the portion of the stock price return that is
not explained by market and industry factors (i.e., the residual or abnormal return); and (2) identifies
whether the residual returns are statistically significant, or sufficiently large that they are unlikely to
be explained by random price fluctuations.72 In an event study analysis, residual returns are
typically considered statistically significant if they fall outside a 95 percent confidence interval (i.e.,
fall outside the range that accounts for 95 percent of random price fluctuations). Residual returns
that fall outside the 95 percent confidence interval are considered to be significant at the 5 percent
level. Using a 5 percent threshold implies that one would expect to observe statistically significant
residual returns on 5 percent of days just by random chance alone (i.e., when there is no value-
relevant company-specific news that affected the stock).
36. Exhibit 3 reports the residual returns in the Affected Stocks on the trading
days during the pre-Class Period. It highlights in grey all dates with statistically significant price
reactions. The exhibit shows a large number of statistically significant days during the pre-Class
Period, indicating that, if markets are efficient, the price movements on some of these statistically
significant dates should be due to value-relevant company-specific information. Accordingly, we
71. I discuss the uses of event study methodology in securities litigation in my early article D.
R. Fischel, “Use of Modern Finance Theory in Securities Fraud Cases Involving Actively
Traded Securities,” The Business Lawyer 38, No. 1 (1982): 1-20. Appendix C describes
the event study methodology used in this case.
72. M.L. Mitchell and J.M. Netter, “The Role of Financial Economics in Securities Fraud
Cases: Applications at the Securities and Exchange Commission,” Business Lawyer 49, No.
2 (1994): 545-590; D. Tabak and F. Dunbar, 2001, “Materiality and Magnitude: Event
Studies in the Courtroom,” in Litigation Services Handbook, Third Edition, R. Weil, et al.,
eds. (John Wiley & Sons, 2001).
21
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 24 of
98
searched news articles for mentions of the company names of the Affected Stocks in the headline
and lead paragraphs of Dow Jones and Wall Street Journal articles, as well as Bloomberg news for
each of the companies, between January 4, 2021 and January 27, 2021 to determine whether any
value-relevant company-specific news was disclosed that could have impacted the price of the
Affected Stocks on days when a statistically significant price movement occurred.73 We
supplemented the news articles searches by also searching for any SEC filings for the Affected
Stocks’ companies over the same time period. This review demonstrates that the vast majority of the
price increases for all nine Affected Stocks cannot be explained by new value-relevant company-
specific information.74 Appendix D reports new potentially value-relevant company-specific news
for each of the days during the pre-Class Period.
73. The supplemental Bloomberg news searches were performed on days with statistically
significant price movements and no value-relevant company specific news from Dow Jones
or the Wall Street Journal.
74. In fact, certain companies made public disclosures commenting on the lack of company-
specific news underpinning the stock price increases.
On January 25, 2021, Blackberry’s (BB) stock price increased from $14.04 to $18.92,
with a statistically significant abnormal return of 27.62%. At the time, the company
announced that it was “not aware of any material, undisclosed corporate
developments and has no material change in its business or affairs that has not been
publicly disclosed that would account for the recent increase in the market price or
trading volume of its common shares.” See “Press Release: BlackBerry Comments on
Trading Activity at Request of the Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada
(IIROC),” Dow Jones Newswires, January 25, 2021, 11:08 AM.
On January 27, 2021, Nokia’s (NOK) stock price increased from $4.73 to $6.55, with
a statistically significant abnormal return of 39.08%. The company issued a
statement relating to the large increases in its stock price, stating that “Nokia is not
aware of any material, undisclosed corporate developments or material change in its
business or affairs that has not been publicly disclosed that would account for the
recent increase in the market price or trading volume of its shares.” See “Nokia
Comments on Trading Activity Of Its Stock,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 27,
2021, 01:15 PM.
22
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 25 of
98
EXHIBIT 3
Statistically Significant Days
January 4, 2021 – January 27, 2021
Date AMC BB BBBY EXPR GME KOSS NOK TR TRVG
1/4/2021 1.40% 0.78% 2.29% 8.13% -7.15% -7.07% 0.69% 1.08% -3.95%
1/5/2021 -4.16% 1.92% 8.34% 3.61% -1.59% -4.47% 3.24% 2.92% -1.86%
1/6/2021 -0.90% -0.71% 1.70% -5.36% 3.48% -0.95% -0.69% 1.06% -4.60%
1/7/2021 3.91% 2.91% -11.69% 2.55% -5.45% 1.38% -1.94% 0.39% 1.19%
1/8/2021 3.37% 6.20% -1.05% 2.03% -4.33% 2.28% -2.43% -1.21% 3.08%
1/11/2021 6.61% 1.83% 6.83% -0.88% 12.51% -2.17% -0.86% -0.46% 1.33%
1/12/2021 1.49% -0.30% 1.44% 4.86% -1.80% 0.51% 2.80% 1.06% 0.08%
1/13/2021 -3.74% -3.11% 7.90% 1.51% 55.43% -5.17% 0.31% -0.62% -2.29%
1/14/2021 -5.58% 22.90% 20.04% 26.42% 26.45% -1.44% 2.02% -0.36% -2.56%
1/15/2021 9.29% 8.71% -9.43% -1.64% -10.91% -5.50% -2.24% 0.95% -0.80%
1/19/2021 30.19% 24.22% -1.29% 0.85% 8.62% 23.97% -0.76% -0.57% -2.36%
1/20/2021 -1.98% 1.60% -2.00% -5.33% -6.74% -7.04% 1.71% -0.47% -1.77%
1/21/2021 4.09% -0.30% 5.42% 1.30% 8.72% 1.46% 1.11% 0.54% 2.33%
1/22/2021 15.20% 9.40% 11.45% 56.69% 50.74% -6.47% 0.47% 1.33% 1.44%
1/25/2021 21.07% 27.62% 1.33% 135.27% 16.84% 78.66% 14.67% 14.18% 1.27%
1/26/2021 13.52% 4.84% 20.76% -22.61% 91.49% 65.74% -2.17% 9.01% -4.75%
1/27/2021 298.35% 35.00% 48.55% 219.93% 138.89% 480.08% 39.08% 11.95% 53.36%
Total Cumulative
831.37% 264.29% 158.61% 1184.70% 1368.18% 1387.61% 61.09% 47.29% 32.31%
Residual Return
Sources: Bloomberg, LP; CRSP.
37. Thus, I find that the Affected Stocks did not trade in an efficient market
during the pre-Class Period.
IV. PLAINTIFFS CANNOT PROVIDE A COMMON METHODOLOGY TO
CALCULATE DAMAGES IF ANY
38. As described above, the prices of the Affected Stocks increased dramatically
and artificially during the pre-Class Period. These artificial price increases were widely recognized
by market participants as temporary market manipulations and/or coordinated purchasing by retail
traders due to heightened commentary on social media. Absent Robinhood’s and other brokers’
actions, there is no way to know in the but-for world whether prices would have kept rising, how
long they would have remained artificially high, and how quickly they would have fallen to non-
manipulated levels. Similarly, there is no way of knowing whether the potential Class Members’
trading behavior in the but-for world would have differed from what actually occurred or whether
23
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 26 of
98
potential Class Members would have suffered the same loss, a greater loss, made a profit in the
Plaintiffs’ but-for world, or would have traded at all. For example, potential Class Members in the
but-for world posited by Plaintiffs may have avoided losses and made a profit if they were able to
sell at higher prices before prices fell; alternatively, they may have incurred greater losses if absent
the actions by Robinhood and other brokers they would have held on longer and sold only when
prices returned to their pre-artificial price level. For these reasons, there is no common methodology
to determine the amount of damages incurred by individual potential Class Members, if damages
exist at all.75 Individualized inquiry is required.
39. Moreover, given the volatile and non-uniform movements of each of the
Affected Stocks during the Class Period, even small changes in the timing of trades could alter
whether or not an individual incurred a loss as a result of a sale and therefore qualifies to be a
potential Class Member. For example, Named Plaintiff Joseph Gurney purchased 21.27 AMC
shares at an average price of $5.64 on January 26-27, 2021, and sold the shares at an average price of
$8.01 for a gain of $50.39 (a 42.0 percent return) on January 28, 2021.76 Compare Gurney's activity
to Named Plaintiff Abraham Huacuja, who purchased 2,200 AMC shares at an average price of
$18.18 on January 27, 2021. Huacuja also sold his shares on January 28, 2021, at an average price
of $13.00, for a loss of $11,393.93 (a -28.5 percent return).77 These trades illustrate that slight
differences in timing contribute greatly to profit or loss. Counterfactually speculating as to the
75. Price movements of the Affected Stocks were not even consistent during the Class Period.
Plaintiffs allege that “…each time new restrictions were imposed, the prices of the Affected
Stocks declined.” See Complaint, ¶ 88. This claim is false. For example, there was no
uniform negative price reaction to Robinhood’s tightening of purchase limit restrictions in
the afternoon of January 29, 2021. See Appendix E.
76. Robinhood Named Plaintiffs’ Trading Data. Exhibit A to the Amended Complaint does
not list that Joseph Gurney traded AMC shares.
77. Robinhood Named Plaintiffs’ Trading Data; Exhibit A to the Amended Complaint.
24
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 27 of
98
timing of trades (i.e., whether and when investors would have traded in the but-for scenario in which
Robinhood did not put restrictions in place) requires individualized inquiries. Moreover, the same
investor could have both losses and gains on round trip trades depending on the timing of the trades.
For example, Named Plaintiff Brian Harbison had an overall gain of $752.20 (a 10.7 percent return)
from trading in AMC between January 26, 2021 and January 28, 2021.78 However, Harbison only
suffered a loss on his last roundtrip where he purchased 200 shares on January 27, at a price $15.98
per share, and sold the same shares on January 28 at $13.02 per share for a loss of $592.08.79
Individualized inquiry would be required to determine whether (and how) a potential Class Member
would have changed their trading behavior and therefore whether they would have sustained a net
gain or loss in the Affected Stocks in the but-for world.
40. Plaintiffs also have no way of disentangling the effects of confounding events.
As discussed above, multiple brokerages implemented trading restrictions in the pre-Class Period
and during the Class Period. For example, Interactive Brokers Group, TD Ameritrade, and Charles
Schwab restricted trading in options for GME and AMC on January 27, 2021.80 In the morning of
January 28, 2021, brokerages other than Robinhood also placed PCO and other restrictions on the
78. Robinhood Named Plaintiffs’ Trading Data; Exhibit A to the Amended Complaint.
79. See Robinhood Named Plaintiffs’ Trading Data. Exhibit A to the Amended Complaint
does not list Harbison’s AMC trades where he had gains. Exhibit A only lists the last
transaction where Harbison lost.
80. “On Wednesday, TD Ameritrade said it was restricting trading in GameStop GME … and
AMC Entertainment Holdings AMC, [] along with other names, amid a triple-digit
percentage surge in the price of those companies in recent days … On Thursday [January
27, 2021], Interactive Brokers Group IBKR, [] announced that as of midday Wednesday, it
put GameStop, AMC, BlackBerry Limited BB, [] retailer Express Ltd. EXPR, [] and Koss
Corp. KOSS, [] option trading into liquidation only due to the extraordinary volatility in the
markets. Meaning investors could only unwind their positions, not create new ones.” See
“GameStop and AMC trading restricted by TD Ameritrade, Schwab, Robinhood others,”
Market Watch, January 27, 2021 available at
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/gamestop-amc-trading-is-now-being-restricted-at-td-
ameritrade-11611769804 (last accessed February 16, 2023).
25
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 28 of
98
Affected Stocks around the same time as Robinhood. Interactive Brokers’ trading restrictions were
reported on January 28, 2021 at 9:26 AM, eight minutes after Robinhood’s trading restrictions were
reported (and both were reported before the market opened at 9:30 AM that day).81 Throughout the
day on January 28, 2021, other brokerages, such as Ally Financial, E*Trade, Webull, M1 Finance,
and Trading 212, placed AMC, GME, and KOSS on PCO status.82 Separately, stock exchanges
halted trading multiple times throughout the day on January 27 and January 28, 2021.83 In addition
to trading platforms restricting trading and stock exchanges halting trading, retail banks such as Citi
and Wells Fargo informed its financial advisors that they could no longer recommend several of the
Affected Stocks to clients, and Citi placed restrictions on margin transactions.84
41. I am not aware of any method that would be able to reliably isolate the impact,
if any, of Robinhood’s trading restrictions from the restrictions of the other brokerages, stock
exchange trading halts, and other financial institutions’ restrictions that were implemented
81. “Robinhood Makes Several Hot Stocks Unavailable for New Trades,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 28, 2021, 08:58 AM; “Interactive Brokers Curbs Trading of AMC,
GameStop and Other Stocks,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 09:26 AM.
82. “Robinhood, Other Brokerages Restrict Trading on GameStop, AMC,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 28, 2021, 06:15 PM; “Our clearing firm, Apex Clearing, is not
allowing purchases of the following securities…but M1 no longer has the ability to place
buy orders in these securities. We will continue to relay additional information as we have
it,” M1 Finance Official Twitter, January 28, 2021, 09:01 AM available at:
https://twitter.com/M1Finance/status/1354837064072753152 (last accessed February 16,
2023); “Some E*Trade Users Say Access Is Now Restricted to GameStop, AMC
Purchases,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 03:20 PM; “GameStop shares plunge
after ban by Robinhood app,” The Guardian, January 28, 2021, 04:54 PM.
83. See Supra fn. 16.
84. “Citigroup Joins Firms Curbing GameStop, AMC Buys,” Dow Jones Newswires, January
28, 2021, 04:45 PM; “Wells Fargo Curbs GameStop, AMC Buys,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 28, 2021, 11:03 AM.
26
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 29 of
98
simultaneously with Robinhood’s restrictions.85 This also demonstrates the lack of any common
methodology to measure damages, if any, caused by Robinhood.
______________________________
Daniel R. Fischel
February 16, 2023
85. In addition to disentangling the effects of restrictions by other brokerages, I am not aware
of a common method that would measure the relative contribution, if any, of transactions,
such as canceling purchase orders, liquidating customers’ shares, and closing out options
from the alleged impact of Robinhood’s PCO restrictions and position limits.
27
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 30 of
98
Appendix A
DANIEL R. FISCHEL February 2023
Business Address:
Compass Lexecon
332 South Michigan Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Tel: 312-322-0209
dfischel@compasslexecon.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Lee and Brena Freeman Professor of Law and Business, University of Chicago Law School (1/84 – 12/2005,
chair awarded in 7/89, emeritus as of 1/1/2006); Dean of Law School (1/99 – 2/01); Visiting Professor of Law,
University of Chicago Law School (7/82 - 6/83).
Professor of Law and Business, Northwestern University School of Law (1/1/2006 – 5/2011). Professor, Kellogg
School of Management (courtesy appointment, 1/1/2006 – 5/2011).
Jack N. Pritzker Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law (6/02-6/03).
Professor of Law and Business, University of Chicago Graduate School of Business (courtesy
appointment, 7/87 - 6/90).
Director, Law and Economics Program, University of Chicago (1/84 - 6/91).
Assistant Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law (6/80 - 6/81); Associate Professor of Law,
Northwestern University School of Law (6/81 - 6/82); promoted to full professor in 6/82.
Attorney with Levy and Erens, Chicago, Illinois (7/79 - 6/80).
Law Clerk for Associate Justice Potter Stewart of the United States Supreme Court (1978 - 1979).
Law Clerk for Judge Thomas E. Fairchild, Chief Judge of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (1977 - 1978).
CONSULTING EXPERIENCE
President and Chairman, Compass Lexecon (formerly Lexecon).
AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION
Securities and Financial Markets, Valuation and Financial Analysis, Bankruptcy and Financial Distress Litigation,
ERISA Litigation, Class Certification, Damages, Corporate Governance.
PUBLICATIONS
Payback: The Conspiracy to Destroy Michael Milken and His Financial Revolution, Harper Business (1995).
The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, Harvard University Press (1991) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
ARTICLES
The Use of Trading Models to Estimate Aggregate Damages in Securities Fraud Litigation: An Update,
Briefly… Perspectives on Legislation, Regulation, and Litigation, Vol. 10, No. 3 (National Legal Center for the
Public Interest, 2006) (with David J. Ross and Michael A. Keable).
The Hewlett-Packard Merger: A Case Study, in The New Investor Relations, Expert Perspectives on The
State Of The Art (Bloomberg Press Princeton, 2004) (with Kenneth R. Cone, Gregory J. Pelnar and David J.
Ross).
A-1
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 31 of
98
Market Evidence in Corporate Law, 69 U. Chi. L. Rev. 941 (2002).
Multidisciplinary Practice, The Business Lawyer, Vol. 55, (May 2000).
Government Liability for Breach of Contract, American L. & Econ. Rev. V1 N1/2 313 (1999) (with Alan Sykes).
Lawyers and Confidentiality, 65 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1 (1998).
The Law and Economics of Vanishing Premium Life Insurance, 22 Del. J. Corp. Law 1 (1997) (with Robert S.
Stillman).
Clustering and Competition in Asset Markets, 20 J. Law & Econ. 23 (1997) (with Sanford J. Grossman, Merton
H. Miller, Kenneth R. Cone and David J. Ross).
Corporate Crime, 25 J. Legal Studies 319 (1996) (with Alan O. Sykes).
The Use of Trading Models to Estimate Aggregate Damages in Securities Fraud Litigation: A Proposal for
Change, in Securities Class Actions: Abuses and Remedies (The National Legal Center for the Public
Interest, 1994) (with David J. Ross).
Civil Rico After Reves: An Economic Commentary, 1993 Sup. Ct. Rev. 157 (with Alan O. Sykes).
Contract and Fiduciary Duty, 36 J. Law & Econ. 425 (1993) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
Should the Law Prohibit “Manipulation” in Financial Markets?, 105 Harv. L. Rev. 503 (1991) (with David J.
Ross).
Efficient Capital Markets, the Crash, and the Fraud on the Market Theory, 74 Cornell L. Rev. 907 (1989).
The Corporate Contract, 89 Colum. L. Rev. 1416 (1989) (with Frank H. Easterbrook); also published in
Corporate Law and Economic Analysis (Cambridge University Press 1990) (Lucian Bebchuk ed.).
The Economics of Lender Liability, 99 Yale L. J. 131 (1989).
Should One Agency Regulate Financial Markets, in Black Monday and the Future of Financial Markets (R.
Kormendi, R. Kamphuis & J. W. H. Watson, ed.) (Dow Jones-Irwin Inc., 1988).
ERISA’s Fundamental Contradiction: The Exclusive Benefit Rule, 55 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1105 (1988) (with
John H. Langbein).
From MITE to CTS: Takeovers, the Williams Act and the Commerce Clause, 1987 Sup. Ct. Rev. 47.
The Regulation of Banks and Bank Holding Companies, 73 Va. L. Rev. 301 (1987) (with Andrew
M. Rosenfield and Robert S. Stillman).
The Regulation of Accounting: Some Economic Issues, 52 Brooklyn L. Rev. 1051 (1987).
Organized Exchanges and the Regulation of Dual Class Common Stock, 54 U. Chi. L. Rev. 119 (1987).
Comparable Worth and Discrimination in Labor Markets, 53 U. Chi. L. Rev. 891 (1986) (with Edward P. Lazear).
Comparable Worth: A Rejoinder, 53 U. Chi. L. Rev. 950 (1986) (with Edward P. Lazear).
Close Corporations and Agency Costs, 38 Stan. L. Rev. 271 (1986) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
The Role of Liability Rules and the Derivative Suit in Corporate Law: A Theoretical and Empirical
Analysis, 71 Corn. L. Rev. 261 (1986) (with Michael Bradley).
Regulatory Conflict and Entry Regulation of New Futures Contracts, 59 J. Bus. S85 (1985).
Optimal Damages in Securities Cases, 52 U. Chi. L. Rev. 611 (1985) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
The Business Judgment Rule and the Trans Union Case, 40 Bus. Law. 1437 (1985).
Insider Trading and Investment Analysts: An Economic Analysis of Dirks v. SEC, 13 Hofstra L. Rev. 127 (1984).
A-2
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 32 of
98
Limited Liability and the Corporation, 52 U. Chi. L. Rev. 89 (1985) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
Labor Markets and Labor Law Compared with Capital Markets and Corporate Law, 51 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1061
(1984).
Customer Protection in Futures and Securities Markets, 4 J. Futures Markets 273 (1984) (with Sanford J.
Grossman).
Mandatory Disclosure and the Protection of Investors, 70 Va. L. Rev. 669 (1984) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
The Appraisal Remedy In Corporate Law, 1983 Am. Bar Found. Res. J. 875.
The Regulation of Insider Trading, 35 Stan. L. Rev. 857 (1983) (with Dennis W. Carlton).
Voting in Corporate Law, 26 J. Law & Econ. 395 (1983) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
Auctions and Sunk Costs in Tender Offers, 35 Stan. L. Rev. 1 (1982) (with Frank H.
Easterbrook).
The Corporate Governance Movement, 35 Vand. L. Rev. 1259 (1982).
Use of Modern Finance Theory in Securities Fraud Cases Involving Actively Traded Securities, 38 Bus. Law 1
(1982).
Antitrust Suits By Targets of Tender Offers, 80 Mich. L. Rev. 1155 (May 1982) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
Corporate Control Transactions, 91 Yale L. J. 698 (1982) (with Frank H. Easterbrook).
The “Race to the Bottom” Revisited: Reflections on Recent Developments in Delaware Corporation Law, 76 Nw.
Univ. L. Rev. 913 (1982).
Takeover Bids, Defensive Tactics and Shareholders’ Welfare, 36 Bus. Law 1733 (1981) (with Frank H.
Easterbrook).
The Law and Economics of Dividend Policy, 67 Va. L. Rev. 699 (1981).
The Proper Role of a Target’s Management in Responding to a Tender Offer, 94 Harv. L. Rev. 1161 (1981) (with
Frank H. Easterbrook) (awarded prize by Emory University for best paper written in law and economics for the
year 1981).
Secondary Liability Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Act of 1934, 69 California L. Rev. 80 (1981).
Efficient Capital Market Theory, the Market for Corporation Control, and the Regulation of Cash Tender Offers,
57 Tex. L. Rev. 1 (1978); reprinted in K. Scott and R. Posner ed., Economic Perspectives on Corporation Law
and Securities Regulation (Little Brown 1980).
Antitrust Liability for Attempts to Influence Government Action: The Basis and Limits of the Noerr-
Pennington Doctrine, 45 U. Chi. L. Rev. 80 (1977).
Comment, The Demand and Standing Requirements in Stockholder Derivation Actions, 44 U. Chi. L. Rev. 168
(1977).
Comment, The Use of Government Judgments in Private Antitrust Litigation: Clayton Act Section 5(a),
Collateral Estoppel, and Jury Trial, 43 U. Chi. L. Rev. 338 (1976).
EDUCATION
University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, Illinois; J.D. 1977, cum laude; Order of the Coif; Comment Editor,
Vol. 44, University of Chicago Law Review; Approximately top 1% of the Class. Awarded Casper Platt Award
for best paper written by a student of the University of Chicago Law School; awarded Jerome N. Frank Prize for
excellence in legal writing while a member of the University of Chicago Law Review, 1975 - 1977. Studied law
and economics with Richard Posner and other members of the faculty.
Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; M.A. 1974 in American History.
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York; major-American History; minor-Economics; B.A. 1972.
A-3
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 33 of
98
TESTIMONY
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Sanchez Energy Corporation, et al., Debtors, In The United States
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Chapter 11, Case No. 19-34508 (MI),
(February 10, 2023).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Boeing Company and Boeing Brasil Servicos Tecnicos Aeronauticos
LTDA. v. Embraer S.A. and Yabora Industria Aeronautica S.A., American Arbitration Association, Case No.
01-20-0005-0591, (February 6, 2023).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Straight Path Communications Inc. Consolidated Stockholder Litigation, In
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 2017-0486-SG, (December 9, 2022).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Oracle Corporation Derivative Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 2017-0337-SG, (July 28, 2022).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Gregg Smith, Michael Nowak, and Jeffrey Ruffo,
In The United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 19 CR 00669, (July 25
and 26, 2022).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Sjunde Ap-Fonden, et al. vs. General Electric, et al. In The United States
District Court, Southern District of New York, Index No. 17-cv-08457 (JMF), (July 14, 2022).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Sanchez Energy Corporation, et al., and Delaware Trust Company v.
Mesquite Energy Inc. f/k/a Sanchez Energy Corporation, Apollo Commodities Management, L.P., Fidelity
Management and Research Company, et al. In the United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of
Texas, Houston Division, Chapter 11, Case No. 19-34508 (MI), Adv. Pro. No. 21-3862 (MI), (May 17,
2022).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tesla, Inc., Securities Litigation, In the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-04865-EMC, (March 28,
2022).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Petersen Energia Inversora, S.A.U. and Petersen Energia S.A.U. v.
Argentine Republic and YPF S.A., In the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, 15
Civ. 2739 (LAP), (March 17, 2022).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Mindbody, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the State
of Delaware, C.A. No. 2019-0442-KSJM, (March 9, 2022).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Allied Systems Holdings,
Inc. and its affiliated debtors et al. v. Yucaipa, et al., In the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of
Delaware, Bankr., D. Del., Proc. Nos. 13-50530-KBO, 14-50971-KBO (March 4, 2022).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Ripple Labs, Inc. et al., In
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 20-Civ-10832 (AT) (SN)
(February 28, 2022).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Mindbody, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the State
of Delaware, C.A. No. 2019-0442-KSJM, (February 4, 2022).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Mylan N.V. Securities Litigation, In the United States District Court,
Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:16-cv-07926 (JPO), (December 22, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: JUUL Labs, Inc. Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation,
In the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No.: 19-md-02913-WHO,
(December 13, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Oracle Corporation Derivative Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 2017-0337-SG, (December 8, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Straight Path Communications Inc. Consolidated Stockholder Litigation, In
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 2017-0486-SG, (October 21, 2021).
A-4
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 34 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Abu Dhabi Investment Authority vs. Mylan N.V. and Mylan Inc., In the
United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-01342-JPO,
(August 18, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Mylan N.V. Securities Litigation, In the United States District Court,
Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:16-CV-07926 (JPO), (August 17, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Hawaii Structural Ironworkers Pension Trust Fund, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated vs. AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., et al., In the United
States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No.1:18-cv-00299-AJN-SLC, (August
12, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Sjunde Ap-Fonden, et al, vs. General Electric, et al., In the United States
District Court, Southern District of New York, Index No. 17-cv-08457 (JMF), (August 9, 2021).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America vs. Edward Bases and John Pacilio, In the United
States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Docket No. 18 CR 48, (July 29, 2021).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Ahmed D. Hussein vs. Sheldon Razin, Steven Plochocki, Quality Systems,
Inc., And Does 1-10, Inclusive, In the Superior Court of California, County of Orange, NO. 30-2013-
00679600, CU-NP-CJC (July 27, 2021).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tesla Motors, Inc. Stockholders Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware, Consolidated Civil Action No. 12711-VCS (July 23, 2021).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Huntsman International, LLC vs. Albemarle Corporation, Rockwood
Specialties Group, Inc., and Rockwood Holdings, Inc., American Arbitration Association, AAA Case No. 01-
17-001-4588 (May 10, 2021).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Resolution Life L.P. and Resolution Life (Parallel) Partnership vs. GBIG
Holdings, Inc. f/k/a Southland National Holdings, Inc.; SNH Acquisition, LLC and Greg Lindberg, In the
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Civil Division, Index Nos. 650575/19, 653258/19, (April 19, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Matthew Sciabacucchi and Hialeah Employees’ Retirement System vs. John
Malone, et al., and Charter Communications, Inc., In the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware, C.A.
No. 11418-VCG, (April 16, 2021).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Jeld-Wen Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation, In the United States District
Court for The Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, Civil Action No. 3:20-cv-00112-JAG,
(February 26, 2021).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Pacific Gas and Electric Company Administration of Stress Test
Methodology Developed Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 451.2(b) and (2) Determination That
$7.5 Billion of 2017 Catastrophic Wildfire Costs and Expenses Are Stress Test Costs That May Be
Financed Through Issuance of Recovery Bonds Pursuant to Section 451.2(c) and Section 850 et
Seq.(U39E), Before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, Application No. 20-04-023,
(December 15, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Resolution Life L.P. and Resolution Life (Parallel) Partnership vs. GBIG
Holdings, Inc. f/k/a Southland National Holdings, Inc.; SNH Acquisition, LLC and Greg Lindberg, In the
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Index No. 650575/2019, (November 24, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: SH 130 Concession Company, LLC, Zachry Toll Road – 56 LP Cintra Texas
56 LLC et al. vs. Central Texas Highway Constructors, LLC, et al., In the United States Bankruptcy
Court, Western District of Texas, Austin Division, Case No. 16-10262-TMD, Adversary No. 18-01030,
(November 5, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Ahmed D. Hussein versus Sheldon Razin, Steven Plochocki, Quality
Systems, Inc., et al., In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, Case No. 302013-
00679600 CUNPCJC, (October 22, 2020).
A-5
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 35 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Solely in its Capacity as Trustee of
the Harborview Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Loan Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-9, In the
Supreme Court of the State of New York County of New York, Index No. 654208/2018 (September 25,
2020).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Fairstone Financial Holdings Inc., J.C. Flowers IV L.P. and VP Canada
Acquisition, L.P. vs. Duo Bank of Canada, Court File No. CV-20-00641857-00CL and Duo Bank of
Canada vs. Fairstone Financial Holdings Inc., J.C. Flowers IV L.P. and VP Canada Acquisition, L.P.,
Court File No. CV-20-00643629-00CL, In the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, (September 11,
2020).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: AB Stable VIII LLC vs. Maps Hotels and Resorts One LLC, et al., In the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C. A. No. 2020-0310-JTL (August 28, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: AB Stable VIII LLC vs. Maps Hotels and Resorts One LLC, et al., In the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Case No. 2020-0130-JTL (August 14, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Willis Towers Watson PLC Proxy Litigation, In the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, Master File No. 1:17-cv-1338-AJT-JFA
(August 12, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Forescout Technologies, Inc. et al. vs. Ferrari Group Holdings, LP, and
Ferrari Merger Sub, Inc., et al., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Civil Action No. 2020-
0385-SG (July 13, 2020).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Brigade Leveraged Capital Structures Fund Ltd. et al. vs. Kindred
Healthcare, Inc., et al., In the Circuit Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Case No. 2018 0165
(February 5, 2020).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Gannaway Entertainment, Inc. et al vs. Frankly Inc. et al., In the United
States District Court, Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, Case No. 3:17-cv-04169-RS
(December 17, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Allied Systems Holdings,
Inc. and its affiliated debtors et al. v. Yucaipa, et al., In the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of
Delaware, Bankr., D. Del., Proc. Nos. 13-50530-KBO, 14-50971-KBO (December 16, 2019).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Nord Anglia Education, Inc., In the Grand Court of The Cayman Islands,
Financial Services Division, Cause No. FSD 235 of 2017 (IKJ). (December 6, 9, 10 and 11, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lindie L. Banks and Erica LeBlanc, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated vs. Northern Trust Corporation and Northern Trust Company, In the United States District
Court, Central District of California, Case No. 2: 16-cv-09141-JFK (JCx) (November 22, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tesla Motors, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware, C.A. No. 12711-VCS (November 19, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Melina N. Jacobs, On Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated vs.
Verizon Communications, Inc., et al., In the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-01082 (August 28, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: American Realty Capital Properties, Inc. Litigation, In the United States
District Court, Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 1:15-mc-00040-AKH Class Action (July 25,
2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Rajesh M. Shah, et al vs. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.,
et al, In the United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Case No. 3:16-
cv-815-PPS-MGG (May 17, 2019).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Colonial Chevrolet Co., Inc., et al., Alley’s of Kingsport, Inc., et al., and Union
Dodge, Inc., et al. vs. The United States (Nos. 10-647C, 11-100C, and 12-900L – Consolidated), In the
United States Court of Federal Claims (May 8, 2019).
A-6
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 36 of
98
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Anthem, Inc. vs. Cigna Corporation, In the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, C.A. No. 2017-0114-JTL (March 8, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Nine West holdings, Inc., et al., Debtors, United States Bankruptcy Court,
Southern District of New York, Chapter 11 Case No. 18-10947 (SCC) (January 16, 2019).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Sandisk LLC Securities Litigation, United States District Court, Northern
District of California, San Francisco Division, Case No. 3:15-cv-01455-VC (November 16, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Colonial Chevrolet Co., Inc., Alley’s of Kingsport, Inc. and Union Dodge, Inc.,
et al vs. The United States, In the United States Court of Federal Claims, Nos. 10-647C, 11-100C and 12-
900L (Consolidated) (November 15, 2018).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America, et al., vs. J-M Manufacturing Co., Inc., United
States District Court, Central District of California – Western Division, No. CV 6-55 GW (November 5,
2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Appraisal of Air Methods Corp., In the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, C.A. No.: 2017-0317-JRS (September 27 and 28, 2018).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Akorn, Inc., v. Fresenius Kabi, AG, et al., In the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware, C.A. No. 2018-0300-JTL (July 13, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Starz Stockholder Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 12584-VCG (July 12, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Akorn, Inc. vs. Fresenius Kabi AG, Quercus Acquisition, Inc. and Fresenius
SE & Co. KGaA, In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Index No. 2018-0300 (June 30, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Physiotherapy Holdings, Inc., et al., Debtors; PAH Litigation Trust v. Water
Street Healthcare Partners, L.P., et al., In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware,
Case No. 13-12965 (KG) (Jointly Administered) (June 5, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Facebook, Inc. Class C Reclassification Litigation, In the Court of Chancery
of the State of Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 12286-VCL (May 18, 2018).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Dr. Alan Sacerdote, et al. vs. New York University, In the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-6284-KBF (April 24, 25 and
26).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Daniel Turocy, et al. vs. El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc., et al., In the United
States District Court, Central District of California, Southern Division, Case No. 8:15-cv-01343-DOC-KES
(April 12, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. AT&T Inc., Directv Group Holdings, LLC, and
Time Warner Inc., In the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:17-cv-02511-
RJL (March 9, 2018).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Dr. Alan Sacerdote, et al. vs. New York University, In the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-6284-KBF (March 1, 2018).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., et al., In the United States Bankruptcy
Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11, Case No. 08-13555 (SCC) (December 4, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., et al., In the United States Bankruptcy
Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11, Case No. 08-13555 (SCC) (October 17, 2017).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Genon Energy, Inc., et al, Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division, Chapter 11, Case No. 17-33695 (DRJ) (October 6,
2017).
A-7
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 37 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Genon Energy, Inc., et al, Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division, Chapter 11, Case No. 17-33695 (DRJ)
(August 25, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States ex re. Hendrix et al., vs. JM Manufacturing Company, Inc.,
et al., In the United States District Court, Central District of California, Case No. ED CV 06-00055-GW
(July 20, 2017).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Saguaro Power Co. v. Pioneer Americas LLC d/b/a Olin Chlor Alkali
Products, In AAA Case No. 01-16-0005-1073 (June 30, 2017).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Syngenta AG MIR 162 Corn Litigation, In the United States District Court
for the District of Kansas, Master File No. 2:14-MD-02591-JWL-JPO (June 19, 2017).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Motors Liquidation Company, f/k/a General Motors Corporation, et al.,
Debtors, United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11, Case No.:09-
50026 (MG) and Motors Liquidation Company Avoidance Action Trust, et al vs. JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A., et al., United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case No.: 09-00504
(MG) (May 2 and 3, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Alere-Abbott Merger Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 12963-VCG (April 4, 2017).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Appraisal of AOL Inc., In the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, Consol C.A. No. 11204-VCG (March 20, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: City of Daytona Beach Policy and Fire Pension Fund, et al vs.
Examworks Group, Inc., et al., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware,
C.A. No. 12481-VCL (February 22, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Appraisal of AOL Inc., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware,
Consol C.A. No. 11204-VCG (February 14 and 15, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Motors Liquidation Company, f/k/a General Motors Corporation, et al.,
Debtors, United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11, Case No.:09-
50026 (MG) and Motors Liquidation Company Avoidance Action Trust, et al vs. JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., et al., United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case No.: 09-00504 (MG)
(January 31, 2017).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Syngenta Litigation, In the State of Minnesota District Court, County of
Hennepin Fourth Judicial District, Court File No. 27-CV-15-3785 and In Re: Syngenta AG MIR 162
Corn Litigation, In the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, Case No. 2:14-md-2591-
JWL-JPO (January 20, 2017).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Motiva Enterprises LLC vs. Bechtel Corporation, Jacobs
Engineering Group, Inc. and Bechtel-Jacobs CEP Port Arthur Joint Venture, International Institute for
Conflict Prevention and Resolution (October 20, 2016)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, et al., vs. Cyan, Inc., et al.,
Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco, Lead Case No. CGC-14-538355
(Consolidated with No. CGC-14-539008) (October 11, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Paragon Offshore PLC, et al, Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy
Court, District of Delaware, Case No. 16-10386 (September 23, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Motiva Enterprises LLC vs. Bechtel Corporation, Jacobs
Engineering Group, Inc. and Bechtel-Jacobs CEP Port Arthur Joint Venture, International Institute for
Conflict Prevention and Resolution (August 25, 2016)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn Litigation, In the United States District Court
for the District of Kansas; Case No. 2;14-MD-02591-JWL-JPO and In Re: Syngenta Litigation, In the
State of Minnesota District Court, County of Hennepin, Fourth Judicial District, Case No. 27-CV-15-385
(August 11, 2016).
A-8
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 38 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in The Western and Southern Life Insurance Company vs. The Bank of New
York Mellon, Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, Ohio, Case No. A 1302490 (July 27, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Herbalife, Ltd., vs. KPMG LLP, Non-Administered Arbitration of the
International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution, CPR Case No.
1100076998 (May 19, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in iHeart Communications, Inc., f/k/a Clear Channel Communications, Inc. vs.
Benefit Street Partners, et al., In the District Court of Bexar County, Texas, Cause No. 2016 CI 04006
(May 17, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in iHeart Communications, Inc., f/k/a Clear Channel Communications, Inc. vs.
Benefit Street Partners, et al., In the District Court of Bexar County, Texas, Cause No. 2016 CI 04006
(May 12, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Igor B. Oystacher and 3 Red
Trading, LLC, In the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division,
Docket No. 15 C 9196 (May 6, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Merion Capital LP and Merion Capital II, LP vs. Lender Processing
Services, Inc., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 9320-VCL (May 4 and 5,
2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in iHeart Communications, Inc., f/k/a Clear Channel Communications, Inc. v.
Benefit Street Partners LLC, et al., In the District Court of Bexar County, Texas, 285th Judicial District,
Cause No. 2016-CI 04006 (April 5, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in iHeart Communications, Inc., f/k/a Clear Channel Communications, Inc. v.
Benefit Street Partners LLC, et al., In the District Court of Bexar County, Texas, 285th Judicial District,
Cause No. 2016-CI 04006 (April 2, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Herbalife Ltd. vs. KPMG LLP, Non-Administered Arbitration of the International
Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution, CPR Case No.1100076998 (March 31, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Igor B. Oystacher and 3 Red
Trading, LLC, In the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 15-cv-
09196 (March 25, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Merion Capital LP and Merion Capital II, LP vs. Lender Processing Services,
Inc., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 9320-VCL (March 15, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Lawrence E. Jaffe Pension Plan, On Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly
Situated v. Household International, Inc., et al., In the United States District Court, Northern District of
Illinois Eastern Division, Lead Case No. 02-C-5893 (February 24, 2016).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Robert E. Morley, Jr. and REM Holdings 3, LLC vs. Square, Inc., Jack Dorsey,
and James McKelvey, Jr., United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern
Division, Civil Action No. 14-CV-00172-SNLJ (February 19, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of the Application of U.S. Bank National Association, The Bank of
New York Mellon, et al., Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Index No.
652382/2014 (January 20 and 21, 2016).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Sangeeth Peruri v. Ameriprise Financial, Inc., et al, American Arbitration
Association, Case No. 01-15-0002-3991 (December 7, 2015).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of the Application of U.S. Bank National Association, The Bank of
New York Mellon, The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., et al, In the Supreme Court of the
State of New York, County of New York, Index No. 652382/2014 (December 3, 2015).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Arkadiy Dubovoy, et al, In the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Civil Case No. 15-cv- 6076-MCA (October 8, 2015).
A-9
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 39 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Steven A. Stender, Harold Silver and Infinity Clark Street Operating, L.L.C.,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Archstone- Smith Operating Trust, et al., in
the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, Case No. 07-CV-02503-WJM-MJW (July
24, 2015).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Ephemeral Recording
and Digital Performance of Sound Recordings (Web IV), in the United States Copyright Royalty
Judges, The Library of Congress, Docket No. 14-CRB-0001-WR (2016-2020) (May 21 and 22, 2015).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Ephemeral Recording and
Digital Performance of Sound Recordings (Web IV), in the United States Copyright Royalty Judges, The
Library of Congress, Docket No. 14-CRB-0001-WR (2016-2020) (April 1, 2015).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in MacDermid, Incorporated vs. Cookson Group, PLC, Cookson Electronics and
Enthone, Inc., in the Superior Court, Judicial District of Waterbury, Docket No. UWY-CV-12-6016356-S
(January 21, 2015)
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in the Securities and Exchange Commission vs. Samuel E. Wyly and Donald R.
Miller, Jr., in his capacity as the Independent Executor of the Will and Estate of Charles J. Wyly, Jr., in
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, 10 Civ. 5760 (SAS) (November 17,
2014).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Activision Blizzard, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, In the Court of Chancery
of the State of Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 8885-VCL (October 17, 2014).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Hugh M. Caperton, Harman Development Corporation, Harman Mining
Corporation, and Sovereign Coal Sales, Inc. v. A.T. Massey Coal Company, Inc., In the Circuit Court for
Buchanan County, Case No. 027CL10000771-00 (May 20 and 21, 2014).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Center Partners, Ltd., et al v. Urban Shopping Centers, L.P., et al., In the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, Law Division, Case No. 04 L 012194 (April
24, 2014).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Third Point LLC v. William F. Ruprecht, et al and Sotheby’s, In the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 9469-VCP (April 19, 2014).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Hugh M. Caperton, Harman Development Corporation, Harman Mining
Corporation, and Sovereign Coal Sales, Inc. v. A.T. Massey Coal Company, Inc., In the Circuit Court for
Buchanan County, Case No. 027CL10000771-00 (March 14, 2014).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Corre Opportunities Fund, LP, Zazove Associates LLC, DJD Group LLLP,
First Derivative Traders LP, and Kevan A. Fight vs. Emmis Communications Corporation, United States
District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Case No. 1:12-cv-0491-SEB-TAB
(October 4, 2013).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of the Application of The Bank of New York Mellon, (As Trustee
Under Various Pooling and Servicing Agreements and Indenture Trustee under various indentures),
Petitioner, for an order, pursuant to CPLR §7701, seeking judicial instructions and approval of a
proposed settlement, Index No. 651786/11, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New
York: Trial Term Part 39 (September 9 and 10, 2013).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: September 11 Litigation, Case No. 21 MC 97 (AKH), United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, (July 16, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., et al v. American Airlines, Inc., et al, Case No. 21
MC 101 (AKH), 04 CV 7318 (AKH), United States District Court, Southern District of New York (July 1,
2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Pfizer Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 04 Civ. 9866 (RO) in The
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (June 28, 2013).
A-10
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 40 of
98
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in William T. Esrey, Julie C. Esrey, Ronald T. LeMay and Casondra C. Lemay v.
Ernst & Young LLP Arbitration, Case No. 13 107 Y 02332 11 (May 29, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Christine Bauer-Ramazani and Carolyn B. Duffy, on behalf of themselves and
all other similarly situated v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America – College
Retirement and Equities Fund (TIAA-CREF), et al, in the United States District Court, District of
Vermont, Docket No. 1:09-cv-190 (May 21, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Google Inc. Class C Shareholder Litigation, In the Court of Chancery
of the State of Delaware, Case No. 7469CS (May 17, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of the application of The Bank of New York Mellon (as Trustee
under various Pooling and Servicing Agreements and Indenture Trustee under various Indentures), et
al., Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Index No. 651786/2011 (May 9,
2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in William T. Esrey, Julie C. Esrey, Ronald T. Lemay, and Casondra C. Lemay v.
Ernst & Young, L.L.P., Before the American Arbitration Association, Case No. 1234 (May 7, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Archer Well Company, Inc. v. GW Holdings LLC and Wexford Capital LP, in
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, ECF Case No. 1 1:12-cv-06762-JSR
(April 5, 2013).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC , Meso Scale Technologies, LLC v. Roche
Diagnostics GmbH, et al., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Civil Action No. 5589-VCP
(February 27, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Center Partners, Ltd. et al v. Urban Shopping Centers, L.P., et al, Circuit
Court of Cook County, Illinois, No. 04 L 012194 (February 6 and 7, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: September 11 Litigation, United States District Court, Southern
District of New York, Civil Action No. 21 MC 101 (AKH) (January 11, 2013).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC, Meso Scale Technologies, LLC v. Roche
Diagnostics GmbH, et al., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Case No: 5589-VCP
(November 12, 2012).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Stuart Bederman, et al. v. Archstone, f/k/a Archstone-Smith Operating Trust,
Arbitration before the Honorable Bruce W. Kauffman (October 17, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in David E. Brown, et al. v. Authentec, Inc. et al., In the Circuit Court of the
Eighteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Brevard County, Florida, Civil Division, Case No. 05-2012-CA-57589
(September 18, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Stuart Bederman, et al. v. Archstone, f/k/a Archstone-Smith Operating
Trust, Arbitration before the Honorable Bruce W. Kauffman (September 14, 2012).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Tronox, Incorporated, et al., v. Kerr-McGee Corporation, et al., United States
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Adversary Proceeding No. 09-10098(ALG) (August 7,
8 and 9, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In re McAfee, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Superior Court of the State of
California, County of Santa Clara, Lead Case No. 1:10-cv-180413 (August 2, 2012).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Kraft Foods Global, Inc., v. Starbucks Corporation, Arbitration Before JAMS,
Arbitration No. 1340008345 (July 31, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Altana Pharma AG, and Wyeth v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva
Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., In the United States District Court, District of New Jersey, Consolidated
Civil Action Nos. 04-2355 (JLL)(CCC), 05-1966 (JLL)(CCC), 05-3920 (JLL)(CCC) and 05-3672
(JLL)(CCC) (June 1, 2012).
A-11
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 41 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Kraft Foods Global, Inc. v. Starbucks Corporation, Arbitration before JAMS,
Arbitration No. 1340008345 (May 15, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Capital One Financial Corporation v. John A. Kanas and John Bohlsen, In the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, Civil Action No. 1:11-
cv-750 (LO/TRJ) (May 10, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Pfizer Inc. Securities Litigation, In the United States District Court,
Southern District of New York, Case 1:04-cv-09866-LTS-HBP (May 3, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Willie R. Pittman, Susan B. Seales and Stephen T. Selzer vs. J. Coley Clark,
Moneygram International, Inc., et al., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 6387-
VCL (April 26, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Chona Allison, et al v. CRC Insurance Services, Inc., In the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Case No. 10-3313 (March 14 and 15,
2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tronox Incorporated, et al., Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy
Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11, Case No. 09-10156 (ALG) (February 24, 2012).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the State
of Delaware, Consolidated Civil Action No. 7068-VCL (January 27 and 30, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Hildene Capital Management, LLC et al v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc., et al,
In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 7068- VCL (January 19, 2012).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Advanced Analogic Technologies, Incorporated v. Skyworks Solutions, Inc.
and Powerco Acquisition Corp., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Arbitration No.
005-A-CS (November 18, 2011).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Prudential Retirement Insurance and Annuity Company v. State Street
Bank and Trust Company and State Street Global Advisors, Inc., United States District Court,
Southern District of New York, Case No. 07-CV-8488 (October 13, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Inkeepers USA Trust, et al v. Cerberus Series Four Holdings, LLC., et al,
United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 10-13800 (SCC) (October 5,
2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Mary K. Jones, et al v. Pfizer, Inc., et al, United States District Court, Southern
District of New York, Civil Action No. 10-cv-03864 (AKH) ECF (October 4, 2011).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Marina Del Rey Country Club Apartments, et al. vs. Archstone and Archstone
Multifamily Series I Trust, Ruby/Archstone Arbitration (August 30, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Maher Terminals, LLC v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey,
Before the Federal Maritime Commission, FMC Docket No. 08-03 (August 25, 2011).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Joseph P. Nacchio, Robert S.
Woodruff, Afshin Mohebbi, James J. Kozlowski and Frank T. Noyes, United States District Court for
the District of Colorado, Civil Action No. 05-cv-480-MSK-CBS (August 16, 2011).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel in Glenhill Capital LP, et al v. Porsche Automobil Holding, SE, f/k/a Dr. Ing. h.c. F.
Porsche AG, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Index Number 650678/2011
(August 15, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited and Crum & Forster Holdings Corp. v.
S.A.C. Capital Management, LLC, et al., Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division: Morris County,
Docket No. MRS-L-2032-06 (July 27, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lyondell Chemical Company, et al v. Leonard Blavatnik, et al., United
States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11 Case No. 09-10023 – (REG)
(Jointly Administered) (July 25, 2011).
A-12
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 42 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Constar Int’l Inc. Securities Litigation, United States District Court,
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Master File No. 03cv05020 (June 28, 2011).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Massey Energy Co. Derivative and Class Action Litigation, in The Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 5430-VCS (May 20, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Marina Del Rey Country Club, et al v. Archstone and Archstone Multifamily
Series I Trust, Ruby/Archstone Arbitration (May 9, 2011).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in The Dow Chemical Company v. Petrochemical Industries Company
(K.S.C.), International Chamber of Commerce, International Court of Arbitration, ICC Case No.
16127/JEM/MLK (April 7, 2011).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tribune Company, et al., Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the District of Delaware, Chapter 11, Case No. 08-13141 (KJC) (March 10, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tribune Company, et al., Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the District of Delaware, Chapter 11, Case No. 08-13141 (KJC) (March 2, 2011).
Deposition of Daniel F. Fischel In Re: Genetically Modified Rice Litigation, In the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, Case No. 4:06 MD 1811 CDP (February 15, 2011)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Riceland Food, Inc. v. Bayer Cropscience LP, et al, In the United States
District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, Case No. 4:09- cv-00433 CDP (January 18,
2011).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Genetically-Modified Rice Litigation, In the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Missouri, Case No. 4:06-MD-1811 (November 11, 12, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Coleen Witmer, Individually, and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Dynegy Inc., In the District Court of Harris County, Texas, 234th Judicial District
(November 6, 2010).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Terra Firma (GP) 2 Investments Limited v. Citigroup Inc., United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:09-CV-10459 (JSR) (November 2, 2010).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Terra Firma (GP) 2 Investments Limited v. Citigroup Inc., United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:09-CV-10459 (JSR) (October 22, 2010).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. v. Airgas, Inc., Peter McCausland, et al, In
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 5249-CC (October 5, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. v. Airgas, Inc., Peter McCausland, et al, In
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 5249-CC (September 8, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Terra Firma (GP) 2 Investments Limited v. Citigroup Inc., United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:09-CV-10459 (JSR) (July 28, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Citadel Investment Group, L.L.C. et al v. Mikhail Malyshev and Jace
Kohlmeier, In the American Arbitration Association, Case No.AAA No. 51 166 00969 09 (July 13, 2010).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Joseph P. Nacchio, in the United States
District Court for the District of Colorado, Case No. 05-CR-00545-EWN (June 23, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Cantor Fitzgerald Securities, Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., Cantor Fitzgerald
Partners v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, in the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, County of New York, Case No. 105447/94 (June 4, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Alaska Retirement Management Board on behalf of State of Alaska Public
Employees’ Retirement System and State of Alaska Teachers’ Retirement System v. Mercer (US), Inc.,
Mercer Human Resources Consulting, Inc., and William M. Mercer, Inc., in The Superior Court for the
State of Alaska, First Judicial District at Juneau, Case No. 1JU-07-974CI (April 29, 2010).
A-13
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 43 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: ACS Shareholders Litigation, in The Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, Consolidated Case No. 4940-VCP (April 26, 2010).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Carl W. Jasper, in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, Case No. C-07-06122-JW (April
16, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Prudential Retirement Insurance and Annuity Company v.
State Street Bank and Trust Company and State Street Global Advisors, Inc., in the United States
District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 07 CIV 8488 (April 9, 2010).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In re: Lyondell Chemical Company, et al., Debtors. Official Committee of
Unsecured Creditors, on behalf of the Debtors’ Estates v. Citibank, N.A., et al., in the United States
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Chapter 11 Case No. 09-10023 – (RED) (December 2,
2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Carl W. Jasper, In the United
States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division, Case No. CV 07-6122 (HRL)
(October 22, 2009).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in Ventas, Inc. v. HCP, Inc., In the United States District Court of the Western
District of Kentucky at Louisville, Civil Action No. 3:07-cv-00238-JGH (September 2, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Frank K. Cooper Real Estate #1, Inc., et al vs. Cendant Corporation f/k/a
Hospitality Franchise Systems and Century 21 Real Estate Corporation, Superior Court of New Jersey,
Law Division: Morris County, Docket No. MRS-L-377-02 (August 10, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in Ventas, Inc. v. HCP, Inc., In the United States District Court of the Western
District of Kentucky at Louisville, Civil Action No. 3:07-cv-00238-JGH (August 3, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Amaranth Advisors, L.L.C.,
Amaranth Advisors (Calgary) and Brian Hunter, in the United States District Court, Southern District of
New York, Case No. 07 CIV 6682 (July 8, 2009).
Declaration and Expert Surrebutal Report of Daniel R. Fischel in Ventas, Inc. v. HCP, Inc., In The United
States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky at Louisville, Case No. 3:07-CV-00238-JGH
(June 22, 2009).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel in NRG Energy, Inc. v. Exelon Corporation and Exelon Exchange Corporation, in
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No.
09-CV-2448 (JGK) (DFE), (June 3, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Delphi Corporation v. Appaloosa Management L.P., et al., In the United
States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York; Chapter 11, Case No. 05-44481(RDD) (Jointly
administered), (June 2, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in NRG Energy, Inc. v. Exelon Corporation and Exelon Exchange
Corporation, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 09-CV-2448
(JGK) (DFE), (May 31, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel in e-Bay Domestic Holdings, Inc. v. Craig Newmark and James Buckmaster
and Craigslist, Inc., in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Case No. 3705-CC (May 29,
2009)
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lawrence E. Jaffe Pension Plan, et al v. Household International,
Inc., et al, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division,
No. 02-C-5893 (April 16, 20, 28 and 29, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Rohm and Haas Company v. The Dow Chemical Company and
Ramses Acquisition Corp., In the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 4309-
CC (March 4, 2009).
A-14
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 44 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Hoffman, et al. v. American Express Travel Related Services
Company, Inc., et al., in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Alameda,
Case No. 2001-022881 (January 15, 2009).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: TyCom Ltd. Securities Litigation, in the United States District Court,
District of New Hampshire, Docket No. 03-CV-1352 (September 22, 2008).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Hexion Specialty Chemicals, Inc., et al v. Huntsman Corp., in the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Civil Action No. 3841-VCL (September 4, 2008).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Stone Energy Corp. Securities Litigation, in the United States District
Court, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette-Opelousas Division, Civil Action No. 6:05CV2088
(LEAD) (July 16, 2008).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, in the United States District
Court, Southern District of New York, Master File No. 21 MC 92 (SAS) (April 3 and 4, 2008).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lawrence E. Jaffe Pension Plan, et al v. Household International, Inc., et
al, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 02-C-5893
(March 21, 2008).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: IAC/InteractiveCorp and Barry Diller v. Liberty Media Corporation,
in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Consolidated Case
Number 3486-VCL (February 29, 2008).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Immunicon Corporation v. Veridex LLC, before the American Arbitration
Association (Commercial Arbitration Rules), Case Number 50 180T 00192 07 (January 17, 2008).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Unitedglobalcom Shareholders Litigation, in the Court of Chancery of
the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Consolidated C.A. No. 1012-N (November 19,
2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Cendant Corporation Litigation, in the United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey, Master File No. 98-1664 (WHW) (November 15, 2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Cendant Corporation Litigation, in the United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey, Master File No. 98-1664 (WHW) (October 16, 2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Schering-Plough Corporation Securities Litigation, in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey, Master File No. 01-CV-0829 (KSH/RJH) (October 12,
2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Carpenters Health & Welfare Fund, et al. vs. The Coca- Cola Company, in
the United States District Court, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, File No. 1:00-CV-2838-
WBH (Consolidated) (September 26, 2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Parker Freeland, et al., vs. Iridium World Communications, Ltd., et al., in
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 99-1002 (August 7, 2007)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Chuck Ginsburg v. Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., et al., In the Court
of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, C.A. No. 2202-N (June 12, 2007).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Holcombe T. Green and HTG Corp. v. McKesson, Inc., et al, In the
Superior Court for the County of Fulton, State of Georgia, Civil Action File No.
2002-CV-48407 (June 5, 2007).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lear Corporation Shareholders Litigation, In the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware, Consolidated C.A. No. 2728-VCS (May 30, 2007).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Aeroflex, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, in the Supreme Court of the State of
New York, County of Nassau: Commercial Division, Index No. 07-003943 (May 23, 2007).
A-15
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 45 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Holcombe T. Green and HTG Corp. v. McKesson, Inc., HBO &
Company, Albert Bergonzi, and Jay Gilbertson, in the Superior Court for the County of Fulton, State of
Georgia, Civil Action File No. 2002W48407 (May 21, 2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Adelphia Communications Corp. v. Deloitte & Touche LLP, et al, in the
Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, Case No. 000598 (May 3 and 4, 2007).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Joseph P. Nacchio, in the United States
District Court for the District of Colorado, Case No. 05-CR-00545-EWN (April 9, 2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: MK Resources Company Shareholders Litigation, in the Court of
Chancery for the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, C.A. No. 1692- N (February 22,
2007).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Starr International Company, Inc. v. American International Group, Inc., In
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 05 CV 6283 (January 26,
2007).
Written testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Verizon Communications Inc. and Verizon Services Corp. v.
Christopher G. Pizzirani, In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Case
No. 2:06-cv-04645-MK (November 6, 2006).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Northeast Savings, F.A. v. United States of America, In the United States
Claims Court, Case No. 92-550 C (November 2 and 9, 2006).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Sanjay Kumar and Stephen Richards,
United States District Court, Eastern District of New York, 04 Civ. 4104 (ILG) (October 25, 2006).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lionel I. Brazen and Nancy Hammerslough, et al v. Tyco International Ltd., et
al, In the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois County Department, Chancery Division, No. 02 CH 11837
(September 18, 2006).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tele-Communications, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, in the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Consolidated
C.A. No. 16470 (September 15, 2006).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Sanjay Kumar and Stephen Richards,
United States District Court, Eastern District of New York, 04 Civ. 4104 (ILG) (September 8, 2006).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: James Gilbert v. McKesson Corporation, et al., in the State Court of
Fulton County, State of Georgia, Civil Action File No. 02VS032502C (September 7, 2006).
Supplemental Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Jeffrey K. Skilling, in the
United States District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Crim. No. H-04-25 (Lake,
J.) (August 25, 2006).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Sanjay Kumar and Stephen Richards,
United States District Court, Eastern District of New York, 04 Civ. 4104 (ILG) (August 22, 2006).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Jeffrey K. Skilling, in the United States
District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Crim. No. H-04- 25 (Lake, J.) (August 3,
2006).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Enron Corporation Securities Litigation, in the United States District
Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case Number: H-01- 3624 (May 24, 2006).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Guidant Corporation Shareholders Derivative Litigation, in the United
States District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Master Derivative Docket No.
1:03-CV-955-SEB-WTL (January 20, 2006).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re. Hideji Jumbo Tanaka v. Cerberus Far East Management, L.L.C., et al.,
AAA Case No. 50 T 116 00284 03, (December 15, 2005).
A-16
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 46 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: McKesson HBOC, Inc. Securities Litigation, in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California, No. C-99-20743-RMW (August 16, 2005).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Visconsi Companies Ltd., et al. and Lehman Brothers, et al.,
National Association of Securities Dealers Department of Arbitration, Grievance No. 03-07606 (July 26,
2005).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: John P. Crowley, as Receiver of Ambassador Insurance Company v.
Doris June Chait, et al., in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 85-
2441 (HAA) (July 21 and 22, 2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Electronic Data Systems Corporation Securities Litigation, in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Case No. 6:03-MD-1512 (July 20,
2005).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al, in the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:99CV02496 (May 26 and 27, 2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corporation, et ano, in the
United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Case No. 03-027-SLR (May 25, 2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al, in the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:99CV02496 (May 16, 2005).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Drury Industries, Inc. v. Drury Properties, Inc., in the First Judicial District
Court of the State of Nevada in and for Carson City, Nevada (April 6 and 7, 2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Jerry R. Summers and George T. Lenormand, et al v. UAL Corporation
ESOP Committee, Marty Torres, Barry Wilson, Doug Walsh, Ira Levy, Don Clements, Craig Musa, and
State Street Bank and Trust Company, in the United States District Court for the North District of Illinois,
Eastern Division, No. 03 C 1537 (March 9, 2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Drury Industries, Inc. v. Drury Properties, Inc., in the First Judicial District
Court of the State of Nevada in and for Carson City, Nevada (March 7 and 10, 2005).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Fyffes PLC v. DCC PLC, S&L Investments Limited, James
Flavin and Lotus Green Limited, in The High Court, Dublin, Ireland (2002 No. 1183P) (February 1 and 2,
2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of the Arbitration between The Canada Life Assurance Company
and The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America (January 12, 2005).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: IDT Corporation vs. Telefonica, S.A., et al, in the United States District
Court, District of New Jersey, Civil Action No. 01-CV 471 (December 14, 2004).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: DQE, Inc. Securities Litigation, in the United States District Court,
Western District of Pennsylvania, Master File No. 01-1851 (December 7, 2004)
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Daniel Bayly, James A Brown, Robert S. Furst,
Daniel O. Boyle, William R. Fuhs and Sheila K. Kahanek, in the United States District Court of Southern
Texas Houston Division, Case No. H-CR-03-363 (November 4, 2004).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of the Arbitration Between the Canada Life Assurance
Company, Petitioner v. Caisse Centrale De Reassurance, Respondent, (November 2, 2004).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power
Company, and Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company v. The United States, in the United States Court of
Federal Claims, Case Nos. 98-126C, 98-154C and 98-474C (August 9, 2004).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Oracle Corp. Derivative Litigation, in the Court of the Chancery of the State
of Delaware In and For New Castle County, Consolidated Civil Action No. 18751 (June 8, 2004).
A-17
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 47 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Reading International, Inc., et al v. Regal Entertainment Group, et al,
(Delaware Chancery Court) (May 30, 2004).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Reading International, Inc., et al v. Regal Entertainment Group, et al,
(Delaware Chancery Court) (May 28, 2004).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Northeast Savings, F.A. v. United States of America, in the United States
Claims Court, Case No. 92-550-C (May 4, 5 and 6, 2004).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tyson Foods, Inc. Securities Litigation, in the United States District
Court for the District of Delaware, Civil Action No. 01-425-SLR (March 18, 2004).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Coram Healthcare Corp. and Coram, Inc., Debtors, In the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, Case No. 00- 3299 Through 00-3300 (MFW) (March
4, 2004).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tracinda Corporation v. DaimlerChrysler AG, et al, in the United States
District Court for the District of Delaware, Civil Action No. 00-984 (February 11, 2004)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Gerald K. Smith, as Plan Trustee for and on behalf of the Estates of
Boston Chicken, Inc., et al. v. Arthur Anderson LLP, et al., in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, Case Nos. CIV-01-218-PHX-PGR, CIV-01- 246-PHX-EHC, CIV-02-1162-
PHX-PGR, CIV-02-1248-PHX-PGR (Consolidated) (October
29 and 30, 2003).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Irene Abrams, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Van
Kampen Funds, Inc., Van Kampen Investment Advisory Corp., Van Kampen Prime Rate Income Trust,
Howard Tiffen, Richard F. Powers III, Stephen L. Boyd, Dennis J. McDonnell and Jeffrey W. Maillet, in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Case No. 01-C-7538
(October 21, 2003).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Coram Healthcare Corp. and Coram, Inc., Debtors, In the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, Case No. 00- 3299 Through 00-3300 (MFW)
(October 13, 2003).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Transcore Holdings, Inc. v. Rocky Mountain Mezzanine Fund II, LP;
Hanifen Imhoff Mezzanine Fund, LP; Moramerica Capital Corporation; and NDSBIC, LP and W. Trent
Ates and Fred H. Rayner, In Re: Jams Arbitration, Case No.
1410003193 (September 24, 2003).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Transcore Holdings, Inc. v. Rocky Mountain Mezzanine Fund II, LP;
Hanifen Imhoff Mezzanine Fund, LP; Moramerica Capital Corporation; and NDSBIC, LP and W. Trent
Ates and Fred H. Rayner, In Re: Jams Arbitration, Case No.
1410003193 (May 13, 2003).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: AT&T Broadband Management Corporation v. CSG Systems, Inc.,
American Arbitration Association No. 77 181 00159 02 VSS (April 9, 2003).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: DaimlerChrysler AG Securities Litigation, in the United States District
Court for the District of Delaware, Civil Action No. 00-993-JJF (February 11 and 12, 2003).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: David T. Bard, Commissioner of Banking and Insurance for the State of
Vermont, as Receiver for Ambassador Insurance Company v. Arnold Chait, et al, in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey, Civil Action No. 85- 2441 (December 12, 2002).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: MHC Financing Limited Partnership, et al vs. City of San Rafael, et al, in
the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. C 00-3785 VRW (November 6,
2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: MHC Financing Limited Partnership, et al vs. City of San Rafael, et al, in
the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. C 00-3785 VRW (October 16,
2002).
A-18
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 48 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company v. United States of America, In the
United States Court of Federal Claims, Case No. 98-474 C (October 8 and 9, 2002)
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: California Federal Bank, FSB v. The United States of America, In the
United States Court of Federal Claims, Case No. 92-138C (September 20 and 23, 2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company v. United States of America, In the
United States Court of Federal Claims, Case No. 98-474 C (September 4 and 6, 2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of RDM Sports Group, Inc., et al v. Smith, Gambrell, Russell,
L.L.P.; et al, In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Newnan Division,
Case No. 00-1065 (May 14 and 15, 2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Walter B. Hewlett, individually and as Trustee of the William R. Hewlett
Revocable Trust, and Edwin E. van Bronkhorst as Co-Trustee of the William R. Hewlett Revocable Trust
v. Hewlett-Packard Company, in the Court of the Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New
Castle County (April 24, 2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: California Federal Bank, FSB, v. The United States of America, in the
United States District Court of Federal Claims, Case No. 92-138C (April 16 and 17, 2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Computer Associates Class Action Securities Litigation, in the United
States District Court, Eastern District of New York, File No. 98-CV-4839 (TPC) (MLO) (March 19 and 20,
2002).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. David Blech, In the United States District
Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. S1 97 Cr. 402 (KTD) (February 13, 2002).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Coram Healthcare Corp. and Coram, Inc., Debtors, In the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, Case No. 00- 3299 Through 00-3300 (MFW)
(December 14, 2001).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Sunbeam Securities Litigation, In the United States District Court,
Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, Case No. 98-8258-CIV – Middlebrooks (December 4,
5 and 6, 2001).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Jack M. Webb, Special Deputy Receiver for American Eagle Insurance
Company v. Elvis Mason, Mason Best Company, L.P., Don D. Hutson, American Eagle Group, Inc., Marion
Phillip Guthrie, Frederick G. Anderson, George F. Cass, Richard M. Kurz, Patricia S. Pickard, Arthur
Andersen & Co., L.L.P., and Towers, Perrin Forester & Crosby, Inc., D/B/A Tillinghast, In the District Court
of Travis County, Texas, 201st Judicial District, Cause No. 99-08253 (September 7, 2001).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In the Matter of Inquiry Concerning High-Speed Access to the Internet Over
Cable and Other Facilities: Before the Federal Communications Commission, Washington DC, GN
Docket No. 00-185, (Declaration with K. Arrow, G. Becker, D. Carlton, R. Gertner, J. Kalt, H. Sider, and
Gustavo Bamberger) (July 24, 2001).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Walter Green, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.
Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C., United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Civil
Action No. 99 CIV 0847 (CLB) (June 18, 2001).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re:Tyson Foods, Inc. and Lasso Acquisition Corporation v.
IBP, Inc., Delaware Chancery Court, (May 25, 2001).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re:Tyson Foods, Inc. and Lasso Acquisition Corporation v.
IBP, Inc., Delaware Chancery Court, (May 10, 2001).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Myron Weiner, Nicholas Sitnycky, Ronald Anderson and Robert Furman
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. The Quaker Oats Company and William D.
Smithburg, United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Case No. 98 C 3123, (January 24,
2001).
A-19
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 49 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Retsky Family Limited Partnership v. Price Waterhouse, LLP, United
States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 97 C 7694, (October 31, 2000).
Joint Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel and David J. Ross In Re: Floyd D. Wilson, for himself and all others similarly
situated v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, in the First Judicial District Court, County of
Santa Fe, State of New Mexico, No. D0101 CV-98-02814 (August 4, 2000).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: T. Rowe Price Recovery Fund, L.P., and Carl Marks Management Co.,
L.P., individually and derivatively on behalf of Seaman Furniture Co., Inc. v. James Rubin, M.D. Sass
Associates, Inc., Resurgence Asset Management, L.L.C., M.D. Sass Corporation Resurgence Partners,
L.P. , M.D. Sass Corporate Resurgence International, Ltd., Robert Symington, Byron Haney, Alan
Rosenberg, Steven H. Halper, and Peter McGeough and Seaman Furniture Co., Inc., In the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, C.A. No. 18013, (June 7, 2000).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Bank United of Texas, FSB, et al., v. United States of America, United
States Court of Federal Claims, Case Number 95-437C, (October 12 and 14, 1999).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Bank United of Texas, FSB, et al., v. United States of America, United
States Court of Federal Claims, Case Number 95-437C, (September 26, 1999; July 10, 1999; and June
16, 17, 1999).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: C. Robert Suess, et al., v. The United States, United States Court
of Federal Claims, No. 90- 981C (May 17, 1999).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lexecon, Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Specthrie & Lerach, et al.,
in the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, Case No. 92 C
7768 (March 8, 9, 10 and 15, 1999).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: California Federal Bank v. United States, in the United States Court
of Federal Claims, Case Number 92-138C, (February 4 and 11, 1999).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: California Federal Bank v. United States, in the United States Court of
Federal Claims, Case Number 92-138C, (February 6, 1999; January 27 and 30, 1999).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: C. Robert Suess, et al., v. The United States, United States Court of
Federal Claims, No. 90- 981C (October 27 and 28, 1998).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Connector Service Corporation v. Jeffrey Briggs, United States District
Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 97-C-7088 (August 28, 1998).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Statesman Savings Holding Corp., et al. v. United States of America,
United States Court of Federal Claims, Case No. 90-773C, (May 4, 1998 and February 12, 1998).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Glendale Federal Bank FSB v. United States of America, United States
Court of Federal Claims, No. 90-772C, (March 24, 25 and 26, 1998; September 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
24, 25, 26 and 27, 1997; October 7, 9, 16, 17, 30
and 31, 1997; December 8, 9 and 10, 1997).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel and David J. Ross In Re: Publicis Communication v. True North Communications
Inc., et al., United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Case No. 97-C-
8263, (December 7, 1997).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Glendale Federal Bank FSB v. United States of America, United States
Court of Federal Claims, No. 90-772C, (August 27 and 28, 1997).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: AUSA Life Insurance Company, et al. v. Ernst & Young, in the United
States District Court, Southern District of New York, Master File No. 94 CIV.
3116 (CLB) (July 7 and 8, 1997).
A-20
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 50 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Santa’s Best, f/k/a National Rennoc, an Illinois general partnership, and
Tinsel/Ruff Group Limited Partnership, an Illinois limited partnership v. Rennoc Limited Partnership, a
New Jersey limited parternship, v. Tinsel/Ruff Group Limited Parternship, an Illinois limited partnership,
in the Circuit Court of Cook, Illinois County Department - Chancery Division, No. 95 CH 12160, (June
17, 1997).
Arbitration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Lerner v. Goldman Sachs, et. al., Before the American Arbitration
Association, 75-136-00090-94 (April 10, 1997).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Hilton Hotels Corporation and HLT Corporation v. ITT Corporation, United
States District Court, District of Nevada, CV-S-97-00095-PMP (RLH) (March 24, 1997).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Glendale Federal Bank, FSB v. United States of America, Washington,
D.C., Case No. 90-772C, (March 19, 1997; January 30 and 31, 1997).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Statesman Savings Holding Corporation v. United States of America,
Washington, D.C., Case No. 90-773-C, (February 19 and 20, 1997).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Westcap Enterprises, Inc. and Westcap Corporation, Debtor; in the United
States Bankruptcy Court, for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Houston, Texas; Case No.
96-43191-H2-11, (November 1996).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. Robert R. Krilich, in the United States
District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 94 CR 419, (August 20, 1996 and July
15, 1996)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: McMahan & Company, Froley, Revy Investment Co., Inc. and Wechsler
& Krumholz, Inc. v. Wherehouse Entertainment, Inc., Louis A. Kwiker, George A. Smith, Michael T.
O’Kane, Lawrence K. Harris, et al., United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Index No.
88 Civ. 0321 (SS) (AJP), (July 16, 1996 and June 10, 1996).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Joseph W. and Helen B. Teague, Steven Allen Barker, Rita Strahowski,
Swannee Beck, and Lifetime Partners of PTL, as representatives of a nationwide class consisting of
150,129 Lifetime Partners and of 27,839 persons who have partially paid for Lifetime Partnerships v.
James O. Bakker, in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Civil
Action No. 3:87CV514, (June 28, 1996).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Snapple Beverage Corporation Securities Litigation, in the United States
District Court, Eastern District of New York, Master File No. CV 94-3647 (May 30, 1996).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Chuck Quackenbush, Insurance Commissioner of the State of California,
in his capacity as Trustee of Mission Insurance Company Trust, et al. v. Borg-Warner Corporation, Borg
Warner Equities Corporation, Borg-Warner Insurance Service, Inc., et al., for the Superior Court of the
State of California, for the County of Los Angeles, No. C688487 (April 18, 1996).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Chuck Quackenbush, Insurance commissioner of the State of California,
in his capacity as Trustee of Mission Insurance Company Trust, et al. v. Borg-Warner Corporation, Borg
Warner Equities Corporation, Borg-Warner Insurance Service, Inc., et al., for the Superior Court of the
State of California, for the County of Los Angeles, No. C688487 (April 17, 1996).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Household Commercial Financial Services, Inc. a citizen of the states of
Delaware and Illinois v. Julius Trump, a citizen of the State of Florida, Edmond Trump, a citizen of the
state of Florida, James M. Jacobson, a citizen of the State of New York, and Parker, Chapin, Flattau &
Klimpl, a citizen of the states of New York and New Jersey, in the United States District Court, for the
Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, 92 C 5010 (February 1, 1996).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: JWP, Inc. Securities Litigation, in the United States District Court,
Southern District of New York, Master File No. 92 Civ. 5815 (CLB); AUSA Life Insurance Company, et
al. v. Ernst & Young, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Master File No.
94 Civ. 3116 (CLB) (November 30, 1995; November 9, 1995; October 18 and 19, 1995; September 28,
1995).
A-21
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 51 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: City of Houston Municipal Employees Pension System, a Texas
association v. PaineWebber Group Inc., et al., in the United States District Court, Eastern District of
Missouri, Eastern Division, No. 4:94CV0073CAS (November 15 and 16, 1995).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: American Continental Corporation/Lincoln Savings & Loan Securities
Litigation - Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach and Kevin P. Roddy, in the United
States District Court, District of Arizona, Civ-93-1087-PHX-JMR (July 25 and 26, 1995).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Keith C. Bogard, et al., v. National Community Bank Inc., et al., in the
United States District Court, District of New Jersey, No. 90-5-32 (HAA) (December 20, 1994).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Harvey Rosen, Ben Rogers and Julie Rogers v. Deloitte & Touche,
Elias Zinn, Julius Zinn, Dennis Lamm, and Ronald Begnaud, in the 268th Judicial District Court, of Fort
Bend County, Texas, Cause No. 84-482 (November 9, 1994).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: PPM America, Inc., et al. v. Marriott Corporation et al., in the United
States District Court, for the District of Maryland, Civil Docket No. H-92-3068 (October 12, 1994).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., Securities Litigation, United States
District Court, for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Civil Action H-903477 (September 1,
1994).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Computer Associates International Inc. Securities Litigation, United
States District Court, Eastern District of New York, CV-90-2398 (JBW) (May 26 and 27, 1994).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: PPM America, Inc., et al. v. Marriott Corporation et al., United States
District, for the District of Maryland, H-92-3068 (May 10, 1994 and March 8, 1994).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Shared Medical Systems
Corporation, R. James Macaleer, James C. Kelly and Clyde M. Hyde, United States District Court, for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Civil Action - Law: No. 91- CV-6549 (February 22, 1994).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Peter M. Schultz and Pamela A. Schultz v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust
National Bank, N.A., et al., United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 88-
2870-T (February 16, 1994).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Henry T. Endo, et al. v. John M. Albertine, et al., United States District
Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, No. 88 C 1815 (November 11 and 12, 1993;
October 28, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Computer Associates International Inc. Securities Litigation, United
States District Court, Eastern District of New York, CV 90-2398 (JBW) (November 2, 1993 and February
4, 1993).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Peter M. Schultz and Pamela A. Schultz v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust
National Bank, N.A. et al., United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, Civil Action No. SS-
2870-T (October 28, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Alpheus John Goddard, III, etc. v. Continental Bank N.A., etc., State of
Illinois, County of Cook, Circuit Court of Cook County, County Department- Chancery Division, No. 89 CH
1081 (September 10, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Taxable Municipal Bond Section “G” Securities Litigation, United States
District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, MDL No. 863 (September 2, 1993).
Reply Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Columbia Securities Litigation, United States District Court Southern
District of New York, 89 Civ. 6821 (LBS) (August 30, 1993).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Consumers Gas & Oil, Inc. v. Farmland Industries, Inc., et al., United
States District Court, for the District of Colorado, Civil Action No. 92-F-1394 (August 26, 1993).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Equitec Rollup Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, Master file No. C90 2064 CAL (July 28, 1993).
A-22
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 52 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United Telecommunications, Inc. Securities Litigation, United States
District Court for the District of Kansas, No. 90-2251-0 (July 22, 1993, April 21 and 22, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Consumers Gas & Oil, Inc., a Colorado farm cooperative in liquidation,
on behalf of itself and others similarly situated v. Farmland Industries, Inc., a Kansas farm cooperative,
et al., United States District Court, District of Colorado, 92-F- 1394 (June 18, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re. Rosalind Wells v. HBO & Company, United States District Court,
Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, 8-87-CV-657A (JTC) (June 10, 1993 and May 24, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Equitec Rollup Litigation, United States District Court, Northern District of
California, No. C-90-2064 CAL (June 2 and 3, 1993).
Supplemental Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Oracle Securities Litigation, United States District Court,
Northern District of California, Master File No. C 90 0931 VRW (May 20, 1993).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel and Kenneth R. Cone In Re: Raymond P. Hayden, et al. v. Jeffrey L. Feldman,
et al., United States District Court, Southern District of New York No. 88 Civ. 8048 (JES) (May 12,
1993).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Melridge, Inc., Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the
District of Oregon, CV No. 87-1426-FR (May 4 and 5, 1993).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Oracle Securities Litigation, United States District Court, Northern District
of California, Master File No. C 90 0931 VRW (April 20, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Gillette Securities Litigation, United States District Court, District of
Massachusetts, No. 88-1858-K (April 1, 1993).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Columbia Securities Litigation, United States District Court, Southern District
of New York, 89 Civ. 6821 (LBS) (March 25, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Westinghouse Securities Litigation, United States District Court, Western
District of Pennsylvania, CV No. 91 354 (March 23, 1993).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Oracle Securities Litigation, United States District Court, Northern District
of California, Master File No. C 90-0931 VRW (March 22, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Kroy, Inc., a Minnesota corporation et al. v. Bankers Trust New York
Corporation, et al., Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa, No. CV 89-
35680 (March 18, 1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Amos M. Ames, Helen M. Ames, Robert F. Bourke, Louise L. Bourke,
Leo E. Corr, April C. Corr, Wence M. Horak, Ruth Horak, Robert T. Freas, Maurita Freas, Bruce Fink,
Jr., William H. Jones, Candace A. Jones, Richard Paul, William L. Paul, Carole Paul, Steven J. Paul,
Best Power Technology, Incorporated, and Best Power Technology Sales Corporation, in the State of
Wisconsin, Circuit Court, Juneau County, Consolidated Case Nos. 92-CV-31, 92-CV-32 (January 26,
1993).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Federal Express Corporation Shareholder Litigation, in the United States
District Court, Western District of Tennessee, Master File No. 90-2359- 4B (December 3, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Raymond Snyder, Individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated
v. Oneok, Inc., et al., in the United States District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma, Civil Action No.
88 C 1500 E (October 15 and 16, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Melridge, Inc. Securities Litigation, Consolidated Actions, United States
District Court, District of Oregon, Master File No. CV87-1426-JU and Nos.
387-06589-P11, 88-05-JU, 88-221-JU, 88-0699-PA, 88-1266-JU (September 17, 1992;
July 25 and 26, 1991).
A-23
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 53 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Maxus Corporate Company v. Kidder, Peabody & Co. Incorporated, Martin
A. Siegel and Ivan F. Boesky, in the District Court Dallas County, Texas, 298th Judicial District, No. 87-
15583-M (September 11, 1992; August 18 and 19,
1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Jennifer A. Florin and Alan L. Mundt, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. Wesray Capital Corp., Citizens and Southern Trust Company, a subsidiary
of Citizens and Southern Corporation, Robert K. Barton, Leonard S. Gaby, Allen G. Lacoe, Robert A.
Magnusson, Anthony A. Saliture, Harlan B. Smith, Thomas F. Stutzman, Raymond G. Chambers,
Frank E. Richardson, E. Burke Ross, Jr., William E. Simon and Frank W. Walsh, Jr., in the United
States District Court, Western District of Wisconsin, Civil Action No. 91C-0948 (August 12, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Pearl Newman, Shanna Lehmann & Athanasios Tsivelekidis, on their
own behalf and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. On- Line Software International, Inc.
Jack M. Berdy, John C. Crocker, Richard A. Granger, Richard R. Holtmeier, Michael S. Juceam, Edward
J. Siegel, Howard P. Sorgen and Richard Ward, United States District Court, District of New Jersey,
Consolidated Civil Action Nos. 88-3247, 88-3411 (July 28 and 29, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Crazy Eddie Securities Litigation, Oppenheimer-Palmieri Fund, I.P., et al.
v. Peat Marwick Main & Co., et al., United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, 87
Civ. 0033 (EHN), 88 Civ. 3481 (EHN) (June 11, 1992;
March 26 and 27, 1992).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: American Continental Corporation/Lincoln Savings and Loan Securities
Litigation, in the United States District Court, for the District of Arizona MDL Docket No. 834 (June 4,
1992; May 26, 27 and 28, 1992).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: State of West Virginia v. Morgan Stanley & Co.
Incorporated, in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, State of West Virginia, Civil Action No. 89-C-
3700 (April 27, 1992).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: William Steiner, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.
Tektronix, Inc., et al., in the United States District Court, District Court of Oregon, Civil No. 90-587-JO
(March 23, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Martin Kaplan and Selma Kaplan, on Behalf of Themselves and All
Others Similarly Situated v. VICORP Restaurants, Inc., Charles R. Frederickson, Robert S. Benson,
Emerson B. Kendall, Robert T. Marto and Johyn C. Hoyt, United States District Court, District of
Colorado, Civil Action No. 90-C-2182 (February 11, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Interco Incorporated v. Wasserstein, Perella & Co., Inc., United States
District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, No. 91-0151-C- 6 (February 3, 1992 and
December 12, 1991).
Statement of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Far West Federal Bank, S.B., et al. v. Director, Office of Thrift Supervision,
et al., United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Civil Action No. 90-103 PA (February 3,
1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Capital Bank of California v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Incorporated, United
States District Court, Central District of California, No. 91-1650-R (January 24, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Trinity Ventures, et al. v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in its
own capacity and as successor to the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, United States
District Court, for the District of Oregon, No. 90-103- PA (January 6, 1992).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: First Republicbank Securities Litigation, United States District Court,
Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Civil Action No. 3-88-0641-H (January 2, and 3, 1992;
November 26, 1991).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: State of West Virginia v. Morgan Stanley & Co.
Incorporated; Salomon Brothers Inc.; and Goldman Sachs & Co., in the Circuit Court of Kanawha
County, State of West Virginia, Civil Action No. 89-C-3700 (December 19 and 20, 1991).
A-24
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 54 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Regina Company, Inc. Securities Litigation, United States District
Court, District of New Jersey, Civil Action No. 88-4149 (HAA) (October 31, 1991).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Gillette Securities Litigation, United States District Court, District of
Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 88-1858-K (October 7, 1991)
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Capital Maritime Corporation v. Amfels, Inc., Far East Levingston
Shipbuilding Ltd., John B. Allison and Patrick A. McDermid, United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas Houston Division, C.A. No. H-90-3417 (September 12, 1991).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Thomas J. Caldarone, Jr. v. Isidore Brown, et al., and John E.
Washburn, et al. v. Isidore Brown, et al., United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern
Division, Docket Nos. 80 C 6251 and 81 C 1475 (August 28, 29,
and 30, 1991).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Apple Securities Litigation, United States District Court, Northern District
of California, Northern Division, Docket No. C-84-20148 (May 20 and 21, 1991).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Stuart-James Co., Inc., et al. Litigation, United States of America
before the Securities & Exchange Commission, in Denver, Colorado, Administrative Proceeding File No.
3-7164 (May 6, 1991).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Jennie Farber on behalf of herself and all others similarily situated v.
Public Service Company of New Mexico; Jerry D. Geist; John P. Bundrant and Albert J. Robison, United
States District Court for the District of New Mexico, CIV 89-456 JB WWD (April 17 and 18, 1991).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Moise Katz, Frederick Rand, Elias Weissman, Richard D. Morgan, Marion R.
Morgan and Mortimer Schulman v. Raymond A. Hay, United States District Court, Southern District of
New York, No. 86 Civ. 5640 (JES) (March 29, 1991).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Standard Chartered PLC., a United Kingdom corporation, et al. v. Price
Waterhouse, a general partnership, Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the County of
Maricopa, CV 88-34414 (March 13 and 14, 1991).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. AVX Corporation, and Commonwealth of
Massachusetts v. AVX Corporation, United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, Civil Action
Nos. 83-3882-Y and 83-3899-Y (January 29, 1991).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Apple Computer Securities, United States District Court Northern District
of California, San Jose Division, No. C-84-20148 (a) JW (December 13 and 14, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Polycast Technology Corporation, and Uniroyal Plastics Acquisition Corp.
v. Uniroyal, Inc., et al., United States District Court Southern District of New York, No. 87 Civ. 3297
(December 6, 1990 and November 28, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Ellen Rudd, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, and
Mayer Corporation on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated, and Louis Brandt, and
Israel Baker, Jay R. Kuhne, Pininfarina Corp., and American Transfer Co., on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated v. Kirk Kerkorian, et al., Superior Court of the State of California, County of
Los Angeles, Nos. CA 000980, CA 000981, CA 001017, CA 620279 (June 21, 1990).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: City of San Jose v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Incorporated, et al.,
and related counter- and Third-Party Claims, United States District Court, Northern District, No. C-84-
20601 RPA (May 23 and 24, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: City of San Jose v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Incorporated, et al.,
and related counter- and Third-Party Claims, United States District Court, Northern District, No. C-84-
20601 RPA (May 22, 1990), No. RPA 84-20601 (November 16, 1989 and September 8, 1989).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Kulicke and Soffa Industries, Inc. Securities Litigation, United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 86-1656 (March 20 and 21, 1990).
A-25
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 55 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Kulicke and Soffa Industries, Inc. Securities Litigation, United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 86-1656 (March 9, 1990; December 19 and 21, 1989).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Viacom International Inc. v. Carl C. Icahn, et al., v. Ralph M. Baruch, et al.,
United States District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 86 Civ. 4215 (RPP) (March 8, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Technical Equities Coordination Litigation, Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Santa Clara, Master File No. 1991, Santa Clara County Superior No. 600306
(March 1, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, AFL- CIO, et al. v.
David A. Murdock, et al., United States District court for the Central District of California, No. CV-86-6410
IH (February 8, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Connecticut National Life Insurance Company, et al. v. Peter A.
Sprecher and Laventhol & Horwath, United States District Court, Central District of California, No. CV
87-1945 WJR (Tx) (January 30, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Consolidated Capital Securities Litigation, United States District Court,
Northern District of California, No. C-85-7332 AJZ (January 22, 1990).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel In Re Plaintiffs’ Damages in Re: Liquidity Fund, et al. v.
Southmark Corporation, et al. in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo,
No. 332435 (January 18, 1990).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Norman Kamerman, Shirley Brown, Edward Rosen, Lexim Investors
Corp., and Dohsa Anstalt, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, and Barnett Stepak
v. Saul Steinberg, Reliance Group Holdings, Inc., Reliance Group, Inc., Reliance Financial Services
corp., and Reliance Insurance Company, United States District Court, Southern District of New York,
No. 84 Civ. 4440 (September 13, 1989).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Edward A. Taylor, et al. v. A. O. Smith Corporation et al., Circuit Court for
Lincoln County, Tennessee, No. 098-84 (August 11, 1989).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Container Products Inc. v. Pace Industries, United States District Court,
Southern District of New York, No. 88-CIV. 3549 (KMW) (July 19, 1989).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Joseph B. Moorman, et al. v. Southmark Corporation, et al., Liquidity
Fund, et al. v. Southmark Corporation, et al., Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
San Mateo, Nos. 322135 and 332435 (July 11, 1989).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tessie Wolfson, et al. v. Frederick S. Hammer, and Meritor
Financial Group, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Civil Action
No. 87-8471 (June 20, 1989).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Richard J. Heckmann, et al. v. C. L. Ahmanson, et al., and Consolidated
Cases, Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Nos. CA000851 and
C642081 (June 8, 1989).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tessie Wolfson, et al. v. Frederick S. Hammer, United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Civil Action No. 87-8472 (May 11, 1989).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Tessie Wolfson, et al. v. Frederick S. Hammer, United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Civil Action No. 87-8472 (April 13, 1989).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA v. Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., District Court of Harris County, Texas, 125th Judicial District, No. 88-49246 (April 10 and 11,
1989).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Susan Rothenberg, as Custodian for Stephen J. Rothenberg v. Charles
E. Hurwitz, United Financial Corporation, United Savings Association of Texas, et al., United States
District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Civil Action No. H-86-1435 (March
30, 1989).
A-26
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 56 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Jose Nodar, et al. v. William Weksel, Albert Bromberg, Henry B. Turner,
IV, Frank L. Bryant, Leo Kuperschmid, Bennett S. Lebow, Ernst & Whinney and Oppenheimer & Co.,
Inc., United States District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 84 Civ. 3870 (VLB) and
consolidation case No. 84 Civ. 5132 (VLB) (December 15 and 16, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: William Steiner, et al. v. Whittaker Corporation, et al., Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, No. CA000817 (December 7, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Arnold I. Laven, et al. v. Western Union Corporation, et al., United States
District Court for the District, Western District of Washington, MDL No. 551 (August 30 and 31, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Washington Public Power Supply System Securities Litigation, United
States District Court, Western District of Washington, MDL No. 551 (August 16 and 22, 1988).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: District Business Conduct Committee for District No. 3 v. Blinder, Robinson &
Company Inc., et al., National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. National Business Conduct
Committee, Complaint No. DEN-666 (July 21, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Joseph Seidman, et al. v. Stauffer Chemical Company, et al, United
States District Court for the District of Connecticut, No. B 84-543 (TFGD) (June 10, 1988 and May 5,
1987).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Edlin Cattle Co., Inc., and James Edlin v. A. O. Smith Harvestore
Products, Inc., et al., United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division,
No. CA-2-86-0122 (May 12, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: MicroPro Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, No. C-85-7428-EFL (A) (May 2, 1988).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Pizza Time Theatre Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, Civil File No. 84-20048-(A)-RPA (March 25, 1988).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel and Robert A. Sherwin In Re: First National Bank of Louisville v.
Brooks Farms, and George C. Brooks, et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs v. A. O. Smith Corporation, et al.,
Circuit Court for Maury County, Tennessee, No. 2058 (March 3, 1988).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Nucorp Energy Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the
Southern District of California, M.D.L. 514 (March 15, 16, 17, and 18, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Nucorp Energy Securities Litigation, United States District Court for
the Southern District of California, M.D.L. 514 (January 27, 1988).
Deposition of Daniel R Fischel In Re: Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. v. W. Paul Thayer, et al., United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, No. CA- 3-85-0794-R (January
21, 1988; December 4, 1987; and November 5, 1987).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Securities and Exchange Commission v. First City Finance Corporation
Ltd., and Marc Belzberg, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 86-
2240 (December 18, 1987).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Irvine Company v. Athalie Irvine Smith and Athalie R. Clarke,
Trustee, State of Michigan Circuit Court for the county of Oakland, Civil Action No. 8327011-CZ
(December 14, 15, and 16, 1987).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Securities and Exchange Commission v. First City Finance Corporation,
Ltd. and Marc Belzberg, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 86-2240
(December 11, 1987).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Gerald D. Broder and Constance D. Broder v. Alphonse H. Bellac and
William B. Weinberger v. Combustion Equipment Associates, Inc., et al., and William B. Weinberger v.
Coopers & Lybrand, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 80 CIV 6175 (CES)
80 CIV 6839 (CES) 84 CIV 8217 (CES) (July 22,
1987).
A-27
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 57 of
98
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Irvine Company v. Athalie Irvine Smith and Athalie R. Clarke, Trustee,
State of Michigan, Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, Civil Action No. 83270011-CZ (June 1, 1987).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Fortune Systems Securities Litigation, United States District for the
Northern District of California, Master File No. 83-3348A-WHO (May 7, 1987).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Victor Technologies Securities Litigation, United States District Court
for the Northern District of California, Master File No. C-83-3906(A)-RFP (FW) (January 8, 1987 and
October 30, 1986).
Reply Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel in Support of the Motion by the Activision Defendants for Summary
Judgment In Re: Activision Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, Master File No. C-83-4639(A)-MHP (October 27, 1986).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: NVHomes, L.P. v. Ryan Homes, Inc.; and Ryan Homes, Inc. v.
NVHomes, L.P., et al., United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Civil Action
No. 86-2139 (October 24, 1986).
Supplemental Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: NVHomes, L.P. v. Ryan Homes, Inc.; and Ryan Homes, Inc.
v. NVHomes, L.P. and NVAcquisition L.P., et al., United States District Court the Western District of
Pennsylvania, Civil Action No. 86-2139 (October 24, 1986).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel in Support of the Motion by the Activision Defendants for Summary Judgment In
Re: Activision Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of California,
Master File No. C-86-2139 (October 20, 1986).
Declaration of Daniel R. Fischel in Support of the Motion by the Activision Defendants for Summary Judgment In
Re: Activision Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of California,
Master File No. C-83-4639(A)-MHP (October 2, 1986).
Affidavit in Support of Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment In Re: MCorp Securities Litigation,
United States Court for the Southern District of Texas, Civil Action No. H-85- 5894 (September 25,
1986).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Activision Securities Litigation, United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, No. C 83 4639 (August 18 and 19, 1986).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: John Mancino v. James A. McMaqhan, et al., United States District
Court for the Northern District of California, Civil No. C-84-0407-TEH (August 14, 1986).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Charles W. Leigh, et al. and George Johnson, et al. v.
Clyde William Engle, et al., United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern
Division, Case No. 78 C 3799 (August 1, 1986).
Reply Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Amalgamated Sugar Company v. NL Industries, United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, 86 Civ. 5010 (VLB) (July 28, 1986).
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: The Amalgamated Sugar Company v. NL Industries, United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York, 86 Civ. 5010 (VLB) (July 18, 1986).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Charles W. Leigh, et al. and George Johnson, et al. v.
Clyde William Engle, et al., United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern
Division, Case No. 78 C 3799 (July 1, 1986).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Seafirst Corporation v. William M. Jenkins, et al.; and Seafirst Corporation
v. John R. Boyd, et al., United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle, Case
No. C83-771R (February 27, 1986).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Kreindler v. Sambo’s Restaurants, Inc., United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, Case No. 79 Civ. 4538 (December 17, 1985).
A-28
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 58 of
98
Affidavit of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: United States of America v. S. Richmond Dole and Clark J. Matthews II
(March 19, 1985).
Deposition of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Craig T. McFarland, et al. v. Memorex Corporation, United States
District Court for the Northern District of California, No. C 79-2926-WAI, C 79-2007-WAI, C 79-241-
WAI (February 26, 1985; January 29 and 30, 1985).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fischel In Re: Robert J. Lawrence v. Grumman Corp. Pension Plan, et al., United
States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, No. CV-81-3530 (December 19, 1983).
Testimony of Daniel R. Fishel In Re: Telvest, Inc. v. Junie L. Bradshaw, et al. and American Furniture Company,
United States District Court, for the Eastern District of Virginia Richmond Division, No. CA-79-0722-R
(December 4, 1981).
OTHER ACTIVITIES
Member, American Economic Association, American Finance Association.
Former Member of the Board of Overseers of the Becker-Friedman Institute at the University of
Chicago.
Former Advisor to the Harvard Program on Corporate Governance at Harvard University.
Former Member, Board of Directors, Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
Former Member, Mid-America Institute Task Force on Stock Market Collapse.
Have acted as a consultant and/or advisor to the New York Stock Exchange, the National Association of
Securities Dealers, the Chicago Board of Trade, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, the Chicago Mercantile
Exchange, the New York Mercantile Exchange, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Labor, the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Canadian Securities and Exchange Commission, the United States
Department of Justice, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Resolution Trust Corporation, the Federal
Housing Finance Agency, and the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Referee, Journal of Financial Economics, Journal of Law and Economics, Journal of Legal Studies.
Participant and speaker at multiple conferences on the Economics of Corporate, Securities and Commodities
Law and the Regulation of Financial Markets.
Former Chairman, American Association of Law Schools’ Section on Law and Economics.
A-29
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 59 of
98
Appendix B
Materials Considered
Court Documents
Cammer v. Bloom, 711 F. Supp. 1264-1301 (D.N.J. 1989)
Order, In re: January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation, United States District Court
Southern District of Florida, Case No. 21-2989-MDL-ALTONAGA/Damian, Motion to
Dismiss, August 10, 2022
Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, In re: January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading
Litigation, United States District Court Southern District of Florida, Case No. 21-2989-
MDL-ALTONAGA/Damian, January 17, 2023, with Exhibit A
SEC Documents
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January 19, 2021
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January 25, 2021
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 27, 2021
BlackBerry Limited, Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2021
Express, Inc., Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 30, 2021
GameStop Corp., Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 30, 2021
Koss Corporation, Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021
Nokia Corporation, Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020
Robinhood Markets, Inc., Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021
Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc., Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020
trivago N.V., Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020
Analyst Reports Cited in the Report
“GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 23, 2021
“Cautious on Heels of Squeeze Play Coupled with Stampede Following Speculation,” Wedbush,
January 25, 2021
“AMC Gets its $1b: Management Sees Liquidity into 2H21 After Odeon Financing and Equity
Raise,” Credit Suisse, January 26, 2021
“Taking a Breather For Now; Downgrading to Market Perform,” Raymond James, January 26,
2021
B-1
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 60 of
98
“The gravity of GME’s earnings will likely weigh on shares again; PO to $10; Reit U/P,” BofA
Securities, January 27, 2021
“When fundamentals still appear on the sidelines, what other factors matter,” BofA Securities,
February 4, 2021
Additional Analyst Reports
AMC
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 2, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 9, 2021
“Last Month in Parks and Recreation,” William Blair, January 11, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 16, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 23, 2021
“Media Trends, Cinema – Fourth Quarter 2020 Earnings Preview,” Barrington Research,
January 26, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. – Staves Off Bankruptcy but Massive Share Dilution,” Loop
Capital Markets, January 26, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 30, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Downgrading to Sell: There’s A Steep Price To Pay For
Solvency,” MKM Partners, February 1, 2021
“Morning Summary – AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (AMC-Sell),” MKM Partners,
February 1, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, February 4, 2021
“AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. – CFRA Reduces Opinion on Shares of AMC
Entertainment To Sell From Hold,” CFRA Equity Research, February 4, 2021
BB
“BlackBerry Limited,” CFRA Equity Research, January 2, 2021
“BlackBerry LTD,” Argus Research, January 6, 2021
“BB.TO – BlackBerry Ltd at Citi Global TMT West Virtual Conference (Virtual) – Edited
Transcript,” Refinitiv Streetevents, January 7, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” CFRA Equity Research, January 9, 2021
“BB.TO – BlackBerry Ltd at JPMorgan Tech/Auto Forum (Virtual),” Refinitiv Streetevents,
January 12, 2021
“BlackBerry LTD,” Argus Research, January 13, 2021
“Blackberry Ltd. – BlackBerry Reaches Settlement with Facebook,” TD Securities Inc., January
15, 2021
B-2
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 61 of
98
“BlackBerry Limited,” Zacks, January 15, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” CFRA Equity Research, January 16, 2021
“BlackBerry Ltd,” Argus Research, January 20, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” Zacks, January 20, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” CFRA Equity Research, January 23, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited – Downgrading to Underperform,” RBC Capital Markets, January 26, 2021
BlackBerry LTD,” Argus Research, January 27, 2021
“BB – Professional TikTok investors poised to discover stocks can also go down,” Canaccord
Genuity Capital Markets, January 27, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited- Lowering Recommendation on Significant Market Move,” Scotiabank,
January 27, 2021
“Why BlackBerry Stock’s Surge Doesn’t Really Make Sense,” Trefis, January 27, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” Zacks, January 27, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” Zacks, January 28, 2021
“BlackBerry Limited,” CFRA Equity Research, January 30, 2021
“Quantitative Strategy, Value-Momentum Remains Best Bet,” Scotiabank, February 1, 2021
“BlackBerry LTD,” Argus Research, February 4, 2021
BBBY
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 2, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, Virus Sure and Shipping Delays Slowing Sales, but Outlook Is Positive,”
Wedbush, January 4, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 4, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, Reading the Print: Lowering 3Q Estimates on Nov Slowdown But EPS
Remains Well Ahead; Positioning Negative,” J.P. Morgan, January 5, 2021
“Episode 2021: The Battle of Bifurcation Begins,” Wells Fargo Securities, January 6, 2021
“What to Expect From Bed Bath & Beyond’s Stock in Q3?” Trefis, January 6, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 6, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 7, 2021
“CFRA Maintains Sell Opinion On Shares of “Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” CFRA Equity
Research, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., A Little For the Bears, A Little For the Bulls; Reaffirm SB1,”
Raymond James, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Initial Thoughts Following F3Q & Follow Up Call,” Raymond James,
January 7, 2021
B-3
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 62 of
98
“BBBY – 2021 Baseline Set…But It’s Dependent Upon Flat Comps – Reiterate NEUTRAL on
Market Share Trends,” Guggenheim, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, Turnaround Efforts In Progress, But There Is Still More Work Ahead;
Reit. Hold,” Jefferies, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, Mixed Report; Key Management Takes; Set Up Remains Tough,” J.P.
Morgan, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Lowering Price Target As Relevance Continues To Wane,” Loop
Capital Markets, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Initial Thoughts Following F3Q & Follow Up Call,” Raymond James,
January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., A Little For the Bears, A Little For the Bulls; Reaffirm SB1,”
Raymond James, January 7, 2021
“BBBY – Making Progress on Turnaround in 3Q20,” Telsey Advisory Group, January 7, 2021
“BBBY.OQ – Q3 2020 Bed Bath & Beyond Inc Earnings Call,” Refinitiv Streetevents, January 7,
2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., What’s the Initial Take on 3Q’20 Results?” UBS, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., A Happy Brew Year?” UBS, January 7, 2021
“BBBY: Meet The New Bed Bath, Comps Same As Old Bed Bath?” Wells Fargo Securities,
January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 7, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Transitory issues drag down near term results but remain positive on
LT gains,” BofA Securities, January 8, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, Debt investors should look Beyond mediocre print,” J.P. Morgan, January
8, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, F3Q20 Review: Mixed Quarter and Conservative Outlook,” Wedbush,
January 8, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Sleep easy in Bed Bath & Beyond in FY21; upgrade to
Marketweight,” BofA Securities, January 10, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Argus, January 11, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 11, 2021
“BBBY: Seeing Opportunity to Take Profits; Tightening Estimates,” Wells Fargo Securities,
January 12, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 11, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 12, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 14, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 15, 2021
B-4
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 63 of
98
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., CFRA Equity Research, January 16, 2021
“U.S. Hardlines Retail, Highlights From Expert Call On Consumer Electronics Retail – January
2021,” UBS, January 18, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 18, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond, Model Update,” Jefferies, January 21, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 21, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., CFRA Equity Research, January 23, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Raising Price Target As ‘The Markets Can Remain Irrational Longer
Than You Can Remain Solvent’,” Loop Capital Markets, January 25, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Stepping Back and Sitting Down – Downgrade to Sell,” UBS, January
25, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 25, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Downgrade to NEUTRAL; Opportunity Remains but Stock Is Ahead
of Itself,” Wedbush, January 27, 2021
“Best Ideas List, Removing BBBY,” Wedbush, January 27, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 27, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Still see a great turnaround taking shape but big price move takes us
to Neutral,” BofA Securities, January 28, 2021
“BBBY – Downgrading to Market Perform; Too Far, Too Fast for a Turnaround Story,” Telsey
Advisory Group, January 28, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” Zacks, January 28, 2021
“Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 30, 2021
EXPR
“Financing Facility Provides Bridge Through the Pandemic,” CL King, January 14, 2021
GME
“GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 2, 2021
“GameStop Corp-Class A (NYS:GME),” Argus Research, January 6, 2021
“GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 9, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME) GameStop Reports Disappointing 2020 Holiday Sales Results,”
Benchmark, January 11, 2021
“GameStop Corp. Results Down, Stock Up? First Holiday of the Cycle Disappoints as
anticipated,” Credit Suisse, January 11, 2021
B-5
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 64 of
98
“GameStop Initial Take: Activist Settlement Welcomed; Holiday Sales Light,” Jefferies, January
11, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME - $19.94) Dropping Coverage,” Loop Capital Markets, January 11,
2021
“GameStop (GME) Holiday Results Better-than-Feared with Board Changes Afoot,” Wedbush,
January 11, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 11, 2021
“GME - Announces Holiday Sales and Board Refresh,” Telsey Advisory Group, January 12,
2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 12, 2021
“GameStop Corp-Class A (NYS:GME),” Argus Research, January 13, 2021
“GameStop, Promise of a new day continues to propel stock but fundamentals very challenged,”
BofA Securities, January 13, 2021
“GameStop, Holiday disappoints and GME underperforms in a big way,” BofA Securities,
January 14, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 14, 2021
“CFRA Maintains Sell Opinion On Shares Of GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research,
January 15, 2021
“GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 15, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 15, 2021
“GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 16, 2021
“GameStop Corp-Class A (NYS:GME),” Argus Research, January 20, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 22, 2021
“GME - Downgrading to Underperform; Disconnect Between Fundamentals and Valuation,”
Telsey Advisory Group, January 25, 2021
“What’s Happening Today,” Telsey Advisory Group, January 25, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 25, 2021
“S3 Analytics: GameStop Shorts Down $5 Billion in 2021” S3 Partners, January 26, 2021
“GameStop Corp-Class A (NYS:GME),” Argus Research, January 27, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 27, 2021
“GameStop Corp. (GME),” Zacks Investment Research, January 28, 2021
“GameStop Corp.,” CFRA Equity Research, January 30, 2021
“Gaming out the Rise of GameStop,” Avise Analytics, February 1, 2021
“US Online Brokers, Heightened Activity in Certain Stocks (AMC, GME) and the Impact on
Brokers (SCHW, IBKR),” Credit Suisse, February 1, 2021
B-6
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 65 of
98
“Analysts' Ideas of the Week Silver or Silver Stocks?,” Fundamental Research Corp., February
1, 2021
“Vaxart, Macy's, Gogo: Will These Stocks See A GameStop Like Short Squeeze?,” Trefis,
February 1, 2021
“GameStop Corp-Class A (NYS:GME),” Argus Research, February 4, 2021
NOK
“Nokia Corporation,” CFRA Equity Research, January 2, 2021
“Nokia - Key takeaways from Nokia’s Strategy Update,” BofA Securities, January 5, 2021
“Nokia – Still see risks to 2021/2022 expectations,” Credit Suisse, January 6, 2021
“Nokia Corporation,” CFRA Equity Research, January 9, 2021
“Intel Corporation – New CEO Creates Hope, But Intel’s Platform is Still Burning,” Raymond
James, January 13, 2021
“Nokia – Buy,” Kepler Cheuvreux, January 15, 2021
“Nokia Corporation,” CFRA Equity Research, January 16, 2021
“Nokia – Set for mixed quarter, cost discipline,” DNB Markets, January 18, 2021
“Nokia Corporation,” CFRA Equity Research, January 23, 2021
“Nokia – Preset expectations for 2021,” SEB, January 25, 2021
“Nokia Corporation,” Zacks, January 25, 2021
“Nokia – Sell on retail hype,” ABG Sundal Collier, January 28, 2021
“Nokia – Downgraded on speculative rise,” DNB Markets, January 28, 2021
“Northern Lights,” DNB Markets, January 28, 2021
“Nokia Corporation,” CFRA Equity Research, January 30, 2021
“Nokia – Q4’20 preview: outlook to be reaffirmed,” ABG Sundal Collier, February 1, 2021
“Nokia – Key concerns remain,” Credit Suisse, February 1, 2021
“Nokia – Positive implications from Ericsson,” DNB Markets, February 1, 2021
“Nokia – Market looking for gross margin & FCF progress. We expect small beat on operating
margin,” J.P. Morgan, February 2, 2021
“Nokia – Looking beyond a seasonally strong 4Q20, what are the risks to 2021 expectations?”
Societe Generale, February 3, 2021
“Nokia – First Take – Quarterly earnings,” ODDO BHF Corporates & Markets, February 3,
2021
“Nokia – Q4’20 results much as anticipated,” ABG Sundal Collier, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – Strong finish helped by one-offs, 2021 still challenging,” Barclays, February 4, 2021
B-7
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 66 of
98
“Nokia – First Take: FY20 FCF much improved,” BofA Securities, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – 4Q weak beneath surface; FY21 guidance soft, focus on turnaround plans,” BofA
Securities, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – 4Q20 Report: Firmly on the Fence,” Raymond James, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – Q4 beat but helped by a few one-offs,” Credit Suisse, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – 4Q beat is complicated by one offs. FY21 EBIT Guide ahead of consensus. Too early
to call a turn-around,” J.P. Morgan, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – Buy, Higher-than-expected Q4 due to large one-offs, guidance confirmed,” Kepler
Cheuvreux, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – 2021 targets further clarified with modest downside,” Morgan Stanley, February 4,
2021
“Nokia – 4Q20 Report: Firmly on the Fence,” Raymond James, February 4, 2021
“Nokia Stabilizes After Verizon Fall-out,” Rosenblatt Securities, February 4, 2021
“Nokia – Q4 20: In-line Q4 and in-line guide,” UBS, February 4,2021
“NOKIA.HE – Q4 2020 Nokia Oyj Earnings Presentation, Refinitiv Streetevents, February 4,
2021
TR
“Tootsie Roll INDS (NYS:TR),” Argus Research, January 6, 2021
“Tootsie Roll INDS (NYS:TR),” Argus Research, January 13, 2021
“Tootsie Roll INDS (NYS:TR),” Argus Research, January 20, 2021
“Tootsie Roll INDS (NYS:TR),” Argus Research, January 27, 2021
“Tootsie Roll INDS (NYS:TR),” Argus Research, February 4, 2021
TRVG
“trivago N .V. (TRVG), Revising 40/1 Q Ests Lower to Reflect Pandemic Impact; Hold,” Truist
Securities, January 21, 2021
“trivago N .V. (TRVG), Revising 40/1 Q Ests Lower to Reflect Pandemic Impact; Hold,” Truist
Securities, January 21, 2021
News Articles & Press Releases Cited in the Report
“Press Release: BlackBerry Comments on Trading Activity at Request of the Industry
Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC),” Dow Jones Newswires, January 25, 2021,
11:08 AM
“The Day-Trading Barbarians at the Gate Won’t Sack Wall Street -- Heard on the Street,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 26, 2021, 06:25 AM
B-8
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 67 of
98
“GameStop stock has another volatile trading day, with more price spikes and trading hal[t],”
Dow Jones Newswires, January 26, 2021, 02:51 PM
“GameStop Stock Frenzy: What You Need to Know;…” The Wall Street Journal Online,
January 27, 2021, 05:30 AM
“GameStop, Microsoft, AMC: What to Watch When the Stock Market Opens Today; A volley of
major earnings reports are due including big tech names like Tesla and Apple,” The Wall
Street Journal, January 27, 2021, 09:21 AM
“GameStop and AMC trading restricted by TD Ameritrade, Schwab, Robinhood others,” Market
Watch, January 27, 2021 available at https://www.marketwatch.com/story/gamestop-amc-
trading-is-now-being-restricted-at-td-ameritrade-11611769804
“Bed Bath & Beyond Stock Is Rocketing, but Bulls Are Bailing – Barrons.com,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 27, 2021, 09:49 AM
“Tootsie Roll at Record Highs as Shorted Stocks Get Trader Love,” Bloomberg L.P., January 27,
2021, 10:04 AM
“AMC Stock Gets Caught in Short Squeeze. Shares Are Up 180%. – Barrons.com,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 27, 2021, 12:34 PM
“Ameritrade restricts trading in GameStop, AMC as trading platforms struggle to keep up with
historic volume (GME, AMC),” Business Insider, January 27, 2021, 12:48 PM
“Nokia Comments on Trading Activity Of Its Stock,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 27, 2021,
01:15 PM
“Nokia Stock Is Surging. The Company Says It Can’t Explain It -- Barrons.com,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 27, 2021, 03:00 PM
“Trivago Shares Surge as Investors Eye Next AMC, GameStop: React,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 27, 2021, 03:03PM
“Trading platforms are limiting trades of GameStop and other companies,” The New York Times,
January 27, 2021, 06:00 PM
“*AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. CI A (AMC) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 27, 2021
“*Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (BBBY) Paused due to volatility,” Dow Jones Newswires, January
27, 2021
“*GameStop Corp. Cl A (GME) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 27,
2021
“Not Just GameStop: Here Are The Meme Stocks WallStreetBets Traders Are Pumping Up
During This ‘Extremely Erratic’ Reddit Rally,” Forbes.com, January 27, 2021
“Robinhood Makes Several Hot Stocks Unavailable for New Trades,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 28, 2021, 08:58 AM
“Interactive Brokers Curbs Trading of AMC, GameStop and Other Stocks,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 28, 2021, 09:26 AM
B-9
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 68 of
98
“Robinhood Blocks Buying in GameStop, AMC, and Others Stocks. Other Brokers Also Add
Guardrails. -- Barrons.com,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 09:34 AM
“Wells Fargo Curbs GameStop, AMC Buys,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 11:03
AM
“Some E*Trade Users Say Access Is Now Restricted to GameStop, AMC Purchases,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 28, 2021, 03:20 PM
“Citigroup Joins Firms Curbing GameStop, AMC Buys,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28,
2021, 04:45 PM
“GameStop shares plunge after ban by Robinhood app,” The Guardian, January 28, 2021, 04:54
PM
“Robinhood, Other Brokerages Restrict Trading on GameStop, AMC,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 28, 2021, 06:15 PM
“*AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. CI A (AMC) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 28, 2021
“*GameStop Corp. Cl A (GME) Halted due to volatility,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 28,
2021
“WallStreetBets Reddit Group: What Is It?” CoinDesk.com, January 28, 2021
“When Will The Ride End? Analyzing GameStop Short Squeeze By Looking At History,”
Seeking Alpha, February 1, 2021, 10:35 AM
“Reddit day trader plays sours as GameStop, silver, AMC plunge,” Al Jazeera, February 2, 2021
“Calmer Trading Eases Nerves on Wall Street,” Dow Jones Newswires, February 4, 2021, 09:36
AM
“What Exactly Is a Short Squeeze?” Kiplinger.com, June 11, 2021, available at:
https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/602165/what-exactly-is-a-short-squeeze
News Articles and Additional SEC Filings Cited in Appendix D
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January 19, 2021
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January 25, 2021
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 424B5, January 25, 2021
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January 27, 2021
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 10-Q For the Quarterly Period Ended November 28, 2020
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 8-K, dated January 7, 2021
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 8-K, dated January 8, 2021
Express, Inc., Form 8-K, January 14, 2021
GameStop Corp., Form 8-K, January 11, 2021 07:33 AM
GameStop Corp., Form 8-K, January 11, 2021 08:33 AM
B-10
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 69 of
98
Nokia Oyj SEC Form 6-K, January 27, 2021
“Press Release: Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. Appoints Retail And Brand Veteran Patty Wu As
General Manager Of buybuy BABY,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 5, 2021, 05:00 PM
"AMC in Talks to Leverage European Assets for Another Lifeline; Movie-theater giant AMC
Entertainment is in discussions for a potential financing package backed by its U.K.-based
Odeon subsidiary," The Wall Street Journal Online, January 6, 2021, 11:20 AM
“*Nokia and Zain KSA smarten up Saudi homes and offices with 5G-powered FWA and Wi-Fi
6,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 6, 2021, 02:00 AM
“AMC in Talks to Leverage European Assets for Another Lifeline,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 6, 2021, 11:30 AM
“Digital Growth Boosted Bed Bath & Beyond Holiday Comp Sales -- Market Talk,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 7, 2021, 08:19 AM
“Bed Bath & Beyond Posts Loss, Sales Decline -- WSJ,” Wall Street Journal, January 8, 2021,
02:32 AM
“*Nokia to accelerate Tele2’s digitalization with distributed cloud core,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 11, 2021, 01:30 AM
“Press Release: GameStop Reports 2020 Holiday Sales Results,” Dow Jones Newswires, January
11, 2021, 08:30 AM
“trivago Price Target Raised to $2.20/Share From $2.10 by Morgan Stanley," Dow Jones
Newswire, January 11, 2021, 09:35 AM
"trivago Is Maintained at Equal-Weight by Morgan Stanley," Dow Jones Newswire, January 11,
2021, 09:35 AM
“GameStop Will Add Activist Investors to the Board. The Stock Shot Up. -- Barrons.com,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 11, 2021, 11:59 AM
“Press Release: Bed Bath & Beyond Transforms Marketing With Appointment Of New Leaders
And Award-Winning Agency Partners,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 12, 2021, 08:00
AM
“*Nokia and M1 partner with 5G standalone Core to drive Singapore’s 5G ecosystem,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 12, 2021, 09:00 PM
“Press Release: trivago Acquired weekend.com,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 13, 2021,
09:00 AM
“*Nokia supports T-Mobile 5G evolution with five-year expansion deal,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 14, 2021, 02:15 AM)
“Canada Media Digest: Thursday Jan. 14,” Bloomberg L.P., January 14, 2021, 05:05 AM
“Express Adds $140M to Liquidity Position,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 14, 2021, 06:56
AM
“*Google Cloud, Nokia partner to accelerate cloud-native 5G readiness for communication
service providers,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 14, 2021, 08:00 AM
B-11
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 70 of
98
“*Nokia selected for U.S. Federal 5G Cybersecurity Project,” Dow Jones Newswires, January
14, 2021, 09:00 AM
“*BLACKBERRY, FACEBOOK ARE IN PROCESS OF GLOBAL SETTLEMENT,”
Bloomberg L.P., January 15, 2021, 09:20 AM
“AMC Entertainment Up 24% on Issuing $100M of Notes,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 19,
2021, 11:36 AM
“BlackBerry jumps 20% after settling patent dispute with Facebook (BB, FB),” Business Insider,
January 19, 2021, 02:25 PM
“Press Release: Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. Appoints Retail And Beauty Expert Mara Sirhal As
Senior Vice President And General Manager Of Harmon Health And Beauty Stores,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 19, 2021, 04:30 PM
“*Nokia and Mobility pilot world’s first 4G and 5G Fixed Wireless Access network slicing,”
Dow Jones Newswires, January 20, 2021, 04:30 AM
“*S&PGR Downgrades AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. To 'SD',” S&P Global Ratings," Dow
Jones Newswires, January 21, 2021, 06:22 PM
“GameStop Tug-of-War Gives Reddit Army a Win on Record Volatility,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 22, 2021, 11:47 AM
“Energy & Utilities Roundup: Market Talk,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 22, 2021, 04:50
PM
“AMC Stock Leaps as CEO Rules Out Bankruptcy -- Barrons.com,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 25, 2021, 12:28 AM
“Nokia Shares Rise; SEB Highlights Potential for Turnaround,” Bloomberg L.P., January 25,
2021, 04:49 AM
“Canada Media Digest: Monday Jan. 25,” Bloomberg L.P., January 25, 2021, 05:05 AM
“GameStop Cut to Underperform From Outperform by Telsey Advisory Group,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 25, 2021, 08:10 AM
“AMC Shares Rise After New Financing Announced -- Market Talk,” Dow Jones Institutional
News, January 25, 2021 10:05 AM
"Retailer Express More Than Doubles Amid Reddit Speculation (2)," Bloomberg L.P., January
25, 2021, 04:12 PM
“BlackBerry Expands Partnership with Baidu to Power Next Generation Autonomous Driving
Technology,” Dow Jones Newswires, January 25, 2021, 09:00 PM
“*S&PGR Raises AMC Entertainment Rtg To 'CCC-'; Otlk Negative,” S&P Global Ratings,
Dow Jones Newswires, January 25, 2021, 09:30 PM
“Bed Bath & Beyond Cut to Market Perform at Raymond James,” Bloomberg L.P., January 26,
2021, 03:45 AM
“*Nokia’s comprehensive C-Band portfolio ready for 5G build-out in U.S.,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 26, 2021, 04:00 AM
B-12
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 71 of
98
"BlackBerry Cut to Underperform From Sector Perform by RBC Capital," Dow Jones Newswire,
January 26, 2021, 05:46 AM
“BBBY: Bed Bath & Beyond downgraded to Sell from Neutral at UBS,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 26, 2021, 06:44 AM
“*Ooredoo Algeria deploys Nokia's cloud-native core software to prepare for the future,” Dow
Jones Newswires, January 26, 2021, 09:00 PM
“Bed Bath & Beyond Cut to Neutral at Baird; PT $37,” Bloomberg L.P., January 27, 2021, 01:32
AM
“BBBY: Bed Bath & Beyond downgraded to Neutral from Outperform,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 27, 2021, 06:35 AM
“GameStop Is Maintained at Underperform by B of A Securities,” Dow Jones Newswires,
January 27, 2021, 09:06 AM
“Standpoint Research Downgrades Bed Bath & Beyond to Hold From Buy,” Bloomberg L.P.,
January 27, 2021, 11:23 AM
“Bed Bath & Beyond Cut to Hold at Odeon Capital; PT $38,” Bloomberg L.P., January 27, 2021,
11:57 AM
“AMC Entertainment Sells Out Its Latest Stock Offering -- Market Talk,” Dow Jones
Newswires, January 27, 2021, 12:39 PM
Factiva news search headline/lead paragraph in Dow Jones Newswires and/or The Wall Street
Journal from 12/31/2020 to 01/27/2021 for “amc entertainment”; “bed bath”; “blackberry”;
“express inc”; “gamestop”; “koss corp”; “nokia”; “tootsie roll”; “trivago”
Bloomberg News and its Editorial Suggested Sources search for trading days that had
statistically significant price movements and there was no value-relevant company-specific
news
Academic Literature and Books
Bodie, Z., A. Kane, and A.J. Marcus, Investments, Ninth Edition (McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 2011)
Campbell, J.Y., A.W. Lo, and A.C. MacKinlay, The Econometrics of Financial Markets
(Princeton University Press, 1997)
Fama, E.F., “Efficient Capital Markets: II,” The Journal of Finance 46, No. 5 (1991): 1575-1617
Fischel, D.R., “Use of Modern Finance Theory in Securities Fraud Cases Involving Actively
Traded Securities,” The Business Lawyer 38, No. 1 (1982): 1-20
Harris, L., Trading and Exchanges – Market Microstructure for Practitioners (Oxford University
Press, 2003)
MacKinlay, A.C., “Event Studies in Economics and Finance,” Journal of Economic Literature
35, No. 1 (1997): 13-39
Mendenhall, W., J.E. Reinmuth, and R.J. Beaver, Statistics for Management and Economics
(Duxbury Press, 1993)
B-13
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 72 of
98
Mitchell, M.L. and J.M. Netter, “The Role of Financial Economics in Securities Fraud Cases:
Applications at the Securities and Exchange Commission,” Business Lawyer 49, No. 2
(1994): 545-590
Putniņŝ, T.J., “Market Manipulation: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Surveys 26, No. 5 (2012):
952-967
Schwert, G.W., “Using Financial Data to Measure Effects of Regulation,” Journal of Law and
Economics 24, No. 1 (1981): 121-158
Tabak, D. and F. Dunbar, 2001, “Materiality and Magnitude: Event Studies in the Courtroom,”
in Litigation Services Handbook, Third Edition, R. Weil, et al., eds. (John Wiley & Sons,
2001)
Bates Stamped Documents
RHMDL00047970
Websites
About the Interactive Brokers Group, available at
https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/general/about/about.php
M1 Finance Official Twitter, January 28, 2021, 09:01 AM available at:
https://twitter.com/M1Finance/status/1354837064072753152
Regulatory Halts, available at https://www.nyse.com/trade-halt-historical
“Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev speaks out on decision to restrict trading on GameStop and other
stocks,” CNBC, January 28, 2021 available at
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/01/28/robinhood-ceo-vlad-tenev-on-decision-to-restrict-
trading-on-gamestop.html
TD Ameritrade accounts are moving to Schwab, available at https://www.tdameritrade.com/why-
td-ameritrade/td-ameritrade-charles-schwab.html
Ways to invest with us, available at https://www.schwab.com/invest-with-us
Data Sources
Bloomberg L.P.
Capital IQ
©2023 Center for Research in Security Prices, LLC, An Affiliate of the University of Chicago
Booth School of Business (“CRSP”)
Robinhood Named Plaintiff’s Trading Data
Tick Data
B-14
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 73 of
98
Appendix C
Event Study Model
1. An event study is a statistical method commonly used in financial economics to
measure the impact of events on stock returns.1 It is standard practice in event studies to take
into account the effect of market factors on stock returns. This is typically done by: (1)
estimating the historical relationship between changes in a company’s stock price and changes in
the performance of a market and/or industry index; (2) using the historical relationship and the
actual performance of the market and/or industry index on the day in question to calculate an
expected return; and (3) subtracting the expected return from the actual return to derive a
residual return (sometimes referred to as an “abnormal return” or “market-adjusted return”).
Accordingly, the residual return on a particular day is net of market and industry factors that
affected the stock price on that day. In this case, I estimated the relationship between the
Affected Stocks’ returns, the broad market index return, and the returns of various industry
indices based on each company’s self-identified list of competitors reported in their 2020 annual
filings using daily data for the 120 trading-day period prior to January 1, 2021.2 I then compared
the expected return for the Affected Stocks using the results of my event study model to the
1. See, e.g., A.C. MacKinlay, “Event Studies in Economics and Finance,” Journal of
Economic Literature 35, No. 1 (1997): 13-39.
2. See, e.g., M.L. Mitchell and J.M. Netter, “The Role of Financial Economics in Securities
Fraud Cases: Applications at the Securities and Exchange Commission,” Business Lawyer
49, No. 2 (1994): 545-590, at 568, which states that the estimation period for an event
study “typically ranges from 100 to 300 trading days preceding the event under study.”;
A.C. MacKinlay, “Event Studies in Economics and Finance,” Journal of Economic
Literature 35, No. 1 (1997): 13-39, at 15, which states that “in an event study using daily
data and the market model, the market model parameters could be estimated over 120 days
prior to the event.”
C-1
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 74 of
98
actual returns for each day during the pre-Class Period. Table 1 lists market and industry indices
for each of the Affected Stocks.
TABLE 1
Market and Industry Indices for the Affected Stocks
Affected Stock Market Index [1] Industry Index [2]
1 AMC S&P 500 Equal-Weighted Portfolio of Cinemark and IMAX
2 Bed Bath & Beyond S&P 500 S&P 500 Specialty Retail Index
3 BlackBerry S&P 500 [3] S&P 500 Information Technology Index
4 Express S&P 500 Dow Jones U.S. Apparel Retailers Index
5 GameStop S&P 500 Dow Jones U.S. Retailers Index
6 Koss S&P 500 Equal-Weighted Portfolio of Apple and Sony
7 Nokia S&P 500 Equal-Weighted Portfolio of Adtran, Amdocs, Arista,
Aviat, Calix, Ceragon, Ciena, Cisco, Commscope,
Ericsson, HPE, IBM, Juniper, Motorola, and Oracle
8 Tootsie Roll S&P 500 Dow Jones US Food Producers Index
9 trivago S&P 500 Equal-Weighted Portfolio of Airbnb, Booking, Expedia,
Facebook, Google, Hilton, Marriott, Trip.com, TripAdvisor
and Twitter
Notes:
[1] Unless otherwise noted, market indices were obtained from the stock performance chart contained in each
company’s 2020 annual filing.
[2] Where available, we used the industry index reported in each company’s stock performance chart from their
2020 annual filing. For companies that do not report an industry index, we used an equal weighted index of
competitors listed by each company in their 2020 annual filing and excluded foreign competitors with no ADR
and companies that traded over the counter.
[3] BlackBerry is traded on both the TSX and the NYSE. Blackberry’s 2020 10-K, p. 26 includes the TSX
Composite Index in its stock performance chart. Given that the majority of BlackBerry’s trading volume
occurred on the NYSE, we used the S&P 500 as the market index.
2. When performing event studies, the conventional practice in finance is to test the
“null hypothesis” that the residual return is zero against either the alternative hypothesis that the
residual return is different from zero, or the alternative hypothesis that the residual has a
particular sign (i.e., it is positive or it is negative).3 If the null hypothesis cannot be rejected at
3. See, e.g., J.Y. Campbell, A.W. Lo, and A.C. MacKinlay, The Econometrics of Financial
Markets (Princeton University Press, 1997), at 160-66; A.C. MacKinlay, “Event Studies in
Economics and Finance,” Journal of Economic Literature 35, No. 1 (1997): 13-39; G.W.
Schwert, “Using Financial Data to Measure Effects of Regulation,” Journal of Law and
Economics 24, No. 1 (1981): 121-158; D.R. Fischel, “Use of Modern Finance Theory in
C-2
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 75 of
98
conventional levels of significance, then the residual returns are not considered to be statistically
significant, i.e., they are not considered to be significantly different from zero. Under these
circumstances, one concludes that the observed stock return on a particular date can be explained
by the independent variable(s) considered in the estimation model (and is not attributable to the
firm-specific events which occurred on that date).
3. In event studies, the statistical significance of the residual returns is typically
assessed by calculating a standardized measure of the size of the residual return known as a “t-
statistic.”4 A t-statistic with an absolute value of 1.96 or greater denotes statistical significance
at the 5 percent level of significance (a conventional level at which such assessments are made)
in a “two-tailed” test of statistical significance.5 In a two-tailed test, the null hypothesis is that
the residual return is zero, and the alternative hypothesis is that the residual return is different
from zero (i.e., either positive or negative). A t-statistic with an absolute value of 1.65 or greater
denotes statistical significance at the 5 percent level of significance in a “one-tailed” test of
statistical significance.6 In a one-tailed test, the null-hypothesis is that the residual return is zero,
and the alternative hypothesis is that the residual return has a particular sign (e.g., it is positive).
4. Moreover, even if one finds statistically significant price movements from an
event study, an economist must take another crucial step. If an event study finds a statistically
significant price movement that is contemporaneous with a public disclosure of company-
Securities Fraud Cases Involving Actively Traded Securities,” The Business Lawyer 38,
No. 1 (1982): 1-20.
4. See, e.g., W. Mendenhall, J.E. Reinmuth, and R.J. Beaver, Statistics for Management and
Economics (Duxbury Press, 1993), at 327.
5. W. Mendenhall, J.E. Reinmuth, and R.J. Beaver, Statistics for Management and Economics
(Duxbury Press, 1993), at 331.
6. W. Mendenhall, J.E. Reinmuth, and R.J. Beaver, Statistics for Management and Economics
(Duxbury Press, 1993), at 329-330.
C-3
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 76 of
98
specific information, an economist must closely examine the disclosures involved. For example,
if the particular disclosure at issue was simply repeating information previously disclosed
information (i.e., stale information), an economist could not attribute, consistent with efficient
markets, an abnormal return – regardless of whether it happens to be statistically significant – to
such a disclosure. Disclosures that simply repeat information previously disclosed would not
cause a revision in the company’s expected future cash flows and, hence, would not affect the
company’s stock price. Separately, a company may disclose multiple pieces of information
contemporaneously (stale and new) on a day when an event study finds a statistically significant
price movement. In this case, an event study analysis alone cannot determine which piece of
information is new value-relevant information. Moreover, if there are multiple pieces of new
value-relevant information, event study analysis using daily returns alone cannot reliably parse
the price impact of the multiple new pieces of information.
C-4
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 77 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - AMC Entertainment
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $2.12 $2.01 -5.19% 1.40% 0.24
1/5/2021 $2.01 $1.98 -1.49% -4.16% -0.70
1/6/2021 $1.98 $2.01 1.52% -0.90% -0.15 "AMC ... is negotiating with lenders including Apollo, Davidson Kempner
Capital Management LP, and Ares Management Corp. to expand the line
of credit available to the company's U.K.-based Odeon Cinemas Group
subsidiary..." ("AMC in Talks to Leverage European Assets for Another
Lifeline; Movie-theater giant AMC Entertainment is in discussions for a
potential financing package backed by its U.K.-based Odeon subsidiary,"
The Wall Street Journal Online, January 6, 2021, 11:20 AM)
1/7/2021 $2.01 $2.05 1.99% 3.91% 0.66
1/8/2021 $2.05 $2.14 4.39% 3.37% 0.57
1/11/2021 $2.14 $2.20 2.80% 6.61% 1.11
1/12/2021 $2.20 $2.29 4.09% 1.49% 0.25
1/13/2021 $2.29 $2.18 -4.80% -3.74% -0.63
1/14/2021 $2.18 $2.18 0.00% -5.58% -0.94
1/15/2021 $2.18 $2.33 6.88% 9.29% 1.57
1/19/2021 $2.33 $3.06 31.33% 30.19% 5.09 ** "On January 15, 2021, AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (the 'Company')
issued $100,000,000 aggregate principal amount of its 15%/17% Cash/PIK
Toggle First Lien Secured Notes due 2026 (the 'Notes') as contemplated by
the previously disclosed commitment letter with Mudrick Capital
Management, LP, dated as of December 10, 2020." (AMC Entertainment
Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January 19, 2021, 06:31 AM)
"AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. shares were recently up 24% to $2.90
as the movie theater company said it issued $100 million of notes under its
Dec. 10 commitment letter with Mudrick Capital Management LP. The
15%/17% cash/PIK toggle first lien secured notes due 2026 were issued
Friday, according to a securities filing Tuesday. " ("AMC Entertainment
Up 24% on Issuing $100M of Notes," Dow Jones Newswire, January 19,
2021, 11:36 AM)
D-1
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 78 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - AMC Entertainment
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/20/2021 $3.06 $2.97 -2.94% -1.98% -0.33
1/21/2021 $2.97 $2.98 0.34% 4.09% 0.69
1/22/2021 $2.98 $3.51 17.79% 15.20% 2.56 ** "*S&PGR Downgrades AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. To 'SD'… We
are lowering our issuer credit rating on AMC to 'SD' (selective de-fault)
from 'CC' and our issue-level rating on the second-lien notes to 'D' from 'C'.
In addition, we expect AMC will likely run out of cash on hand within the
next few months, incorporating the proceeds from the transaction, if it
doesn't receive additional capital. Therefore, we believe further debt
restructurings are likely in the immediate future." ("*S&PGR
Downgrades AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. To 'SD'," Dow Jones
Newswire, January 21, 2021, 06:22 PM)
1/25/2021 $3.51 $4.42 25.93% 21.07% 3.55 ** "On January 24, 2021, Odeon Cinemas Group Limited ('Odeon'), a wholly-
owned subsidiary of AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (the 'Company')
entered into a commitment letter (the 'Commitment Letter') with certain
lenders party thereto (the 'Commitment Parties'), pursuant to which the
Commitment Parties committed, subject to the terms and conditions
contained in the Commitment Letter, to provide a senior secured term loan
facility in an aggregate principal amount of £400,000,000 (the 'Term Loan
Facility'). The Term Loan Facility will refinance Odeon's existing
£100,000,000 revolving credit facility and provide additional liquidity of
£300,000,000." (AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January
25, 2021, 06:35 AM)
"On January 24, 2021, Odeon Cinemas Group Limited ('Odeon'), a wholly-
owned subsidiary of AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (the 'Company')
entered into a commitment letter (the 'Commitment Letter') with certain
lenders party thereto (the 'Commitment Parties'), pursuant to which the
Commitment Parties committed, subject to the terms and conditions
contained in the Commitment Letter, to provide a senior secured term loan
facility in an aggregate principal amount of £400,000,000 (the 'Term Loan
Facility'). The Term Loan Facility will refinance Odeon's existing
£100,000,000 revolving credit facility and provide additional liquidity of
£300,000,000." (AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form 8-K, January
24, 2021)
D-2
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 79 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - AMC Entertainment
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
"Movie theater giant AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. signed deals for
$917 million in financing to survive the Covid-19 pandemic for months
longer without resorting to bankruptcy, the company said Monday. ...'This
means that any talk of an imminent bankruptcy for AMC is completely off
the table,' said Chief Executive Adam Aron." ("AMC Nets $917 Million in
Financing to Ward Off Bankruptcy," Dow Jones Newswire, January 25,
2021, 06:35AM)
"Movie theater giant AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. signed deals for
$917 million in financing to survive the Covid-19 pandemic for months
longer without resorting to bankruptcy, the company said Monday. "
(“AMC Nets $917 Million in Financing to Ward Off Bankruptcy,” January
25, 2021 6:35 AM)
"We have entered into an equity distribution agreement (the 'Distribution
Agreement') with Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC and B. Riley Securities, Inc.,
as our sales agents, relating to the shares of our Class A common stock, par
value $0.01 (the 'Class A common stock'), offered by this prospectus
supplement and the accompanying prospectus. In accordance with the
terms of the Distribution Agreement, we may, through our sales agents,
offer and sell from time to time up to an aggregate of 50,000,000 shares of
our Class A common stock." (AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., Form
424B5, January 25, 2021, 08:21 AM)
D-3
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 80 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - AMC Entertainment
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
Shares of movie theater chain AMC Entertainment jump 25% after the
company announced $917M in new financing to help stave off bankruptcy.
AMC's bonds also climbed after the announcement. The company's $1.5B
bond due 2026 recently traded at 48.5 cents on the dollar, according to
MarketAxess, implying a 32.92% yield. That's up from 39.5 cents on
Friday. (“AMC Shares Rise After New Financing Announced -- Market
Talk,” Dow Jones Institutional News, January 25, 2021 10:05 AM)
1/26/2021 $4.42 $4.96 12.22% 13.52% 2.28 ** "*S&PGR Raises AMC Entertainment Rtg To 'CCC-'; Otlk Negative…
We are raising our issuer credit rating to 'CCC-' from 'SD' (selective
default). -- We are also raising our issue-level rating on AMC's remain-ing
second-lien notes to 'C' from 'D'." (“*S&PGR Raises AMC Entertainment
Rtg To 'CCC-'; Otlk Negative,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 25, 2021,
09:30 PM)
1/27/2021 $4.96 $19.90 301.21% 298.35% 50.29 ** "AMC Entertainment Sells Out Its Latest Stock Offering… AMC Enter-
tainment said shortly after noon that it's completed its latest at-the-market
offering of 50M shares, which it had launched Monday. Com-bined with
some shares under a previous equity offering, AMC has since Monday sold
a total of 63.3M shares for a combined sum of $304.8M, the company says.
AMC is up 185% today. Chief Execu-tive Adam Aron declines to
comment on whether AMC would consid-er launching yet another stock
offering in light of the market enthusi-asm. " (“AMC Entertainment Sells
Out Its Latest Stock Offering -- Market Talk,” Dow Jones Newswire,
January 27, 2021, 12:39 PM)
D-4
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 81 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Bed Bath & Beyond
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $17.76 $18.03 1.52% 2.29% 0.59
1/5/2021 $18.03 $19.76 9.60% 8.34% 2.14 **
1/6/2021 $19.76 $21.03 6.43% 1.70% 0.44 "Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (Nasdaq: BBBY) today named Patty Wu as
Senior Vice President and General Manager for buybuy BABY, effective
January 18." (“Press Release: Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. Appoints Retail
And Brand Veteran Patty Wu As General Manager Of buybuy BABY,”
Dow Jones Newswire, January 5, 2021, 05:00 PM.)
1/7/2021 $21.03 $18.73 -10.94% -11.69% -3.01 ** "On January 7, 2021, Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (the 'Company') issued a
press release announcing the Company’s financial results for its fiscal third
quarter ended November 28, 2020." (Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 8-K,
January 7, 2021, 07:11 AM)
Stronger e-commerce sales helped Bed Bath & Beyond record higher total
comparable sales year over year during the six-week holiday shopping
period, CFO Gustavo Arnal tells analysts on a call. … Bed Bath & Beyond
shares decline 13% in pre-market trading after the company posts a lower-
than-expected 3Q adjusted profit. (“Digital Growth Boosted Bed Bath &
Beyond Holiday Comp Sales -- Market Talk,” Dow Jones Newswire,
January 7, 2021, 08:19 AM.)
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
November 28, 2020, January 7, 2021, 09:17 AM.
1/8/2021 $18.73 $18.94 1.12% -1.05% -0.27 "Revenue slipped 5% year over year. The retailer attributed the revenue
decline in part to permanent store closures and divestitures of some of its
brands. Those moves, along with the greater emphasis on digital sales, are
part of a longer-term company reorganization that the pandemic
accelerated, Chief Executive Mark Tritton said. … Shares fell 11% in
Thursday trading." (“Bed Bath & Beyond Posts Loss, Sales Decline --
WSJ,” Wall Street Journal, January 8, 2021, 02:32 AM.)
D-5
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 82 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Bed Bath & Beyond
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
"On January 7, 2021, Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (the 'Company') entered into
an additional $150 million accelerated share repurchase agreement (the
'ASR Agreement') with JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (the
'Bank')." (Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Form 8-K, dated January 8, 2021,
08:50 AM.)
1/11/2021 $18.94 $20.49 8.18% 6.83% 1.76
1/12/2021 $20.49 $21.53 5.05% 1.44% 0.37 "Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (Nasdaq: BBBY) has appointed two new
strategic marketing leaders - Kristi Argyilan as Senior Vice President
(SVP), Brand Innovation and Jim Reath as SVP, Marketing." (“Press
Release: Bed Bath & Beyond Transforms Marketing With Appointment Of
New Leaders And Award-Winning Agency Partners,” Dow Jones
Newswire, January 12, 2021, 08:00 AM.)
1/13/2021 $21.53 $23.02 6.95% 7.90% 2.03 **
1/14/2021 $23.02 $27.34 18.77% 20.04% 5.15 **
1/15/2021 $27.34 $25.60 -6.38% -9.43% -2.42 **
1/19/2021 $25.60 $25.03 -2.21% -1.29% -0.33
1/20/2021 $25.03 $24.97 -0.24% -2.00% -0.51 "Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (Nasdaq: BBBY) today named Mara Sirhal as
Senior Vice President and General Manager for Harmon Health and
Beauty Stores, effective immediately." (“Press Release: Bed Bath &
Beyond Inc. Appoints Retail And Beauty Expert Mara Sirhal As Senior
Vice President And General Manager Of Harmon Health And Beauty
Stores,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 19, 2021, 04:30 PM.)
1/21/2021 $24.97 $26.87 7.61% 5.42% 1.39
1/22/2021 $26.87 $30.21 12.43% 11.45% 2.94 **
1/25/2021 $30.21 $30.68 1.56% 1.33% 0.34
1/26/2021 $30.68 $36.87 20.18% 20.76% 5.34 ** "Raymond James analyst Bobby Griffin cut the recommendation on Bed
Bath & Beyond Inc. to market perform from strong buy." ("Bed Bath &
Beyond Cut to Market Perform at Raymond James," Bloomberg L.P.,
January 26, 2021, 03:45 AM.)
"Bed Bath & Beyond downgraded to Sell from Neutral at UBS." ("BBBY:
Bed Bath & Beyond downgraded to Sell from Neutral at UBS," Bloomberg
L.P., January 26, 2021, 06:44 AM.)
D-6
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 83 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Bed Bath & Beyond
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/27/2021 $36.87 $52.89 43.45% 48.55% 12.48 ** "Baird analyst Peter Benedict cut the recommendation on Bed Bath &
Beyond Inc. to neutral from outperform." ("Bed Bath & Beyond Cut to
Neutral at Baird; PT $37," Bloomberg L.P., January 27, 2021, 01:32 AM.)
"Bed Bath & Beyond downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Wedbush
Wedbush analyst Seth Basham downgraded Bed Bath & Beyond to Neutral
from Outperform." ("BBBY: Bed Bath & Beyond downgraded to Neutral
from Outperform," Bloomberg L.P., January 27, 2021, 06:35 AM.)
"Standpoint Research Downgrades Bed Bath & Beyond to Hold From
Buy." ("Standpoint Research Downgrades Bed Bath & Beyond to Hold
From Buy," Bloomberg L.P., January 27, 2021, 11:23 AM.)
"Odeon Capital Group LLC analyst Alexander Arnold cut the
recommendation on Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. to hold from buy." ("Bed
Bath & Beyond Cut to Hold at Odeon Capital; PT $38," Bloomberg L.P.,
January 27, 2021, 11:57 AM.)
D-7
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 84 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - BlackBerry
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $6.63 $6.58 -0.75% 0.78% 0.23
1/5/2021 $6.58 $6.77 2.89% 1.92% 0.55
1/6/2021 $6.77 $6.71 -0.89% -0.71% -0.20
1/7/2021 $6.71 $7.06 5.22% 2.91% 0.84
1/8/2021 $7.06 $7.56 7.08% 6.20% 1.79
1/11/2021 $7.56 $7.65 1.19% 1.83% 0.53
1/12/2021 $7.65 $7.63 -0.26% -0.30% -0.09
1/13/2021 $7.63 $7.44 -2.49% -3.11% -0.90
1/14/2021 $7.44 $9.11 22.45% 22.90% 6.60 ** "BlackBerry sells 90 patents to Huawei…" ("Canada Media Digest:
Thursday Jan. 14," Bloomberg L.P., January 14, 2021, 05:05 AM.)
1/15/2021 $9.11 $9.84 8.01% 8.71% 2.51 ** "*BLACKBERRY, FACEBOOK ARE IN PROCESS OF GLOBAL
SETTLEMENT." ("*BLACKBERRY, FACEBOOK ARE IN PROCESS
OF GLOBAL SETTLEMENT," Bloomberg L.P., January 15, 2021, 09:20
AM.)
1/19/2021 $9.84 $12.35 25.51% 24.22% 6.98 ** BlackBerry shares spiked as much as 20% Tuesday after the company
announced it settled a patent infringement suit with Facebook. The terms
of the settlement weren't disclosed. ("BlackBerry jumps 20% after
settling patent dispute with Facebook (BB, FB)," Bloomberg L.P.,
January 19, 2021, 02:25 PM.)
1/20/2021 $12.35 $12.79 3.56% 1.60% 0.46
1/21/2021 $12.79 $12.85 0.47% -0.30% -0.09
1/22/2021 $12.85 $14.04 9.26% 9.40% 2.71 **
1/25/2021 $14.04 $18.03 28.42% 27.62% 7.96 ** "BlackBerry extended its stock rally with a 10% gain on Friday, 43% for
the week, following a report that it’s settled a patent-royalty dispute with
Facebook.'" (“Energy & Utilities Roundup: Market Talk,” Dow Jones
Newswire, January 22, 2021, 04:50 PM)
"BlackBerry insiders unload shares in rally…" ("Canada Media Digest:
Monday Jan. 25," Bloomberg L.P., January 25, 2021, 05:05 AM.)
"The Company is not aware of any material, undisclosed corporate
developments and has no material change in its business or affairs that
has not been publicly disclosed that would account for the recent increase
in the market price or trading volume of its common shares" ("Press
Release: BlackBerry Comments on Trading Activity at Request of the
Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC)," Dow Jones
Newswire, January 25, 2021, 11:08 AM)
D-8
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 85 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - BlackBerry
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/26/2021 $18.03 $18.92 4.94% 4.84% 1.40 "BlackBerry Limited (NYSE: BB; TSX: BB) today announced an
expansion of its strategic partnership with Baidu, whose high-definition
maps will run on the QNX(R) Neutrino(R) Real-time Operating System
(RTOS) and will be mass-produced in the forthcoming GAC New Energy
Aion models from the EV arm of GAC Group (Guangzhou Automobile
Group Co., Ltd.). The milestones build on the company’s January 2018
agreement to make BlackBerry QNX's industry-leading ISO 26262 ASIL
D certified operating system (OS) the foundation for Baidu’s ‘Apollo’
autonomous driving open platform.'" (“BlackBerry Expands Partn ership
with Baidu to Power Next Generation Autonomous Driving Technology,”
Dow Jones Newswire, January 25, 2021, 09:00 PM.)
"BlackBerry Cut to Underperform From Sector Perform by RBC
Capital." ("BlackBerry Cut to Underperform From Sector Perform by
RBC Capital," Dow Jones Newswire, January 26, 2021, 05:46 AM)
1/27/2021 $18.92 $25.10 32.66% 35.00% 10.09 **
D-9
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 86 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Express Inc.
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $0.91 $0.93 2.70% 8.13% 1.23
1/5/2021 $0.93 $0.96 3.03% 3.61% 0.55
1/6/2021 $0.96 $1.00 3.85% -5.36% -0.81
1/7/2021 $1.00 $1.02 2.00% 2.55% 0.39
1/8/2021 $1.02 $1.04 1.96% 2.03% 0.31
1/11/2021 $1.04 $1.00 -4.12% -0.88% -0.13
1/12/2021 $1.00 $1.05 5.29% 4.86% 0.74
1/13/2021 $1.05 $1.03 -1.90% 1.51% 0.23
1/14/2021 $1.03 $1.28 24.27% 26.42% 4.00 ** "Shares of Express Inc. (EXPR) soared 24% in premarket trading
Thursday, after the struggling apparel retailer announced an agreement that
will provide it with $140 million in additional financing. The financing
deal, reached with Sycamore Partners, as well as Wells Fargo and Bank of
America Merrill Lynch, includes a $90 million term loan due May 2024
and a $50 million delayed draw term loan, which will be repaid after the
receipt of a CARES Act tax refund. ‘We continue to effectively manage
our financial liquidity,’ said Chief Executive Tim Baxter. ‘I expect this
additional capital will support the Company through the duration of the
pandemic, and allow us to continue the important and transformational
work of the EXPRESSway Forward strategy.’ The stock has tumbled
78.4% over the past 12 months through Wednesday, while the SPDR S&P
Retail ETF (XRT) has run up 56.8% and the S&P 500 has gained 16.0%."
(“Express Adds $140M to Liquidity Position,” Dow Jones Newswire,
January 14, 2021, 06:56 AM.)
"On January 13, 2021, Express, Inc. (the 'Company') and certain of its
subsidiaries entered into new senior secured credit facilities (the 'New
Term Loan Credit Agreement') and amended its existing asset-based loan
credit facility (the 'ABL Facility Amendment'). The New Term Loan Credit
Agreement establishes a $90 million 'first in, last out' term loan facility
maturing in May 2024 and a $50 million delayed draw term loan facility
maturing in May 2024." (Express, Inc., Form 8-K, January 14, 2021, 07:05
AM)
1/15/2021 $1.28 $1.26 -1.56% -1.64% -0.25
1/19/2021 $1.26 $1.21 -3.97% 0.85% 0.13
1/20/2021 $1.21 $1.16 -4.13% -5.33% -0.81
D-10
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 87 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Express Inc.
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/21/2021 $1.16 $1.17 0.86% 1.30% 0.20
1/22/2021 $1.17 $1.79 52.99% 56.69% 8.59 **
1/25/2021 $1.79 $4.15 131.84% 135.27% 20.49 **
1/26/2021 $4.15 $3.04 -26.75% -22.61% -3.42 ** "'We are more cautious on share price and valuation now as the stampede
on Express shares seems to discount the company hemorrhaging cash,' said
Jennifer Redding, an analyst at Wedbush. 'They are burning upwards of
$134.5 million in nine months as the pandemic drives demand for more
casual work-at- home apparel, hitting gross margin and comp at the
traditionally dressier apparel retailer particularly hard...'" ("Retailer Express
More Than Doubles Amid Reddit Speculation (2)," Bloomberg L.P.,
January 25, 2021, 04:12 PM)
1/27/2021 $3.04 $9.55 214.14% 219.93% 33.31 **
D-11
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 88 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Koss Corp.
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $3.44 $3.19 -7.27% -7.07% -1.03
1/5/2021 $3.19 $3.11 -2.51% -4.47% -0.65
1/6/2021 $3.11 $3.05 -1.93% -0.95% -0.14
1/7/2021 $3.05 $3.15 3.28% 1.38% 0.20
1/8/2021 $3.15 $3.27 3.81% 2.28% 0.33
1/11/2021 $3.27 $3.20 -2.14% -2.17% -0.32
1/12/2021 $3.20 $3.24 1.25% 0.51% 0.08
1/13/2021 $3.24 $3.11 -4.01% -5.17% -0.76
1/14/2021 $3.11 $3.07 -1.29% -1.44% -0.21
1/15/2021 $3.07 $2.90 -5.54% -5.50% -0.81
1/19/2021 $2.90 $3.62 24.83% 23.97% 3.51 **
1/20/2021 $3.62 $3.43 -5.25% -7.04% -1.03
1/21/2021 $3.43 $3.54 3.21% 1.46% 0.21
1/22/2021 $3.54 $3.34 -5.65% -6.47% -0.95
1/25/2021 $3.34 $6.00 79.64% 78.66% 11.51 **
1/26/2021 $6.00 $10.00 66.67% 65.74% 9.62 **
1/27/2021 $10.00 $58.00 480.00% 480.08% 70.25 **
D-12
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 89 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - GameStop
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $18.84 $17.25 -8.44% -7.15% -0.92
1/5/2021 $17.25 $17.37 0.70% -1.59% -0.21
1/6/2021 $17.37 $18.36 5.70% 3.48% 0.45
1/7/2021 $18.36 $18.08 -1.53% -5.45% -0.70
1/8/2021 $18.08 $17.69 -2.16% -4.33% -0.56
1/11/2021 $17.69 $19.94 12.72% 12.51% 1.62 "GameStop Corp. (NYSE: GME), today reported worldwide sales results
for the nine-week holiday period ended January 2, 2021 reflecting a 4.8%
increase in comparable store sales and a 309% increase in E-Commerce
sales. Total sales declined 3.1% driven by an 11% decrease in the
company's store base due to its planned de-densification strategy,
temporary store closures around the world due to government mandates
and lower store traffic, particularly later in December, due to the
significant impacts of COVID-19. The Company believes the industry-
wide traffic decline during the Holiday period adversely impacted
comparable sales for the nine-week period in the high single-digit to low
double-digit percentage point range. In addition, significant worldwide
supply chain constraints impacted the ability to distribute products to
customers across all sales channels. However, the Company experienced
unprecedented demand for recently launched gaming consoles, and while
consumer demand far outpaced constrained supply in the nine-week
period, the Company believes these products will drive sales well into
2021 as console availability from our suppliers improves later in the
year." ("Press Release: GameStop Reports 2020 Holiday Sales Results,"
Dow Jones Newswire, January 11, 2021 08:30 AM.)
"On January 10, 2021, GameStop Corp. (the 'Company') entered into an
agreement (the 'Agreement') with RC Ventures LLC and Ryan Cohen
(together, 'RC Ventures')." (GameStop Corp., Form 8-K, January 11,
2021, 07:33 AM)
D-13
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 90 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - GameStop
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
"On January 11, 2021, GameStop Corp. issued a press release
announcing its sales results for the nine-week holiday period ended
January 2, 2021." (GameStop Corp., Form 8-K, January 11, 2021, 08:33
AM)
GameStop gave investors betting on the struggling vidogame retailer good
news and bad news on Monday. The stock, for now, seems fixed on the
former. The company (ticker: GME) reached a deal with Chewy co-
founder Ryan Cohen's RC Ventures. Cohen, as well as former Chewy
executives Alan Attal and Jim Grube, will join the company's board, now
at 13 members. Cohen holds 13% of GameStop shares, according to a
recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. ... That news
seemed to overshadowed a disappointing holiday sales release from
GameStop . The company said net sales during the nine-week holiday
period, which ended Jan. 2, were down 3.1% year-over-year. Comparable
sales were up 4.8% year-over-year, though e-commerce comparable sales
popped 309% year-over-year. ("GameStop Will Add Activist Investors to
the Board. The Stock Shot Up. -- Barrons.com," Dow Jones Newswire,
January 11, 2021, 11:59 AM.)
1/12/2021 $19.94 $19.95 0.05% -1.80% -0.23
1/13/2021 $19.95 $31.40 57.39% 55.43% 7.16 **
1/14/2021 $31.40 $39.91 27.10% 26.45% 3.42 **
1/15/2021 $39.91 $35.50 -11.05% -10.91% -1.41
1/19/2021 $35.50 $39.36 10.87% 8.62% 1.11
1/20/2021 $39.36 $39.12 -0.61% -6.74% -0.87
1/21/2021 $39.12 $43.03 9.99% 8.72% 1.13
1/22/2021 $43.03 $65.01 51.08% 50.74% 6.56 ** "CFRA Research analyst Camilla Yanushevsky reiterated her sell rating
on Jan. 15 and credited the bulk of last week’s gains to a short squeeze
after activist investor and Chewy Inc. co-founder Ryan Cohen was added
to GameStop's board." ("GameStop Tug-of-War Gives Reddit Army a
Win on Record Volatility " Bloomberg L.P., January 22, 2021, 11:47
AM)
1/25/2021 $65.01 $76.79 18.12% 16.84% 2.18 ** "GameStop Cut to Underperform From Outperform by Telsey Advisory
Group." ("GameStop Cut to Underperform From Outperform by Telsey
Advisory Group," Dow Jones Newswire, January 25, 2021, 08:10 AM.)
D-14
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 91 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - GameStop
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/26/2021 $76.79 $147.98 92.71% 91.49% 11.82 **
1/27/2021 $147.98 $347.51 134.84% 138.89% 17.95 ** "GameStop Is Maintained at Underperform by B of A Securities"
("GameStop Is Maintained at Underperform by B of A Securities," Dow
Jones Newswire, January 27, 2021, 09:06 AM.)
D-15
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 92 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Nokia
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $3.91 $3.89 -0.51% 0.69% 0.29
1/5/2021 $3.89 $4.04 3.86% 3.24% 1.36
1/6/2021 $4.04 $4.04 0.00% -0.69% -0.29 “Nokia today announced an expansion of its strategic 5G partnership with
Zain KSA to rollout 60,000 FastMile 5G Gateway 3.1 with eSIM across
Saudi Arabia over the next 12 months. deliver stronger signal, better
connectivity and ultra-high data speeds to every corner of homes and
offices in the Kingdom. The move allows Zain KSA to support smart
home and office adoption in the country with enhanced connectivity for
smart devices through 5G and Wi-Fi 6, which altogether guarantees an
improved customer experience.” (“Nokia and Zain KSA smarten up
Saudi homes and offices with 5G-powered FWA and Wi-Fi 6,” Dow
Jones Newswire, January 6, 2021, 02:00 AM)
1/7/2021 $4.04 $3.99 -1.24% -1.94% -0.81
1/8/2021 $3.99 $3.93 -1.50% -2.43% -1.02
1/11/2021 $3.93 $3.87 -1.53% -0.86% -0.36 “Nokia today announced that it has been selected by Tele2 to deploy
Standalone (SA) 5G Core and Voice over 5G (Vo5G) to enhance its
cloud infrastructure and improve data and voice connectivity for Tele2's
subscribers in Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Deployment is
expected to start in 2021.” (“Nokia to accelerate Tele2’s digitalization
with distributed cloud core,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 11, 2021,
01:30 AM)
1/12/2021 $3.87 $4.01 3.62% 2.80% 1.18
1/13/2021 $4.01 $3.98 -0.75% 0.31% 0.13 “Nokia and M1 have signed a partnership agreement to deploy Nokia's
cloud-native Core software in order to drive Singapore's 5G standalone
network launch in 2021.” (“Nokia and M1 partner with 5G standalone
Core to drive Singapore’s 5G ecosystem,” Dow Jones Newswire, January
12, 2021, 09:00 PM)
D-16
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 93 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Nokia
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/14/2021 $3.98 $4.09 2.76% 2.02% 0.85 “Nokia today announced a continuation of its long standing T-Mobile
partnership with a five-year deal. T-Mobile will utilize Nokia's AirScale
Radio platform to deploy an Ultra Capacity 5G layer with 2.5GHz
Massive MIMO technology, shifting the Un-carrier customer experience
into overdrive. Under the new agreement, Nokia will continue to expand
T-Mobile's extended range (low-band) 5G coverage. Both the extended
range and Ultra Capacity enhancements will augment user experience and
network capacity by leveraging T-Mobile's multi-layer spectrum
strategy.” (“Nokia supports T-Mobile 5G evolution with five-year
expansion deal,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 14, 2021, 02:15 AM)
“Google Cloud and Nokia today announced a global, strategic partnership
to bring new solutions for communications service providers (CSPs) that
modernize their network infrastructures, build on a cloud-native 5G Core,
and develop the network edge as a business services platform for
enterprises.” (“Google Cloud, Nokia partner to accelerate cloud-native
5G readiness for communication service providers,” Dow Jones
Newswire, January 14, 2021, 08:00 AM)
“Nokia today announced it has been selected as a technology provider
and collaborator by the National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence
(NCCoE) 5G Cybersecurity Project. Nokia will work with NCCoE and
other key vendors, including members from government and industry to
ensure the transition from 4G to 5G networks is secure.” (“Nokia selected
for U.S. Federal 5G Cybersecurity Project,” Dow Jones Newswire,
January 14, 2021, 09:00 AM)
1/15/2021 $4.09 $4.08 -0.24% -2.24% -0.94
1/19/2021 $4.08 $4.13 1.23% -0.76% -0.32
D-17
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 94 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Nokia
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/20/2021 $4.13 $4.20 1.69% 1.71% 0.72 “Nokia today announced that it has successfully piloted 4G and 5G fixed
wireless access (FWA) network slicing with Saudi Arabian
telecommunications services provider, Mobily on their live commercial
network -- the first sliced FWA deployment in the world. The ongoing
pilot, which took place in the capital city of Riyadh, occurred in a multi-
vendor environment and included sliced access, transport and core
networks with management and assurance capabilities. The solution will
allow Mobily to offer new FWA services to priority consumer and
enterprise customers. It also enables slicing per application including
voice, data, online gaming or home office applications.” (“Nokia and
Mobility pilot world’s first 4G and 5G Fixed Wireless Access network
slicing,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 20, 2021, 04:30 AM.)
1/21/2021 $4.20 $4.22 0.48% 1.11% 0.46
1/22/2021 $4.22 $4.20 -0.47% 0.47% 0.20
1/25/2021 $4.20 $4.85 15.48% 14.67% 6.16 ** "Nokia shares advance as much as 5.7%, to the highest since Oct. 27,
after SEB underscores 'substantial turnaround potential' in the stock
following the Finnish company’s early stumbles as the 5G cycle gets
underway." ("Nokia Shares Rise; SEB Highlights Potential for
Turnaround," Bloomberg L.P., January 25, 2021, 04:49 AM.)
1/26/2021 $4.85 $4.73 -2.47% -2.17% -0.91 “Nokia today announced that its enhanced C-Band portfolio will be
available from Q1 2021 to support mobile operators' 5G network
deployments, following the conclusion of the recent spectrum auction in
the U.S. Nokia's comprehensive C-Band portfolio, which covers both
indoor and outdoor deployment needs, includes massive MIMO antenna
solutions, hybrid antennas that combine both passive and active radio
platforms into a single, modular unit, macro remote radio heads and small
cell solutions to cover all connectivity and deployment requirements.”
(“Nokia’s comprehensive C-Band portfolio ready for 5G build-out in
U.S.,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 26, 2021, 04:00 AM.)
D-18
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 95 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Nokia
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/27/2021 $4.73 $6.55 38.48% 39.08% 16.42 ** “Ooredoo Algeria has deployed Nokia's cloud-native Core software to
cost effectively strengthen its network performance and reliability, and to
strategically position itself for the future and the launch of new services
to meet customer needs. This deployment will further improve the digital
ecosystem of the country.” (“Ooredoo Algeria deploys Nokia's cloud-
native core software to prepare for the future,” Dow Jones Newswire,
January 26, 2021, 09:00 PM.)
“Nokia is issuing this stock exchange release to comment on recent
trading activity of its stock. Nokia is not aware of any material,
undisclosed corporate developments or material change in its business or
affairs that has not been publicly disclosed that would account for the
recent increase in the market price or trading volume of its shares.”
(Nokia Oyj SEC Form 6-K, January 27, 2021, 03:10 PM.)
D-19
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 96 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Tootsie Roll Industries
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $29.70 $29.86 0.54% 1.08% 0.93
1/5/2021 $29.86 $30.72 2.88% 2.92% 2.52 **
1/6/2021 $30.72 $31.28 1.82% 1.06% 0.92
1/7/2021 $31.28 $31.00 -0.90% 0.39% 0.34
1/8/2021 $31.00 $30.45 -1.77% -1.21% -1.04
1/11/2021 $30.45 $29.92 -1.74% -0.46% -0.40
1/12/2021 $29.92 $30.01 0.30% 1.06% 0.92
1/13/2021 $30.01 $29.91 -0.33% -0.62% -0.54
1/14/2021 $29.91 $30.00 0.30% -0.36% -0.31
1/15/2021 $30.00 $30.31 1.03% 0.95% 0.82
1/19/2021 $30.31 $29.99 -1.06% -0.57% -0.49
1/20/2021 $29.99 $29.77 -0.73% -0.47% -0.41
1/21/2021 $29.77 $29.65 -0.40% 0.54% 0.46
1/22/2021 $29.65 $30.14 1.65% 1.33% 1.15
1/25/2021 $30.14 $34.86 15.66% 14.18% 12.22 **
1/26/2021 $34.86 $38.45 10.30% 9.01% 7.77 **
1/27/2021 $38.45 $42.85 11.44% 11.95% 10.30 **
D-20
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 97 of
Appendix
98 D
Summary of Company Specific News - Trivago
January 4, 2021 - January 27, 2021
Reaction Previous Trading Day Closing Price On Actual Abnormal
Day Close Reaction Day Return Return t -Stat Company-Specific News
1/4/2021 $2.42 $2.27 -6.20% -3.95% -0.91
1/5/2021 $2.27 $2.29 0.88% -1.86% -0.43
1/6/2021 $2.29 $2.20 -3.93% -4.60% -1.07
1/7/2021 $2.20 $2.24 1.82% 1.19% 0.28
1/8/2021 $2.24 $2.35 4.91% 3.08% 0.71
1/11/2021 $2.35 $2.32 -1.28% 1.33% 0.31 "trivago Price Target Raised to $2.20/Share From $2.10 by Morgan
Stanley." ("trivago Price Target Raised to $2.20/Share From $2.10 by
Morgan Stanley," Dow Jones Newswire, January 11, 2021, 09:35 AM.)
"trivago is maintained at equal-weight by Morgan Stanley." ("trivago Is
Maintained at Equal-Weight by Morgan Stanley," Dow Jones Newswire,
January 11, 2021, 09:35 AM)
1/12/2021 $2.32 $2.30 -0.86% 0.08% 0.02
1/13/2021 $2.30 $2.26 -1.74% -2.29% -0.53 "trivago N.V. (NASDAQ: TRVG) announced that it has acquired
weekengo GmbH and weekend.com, a startup focused on finding
travelers inspirational weekend getaway packages." (“Press Release:
trivago Acquired weekend.com,” Dow Jones Newswire, January 13,
2021, 09:00 AM.)
1/14/2021 $2.26 $2.23 -1.33% -2.56% -0.59
1/15/2021 $2.23 $2.16 -3.14% -0.80% -0.18
1/19/2021 $2.16 $2.15 -0.46% -2.36% -0.55
1/20/2021 $2.15 $2.11 -1.86% -1.77% -0.41
1/21/2021 $2.11 $2.18 3.32% 2.33% 0.54
1/22/2021 $2.18 $2.19 0.46% 1.44% 0.33
1/25/2021 $2.19 $2.18 -0.46% 1.27% 0.29
1/26/2021 $2.18 $2.10 -3.67% -4.75% -1.10
1/27/2021 $2.10 $3.19 51.90% 53.36% 12.36 **
D-21
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 559-8 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 98 of
98
Appendix E
Percent Change in Price During Afternoon of January 29, 2021
5% 3.21%
2.63%
1.17%
0%
-2.47%
-5%
-7.04%
Percent Change in Price
-10%
-9.94%
-12.31%
-13.01%
-15%
-20%
-25%
-30%
-29.77%
-35%
BB BBBY KOSS EXPR NOK AMC GME TR TRVG
Sources: TickData API; PCO_00589114.xlsx.
Notes: Plaintiffs allege that in the afternoon of January 29, 2021 Robinhood “significantly ratcheted up the share purchase restrictions in had put in place at the start of trading.”
Complaint, ¶¶ 84-85. Plaintiffs also allege that “…each time new restrictions were imposed, the prices of the Affected Stocks declined.” Complaint, ¶ 88. For example, early in
the trading day during January 29, 2021, purchase restrictions for AMC shares were 115. At 12:02 PM, Robinhood tightened the restriction by imposing a 25-share purchase limit
of AMC shares. For AMC, BB, GME, KOSS, and NOK, the tighter purchase restrictions occurred at 12:02 PM on January 29, 2021. For BBBY and EXPR, the tighter purchase
restrictions occurred at 13:36 PM on January 29, 2021. For TRVG, the tighter purchase restrictions occurred at 14:48 PM on January 29, 2021, and for TR, the tighter purchase
restrictions occurred at 15:24 PM. We use intra-day prices for the relevant start times based on these times. We measured the price changes in the Affected Stocks from the time
that the purchase restrictions were first tightened on January 29, 2021 to the last available intra-day price on January 29, 2021, which was 8:00 PM. The chart shows that from the
time of the first purchase limit reduction to 8:00 PM, three of the Affected Stocks actually increased in price, contrary to what Plaintiffs allege.
E-1
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flsd.590042.559.8.pdf
- Size
- 1,776,073 bytes
- SHA-256
- 015749f3c6ed6eca631554b82559a10707f5109a27da0e6e855dc7d40bd440bd
- Original
- archive.org