Exhibit 15 (Document 568-15): Videotaped Deposition of Adam Werner, Ph.D., May 3, 2023 — Case No. 1:21-MD-2989-CMA
Summary
Exhibit 15, entered June 8, 2023 as Document 568-15 in In re January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation, Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA in the Southern District of Florida, is a 190-page filing of the transcript of the videotaped deposition of Adam Werner, Ph.D., taken by Defendants on May 3, 2023 at the New York offices of Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP. Antony Ryan of Cravath examined him for the Robinhood defendants, and Laurence Rosen of The Rosen Law Firm defended the deposition for the securities class action plaintiffs. The questioning opens with Werner's education, employment, compensation and the reports he has written. Todd DeSimone of Veritext Legal Solutions reported the deposition.
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
- 2023-06-08
Cite this document
“Exhibit 15 (Document 568-15): Videotaped Deposition of Adam Werner, Ph.D., May 3, 2023 — Case No. 1:21-MD-2989-CMA.”
Original at archive.org, dated 2023-06-08. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2023-06-08-covid-era-misc-5d055d42-1/
, SHA-256 5d055d42c794511aace38abcd4b87c750a5a6be45990f4501fe91865f29862dd.Full text
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 1 of
190
Exhibit 15
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 2 of
190
Page 1
1
2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
4 Case No. 1:21-MD-2989-CMA
5 -----------------------------------x
6 IN RE JANUARY 2021 SHORT SQUEEZE
7 TRADING LITIGATION
8
-----------------------------------x
9 May 3, 2023
10:06 a.m.
10
11
12 Videotaped Deposition of ADAM WERNER,
13 Ph.D., taken by Defendants, pursuant to
14 Notice, held at the offices of Cravath
15 Swaine & Moore LLP, 825 Eighth Avenue, New
16 York, New York, before Todd DeSimone, a
17 Registered Professional Reporter and Notary
18 Public of the State of New York.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 3 of
190
Page 2 Page 4
1 1 WERNER
2 APPEARANCES:
3 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM
2 videographer. The court reporter is
275 Madison Avenue 3 Todd DeSimone from Veritext. I am not
4 40th Floor 4 authorized to administer an oath, I am
New York, New York 10016
5 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
5 not related to any party in this
BY: LAURENCE ROSEN, ESQ. 6 action, nor am I financially interested
6 lrosen@rosenlegal.com 7 in the outcome.
7
8
8 If there are any objections to
CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP 9 proceeding, please state them at the
9 825 Eighth Avenue 10 time of your appearance. Counsel will
New York, New York 10019
10 Attorneys for Defendants
11 now state their appearances and
BY: ANTONY L. RYAN, ESQ. 12 affiliations for the record, beginning
11 aryan@cravath.com 13 with the noticing attorney.
ROBERT DeNUNZIO, ESQ.
14 MR. RYAN: Antony Ryan, Cravath
12 rdenunzio@cravath.com
CHARLOTTE LEPIC, ESQ. 15 Swaine & Moore LLP, representing the
13 clepic@cravath.com 16 Robinhood defendants, and I'm joined
14 17 here today by my colleagues Robert
15
16 ALSO PRESENT: 18 DeNunzio and Charlotte Lepic.
17 PHIL GLAUBERSON, Videographer 19 MR. ROSEN: Laurence Rosen on
18 20 behalf of the securities class action
19
20 21 plaintiffs and the class, and also here
21 22 to defend the deposition of Dr. Werner.
22 23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the
23
24 24 court reporter please swear in the
25 25 witness.
Page 3 Page 5
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. 2 * * *
3 We are going on the record at 10:06 3 A D A M W E R N E R, Ph.D.,
4 a.m., 5-3-23. 4 called as a witness, having been first
5 Please note that microphones 5 duly sworn, was examined and testified
6 are sensitive and may pick up 6 as follows:
7 whispering and private conversations. 7 EXAMINATION BY MR. RYAN:
8 Please mute your phones at this time 8 Q. Good morning, Dr. Werner.
9 and please place your phones away from 9 A. Good morning.
10 the microphones as they can interfere 10 Q. Could you please state your
11 with the audio. Audio and video 11 full name for the record.
12 recording will continue to take place 12 A. Legally it is Dr. Adam Davis
13 unless all parties agree to go off the 13 Werner. If you look at my license, it goes
14 record. 14 back to when I was 16 years old, someone
15 This is media unit one of the 15 mistyped it at the DMV, so I have always
16 video-recorded deposition of Dr. Adam 16 been Adam David Werner.
17 Werner in the matter of In Re January 17 Q. Got it. What is your
18 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation, 18 educational background, Dr. Werner?
19 filed in the United States District 19 A. I got my undergraduate degree
20 Court, Southern District of Florida, 20 with honors in economics at Oberlin
21 21-MD-2989-CMA. The location of this 21 College. I got my Ph.D. in finance from
22 deposition is Cravath Swaine & Moore, 22 Northwestern University. I believe I also
23 825 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York. 23 have a master's in finance or MS in
24 My name is Phil Glauberson 24 finance, but I think that is just like give
25 representing Veritext and I am the 25 it to you sort of as part of the process.
2 (Pages 2 - 5)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 4 of
190
Page 6 Page 8
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Do you understand that you are 2 Q. All right. Why don't you
3 appearing here today as an expert in this 3 correct me then.
4 litigation? 4 A. I recently retired from
5 A. I do. 5 teaching at Cal Poly.
6 Q. What is your area of expertise? 6 Q. Got it. And when did you
7 A. Economics and finance. 7 retire from teaching at Cal Poly?
8 Q. Now, am I right that after you 8 A. I believe it was April 4th,
9 graduated from Oberlin, you worked for a 9 April 3rd, something like that.
10 year as a research assistant for the 10 Q. And is that the end of a term
11 Federal Reserve Bank in Cleveland? 11 at Cal Poly?
12 A. I did that for six months. 12 A. I think it was the beginning of
13 Immediately after college I actually worked 13 a quarter, the day prior to the beginning
14 as a secretary at the New York Public 14 of a quarter.
15 Library, but I didn't feel, that was 15 Q. Understood. So that school
16 probably not relevant to my expert opinion. 16 operates on a quarter system and you
17 Q. All right. And then after 17 retired at the end of -- approximately the
18 those six months at the New York Public 18 end of March of 2023?
19 Library, did you work as a research 19 A. Correct.
20 assistant for the Federal Reserve Bank in 20 Q. All right. And am I right,
21 Cleveland? 21 then, that for some period of years up
22 A. I did. 22 until recently you were a lecturer in
23 Q. And then you went to graduate 23 economics at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo?
24 school at Northwestern? 24 A. Correct.
25 A. Correct. 25 Q. What is your association with
Page 7 Page 9
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. And then am I right that since 2 Crowninshield Financial Research?
3 then you have been affiliated with a 3 A. Again, I mean, I think the
4 variety of economic consulting firms? 4 title is affiliated expert, but I'm a 1099
5 A. I think that's accurate. 5 employee. So I don't know if that makes me
6 Q. And those include Cornerstone, 6 a consultant.
7 NERA, CRA, LitiNomics, Gnarus, and the 7 Q. Okay. And for the last --
8 Berkeley Economic Consulting Group; is that 8 well, strike that.
9 right? 9 Am I right that you have been
10 A. Correct. 10 affiliated with Crowninshield since around
11 Q. Were you employed by those 11 2015?
12 organizations? 12 A. I think that's correct. I can
13 A. The first three. Since then I 13 check my vitae if it makes it easier.
14 think I have been a 1099 employee. I don't 14 Q. Sure.
15 recall at Berkeley Economic Consulting, I 15 A. So just to be accurate. So, I
16 think I was still a 1099 employee. But, I 16 don't know, is this an exhibit?
17 mean, at one point I subsumed the firm 17 MR. ROSEN: I brought those.
18 because the principals went to the Brattle 18 THE WITNESS: Oh, you brought
19 Group. So I don't know technically what 19 these, sorry. Okay.
20 status I was, whether I was paying myself 20 MR. ROSEN: Those are what I
21 as a 1099 employee or a W-2 employee. 21 thought were the relevant reports.
22 Q. Am I right that you are 22 Q. We will make it an exhibit in a
23 presently a lecturer in economics at Cal 23 moment.
24 Poly San Luis Obispo? 24 A. Yes, 2015.
25 A. You actually are incorrect. 25 Q. All right. And then from 2015
3 (Pages 6 - 9)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 5 of
190
Page 10 Page 12
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 until you recently retired from Cal Poly 2 cases for The Rosen Law Firm?
3 San Luis Obispo, how much of your 3 A. I mean, I would be speculating.
4 professional time was spent teaching at the 4 If you want me to go through it, I can try
5 school versus consulting with 5 to figure it out.
6 Crowninshield? 6 Q. Is it more than ten?
7 A. Time? 7 A. Oh, I'm sure it is more than
8 Q. Yes. 8 ten. Let me ask a clarifying question, so
9 A. Probably 50/50. 9 when you say reports, would a rebuttal
10 Q. Okay. And did the majority of 10 report and an initial -- so, for example,
11 your compensation during that time frame 11 in this case, right, I have submitted two
12 come from Crowninshield? 12 reports, is that one engagement or would
13 A. I would say about 65 percent of 13 you consider that two reports?
14 my compensation came from Crowninshield. 14 Q. I would consider that two
15 Q. Do you know Steven Feinstein? 15 reports in one case. So let me ask -- let
16 A. I do, as does Dr. Grenadier, 16 me reask the question so we have a clear
17 Professor Grenadier I believe. 17 record.
18 Q. And did Dr. Feinstein hire you 18 Am I right that you have
19 originally at Crowninshield? 19 submitted expert reports or declarations in
20 A. I don't know the answer to that 20 more than ten cases in which you have
21 question. Again, I'm a 1099 employee, so 21 worked with The Rosen Law Firm?
22 as an affiliate, I don't know if I was ever 22 A. I believe that is correct.
23 technically hired by Crowninshield. 23 Q. And are there other occasions
24 Q. Did you meet with Dr. Feinstein 24 beyond the cases in which you have
25 before you began your affiliation at 25 submitted expert reports or declarations in
Page 11 Page 13
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Crowninshield? 2 which you have consulted with The Rosen Law
3 A. I certainly spoke with him 3 Firm?
4 numerous times on the phone. I don't think 4 A. Yes.
5 I physically met -- I don't recall 5 Q. Have you ever submitted an
6 physically meeting him. 6 expert report or declaration on behalf of a
7 Q. All right. And did 7 defendant in a securities case?
8 Dr. Feinstein encourage you to become 8 A. Maybe once or twice.
9 affiliated with Crowninshield? 9 Q. Okay. And what cases are
10 A. I don't think so. I think I 10 those?
11 reached out to him. 11 A. So I'm going to start -- so I'm
12 Q. I see. He is somebody who you 12 looking, again, here, this is my initial
13 knew beforehand? 13 report -- this is my original declaration
14 A. No. 14 here.
15 Q. How did it come about that you 15 Q. Right.
16 reached out to Dr. Feinstein? 16 A. So now I'm looking at Exhibit 1
17 A. I was familiar with his work 17 to my initial declaration. So I believe
18 and I needed more support than I had at the 18 that this case, and this is on page 50 of
19 time. 19 my initial declaration, and this is Exhibit
20 Q. Now, am I right that you have 20 1 to my initial declaration, Securities and
21 worked with The Rosen Law Firm before this 21 Exchange Commission versus Bradley Davis.
22 lawsuit? 22 I believe that was a civil securities class
23 A. That is correct. 23 action. Oh, was it a securities class
24 Q. And approximately how many 24 action? You know, I don't know. It dealt
25 times have you provided an expert report in 25 with securities, but, I mean, I think
4 (Pages 10 - 13)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 6 of
190
Page 14 Page 16
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 technically, was it a securities class 2 expert report or declaration with the
3 action? It was a securities case. As a 3 opinion that a market for a security was
4 legal matter, I don't think -- I mean, it 4 inefficient?
5 wasn't a class action, right? It was a 5 A. Inefficient?
6 suit brought by the SEC. So maybe that 6 Q. Yes.
7 doesn't count. 7 A. I don't believe so, but let
8 Q. All right. So let me just ask 8 me -- with the caveat that oftentimes when
9 you a follow-up question about that case. 9 I'm retained, I render an opinion that I
10 So that was a case that is captioned 10 don't believe a stock is efficient or I
11 Securities and Exchange Commission v. 11 can't claim that a stock is efficient,
12 Bradley C. Davis, right? 12 oftentimes my opinions aren't used by
13 A. Correct. 13 potential clients.
14 Q. And were you retained on behalf 14 Q. All right. But in matters
15 of Mr. Davis? 15 where you submitted an expert report or a
16 A. I was. 16 declaration, you can't think of one where
17 Q. All right. Okay. So assuming 17 you have provided the opinion that the
18 for a moment that that was a case brought 18 market for a security was inefficient,
19 by the SEC and not a securities class 19 right?
20 action, are there any matters in which you 20 A. Right. Well, so in this case I
21 have submitted an expert report or 21 opined that I couldn't prove or I didn't
22 declaration on behalf of a defendant in a 22 have enough evidence to show that two
23 securities class action? 23 stocks were efficient. I don't think
24 A. I don't -- well, let me just go 24 that's the same as rendering an opinion
25 through here and make sure, let's be as 25 that those two stocks are inefficient. So
Page 15 Page 17
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 accurate as possible. 2 I believe the answer to your question is
3 So I'm pretty sure this is not 3 no.
4 a securities class action, but Gwyn Hartman 4 Q. All right. Meaning that it is
5 Revocable Living Trust v. Southern Michigan 5 right that you can't think of a matter
6 Bancorp. So I believe the answer to your 6 where you submitted an expert report or
7 question is no, for securities class 7 declaration and provided the opinion that
8 actions. 8 the market for a security was inefficient,
9 Q. So I asked you just now if 9 right?
10 there were any matters in which you 10 A. Again, with the caveat that
11 submitted an expert report on declaration 11 when I have found that, my reports haven't
12 on behalf of a defendant in a securities 12 been submitted, but yes.
13 class action. Let me ask you now, is it 13 Q. All right. And is it then also
14 also the case that you have never testified 14 the case that you haven't provided
15 in court on behalf of a defendant in a 15 testimony in court that the market for a
16 securities class action? 16 security was inefficient in your opinion?
17 A. So have I testified without 17 A. I'm just trying to be careful.
18 submitting a report? 18 I'm going back to this logic game that
19 Q. Yes. I'm just trying to be 19 we're doing here. I think, again, I
20 careful and cover all my bases here. 20 believe -- wait, could you -- I'm sorry,
21 A. I'm just trying to be careful 21 could you reask the question?
22 too. I'm trying to figure out how that 22 Q. Sure, no problem. Is it also
23 might occur. State court maybe? I don't 23 the case that you have not provided
24 believe so. 24 testimony in court that the market for a
25 Q. Have you ever submitted an 25 security was inefficient in your opinion?
5 (Pages 14 - 17)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 7 of
190
Page 18 Page 20
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. I believe that is correct. 2 you were not on the tenure track?
3 Q. Have you ever provided an 3 A. I was not, correct.
4 opinion that the market for a security was 4 Q. And is it the case that you
5 efficient at one time but not at another? 5 have never held the position of professor
6 A. I don't recall as I sit here 6 at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo or any other
7 today. 7 university?
8 Q. Now, your CV includes a list of 8 A. Yeah. I mean, well, so at the
9 certain publications; is that right? 9 two places I have taught, at the Kellogg
10 A. Correct. 10 Graduate School of Management where I
11 Q. Am I right that you have not 11 taught MBA courses and at Cal Poly where I
12 published any articles in a peer-reviewed 12 taught economics courses, and we will just
13 economics or finance journal? 13 say a portfolio of economics courses, I was
14 A. Well, okay, so let me -- let me 14 not in a tenure track position.
15 ask a clarifying question here, because I 15 Q. All right. And while you were
16 was reading Dr. Fischel's report the other 16 teaching at the Kellogg Graduate School of
17 day and he alluded to academic literature 17 Management at Northwestern, were you a
18 and then he cited to the Wall Street 18 graduate teaching assistant?
19 Journal. Would that -- would something 19 A. Well, I was a graduate teaching
20 appearing in the Wall Street Journal count 20 assistant for some courses, and then for
21 as academic literature? 21 some courses I taught MBA courses, I myself
22 Q. Well, I'm asking you, sir, 22 taught the MBA courses.
23 about peer-reviewed journals. Do you 23 Q. Okay.
24 understand that phrase, a peer-reviewed 24 A. So not as a graduate assistant,
25 journal? 25 as I guess -- I don't know what the title
Page 19 Page 21
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. Yeah, I understand that 2 is. I mean, when was that? So maybe 25
3 academic literature is peer-reviewed, so 3 years ago. I don't remember what the title
4 I'm asking a clarifying question, is the 4 was, maybe like lecturer, adjunct.
5 Wall Street Journal considered 5 Q. All right. But you didn't have
6 peer-reviewed literature? 6 a title as a professor at Northwestern
7 Q. I certainly don't consider the 7 University, right?
8 Wall Street Journal to be peer-reviewed, 8 A. That is correct.
9 no. So let me ask you the question. 9 Q. All right. And you have never
10 Have you ever published an 10 had the title of professor at Cal Poly San
11 article in a peer-reviewed journal of 11 Luis Obispo either, right?
12 economics or finance? 12 A. I think I have answered that
13 A. I don't believe so. I believe 13 already, so the answer hasn't changed.
14 my commentary at the Federal Reserve was 14 Q. All right. The answer being
15 peer-reviewed by other economists and the 15 that you have never held that title at Cal
16 Federal Reserve Board, but other than that, 16 Poly San Luis Obispo, right?
17 I don't believe so. 17 A. Correct.
18 Q. All right. And that's an 18 Q. Okay. Why don't we mark the
19 article that you published jointly with an 19 two exhibits. So these will be Exhibits
20 economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of 20 281 and 282. Exhibit 281 will be the
21 Cleveland when you were a research 21 Declaration of Dr. Adam Werner and Exhibit
22 assistant there in 1993; is that right? 22 282 will be the Rebuttal Report of Dr. Adam
23 A. That is correct. 23 Werner. And I'm happy for you to use the
24 Q. And am I right that while you 24 copies you brought with you if that is
25 were teaching at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, 25 easier.
6 (Pages 18 - 21)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 8 of
190
Page 22 Page 24
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. I assume the copies are the 2 grammatical errors you were just referring
3 same. 3 to?
4 Q. They should be exactly the 4 A. That is correct.
5 same. Why don't I give you the ones that 5 Q. Have you been asked to consider
6 will have exhibit stickers on them. 6 any supplementation to these reports?
7 A. Okay. 7 A. Supplementation by your
8 (Defendant's Exhibit 281 marked 8 reports? So do the reports by your experts
9 for identification.) 9 count as supplemental material? To the
10 (Defendant's Exhibit 282 marked 10 extent I would refer to them in my rebuttal
11 for identification.) 11 report, I would assume that is encompassed,
12 Q. So here is 281, and now I'm 12 so is that correct?
13 handing you 282. 13 Q. Yes. I meant that to be
14 A. Okay, thank you. 14 encompassed, so let me ask the question
15 Q. All right. And is Exhibit 281 15 again.
16 your initial declaration that you submitted 16 Apart from the opinions that
17 in this action? I'm trying to find a date 17 are set forth in your two reports you
18 here, but I'm not seeing one. 18 submitted in this action, is there any
19 A. Well, I'm going to guess it is 19 additional analysis that you have done
20 February 16th, 2023. 20 since submitting your second report?
21 Q. It was certainly sometime in 21 A. I have not done any additional
22 February. 22 analysis. Oh, I should also clarify, I
23 A. Looking at Mr. Fischel's 23 have read the depositions of both of
24 initial report. 24 your -- of the two defense experts. That
25 Q. Sounds right. Let me reask the 25 wasn't obviously encompassed in my rebuttal
Page 23 Page 25
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 question so we have a clear record. 2 report, so that may have informed my
3 Is Exhibit 281 your initial 3 opinion. But I personally, no, I have not
4 declaration that you submitted in this 4 performed any additional work since
5 action in February of 2023? 5 submitting these two reports.
6 A. I believe it is, but let me 6 Q. All right. Have you asked
7 just go through it quickly. 7 anybody at Crowninshield to perform any
8 (Witness perusing document.) 8 additional work since you submitted these
9 A. It appears to be. 9 two reports?
10 Q. Thank you. And is Exhibit 282 10 A. I don't believe so.
11 your rebuttal report that you submitted in 11 Q. Have you been asked by counsel
12 this action on or about March 28th, 2023? 12 at The Rosen Law Firm to consider
13 A. It appears to be. 13 performing any additional work since
14 Q. And is there anything contained 14 submitting your second report?
15 in either of these reports that you wish to 15 A. Not that I recall.
16 change, amend or withdraw? 16 Q. All right. Let me ask you in
17 A. Substantively, no. 17 your opening report, sir, Exhibit 281, if
18 Q. How about nonsubstantively? 18 you could look with me, please, at
19 A. I may have found one or two 19 paragraph 1.
20 grammatical errors in my review of these, 20 A. Okay.
21 but I don't recall where they were. So, 21 Q. Sir, do you see that in the
22 again, substantively, no. 22 first paragraph there, there is a list of
23 Q. All right. So am I right that 23 nine companies that are then defined as the
24 you are unaware of any errors in either of 24 affected companies or affected stocks?
25 your reports beyond the one or two 25 A. I do.
7 (Pages 22 - 25)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 9 of
190
Page 26 Page 28
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. All right. And so then is it 2 things were efficient prior to the class
3 right that you were asked by The Rosen Law 3 period. I don't know whether that's the
4 Firm to determine whether the common stock 4 right analysis. It was the analysis I was
5 of those nine affected companies traded in 5 asked to perform.
6 efficient markets prior to the class 6 Q. Got it, okay. So you took the
7 period? 7 assignment you got from The Rosen Law Firm
8 A. In efficient markets, plural? 8 as a given in determining the scope of the
9 Q. Yes, traded in efficient 9 work you did; is that right?
10 markets, plural. 10 A. Could you reread the question,
11 A. I believe that's correct. 11 please?
12 Q. So was the limitation on this 12 (The record was read.)
13 assignment that you were asked about 13 A. I mean, there is a lot of words
14 whether the stocks traded in efficient 14 there. I mean, I was asked to -- I was
15 markets prior to the class period, was that 15 asked to do what I was asked to do and I
16 prior to the class period limitation part 16 did it. I don't know, you know, whether
17 of the assignment you were given by The 17 there was some --
18 Rosen Law Firm? 18 MR. ROSEN: Are you asking
19 A. It was. 19 whether we limited the scope of what
20 Q. And so another way of putting 20 work he could do?
21 that would be The Rosen Law Firm did not 21 MR. RYAN: No.
22 ask you to evaluate whether the common 22 Q. So let me try to ask the
23 stock of these nine affected companies 23 question a better way.
24 traded in efficient markets during the 24 So you understand that there
25 class period; isn't that right? 25 may be a legal question in this case as to
Page 27 Page 29
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. I believe that's correct. 2 what the right period is over which to
3 Q. And is it the case, then, that 3 analyze efficiency, right?
4 the suitability for the case of evaluating 4 A. I mean, I assume so. I don't
5 the efficiency of the markets prior to the 5 know one way or the other.
6 class period and not during the class 6 Q. Okay.
7 period, that's not something that you're 7 A. That seems to make sense to me.
8 opining on yourself, is it? 8 Q. And am I right that you as an
9 A. I'm just -- I'm slightly 9 expert in economics and finance are not
10 confused by the word "suitability." Could 10 offering any opinion as to what the right
11 you expand upon that? 11 period is over which to analyze market
12 Q. Sure. Let me try to ask it a 12 efficiency in this case?
13 better way. 13 MR. ROSEN: Objection. In this
14 A. Okay. 14 line of questioning, are you asking him
15 Q. Are you offering any opinion in 15 just about this opening report or are
16 this case as to whether the right analysis 16 you also asking him about the rebuttal
17 for analyzing efficiency of markets for the 17 report?
18 nine affected stocks is to analyze their 18 MR. RYAN: I'm asking him about
19 efficiency prior to the class period and 19 all of his opinions in this case.
20 not during the class period? 20 MR. ROSEN: Okay. Just reread
21 MR. ROSEN: Objection to the 21 the question.
22 extent it calls for a legal conclusion. 22 MR. RYAN: Sure.
23 A. So what do you mean by "right 23 Q. Am I right that you as an
24 analysis"? I don't -- I mean, my 24 expert in economics and finance are not
25 assignment was to determine whether these 25 offering any opinion in this case as to
8 (Pages 26 - 29)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 10 of
190
Page 30 Page 32
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 what the right period is over which to 2 281, and this is specifically called
3 analyze market efficiency in this case? 3 Exhibit 2, is a list of documents and other
4 A. I mean, I'm sorry, I'm not 4 information considered; is that right?
5 trying to be difficult, I just have a 5 A. I'm sorry, could you reread the
6 problem with this description of the right 6 question?
7 period. I was asked to determine whether 7 Q. Yes. Am I right that Exhibit 2
8 or not, at least in my initial report, 8 to your opening report, which is Deposition
9 whether these stocks were efficient prior 9 Exhibit 281, is a list of documents and
10 to the class period, that's what I did. 10 other information considered?
11 I was asked to opine whether or 11 A. That is correct.
12 not class-wide damages could be measured in 12 Q. And then similarly for your
13 this matter in my initial report and that's 13 rebuttal report which we have marked as
14 what I did. I don't know if that was the 14 Deposition Exhibit 282, you similarly have
15 right thing to do or the wrong thing to do; 15 an exhibit, again, called Exhibit 2, which
16 it was my assignment and that's what I did. 16 this time lists documents considered in
17 Q. Understood. And so let me just 17 addition to those cited in your opening
18 follow up since in your answer just now you 18 report?
19 said -- 19 A. Yeah, documents considered in
20 A. Well, I mean, look, if we want 20 addition to those cited in the Werner
21 to get into it exactly, I can read to you 21 declaration. That's Exhibit 2 to Exhibit
22 exactly what my assignment was on the off 22 282, yeah.
23 chance there was something inaccurate about 23 Q. Right. And are there any
24 what I said, but that's my remembrance of 24 documents that you considered in forming
25 what my assignment was. 25 your opinions in this lawsuit that are not
Page 31 Page 33
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Understood. I'm not -- I'm not 2 set forth in one of the two Exhibit 2's
3 trying to change any of the words. Am I 3 that we just looked at?
4 right that your assignment is set forth -- 4 A. Up until the submittal of this
5 strike that. 5 second report?
6 Am I right that your assignment 6 Q. Yes, sir.
7 for your opening report is set forth in 7 A. That is correct.
8 paragraphs 1 and 2 of your opening report 8 Q. All right. Since the submittal
9 that we have marked as Exhibit 281? 9 of the second report, are there any
10 A. That is correct. 10 documents that you have considered in
11 Q. Okay. And am I right that 11 forming your opinions in this lawsuit that
12 neither in your opening report nor in your 12 are not set forth in one of the two Exhibit
13 rebuttal report have you analyzed whether 13 2's that we just looked at?
14 the common stock of any of these nine 14 A. Well, I believe the depositions
15 companies traded in efficient markets 15 of your two experts informed --
16 during the class period? 16 subsequently informed my opinion, as well
17 A. I believe that is correct. 17 as a few academic articles I have looked at
18 Q. All right. And is the reason 18 with regards to estimating demand for
19 that you haven't performed that analysis 19 securities. I don't recall off the top of
20 that that was not part of your assignment 20 my head what those articles were, but I
21 from The Rosen Law Firm with respect to 21 distinctly remember looking at two
22 either the opening or the rebuttal report? 22 articles.
23 A. I believe that's correct. 23 Q. Anything other than the two
24 Q. All right. Now, one of the 24 deposition transcripts and the two academic
25 attachments to your opening report, Exhibit 25 articles you just referred to?
9 (Pages 30 - 33)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 11 of
190
Page 34 Page 36
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. I don't believe so. 2 that in my initial recitation.
3 Q. What do you mean by estimating 3 Q. Thank you, all right. And you
4 demand for securities? 4 will provide those two articles to counsel,
5 A. Well, so something similar to 5 right?
6 what Dr. Fischel, sorry, similar to what 6 A. I will.
7 Mr. Fischel did in the IPO litigation, so 7 Q. Thank you. All right, now,
8 trying to determine how changes in order 8 turning now to your rebuttal report which
9 flow affect demand for securities. 9 we have marked as Exhibit 282, do you see
10 Q. All right. And do you 10 that there is a series of intraday stock
11 recall -- 11 price charts at the back of your rebuttal
12 A. As in like individual 12 report that are labeled Exhibit 6A through
13 securities. So the supply and demand for, 13 Exhibit 6I?
14 let's say, Apple Computer, that would be -- 14 A. 6A through Exhibit 6I, do you
15 that's what I mean. 15 have a page number there?
16 Q. What were those two academic 16 Q. Yes, 96 until the end. I
17 articles? 17 didn't even notice the page numbers.
18 A. I don't recall. 18 A. I figured that would be
19 Q. Do you have them somewhere? 19 quicker.
20 A. I do, somewhere. 20 Q. That is quicker.
21 Q. Okay. 21 A. Okay. I am there.
22 A. Not on me. 22 Q. Okay. And am I right that
23 Q. Understood. Would you be able 23 Exhibit 6A through 6I are intraday stock
24 to send them after this deposition to 24 price graphs, one for each of the nine
25 Mr. Rosen? 25 affected stocks?
Page 35 Page 37
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. Sure. 2 A. That is correct. Intraday, to
3 Q. Thank you. All right, now -- 3 the extent we are also talking about
4 A. Actually, can we take a quick 4 periods when the markets -- after the
5 break? 5 markets closed.
6 Q. Sure. 6 Q. There are periods here --
7 MR. RYAN: Let's go off the 7 A. I'm sorry -- my bad, go ahead.
8 record. 8 Q. There are periods here before
9 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will 9 the market opens, right?
10 end media unit one. We are going off 10 A. Correct.
11 the record at 10:46. 11 Q. All right. And were these
12 (Recess taken.) 12 graphs generated using a program called
13 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back 13 Stata?
14 on the record at 10:50. This will 14 A. I believe that's correct.
15 begin media unit two. 15 Q. So we have asked your counsel
16 BY MR. RYAN: 16 if we could receive the backup stat
17 Q. Did you have some item that you 17 accompanied for these nine exhibits. Is
18 thought of on the break that you wanted to 18 that something that you could provide to us
19 clarify, Dr. Werner? 19 after this deposition?
20 A. I did. Thanks. Well, I think 20 MR. ROSEN: Objection. So we
21 when I was talking about the demand, I'm 21 have an outstanding objection to that
22 not sure whether I talked about -- the 22 request, and that still stands. So it
23 articles dealt with how the change in 23 is not up to Dr. Werner, you know.
24 demand affects the price of the underlying 24 MR. RYAN: I actually didn't
25 stock. I don't know if I was clear about 25 realize, to be honest, Larry, that you
10 (Pages 34 - 37)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 12 of
190
Page 38 Page 40
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 had an objection. I just thought you 2 on here, it is just an equal weighted index
3 hadn't responded. Again, I'm not 3 as opposed to a value weighted index.
4 saying in sort of a snide way, I just 4 Q. So equal weighted means it is
5 actually didn't realize you had an 5 simply an average of the nine stocks where
6 objection. 6 each of the stocks counts to the same
7 A. Can I say one thing about these 7 extent?
8 graphs? 8 A. Correct, correct.
9 Q. Yes. 9 Q. All right. And was this Table
10 A. I mean, you can use any program 10 12 similarly generated using Stata code in
11 to generate these graphs, right. I can put 11 the way we just talked about?
12 this data in Excel and the problem is 12 A. I believe so, yes.
13 putting in these vertical lines, so, you 13 Q. All right. Now let me ask you
14 know, if I printed this out in Excel and 14 about Table 7 to your rebuttal report which
15 just drew in lines, that would be the 15 appears on page 21, and do you see that
16 equivalent of what my Stata code did just 16 there is a column here in your Table 7
17 for clarification. There is not some 17 called Statistically Significant News Days?
18 rocket science going on here that I needed 18 A. I do.
19 a powerful computing code to do this graph. 19 Q. Whose regression analysis did
20 Q. All right. But you or folks 20 you use to determine statistical
21 working with you at Crowninshield used the 21 significance for purposes of Table 7 to
22 Stata program to generate the stock price 22 your rebuttal report?
23 graphs in Exhibit 6A through 6I, right? 23 A. My regression analysis that I
24 A. I believe that is correct. 24 used in my first report, which if I
25 Q. And so there would be some 25 remember correctly is Exhibit 281.
Page 39 Page 41
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Stata code that underlies these graphs, 2 Q. Got it, okay. So let's go
3 right? 3 back, please, to your opening report, which
4 A. I think by definition the 4 as you just mentioned is Exhibit 281, and
5 answer is yes. 5 I'm now looking at Opinion 1 which appears
6 Q. Okay. So now let me ask you 6 in the middle of page 3.
7 about Table 12 to your rebuttal report, 7 MR. ROSEN: What page are you
8 which is on page 44. 8 on?
9 A. Okay, here we go, Table 12, 9 MR. RYAN: Page 3.
10 right. 10 A. Okay.
11 Q. And I'm looking now at the 11 Q. All right. And do you see
12 first sentence in paragraph 102 in Table 12 there that Opinion 1 reads "Seven of the
13 12. Am I right that Table 12 is an 13 nine Affected Companies traded in an
14 intraday price chart of an equal weighted 14 efficient market during the relevant
15 index of the affected companies on January 15 period. Those seven companies are AMC,
16 28th, 2021? 16 BlackBerry, Bed Bath & Beyond, Express,
17 A. That is correct. 17 GameStop, Nokia and Trivago"?
18 Q. And by equal weighted, you mean 18 A. Do I see it?
19 that you counted each of the companies the 19 Q. Yes.
20 same even though, for example, the market 20 A. Yes. You expounded upon the
21 capitalization of BlackBerry may be 100 21 ticker symbols, but that's in essence what
22 times the market capitalization of Koss? 22 this says.
23 A. Counted them the same? I mean, 23 Q. All right. And am I right,
24 I guess that's right. It is just an equal 24 then, in your opening report your opinion
25 -- yeah, there is not some sophistry going 25 for seven of the affected companies is that
11 (Pages 38 - 41)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 13 of
190
Page 42 Page 44
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 they traded in an efficient market during a 2 Q. So is it the case that in your
3 one-year period that ended on January 27th, 3 rebuttal report you performed additional
4 2021? 4 analyses regarding market efficiency for
5 A. In this report? 5 seven of the nine stocks over the period
6 Q. Yes. 6 that Mr. Fischel used and that you define
7 A. That is correct. Subsequently 7 as the immediate pre-class period?
8 in my rebuttal report I looked at the 8 A. That is correct.
9 period -- well, let's be exact. Oh, we 9 Q. And am I right that you do not
10 were just looking at this. 10 perform those additional analyses regarding
11 MR. ROSEN: Table 7 on 22. 11 market efficiency in your rebuttal report
12 A. Well, Table 7, but in terms 12 for the other two stocks at issue in this
13 of -- I looked at the market efficiency for 13 case?
14 those seven stocks from I want to say -- 14 A. So for Koss and Tootsie Roll, I
15 well, again -- well, I will just say 15 believe that is correct.
16 January 2021. 16 Q. Okay. So now let's go back to
17 Q. All right. It might be helpful 17 your opening report, Exhibit 281, and we
18 if we look at paragraph 17 of your rebuttal 18 were looking at Opinion 1 on page 3. Are
19 report, Exhibit 282. 19 you there?
20 A. Oh, I now realize when I say 20 A. Opinion 1 on page 3, yup.
21 January 2021, that includes part of the 21 Q. All right. And so you express
22 class period. So that was inaccurate. 22 here an opinion that seven of the nine
23 Q. All right. So I'm hoping that 23 affected companies traded in an efficient
24 maybe we can get this precise by looking at 24 market during what you called the relevant
25 paragraph 17. Do you see that midway 25 period, right?
Page 43 Page 45
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 through paragraph 17 of your rebuttal 2 A. Correct.
3 report there is a sentence that reads 3 Q. And, again, that means the full
4 "Therefore, for purposes of the Cammer and 4 year up to and through January 27th, 2021,
5 Krogman analysis I perform herein, I focus 5 right?
6 on the period from January 4th, 2021 6 A. Correct.
7 through January 27th, 2021," and you then 7 Q. All right. And am I right that
8 define that period as the immediate 8 you express no opinion regarding whether
9 pre-class period, and you go on, "which is 9 the other two companies, namely Koss and
10 Mr. Fischel's period of choice and 10 Tootsie Roll, traded in an efficient market
11 encompasses Dr. Grenadier's pre-class 11 during any period?
12 period"? 12 A. Could you reread the question,
13 A. Correct. 13 please?
14 Q. All right. So am I right, 14 (The record was read.)
15 then, that in your rebuttal report you 15 A. I believe that's correct. I
16 performed an additional analysis for seven 16 mean, there were indicators of efficiency
17 of the nine stocks for the period that you 17 for those two stocks -- different
18 defined here as the immediate pre-class 18 indicators of efficiency, but I don't opine
19 period? 19 that they traded in an efficient market.
20 A. Well, a couple of 20 Q. All right. You were unable to
21 clarifications. So additional analyses I 21 reach what you believed was a reliable
22 believe probably would be the right way to 22 conclusion that those two stocks did trade
23 describe it, and then, I mean, I chose that 23 in an efficient market, right?
24 because that's what -- that's what 24 A. I mean, I don't -- "reliable"
25 Mr. Fischel used. 25 is your word. I just -- again, there was
12 (Pages 42 - 45)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 14 of
190
Page 46 Page 48
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 indications of efficiency. I just didn't 2 additional assumptions like trading models,
3 conclude that they traded in an efficient 3 etc.
4 market. 4 Q. When you say that you would
5 Q. All right. Are all of your 5 need to make additional assumptions like
6 opinions in your view based on reliable 6 trading models, etc., are those additional
7 conclusions that you reached? 7 assumptions you would need to make only to
8 A. I think -- I believe the answer 8 calculate aggregate damages?
9 to that question is yes. 9 A. Not necessarily. I guess, I
10 Q. Okay. And am I right, then, 10 mean, I'm thinking about aggregate damages,
11 that you were unable to reach a reliable 11 and so I'm thinking about a single versus
12 conclusion as to whether either Koss or 12 multi-trader model. I mean, again, I
13 Tootsie Roll traded in an efficient market? 13 talked about a demand model. It showed how
14 A. So based on the prior 14 stock price changes as demand changes. I
15 statement, I believe that would logically 15 don't know if you call that a trading model
16 follow. 16 or not. I don't know if that falls under
17 Q. Okay. Now, do you see Opinion 17 the umbrella of what you consider a trading
18 2 which appears on the top of page 5 of 18 model.
19 your opening report, Exhibit 281? 19 Q. I see. So you are, I think, if
20 A. I do. 20 I understood you right in your answer just
21 Q. And do you see that opinion 21 now, referring back to some of the
22 reads "With expert assistance, the finder 22 testimony you gave previously when you were
23 of fact in this matter will be able to 23 talking about the two articles that you
24 compute damages using a common class-wide 24 recall looking at since your second report,
25 methodology that applies to the calculation 25 you are talking about constructing a model
Page 47 Page 49
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 of damages for each and every class 2 of how a change in demand for a stock might
3 member"? 3 affect that stock price; is that right?
4 Did I read that right? 4 A. I believe that's correct.
5 A. You did. 5 Q. Okay. Have you constructed
6 Q. What do you mean by the phrase 6 such a model?
7 "with expert assistance"? 7 A. I have not.
8 A. With the assistance of an 8 Q. Okay. So you haven't
9 expert, I mean, I guess as opposed to a 9 constructed such a model for any of the
10 layman. 10 nine stocks in this case, right?
11 Q. All right. So do you mean, 11 A. I have not.
12 then, in your Opinion 2 that an expert 12 Q. Have you ever constructed such
13 would be able to compute damages using a 13 a model for any security?
14 common class-wide methodology? 14 A. Have I ever constructed a model
15 A. That's what I mean, yes. 15 such as these models that I have discussed
16 Q. And when you refer there to 16 with regards to these two academic papers?
17 damages, do you have per-share damages in 17 I don't believe so. But that doesn't
18 mind? 18 mean -- I mean, I could just follow the
19 A. I believe that is correct. 19 instructions in the papers.
20 Q. All right. You are not 20 Q. Okay.
21 referring there to aggregate damages, are 21 A. Do it that way.
22 you? 22 Q. And since I haven't seen the
23 A. One could calculate aggregate 23 papers --
24 damages, but no, I'm referring to per-share 24 A. But I should say, I haven't
25 damages. I mean, you would need to make 25 been asked to calculate damages.
13 (Pages 46 - 49)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 15 of
190
Page 50 Page 52
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Okay. I will ask you that in 2 A. Michael Fishman and Kathleen
3 just a moment. 3 Hagerty.
4 So since I haven't seen the 4 Q. What is market microstructure?
5 papers yet, let me ask you what might be 5 A. Basically how stocks are
6 the same question, but what might be 6 traded, or I should say assets are traded
7 somewhat broader. Have you ever 7 maybe. Stocks may be a little too broad --
8 constructed a model regarding how a change 8 or a little too specific, not too broad.
9 in demand and/or supply for a security may 9 Q. Have you ever published in
10 affect the market price for that security? 10 market microstructure?
11 A. Well, I mean, I'm sure I have 11 A. I have not.
12 derived theoretical models on that. Based 12 Q. Have you ever taught a course
13 on actual trading data, as I sit here, I 13 on market microstructure?
14 don't recall, but I don't believe so. 14 A. I don't believe so.
15 Q. Okay. And when you say that an 15 Q. Do you believe that market
16 expert could in your opinion calculate 16 microstructure may be relevant to the type
17 per-share damages in that way, what type of 17 of demand and/or supply models that we were
18 expert do you have in mind? 18 just talking about?
19 A. An expert in finance. 19 A. For those specific models, I
20 Q. All right. Do you believe -- 20 think that that would certainly inform
21 A. Finance and/or economics. 21 one's opinion.
22 Q. Do you believe that you would 22 Q. Do you have any other model in
23 be qualified to perform such a damages 23 mind that could be used to compute damages
24 calculation? 24 in this case using a common class-wide
25 A. I believe so, but, again, I 25 methodology?
Page 51 Page 53
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 haven't been asked to do so. 2 A. Now I'm looking at my initial
3 Q. All right. And you haven't 3 report. So one such example, and let me
4 ever done so at any time during your 4 underline example, because that seemed to
5 career, right? 5 be missed by your experts, so one way to do
6 A. I believe, from an empirical 6 it, and this, again, I'm not a lawyer, but
7 standpoint, I believe that is correct. 7 based on my understanding of Affiliated
8 Wait, let's see. I'm trying to think about 8 Ute, so I'm looking at paragraph 93, and,
9 the market microstructure class I took and 9 again, this is an example, one of at least
10 whether we looked at it. 10 three methodologies that I can think of to
11 MR. ROSEN: You are just 11 calculate damages, one of them being this
12 focusing on this demand-based model? 12 demand-based model, I have been informed by
13 You are not talking about the other 13 counsel for plaintiffs that under Section
14 model? Because I kind of lost -- 14 9(a)(2) and 10(b) of the Exchange Act in a
15 MR. RYAN: So I was asking 15 case where class members are defrauded,
16 about a demand and/or supply-based 16 sorry, defrauded sellers, the measure of
17 model. 17 damages, and here is beginning the quote
18 A. Okay. So now we are adding 18 citing to Affiliated Ute, is the difference
19 supply-based model. I mean, if I have 19 between the fair value of all that the
20 empirically looked at that, over the last 20 seller received and the fair value of what
21 25 years, certainly when I took a market 21 he would have received had there been no
22 microstructure course I probably did, but 22 fraudulent conduct.
23 that was 20 years ago. I don't recall. 23 And let's be specific that when
24 Q. Who did you take market 24 we talk about fair value, we are not
25 microstructure with? 25 talking about some valuation model, we are
14 (Pages 50 - 53)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 16 of
190
Page 54 Page 56
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 talking about dollar value. When I say 2 to a regression on intraday data, you are
3 valuation model, I mean let's just say a 3 talking about a correlation between the
4 discounted cash flow model. I mean, that 4 timing of Robinhood's PCO restrictions and
5 could be one way to measure it, but that's 5 stock price movements in the nine stocks;
6 not what they are talking about here. 6 is that right?
7 So, you know, I go on to talk 7 A. Am I talking about a
8 about how one could look at the difference, 8 correlation between -- I mean, I don't --
9 and now I'm reading from subpoint (b) of 9 I'm not -- I don't know if that's the right
10 paragraph 96 on page 39. Well, I mean, I 10 way to generalize. It would measure the
11 guess I could start at (a). Well, we will 11 impact of the Robinhood PCO restrictions on
12 just go with (b). One way to possibly do 12 the stock price, or the price of the
13 it is look at the price at the end of 13 underlying stocks.
14 trading or the close of trading on January 14 Q. And when you say would measure
15 27th and subtract off the seller's -- or 15 the impact, that's because one of your
16 the investor's sales price. That could be 16 variables would be the time when Robinhood
17 one potential measure of damages. 17 put PCO restrictions in place?
18 Q. All right. So you said just 18 A. I'm not sure that that would be
19 now that the difference between the market 19 one of the variables. One of the
20 price at the close of trading on January 20 dependent, independent variables? Could
21 27th, 2021 and the investor's sale price 21 you be more specific?
22 during the class period could in your 22 Q. What would the inputs in the
23 opinion be a way of calculating class-wide 23 regression that you were just referring to
24 damages; is that right? 24 be?
25 A. That would be -- that is 25 A. Well, again, I haven't been
Page 55 Page 57
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 correct. 2 asked to do this, so this is -- this is not
3 Q. Do you have other ways to 3 like some complete model I would have done.
4 perform such a calculation in mind other 4 I mean, I could put in -- the dependent
5 than that method based on the market price 5 variable could be -- I mean, yeah, I would
6 at the close of trading on January 27th, 6 want to look at the stock price.
7 2021? 7 I guess I could use dummy
8 A. Sure. I mean, and this now 8 variables to indicate when the PCO
9 goes -- we're in my rebuttal report, right? 9 restrictions were indicated or were
10 No. 10 installed. I mean, that's an extremely
11 Q. I think we are in your opening 11 simplistic model. Again, this is not
12 report, Exhibit 281. 12 something I have been asked to do at this
13 A. So let's go to Exhibit 282, and 13 point in time, but, you know, that might be
14 I just want to use this for example 14 one way to do it. I'm sure I could come up
15 purposes, or at least for illustrative 15 with additional variables I would want to
16 purposes. So we are back to Table 12 here. 16 take into consideration, but that could be
17 I could certainly run a regression on 17 one simple way to do it.
18 intraday data looking at the impact of the 18 Q. All right. So when you
19 PCO restrictions -- the imposition of the 19 referred just now to a dummy variable, you
20 PCO restrictions, and I should say because 20 mean something like zero if there is no PCO
21 we are dealing with Robinhood, the 21 restriction in place and 1 if there is a
22 Robinhood specific PCO restrictions, and 22 PCO restriction in place, right?
23 determine the impact that they had on the 23 A. That would be one example. I
24 price of the underlying securities. 24 actually hadn't thought about it in those
25 Q. All right. And when you refer 25 specific terms, but sure.
15 (Pages 54 - 57)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 17 of
190
Page 58 Page 60
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Okay. And so the regression 2 the demand-based model, the model using the
3 that you have in mind just now is whether 3 price at the close on January 27th, 2021,
4 Robinhood had a PCO restriction in place 4 and the regression along the lines of Table
5 correlated with the stock price movement? 5 12 to your rebuttal report?
6 A. Again, I don't -- correlated, I 6 A. I believe that's correct.
7 don't -- maybe, again, like look, this is 7 Q. Okay. And am I right that
8 just an extremely simplistic model. I 8 counsel for the class plaintiffs has not
9 haven't been asked to measure damages. You 9 asked you to calculate damages?
10 asked me how I might go about doing it. 10 A. That is correct, in this
11 That would be one way I might go about 11 matter, that is correct.
12 doing it. I haven't, you know, sat down 12 Q. Am I right that counsel for the
13 and said all right, this is the exact model 13 class plaintiffs has not asked you to
14 I want to use and this is how I would 14 calculate loss causation or to determine
15 implement it. But, again, it is something 15 loss causation in this matter?
16 an economist certainly could do. 16 A. So now you are asking me a
17 Q. All right. So is it the case 17 different question?
18 that you have not tried to implement a 18 Q. Yeah. Let me ask the question
19 model of the type you have just described 19 again.
20 based on the stock price movements and 20 Am I right that counsel for the
21 whether Robinhood had a PCO restriction in 21 class plaintiffs has not asked you to give
22 place? 22 an opinion on loss causation in this
23 A. For this specific case? 23 matter?
24 Q. Yes. 24 A. That is correct. When you said
25 A. I mean, other than the visual 25 "calculate," I appreciate the
Page 59 Page 61
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 presentations, which, you know, are you 2 clarification, yes.
3 going to believe me or your lying eyes? 3 Q. All right. And there are
4 You know, it appears to me that they had 4 components of the damages calculations you
5 impact. 5 were just going through that would relate
6 Have I, you know, beyond the 6 to loss causation, right?
7 surface observations, no, I have not gone 7 A. That is correct. I mean, I
8 ahead and estimated a model that shows the 8 would only want to include the components
9 exact impact of the PCO restrictions by 9 that are attributable to the alleged
10 Robinhood on the underlying securities. 10 actions of Robinhood when calculating
11 Q. Okay. And nor have you 11 damages.
12 constructed a model for how changes in 12 Q. All right. So back in your
13 demand might affect the stock price, right? 13 opening report, Exhibit 281, if you could
14 A. I believe that's what I stated 14 go with me, please, to page 4, I'm in
15 previously. 15 paragraph 8(f).
16 Q. Okay. And when you a few 16 A. Hold on, easy. Page 4, okay,
17 answers ago referred to, I believe you said 17 I'm there.
18 three types of models that you had in 18 Q. Do you see that in paragraph
19 mind -- 19 8(f) you refer to empirical analyses that
20 A. Three, maybe three types of 20 study the relationship between information
21 damage measurements, three different ways 21 flow and security price movement, and you
22 to damage -- but yeah, if you want to 22 state that those analyses demonstrate that
23 describe those as models, by all means go 23 a cause and effect relationship existed
24 ahead. 24 between news flow and movements in the
25 Q. Okay. And so were those three 25 security price of the seven companies? Do
16 (Pages 58 - 61)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 18 of
190
Page 62 Page 64
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 you see that? 2 interested in trying to understand this
3 A. I do. 3 cause and effect relationship, and so we
4 Q. All right. And when you refer 4 started off by saying that it was the
5 there in paragraph 8(f) to a cause and 5 information in the news flow that was the
6 effect relationship, is the news flow the 6 cause, and you are trying to measure
7 cause? 7 whether there is an effect in the security
8 A. Is the news flow the cause? 8 price, right?
9 Q. I'm trying to understand which 9 A. Well, the information in all of
10 is the cause and which is the effect. Are 10 the news flow is the cause, yes.
11 you stating here in paragraph 8(f) of your 11 Q. Okay. So am I right, then,
12 opening report that the news flow is the 12 that you are not studying a cause and
13 cause and the security price movements are 13 effect relationship in the reverse
14 the effect? 14 direction, that is, you are not studying
15 A. I believe that the information 15 whether security price movements cause a
16 contained in the news flow is what is 16 change in the information flow?
17 affecting the underlying stock price. 17 A. I mean, they could. Is that
18 Q. All right. So you would agree 18 what I'm studying? No.
19 that the information in the news flow is 19 Q. All right. And you are
20 the cause in the cause and effect 20 interested, in terms of market efficiency,
21 relationship that you are describing in 21 you are interested just in the first cause
22 paragraph 8(f)? 22 and effect relationship, right?
23 A. I think that's a little -- 23 A. Yeah. I want to understand
24 that's a little -- I mean, there are other 24 whether or not the information out in the
25 factors that could cause the price changes 25 market is incorporated in the stock price.
Page 63 Page 65
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 beyond the information flow. 2 In other words, are these stocks
3 Q. Right. But when in paragraph 3 informationally efficient.
4 8(f) you describe a cause and effect 4 Q. Okay.
5 relationship, is the cause that you are 5 A. That is my understanding under
6 describing there the information in the 6 Halliburton II.
7 news flow? 7 Q. Could you please turn to page
8 A. It is the information in the 8 10 of your opening report, paragraph 21.
9 market. 9 A. Page 10, okay.
10 Q. All right. And so you are 10 Q. I take it you agree that the
11 performing an analysis, if I understand you 11 efficient market hypothesis is the
12 right, of whether information that reaches 12 foundation of modern finance theory?
13 the market affects the stock price? 13 A. Well, it is certainly one of
14 A. That is correct. 14 the foundations of modern finance theory.
15 Q. And you're not studying the 15 I mean, are the Miller-Modigliani
16 inverse of that relationship, that is, 16 principles also foundations of the modern
17 you're not studying whether changes in the 17 finance theory? They are in the pantheon,
18 stock price affect the news flow; is that 18 how about that?
19 right? 19 Q. All right. And you wrote here
20 A. I don't know. I mean, they 20 in paragraph 21 of your opening report that
21 could certainly be correlated. To the 21 "A security trades in an efficient market
22 extent that I'm looking at news flow as a 22 when all publicly available information is
23 proxy of news, I'm not sure. 23 incorporated in the security price and any
24 Q. Okay. So this is something 24 new information that impacts the economic
25 that I'm very interested in, right? So I'm 25 outlook of the firm gets quickly reflected
17 (Pages 62 - 65)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 19 of
190
Page 66 Page 68
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 in its security price," right? 2 efficiency, I mean this is not the correct
3 A. That is correct. 3 standard for evaluating market efficiency
4 Q. What do you mean by the 4 in a securities class action. And, again,
5 economic outlook of the firm? 5 that's based on my understanding of what
6 A. Well, how people -- what people 6 the Supreme Court said in Halliburton II.
7 expect the firm to be worth in the future. 7 Q. Okay. So you are not a lawyer,
8 Q. Do you agree that finance 8 sir, are you?
9 theory holds that the market price of a 9 A. Not today.
10 stock reflects the discounted value of 10 Q. Not ever, right?
11 expected future cash flows to the 11 A. Not ever, not ever. I don't
12 stockholder? 12 know, maybe in traffic court.
13 A. I believe that people who -- 13 Q. And you don't have any legal
14 that that is a definition of fundamental 14 training, do you?
15 value market efficiency. But I'm not 15 A. Other than dealing with
16 sure that -- so academically that's what my 16 securities law over the last 25 years, no.
17 statement is. I'm not sure -- my 17 Q. All right. And you don't hold
18 understanding is the courts are looking for 18 yourself out as an expert in securities
19 informational efficiency. And so to the 19 law, do you?
20 extent that you may have -- well, let's use 20 A. I do not.
21 the exact words so I don't screw it up. 21 Q. Okay. All right, so let's go
22 Actually, let's look at my rebuttal report. 22 back to my question. Do you agree as an
23 So I'm looking at paragraph 82, 23 economist that finance theory holds that
24 page 35, of what is Exhibit 282 for this 24 the market price of a stock reflects the
25 deposition, and I think what you're talking 25 discounted value of expected future cash
Page 67 Page 69
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 about, and I will just read the sentence. 2 flows to the stockholder?
3 "While neither expert explicitly admits 3 A. And I would just give the same
4 this, Dr. Grenadier's and Mr. Fischel's 4 answer, that is a definition of fundamental
5 analyses inappropriately require that all 5 market efficiency.
6 of the Affected Companies' stocks be 6 Q. Is that a definition that you
7 fundamentally efficient in order to 7 as an economist agree with?
8 establish the market prices of the Affected 8 A. As the definition of
9 Companies' stocks were reasonable proxies 9 fundamental -- if you are asking me is that
10 for information. Fundamentally, 10 the correct definition of fundamental
11 efficiency" -- and this is what you were 11 market efficiency? Yes, that is the
12 describing -- "means that a market is only 12 correct definition of fundamental market
13 considered efficient if an asset's price 13 efficiency.
14 is, at all times, a perfect representation 14 Q. I see. And when you use the
15 of the present value of the asset's 15 term "fundamental market efficiency," do
16 expected future cash flows. That is, using 16 you mean, as stated in paragraph 82 of your
17 fundamental efficiency as a standard means 17 rebuttal report --
18 the market for a security is inefficient 18 A. Hold on, I've got to go back
19 unless that security prices matches a 19 there, I'm sorry, I closed off. Paragraph
20 specific target price derived from one 20 82, right?
21 specific valuation model. This is not the 21 Q. Yes.
22 correct standard for evaluating market 22 A. Do you have a page number? It
23 efficiency." 23 is just easier.
24 And when I say this is not the 24 Q. It is page 35.
25 correct standard for evaluating market 25 A. All right, 35. Okay, go ahead.
18 (Pages 66 - 69)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 20 of
190
Page 70 Page 72
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. When you use the term 2 I'm just stating what I stated in my
3 "fundamental market efficiency," do you 3 report.
4 mean, as stated in paragraph 82 of your 4 Q. I'm asking you what you are
5 rebuttal report, that the market for a 5 opining, sir. Are you opining that what
6 security is inefficient unless that 6 you in paragraph 82 of your rebuttal report
7 security price matches a specific target 7 call fundamental efficiency is not the
8 price derived from one specific valuation 8 correct standard for evaluating market
9 model? 9 efficiency in a securities class action?
10 A. Well, I mean, I don't -- I 10 A. That is my understanding.
11 would encompass the entire part that I read 11 Q. Is it an opinion that you are
12 previously. I think that gives a fuller 12 rendering as an expert?
13 explanation. I don't know if that one 13 A. I don't believe so.
14 sentence by itself encompasses the entire 14 Q. You are merely repeating what
15 definition. 15 lawyers have told you they believe the law
16 Q. And when you write in the last 16 is, right?
17 sentence of paragraph 82 of your rebuttal 17 A. Well, as well as my reading,
18 report that "this is not the correct 18 but as a layman. To be specific, as an
19 standard for evaluating market efficiency," 19 economist, that's my understanding. So
20 that's just a statement of your 20 based on, yes, based on conversations with
21 understanding of what securities law is, 21 lawyers, both plaintiff and defense
22 right? 22 lawyers, as well as my conversations I
23 A. Well, I mean, it is based on my 23 guess with my colleagues and my reading of
24 understanding of what my clients have told 24 academic articles, Supreme Court decisions.
25 me over the last -- well, I don't know, 25 I mean, look, economists make a
Page 71 Page 73
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 when was Halliburton II? 2014. So the 2 distinction between fundamental efficiency
3 last nine years. 3 and informational efficiency. I mean,
4 Q. Your clients being plaintiffs 4 Dr. Fischel -- fuck -- sorry -- can we
5 securities class action lawyers, right? 5 strike -- can we strike that? No.
6 A. Well, my clients being lawyers. 6 Mr. Fischel, right, delineates
7 They are not all plaintiffs securities 7 between, and he did this in the IPO case as
8 class action lawyers. 8 well as some of his academic work,
9 Q. Okay. So you are not opining 9 delineates between fundamental efficiency
10 as an expert here today whether what you 10 and informational efficiency. So, I mean,
11 define in paragraph 82 of your rebuttal 11 is there a difference? Yeah, there is a
12 report as fundamental efficiency is or is 12 difference.
13 not the correct standard for evaluating 13 Q. All right.
14 market efficiency in a securities class 14 A. But, I mean, it is not like
15 action, are you? 15 economists just say oh, stocks must be --
16 A. Am I opining about whether or 16 it is not like all economists or all
17 not that is the correct standard? I mean, 17 financial economists have determined that
18 I say it is the incorrect standard. I 18 all stocks might be fundamentally
19 don't know, is that opining that it is not 19 efficient. Again, I mean, I cite to
20 the correct standard? 20 Fischel in his -- well, I guess since I'm
21 Q. Okay. So then are you, I guess 21 citing to Fischel, we should go to the
22 I'm just -- I'm quite surprised to hear 22 cite. Where are we here? Again, I'm back
23 that, so are you opining here today -- 23 at 282, Exhibit 282 to this deposition.
24 A. Well, I'm asking you. I don't 24 So among other things that he
25 know whether that is considered opinion. 25 said, I'm looking at paragraph 84, page 36,
19 (Pages 70 - 73)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 21 of
190
Page 74 Page 76
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 "Unfortunately, no direct method exists for 2 that in an efficient market finance theory
3 testing how closely prices reflect value 3 holds that the market price of a stock
4 because the value of an asset cannot be 4 reflects the discounted value of expected
5 measured apart from its price." 5 future cash flows to the stockholder?
6 And then he goes on to say -- 6 A. And, again, I refer to you,
7 now I'm reading from Halliburton, sorry. 7 that is the definition of fundamental
8 Oh, all right, yeah, so here, paragraph 86, 8 market efficiency. Does finance theory
9 page 37, this is quoting from Mr. Fischel's 9 hold that fundamental market efficiency is
10 Cornell Law Review article in '89. 10 exactly what you wrote? The answer is yes.
11 "Indeed, the constant search for market 11 Q. Okay. And do you agree, then,
12 professionals for mispriced securities is 12 that as a result new information that
13 the mechanism whereby price reflects 13 causes the market to significantly alter
14 information about underlying values, and to 14 its expectations of future cash flows will
15 emphasize, again, the critical question is 15 cause a quick repricing of the security to
16 not whether market prices are always a 16 reflect these new expectations?
17 perfect proxy for the underlying value of 17 A. Oh, I would certainly expect
18 the asset, but whether a better proxy 18 that to be the case, yes, whether it is
19 exists on a consistent basis. Thus far, 19 fundamentally efficient or informationally
20 the answer to this critical question is 20 efficient.
21 no." 21 MR. RYAN: Okay. Why don't we
22 And to the best of my 22 take a quick break.
23 knowledge, even though this was written in 23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will
24 '89, the answer to that question continues 24 end media unit two. We are going off
25 to be no today. 25 the record at 11:41.
Page 75 Page 77
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Do you understand, sir, that 2 (Recess taken.)
3 the judge in this case will determine what 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back
4 the law is? 4 on the record at 11:49. This will
5 A. I think that's true in every 5 begin media unit three.
6 case, right? But as opposed to other 6 BY MR. RYAN:
7 cases? 7 Q. All right. So did I understand
8 Q. Do you understand that it is 8 you before, Dr. Werner, correctly that
9 true in this case? 9 based on discussions you have had with
10 A. I believe that's true. I have 10 lawyers, your understanding is that what
11 no reason not to. 11 you call fundamental efficiency does not
12 Q. All right. And so am I right 12 apply in a securities class action?
13 that you are not purporting to opine as to 13 A. I don't know if that's
14 what the legal standard for market 14 accurate. I mean, I don't know, there
15 efficiency in this case should be? 15 could be instances where it does apply.
16 A. Oh, that is correct. That is 16 Q. Let me ask a better question.
17 correct, yes. 17 Let me ask a better question, since I think
18 Q. All right. 18 I may have asked a bad one.
19 A. Is now a good time to take a 19 A. Sure, sure.
20 break? 20 Q. Did I understand you correctly
21 Q. Let me just ask you this 21 before, Dr. Werner, that based on
22 question again, because I'm trying to 22 discussions you've had with lawyers your
23 finish this question about what finance 23 understanding is that what you call
24 theory holds. 24 fundamental efficiency is not required for
25 Do you agree as an economist 25 a finding of market efficiency in a
20 (Pages 74 - 77)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 22 of
190
Page 78 Page 80
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 securities class action? 2 Could you repeat the question,
3 A. My understanding, and it's not 3 please?
4 just on my discussions with lawyers, it is 4 Q. Sure. When you approached your
5 also discussions with my colleagues, 5 assignment in this matter and the opinions
6 reading of case law, and, again, I'm not a 6 on market efficiency that you gave in this
7 lawyer, review of academic literature, that 7 matter, am I right that you did not attempt
8 the basis under Halliburton II is that 8 to apply the proposition from finance
9 stocks must be informationally efficient. 9 theory that holds that in an efficient
10 That's the impression I'm under. If that's 10 market the market price of a stock reflects
11 wrong, then I'm incorrect or my 11 the discounted value of expected future
12 understanding is incorrect. 12 cash flows to the stockholder?
13 Q. All right. So you are under 13 A. I did not apply the standard of
14 the impression that only what you call 14 foundational market efficiency.
15 informational efficiency is required in a 15 Q. All right.
16 securities class action, right? 16 MR. ROSEN: He misspoke. He
17 A. I believe that -- I believe 17 used the word "foundational."
18 that is correct. 18 THE WITNESS: Oh, foundational,
19 Q. All right. And so the flip 19 you are right. I should have said
20 side of that, then, would be that you are 20 fundamental market efficiency. You
21 under the impression that in a securities 21 used the word "foundational," so it
22 class action, what you call fundamental 22 obviously stuck in my brain.
23 efficiency is not required, right? 23 Q. Okay. And so when you say that
24 A. I guess the question, is it 24 you did not render in your opinions in this
25 necessary or sufficient? I think as 25 case attempt to apply what you call
Page 79 Page 81
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 long -- so it might be -- I don't know. 2 fundamental market efficiency, you are
3 Let's not get into logic. 3 saying that you did not attempt to apply
4 Q. Right. I was asking you 4 the proposition that the market price of a
5 whether it was necessary, not whether it 5 stock reflects the discounted value of
6 was sufficient. 6 expected future cash flows to the
7 A. I guess the answer to that 7 stockholder, right?
8 question is yes, that is my understanding. 8 A. My answer hasn't changed.
9 Q. Okay. And so when you 9 Q. And so is your answer that you
10 approached your assignment in this matter 10 did not attempt to apply that because that
11 and the opinions on market efficiency that 11 is what you believe fundamental market
12 you gave in this matter, am I right that 12 efficiency is?
13 you did not attempt to apply the 13 A. Again, it's the same answer I
14 proposition from finance theory that holds 14 gave you five, ten minutes ago. It hasn't
15 that in an efficient market the market 15 changed.
16 price of a stock reflects the discounted 16 Q. So I don't know what the answer
17 value of expected future cash flows to the 17 is, sir. So I'm entitled to understand
18 stockholder? 18 whether the answer is yes or no.
19 A. So, I mean, do we want to 19 A. So can you go back to the part
20 stipulate that that's the definition of 20 where he last asked me that question? It
21 foundational market efficiency? I don't 21 has been like five or six times. So
22 know why you keep reading that particular 22 whenever you find it, you can just read my
23 statement rather than just say fundamental 23 response to him.
24 market efficiency. But you are asking the 24 Q. I'm entitled to an answer to
25 questions. 25 this question. So let me ask again. It is
21 (Pages 78 - 81)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 23 of
190
Page 82 Page 84
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 a quite simple question. My question is 2 digests all available information and
3 this: 3 translates that information into a market
4 In your work on this case and 4 price?
5 in the opinions that you rendered in this 5 A. I believe that statement is
6 case, am I right that you did not attempt 6 accurate. But, again, I mean, I can cite
7 to apply the proposition from finance 7 to Mr. Fischel, I'm not sure if it was in
8 theory that the market price of a stock 8 the IPO litigation or other litigation,
9 reflects the discounted value of expected 9 that he defined fast and quickly as an
10 future cash flows to the stockholder? 10 18-hour period. You know, one's definition
11 A. I did not use fundamental -- 11 of fast is definitely possibly subjective.
12 the fundamental -- the definition of 12 Q. Do you agree that a corollary
13 fundamental market efficiency as the 13 of the efficient market hypothesis is that
14 standard in my work in this case. 14 disclosure of confirmatory information, or
15 Q. All right. And you believe 15 information already known by the market,
16 that the proposition that I read out in my 16 will not cause a change in the stock price?
17 immediately preceding question is the 17 MR. ROSEN: Could you reread
18 definition of fundamental market efficiency 18 that question.
19 which you did not apply? 19 (The record was read.)
20 A. I believe it is the definition 20 A. I think under the definition of
21 of fundamental market efficiency. 21 fundamental market efficiency, that
22 Q. Okay. Do you agree that an 22 statement is correct.
23 efficient capital market rapidly and 23 Q. Do you believe that that
24 efficiently digests all available 24 statement is incorrect under the definition
25 information and translates that information 25 of what you call informational market
Page 83 Page 85
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 into the processed form of a market price? 2 efficiency?
3 A. Okay, so that sounds like 3 A. Well, it could be incorrect.
4 something I may have said. Is that 4 Q. So you believe that that
5 something you want me to look at or do you 5 statement is not necessarily correct under
6 want to reread it? 6 what you call informational market
7 Q. I'm happy to ask the question 7 efficiency?
8 again. 8 A. I believe your statement is
9 A. You can let him reread it. It 9 correct.
10 is fine. 10 Q. Okay. And so in providing your
11 MR. RYAN: Sure. Go ahead. 11 opinions on market efficiency in this
12 (The record was read.) 12 matter, am I right that you did not attempt
13 A. I mean, could you read it 13 to apply the proposition that disclosure of
14 again? I mean, if you want me to look at 14 confirmatory information or information
15 something, I'm happy to look at it, but let 15 already known by the market will not cause
16 me just -- let me process all of the 16 a change in the stock price?
17 information incorporated in that question. 17 A. Could you repeat that, please?
18 (The record was read.) 18 (The record was read.)
19 A. In the processed form of a 19 A. There is one word I missed
20 market price? What do you mean by 20 there. Sorry, can you reread it again?
21 processed form? 21 And I will stop you when I reach the word
22 Q. Well, let me ask the question 22 that I was focused on and forgot.
23 more simply then. 23 (The record was read.)
24 Do you agree that an efficient 24 A. So it's the word "proposition."
25 capital market rapidly and efficiently 25 I don't know if I applied that proposition
22 (Pages 82 - 85)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 24 of
190
Page 86 Page 88
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 or not. 2 efficiency.
3 Q. All right. You didn't set out 3 Q. Well, how would you define
4 to apply that proposition I take it then? 4 crazy stock price movements?
5 A. I didn't, I mean, I didn't do 5 A. It's your -- it's your term. I
6 it one way or the other. I didn't set out, 6 don't know. It's not -- it's not anything
7 I didn't not set out. 7 I have thought about. I don't sit around
8 Q. Okay. 8 thinking, you know what, this is a crazy
9 A. I mean -- well, we -- I'm sure 9 stock price movement or this is not a crazy
10 we will get into it more later. Go ahead. 10 stock price movement. That's why I'm
11 Q. Do you agree that if you saw 11 asking, go ahead, show me what you mean. I
12 all sorts of crazy stock price movements on 12 mean, I'm sure you have examples. I'm
13 no information, that might inform you that 13 happy to render an opinion about those.
14 the stock was not efficient? 14 Q. Right. I do certainly have
15 A. Crazy stock price movements, so 15 examples in this case of crazy stock price
16 I'm sure you have examples of what you mean 16 movements, that's for sure.
17 by crazy stock price movements. So would 17 A. I should say what you believe
18 you like to give me some examples? I mean, 18 are examples of crazy stock price
19 you -- 19 movements.
20 Q. I will, but let me -- let me 20 Q. Were you an expert in a case
21 ask you -- let me ask you the general 21 called Hi-Crush Partners?
22 question first. 22 A. Evidently.
23 So do you agree that if you saw 23 Q. Do you remember being an expert
24 what you considered crazy stock price 24 in that case?
25 movements on no information that might 25 A. I do not recall being an expert
Page 87 Page 89
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 inform you that the stock wasn't efficient? 2 in that case. But I was -- I mean, it's on
3 A. So things that I thought were 3 my vitae.
4 crazy? 4 Q. All right. Let me hand you
5 Q. Yes. 5 what we have marked as Deposition Exhibit
6 A. Could that inform my opinion? 6 283, which is a transcript of the
7 It certainly could inform my opinion as to 7 deposition of Dr. Adam Werner in the case
8 whether or not the stock was fundamentally 8 captioned In Re Hi-Crush Partners LP
9 efficient. 9 Securities Litigation held on April 24th,
10 Q. Could it inform your opinion as 10 2014.
11 to whether or not the stock was, to use 11 (Defendant's Exhibit 283 marked
12 your term, informationally efficient? 12 for identification.)
13 A. I don't, as I sit here today, I 13 A. April 24th, so over nine years
14 don't know. It is not anything I have 14 ago. All right, go ahead.
15 thought about. I mean, in your 15 Q. So if I could ask you, please,
16 hypothetical you are talking about crazy 16 to look at page 124 of this deposition,
17 stock price movements. 17 line 25.
18 Q. I am. 18 A. Page 124. Hold on. 124.
19 A. I don't know what you mean by 19 Q. Do you see that you said at
20 crazy stock price movements. So it is not 20 page 124, line 25, to page 125, line 4 "So,
21 anything -- I haven't sat down with anyone 21 I mean, if I saw all sorts of crazy stock
22 and said hey, let's think about crazy stock 22 price movements on no information, that
23 price movements without defining what crazy 23 might inform me that the stock wasn't
24 stock price movements are and then how does 24 efficient"?
25 that affect my opinion about market 25 Do you see that?
23 (Pages 86 - 89)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 25 of
190
Page 90 Page 92
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. I do see that. 2 That's what the --
3 Q. All right. And that is 3 MR. ROSEN: Are you saying the
4 testimony that you gave in the Hi-Crush 4 class period or the stock period?
5 case, right? 5 MR. RYAN: I'm asking the class
6 A. Right, or, I'm sorry, correct. 6 period.
7 Q. And the reason that you gave 7 MR. ROSEN: Where does the
8 that testimony is that if you saw all sorts 8 class period say that? I saw study
9 of crazy stock price movements without any 9 period. I didn't see class period.
10 new information coming to the market, that 10 A. Wait, hold on. So this is just
11 might inform you that the stock was not 11 a question the lawyer is asking, so I have
12 trading in an efficient market, right? 12 no idea what we are talking about.
13 A. Well, let me -- let me read 13 Q. Okay.
14 around this so I know exactly. I mean, 14 A. Like I said, I barely remember
15 look, I don't even -- I don't have this 15 this case. So yeah, I don't know what was
16 report. I don't remember this case at all. 16 going on here. But if you want me to read
17 So let me -- let me read some of the 17 it and try to get context so I can answer
18 context in which -- and I will figure out 18 your questions, I'm happy to do that.
19 whether the facts and circumstances are 19 Q. Do you see on page 122 on lines
20 similar to this case and what exactly I 20 13 to 18 the lawyer who is questioning you
21 meant. 21 asks you whether you agree with him that in
22 (Witness perusing document.) 22 your event study in that case there were no
23 Q. So if you have read pages 122 23 statistically significant dates during the
24 to 125 I think you have all the context 24 class period, and he explains that the
25 that we need to understand this. 25 class period was from September 19th
Page 91 Page 93
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. Oh, well, I don't want to 2 through November 12th of 2012?
3 disagree with you, but, again, this is -- 3 A. I mean, yeah, that's the way I
4 when was this deposition? Over nine years 4 would read it as I sit here today.
5 ago. And I believe it was before -- I 5 Q. And then do you see that the
6 don't know, when did the Halliburton II 6 lawyer goes on to ask you about how there
7 decision come out? Anyway, I mean, I need 7 is a subsequent event period that you study
8 to read what I need to read to answer your 8 for one year after the class period in the
9 question properly, right? 9 Hi-Crush case from November 13th, 2012
10 Q. All right. So let me try to -- 10 through November 13th, 2013 where there are
11 let me ask you a question -- 11 a number of statistically significant dates
12 A. So do you want to rescind that 12 in your regression analysis?
13 question? Or do you want me to continue to 13 A. Well, again, in order to answer
14 try to answer it? 14 these questions, I really need to put these
15 Q. Why don't I withdraw my 15 statements that I made into context. So
16 previous question and ask you this 16 I'm happy to read this and let that inform
17 question: 17 my opinion of exactly what I said if you
18 Do you see on page 122 of this 18 would like me to. But I would like that
19 transcript from the Hi-Crush case that you 19 opportunity so I can answer the question as
20 had -- that you were analyzing a class 20 accurately as possible. Again, I don't
21 period in this case from September 19th 21 remember this case at all.
22 through November 12th, 2012? 22 Q. Right. So what I'm asking you
23 A. I do see that that's what I was 23 right now is whether you see on pages 122
24 doing, yes, or at least that's what the 24 to 123 that that is what the lawyer is
25 lawyers -- again, I don't recall this. 25 asking you, whether you agree that in this
24 (Pages 90 - 93)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 26 of
190
Page 94 Page 96
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 case, the Hi-Crush case, you analyzed an 2 Q. And then do you see on page
3 event period for one year subsequent to the 3 124, beginning at line 5, the lawyer asks
4 class period and there were statistically 4 you to explain how you were able to
5 significant dates during that period? 5 conclude based on the presence of
6 A. So if you are just asking if 6 statistically significant events during the
7 you are reading that statement correctly, 7 subsequent period, the subsequent one-year
8 the answer is yes, you are reading the 8 period, how that forms your opinion that
9 statement correctly. But I have no context 9 the market was efficient during the class
10 for what that guy was asking or why he was 10 period, and then do you see your answer
11 asking it without reading more of my 11 that begins at line 19 that reads "Answer:
12 deposition. 12 Well, there are no -- I mean, I don't --
13 Q. Okay. And then do you see on 13 you are right, I don't see any
14 page 123 at lines 8 through 17 you are 14 statistically significant price movements,
15 asked to confirm that there were no 15 but there was also no significant news
16 statistically significant dates during the 16 issue during that time. So, I mean, if I
17 class period in Hi-Crush, and you confirmed 17 saw all sorts of crazy stock price
18 that that's accurate? Do you see that? 18 movements on no information, that might
19 A. Where? 19 inform me that the stock wasn't efficient"?
20 Q. On page 123, lines 8 through 20 Do you see that?
21 17. 21 A. I see your reading of that,
22 A. Wait, I'm sorry, so it seems 22 yes. I mean, you read it correctly, not
23 like -- my reading of this is that there 23 that I see your reading, you are obviously
24 were some disagreement over what the class 24 reading. I'm not seeing words in front of
25 period was. Was that the case? 25 me.
Page 95 Page 97
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. That's not my understanding. 2 Q. And so what you are saying
3 My understanding is these questions are 3 there was that even though there were no
4 just distinguishing between the class 4 statistically significant stock price
5 period and a one-year period that you also 5 movements during the class period in the
6 analyzed in the Hi-Crush case following the 6 Hi-Crush case, that wasn't inconsistent
7 class period. 7 with efficiency, because there was also no
8 A. Okay. So during the class 8 material information that was coming out
9 period, and this is me asking it, I'm using 9 about the company during the period, and so
10 your definition or everyone's definition, 10 you didn't expect to see statistically
11 so that to me suggests that there was some 11 significant stock price movements, right?
12 conflict over what the proper class period 12 A. I'm sorry, where are you
13 was. 13 reading from? Where are we talking about
14 I certainly want more 14 material information? I missed that part.
15 information about that so that I can -- I 15 Again, if you want me to answer
16 mean, again, if you want to ask me if you 16 these questions and you are going to talk
17 are just reading it correctly, the answer 17 about material information, I definitely
18 is yes. If you want me to give a 18 need to read more of this. I will point
19 substantive answer, I need to understand 19 out -- see, I don't remember the facts of
20 what was going on here. 20 this case. Was there a corrective
21 Again, to the extent that there 21 disclosure at the end of the class period?
22 was some -- I don't know if part of this 22 Like is this one of these cases where, you
23 conflict leaked into this additional period 23 know, the class period ended on the 26th
24 that I was looking at. I have no idea as I 24 and the corrective disclosure came after
25 sit here today. 25 the market closed on the 26th, and so that
25 (Pages 94 - 97)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 27 of
190
Page 98 Page 100
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 we observed the stock price movement on the 2 information during the class period.
3 27th? 3 MR. ROSEN: Do you have his
4 I don't -- I mean, I would say 4 report so --
5 that I need, in order to answer your 5 A. There you go. I can look at my
6 questions, I need to understand the facts 6 report and tell you.
7 and circumstances surrounding this case, 7 Q. Let me ask you the question
8 and my guess is the facts and circumstances 8 this way: As you sit here today, do you
9 surrounding this case, to the extent that I 9 agree that if during a particular time
10 recall it, which I don't, are different 10 period you see all sorts of crazy stock
11 than the facts and circumstances associated 11 price movements on no information, that
12 with this case. 12 might inform you that the stock wasn't
13 Q. So do you see that the phrase 13 efficient?
14 that you used in your answer that I just 14 A. Do I agree today -- I think
15 read out beginning at page 124, line 19, 15 if -- and, again, this is nine years ago,
16 was "no significant news"? 16 and, again, I believe before Halliburton II
17 A. I'm sorry, where are we? 17 came out, I believe if I put in the term
18 Q. Do you see that in the answer I 18 "fundamental market efficiency," your
19 just read out from page 124, line 19, 19 statement is correct.
20 through page 125, line 4, you used the 20 But, well, I mean, to the
21 phrase, on lines 22 to 23, "no significant 21 extent I can answer the question, that's my
22 news"? 22 answer. But, again, I mean, this was -- I
23 A. I do see that. 23 don't recall this case at all. I mean, I
24 Q. All right. So isn't it the 24 can't even -- I couldn't even find a
25 case that what you are testifying here was 25 report. You presumably have the report.
Page 99 Page 101
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 that during the class period in the 2 I'm happy to take a look at it if you want
3 Hi-Crush case you didn't see any 3 me to. Maybe that will reflect -- refresh
4 statistically significant price movements, 4 my memory as to it.
5 but there was also no significant news 5 Q. So in the work that you are
6 issued during that period, and therefore 6 doing in this litigation that brings us
7 the lack of statistically significant stock 7 here today, in the short squeeze trading
8 price movements was not inconsistent with 8 litigation, am I right that you are not
9 market efficiency? 9 applying the principle that if you see all
10 A. Again, I don't know what I was 10 sorts of crazy stock price movements on no
11 saying in this case. This is nine years 11 information, that might inform you that the
12 ago. Again, I'm happy to read more of this 12 stock wasn't trading in an efficient
13 so I understand exactly what was going on 13 market?
14 in this case to accurately answer your 14 A. I think, again, I don't recall
15 question. 15 this case at all.
16 I mean, I guess I -- I assume 16 Q. I'm not asking you about the
17 what I meant there was fundamental market. 17 case.
18 I mean, do I even mention market 18 A. No, no, no. I'm speculating
19 efficiency? I probably -- yeah, again, I 19 that what I was talking about here was
20 don't recall this at all, but I'm happy to 20 fundamental market efficiency. What I am
21 read and refresh my recollection and give 21 talking about and what I have realized over
22 you the best answer I can. So I don't 22 the last nine years based on literature,
23 understand -- I don't know the facts and 23 based on discussions, based on case law, is
24 circumstances of this case. I don't know 24 that the standard is informational market
25 why there wouldn't have been any 25 efficiency. That is the standard I'm
26 (Pages 98 - 101)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 28 of
190
Page 102 Page 104
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 applying for this case. 2 informational market efficiency.
3 Q. So regardless of the specifics 3 Q. All right. And so if in this
4 of the Hi-Crush case, is it the case that 4 case you believe that there were crazy
5 at some earlier point in time during your 5 stock price movements on no information, am
6 career as a testifying expert, you were 6 I right that you would not draw any
7 applying a standard that you now consider 7 conclusion from that one way or the other
8 to be fundamental market efficiency? 8 as to whether the markets for those stocks
9 A. I think from an academic 9 were informationally efficient?
10 perspective, to the extent I was thinking 10 A. Again, I don't know what I
11 like an academic and thinking about a 11 meant by "crazy" nine years ago.
12 theoretical world, that is correct. 12 Q. I'm not asking you that, sir.
13 Q. And so am I understanding you 13 I'm not asking you anything about --
14 right, then, that over time in your career 14 A. But you are. You are asking me
15 as a testifying expert you have consciously 15 about crazy stock price movements, right?
16 changed the standard that you are applying 16 Was that not in the question?
17 and you are no longer applying a 17 Q. Hi-Crush was not in the
18 fundamental efficiency standard, you are 18 question.
19 now applying what you call an informational 19 A. No, no, but the word "crazy"
20 efficiency standard? 20 was in the question, correct?
21 A. Well, I mean, it's not just me 21 Q. Let me ask you the question
22 who calls it informational market 22 again.
23 efficiency. I mean, Mr. Fischel calls it 23 If in this case you believed
24 informational market efficiency, thousands 24 that there were crazy stock price movements
25 of economists call it informational market 25 on no information, am I right that you
Page 103 Page 105
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 efficiency. It is an accepted term within 2 would not draw any conclusion from that one
3 the finance world. 3 way or the other as to whether the markets
4 So am I applying the standard 4 for those stocks were informationally
5 of informational market efficiency which is 5 efficient?
6 accepted throughout academia? Yeah, that's 6 A. Again, I don't know what you
7 what I'm applying. I'm sorry, whoa, did I 7 mean by "crazy."
8 say fundamental or informational? 8 Q. All right. So that term "crazy
9 Q. You said informational. 9 stock price movements" is one that you
10 A. I'm sorry, this is just -- 10 agree that you used under oath, right?
11 again, I'm just confused by this case. 11 A. Nine years ago, right. Do you
12 Q. So let me get back to my 12 want me to reread this so I get an
13 question. Is it the case, then, that over 13 understanding and context of "crazy"?
14 time in your career as a testifying expert 14 Because I'm happy to do it so I have a
15 you have consciously changed the standard 15 better understanding of what I meant by
16 that you are applying and you are no longer 16 "crazy" nine years ago. But if you have a
17 applying a fundamental efficiency standard, 17 definition today of "crazy" that you would
18 you are now applying an informational 18 like me to use in this matter, define it
19 efficiency standard? 19 for me and I will try to apply it to this
20 A. I believe that is correct. I 20 matter.
21 believe my understanding is that the 21 Q. Okay.
22 standard, and, again, based on everything I 22 A. Does that make sense? I mean,
23 have stated, that in this, I don't know, 23 I think I'm being reasonable here. I'm
24 realm, the world of securities class 24 just trying to answer the question to the
25 actions, that the standard of efficiency is 25 best of my ability, and you are using a
27 (Pages 102 - 105)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 29 of
190
Page 106 Page 108
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 subjective term that I guess I used in a 2 A. I do. Whoa, all right, I do.
3 deposition nine years ago. Who knows what 3 Q. Could you please turn to page
4 was going on in my life at that point in 4 132.
5 time. 5 A. 132. Okay.
6 So is there a corollary to what 6 Q. All right. Are you with me
7 "crazy" means today? I honestly -- I don't 7 here on the last page of your Exhibit 7A?
8 know what you mean, so give me some 8 A. I am here, yeah.
9 examples, I'm happy to take a look at them. 9 Q. And these are the day-by-day
10 But it's a subjective term, so I need to 10 results of your AMC event study, right?
11 understand what it means, or what you think 11 A. Oh, okay, yeah. I just saw
12 it means. I think that's reasonable. 12 this one page in a vacuum and I thought I
13 Q. All right. And you understand 13 couldn't figure out why I would just put
14 that in the Hi-Crush case itself there in 14 one, you know, point on a page.
15 fact were no statistically significant 15 MR. ROSEN: Which exhibit are
16 stock price movements during the class 16 you on?
17 period, and so you were introducing a 17 THE WITNESS: 7A, so page 132.
18 counterfactual of the crazy stock price 18 And for context you may want to look at
19 movements, right? You understand that, 19 131 before that.
20 don't you? 20 Q. Right. So Exhibit 7A begins on
21 A. No, I don't understand it. I 21 page 125, right?
22 don't remember the case. But, again, 22 A. Yeah.
23 either -- here, I will give you the best 23 Q. And on --
24 answer I can. If you give me the report 24 A. Yes.
25 and allow me to look at it, or allow me to 25 Q. And on pages 125 to 132 there
Page 107 Page 109
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 read my deposition testimony so I have a 2 is an entry for each day during your
3 clear understanding of what was happening 3 one-year period, right?
4 in this case. 4 A. Correct.
5 Q. All right. Could you turn, 5 Q. And you found that in your
6 please, to Exhibit 7A. 6 event study on January 27th, 2021 the
7 A. So we're going off of this? We 7 residual return for AMC was 138.05 percent,
8 are going off "crazy"? 8 right?
9 Q. We are going off the Hi-Crush 9 A. Well, oh, yeah, I'm sorry. I'm
10 case. I'm taking you up on your invitation 10 looking at the wrong page. On a
11 for me to give you some facts of this case 11 logarithmic -- on a logarithmic basis, yes,
12 so we can see whether the stock price 12 that is correct, the abnormal return.
13 movements are crazy. 13 Q. And if we look, for example, at
14 A. Okay. Hold on. Hold on. What 14 Koss, this is now page 172 in Exhibit 7F.
15 is this? Did you give me the whole 15 A. Okay, hold on. Okay.
16 deposition? 16 Q. You found that the residual
17 Q. Yes, sir. 17 return for Koss on January 27th, 2021 was
18 MR. ROSEN: You just turned 18 176.03 percent, right?
19 around the front page. 19 A. Correct, again, on a
20 A. Do I need this anymore? 20 logarithmic basis, but yes.
21 Q. No. 21 Q. And I will do one more. If we
22 A. Okay, we are fine. 22 look at Express, this is now on page 156,
23 Q. Do you have your opening 23 Exhibit 7D to your opening report --
24 report, marked as Exhibit 281 to this 24 A. Oh, I'm sorry, what page?
25 deposition? 25 Q. 156.
28 (Pages 106 - 109)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 30 of
190
Page 110 Page 112
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. 156. 2 A. They are large.
3 Q. You found that the residual 3 Q. Do you agree that they are the
4 return for Express on January 27th, 2021 4 largest for any day during your study?
5 was 118.43 percent, right? 5 A. Oh, as I sit here, I don't
6 A. Correct. 6 recall. I'm happy to look through all of
7 Q. All right. And so do you agree 7 these exhibits and let you know if that's
8 with me that at least for AMC, Koss and 8 the case.
9 Express, those were crazy stock price 9 Q. That is not something you
10 movements on January 27th, 2021? 10 thought about before I just asked you that
11 A. No, I don't think I will ever 11 question?
12 use the term "crazy stock price movements" 12 A. That these are the largest
13 again. I would say they are large. 13 stock price movements?
14 Q. They are each over 100 percent 14 Q. Yes, sir.
15 residual return on one day, right? 15 A. These three companies?
16 A. That is correct. 16 Q. On January 27th, 2021, yes,
17 Q. And by residual return, we mean 17 sir.
18 adjusted for market and industry index 18 A. I mean, I have thought about
19 returns, right? 19 the stock price movements. I haven't
20 A. Correct. 20 thought about whether they are the largest
21 Q. So this is, in effect, a 21 stock price movements throughout the seven
22 company-specific return for each of these 22 companies I studied, or nine companies I
23 stocks was each over 100 percent on that 23 studied. So, I mean, no, I haven't thought
24 day, right? 24 about the fact that these are the largest
25 A. That is correct. 25 stock price movements among the nine
Page 111 Page 113
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. That is highly abnormal, isn't 2 companies.
3 it? 3 Q. That wasn't the question I
4 A. It is large. 4 meant to ask, so let me ask a better
5 Q. Do you agree with me that it is 5 question.
6 highly abnormal? 6 A. All right, sure.
7 A. I haven't performed a study to 7 Q. You have noticed before this
8 determine whether or not it is highly 8 line of questioning at your deposition,
9 abnormal. It is large. 9 haven't you, that January 27th, 2021 was
10 Q. You have performed a day-by-day 10 the largest stock price movement during
11 study of the returns over a full year for 11 your one-year period for AMC, right?
12 each of those three stocks as well as other 12 A. I believe that's correct, but I
13 stocks, right? 13 can look through it and verify that for
14 A. Correct. 14 you.
15 Q. And so that study informs you 15 Q. And you have noticed --
16 as to whether those one-day returns are 16 A. Wait, do you want me to look
17 highly abnormal, doesn't it? 17 for it?
18 A. Again, what do you mean by 18 Q. No, I'm asking you whether
19 highly abnormal? They are large. Highly 19 you -- whether you observed that fact
20 abnormal relative to what? Is there some 20 before your deposition here today.
21 statistical standard you are trying to put 21 A. So --
22 into place here? 22 Q. Did you observe that fact?
23 Q. Okay. So you are unable to 23 A. I'm sure I did. But I don't
24 apply the eyeball test to determine those 24 know that what you are saying is correct.
25 are highly abnormal; is that right? 25 If you want me to let you know that what in
29 (Pages 110 - 113)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 31 of
190
Page 114 Page 116
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 fact you are saying is correct, let me look 2 I can't. I gotta look at the report, or,
3 through -- 3 I'm sorry, I should use proper English. I
4 Q. That is not my question, sir. 4 have to look at the report.
5 A. Well, it is your question. 5 Q. So am I right, then, that it
6 Q. No, my question is not -- 6 was not important for any of your opinions
7 A. Could you reread the question, 7 in this case whether the residual returns
8 please? 8 on January 27th, 2021 were the highest of
9 (The record was read.) 9 any day during your one-year period for any
10 A. Did I observe that fact? 10 of these nine stocks?
11 Right, so I don't recall. 11 A. Again, are we stipulating to
12 Q. Okay. 12 the fact that it is the highest day?
13 A. If that fact as you stated is 13 Q. No. I'm asking you was it
14 in fact a fact. So let me look through -- 14 important for any of your opinions in this
15 Q. That means that you didn't -- 15 case whether the residual returns on
16 A. No. 16 January 27th, 2021 were the highest of any
17 MR. ROSEN: Hold on, don't 17 day during your one-year period for any of
18 argue with him. Your question, what 18 these nine stocks? Was that important to
19 you just said, that means if he didn't 19 any of your opinions or not?
20 observe it, therefore he never saw it. 20 A. So, again, I don't know if -- I
21 That's not true. He may not remember, 21 don't remember if this is the largest stock
22 right? 22 price movement during that period. If you
23 So he may not have memorized 23 want me to look and tell you and verify
24 all the stock price movements for the 24 that it is in fact the largest stock price
25 nine stocks over that one-year period. 25 movement, I will be happy to answer your
Page 115 Page 117
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 When you ask him a question whether 2 question.
3 that is the largest, he just wants to 3 Q. That's not my question.
4 look to see if that is true because he 4 A. Or do you want to stipulate --
5 may not be remembering. 5 Q. Let me try to ask the question
6 Q. My question is not whether it 6 again.
7 is the largest. My question, sir, is 7 A. There seems to be a fundamental
8 before today's deposition did you observe 8 misunderstanding here, because when you say
9 whether the stock price movement in AMC on 9 "observe," at some point I observed it.
10 January 27th, 2021 was the largest of any 10 Did I mentally note that it was the largest
11 of the daily stock price movements for AMC 11 stock price movement? I may have at one
12 during your one-year period? 12 point, but I can't be expected to sit here
13 A. Again, if you want to stipulate 13 today, I've got what, nine stocks,
14 to the fact that that is the largest stock 14 basically 253 days, so nine times 253, can
15 price movement along that one-year period, 15 I borrow this pen here?
16 then I'll say yes, I observed it. But if 16 Q. Dr. Werner, "observe" was many
17 you want me to answer that question without 17 questions ago. Please try to focus on this
18 that stipulation, I need to look at daily 18 question I'm asking. Here is my question:
19 stock price. 19 Was it important to any of your
20 Q. Okay. 20 opinions whether or not the stock price
21 A. I mean, this isn't a memory 21 movements on January 27th, 2021 were the
22 test, right? Like I can't tell you well, 22 highest of any day during your one-year
23 you know, Dr. Werner, can you tell me what 23 period for any of the nine stocks you
24 the price of Tootsie Roll was on December 24 studied? Was that important to any of your
25 12th, 2020 and what the abnormal return is, 25 opinions, sir?
30 (Pages 114 - 117)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 32 of
190
Page 118 Page 120
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. So, okay, why don't you want me 2 some significance? Okay, then -- I mean,
3 to look at the data and verify that what 3 we have been talking about this for ten
4 you are saying is correct? 4 minutes. I could have just looked through
5 Q. Because that's not my question. 5 this exhibit in one minute and verified
6 A. Well, you are making a 6 that what you are saying is accurate.
7 statement in your -- 7 Q. Are you able to identify any of
8 Q. Respectfully, I'm not. 8 your opinions for me that would change
9 MR. ROSEN: Objection. You 9 based on whether or not the stock price
10 want him to answer two questions, one 10 movements on January 27th were the largest
11 of which assumes the truth of the 11 during the one-year period?
12 question -- of the stock prices. 12 A. Okay, so now you are asking me
13 MR. RYAN: It doesn't. 13 a different question.
14 MR. ROSEN: Before he answers 14 Q. That is the same question I
15 it, he just wants to check if those 15 have been trying to ask you, worded
16 really were the largest. Now, there is 16 slightly differently. I'm getting at the
17 a way to get to what you want 17 importance of your opinions.
18 without -- 18 A. Can you read the question
19 MR. RYAN: Let me ask -- let me 19 again, please?
20 try to make very clear now. 20 (The record was read.)
21 Q. I am not making any statement 21 A. With regards to this report, I
22 about the fact of whether January 27th was 22 don't know without verifying that what you
23 the largest stock price movement or not. 23 are saying is accurate, but no, my opinions
24 I'm not making any statement about that. 24 would not change.
25 I'm asking you this question -- 25 Q. Could you turn, please, to
Page 119 Page 121
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. But you have been, correct? 2 paragraph 62, which is on page 26 of your
3 Q. No. I am asking you the 3 opening report, Exhibit 281.
4 following question, sir -- 4 A. Paragraph 62. Paragraph, not
5 A. All right, so we are going to 5 page, right?
6 agree to disagree. 6 Q. Yes. The bottom of page 26.
7 MR. ROSEN: Why don't you just 7 A. Did you say rebuttal or --
8 ask him if there were large stock price 8 Q. Opening report.
9 movements? 9 A. Opening report, okay. What am
10 MR. RYAN: Not my question. 10 I in here? Oh, okay. Okay.
11 Larry, let me ask my question. 11 Q. And do you see you wrote there
12 MR. ROSEN: I'm just trying to 12 "Prior to running a regression, one must
13 solve this -- 13 decide on an estimation period over which
14 MR. RYAN: Let me ask my 14 to measure the relationship between the
15 question, please. 15 security at issue and the corresponding
16 Q. Was it important for you in 16 market and industry indices"?
17 reaching your opinions to know whether 17 Do you see that?
18 January 27th, 2021 was or was not the 18 A. Is the question do I see it?
19 largest stock price movement of any day 19 Q. Yes.
20 during the one-year period for any of these 20 A. Yes, you read that correctly.
21 stocks? 21 Q. And was your estimation period
22 A. I don't know how to answer that 22 here the one year through January 27th,
23 question without verifying. I mean, was it 23 2021?
24 large? Yes. I don't know why you are 24 A. Well, I mean, we might as well
25 stuck on the largest. Like does that have 25 be as accurate as possible. So I'm reading
31 (Pages 118 - 121)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 33 of
190
Page 122 Page 124
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 from paragraph 1 of my -- of Exhibit 281 to 2 Q. All right. And am I right that
3 this exhibit, the time period I looked at 3 you used dummy variables for January 27th,
4 was January 28th, 2020 through January 4 2021 because of the potentially abnormal
5 27th, 2021. 5 returns on that date?
6 Q. All right. So that was -- 6 A. I'm sorry, could you reread the
7 A. And that is what I have defined 7 question?
8 as the relevant period. So if we just want 8 (The record was read.)
9 to refer to it as the relevant period, we 9 A. Well, I used it because it was
10 can do that. 10 the -- my understanding was it was the
11 Q. And so that one year through 11 mitigating factor to the beginning of
12 January 27th, 2021 is what you used as the 12 Robinhood's actions, which is akin to
13 estimation period for your regression, 13 something I would do if I was looking at a
14 correct? 14 corrective disclosure.
15 A. That is correct. 15 That having been said, if I had
16 Q. All right. Now, do you see, 16 known that -- well, I believe what I did
17 then, in the sentence that spans the pages 17 was correct from a theoretical standpoint.
18 from pages 26 to 27 of your opening report, 18 My analysis, and when I say my analysis, I
19 you write "In event study analysis, the 19 mean my news/no news test, do not change if
20 choice of using the period preceding the 20 I don't dummy out the 27th.
21 event window, here the year prior to 21 Q. When you referred just now to
22 Robinhood's challenged actions, as the 22 the beginning of Robinhood's actions, do
23 regression estimation period is a widely 23 you mean the time when Robinhood first put
24 used and generally accepted methodology"? 24 the so-called PCO restrictions in place?
25 A. Correct. 25 A. Well, the actions at issue in
Page 123 Page 125
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Okay. And by the event period, 2 this case.
3 do you mean the period of time during which 3 Q. All right.
4 Robinhood's challenged actions were in 4 A. So all of the actions.
5 place? 5 Q. And do you understand that that
6 A. Well, I mean, the class, event 6 began on the morning of January 28th, 2021?
7 period is analogous to the class period. 7 A. I believe that's correct, but
8 Q. All right. And in this case is 8 let me just look at my report to refresh my
9 the proposed class period the period of 9 memory.
10 time during which at least some of 10 Q. And I would refer you, again,
11 Robinhood's challenged actions were in 11 to what we were looking at before, Table 12
12 place? 12 in your rebuttal report.
13 A. I mean, I believe that's 13 A. Do you have a page number for
14 correct. But if you want to give me the 14 Table 12?
15 complaint, I can verify that that is 15 Q. Page 44.
16 exactly what it is. 16 A. Okay.
17 Q. Now, do you see in paragraph 17 Q. And then I would also refer you
18 63, do you see that you write "For each 18 to paragraph 103, the text of which is
19 Affected Company, I also used dummy 19 beneath that, carrying on to the following
20 variables in the regression model to 20 page, page 45 of your rebuttal report. Do
21 control for the potentially abnormal 21 you see that?
22 returns on each Affected Company's earnings 22 A. Yeah. I'm just reading it.
23 announcement dates and on January 27th, 23 (Witness perusing document.)
24 2021"? 24 A. Okay, so this is a subset of
25 A. I do, yes. 25 the -- the PCO restrictions are a subset of
32 (Pages 122 - 125)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 34 of
190
Page 126 Page 128
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 the restrictions at issue in this case. 2 look at the -- I don't recall, but if you
3 Q. All right. So is it your 3 showed me the complaint, I would be happy
4 understanding that the first Robinhood 4 to give you the most accurate answer I can.
5 restrictions at issue in this case were 5 Q. All right. I will take the
6 imposed starting 8:03 a.m. eastern time on 6 answer that you don't recall now.
7 January 28th, 2021? 7 So your understanding, then, is
8 A. I'm sorry, can you repeat the 8 that the full day of January 27th, 2021 was
9 question? 9 unaffected by Robinhood PCO restrictions,
10 Q. Is it your understanding that 10 right?
11 the first Robinhood restrictions at issue 11 A. When you say the entire day, do
12 in this case were imposed starting 8:03 12 you mean the entire trading day? And when
13 a.m. eastern time on January 28th, 2021? 13 I mean trading day, ending at 4:00 p.m.
14 A. For AMC, BlackBerry, Bed Bath & 14 eastern time?
15 Beyond, Express, Koss, Nokia and Trivago, 15 Q. Well, why don't I start with
16 that is correct. 16 that question. Do you -- strike that.
17 Q. And that is all the stocks 17 Is it your understanding, then,
18 except Tootsie Roll, right? 18 that the full trading day of January 27th,
19 A. Correct. All of the affected 19 2021 ending at 4:00 p.m. eastern time was
20 -- I believe what I called the affected 20 unaffected by Robinhood PCO restrictions?
21 stocks, the nine stocks at issue in this 21 A. To the best of my recollection,
22 case. 22 I believe that is correct.
23 Q. And for Tootsie Roll as stated 23 Q. All right. And is it similarly
24 on page 45 of your rebuttal report, the 24 your understanding that aftermarket trading
25 first Robinhood restrictions at issue in 25 on January 27th, 2021 was unaffected by
Page 127 Page 129
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 this case were imposed a little under two 2 Robinhood PCO restrictions?
3 hours later, at 9:54 a.m. eastern time, 3 A. I'm sorry, can you repeat the
4 right? 4 question?
5 A. I'm sorry, could you reread the 5 Q. Is it similarly your
6 question? 6 understanding that aftermarket trading,
7 Q. And for Tootsie Roll as stated 7 after 4:00 p.m. eastern time on January
8 on page 45 of your rebuttal report, the 8 27th, 2021, was unaffected by Robinhood PCO
9 first Robinhood restrictions at issue in 9 restrictions?
10 this case were imposed a little under two 10 A. And so we're just talking about
11 hours later, at 9:54 a.m. Eastern time, 11 the 27th now, we are not talking about the
12 right? 12 premarket on the 28th?
13 A. That's my understanding. 13 Q. Just on January 27th, 2021
14 Q. Okay. So going back to my 14 eastern time.
15 original question, you agree then that the 15 A. Yeah, let me refresh my memory.
16 first Robinhood restrictions for any of the 16 (Witness perusing document.)
17 stocks that are at issue in this case were 17 A. Okay, yeah, so I think the PCO
18 put in place starting at 8:03 a.m. eastern 18 -- the first PCO restrictions, as you
19 time on January 28th, 2021, right? 19 stated earlier, were on the 28th at 8:03.
20 A. The PCO restrictions. 20 Q. Okay. Why then in your
21 Q. All right. And you are not 21 regression analysis did you use a dummy
22 aware of there being any restrictions at 22 variable for January 27th, 2021 when that
23 issue in this case that were imposed before 23 day was unaffected by any Robinhood PCO
24 the PCO restrictions, are you? 24 restrictions?
25 A. Well, okay, now I would want to 25 A. Again, my understanding was
33 (Pages 126 - 129)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 35 of
190
Page 130 Page 132
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 those stock price movements were the 2 Q. All right. And isn't that why
3 mitigating factor in Robinhood's actions. 3 you use a dummy variable for January 27th,
4 That having been said, if I left the dummy 4 2021 here?
5 variables out, I knew it would cause such 5 A. I have stated why I used the
6 consternation. My answers don't -- my 6 dummy variable. I'm sorry, January 27th,
7 answers don't change if I don't dummy out 7 2021?
8 the 27th. 8 Q. Yes.
9 Q. What do you mean by the 9 A. Right, yeah, I mean, I have
10 mitigating factor? I'm not following you. 10 stated why I have done that, and I have
11 A. Well, maybe mitigating is the 11 also stated if I hadn't done it, my results
12 wrong term. It was -- it was the price 12 wouldn't have changed.
13 changes on the 27th that Robinhood's 13 Q. And did you do it because of
14 actions were a reaction to. So in the same 14 the presence of a non-model explained event
15 way that if I was looking at a corrective 15 that may be expected to shift the model's
16 disclosure in a case I would often dummy 16 outcome?
17 that -- I wouldn't often -- I would dummy 17 A. No, I did it because of what I
18 that out, because -- I mean, yeah, that's 18 said before.
19 it. 19 Q. Okay. In your report on page
20 Q. I see. So your understanding 20 27 of your opening report in paragraph 71,
21 is that Robinhood's PCO actions were a 21 you cite to two academic articles for your
22 reaction to the stock price movements on 22 use of --
23 January 27th? 23 A. I'm sorry, what page are we on
24 A. Among other things, yes. 24 now?
25 Q. Okay. And among what other 25 Q. Page 27, same page we were on
Page 131 Page 133
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 things? 2 before, of your opening report.
3 A. Well, I mean, they couldn't 3 A. Of my opening report. Sorry,
4 essentially meet their margin calls, so 4 we are going back and forth. Okay.
5 they needed to put those restrictions in 5 Q. Do you see that in note 71 you
6 place. And, I mean, margin call is a 6 cite to two academic articles to support
7 euphemism, but I can give you the exact 7 your use of dummy variables?
8 term. But for you and I, it would be the 8 A. I do.
9 equivalent of a margin call. 9 Q. And the first article is
10 Q. All right. Are you referring 10 entitled Event Studies with a Contaminated
11 to the collateral call from the NSCC? 11 Estimation Period, and it is authored by
12 A. Correct. 12 Nihat Aktas and others. Do you see that?
13 Q. Okay. Do you agree with me 13 A. I do.
14 that a dummy variable is used to indicate 14 Q. All right. And it's your
15 the absence or presence of some non-model 15 understanding, isn't it, that what these
16 explained event that may be expected to 16 authors are discussing is the use of
17 shift the model's outcome? 17 contaminating events in the estimation
18 MR. ROSEN: Objection. Could 18 window?
19 you reread the question? 19 A. I'm happy to look at -- I mean,
20 (The record was read.) 20 if you want me to go based on the title,
21 MR. ROSEN: Objection. But you 21 that seems accurate. But I would want to
22 can answer it if you understand the 22 refresh my memory to know exactly what they
23 question. 23 did here.
24 A. It could. I mean, people use 24 Q. All right.
25 dummy variables for all sorts of reasons. 25 A. Do you have -- do you have
34 (Pages 130 - 133)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 36 of
190
Page 134 Page 136
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 their paper? 2 Again, I'm more than happy to look at that
3 Q. Yes, I do. And isn't it your 3 article and refresh my memory.
4 understanding that January 27th, 2021 was a 4 Is now a good time for lunch?
5 contaminating event during the estimation 5 Q. Sure. Why don't we take a
6 period in the sense that Nihat Aktas and 6 break.
7 co-authors used that term? 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will
8 A. Well, now I would need to look 8 end media unit three. We are going off
9 at the paper to answer that question. 9 the record at 12:56.
10 Q. Well, let me ask it more 10 (Luncheon recess: 12:56 p.m.)
11 generally. 11
12 It's your understanding, isn't 12
13 it, that January 27th, 2021 was a 13
14 contaminating event during your estimation 14
15 period? 15
16 A. No, that's not necessarily my 16
17 understanding. 17
18 Q. I'm not sure what you meant by 18
19 "necessarily" there. Is it your belief 19
20 that it was a contaminating event or not? 20
21 A. Well, what do you mean by 21
22 "contaminating event"? Do you mean 22
23 contaminating event in the context of what 23
24 they are talking about? Because if that's 24
25 what you are talking about I would like to 25
Page 135 Page 137
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 see their definition of contaminating 2 AFTERNOON SESSION
3 event. 3 1:38 p.m.
4 Q. All right. So I'm using the 4 A D A M W E R N E R, Ph.D., resumed.
5 term "contaminating event" to mean a 5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back
6 firm-specific event that will most likely 6 on the record at 1:38. This will begin
7 affect the estimation of the 7 media unit four.
8 return-generating process. Okay? 8 CONTINUED EXAMINATION
9 A. Okay. All right, can you 9 BY MR. RYAN:
10 reread that definition for me? 10 Q. Good afternoon, Dr. Werner.
11 (The record was read.) 11 A. Good afternoon.
12 A. Okay. 12 Q. Could you turn, please, in your
13 Q. All right. With that 13 opening report, Deposition Exhibit 281, to
14 definition in mind, do you agree that 14 page 11, paragraph 23 on the top of the
15 January 27th, 2021 was a contaminating 15 page.
16 event in your estimation window? 16 A. Page 11, paragraph 23, okay.
17 A. Based on my understanding of 17 Q. And do you see you wrote there
18 that statement, I don't know if that would 18 that "While financial economists rely on
19 fall under the rubric or the umbrella of a 19 event study analysis as direct evidence
20 contaminating event as stated by you. 20 demonstrating security price response to
21 Q. Okay. But you did decide to 21 new information, they accept other factors
22 cite this Aktas article as support for your 22 as tending to support the existence of an
23 use of the dummy variable described in 23 efficient market for a security"?
24 paragraph 63 of your opening report, right? 24 Do you see that?
25 A. I did cite to that article. 25 A. I do.
35 (Pages 134 - 137)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 37 of
190
Page 138 Page 140
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. And Cammer factor five often 2 Q. And you agree that these other
3 uses event study analysis, right? 3 Cammer and Krogman factors are ones that
4 A. That is correct. 4 tend to support the existence of an
5 Q. And do you agree that Cammer 5 efficient market for a security, right?
6 factor five is a direct test of market 6 A. Well, I mean, so it's
7 efficiency? 7 ultimately up to the court to decide
8 A. I think in academia that is 8 whether or not a stock is efficient, right?
9 correct. I think for legal matters, and, 9 I'm just asked to do these analyses, and so
10 again, I'm not a lawyer, you look at all 10 that's what I present.
11 Cammer and Krogman factors. You know, I 11 So, you know, I think it's true
12 have seen cases, I can't think of any off 12 to say that academics, you know, would
13 the top of my head, but I have certainly 13 tend, as you used the word, term, "direct
14 seen cases in the Second Circuit where, you 14 evidence," would say -- then say is direct
15 know, they just ignore factor five and they 15 evidence.
16 determine efficiency based on the other 16 You know, have I seen people
17 Cammer and Krogman factors. 17 talk about market efficiency in terms of
18 Q. Do you agree that in academia 18 let's say firm size or analyst coverage?
19 Cammer factor five, the event study 19 You know, so, for example, if I look here
20 analysis, is the only direct test of market 20 at footnote 35 of my report, or 34, this is
21 efficiency? 21 on page 11, this paper by Brad Barber, et
22 A. Let me think about that. 22 al, The Fraud on the Market Theory and the
23 MR. ROSEN: Are you trying to 23 Indicators of a Common Stock's Efficiency.
24 turn that off the screen? 24 So, you know, economists have looked at
25 MR. DeNUNZIO: Correct. 25 other factors as well.
Page 139 Page 141
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 MR. ROSEN: It will probably 2 Q. All right. But you would
3 turn off itself. 3 agree, wouldn't you, that financial
4 A. Why don't we just wait for 4 economists accept the other Cammer and
5 that. Could you reread the question? 5 Krogman factors as tending to support the
6 Q. Yes. Do you agree in academia, 6 existence of an efficient market but not as
7 Cammer factor five, the event study 7 often direct evidence as the way Cammer
8 analysis, is the only direct test of market 8 factor five does?
9 efficiency? 9 A. I'm sorry, are you reading
10 A. So it is certainly a test -- a 10 somewhere from my reports?
11 direct test of market efficiency. I don't 11 Q. Yes, from the first sentence of
12 know if it is the only test of market 12 paragraph 23.
13 efficiency. 13 You would agree, wouldn't you,
14 Q. All right. So you wrote here 14 that financial economists accept the other
15 in paragraph 23 of your opening report that 15 Cammer and Krogman factors as tending to
16 financial economists would rely on event 16 support the existence of an efficient
17 study analysis as direct evidence, right? 17 market but not as direct evidence the way
18 A. That is correct. 18 Cammer factor five does?
19 Q. And then you wrote that 19 A. I think for the most part
20 financial economists accept other factors, 20 that's an accurate statement. But, again,
21 not that they rely on them, right? 21 there are other things beyond the Cammer
22 A. In terms of the Cammer and 22 and Krogman factors that academicians look
23 Krogman factors? 23 at when they discuss market efficiency.
24 Q. Yes, sir. 24 But within the context of securities class
25 A. That is correct. 25 action, I think that to the extent that
36 (Pages 138 - 141)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 38 of
190
Page 142 Page 144
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 academics look at this stuff, I think 2 stock's price reacted differently on days
3 that's probably accurate. 3 in which new information was revealed
4 Q. Do you agree as a financial 4 ('news days') versus all other days
5 economist that Cammer factor five is more 5 ('non-news days')"?
6 informative than the other factors in 6 Do you see that?
7 determining market efficiency? 7 A. I do see that, yes.
8 A. So as a financial economist and 8 Q. All right. And is this
9 not as a court, again, I'm not a lawyer, I 9 sometimes described as a news/no news test?
10 certainly find it informative. You know, 10 A. Yes.
11 having done this now for 20, 25 years, I 11 Q. All right. What is a news/no
12 don't know if I would adopt the other 12 news test?
13 Cammer and Krogman factors if I was trying 13 A. You know, basically it's run an
14 to show market efficiency. That's not 14 event study, you define, come up with a
15 really anything I thought about. 15 definition of what news is, you look at the
16 Q. All right. Well, let me ask 16 frequency under which there are
17 you to think about it now. Do you agree 17 statistically significant changes on news
18 sitting here as a financial economist that 18 days versus non-news days, and then usually
19 Cammer factor five is more informative than 19 you perform some kind of statistical
20 the other factors in determining market 20 analysis. Often I will use a Fisher's
21 efficiency? 21 exact test to determine whether these
22 A. Well, again, so it's not 22 reactions -- or the frequency of reactions
23 ultimately up to me to make that decision. 23 to news is significantly different between
24 It is up to the court to decide which 24 the two subsamples, the subsamples being
25 factors are important and not important. 25 defined as what is the news days and the
Page 143 Page 145
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 So I'm just presenting the information. It 2 non-news days.
3 is up to them to determine, you know, 3 Q. All right. So one part of this
4 interpret. 4 test is to determine how the stock price
5 Q. Absolutely it is. And so I'm 5 reacts on the so-called news days, right?
6 merely asking for your opinions as a 6 A. What do you mean, "determine"?
7 financial economist, which is all I can do, 7 Determine, I mean, you look -- you
8 since a financial economist is what you 8 calculate the abnormal return and then you
9 are, not a court, and all I can do is ask 9 look at the abnormal returns relative to
10 you questions in that role. 10 the news days versus the non-news days.
11 So my question is do you agree 11 Q. Okay. So one part of this test
12 sitting here as a financial economist that 12 is to observe how the stock price reacts on
13 Cammer factor five is more informative than 13 the so-called news days, right?
14 the other factors in determining market 14 A. What you have defined as news
15 efficiency? 15 days, yes, that is correct.
16 A. As a financial economist, I 16 Q. Okay. Why is it important to
17 think that's an accurate statement. 17 then compare that result, namely the result
18 Q. Now, let me ask you about 18 of how the stock price reacted to news on
19 paragraph 67 of your opening report, this 19 the so-called news days, to the second set
20 is on page 28. 20 of results, which is how the stock price
21 A. 67, okay. 21 reacted on the so-called non-news days?
22 Q. And do you see about halfway 22 A. Why is it important?
23 through there is a sentence there where you 23 Q. Yes, sir.
24 wrote "In order to test this proposition, 24 A. Because you are trying to
25 one must first examine whether or not a 25 determine whether or not the stock price
37 (Pages 142 - 145)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 39 of
190
Page 146 Page 148
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 reacts differently to news days as opposed 2 A. Nothing. I mean, it is going
3 to non-news days, that's why it is 3 to depend upon -- let me give you an
4 important. 4 example. And I don't mean to say "nothing"
5 Q. And if the stock price does 5 like I'm being flippant. But let's say
6 react statistically significantly 6 that I'm looking at earnings announcements.
7 differently on the news days from how it 7 So I'm looking at a one-year period, there
8 reacts on the non-news days, what can you 8 is four earnings announcements, each
9 conclude from that, if anything? 9 earnings announcement meets expectations.
10 A. I'm sorry, so let me -- so if 10 I have defined news days as earnings days.
11 the stock -- could you reread the question, 11 So I observe no statistically
12 please? 12 significant stock price reaction on those
13 Q. Sure. 13 four days because the earnings meet
14 A. I'm not sure it is completely 14 expectations. Now, the news/no news test
15 accurate, that's why I would like it 15 is going to fail. I'm not going to see a
16 reread. 16 statistically significant difference
17 (The record was read.) 17 between those two subsamples, but it
18 A. I mean, one of the conclusions 18 doesn't then render that stock inefficient.
19 people draw is that the stock price reacts 19 Q. All right. But it is an
20 to news. 20 absence of evidence to support efficiency,
21 Q. And that would tend to support 21 right, on that test?
22 a finding of market efficiency? 22 A. Is it an absence of evidence to
23 A. Correct. 23 support -- I don't understand.
24 Q. All right. And so then if the 24 Q. All right. So you earlier
25 stock price does not react statistically 25 testified that if you find a statistically
Page 147 Page 149
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 significantly differently on the news days 2 significant difference and the stock price
3 from how it reacts on the non-news days, 3 is reacting more on the news days than on
4 what can you conclude from that, if 4 the non-news days, you testified that was
5 anything? 5 evidence in support of market efficiency,
6 A. Well, it could depend upon how 6 right?
7 you define news days. 7 A. Well, I don't think -- I don't
8 Q. Sure. So news days are defined 8 think I said anything about the stock
9 however the person carrying out this 9 reacting more on news days versus non-news
10 analysis has defined the news days, right? 10 days.
11 A. Okay. 11 Q. All right. Let me ask the
12 Q. And you were able to answer for 12 question differently then.
13 me what one could conclude if there was a 13 You testified before that if
14 statistically significant difference in how 14 the stock price reacts differently to a
15 the stock price reacted on what were the 15 statistically significant extent on news
16 news days as defined by the person carrying 16 days as compared to non-news days, that in
17 out the study as compared to the non-news 17 your opinion would be evidence in support
18 days, right? 18 of market efficiency, right?
19 A. Yes. 19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. So my question now is about the 20 Q. And so if the finding is the
21 inverse of that. If the stock price does 21 opposite, that there is no statistically
22 not react statistically significantly 22 significant difference in how the stock
23 differently on the news days from how it 23 price reacts on the news days as compared
24 reacts on the non-news days, what can you 24 to the non-news days, wouldn't you agree
25 conclude from that, if anything? 25 with me that that is a lack of evidence on
38 (Pages 146 - 149)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 40 of
190
Page 150 Page 152
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 that test in support of market efficiency? 2 movements on each one of those days, would
3 A. And I repeat, no. 3 that then indicate to me that the stock was
4 Q. You don't agree with me that is 4 not traded in an efficient market? I don't
5 a lack of evidence in support of market 5 know. I would have to think about it.
6 efficiency? 6 But I think in terms of what
7 A. No, because, again, look at the 7 you're asking, I'm comfortable with the
8 example I gave you, right? The stock price 8 first assertion you are making. It is not
9 didn't react on news that was expected. To 9 clear to me that the corollary, by taking
10 me that means that that's an indicator the 10 the other side of the coin, is necessarily
11 stock is efficient. Just because it fails 11 correct.
12 the news/no news test, under that guise, 12 Q. Okay. So it's your testimony
13 under my definition of what news is in that 13 that if somebody runs a properly designed
14 case, doesn't then render the stock -- it 14 news/no news study --
15 is not necessarily an indicator that the 15 A. Okay, so let me stop you,
16 stock is traded in an inefficient market. 16 because now you have said a properly run
17 Q. All right. But you have 17 news/no news study. So that means that the
18 answered a different question from what I 18 news is defined properly.
19 asked. I never asked you whether it is 19 Q. Uh-huh.
20 evidence of inefficiency. What I asked 20 A. I just want to make that
21 you, sir, was don't you agree with me that 21 clarifying statement.
22 it is a lack of evidence in support of 22 Q. Okay.
23 market efficiency? 23 A. Okay, go ahead.
24 A. And I said no. 24 Q. So is it your opinion, then,
25 Q. All right. And so it is your 25 that if somebody runs a properly designed
Page 151 Page 153
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 testimony, then, that if you run this test 2 news/no news study and there is no
3 of news/no news test, if it has a certain 3 statistically significant difference in the
4 result, that would be evidence in support 4 stock price reaction on the news days as
5 of market efficiency, and if it has a 5 compared to the non-news days, that that
6 different result, it is just no evidence 6 shows nothing?
7 showing anything either way at all? 7 A. I would have to know more about
8 A. No. 8 the test to answer that question, beyond
9 Q. Is that your testimony? 9 properly run.
10 A. No. Again, it would depend 10 Q. Okay. Now, looking at
11 upon what you defined as news. I mean, 11 paragraph 68 of your opening report, am I
12 again, I mean, I don't -- I can't -- off 12 right that you designed your news/no news
13 the top of my head I can't give you another 13 test to isolate a test sample of news days
14 example other than the earnings example, 14 that would be more likely than not to
15 but it is a perfectly valid one. 15 contain valuation relevant information?
16 The earnings come in as they 16 A. Are you reading from somewhere
17 are expected to come in, I mean, I guess I 17 in my report?
18 would be disturbed if there -- I don't know 18 Q. Yes, sir.
19 if you would call it a false positive, but 19 A. Okay. So where are we reading
20 if earnings met expectations on each one of 20 from?
21 those days, and that was the only 21 Q. Three lines down from the
22 information that came out, they met 22 bottom of the page on page 28.
23 expectations, there was no other news that 23 Let me ask the question this
24 we are talking about in a vacuum, if there 24 way: Do you agree with me that the right
25 were statistically significant stock price 25 way to design a news/no news test is, and
39 (Pages 150 - 153)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 41 of
190
Page 154 Page 156
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 I'm now quoting from your words, "to 2 that begins three lines from the bottom of
3 isolate a test sample of news days that 3 page 28 of your opening report. You wrote
4 would be more likely than not to contain 4 "In order to isolate a test sample of news
5 valuation relevant information"? 5 days that would be more likely than not to
6 A. Right. So that's certainly one 6 contain valuation relevant information, I
7 example. 7 focused on the frequency of news releases
8 Q. Did you attempt in your work on 8 on each day during the relevant period for
9 this case to design a news/no news test to 9 each Affected Company," right?
10 isolate a test sample of news days that 10 A. That's what I said, yes.
11 would be more likely than not to contain 11 Q. You didn't write anything about
12 valuation relevant information? 12 finding news that was informationally
13 A. Well, to the extent I was 13 relevant as opposed to valuation relevant,
14 looking at informational efficiency, that's 14 did you?
15 what I focused on. Does that mean that I 15 A. No. But I'm giving an overview
16 looked at events that contained value 16 of a news/no news analysis, so, I mean, I
17 relevant information? It is certainly 17 guess I should have said "for example."
18 possible. I mean, I believe I did. But 18 Q. Okay. So is it your testimony
19 that might not be the entire set of news 19 now that the news/no news test that you
20 days that I looked at. 20 actually ran in this case did not isolate a
21 Q. All right. Let me -- I got 21 test sample of news days that would be more
22 confused there, so let me try to ask the 22 likely than not to contain valuation
23 question this way: In performing the 23 relevant information?
24 news/no news test that is set forth in your 24 A. The news, I mean, I have
25 opening report in this case, was it your 25 defined the news days as they are defined
Page 155 Page 157
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 objective to isolate a test sample of news 2 in my report.
3 days that would be more likely than not to 3 Q. And did your news/no news test
4 contain valuation relevant information? 4 isolate a test sample of news days that
5 A. That was an example of one of 5 would be more likely than not to contain
6 the things that I attempted to look at. 6 valuation relevant information?
7 Q. Sir, I don't know what you mean 7 A. Oh, is it more likely to
8 when you say it was an example. 8 contain valuation relevant information?
9 A. Well, so, again, I mean, we are 9 That is certainly a possibility.
10 making the distinctions between value 10 Q. Well, I'm asking you as the
11 relevant and informationally relevant. So 11 person who performed the news/no news test
12 yes, this is certainly one of the things 12 and who wrote these words to tell me
13 that I would have looked at. But I also 13 whether in fact the test that you ran
14 look at things that are informationally 14 isolated a test sample of news days that
15 relevant. 15 would be more likely than not to contain
16 Q. What you wrote in your report 16 valuation relevant information.
17 was "In order to isolate a test sample of 17 A. And I will give you the same
18 news days that would be more likely than 18 answer.
19 not to contain valuation relevant 19 Q. Which is that it is possible,
20 information, I focused on the frequency of 20 it is certainly a possibility?
21 news releases on each day during the 21 A. Well, I mean --
22 relevant period for each Affected Company," 22 Q. That's your answer?
23 right? 23 A. Yeah, that's my answer.
24 A. I'm sorry, where are you at? 24 Q. Okay. In running a news/no
25 Q. I'm on the last full sentence 25 news test, is it appropriate -- is it
40 (Pages 154 - 157)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 42 of
190
Page 158 Page 160
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 appropriate to use a specific and objective 2 definitely want to do that. I'm not saying
3 criterion to identify news events that 3 then I wouldn't want to do that if I was
4 contain new valuation relevant information 4 looking at informational efficiency.
5 such that one would, ex ante, reasonably 5 Q. That's why I asked you the
6 expect a security price reaction? 6 follow-up question. So is it your
7 A. So where are you looking at? 7 testimony that you would not want to do
8 Q. I'm not reading from your 8 that if you are testing for informational
9 report, I'm asking you a question, sir. In 9 efficiency?
10 running a news/no news test, in your 10 A. Right, and I'm saying that, I
11 opinion, is it appropriate to use a 11 mean, I don't know how to answer the
12 specific and objective criterion to 12 question other than what I have given you
13 identify news events that contain new 13 as an answer.
14 valuation relevant information such that 14 Q. Let me try to rephrase my
15 one would, ex ante, reasonably expect a 15 question this way: If you are running a
16 security price reaction? 16 news/no news test for Cammer factor five
17 A. I certainly agree with the 17 purposes in order to test informational
18 statement that you would want to use an 18 efficiency, do you believe it would be
19 objective criterion. Are you reading from 19 appropriate to use a specific and objective
20 the Ferrillo, Tabak and Dunbar paper? 20 criterion to identify news events that
21 Q. I am not. I will get to that 21 contain new valuation relevant information
22 paper shortly. 22 such that one would, ex ante, reasonably
23 A. So where -- I mean, do you want 23 expect a security price reaction?
24 to -- well, you are asking the questions. 24 A. Well, so now you are saying
25 Q. I'm asking you a question. As 25 informationally efficient. If I was
Page 159 Page 161
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 somebody -- so you -- let me ask this 2 looking at informational efficiency, I
3 foundational question: As a testifying 3 might -- I might, and there is no -- there
4 expert, you have run news/no news tests in 4 is not necessarily a problem looking at
5 application of Cammer factor five on 5 value relevant information, but if I'm just
6 multiple occasions, right? 6 talking about the definition of
7 A. That is correct. 7 informational efficiency, I might, and,
8 Q. All right. And so do you 8 again, I'm not -- I don't have these words
9 believe that in running such a news/no news 9 in front of me, so this is off the top of
10 test for Cammer factor five purposes it is 10 my head, I might want to exclude the term
11 appropriate to identify news events that 11 "value" from that statement.
12 contain new valuation relevant information 12 Q. Were you an expert in a case
13 such that one would, ex ante, reasonably 13 called Omega Healthcare Investors?
14 expect a security price reaction? 14 A. I was.
15 A. If I'm testing for fundamental 15 Q. Do you recall that in that case
16 efficiency, yeah, I definitely want to do 16 you ran a news/no news test using the
17 that. 17 criteria for a news day that I just read
18 Q. All right. Is it your 18 out?
19 testimony you would not want to do that if 19 A. No, I don't recall.
20 you are testing for informational 20 Q. Okay. Why don't I show you
21 efficiency? 21 your report.
22 A. No. You are now making -- you 22 (Defendant's Exhibit 284 marked
23 are making a distinction between a type 1 23 for identification.)
24 and type 2 error. I'm saying that if I was 24 Q. All right, so I will hand you
25 looking for fundamental efficiency, I would 25 in just a moment here what we have marked
41 (Pages 158 - 161)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 43 of
190
Page 162 Page 164
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 as Exhibit 284. It is a document entitled 2 Q. All right. And you believed
3 Declaration of Dr. Adam Werner, March 16th, 3 that that was an appropriate way to conduct
4 2022, in a case called In Re Omega 4 the news/no news case in the Omega case?
5 Healthcare Investors, Inc. Securities 5 A. In this specific case, given
6 Litigation in the Southern District of New 6 the facts and circumstances surrounding
7 York. 7 this case, yes, that was appropriate.
8 A. Thank you. 8 Q. All right. In this case were
9 Q. And is this your signature on 9 you testing for informational or
10 page 41 of Exhibit 284, sir? 10 fundamental efficiency?
11 A. Page 41? 11 A. Well, I don't -- I'm not sure I
12 Q. Yes, sir. 12 distinguished. I don't know. That's an
13 A. Yes. 13 interesting question. I have to think
14 Q. And is this an expert report 14 about it. But the facts and circumstances
15 you submitted just about one year ago? 15 of this case are much different than the
16 A. Yeah, that looks about right. 16 facts and circumstances of the case we're
17 Q. All right. So if you could 17 dealing with now.
18 turn, please, with me to paragraph 77. 18 Q. Okay. But let me go on my
19 A. 77, okay. Before we do that, 19 question though. So am I right that you
20 let me just refresh my memory. I want to 20 are uncertain whether you were testing for
21 make sure -- right, okay. I have done 21 informational or fundamental efficiency in
22 that. What page do you want me to look at? 22 this Omega case?
23 Q. Page 30. 23 A. Well, I mean, to the extent
24 A. Page 30. 24 that we are talking about a REIT, basically
25 Q. So let me just ask you first to 25 I think I'm testing for both. That's why
Page 163 Page 165
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 read paragraphs 75 and 76 to yourself. 2 I'm saying it is fact and case specific.
3 A. Oh, page 30? 3 So -- well, go ahead, why don't you ask the
4 Q. Yeah, page 30. 4 questions. I don't want to explain to you
5 A. I'm sorry. Okay. 5 what a REIT is and how it trades.
6 Q. So if you just read, please, to 6 Q. Do you then apply different
7 yourself paragraphs 75 to 76, which are the 7 tests, either fundamental or informational
8 beginning two paragraphs of this section. 8 efficiency, as an expert on class
9 (Witness perusing document.) 9 certification in different cases?
10 A. Okay, so it was coming from one 10 A. No, not necessarily. But I
11 of my reports. All right, I have read it. 11 think my opinions have evolved over time.
12 Q. This is a case where you 12 My understanding of what courts find needed
13 applied a news/no news test and then 13 with regards to market efficiency, and it
14 conducted a Fisher's exact test to compare 14 is now clear to me that what they demand is
15 the price reaction on the news days to that 15 informational efficiency, or I should say
16 on the non-news days, right? 16 that's my opinion. Those are the tests I
17 A. I did. 17 run.
18 Q. And in defining what 18 But it is not inconsistent to
19 constitutes a news days for the Omega case, 19 say that this thing is fundamentally
20 you wrote "Using a specific and objective 20 efficient and informationally efficient,
21 criterion to identify news events that 21 because if we are talking about a REIT
22 contain new valuation relevant information 22 where the news days, if I looked at
23 such that one would, ex ante, reasonably 23 frequency of news days and ran the same
24 expect a security price reaction," right? 24 test I did, I'm sure they are going to be
25 A. Correct. 25 highly correlated with the days I have
42 (Pages 162 - 165)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 44 of
190
Page 166 Page 168
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 identified here as earnings days. 2 academic work, discussion with colleagues.
3 Q. All right. So I just have to 3 What else? Off the top of my head, that
4 follow up on this. You said just now that 4 would certainly fall under that umbrella.
5 it was your opinion that courts demand only 5 Q. And this reading of academic
6 informational efficiency. That's not your 6 work, again, would be legal academic work
7 expert opinion as an expert in finance or 7 in which you're not an expert, right?
8 economics, is it? That is simply your 8 A. No.
9 understanding of what the lawyers have told 9 Q. All right. Is there any
10 you and what you have read about the law as 10 article in a finance or economics journal
11 somebody who has no legal training; isn't 11 published within the past year that you can
12 that right? 12 point me to that has changed your
13 A. That is correct. 13 understanding of what the law requires in
14 Q. Okay. Now, this report was 14 terms of market efficiency in class
15 submitted one year ago, in March of 2022, 15 actions?
16 right? 16 A. All right, so let's cut up your
17 A. Correct. 17 question there. First of all, the article
18 Q. Okay. Has your understanding 18 doesn't have to be written in the last
19 of the law changed within the past year? 19 year, right? I don't have a universal
20 A. Yes. But, again, because of 20 knowledge of every finance article ever
21 this particular -- again, the facts and 21 written. Is that fair?
22 circumstances surrounding this case were 22 Q. You testified, sir, that your
23 the basis for the tests I performed here. 23 understanding changed over the past year
24 Q. What happened in the past year 24 and you have now said a number of things on
25 to change your understanding of what the 25 the basis of which it changed. So I'm
Page 167 Page 169
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 law requires in terms of market efficiency 2 following up.
3 in class actions? 3 A. Okay.
4 A. I mean, among other things, 4 Q. And you said that it changed
5 more thorough reading of Halliburton II. 5 based on a rereading of Halliburton II,
6 But, again, this isn't like those stocks in 6 talking to colleagues, and some academic
7 this case. This is a completely different 7 work. And I'm asking you, you are not
8 stock. The circumstances of this case are 8 saying, are you, that whatever the academic
9 completely different. This is not a market 9 work is that you have read in the past year
10 manipulation case. And so anything that I 10 that has changed your understanding of what
11 have done here is not necessarily 11 the law requires for market efficiency in
12 appropriate for this particular case. 12 securities class actions was published in
13 Q. Okay. So I just want to make 13 an economics or finance journal, are you?
14 sure I have a complete answer. I asked 14 A. So could you go back? Because
15 what happened in the past that changed your 15 I think your original question, you said
16 understanding of what the law requires in 16 written in the last year, and this was my
17 terms of market efficiency in class 17 cause for confusion. If you are asking if
18 actions, and you said, among other things, 18 I have read academic papers outside of the
19 a more thorough reading of Halliburton II. 19 realm of securities litigation that talks
20 Is there anything else that has 20 about informational efficiency in the last
21 happened in the past that would change your 21 year, absolutely.
22 understanding of what the law requires in 22 Q. All right. And what articles
23 terms of market efficiency in class 23 are those?
24 actions? 24 A. I don't recall off the top of
25 A. Well, yeah, sure, reading of 25 my head.
43 (Pages 166 - 169)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 45 of
190
Page 170 Page 172
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. You are not able to name a 2 A. I don't know how to answer that
3 single one as you sit here today? 3 question. Stricter to the extent that
4 A. Well, I think I referenced some 4 fundamental efficiency requires a specific
5 of them here. I mean, I hadn't read -- let 5 definition? I mean, at this point you have
6 me find the reference to Mr. Fischel's 6 read the definition numerous times prior to
7 paper, because I hadn't read that prior to 7 this morning, so I don't feel like I need
8 this year. This is his '89 Cornell Law 8 to repeat them. Is that a stricter
9 Review article. Well, we will just go with 9 definition than the definition of
10 that. That would be one such example. 10 informational efficiency? I think that's
11 Q. Okay. Are there any others 11 correct. But I don't know, if you are
12 that you can think of that have changed 12 asking me are the tests stricter, I'm not
13 your understanding of the law over the past 13 sure.
14 year other than Mr. Fischel's 1989 Cornell 14 Q. All right. So in other cases
15 Law Review article? 15 in which you are a class certification
16 A. Off the top of my head, no. 16 expert in recent years, you have applied
17 But as I said, I have read numerous 17 the selection criteria in paragraph 77 of
18 articles, it is just I don't recall what 18 the Omega report for your news/no news
19 they were. In the same way that I recently 19 test, right?
20 read two articles that look at how demand 20 A. I'm sorry, I have used the
21 changes the price of an underlying stock, I 21 selection criteria? You said page 77?
22 read those extremely recently, but I don't 22 Q. No, I said paragraph 77, so
23 remember the names of the authors or the 23 that was on page 30 as I recall.
24 names of the papers. That's not certainly 24 A. Okay.
25 anything that I focus on. 25 Q. And in this Omega case, for
Page 171 Page 173
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. All right. Now, you have used 2 your news/no news test, you identified news
3 this formulation that we just looked at in 3 events that contain new valuation relevant
4 paragraph 77 of the Omega report from March 4 information such that one would, ex ante,
5 of 2022, you have used that formulation in 5 reasonably expect a security price
6 expert reports that are outside the context 6 reaction, right?
7 of REITs, haven't you? 7 A. Well, to the extent that I was
8 A. What do you mean, formulation? 8 talking about earnings announcements, yes,
9 Q. That group of words put 9 that earnings announcements usually contain
10 together as a sentence, that sentence 10 value relevant information.
11 appears in expert reports that you have 11 Q. And you applied this test I
12 submitted recently that do not involve 12 have just read out from paragraph 77 of the
13 REITs; isn't that right? 13 Omega report in other recent expert reports
14 A. Oh, it is certainly possible. 14 you have submitted in securities class
15 Q. Okay. 15 actions on class certification, right?
16 A. I mean, I don't recall off the 16 A. Well, I don't -- I'm not sure
17 top of my head, but I would not be 17 if I used that exact wording in my more
18 surprised if that were in fact the case. 18 recent reports. So maybe you want to -- so
19 Q. Okay. And if I'm following you 19 the test I used or my definition of news
20 right, you believe that that standard for 20 that I used in this case, every market
21 identifying news days that is set forth in 21 efficiency report I have done since then
22 paragraph 77 of the Omega report is one 22 has utilized the specific news/no news test
23 that goes to fundamental efficiency and is 23 that I used in this matter.
24 therefore stricter than the one you have 24 Q. You can't point to a single
25 applied here; is that right? 25 report that you submitted before you
44 (Pages 170 - 173)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 46 of
190
Page 174 Page 176
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 submitted your opening report in this 2 on class certification where for the
3 matter where you applied this version of 3 news/no news test you applied earnings
4 the news/no news test; isn't that right, 4 announcements; is that right?
5 sir? 5 A. I mean, I don't know the
6 A. I believe that's correct. But, 6 frequency, the number, but yes, I have
7 I mean, maybe you will understand it better 7 certainly done that in the past. And, I
8 if I explain the evolution. 8 mean -- I will just leave it at that.
9 So when we had our discussion 9 Q. And you describe that criterion
10 earlier about earnings days, right, and so 10 for selection of news days just now as
11 it could be the case that, you know, each 11 extremely restrictive; is that right?
12 earnings day met expectations and there was 12 A. Well, if I said "extremely," I
13 no stock price movement. So what I was 13 misspoke. It is restrictive to the extent
14 doing in this case was trying to find a 14 that, again, if earnings are meeting
15 consistent methodology that would work 15 expectations, the fact that the news/no
16 across all companies. So, you know, 16 news test doesn't pass doesn't then
17 earnings announcements are extremely 17 render -- I can't -- it doesn't necessarily
18 restrictive. I have stopped using that at 18 mean that I should arrive at the conclusion
19 least at this point. 19 that the stock trades in an inefficient
20 In terms of looking at 8-Ks or 20 market, or, put another way, the stock does
21 news releases, in the NEO case I discovered 21 not trade in an efficient market.
22 that when I looked at the underlying 22 Q. You continue to believe that
23 information, there were discussions of 23 the use of earnings announcements as the
24 things like moving stock, like a CEO moving 24 selection criterion for news days in
25 from his personal account to a trust. So 25 running a news/no news test for Cammer
Page 175 Page 177
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 it became obvious to me that using 8-Ks or 2 factor five on class certification is an
3 press releases could be over or 3 appropriate methodology, right?
4 under-inclusive with regards to news that 4 A. I'm sorry, could you read -- at
5 investors might find material. And then 5 some point I believed it was an appropriate
6 based on court acceptance of these tests 6 methodology.
7 that I ran in this case as well -- as well 7 Q. Sure. So let's start with
8 as reports that I've seen by other experts, 8 that. At the time you submitted the
9 it seemed to me that this was the most 9 reports in which you used earnings
10 objective way to measure news. 10 announcements as the selection criteria for
11 And, by way of example, you 11 news days, you believed that was an
12 know, you have two experts who arrive at 12 appropriate methodology, right?
13 different conclusions with regards to which 13 A. I assume that that was one
14 days contained material information over a 14 possible definition of news that one could
15 five or six-day period. So it seemed to me 15 use.
16 that I wanted to be as objective as 16 Q. And as you sit here today on
17 possible, and so I have adopted this 17 May 3rd, 2023, do you continue to believe
18 current methodology on this report and 18 that the use of earnings announcements as
19 every report since. 19 the selection criterion for news days in
20 Q. All right. So let me follow 20 running a news/no news test for Cammer
21 up, because there was a lot of information 21 factor five on class certification is an
22 in the answer. 22 appropriate methodology?
23 So if I understood you right, 23 A. Again, it would depend upon the
24 there are a number of expert reports that 24 facts and circumstances of the case. So,
25 you previously submitted in other matters 25 you know, for instance, you know, I have
45 (Pages 174 - 177)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 47 of
190
Page 178 Page 180
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 done a lot of efficiency studies on drug 2 three pages, do you see with me --
3 manufacturers. 3 A. The last three pages?
4 Q. I have noticed that. 4 Q. Yes. Do you see a set of three
5 A. Drug manufacturers don't -- it 5 charts that are headed Exhibit 1A, Exhibit
6 is not necessarily earnings releases that 6 1B and Exhibit 1C?
7 tend to move the stock price of the drug 7 A. I do.
8 manufacturers, oftentimes it has to deal 8 Q. All right. And do you see that
9 with the efficacy or FDA approval process. 9 Exhibit 1A states that it applies
10 And so to the extent that if I'm looking at 10 Dr. Werner's news versus no news test using
11 a pharmaceutical company and I do a news/no 11 earnings and guidance releases?
12 news test based on earnings, it is very 12 A. Correct.
13 possible, very likely that it is going to 13 Q. Do you see that in the heading?
14 fail the news/no news test, but that does 14 A. Yes, correct.
15 not necessarily mean that that trades -- 15 Q. And then I know the type is a
16 does not trade in an efficient market. 16 little bit small, but do you see in
17 Q. Do you have in the stack that 17 footnote 1, Professor Grenadier says that
18 Mr. Rosen kindly provided at the outset of 18 he has identified five publicly available
19 the day, do you have the rebuttal expert 19 reports where you used earnings or guidance
20 report of Professor Steven Grenadier? 20 announcements to define news days, and then
21 A. I believe so. Oh, the 21 he lists five matters that includes the
22 rebuttal? 22 Omega Healthcare Investors matter that we
23 MR. ROSEN: I don't have the 23 just looked at just now? Do you see that?
24 rebuttal, I just brought the opening 24 A. I do.
25 report. 25 Q. All right. And do you have any
Page 179 Page 181
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Okay. Why don't we give you -- 2 basis to disagree with Professor Grenadier
3 A. Can I just get something to 3 when he says that you used earnings or
4 drink? 4 guidance announcements in the five cases in
5 Q. Absolutely. 5 his footnote 1 to his Exhibit 1A?
6 MR. RYAN: Let's go off the 6 A. I have no reason to disagree
7 record. 7 with -- I haven't looked at each one -- I
8 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will 8 haven't looked at each one since I received
9 end media unit four. We are going off 9 this report, but I have no reason to doubt
10 the record at 2:24. 10 that what he is saying is accurate.
11 (Recess taken.) 11 Q. All right. And that's in part
12 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back 12 because you know that there are multiple
13 on the record at 2:29. This will begin 13 expert reports, these are all from 2019 to
14 media unit five. 14 present, there are multiple expert reports
15 BY MR. RYAN: 15 within the last four or five years where
16 Q. All right. So during the break 16 you have used this earnings and guidance
17 I have handed you what we have previously 17 release criterion for news days, right?
18 marked as Exhibit 176, which is the 18 A. There are certainly five, yes.
19 rebuttal expert report of Professor Steven 19 Q. Okay. And you earlier
20 Grenadier in this case dated March 28th, 20 testified that using earnings and guidance
21 2023. Have you seen this report before, 21 releases as opposed to the methodology that
22 sir? 22 you used in this case was a more
23 A. I believe so. 23 restrictive methodology, right?
24 Q. All right. If you could look 24 A. I don't, again, I don't think I
25 to the very back of the report, the last 25 said the methodology is more restrictive.
46 (Pages 178 - 181)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 48 of
190
Page 182 Page 184
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 I don't quite remember what I said was more 2 Q. Okay. And indeed if we look
3 restrictive. But, again, I don't think I 3 here in Professor Grenadier's Exhibit 1A,
4 said the methodology was more restrictive. 4 he finds that only three of the nine stocks
5 But, I mean, I don't want to quibble with 5 meet the Fisher's exact test using your
6 you. Maybe that's what I did say. 6 news versus no news test, but with earnings
7 Q. Well, so let me ask you, you 7 and guidance releases as the news, right?
8 said that using earnings announcements was 8 A. Could you reread that question,
9 extremely restrictive. What did you mean 9 please?
10 by "restrictive"? 10 (The record was read.)
11 A. Well, you are going to get 11 A. So what do you mean by meets
12 these false negatives that I have 12 the Fisher's exact test? I'm not familiar
13 discussed. 13 with that phrase.
14 Q. Certain valuation relevant news 14 Q. Okay. So you see then in the
15 that is not included among the news days? 15 far right column of Exhibit 1A there are
16 A. I'm sorry, what? 16 p-values?
17 Q. By false negatives, do you mean 17 A. Correct.
18 certain valuation relevant news that is not 18 Q. And the p-values below 5
19 included among the news days? 19 percent indicate statistical significance
20 A. Certain value -- I don't -- I 20 at the 95 percent confidence level, right?
21 don't understand that sentence. What do 21 A. That is correct.
22 you mean? 22 Q. Okay. And so am I right, then,
23 Q. Okay. So you introduced the 23 that in Professor Grenadier's Exhibit 1A,
24 concept of false negatives as opposed to 24 he finds that only three of the nine stocks
25 false positives, right? 25 have a statistically significant difference
Page 183 Page 185
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. Maybe I should make a 2 between the news days and the non-news days
3 clarification. When I say false negatives, 3 using your news versus no news test, but
4 I mean that it will identify -- it is 4 with earnings and guidance releases as the
5 possible that it will identify a stock that 5 news?
6 actually trades in an efficient market as 6 A. There is a lot packed in there,
7 one that, at least based on this particular 7 but I believe that is correct.
8 criterion, appears to not trade in an 8 Q. Okay. And you don't have any
9 efficient market. 9 reason to dispute Professor Grenadier's
10 Q. I see. Thank you, that is 10 calculations here, do you?
11 helpful. 11 A. The actual calculations?
12 So when you said that using 12 Q. Yes.
13 earnings and guidance releases as the 13 A. No.
14 criterion for news days was more 14 Q. Okay. Now if we look at
15 restrictive, what you were saying was it 15 Exhibit 1B, the following page to
16 would lead more often to a negative result 16 Deposition Exhibit 176, Professor
17 on the news/no news test for market 17 Grenadier's rebuttal report, we see now he
18 efficiency, right? 18 has a table that applies your news versus
19 A. A negative result, meaning -- 19 no news test but this time uses Forms 8-K
20 Q. No finding of efficiency. 20 and 6-K for the news days, right?
21 A. Based on that particular 21 A. Correct.
22 factor? 22 Q. And you understand that a Form
23 Q. Yes, sir. 23 6-K is essentially the equivalent of a
24 A. Yes. I believe what you have 24 current event filing on Form 8-K if the
25 said is correct. 25 issuer is foreign, right?
47 (Pages 182 - 185)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 49 of
190
Page 186 Page 188
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. Correct, correct. 2 no reason to think it is incorrect.
3 Q. Okay. So in footnote 1 to 3 Q. Okay. And NEO, is that a
4 Exhibit 1B Professor Grenadier states that 4 Chinese electric car company?
5 he has identified seven publicly available 5 A. To the best of my recollection,
6 reports where you used the filing of a Form 6 yes.
7 8-K or 6-K to define the news days, right? 7 Q. And I do apologize if you
8 A. Correct. 8 explained this in greater detail in that
9 Q. And do you see there are seven 9 very long answer you gave, but I didn't
10 reports listed which have dates from 2016 10 manage to write that down. Was there
11 to 2021? 11 something that occurred as you were working
12 A. I haven't counted them. I have 12 on the NEO case that led you to decide not
13 no reason to doubt your calculation. 13 to use this approach any longer?
14 Q. Okay. And do you have any 14 A. Yes.
15 reason to dispute what Professor Grenadier 15 Q. What was that?
16 says in footnote 1 to his Exhibit 1B of his 16 A. Well, I mean, there is a couple
17 rebuttal report, namely that you used this 17 of things. With regards to NEO, right, I
18 Form 8-K or Form 6-K criterion to define 18 found news, I don't remember if it was in a
19 news days in at least these seven reports? 19 press release or an 8-K, it is a foreign
20 A. Without looking at -- I mean, 20 company, so it is a 6-K, that dealt with
21 again, I haven't looked at these reports 21 news that I thought would not be material
22 even since Professor Grenadier submitted 22 to investors.
23 his report, but I have no reason to doubt 23 So the test would quantify
24 that what you are saying is accurate. 24 those days as news days, but in fact there
25 Q. Okay. And one reason why you 25 is no reason to think that that information
Page 187 Page 189
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 say that, I take it, is you agree, even if 2 would have any impact on the stock price.
3 you don't have the exact number of reports 3 And so to that extent, some firms, and, I
4 in mind, that there are a number of expert 4 mean, you know, it is a case-by-case basis,
5 reports over the past five years where you 5 some firms are going to be over-inclusive
6 have used a Form 8-K or 6-K criterion for 6 in terms of what they report.
7 news day selection in performing a news 7 So, for instance, this guy,
8 versus no news test for Cammer factor five 8 again, reports that he changed his -- he
9 for market efficiency, right? 9 moved his stock, his company stock, and I
10 A. Absolutely. But I want to 10 think it was the CEO, from his personal
11 point out that since the NEO report I have 11 account to a trust account, and there is no
12 not used any of these methodologies to 12 reason for me as a financial economist to
13 define my news/no news test. 13 think that that would have any
14 Q. Okay. And you see here that in 14 informational value to investors.
15 Exhibit 1B, Professor Grenadier reports 15 And the flip side of that,
16 that the Fisher's exact test showed 16 right, is that oftentimes firms will
17 statistical significance for only two of 17 under-report news, so it is basically, to
18 the nine stocks using the Form 8-K or 6-K 18 the extent that they are either filing
19 news day selection criterion? 19 press releases or 8 or 6-Ks, right, there
20 A. That is correct. 20 is some decision made on the part of the
21 Q. All right. And you don't have 21 corporation that this news is material to
22 any basis to dispute that calculation, do 22 the market, and so they are making that
23 you? 23 choice, it is an objective criterion,
24 A. I have not checked. I have not 24 where -- I'm sorry, subjective criteria,
25 personally checked his calculation. I have 25 right. Whereas what I have done -- so if
48 (Pages 186 - 189)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 50 of
190
Page 190 Page 192
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 you think about this as a, you know, a 2 call it the Factiva news approach, I'm not
3 sliding scale of most objective to most 3 sure that that's a fully accurate
4 subjective, right, these methodologies are 4 description. But if you are saying what I
5 going to be somewhere in here. 5 have done -- if you are describing what I
6 In terms of what I've done, 6 have done and you want to call it the
7 I've gone to this extreme point of the most 7 Factiva news/no news approach, I'm more
8 objective test that one could do in 8 than happy to accept that definition.
9 performing those news/no news tests. And 9 Q. Okay, all right. So when you
10 as I have stated previously, it has been 10 are talking about courts accepting this
11 accepted by courts, well, beyond its being 11 Factiva headline approach, are you
12 accepted by courts, it has also been 12 referring to reports from Dr. Tabak or from
13 utilized by one of the authors of the 13 others?
14 Ferrillo paper written in I believe 2004. 14 A. Certainly I believe Dr. Tabak.
15 So it has got, even though the 15 I believe I have seen others, but off the
16 Ferrillo paper doesn't deal specifically 16 top of my head, I don't recall.
17 with that methodology, obviously if one of 17 Q. Okay. Is it just one court
18 the co-authors of the paper deemed it 18 opinion or more than one that you have in
19 sufficient to run a news/no news test, it 19 mind as accepting Dr. Tabak's use of this
20 should be sufficient for me as well as the 20 more recent news/no news approach?
21 fact that courts have accepted it. 21 A. Well, I don't know how many
22 Q. And when you say you have gone 22 times Dr. Tabak has used it, so I can't
23 to this extreme point of the most objective 23 tell you if there is more than one court
24 test that one could do in performing these 24 who has accepted it or not.
25 news/no news tests, you are referring to 25 Q. Okay.
Page 191 Page 193
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 the Factiva headline approach that you used 2 A. I don't know, off the top of my
3 in this case, right? 3 head, I don't know the frequency with which
4 A. Right, correct. Well, I 4 other experts have used this definition of
5 don't -- that might be -- in general, 5 news/no news. So I can't tell you, you
6 that's correct. 6 know, how many times courts have accepted
7 Q. And when you refer to one of 7 it.
8 the co-authors of the Ferrillo paper, you 8 Q. Okay. But if I understood you
9 are referring to Dr. Tabak, right? 9 right, you were saying that you personally
10 A. That is correct. 10 have read a court opinion that accepted
11 Q. Have you discussed news/no news 11 Dr. Tabak's use of an approach similar to
12 selection criteria with Dr. Tabak? 12 your Factiva headline approach for the
13 A. It is possible. I worked with 13 news/no news test?
14 him at NERA. I don't recall. 14 A. Well, I'm not sure that the
15 Q. Okay. Have you discussed it 15 courts necessarily discussed the news/no
16 within the last two years with him? 16 news test specifically, but to the best of
17 A. No. 17 my recollection, I believe some courts have
18 Q. All right. When you said 18 found -- have certified classes where this
19 earlier that you believed that there are 19 methodology was used.
20 some courts that have accepted your current 20 Q. Okay. So if you didn't learn
21 approach, this Factiva headline approach, 21 this from speaking to Dr. Tabak, because
22 the news/no news test, you are not 22 you say you haven't spoken to him about
23 referring to opinions you have rendered, 23 news/no news test in the past two years,
24 are you? 24 and if you didn't learn this from reading a
25 A. Oh, that is correct. When you 25 court opinion yourself because you said you
49 (Pages 190 - 193)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 51 of
190
Page 194 Page 196
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 don't know whether the court necessarily 2 Deposition Exhibit 176.
3 discussed the no news test, what is the 3 So do you see that Exhibit 1C
4 basis for your belief that some courts have 4 states that it is an application of your
5 found this news/no news test using the 5 news/no news test but this time using press
6 Factiva headline approach to be acceptable? 6 releases as the news day selection
7 A. So you've said that I didn't 7 criterion?
8 read court opinions. I have said I have 8 A. Correct.
9 read court opinions. I don't recall what 9 Q. And do you see that Professor
10 court opinions. 10 Grenadier in footnote 1 to Exhibit 1C
11 Q. Okay. So I believe you said 11 states that he identified two reports where
12 that you are not sure that the courts 12 you did that, the Ebix report from 2012 and
13 necessarily discussed the news/no news test 13 the Hi-Crush report from 2014? Do you see
14 specifically, but to the best of your 14 that?
15 recollection you believe some courts 15 A. Yes. Yes, I do.
16 certified classes where this methodology 16 Q. And do you have any reason to
17 was used? 17 dispute Professor Grenadier's statement
18 A. That's a correct statement. 18 here in footnote 1 that you did indeed use
19 Q. And so my question is if the 19 a press release, news day selection
20 court opinion doesn't talk about the 20 criterion in at least those two reports?
21 news/no news test, how do you know that any 21 A. I believe that prior to 2014 I
22 court has certified a class using this 22 definitely, so nine years ago, I definitely
23 methodology? 23 used this methodology. I don't recall --
24 A. Oh, okay, now I think I 24 my guess is if I had used it since then,
25 understand. It is certainly possible that 25 Dr. Grenadier may have highlighted it. So
Page 195 Page 197
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 the court discussed the news/no news test. 2 based on what I'm seeing here, yeah, I have
3 It is also possible that I saw the report 3 used it twice, not since 2014.
4 written by the expert in which this 4 Q. All right. And do you see in
5 methodology was used. 5 Exhibit 1C Professor Grenadier calculates
6 Q. And as you sit here today, you 6 that using the Fisher's exact test there is
7 don't know which of the two it is? 7 statistical significance to the comparison
8 A. Which of the two it is? It 8 of the high information flow days to the
9 could be both. 9 low information flow days for only one of
10 Q. Okay. But you're not telling 10 the nine stocks?
11 me that there is a court case out there 11 A. I don't think what you've said
12 that you're aware of that accepts this 12 is correct.
13 broad of a news/no news test where it is 13 Q. I may have bolloxed that, so
14 just every headline result from Factiva, 14 let me try again.
15 right? 15 A. Okay.
16 A. I mean, I don't know how else 16 Q. Do you see in Exhibit 1C that
17 to answer the question. I mean, I have 17 Professor Grenadier calculates Fisher exact
18 answered the question to the best of my 18 test p-values using the press release
19 ability. 19 method for each of the nine stocks?
20 Q. Okay. 20 A. Yes, I do see that.
21 A. I don't know that -- I mean, I 21 Q. And do you see that he finds
22 did the best I could. 22 statistical significance at the 95 percent
23 Q. Okay. Let's turn to Exhibit 23 confidence level for only one of the nine
24 1C. This is in Professor Grenadier's 24 stocks using the press release method,
25 rebuttal report previously marked as 25 namely Bed Bath & Beyond?
50 (Pages 194 - 197)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 52 of
190
Page 198 Page 200
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. Well, statistical significance, 2 three different recalculations in Exhibits
3 to the extent that you are looking at a 3 1A, 1B and 1C, and here he is saying if he
4 difference between news and no news, yes. 4 instead defines in effect a combined set of
5 Q. Okay. And -- 5 news days that meet any of those three
6 A. Or as defined here by using 6 criteria, and he defines that as the news
7 press releases. 7 day set, then his result is that there is
8 Q. Okay. So let me just make 8 statistical significance for only two
9 sure. Running a Fisher's exact test to 9 stocks, namely AMC and Bed Bath & Beyond,
10 calculate statistical significance of the 10 right?
11 difference between news and no news days is 11 A. Correct.
12 the same methodology that you used in your 12 MR. ROSEN: What paragraph are
13 opening report in this case, right? 13 you referring to?
14 A. I believe that is correct. 14 MR. RYAN: Footnote 96, which
15 Q. All right. 15 is off of paragraph 53 on page 26 of
16 A. But we haven't said anything 16 Professor Grenadier's rebuttal report.
17 about the definition of news. 17 Q. And you don't have any basis to
18 Q. Understood. We have alluded to 18 disagree, do you, Dr. Werner, with the
19 it several times. We are going to get into 19 calculations in Professor Grenadier's note
20 it in more detail, worry not. All right. 20 96?
21 So now if you could turn, 21 A. I have no reason to disagree
22 please, with me in Professor Grenadier's 22 that the calculations are accurate.
23 rebuttal report, this same document we have 23 Q. Okay. And you haven't done
24 been looking at, to page 26. 24 anything for any of the cases that are
25 MR. ROSEN: This is Grenadier's 25 still ongoing that are cited here in
Page 199 Page 201
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 report again? 2 footnotes 1 to Exhibit 1A or 1B of
3 MR. RYAN: Yes. 3 Professor Grenadier's rebuttal report, you
4 Q. You see in paragraph 53 he goes 4 haven't done anything to somehow withdraw
5 through his findings for three exhibits 5 the news/no news test that you ran in any
6 that you and I just looked at together for 6 of those cases, have you?
7 the last half hour, Exhibits 1A, 1B and 1C, 7 A. No, not to my knowledge. I
8 right? 8 mean, you said ongoing. I mean, if you
9 A. Correct. 9 really want me to look at it, I'm pretty
10 Q. And then in footnote 96, 10 sure none of those cases are ongoing, but
11 Professor Grenadier reports that 11 it is possible they are.
12 "Additionally, when news days, or high 12 Q. Okay.
13 information flow days, are defined as the 13 A. Obviously, you know, the
14 combination of earnings releases, Form 8-K 14 Hi-Crush case and the case from -- the Ebix
15 and Form 6-K filings, and press releases, 15 case are not ongoing to the best of my
16 his results," meaning your, Dr. Werner's 16 knowledge.
17 results, "are reversed for all but two 17 Q. Understood.
18 stocks, namely AMC and Bed Bath & Beyond." 18 A. But that caveat aside, yeah.
19 A. Hold on a second. 19 Q. Okay. All right. Now, you
20 Q. Uh-huh. 20 cite in your report, so let's try to find
21 A. I'm sorry, maybe I 21 this now, this would be your opening
22 misunderstood you. Did you say he combined 22 report, Exhibit 281, on page 31 --
23 those definitions into one news day? 23 A. I think I mixed up some stuff
24 Q. Yes. So what he is saying as I 24 here. Oh.
25 understand it in 96, we saw how he did the 25 MR. ROSEN: You are talking
51 (Pages 198 - 201)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 53 of
190
Page 202 Page 204
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 about the opening report? 2 one looks at may have changed since they
3 MR. RYAN: Yes. 3 read this report, or, sorry, report, paper
4 MR. ROSEN: Page 31? 4 back in 2004.
5 MR. RYAN: Yes. 5 Q. Maybe. I mean, you can't ask
6 A. So this only goes up to page 6 Fred Dunbar, can you, unfortunately?
7 28, which suggests to me that I may have 7 A. No, I'm sure you could depose
8 combined some documents. 8 David Tabak, but the evidence is that he
9 MR. ROSEN: I think the problem 9 has adopted possibly a different criterion
10 is they are not stapled, so you are 10 than what was strictly said in this report.
11 mixing everything together. 11 His opinions may have evolved over time I
12 THE WITNESS: Do you want to 12 guess is what I'm saying. In fact, all
13 give me your copy, Larry, or Mr. Rosen? 13 indications are that they have evolved over
14 MR. ROSEN: Which report are we 14 time.
15 talking about? 15 Q. All right. So let me go back
16 THE WITNESS: So my initial 16 to my question. Do you consider the
17 report. 17 Ferrillo article to be a reputable
18 MR. ROSEN: Your initial 18 authority in how to conduct event studies
19 report, that should be here. Oh, I 19 for market efficiency purposes?
20 have it here. Hang on. Your initial 20 A. I think it is a reputable study
21 report is this one, 284, right? 21 with regards to how to conduct -- I
22 MR. RYAN: No, it is 281. It 22 don't -- again, reputable study? It is --
23 is the thick document. 23 it is informative. It has met the
24 THE WITNESS: This is the Omega 24 methodology of looking at a news/no news
25 document. Yeah, the big one. 25 test is certainly something that has been
Page 203 Page 205
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 MR. ROSEN: I'm sorry. 2 adopted by many economists, many courts. I
3 THE WITNESS: No worries. 3 don't know if that makes it a reliable
4 Q. All right. So we are looking 4 source. That's your term, reliable source.
5 at page 31, note 74. 5 I think you said reliable source.
6 A. Okay, page 31, note 74. 6 Q. Reputable.
7 Q. Right. 7 A. Reputable, reputable. So I
8 A. Footnote 74. 8 don't know how to necessarily define that.
9 Q. Yes. 9 But to the extent that they present an
10 A. Okay. 10 analysis, a news/no news analysis that
11 Q. And do you see the citation to 11 people have since adopted or at least the
12 Ferrillo, et al, from the St. John's Law 12 methodology that people have still -- have
13 Review in 2004? 13 since adopted, again, I don't know if that
14 A. I do. 14 renders it reputable. It certainly renders
15 Q. And is this the Ferrillo 15 it informative.
16 article that you were referring to 16 Q. All right. You chose to cite
17 previously in your testimony? 17 the Ferrillo article in your opening
18 A. Correct. 18 report, right?
19 Q. Okay. And do you consider this 19 A. That is correct.
20 article to be a reputable authority in how 20 Q. And I assume that is because
21 to conduct event studies for market 21 you hold the article in high esteem?
22 efficiency purposes? 22 A. It informs my opinion about how
23 A. Reputable? It is informative. 23 to run a news/no news test.
24 But, as I've said, the underlying authors' 24 Q. Has the article been
25 opinions of how one defines news and what 25 influential in terms of a methodology for
52 (Pages 202 - 205)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 54 of
190
Page 206 Page 208
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 running a news/no news test? 2 mean, I don't -- I haven't perfectly
3 A. When you say influential, 3 memorized the entire methodology as
4 influential to who? 4 described in this report. So if you want
5 Q. Has it had influence on other 5 me to look how they describe it, again,
6 people, readers? 6 even Dr. Tabak has changed some of his
7 A. Readers? 7 opinions. So I don't know how that might
8 Q. Yes. 8 or might not be reflected in the
9 A. Well, I mean, I don't remember 9 methodology that they describe in this
10 if it is cited in Halliburton I or in 10 paper. Now, I do know, again, courts have
11 Halliburton II, the amicus brief. I mean, 11 accepted the news/no news analysis in
12 people certainly have cited it. I don't 12 general. Again, I don't know if that makes
13 know -- what was the specific word he used? 13 it reputable, reliable, whatever.
14 MR. ROSEN: Reliable. 14 Q. I am going to show you the
15 THE WITNESS: No, we are past 15 report. I'm going to show it to you in just
16 "reliable." 16 a minute. But I do want to see whether you
17 Q. Has it had influence on other 17 can answer this question: Are you able to
18 people, namely readers? 18 answer my question before we look at the
19 MR. ROSEN: Objection, calls 19 report whether you considered the
20 for speculation. 20 methodology for running the news/no news
21 A. Again, I don't know. Like I 21 test in Ferrillo, et al, to be reliable?
22 said, people have seemed to adopt the 22 THE WITNESS: Do you want to
23 general methodology that these people used 23 object?
24 in this report. 24 MR. ROSEN: I already objected.
25 Q. All right. Do you believe that 25 You know, it is up to you to answer the
Page 207 Page 209
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 the Ferrillo, et al, methodology is 2 question.
3 reliable? 3 THE WITNESS: You didn't
4 A. Do I believe that running a 4 technically object, that's why I was
5 news/no news test can inform one about 5 waiting.
6 whether or not a security trades in an 6 A. I mean, I don't know how to
7 efficient market? I do. 7 give you a different answer than I have
8 Q. All right. My question, 8 previously given. That's my answer.
9 though, is a little different. Do you 9 Q. You won't know if it is
10 believe that the methodology for running a 10 reliable until you have looked at it?
11 news/no news test set forth in Ferrillo, et 11 A. I defer to what I said
12 al, is reliable? 12 previously.
13 A. I would have to look -- if you 13 Q. That's the best answer you are
14 want to give me the paper, I'm happy to 14 able to give me to that question?
15 look at it. I have given you the best 15 A. Well, I mean, there has been --
16 answer that I can without actually looking 16 I don't know, you keep asking me the
17 at the report. 17 question.
18 Q. Okay. So am I understanding 18 MR. ROSEN: You want an answer
19 you right that without looking at the 19 to a question that specifically refers
20 report you cannot tell me one way or the 20 to a specific -- to the specific model
21 other whether you believe that the 21 in that specific academic paper, and he
22 methodology in Ferrillo, et al, for running 22 is saying well, let me look at the
23 a news/no news test is reliable? 23 academic paper so I can better answer
24 A. Well, let's see the full 24 your question. So you said you have
25 methodology and then I will tell you. I 25 the paper, so just show it to him and
53 (Pages 206 - 209)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 55 of
190
Page 210 Page 212
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 he will answer your questions. It 2 This was -- this is 2004, so ten years
3 seems that that will get us through 3 before Halliburton II.
4 this. 4 (Witness perusing document.)
5 MR. RYAN: I will. 5 Q. So I believe that discussion
6 Q. So you're not able to answer 6 you are looking for begins at the very
7 the question unless I show you the paper, 7 bottom of page 102 under the heading
8 right? Is that right? 8 Efficient Markets in Theory. That also
9 A. I believe that in order to give 9 defines the term EMH.
10 you the most accurate answer possible I 10 MR. ROSEN: It is also on page
11 would need to see the paper. As my 11 117 there is a discussion. You said
12 understanding, at the deposition, my job is 12 102 or 112?
13 to give the most accurate testimony 13 MR. RYAN: 102.
14 possible. It doesn't seem odd that I 14 (Witness perusing document.)
15 should ask to see the underlying paper for 15 MR. ROSEN: The beginning of
16 which you are asking me this question. 16 page 14 and the middle of page 14 --
17 Q. All right. Why don't we look 17 MR. RYAN: I don't think we
18 at the paper. So this will be Exhibit 285 18 need this commentary.
19 I believe. 19 MR. ROSEN: Well, all right,
20 (Defendant's Exhibit 285 marked 20 then we can go through the whole thing.
21 for identification.) 21 (Witness perusing document.)
22 Q. All right. So why don't we 22 Q. All right. Have you had the
23 turn to page 119. 23 chance now to read pages 119 to 121?
24 A. 119. 24 A. No, I haven't.
25 Q. Let me just ask you a 25 (Witness perusing document.)
Page 211 Page 213
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 foundational question first, which I meant 2 MR. ROSEN: Go to page 117.
3 to do. Is Exhibit 285 the Ferrillo, et al, 3 THE WITNESS: Do you want me to
4 paper that we have been talking about? 4 move ahead to page 117?
5 A. I believe so, yes. 5 Q. I would like you to read pages
6 Q. All right. So if you could 6 119 to 121 and then I'm going to ask you
7 turn, please, to page 119. Do you see a 7 some specific questions. You asked where
8 heading there number 2, Price Reaction to 8 efficient market hypothesis was defined in
9 News? 9 the document. I have shown you where it
10 A. I do. 10 was defined. There is no need for you
11 MR. ROSEN: What page are you 11 waste time on the record reading 20 pages
12 on? 12 of this article, which is an article that
13 MR. RYAN: 119. 13 you are quite familiar with.
14 Q. And so if you could maybe just 14 MR. ROSEN: Look, he is
15 read to yourself from that heading in the 15 entitled to read the article if you are
16 middle of page 119 to the very top of page 16 going to ask him questions about it.
17 121 before the table about Metro Global 17 Q. Well, let me start asking you
18 Media and then I will ask you some 18 questions. So, Dr. Werner, do you agree,
19 questions. 19 and I'm reading from -- five lines from the
20 A. I want to first go to -- I 20 bottom of page 119 --
21 don't recall what their -- what type of 21 A. I'm like ten pages -- yeah, I'm
22 definition they are using for the efficient 22 on 109, so let's slow your roll there.
23 market hypothesis, so I would like to go to 23 Q. Do you agree that because stock
24 the beginning and just refresh my memory 24 prices move all the time one must compare
25 about the exact standard they were using. 25 the movements in response to news stories
54 (Pages 210 - 213)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 56 of
190
Page 214 Page 216
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 with a control group of prices? 2 to read. You should start at least at
3 A. I haven't read that yet. 3 117, because the whole context --
4 Q. So you can't tell me if you 4 MR. RYAN: I'm going to
5 agree or disagree with that? 5 continue.
6 A. I would like to read it in the 6 MR. ROSEN: He is allowed to
7 context in which it was written. 7 read it if you ask him about it.
8 Q. Well, I have given you about 8 THE WITNESS: I can't read
9 ten minutes already to read portions of 9 while you are asking questions.
10 this article, and I directed you to a full 10 MR. ROSEN: This is a long,
11 two pages and you apparently have been 11 complicated academic paper and you want
12 reading other pages of the article. I just 12 to ask him is it true what is written
13 want the record to clearly reflect that. 13 in this long, complicated academic
14 So you are not able to answer that 14 paper. He has to read it. He hasn't
15 question? 15 looked at it in -- even if he hasn't
16 A. I will be able to answer that 16 looked at it in three weeks, it is
17 question when I read that sentences or 17 still three weeks ago. So he is
18 sentence and put it in the context of what 18 entitled to read it.
19 the authors are saying. 19 MR. RYAN: I gave the witness
20 Q. Okay. Let me ask you then the 20 plenty of time to read it.
21 top of page 120, you see that Ferrillo, et 21 Q. Now, do you see here now on
22 al, write "Using whatever sample is chosen, 22 line 5 of page 120, the authors say that
23 one could then separate out those days on 23 "There is the choice of news sources to be
24 which the company is mentioned in the news 24 searched (for example, major newspapers and
25 from those on which it is not. Of course 25 presswires versus all available news
Page 215 Page 217
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 there are various ways to implement this 2 sources) and whether to limit the search to
3 procedure." 3 those stories where the company name and/or
4 Do you agree with the authors 4 ticker is mentioned in the headline, the
5 that there are various ways to implement 5 headline or lead paragraph, or anywhere in
6 this procedure? 6 the story"?
7 A. You are on page 120 now? 7 A. What paragraph are you on?
8 Q. Yes, sir. 8 Q. I'm on page 120, beginning five
9 A. That is what they wrote. 9 lines from the top. And do you agree with
10 Q. All right. And do you agree 10 the authors that there are these choices of
11 with them as an expert in finance and 11 what news sources to be searched and
12 economics who yourself apply the news/no 12 whether to limit the search to stories
13 news test regularly, do you agree with them 13 where the company name or ticker is in the
14 that there are various ways to implement 14 headline or the headline and lead paragraph
15 this procedure? 15 or anywhere in the story?
16 A. Well, I don't know exactly what 16 A. I agree that that's what they
17 procedure they are talking about, so, I 17 wrote.
18 mean, if you would let me -- I still 18 Q. And do you agree that those are
19 haven't read 119 through 121. So, I mean, 19 all reasonable methodological choices to
20 I guess you want me to skip ahead and 20 make in conducting a news/no news test for
21 ignore what is written with regards to the 21 the purpose of testing market efficiency?
22 efficient market hypothesis and what needs 22 A. Is it a reasonable assumption?
23 to be shown. 23 It is certainly one that one could use.
24 MR. ROSEN: Well, before you 24 Q. Do you see the next sentence
25 answer the question, read what you want 25 then reads "One could also refine the
55 (Pages 214 - 217)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 57 of
190
Page 218 Page 220
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 search to only focus on particular types of 2 to make 8-K and 6-K filings; is that right?
3 news stories, for example, earnings 3 A. I don't know if that's
4 announcements"? 4 accurate. I mean, if you want to show
5 A. You have read that correctly. 5 me -- just show me an 8-K or show me the
6 Q. Okay. And that's a 6 SEC rules about when a firm needs to issue
7 methodological choice that you have made in 7 an 8 or 6-K, I'm happy to review it. I
8 multiple previous expert reports as we went 8 have a general understanding.
9 over, right? 9 Q. All right. What is your
10 A. Yes, prior to my submission of 10 general understanding of the SEC rules for
11 the NEO report, correct. 11 when a firm needs to issue an 8-K or a 6-K?
12 Q. All right. So your submission 12 A. Again, I don't want to give an
13 of the NEO report I think had to do with 13 inaccurate answer. So if you want to show
14 not using Form 8-K or 6-K, right? 14 me where that's written, I'm happy to
15 A. No. It had to deal with the 15 review that and then give you an answer.
16 problems under any definition -- under any 16 Q. Okay. Without reviewing SEC
17 subjective definition of news. I don't 17 regulations or other documents, am I right
18 recall -- I mean, if you want to show me 18 that you are unable to provide any general
19 the NEO report, I don't remember whether I 19 understanding of what the SEC rules are
20 was looking at 8-Ks or press releases. 20 about when a firm needs to issue an 8-K or
21 Q. Didn't you tell me 15 minutes 21 a 6-K?
22 ago that in the NEO case you were looking 22 A. See, my problem is I don't
23 at a Form 8-K and you found that an 23 remember if it specifically states that it
24 executive, you believed it was the CEO, was 24 has to include -- that it must be written
25 making a disclosure in the Form 8-K about 25 or published when they have material
Page 219 Page 221
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 moving a certain investment from a personal 2 information. That's the only distinction.
3 account to a trust account, and you said 3 I'm not positive that that's exactly what
4 that it was your experience in looking at 4 they say, and that's why I would want to
5 Forms 8-K and 6-K that companies used 5 refresh my memory as to whether or not that
6 different standards in how often they 6 is the exact wording used by the SEC.
7 reported items and that you concluded that 7 Q. Because that would be relevant
8 the Form 8-K and 6-K approach was both over 8 to you in assessing the suitability of that
9 and under-inclusive, isn't that what you 9 news day selection criterion for purposes
10 testified to 20 minutes ago? 10 of testing market efficiency, right?
11 A. Well, let's be specific, 11 A. Well, again, it would -- it
12 because when we were talking about NEO, I 12 goes to what -- assuming that my definition
13 wasn't talking about 8-Ks, I was talking 13 is correct, right, it goes to what the
14 about 6-Ks. So if you go to the beginning 14 company believes is material, and that is
15 of your statement there, it is incorrect. 15 necessarily a subjective view of what news
16 Now, whether I was looking at press 16 is or what material news is.
17 releases or 6-Ks at the time, I don't 17 So to the extent that the
18 recall. 18 company has to determine, and, again, I
19 Q. And you agree that a 6-K is 19 don't recall it off the top of my head, but
20 basically the same as an 8-K except for a 20 if you want to stipulate that in fact what
21 foreign issuer, right? 21 it discusses is material news, it then --
22 A. That is correct. 22 it rests on how -- what a company believes
23 Q. And I guess because you're not 23 is material, and as I've said, and as
24 a lawyer, you are unfamiliar with the SEC 24 you've stated, those two things could be
25 regulations for when companies are required 25 over or under-inclusive with regards to
56 (Pages 218 - 221)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 58 of
190
Page 222 Page 224
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 news. 2 closed could only affect the next day's
3 Q. Okay. Help me understand what 3 stock price movements"?
4 you are saying better. You are saying your 4 Do you see that?
5 criticism of the use of 8-K or 6-K as a 5 A. Oh, right. I do see that.
6 news day selection criterion as you used to 6 Q. All right. And do you agree
7 do in running the news/no news test is that 7 with them that whether one uses all news
8 materiality is in the eye of the beholder? 8 stories or whether one refines the search
9 A. Well, again, that's to the best 9 to focus on particular types of news
10 of my recollection. 10 stories, one would still have to be careful
11 Q. Okay. 11 to assign stories to the proper dates?
12 A. With regards to the 12 A. The proper dates?
13 definition -- the definition being 13 Q. Yes.
14 materiality. That being the benchmark 14 A. Yes, you would definitely have
15 under 8 or 6-K. That's my recollection, 15 to assign them to the proper dates.
16 but I could be wrong. 16 Q. All right. You see they also
17 Q. Do you agree that it is 17 state in this sentence "In any case, one
18 reasonable to refine the search to only 18 would still have to be careful to remove
19 focus on particular types of news stories, 19 any stories that exist because they report
20 for example, earnings announcements, as 20 on a price movement"?
21 discussed by Ferrillo, et al? 21 Do you see that?
22 A. Well, see, now here is where 22 A. I do see that, yes.
23 this paper that was written in 2004, where 23 Q. And do you agree with the
24 people's opinions about things have 24 authors of the Ferrillo, et al, paper that
25 evolved. Like I said before, Dr. Tabak has 25 regardless of whether one includes all news
Page 223 Page 225
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 used the exact same analysis I have used in 2 articles or instead refines the search to
3 this report in determining market 3 only focus on particular types of news
4 efficiency. So he is one of the co-authors 4 stories, one would still have to be careful
5 of the report. He obviously doesn't think 5 to remove any stories that exist because
6 that you have to do that exact type of 6 they report on a price movement?
7 screening. 7 A. So here I defer to Dr. Tabak.
8 Q. Sure. I didn't ask you whether 8 He doesn't -- he runs this test without
9 anybody believed that you had to do that 9 removing information that has to deal with
10 exact type of screening. My question is do 10 price movement. So evidently he doesn't
11 you agree it is reasonable to refine the 11 currently agree with this statement that he
12 search to only focus on particular types of 12 made 20 years ago, so I'm going to defer to
13 news stories, for example, earnings 13 him and disagree with that statement.
14 announcements, as discussed by Ferrillo, et 14 Q. All right. So you disagree
15 al? 15 with the statement in the Ferrillo, et al,
16 A. Oh, I don't know whether it is 16 paper that one has to be careful to remove
17 reasonable or not. I think if you want to 17 any stories that exist because they report
18 be as objective as possible, you should use 18 on a price movement; is that right?
19 my methodology. There is some subjectivity 19 A. In order to be as objective as
20 in that type of screening. 20 possible, yes, that is correct.
21 Q. All right. Do you see the 21 Q. Okay. And have you discussed
22 authors of the Ferrillo article continue 22 with Dr. Tabak why he no longer follows
23 "In any case, one would still have to be 23 this methodology if indeed he does no
24 careful to assign stories to the proper 24 longer follow it?
25 dates, that is stories after a market 25 A. I have not discussed it with
57 (Pages 222 - 225)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 59 of
190
Page 226 Page 228
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 him. 2 stories that existed because they reported
3 Q. All right. Have you seen 3 on a price movement, right?
4 anything in writing from Dr. Tabak where he 4 A. Well, you say -- what do you
5 has explained why he no longer follows this 5 mean by "many"?
6 aspect of the methodology set forth in the 6 Q. I mean a very high proportion
7 Ferrillo, et al, article, if indeed he does 7 of the news articles about these nine
8 no longer follow it? 8 stocks in the week before the class period
9 A. I have not. 9 begins at the end of January 2021 are news
10 Q. Okay. So if I understand you 10 stories that exist because they report on a
11 right, you are simply observing that you've 11 price movement, right?
12 seen expert reports Dr. Tabak has submitted 12 A. I don't know if it is a high
13 at some point since 2004 in which you 13 frequency. Did you use the term "high
14 didn't notice him removing any stories that 14 frequency"?
15 existed because they reported on a price 15 Q. High proportion.
16 movement and you are inferring that 16 A. High proportion, right. Yeah,
17 Dr. Tabak must have changed his mind about 17 as I sit here, I mean, certainly there were
18 the need to do that; is that right? 18 discussions about price movements. I
19 A. Among other things. I mean, 19 won't -- I don't disagree with that.
20 look, your client, Robinhood, and I haven't 20 Whether or not it was a high proportion, I
21 seen this personally, but they published I 21 don't know as I sit here today.
22 think on the website, you know, they would 22 Q. Okay.
23 show the ten biggest stock price movers 23 A. As you have defined a high
24 every day, throughout the day, right? So 24 proportion, I don't know what you mean by a
25 that is reporting on stock price movements. 25 high proportion.
Page 227 Page 229
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 I assume they put it up there because they 2 Q. Okay. So do you know anything
3 think it is relevant to investors and that 3 about what proportion of the news stories
4 investors possibly use that information. 4 in that week before the class period exist
5 So I think that this is, going 5 because they report on a price movement?
6 back to 2004, it is oversimplified. It is 6 A. I do not.
7 not accounting for things like Chartis, who 7 Q. All right. That's not
8 might possibly use stock price as an 8 something that you thought was important to
9 indicator. I think momentum traders would 9 look into in connection with rendering your
10 be an example. I think Professor Grenadier 10 opinion, right?
11 worked or advised on a hedge fund that used 11 A. No. Look, so, you know, I'm
12 momentum trading. 12 damned if I do, I'm damned if I don't.
13 So I think it is overly 13 What I initially did was I started to look
14 simplistic, and, again, we are talking 14 through the information and then I started
15 about a different period of time, to say 15 to ask the question, okay, well, is each
16 that price is not informative. 16 one of these news articles material? In
17 Q. Am I right that in conducting 17 other words, is it something that an
18 your news/no news test in your opening 18 investor might find informative? And in
19 report in this case, you did not remove any 19 doing so, it became more and more apparent
20 stories that exist because they report on a 20 that whatever decisions I made as to what
21 price movement? 21 was material and what was not, which was
22 A. That is correct. 22 what was immaterial, was going to be
23 Q. And in fact you are aware that 23 criticized.
24 in that last week before the class period 24 So it has been this seven and a
25 at the end of January 2021, there were many 25 half hours discussing Dr. Werner, how did
58 (Pages 226 - 229)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 60 of
190
Page 230 Page 232
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 you decide that this information is 2 And, I mean, look, you have two
3 material or that information is material? 3 experts who used what I would consider an
4 What I decided then based on my initial 4 objective, I'm sorry, subjective criterion,
5 review of documents is that look, I'm going 5 and they couldn't agree over a five or
6 to use the most objective criterion 6 six-day period which days, and this is
7 possible, and so that is exactly what I did 7 their definition, had value relevant
8 here. 8 information.
9 So, you know, does it matter 9 So, look, if I go ahead and did
10 that prices -- that there was a reporting 10 that, if I did that, and granted, I mean, I
11 on prices? Look, again, people seem to 11 recreated, I used a super set of their
12 find that information informative. There 12 information to show that those stocks
13 are people who trade based on the stock 13 traded in an efficient market over that
14 price. Again, Dr. Grenadier, or Professor 14 week, I'm going to be criticized for being
15 Grenadier, was a consultant to a hedge fund 15 subjective. So I'm trying to be as
16 that based some of its trading strategy on 16 objective and scientific as possible. That
17 momentum trading. All right, what is 17 was how I arrived at that decision.
18 momentum trading based on? Stock prices. 18 Q. And so am I understanding your
19 So is it relevant to investors? 19 testimony right, I think you have now said
20 It appears that some investors find it 20 twice that when you began work on this
21 relevant. So rather than suss out, 21 matter, you began on some process of trying
22 Dr. Werner, you included this, but you 22 to subjectively sort through the articles,
23 didn't include that, why is this relevant, 23 and then you abandoned that; is that right?
24 why is that not relevant, I used the most 24 A. Did I abandon it?
25 objective criterion I could use in looking 25 Q. Well, you didn't use that --
Page 231 Page 233
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 at nine separate companies across a year. 2 you didn't complete your work using that
3 Q. All right. And this case, I 3 approach and include it in your report, did
4 think you testified earlier, is the first 4 you?
5 case in which you have submitted a report 5 A. That is correct. I did a
6 in which you used this inclusive method of 6 cost/benefit analysis of what would be the
7 using every single Factiva hit, right? 7 most appropriate thing to do looking at
8 A. That is true. But this is also 8 nine companies over a one-year period. I
9 the first case where I have needed to look 9 determined based on how I wanted to deal
10 at nine different companies in order to 10 with criticisms, in other words, did I want
11 render an opinion. 11 to deal with people criticizing me for
12 Q. All right. And did I 12 being subjective or criticizing me for
13 understand your answer two answers ago that 13 being too objective, I thought that it was
14 what you initially did when you started 14 better to be too objective as opposed to
15 your work on this case was to ask the 15 being too subjective.
16 question of how you could weed out the 16 Q. All right. And this conscious
17 articles that didn't contain material 17 decision you made to be too objective
18 information? 18 rather than too subjective, that's a
19 A. I don't know if I said that I 19 decision that you didn't make at the
20 was trying to weed out. I was trying to 20 outset, you made it after having begun work
21 determine what information would be 21 on trying to sort through the articles
22 material, and it occurred to me that any 22 using value relevance criteria, right?
23 decision I made was going to be criticized 23 MR. ROSEN: Objection,
24 as being subjective. So I used the most 24 mischaracterizes his prior testimony.
25 objective criterion I could use. 25 A. I shouldn't say too -- if I
59 (Pages 230 - 233)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 61 of
190
Page 234 Page 236
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 said too objective, I misspoke. 2 Q. Ferrillo, et al, then give an
3 MR. ROSEN: He said criticized 3 example. They say "For example, if 7
4 for being too objective. 4 percent of the days with news have
5 A. Right. I believe that is 5 statistically significant price movements
6 correct. I was worried about being 6 and 4 percent of the days without news have
7 criticized. Oh, if I had to be worried 7 statistically significant price movements,
8 about criticism, I was going to err on the 8 then the analyst would test whether the
9 side of being criticized for being too 9 difference between the 7 percent and the 4
10 objective, which is how we ended up here 10 percent is statistically significant."
11 right now, as opposed to too subjective. 11 That makes sense so far to you,
12 Q. All right. So at some point 12 right?
13 you made a decision that you were going to 13 A. Yes.
14 err on the side of being criticized for 14 Q. They then write "If it is, then
15 being too objective rather than being 15 the evidence would show that on average the
16 criticized for being too subjective, right? 16 defendant's stock price reacts to news
17 A. That certainly was something 17 announcements."
18 that informed my opinion, informed my 18 Do you agree that that's what
19 opinion as to what I would do in this case. 19 the comparison of the news days to the no
20 Q. Okay. And that was a decision 20 news days would show in their example?
21 you made after you began work undertaking 21 A. I believe that that would be
22 what you are describing as the more 22 the conclusion that the person writing this
23 subjective process to sort through the news 23 statistical methodology would arrive at.
24 articles, right? 24 Q. All right. And then do you see
25 A. I believe that's a fair 25 that Ferrillo, et al, continue in the same
Page 235 Page 237
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 characterization. 2 sentence beginning at the very bottom of
3 Q. Okay. Now let's return to the 3 page 120 and going over to the top of page
4 Ferrillo, et al, article that we have 4 121 by saying "If the difference is not
5 marked as Deposition Exhibit 285 and we are 5 statistically significant, then there would
6 still on page 120. 6 be no basis for saying that the defendant's
7 Do you see the last paragraph 7 stock price is affected by news"?
8 in this page begins with the sentence "The 8 And you agree with them that in
9 final step involved comparing the 9 comparing the news days with the no news
10 percentage of days with news that have a 10 days, if the difference is not
11 statistically significant price movement to 11 statistically significant then there would
12 the percentage of days without news that 12 be no basis for saying that the defendant's
13 have a statistically significant price 13 stock price is affected by news?
14 movement"? 14 A. So here, I mean, I don't want
15 Do you see that? 15 to keep rehashing this, here I go back to
16 A. I do. 16 my earnings example. And so to the extent
17 Q. And you agree with that 17 that we're looking at earnings
18 statement of methodology? 18 announcements and the firm continually
19 A. I don't know if that's 19 meets expectations, the fact that it
20 technically the final step, but that's 20 consistently meets expectations and fails
21 certainly something one would do. 21 the news/no news test would not necessarily
22 Q. Okay. And that's something you 22 mean that I don't have a basis for saying
23 did in your news/no news test in your 23 that the defendant's stock price was
24 opening report, right? 24 affected by news. I could come to the
25 A. Yes. I did do that. 25 conclusion that the stock price is reacting
60 (Pages 234 - 237)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 62 of
190
Page 238 Page 240
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 in exactly the way one would expect it to 2 Hi-Crush, so Hi-Crush, I looked at
3 react to news. 3 earnings, right? If all the earnings came
4 Q. All right. So am I right, 4 in as expected and there was no -- and it
5 then, that you disagree with what Ferrillo, 5 failed the news/no news test based on
6 et al, write about what they would conclude 6 earnings being the indicator, that might
7 if the difference is not statistically 7 inform my opinion as to whether or not that
8 significant? 8 stock traded in an efficient market. How
9 A. I think that they are being 9 it would affect my opinion? I don't know
10 overly broad in what they have stated 10 as I sit here today, but it would certainly
11 there. 11 inform my opinion.
12 Q. Okay. Do you believe that 12 Q. All right. So you agree that
13 there are instances where, as Ferrillo, et 13 there are instances when the Ferrillo, et
14 al, write in a comparison of the news days 14 al, conclusion would follow?
15 with the non-news days, if the difference 15 A. Yes.
16 is not statistically significant, then 16 Q. How did you go about reviewing
17 there would be no basis for saying that the 17 the results of your Factiva search?
18 defendant's stock price is affected by 18 A. What do you mean, how did I go
19 news? 19 about reviewing --
20 A. Again, I'm not going -- the 20 Q. I'm just trying to understand
21 answer I'm going to give is the same. The 21 in a very granular methodological basis,
22 fact that -- in the example I have given, 22 were you looking a a computer monitor, were
23 the fact that there was no difference 23 you looking at printouts, did somebody else
24 between the news and no news days certainly 24 read you results over the phone? I'm just
25 informed my opinion that the stock may have 25 trying to understand really granularly, how
Page 239 Page 241
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 traded in an efficient market. I mean, 2 did you receive and review the results of
3 again, I would have to look at it on a 3 this Factiva test?
4 case-by-case basis. 4 A. I would say printouts. They
5 Q. So I don't understand that 5 weren't literally printed out, right? I
6 response. So what I believe you have said 6 didn't put them out on a printer. So if
7 is that you can think of some instances, 7 you want to, I don't know, maybe it was a
8 like your earnings release example, where 8 PDF, and I looked through the documents. I
9 the earnings releases come in as expected, 9 definitely did not print them out.
10 where you believe that the Ferrillo, et al, 10 Q. All right. So you didn't print
11 conclusion in the event of no statistical 11 hundreds or thousands of pages?
12 significant difference does not follow, and 12 A. No, I did not.
13 I understand your response, and so what I'm 13 Q. All right. Am I right that the
14 asking you as a follow-up question is can 14 PDF files, I will just use that term, I'm
15 you also think of any instances where you 15 not implying it was necessarily that
16 believe that the Ferrillo, et al, 16 format, but are you saying the PDF file was
17 conclusion does follow, or do you believe 17 the headlines and the first few words of
18 that they are just flat wrong always? 18 the article or was it the entirety of every
19 A. Of course what they are saying 19 article?
20 is possibly correct. I'm just thinking of 20 A. In some cases it was just the
21 specific examples where it may not be 21 headlines, in some cases it was the content
22 correct, and it would still inform my 22 of the article. But, I mean, again, I have
23 opinion with regards to market efficiency. 23 made a very specific explanation of what I
24 So, I mean, I can't even 24 did in this case, and I relied on the idea
25 remember what we were talking about, 25 of content analysis to arrive at what I
61 (Pages 238 - 241)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 63 of
190
Page 242 Page 244
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 defined as news days. 2 A. As I sit here, I don't recall.
3 Q. Okay. So why don't we look at 3 There was no -- I don't recall.
4 an example of this to see how this worked. 4 Q. You didn't do that in any
5 So I'm going to mark now as Exhibit 286 a 5 systematic way; is that right?
6 document that The Rosen Law Firm produced 6 A. I think that's accurate.
7 to us as part of the backup to your work, 7 Q. Okay. So let's just look at an
8 Dr. Werner. 8 example here. Let's turn to page 118.
9 (Defendant's Exhibit 286 marked 9 A. Okay.
10 for identification.) 10 Q. And do you see the second
11 A. Okay. Let's not get these 11 article there is "Batavia man charged with
12 confused. Do you have a bigger binder 12 DUI after crashing into Con Ed pole"?
13 clip? 13 A. I do.
14 MR. ROSEN: Take this one. 14 Q. And do you see that this is a
15 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 15 drunken driving report from the Kane County
16 Q. And just for the record, this 16 Chronicle?
17 is a printout from Dow Jones, it says 17 A. I do.
18 Factiva on the bottom, it relates to 18 Q. Do you see that this appears to
19 BlackBerry, there are 143 pages. 19 be included because the drunk driver was in
20 A. You know what, it occurs to me 20 Blackberry Township in Pennsylvania?
21 since you are going to ask me about this, I 21 A. I do.
22 should probably review the appendix in my 22 Q. Okay. And you would agree that
23 initial report where I discuss exactly what 23 that's a false positive, the inclusion of
24 I did in looking at these news articles. 24 this article in a set of articles about
25 Q. That's a great idea. So that 25 BlackBerry, the company, right?
Page 243 Page 245
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 was I think Exhibit A to your opening 2 A. Yeah. Let me -- let me just
3 report, Deposition Exhibit 281, and that is 3 look at BlackBerry's results here.
4 found on, sorry, it was Exhibit B, so it 4 (Witness perusing document.)
5 was found on pages 44 to 46. 5 A. Okay.
6 A. Okay. Do you mind if I just 6 Q. All right. So my question --
7 read this quickly? 7 A. I'm sorry, hold on -- hold on
8 Q. No, please. 8 one more second.
9 (Witness perusing document.) 9 (Witness perusing document.)
10 A. Okay, I'm done, thank you. 10 A. Right, so this is outside the
11 Q. Now we are looking at Exhibit 11 range of my study, so this wasn't included
12 286. Is this the format in which you 12 in my study.
13 reviewed the Factiva results? 13 Q. So this article we have just
14 A. To the extent I reviewed them, 14 been looking at --
15 yes, and I also saw -- I believe I have 15 A. Oh, December 28th, 2020, sorry,
16 seen some more -- some longer articles. 16 my bad, my mistake. Hold on.
17 I'm pretty sure this is just the first 17 Q. Just so we have a clear record,
18 paragraph or first couple of lines. There 18 the article that we have been talking about
19 are certainly other -- other formats I've 19 on page 118 of Deposition Exhibit 286 is
20 seen. 20 from December 28th, 2020, about one month
21 Q. All right. So for what 21 before the end of your one-year period,
22 articles did you go and look at the entire 22 right?
23 article as opposed to just looking at the 23 A. Correct.
24 headline and the first few lines as shown 24 Q. And so my question about this
25 here in Exhibit 286? 25 is do you agree with me that the inclusion
62 (Pages 242 - 245)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 64 of
190
Page 246 Page 248
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 of this article about drunken driving in 2 does.
3 Blackberry Township is a false positive for 3 It is based on the theory, and,
4 your set of articles about BlackBerry, the 4 again, let's look at what I have said about
5 company? 5 content analysis here --
6 A. I would agree. But to the 6 Q. All right, I do think we are
7 extent that -- so, first of all, that was 7 getting very far away from my question,
8 not in the top 10 percent news days. To 8 sir, which is do you agree with me that
9 the extent that that would be included, and 9 articles about the restaurant chain Panda
10 I wouldn't expect that to move the stock 10 Express are not relevant to investment in
11 price, it would -- it would lead me, if it 11 the company Express?
12 was -- if it happened to be a news day, you 12 A. Right. You are right. I'm
13 know, let's say there were 20 articles 13 taking it a step further and saying okay,
14 about this drunk driving accident, that 14 let's say that there are false positives,
15 would lead me to -- that would bias my 15 will this have any impact on our results?
16 results towards a finding of -- a finding 16 You are right, I'm going beyond that.
17 of nonefficiency. 17 Because based on my understanding, I would
18 Q. Do you know whether there are 18 be shocked if any of these false positives
19 articles included in your set about 19 actually had an impact on my results.
20 blackberries, the fruit, the edible fruit 20 Look, to me, that is --
21 that is grown on bushes? 21 MR. ROSEN: Let him finish. He
22 A. I do not as I sit here today. 22 is not done.
23 Q. And you would agree with me 23 MR. RYAN: He is not done
24 that articles about blackberries, the 24 answering something that has nothing to
25 edible fruit that grow on bushes, are not 25 do with my question.
Page 247 Page 249
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 relevant to investment in BlackBerry, the 2 MR. ROSEN: But if he wants to
3 company, right? 3 respond to your question, he is
4 A. Yeah, in a vacuum, that is 4 entitled to respond.
5 correct. 5 MR. RYAN: Not in a way that
6 Q. Are you aware that your set of 6 has nothing to do with my question,
7 articles about the company Express include 7 Larry.
8 articles about the restaurant chain Panda 8 MR. ROSEN: He can answer the
9 Express? 9 question as he sees fit.
10 A. It is certainly possible. 10 A. Look, ultimately, I mean, you
11 Q. All right. And you would agree 11 want to ask, does that -- I mean, okay, so
12 with me that articles about the restaurant 12 there are these false positives. Does it
13 chain Panda Express are not relevant to 13 have any impact on my results? And the
14 investment in the company Express, right? 14 probability that it would have any impact
15 A. Look, I mean, these questions 15 on my results is minuscule.
16 are based on -- I mean, you are perfectly 16 Q. All right. Have you done any
17 reasonable to ask these questions. The 17 study to determine how many false positives
18 question is should that impact my results. 18 there are and whether they have an impact
19 If by chance there happened to be 50 news 19 on your results?
20 articles on BlackBerry the day where there 20 A. Well, okay, I have not. But I
21 is a discussion of blackberry the fruit, 21 imagine that if they did have a significant
22 that would then show up in the news days. 22 impact on my results, one of your two
23 Does that mean that I think this article 23 experts would have done so. So based on
24 about blackberries was informational? No. 24 the absence of any analysis that looks at
25 But that's part of what this methodology 25 that, my guess is it doesn't have any
63 (Pages 246 - 249)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 65 of
190
Page 250 Page 252
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 impact on my results. 2 There is Dylan McCabe. There is Rashi, I
3 Q. Do you know whether there are 3 believe the last name is Agarwal, Miguel
4 articles in your set about the rapper 4 Villanueva, Dan Bettencourt may have
5 Princess Nokia? 5 tangentially worked on this, but I don't
6 A. Who? 6 know, not in any significant way. I think
7 Q. The rapper, Princess Nokia. 7 off the top of my head, those would be the
8 A. It is certainly possible. 8 individuals.
9 Again, there is absolutely no reason -- are 9 Q. Okay. So at least four or five
10 you familiar with her music? I'm sorry, I 10 individuals from Crowninshield?
11 know I'm not supposed to ask you questions. 11 A. Correct.
12 Q. I gather you're not familiar 12 Q. How many hours did you work on
13 with Princess Nokia? 13 this engagement through submission of your
14 A. I am not familiar with her 14 rebuttal report?
15 music. Again -- 15 A. I have no idea.
16 Q. Do you agree that articles 16 Q. Do you have an approximation?
17 about the rapper Princess Nokia are not 17 A. More than 150, less than 500.
18 relevant to investment in Nokia, the 18 Q. Okay.
19 company? 19 A. But, I mean, that's a guess.
20 A. I agree, and yet I also agree 20 I'm not sure that that's -- I mean, I
21 that the probability of that having any 21 would -- I would be very surprised if I
22 impact on the results of my study are 22 worked under 150. I gave you an upper
23 minuscule. 23 estimate that I would be surprised that I
24 THE WITNESS: What time did we 24 worked more than, but it is possible.
25 start or go back on? 25 Q. Do you know how many hours the
Page 251 Page 253
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 MR. ROSEN: 2:29 I think. 2 Crowninshield team worked on this?
3 THE WITNESS: Can we take a 3 A. I do not.
4 break, a five-minute break? Is that 4 Q. But presumably several hundred
5 okay? 5 hours?
6 MR. RYAN: Do you want to do it 6 A. I think that is a pretty safe
7 right now? 7 assumption.
8 THE WITNESS: Yeah, yeah, yeah. 8 Q. Now, I have seen two
9 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will 9 publications that you are a co-author of in
10 end media unit five. We are going off 10 Law 360 with an individual named Narinder
11 the record at 3:51. 11 Walia; is that right?
12 (Recess taken.) 12 A. Correct, yes.
13 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back 13 Q. And is he affiliated with
14 on the record at 4:02. This will begin 14 Crowninshield?
15 media unit six. 15 A. He was at the time those
16 BY MR. RYAN: 16 articles were submitted. He is now, I'm
17 Q. Were there individuals at 17 trying to remember the name of the firm, I
18 Crowninshield who worked with you, 18 think the firm -- he worked at a firm
19 Dr. Werner, on your reports in this matter? 19 called StoneTurn, TurnStone.
20 A. There were. 20 Q. I'm familiar with StoneTurn.
21 Q. Who were they? 21 A. Oh, you are. It is StoneTurn,
22 A. And forgive me with regards to 22 okay.
23 spelling, we may have to go to a website, 23 Q. Yes, I actually know an expert
24 there is Alex Huang, that is with an 24 that works now at StoneTurn.
25 H-u-a-n-g. There is Alex Zhang, Z-h-a-n-g. 25 All right. At the time you
64 (Pages 250 - 253)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 66 of
190
Page 254 Page 256
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 co-authored these articles about securities 2 A. I'm sorry, I don't see that
3 damages with Mr. Walia, was he affiliated 3 particular -- is it on 22 or 23?
4 with Crowninshield? 4 Q. The first full sentence on 23.
5 A. He was. I don't know if 5 A. Okay, there we go.
6 technically he was an employee or he was a 6 Q. And my question really is quite
7 1099. What's the right term? 1099 7 simple, which is what does the word
8 employee, I don't know, consultant. 8 "collective" mean in that sentence?
9 Q. Okay, sure. And have you 9 A. A collection of information. I
10 worked with Mr. Walia on a number of expert 10 mean, that's what a -- people always -- not
11 reports? 11 always -- often refer to a news/no news
12 A. Over the years, certainly. I 12 test as a collective test.
13 mean, we worked together at CRA. 13 Q. I see. You are not saying that
14 Q. Oh, I see. 14 you studied the nine stocks in a collective
15 A. If you mean my expert reports, 15 way?
16 we have certainly worked on some together. 16 A. I don't know the answer.
17 Q. All right. And did he work at 17 That's not anything I thought about. I
18 all with you on this engagement for the 18 don't know the answer to that.
19 Robinhood matter? 19 Q. You ran separate regression
20 A. He did not. 20 analyses for the nine stocks, right?
21 Q. Okay. And do you consider 21 A. That is correct.
22 Mr. Walia to be a capable financial 22 Q. Okay. Now, there is a citation
23 economist? 23 here in paragraph 52, I'm looking at Note
24 A. He is a capable financial 24 64.
25 economist, yes. 25 A. Okay, hold on. I shouldn't
Page 255 Page 257
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Okay. Now, back in your 2 have shut it. I apologize. Note 64, yes.
3 opening report, this was Exhibit 281. 3 Q. There is a citation to an
4 A. I'm sorry, I shouldn't 4 article by Eugene Fama. Do you see that?
5 anticipate questions. I'm pretty sure I 5 A. I do.
6 know where you were going with that. Okay, 6 Q. And is Professor Fama
7 281? 7 considered to be a foremost authority on
8 Q. Yes, sir. 8 the efficient market theory?
9 A. Why don't you just tell me 9 A. I believe he has -- he won a
10 which one that is. 10 Nobel Prize. He is certainly knowledgeable
11 Q. It is your original report. 11 about it.
12 MR. ROSEN: What page of it? 12 Q. All right. He won a Nobel
13 MR. RYAN: Page 23. 13 Prize in large part for his work --
14 Q. I'm at the top of the page, 14 A. Is that correct?
15 which is the carryover of paragraph 52. 15 Q. That is my understanding. He
16 A. Page 23? 16 won a Nobel Prize in large part for his
17 Q. Yes, sir. 17 work on the efficient market theory, right?
18 A. Okay, all right, yup. 18 A. Right, as an academic, but
19 Q. And do you see there, there is 19 yeah.
20 a sentence that reads "To demonstrate this 20 Q. Sure. Now, let me ask you to
21 cause and effect relationship, I conducted 21 turn to paragraph 96 of your rebuttal
22 collective event study tests investigating 22 report.
23 whether the market for each of the nine 23 A. All right.
24 Affected Companies' common stock was 24 Q. So this is what we marked as
25 efficient"? 25 Deposition Exhibit 282, and we are on page
65 (Pages 254 - 257)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 67 of
190
Page 258 Page 260
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 41. 2 right now. So this is paragraph 149 of his
3 A. Page 41, okay, I'm there. 3 initial report or his rebuttal? It must be
4 Q. All right. Do you see you have 4 his initial report, right?
5 a discussion here in your paragraph 96 that 5 Q. It was his initial report. But
6 Dr. Grenadier, in your words, presents a 6 that wasn't important enough to you, having
7 contradictory opinion in Section 7 of his 7 read his testimony that you misquoted him,
8 report? 8 you just didn't bother to look it up to see
9 A. Yes, I do. 9 whether he was right; is that right?
10 Q. And then you have a quotation 10 A. Let's just see what he said.
11 in the middle of the paragraph where you 11 Q. Well, I'm asking you a
12 write "Dr. Grenadier writes 'I see no 12 different question first. Am I right that
13 reasons why a restriction on a subset of 13 you read --
14 retail investors that account for a 14 MR. ROSEN: You asked him two
15 fraction of the overall market would have 15 questions. You asked him one question.
16 artificially distorted the stock price 16 He was about to give you an answer to
17 throughout the proposed class period.'" 17 the first question and then you asked
18 Do you see that? 18 him a second question before he could
19 A. I do. 19 answer. So let him answer the first
20 Q. And you read Dr. Grenadier's 20 question and then go to the second
21 deposition, right? 21 question.
22 A. I did. 22 Q. Here is the question that is on
23 Q. All right. And you saw that he 23 the record: It wasn't important enough to
24 explained that you had misquoted him, that 24 you that after you read his testimony that
25 the sentence in his report, that you left 25 you had misquoted him, that you took the
Page 259 Page 261
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 out a material portion of the sentence in 2 time to look it up to see whether he was
3 his report, do you remember that? 3 right, I'm right about that, aren't I?
4 A. I remember him saying that I 4 A. I did not look it up, that is
5 misquoted him, but I don't remember -- I'm 5 correct. I'm looking at it now.
6 happy to look at his deposition to know 6 Q. So you are now looking at
7 exactly what he said. 7 paragraph 96 of Dr. --
8 Q. Okay. 8 A. Oh, 96? I'm sorry, I'm looking
9 A. I mean, other than the fact 9 at the wrong thing.
10 that -- I mean, I don't know why he thought 10 Q. I misspoke, paragraph 149, I
11 that I misquoted him. Like I don't 11 apologize. And you see the first full
12 remember any of that. 12 sentence on page 76 of Dr. Grenadier's
13 Q. All right. So after you read 13 opening report reads "Conversely, if the
14 Dr. Grenadier's testimony that you had 14 markets for the at-issue stocks were
15 misquoted him, what did you do to see 15 efficient, contrary to the evidence I have
16 whether you had in fact misquoted him? 16 discussed in Section 6, I see no reason why
17 A. Nothing. 17 restrictions on a subset of retail
18 Q. Nothing at all? 18 investors that account for a fraction of
19 A. Correct. 19 the overall market would have artificially
20 Q. Okay. So you don't dispute 20 distorted the stock price throughout the
21 that you in fact left out a material 21 proposed class period"?
22 portion of the sentence in paragraph 149 of 22 A. I do see that.
23 Dr. Grenadier's report, because you 23 Q. And you didn't quote the
24 apparently haven't checked, right? 24 portion of the sentence that reads
25 A. Well, I mean, I can look at it 25 "Conversely, if the market for the at-issue
66 (Pages 258 - 261)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 68 of
190
Page 262 Page 264
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 stocks were efficient, contrary to the 2 A. Well, I'm sorry, then I don't
3 evidence I have discussed in Section 6," 3 understand what you mean by an empirical
4 right? 4 question. I mean, if, you know, I said you
5 A. That is true. 5 could study my intake of Coke Zero, I don't
6 Q. And you agree that that removes 6 think of that as an empirical question.
7 the supposed contradiction that you 7 Q. I do. We could measure it. We
8 discussed in paragraph 96 of your report, 8 could track it. We could say two cans
9 that is the only reason you thought that he 9 today, three cans tomorrow, right, that
10 presented a contradictory opinion is you 10 would be five cans over two days, we could
11 are leaving out a material portion of his 11 do that, couldn't we?
12 sentence, right? 12 A. Okay, maybe you and I have
13 A. That is incorrect. 13 different understanding or definitions of
14 Q. Okay. Do you agree that a 14 what empirical is. To me, that's
15 bubble typically will not last forever? 15 observational.
16 A. In what context? 16 Q. Fine, observational. As an
17 Q. Financial markets. 17 observational matter, do you believe that
18 MR. ROSEN: I thought you were 18 from time to time there are bubbles in
19 talking about like blowing bubbles. 19 financial markets?
20 MR. RYAN: I'm not talking 20 A. It is certainly possible.
21 about blowing bubbles. 21 Q. That's not my question, sir.
22 Q. Do you agree with the statement 22 Do you believe that in fact, in the real
23 that a bubble typically will not last 23 world, as an observational matter from time
24 forever? 24 to time there are bubbles in the financial
25 A. I think that is generally true, 25 markets?
Page 263 Page 265
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 to the extent that there are bubbles. 2 A. Okay. Can you show me -- can
3 Q. And there are from time to time 3 you show me exactly what you mean by
4 bubbles in financial markets, right? 4 bubble? I don't believe that I have used
5 A. I'm certainly familiar with the 5 it in any of my writings here, so if you
6 fact that people have talked about bubbles. 6 would like to point me to a definition, I
7 I don't know if there are periods of time 7 will give you a clear answer.
8 that officially have been defined as 8 Q. Do you have an understanding of
9 bubbles. Certainly people have discussed 9 what the term "bubble" means?
10 it. 10 A. I have a notion, but I don't
11 Q. All right. Well, do you 11 know what your definition of a bubble is,
12 believe that there are bubbles from time to 12 since we are arguing about empiricism.
13 time in financial markets? 13 Q. So how would you define the
14 A. Is it possible? It is 14 term "bubble"?
15 certainly possible. 15 A. In a stock market, I don't
16 Q. I guess I'm asking an empirical 16 know. I mean, I would turn to Brealey and
17 question. As a financial economist as you 17 Myers or I would turn to Shleifer and quote
18 sit here today, do you believe that from 18 him, or quote Brealey and Myers. It is not
19 time to time there are bubbles in financial 19 something I think about, like oh, the
20 markets? 20 definition of a bubble is X.
21 A. Why is that an empirical 21 Q. All right. So you agree that
22 question? 22 Brealey and Myers, I guess it is now
23 Q. It is something that one could 23 Brealey, Myers and Allen are a leading
24 study. That's what I mean by an empirical 24 authority on corporate finance, right?
25 question. 25 A. Well, no.
67 (Pages 262 - 265)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 69 of
190
Page 266 Page 268
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Really? 2 Q. Do you believe that
3 A. I believe that they write a 3 observationally they occasionally take
4 textbook that is frequently used. 4 place?
5 Q. Okay. 5 A. Well, I believe that some
6 A. But I don't know if they 6 people believe, I mean, you have mentioned
7 discuss -- I mean, I used that as an 7 Mr. Allen -- oh, no, I'm sorry, not
8 example. I don't know if they discussed 8 Mr. Allen. I mean, so this is really where
9 bubbles in their textbook. 9 I got confused, right? So if I look at
10 Q. All right. And you agree that 10 Mr. Fischel's initial report, he talks
11 Andre Shleifer is a leading authority on 11 about a short squeeze as in that's exactly
12 corporate finance, right? 12 what happened, and then I read his
13 A. I believe that's accurate. 13 deposition, and he said I never said that.
14 Q. Okay. So to go back to my 14 So I guess let's go to Mr. Fischel's
15 question about bubbles, if I'm 15 report.
16 understanding you right, you are unable to 16 Q. This is very far afield from my
17 give me with any precision a definition of 17 question, sir.
18 what you believe a bubble in financial 18 A. Well, I'm trying to give you --
19 markets is, right? 19 Q. My question is not about
20 A. Yeah. Again, I have a vague 20 Mr. Fischel.
21 notion, and, you know, if someone asked me 21 A. Well, right, but I'm trying to
22 to define a bubble I would go to, off 22 make sure that I have an accurate
23 the -- I would refer them to Shleifer or 23 description of what a short squeeze is, so
24 someone else and then I would say oh, okay, 24 I can tell you when one has occurred.
25 well then specifically Shleifer means this 25 Q. I'm using your definition. You
Page 267 Page 269
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 is a bubble, this is what he is discussing. 2 gave me a definition. I'm happy to take
3 Q. Okay. Do you know what a short 3 it. So now do you believe that, using your
4 squeeze is? 4 definition, that from time to time short
5 A. I do know what a short squeeze 5 squeezes take place in the financial
6 is. 6 markets?
7 Q. What is a short squeeze? 7 A. And I said it is possible.
8 A. Oh, wait, I'm sorry, do I know 8 Q. And so observationally do they
9 what a short squeeze is? I don't know -- 9 in fact happen, perhaps rarely, but
10 you know, that's actually a very vague 10 sometimes, do they happen, ever?
11 term, and so it is at least the concept, I 11 A. Well, I guess by saying it is
12 don't know if it is an actuality, where 12 possible, it is possible they have
13 people short a stock, as a response to the 13 occurred.
14 stock price going up they are squeezed out 14 Q. Okay. Do you have any
15 of their positions. Now, again, that is 15 understanding as you sit here today as to
16 not a formal definition of a short squeeze. 16 whether they in fact have occurred let's
17 Yeah, that's not a formal definition of a 17 say in the last hundred years in financial
18 short squeeze. But it gets at the -- kind 18 markets?
19 of the idea. 19 A. Again, I haven't memorized when
20 Q. All right. So using that 20 they occurred, but I'm happy to look at
21 definition of a short squeeze, do you agree 21 people like Mr. Fischel who said the short
22 that from time to time short squeezes take 22 squeeze happened here, and I'm sure he has
23 place in financial markets? 23 cites to examples of short squeezes. I'm
24 A. Oh, is it possible? It is 24 more than happy to discuss them with you.
25 certainly possible. 25 Q. All right. Without looking at
68 (Pages 266 - 269)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 70 of
190
Page 270 Page 272
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Mr. Fischel's report, you are unable to 2 So I'm not quite sure, is it possible? I
3 tell me whether you believe short squeezes 3 don't -- I don't know as I sit here today.
4 in fact occur in the financial markets; is 4 Again, I mean, I quibble with
5 that right? 5 what you define as a bubble. So you want
6 A. I'm not sure that's what I 6 to give me an example of a bubble, I will
7 said. 7 be happy to look at it and then tell you
8 Q. Well, I think the record will 8 whether or not it is possible that a stock
9 reflect that you haven't answered that 9 is trading in an efficient market during a
10 question. 10 period which you've defined as a bubble.
11 Do you agree that short 11 Q. All right. So I take it, then,
12 squeezes, when they do occur, are typically 12 that you have no opinion as to whether the
13 short-lived? 13 market for a security is efficient when a
14 A. Define short-lived. 14 bubble is taking place?
15 Q. A relatively short duration. 15 A. I defer to my last answer.
16 A. Okay. Could you be more 16 Q. Okay. Do you have an opinion
17 specific? And I only ask because, you 17 as to whether the market for a security is
18 know, in economics, oftentimes when we talk 18 efficient when a short squeeze is taking
19 about short term, you could be talking 19 place?
20 about a year, right? If I talk about 20 A. To the extent a short squeeze
21 short-term macroeconomic events, I could be 21 is taking place, well, since -- my
22 talking about one or two years. So if you 22 understanding now is that no one believes a
23 want to give me a specific description of 23 short squeeze took place, even though this
24 what you consider to be short-lived or a 24 is called short squeeze litigation. I
25 definition of short, I'm happy to do it. 25 don't know that that's anything that I have
Page 271 Page 273
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Fine. Do you agree that short 2 thought about.
3 squeezes, when they do occur, typically 3 If you want to point me to a
4 last only a matter of days? 4 period in time where people uniformly agree
5 A. Do I agree? So, again, why not 5 that a short squeeze occurred, I'm happy to
6 just let me look at Mr. Fischel's report? 6 look at that and then render an opinion or
7 Because I'm pretty sure that's what he 7 render you my opinion of what I think about
8 said. If you want me -- I believe -- 8 whether or not the stock at issue could be
9 evidently that's what he believes. I 9 efficient.
10 haven't done a comprehensive study on short 10 Q. So I was asking you a question
11 squeezes. Off the top of my head, I don't 11 that wasn't tethered to the facts of this
12 know how long they do or do not last. 12 case. It was a general question about
13 Q. I see, okay. Is there any way 13 financial economics. My question is do you
14 of knowing when a bubble in the financial 14 have an opinion as to whether the market
15 markets will burst? 15 for a security is efficient while a short
16 A. To the extent that there are 16 squeeze is taking place?
17 bubbles, is there a way of knowing when 17 A. Well, again, so you are
18 they will end? That's not anything I have 18 assuming a short squeeze has taken place.
19 ever thought about. 19 So show me an example where a short
20 Q. Okay. Do you have an opinion 20 squeeze, people have agreed that a short --
21 as to whether the market for a security is 21 excuse me, sorry, too many Diet Cokes or
22 efficient when a bubble is taking place? 22 Coke Zeros -- where a short squeeze has
23 A. So you are asking a yes or no 23 taken place and I will be happy to give you
24 question, so that's a binary question. 24 the best answer I possibly can.
25 There are different degrees of efficiency. 25 Q. All right. But you have got no
69 (Pages 270 - 273)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 71 of
190
Page 274 Page 276
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 opinion as a general matter on that 2 opinion about the efficiency of the market
3 question on the efficiency of financial 3 for that security while the short squeeze
4 markets for a security while a short 4 is taking place?
5 squeeze is taking place? 5 A. So that's an incomplete
6 A. Well, so when you say a short 6 hypothetical. I would need much more
7 squeeze is taking place, define exactly 7 information to answer that.
8 what you mean by it is taking place. 8 Q. All right. So you are not able
9 Q. I was using your definition of 9 to answer that either yes or no?
10 a short squeeze from before. 10 A. Again, if you want to show me
11 A. Right, and I gave you a very 11 where economists say -- why make it a
12 broad, a lay -- not a layman's 12 hypothetical? Show me some actual evidence
13 understanding -- but a broad definition of 13 where people say a short squeeze occurred,
14 what a short squeeze could be. So if there 14 and we can look at it. Where you people
15 is something -- look, I mean, throughout 15 universally agree that a short squeeze
16 all of this work, right, people disagree 16 occurred, 90 percent of the 100 people who
17 about what a short squeeze is. 17 looked at it believe a short squeeze
18 So some people think a short 18 occurred, yeah, I will take a look at it.
19 squeeze has occurred. Your two experts, 19 Q. As I'm sure you know, it is
20 despite what they have suggested, or at 20 common to ask experts, whether in financial
21 least written in one of their original 21 economics or something else, hypothetical
22 reports, now say that a short squeeze did 22 questions to see what expertise they have
23 not occur, at least that's my understanding 23 and whether they actually have expertise in
24 based on my reading of their depositions. 24 this area. So I take it you, though, have
25 So to the extent that you want 25 no expertise in short squeezes, right?
Page 275 Page 277
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 me to look at an exact period of time where 2 A. My opinion is you have asked an
3 people agree, people, economists, agree 3 incomplete hypothetical question.
4 that a short -- a short squeeze occurred, 4 Q. Okay. Have you ever calculated
5 right, not people talking about a short 5 damages in a securities class action?
6 squeeze, a short squeeze occurred, I will 6 A. Per-share damages or aggregate
7 take a look at it and let you know if I 7 damages?
8 think that affects the efficiency of the 8 Q. Per-share damages.
9 stock at issue. 9 A. I have.
10 Q. So my question is assume with 10 Q. And have you typically used a
11 me that all economists agree that in a 11 regression analysis as part of your damages
12 particular case a short squeeze is taking 12 calculation?
13 place. Do you have an opinion about the 13 A. Typically, yes.
14 efficiency of the market for that security 14 Q. Have you ever calculated
15 while the short squeeze is taking place? 15 per-share damages in a securities case
16 A. So in your hypothetical 16 where the market was inefficient during the
17 example, all economists believe that a 17 class period?
18 short squeeze can occur? 18 A. Not to my knowledge as I sit
19 Q. No, is occurring. 19 here today.
20 A. Oh, so, again, let me restate 20 Q. All right. Are you aware of
21 it, in your hypothetical, the assumption is 21 any case where someone has done that?
22 that all economists believe that a short 22 A. I'm not, but that doesn't mean
23 squeeze is occurring? 23 it hasn't happened. Again, I mean, it is a
24 Q. Correct. And my question is do 24 question of how you define efficiency.
25 you, in that hypothetical, do you have an 25 I mean, obviously I have been
70 (Pages 274 - 277)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 72 of
190
Page 278 Page 280
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 spending a lot of time reading about 2 seen that. So I don't -- I don't know.
3 Halliburton II and what people think about 3 Q. Okay. Have you given any
4 efficiency. So that certainly informs my 4 thought before this deposition to the
5 opinion now. 5 question of whether one can have a
6 So I don't know exactly what 6 reasonably certain proof of damages in a
7 you are referring to. Is it possible that 7 securities class action where the security
8 you could measure damages for a stock that 8 trades in an inefficient market during the
9 trades in an inefficient market? I 9 class period?
10 believe, one, I believe you could do it, 10 A. Again, what do you mean by
11 and, two, I believe that -- well, first of 11 reasonable certainty?
12 all, when you say efficient, you are 12 Q. Are you familiar with the
13 talking informationally efficient or 13 concept that damages in the law need to be
14 value -- value relevant efficient? Are we 14 proved to a reasonable certainty?
15 talking about, let's say, Dr. Fischel -- 15 A. Oh, is there a law you want me
16 Dr. Fischel, sorry -- Mr. Fischel's example 16 to look at or a specific cite that you want
17 of arbitrage efficiency? 17 me to look at?
18 Q. I take it you are unaware of 18 Q. Are you familiar with the legal
19 any case where someone has calculated 19 concept that in calculating damages,
20 damages in a securities class action for a 20 damages should be proved, should be
21 stock that traded in an inefficient market 21 calculated, to a reasonable certainty? Is
22 during the class period, right? 22 that a principle that you are familiar
23 A. I have no knowledge one way or 23 with?
24 the other about that. 24 A. I don't believe -- I don't
25 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding 25 believe that's anything I have ever read or
Page 279 Page 281
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 that in a securities class action the 2 seen.
3 question of whether a stock trades in an 3 Q. I see, okay. So since you are
4 efficient market goes to the issue of 4 unfamiliar with that term, I will remove
5 reliance? 5 those words from my question.
6 A. Well, it kind of sounds like a 6 So is it your understanding
7 legal conclusion. 7 that whether a stock trades in an efficient
8 Q. I agree. So I'm asking you 8 market goes not just to the issue of
9 whether that's your understanding. That's 9 reliance, but also to whether one can prove
10 why I did not ask you whether it was your 10 damages?
11 opinion. 11 A. So one can prove damages? It's
12 Is it your understanding that 12 possible.
13 in a securities class action the question 13 Q. Okay. You don't have a view on
14 of whether a stock trades in an efficient 14 that one way or the other?
15 market goes to the issue of reliance? 15 A. I haven't been asked to render
16 A. That's my general 16 an opinion about that here.
17 understanding, as a layperson. 17 Q. Okay. So let me ask you, in
18 Q. Is it also your understanding 18 your opening report, if we go toward the
19 that the question of whether a stock trades 19 back -- sorry, I think it was the rebuttal
20 in an efficient market goes to whether one 20 report. Bear with me one moment.
21 can have a reasonably certain proof of 21 All right. So I'm in your
22 damages? 22 rebuttal report which we marked as
23 A. Reasonably certain proof of 23 Deposition Exhibit 282.
24 damages? That sounds like you are reading 24 A. Okay, hold on one second.
25 from something. I don't recall having ever 25 Okay, sorry, go ahead.
71 (Pages 278 - 281)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 73 of
190
Page 282 Page 284
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. I'm on page 51 and I'm looking 2 deviate from using market prices to
3 at paragraph 115. So do you see that the 3 establish the appropriate but-for price
4 first sentence of that paragraph reads 4 absent the alleged market manipulation?
5 "Because these markets were efficient 5 A. Is it possible? It is
6 during the immediate pre-class period, 6 certainly possible.
7 there is no need to deviate from using 7 Q. And I take it that's not
8 market prices to establish the appropriate 8 something you have looked into because you
9 but-for price absent the alleged market 9 concluded the other way, that these markets
10 manipulation"? 10 were efficient during the immediate
11 A. I do see that. 11 pre-class period, right?
12 Q. And you hold that view in terms 12 A. I don't think that that was
13 of calculating class-wide damages in this 13 necessarily my thought process. Again, I
14 case, right? 14 gave -- this is -- this is not absurd, but,
15 A. Under my understanding of 15 you know, I say in my report for example,
16 Affiliated Ute, but I have given you two 16 this is one way you could measure damages.
17 additional damage -- possible damage 17 It doesn't necessarily then mean that all
18 analyses that would be done that I don't 18 my damage theories are based solely on a
19 necessarily think -- well, I don't know. 19 market price.
20 Okay, so yeah, again, I think I 20 Q. All right. So I'm asking you
21 refer back to Affiliated Ute with regards 21 about the first sentence in paragraph 115
22 to that particular sentence. I think that 22 of your rebuttal report, sir. And am I
23 the other -- the two additional damage 23 right that the first clause of this
24 analyses I look at don't necessarily use 24 sentence is linked causally, because of the
25 market prices as the but-for price. It may 25 word "because," to the second clause,
Page 283 Page 285
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 influence or bear upon the but-for price, 2 right?
3 but I don't think that it's the exact same 3 A. That is correct.
4 thing. 4 Q. And so if we remove the
5 Q. You understand that Affiliated 5 premise, the first clause, that is if we,
6 Ute is a case that does not depend on a 6 hypothetically now, since I understand it
7 showing of market efficiency, right? 7 is not your opinion, if we remove the
8 A. That is correct. 8 premise that markets were efficient during
9 Q. So your first sentence in 9 the immediate pre-class period, do you
10 paragraph 115 says "Because these markets 10 agree with me that it no longer necessarily
11 were efficient during the immediate 11 follows that there was no need to deviate
12 pre-class period, there is no need to 12 from using market prices to establish the
13 deviate from using market prices to 13 appropriate but-for price absent the
14 establish the appropriate but-for price 14 alleged market manipulation?
15 absent the alleged market manipulation," 15 A. So that is an extremely long
16 right? 16 question. I believe in there somewhere you
17 A. Okay, I mean, yes, that's what 17 said something -- there wasn't a discussion
18 I said. But I don't know how that's 18 of assumptions, but there was certainly
19 inconsistent with my statement that there 19 some qualifications that you made in that
20 are two additional analyses that one could 20 statement. Without rehearing those
21 do. 21 qualifications, I can't answer that
22 Q. Do you agree with me that if, 22 question.
23 contrary to your opinion, these markets 23 Q. Okay. Why don't we read it
24 were inefficient during the immediate 24 back.
25 pre-class period, there may be a need to 25 A. Can you read it slowly, please?
72 (Pages 282 - 285)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 74 of
190
Page 286 Page 288
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 I can write it down. 2 make adjustments to that. So this is just
3 (The record was read.) 3 an example of what one could do.
4 A. I'm sorry, I don't know how to 4 Q. So I agree one would need to
5 answer that question. Do you want to break 5 make adjustments for E*Trade and so forth.
6 it into like small chunks so we can walk 6 But I'm just looking at what you wrote.
7 through it? 7 You wrote "Because these markets were
8 Q. Sure. 8 efficient during the immediate pre-class
9 A. There seems like there was a 9 period," it followed for you logically that
10 lot of qualifying statements in there that 10 there was no need to deviate from using
11 I need to kind of sequentially go through 11 market prices to establish the appropriate
12 to accurately answer your question. 12 but-for price absent the alleged market
13 Q. I will do this in little bites. 13 manipulation, right?
14 A. Okay, thank you. 14 A. I don't think -- see, you are
15 Q. So I'm looking now at the first 15 making a causal connection between those
16 sentence of paragraph 115. 16 two statements and I'm not sure that that
17 A. Hold on while I go back. So we 17 was my intention.
18 are in my rebuttal report, right? 18 Q. I see. So you used the word
19 Q. Yes, page 51 of your rebuttal 19 "because," but you can't say whether you
20 report, Deposition Exhibit 282. 20 believed there was a causal relationship
21 A. Oh, paragraph 115, not page 21 between the two clauses of the sentence?
22 115, right? 22 A. Well, I'm saying that this is
23 Q. Yes. 23 an example, one example of how one might
24 A. Hold on, hold on, almost there. 24 calculate damages. Now, I referred you to
25 Okay. 25 at least two other methodologies.
Page 287 Page 289
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. All right. It is your opinion 2 Q. I'm asking you about this
3 that the markets for some of the affected 3 sentence though, sir. So let me ask you
4 stocks were efficient during the immediate 4 this hypothetical --
5 pre-class period, right? 5 A. So I have answered the question
6 A. It is -- oh, is it my opinion 6 to the best of my ability.
7 that the market for some of these stocks 7 Q. I'm going to make one more
8 was efficient during the pre-class period? 8 attempt.
9 Q. Yes. 9 A. Sure.
10 A. Yes. 10 Q. Which is this attempt: So do
11 Q. All right. And what you are 11 you have the hypothetical in mind that you
12 writing here in the first sentence of 12 found that the markets were inefficient for
13 paragraph 115 is because that is your 13 each of the nine stocks during the
14 opinion it follows, you believe, that there 14 immediate pre-class period?
15 is no need to deviate from using market 15 A. Okay, so in your hypothetical,
16 prices to establish the appropriate but-for 16 I find that the stock price is inefficient
17 price absent the alleged market 17 as defined by what?
18 manipulation, right? 18 Q. As defined by you. You used
19 A. So I see what you are saying. 19 the word "efficient" and "inefficient"
20 I'm not sure I completely agree with it. 20 throughout your entire report. So as you
21 Because, I mean, you would have to make 21 used those terms, I'm asking you to assume
22 adjustment for mitigating factors. I mean, 22 the hypothetical that you find that the
23 I don't want to attribute damages to 23 markets were inefficient during the
24 actions by E*Trade. Again, I mean, I could 24 immediate pre-class period, okay?
25 be put in a situation where I may have to 25 A. Okay. So I'm just trying to
73 (Pages 286 - 289)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 75 of
190
Page 290 Page 292
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 understand your hypothetical, and let's be 2 damage methodology that could be used in
3 clear, it is a hypothetical. So you want 3 calculating damages.
4 me to assume the stocks trade in an 4 Q. All right. So I just want to
5 inefficient market or that I cannot prove 5 make sure, of these three damages
6 that these stocks trade in an efficient 6 methodologies that you have talked about,
7 market? Which one are we talking about 7 one, namely this demand-based model, is
8 here? 8 found nowhere in either your opening or
9 Q. The first. 9 rebuttal report, right?
10 A. So I'm supposed to assume that 10 A. That is correct.
11 the stock trades in an inefficient market? 11 Q. Do you agree that in the week
12 Q. During the immediate pre-class 12 leading up to the class period, the price
13 period. 13 of the affected stocks increased
14 A. All right, we are on the same 14 substantially?
15 page. 15 A. Well, I don't want to quibble
16 Q. With that hypothetical in mind, 16 with you with regards to the definition of
17 do you agree that it no longer necessarily 17 "substantially," but yes, they certainly
18 follows that there is no need to deviate 18 increased.
19 from using market prices to establish the 19 Q. Do you recall that Professor
20 appropriate but-for price absent the 20 Grenadier described an analysis he ran
21 alleged market manipulation? 21 where he put together a million different
22 A. Right. So no longer 22 portfolios composed of randomly chosen
23 necessarily follows, this is where I was 23 stocks to see how those portfolios
24 getting stuck, I don't have an opinion one 24 performed?
25 way or the other. 25 A. I do recall that, yes.
Page 291 Page 293
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Okay. That's not something you 2 Q. And do you recall that these
3 have thought about? 3 stocks in the week we are talking about
4 A. Well, you have used specific 4 before the class period had a higher return
5 wording in your hypothetical example, "no 5 than any of these million different
6 longer applies," that is open to 6 portfolios that he created?
7 interpretation. So to the extent that your 7 A. Well, right, that is certainly
8 hypothetical at least to me appears to be 8 the conclusion he came to, right, but that
9 incomplete, and maybe it is just, you know, 9 doesn't -- yes, that's the conclusion he
10 I'm dense and it is the end of the day, or 10 came to.
11 it is late in the day, I don't -- I think 11 Q. So you would agree that these
12 it is an incomplete hypothetical that I 12 are pretty abnormal returns, right?
13 cannot answer as I sit here today. 13 A. Well, okay, so "abnormal
14 Q. Okay. So, all right, now you 14 return" has a very specific definition in
15 have mentioned several times that since 15 finance. So what do you mean by "abnormal
16 submitting your rebuttal report, you read a 16 return"?
17 couple of academic articles about building 17 Q. What do you mean by "abnormal
18 a demand-based model to predict stock price 18 return"?
19 movements, right? 19 A. The abnormal return was
20 A. To changes in demand, correct. 20 measured as the, I mean, the difference
21 Q. And you don't say anything 21 between the actual price and the predicted
22 about that in either of your reports, do 22 price of the stock. That's how I would
23 you? 23 normally use the term "abnormal return" in
24 A. Oh, I do not, right. I just 24 the context of a securities class action.
25 gave a general -- an example of a general 25 Q. Okay. So you are using it
74 (Pages 290 - 293)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 76 of
190
Page 294 Page 296
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 synonymously with the residual return in an 2 stock price movements?
3 event study? 3 A. What do you mean by a large
4 A. Correct. 4 amount?
5 Q. Okay. Have you done anything 5 Q. A large proportion of the
6 to analyze why these stocks had such 6 articles that you include in your news/no
7 extraordinary run-ups in the week before 7 news test in the week before the class
8 the class period? 8 period are articles about the unusual stock
9 A. Why these stocks had such 9 price movements, right?
10 extraordinary run-ups? Well, certainly 10 A. Okay. Define "large
11 they responded to information during those 11 proportion."
12 periods. As to the exact magnitude of 12 Q. Well, do you have any idea what
13 those price changes, I have not. 13 the proportion is?
14 Q. You have not worked on a case 14 A. As I sit here today, I don't.
15 before where a stock rose 700 percent in a 15 Q. Okay. So you don't know one
16 week, have you? 16 way or the other whether, let's say, more
17 A. I don't know. As I sit here 17 than 50 percent of the articles in your
18 today, I don't know. 18 news/no news test in the week preceding the
19 Q. You certainly haven't worked on 19 class period are articles about the unusual
20 a case before where a stock rose 1,000 20 stock price movements?
21 percent in a week, have you? 21 A. That is correct. To the extent
22 A. Well, if I don't recall the 700 22 that these articles talked about unusual
23 percent, I don't recall the 1,000 percent. 23 stock price movements, that is correct.
24 It doesn't mean it didn't happen. 24 Q. Okay. Are you able to point to
25 Q. And you are aware that that did 25 any valuation relevant news about any of
Page 295 Page 297
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 happen here, right? 2 these nine companies that would explain the
3 A. I mean, if you want me to go 3 stock price movement in the week before the
4 through it and refresh my memory, if you 4 class period?
5 want to stipulate to those facts, I will 5 A. Well, I mean, I defer to what
6 agree with you, but if you want me to 6 Dr. -- Mr. Fischel and Professor Grenadier
7 verify that that in fact is an accurate 7 determined were value relevant news.
8 statement, I'm happy to do that as well. 8 Again, they don't agree, so it goes to the
9 Q. All right. Did you see 9 subjectivity of their definition.
10 Professor Grenadier's testimony about the 10 So, I mean, there certainly was
11 700 percent increase for one stock and the 11 what they determined was value relevant
12 1,000 percent increase for another stock in 12 news that came out during that period. So,
13 the week before the class period? 13 you know, from a point of view of
14 A. His testimony being his report 14 informational efficiency, my concern is
15 or his deposition? 15 whether or not that information is
16 Q. His deposition testimony. 16 incorporated in the stock price, and to the
17 A. Okay, so now that we are 17 best of my knowledge, it was incorporated
18 talking about -- I don't recall every word 18 in the stock price, or the stock prices of
19 of his deposition, so if you want to give 19 these firms.
20 me his deposition and show me where he said 20 Q. Dr. Grenadier concluded that he
21 that, I'm happy to look at it. 21 did not find any valuation relevant news
22 Q. You agree with me that a lot of 22 about any of these nine companies that
23 the news articles that are included in your 23 would explain the stock price movement in
24 news/no news study for the week before the 24 the week before the class period, right?
25 class period are articles about the unusual 25 A. Well, when you say "find," he
75 (Pages 294 - 297)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 77 of
190
Page 298 Page 300
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 didn't do any type of study. This was all 2 I will try to answer it. That was my
3 based on observations. For instance, he 3 misunderstanding.
4 didn't do any DCF analysis and said the 4 Q. So my question was, do you
5 stock price should be $10 and it is trading 5 agree that Dr. Grenadier concluded that he
6 at 30. 6 did not find any value relevant news for
7 So what you are talking about 7 any of the nine companies at issue that
8 with regards to both Professor Grenadier 8 would explain the stock price movement in
9 and Mr. Fischel is they present 9 the week before the class period, and you
10 observations and say, you know, I can't 10 answered that you believed that that is
11 explain it, but they make no effort to show 11 what he had stated, right?
12 what caused these stock prices, or that in 12 A. So he has demonstrated -- I
13 fact these stock prices weren't 13 mean, he has included news that changed the
14 completely -- well, I will leave it at 14 stock price of the stock. So I guess I
15 that. 15 don't understand your premise. I mean, you
16 I just disagree with your 16 know, let's look at a discussion of AMC.
17 assertion that they proved or they 17 Q. So I'm not asking you whether
18 demonstrated that these stock prices 18 you have a criticism --
19 somehow changed in such a way that cannot 19 MR. ROSEN: Are you withdrawing
20 be explained, because all of their 20 the question?
21 analyses, or the majority of their analyses 21 MR. RYAN: He in fact has
22 certainly in their initial reports is all 22 answered the question. He is now
23 observation. 23 moving on to something else he wants to
24 Q. So I didn't ask you any 24 say and using up my time.
25 question about demonstration or proof. 25 Q. So my question is you
Page 299 Page 301
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 What I asked you, and I will ask you again, 2 understand that Dr. Grenadier's conclusion,
3 is do you agree that Dr. Grenadier 3 whether you agree with it or not, you
4 concluded that he did not find any value 4 understand that his conclusion is that he
5 relevant news for any of the nine companies 5 did not find any value relevant news for
6 at issue that would explain the stock price 6 any of the nine companies at issue that
7 movement in the week before the class 7 would explain the stock price movement in
8 period? 8 the week before the class period?
9 A. I believe that that is what he 9 A. I don't think what you are
10 stated. I have not seen any evidence that 10 saying is accurate.
11 allows me to understand how he reached 11 Q. All right. Let me ask you the
12 those conclusions. 12 same question about Mr. Fischel. Do you
13 Q. All right. Do you agree that 13 understand that Mr. Fischel's conclusion,
14 Mr. Fischel similarly concluded that he did 14 again, whether you agree with it or not, do
15 not find any value relevant news for any of 15 you understand that his conclusion is that
16 the nine companies at issue that would 16 he did not find any value relevant news for
17 explain the stock price movement in the 17 any of the nine companies at issue that
18 week before the class period? 18 would explain the stock price movement in
19 A. Well, so now -- so before, I'm 19 the week before the class period?
20 sorry, I thought you said the magnitude of 20 A. Again, based on the way you
21 the stock price movement, and now you are 21 have phrased the question, I don't believe
22 asking -- 22 what you have said is correct.
23 Q. No, I never used the word -- 23 Q. Okay. Did you do any analysis
24 A. All right, so then let me -- 24 yourself to try to understand why the nine
25 ask the question about Grenadier again and 25 stocks at issue had such an extraordinary
76 (Pages 298 - 301)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 78 of
190
Page 302 Page 304
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 run-up in the week before the class period? 2 you are wasting time, sir. You are wasting
3 A. Okay, so, first of all, you are 3 time, and I'm going to give you the
4 using a pejorative term, "extraordinary." 4 definition now. Do you understand that I'm
5 Q. I didn't mean to be pejorative, 5 defining "extraordinary" to mean out of the
6 so let me back up and ask you the question. 6 ordinary and highly unusual?
7 Let me ask the question. 7 A. Out of the ordinary and highly
8 Do you agree that these nine 8 unusual, okay, those are all vague terms.
9 stocks had an extraordinary run-up in the 9 But, okay, out of the ordinary, so let's go
10 week before the class period? 10 first, out of the ordinary, what would be
11 A. Define "extraordinary." 11 the ordinary?
12 Q. You are not able to answer that 12 Q. So my question is with this
13 question either way? 13 definition of "extraordinary" in mind, are
14 A. Do you want me to point to a 14 you able to answer whether or not these
15 definition of extraordinary so I -- 15 stocks had an extraordinary run-up in the
16 Q. Out of the ordinary and highly 16 week before the class period?
17 unusual is my definition. 17 A. In order to answer your
18 A. Can I -- look, I'm just trying 18 question as precisely as I can, I would
19 to answer your questions as accurately as 19 need your definition of "ordinary." So
20 possible. 20 would you like to give me a definition of
21 Q. Do you have my definition of 21 "ordinary" and then we can go to your
22 "extraordinary" in mind? 22 definition of "extraordinary"? Because it
23 A. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Again, I'm 23 seems to me that it is based on your
24 trying to be as accurate as possible in my 24 definition of what "ordinary" is.
25 responses, so when you use terms like 25 Q. All right. So am I right that
Page 303 Page 305
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 "extraordinary" or "significant," those 2 based on my definition, you find that too
3 have specific meanings in different 3 vague and you can't answer; is that right?
4 situations. I'm just trying to understand 4 A. Your definition of what?
5 exactly what you are talking about. 5 Q. "Extraordinary." Am I right
6 So I don't -- I don't know why 6 that you can't answer the question because
7 you define -- why can't you define 7 you think my definition is too vague and
8 "extraordinary"? Go ahead, ask me the 8 you don't understand what I mean by
9 question, give me a description, a 9 "extraordinary," right?
10 definition of "extraordinary," and I will 10 A. You are giving me no context
11 try to answer your question as accurately 11 into exactly what you mean by "ordinary,"
12 as possible. 12 and thus I am unable to determine what you
13 Q. Do you have in mind the 13 believe is extraordinary. You are defining
14 definition of "extraordinary" that I have 14 the term, so tell me what you mean. Point
15 given you twice now? Do you have that in 15 to a definition.
16 mind, sir? 16 Q. I did. If you can't answer the
17 A. Could you read his definition? 17 question, that's fine. Let me ask another
18 Q. I can repeat it if you don't 18 question.
19 have it in mind. 19 A. Whoa, whoa, whoa. So we will
20 A. I'm asking him, because you 20 agree to disagree. I don't believe -- I
21 maintain you have defined it twice, I'm 21 don't believe that using the term
22 asking him to read your definition of 22 "ordinary" -- not "ordinary" -- is a
23 "extraordinary," because you have said you 23 definition of "extraordinary." It follows
24 have done it twice. 24 tautologically, right, but it is not any
25 Q. I will give it to you now -- 25 more descriptive than saying
77 (Pages 302 - 305)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 79 of
190
Page 306 Page 308
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 "extraordinary" or "ordinary." 2 Q. So I think the record will show
3 Q. Let me ask my next question. 3 that you are avoiding answering my
4 A. By all means. 4 question, so I will move to a different
5 Q. Am I right that you conducted 5 topic.
6 regression analyses for these nine stocks 6 A. I'm sorry, what? I didn't hear
7 for one year before the class period? 7 that.
8 A. That is correct. 8 Q. I will move to a different
9 Q. And so you studied their 9 topic.
10 volatility, right? 10 A. Okay, sure.
11 A. Correct. Well, I mean, to the 11 Q. Have you studied at all the
12 extent we are looking at things like 12 cause of the increases in stock price for
13 standard errors and R-squared, yeah, I 13 these nine companies during the week before
14 studied its volatility. 14 the proposed class period?
15 Q. Okay. So having studied the 15 A. Certainly part of the
16 volatility of each of these nine stocks for 16 increases, yes.
17 the year before the class period, do you 17 Q. Okay.
18 agree that they had extraordinary run-ups 18 A. I mean, again, to the extent
19 during the week before the class period? 19 that your experts found that there was
20 A. Well, now you are asking about 20 value relevant information that came out
21 volatility during this entire one-year 21 during those periods, that would impact the
22 period. 22 stock price.
23 Q. Yes, sir. 23 Q. What part of the increase in
24 A. And now you are -- and then you 24 stock price for these nine companies during
25 are trying to draw some parallel, to, 25 the week before the proposed class period
Page 307 Page 309
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 again, a term that you have not described, 2 did you study?
3 an extraordinary stock price. So can you 3 A. What part did I study?
4 make the connection for me between the 4 Q. I asked you whether you studied
5 volatility during that one-year period and 5 the cause and you said part of the
6 whether or not these things had, as you 6 increases. So my follow-up is what part of
7 define it, an extraordinary price run-up? 7 the increases did you study?
8 Q. You are not able to answer the 8 A. I'm sorry, you lost me there.
9 question; is that right? 9 Q. All right. Do you recall that
10 A. I would like -- I would like 10 I asked you "Have you studied at all the
11 clarification before answering the 11 cause of the increases in stock price for
12 question. Because, again, my job here is 12 these nine companies during the week before
13 to give the most accurate answers I can. 13 the proposed class period?" And you
14 So if I need things to inform my opinion, 14 answered "Certainly part of the increases,
15 if you are using vague terms, I can ask for 15 yes"?
16 clarification. If you don't want to give 16 A. Okay.
17 me the clarifications, that's fine, right, 17 Q. All right. My follow-up
18 but until I receive such a clarification, I 18 question is which part of the increases
19 can't answer the question. 19 were you referring to just now in your
20 And now, again, now you are 20 answer?
21 throwing in a whole other thing about 21 A. Oh, I'm not referring to any
22 volatility. I'm not -- are you making a 22 particular. The size of -- again, you are
23 connection between the volatility over my 23 asking about magnitude versus increase.
24 estimation period and what you define as 24 Well, I mean, whatever, if you -- you are
25 extraordinary stock price movements? 25 allowed --
78 (Pages 306 - 309)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 80 of
190
Page 310 Page 312
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Your answer was "Certainly part 2 that period that altered the stock prices.
3 of the increases" and I'm simply asking you 3 Now, that's what their definition of value
4 what part of the increases are you 4 relevant is. Value relevant is an
5 referring to? Can you tell me? What did 5 extremely broad term. We have discussed
6 your answer mean? 6 people, Chartis, we have discussed momentum
7 A. That's not anything I have been 7 traders. These people take into things --
8 asked to opine on for this matter at this 8 these things -- these people or these
9 point in time. 9 individuals find things like stock prices
10 Q. Okay. So is it in fact the 10 material, right? So is that reflected in
11 case that you have not studied at all the 11 the stock prices of all of these stocks?
12 cause of the increases for any of the nine 12 Absolutely.
13 affected stocks during the week before the 13 Now can I take a break?
14 proposed class period? 14 Q. You are avoiding answering my
15 A. That is incorrect. 15 question. You can take a break. This is
16 Q. Is it the case that you have 16 not a torture chamber. You can have a
17 expressed no opinion on the cause of the 17 break. But I'm going to follow up with
18 increases for any of the nine affected 18 this when you get back. You are evading my
19 stocks during the week before the proposed 19 questions.
20 class period? 20 A. Fantastic.
21 A. Certainly some of it was based 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will
22 on information incorporated in the stock 22 end media unit six. We are going off
23 price. I mean, again, I found that these 23 the record at 5:03.
24 stocks were informationally efficient, so 24 (Recess taken.)
25 whatever information was out there affected 25 (Defendant's Exhibit 287 marked
Page 311 Page 313
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 those prices. 2 for identification.)
3 Q. When you answered just now 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back
4 "That's not anything I have been asked to 4 on the record at 5:09. This will begin
5 opine on for this matter at this point in 5 media unit seven.
6 time," what specifically have you not been 6 BY MR. RYAN:
7 asked to opine on that you were referring 7 Q. All right. During the break I
8 to in that response? 8 marked as Exhibit 287 the Factiva headline
9 A. I guess I misspoke. I'm sorry, 9 results we received from plaintiff's
10 you are coming at me with all sorts of 10 counsel related to Bed Bath & Beyond. Do
11 stuff. You seem to be agitated. I'm 11 you have that exhibit in front of you, sir?
12 trying to focus on what I'm saying. So if 12 A. I do.
13 I misspoke, I apologize. Maybe now would 13 Q. And does this look like the
14 be a good time to take a break. 14 results that you would have received from
15 Q. I would like an answer to this 15 your Factiva search for Bed Bath & Beyond?
16 question. So let me ask this question 16 A. It is certainly possible.
17 again, since you're now saying you don't 17 Q. And do you see the very first
18 stand by your answer. 18 article that is listed there is an article
19 I'm asking you what part of the 19 about Beyond Burger, right?
20 increases are you referring to, can you 20 A. That is correct.
21 tell me what did your answer mean? 21 Q. And you don't believe that that
22 A. Well, according to your 22 contains any relevant information to Bed
23 experts, and, again, I'm just focusing on 23 Bath & Beyond, do you?
24 what your experts said, there is value 24 A. I have no reason to think it
25 relevant information that occurred during 25 does. But, I mean, look, we went over this
79 (Pages 310 - 313)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 81 of
190
Page 314 Page 316
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 issue before. What I have stated 2 period, right?
3 previously with regards to things like 3 A. That is correct.
4 Princess Nokia would apply here as well. 4 Q. And so we now have seven
5 Q. So let's look then at page 316 5 articles on that day that are actually
6 of this exhibit, Deposition Exhibit 287. 6 about Aaron Rodgers and his journey of
7 A. Okay. 7 self-actualization, not about Bed Bath &
8 Q. Do you see there that the third 8 Beyond, right?
9 article down is an article about the NFL 9 A. I don't know if it is seven. I
10 quarterback Aaron Rodgers and why in his 10 can count them. I believe that's correct.
11 own words he is on a journey of 11 Q. Okay. We can put that aside,
12 self-actualization? 12 sir. Now, in your rebuttal report that we
13 A. I do see that. 13 have marked as Exhibit 282 to this
14 Q. And then do you see that there 14 deposition --
15 is perhaps an identical article, I'm 15 A. Okay, hold on a minute. Yeah,
16 looking at the first few lines of text, 16 okay.
17 from the Capitol Times and Wisconsin State 17 Q. You conducted a test that you
18 Journal that same day entitled "Finding his 18 referred to as a binomial test that relates
19 peace: Aaron Rodgers details journey that 19 to news for seven of the companies at issue
20 changes his outlook towards life, NFC 20 in the week before the proposed class
21 championship"? 21 period; is that right?
22 A. Okay, so is this my production? 22 A. Well, what your experts defined
23 Q. Yes, sir. 23 as news.
24 A. Okay, all right. Because, 24 Q. Okay. And I'm looking here at
25 yeah, that, I mean, it seems that that -- 25 Table 7 on page 21 of your rebuttal report.
Page 315 Page 317
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 there are multiple -- well, I'm sorry, go 2 A. Okay, I'm there.
3 ahead and ask your question. 3 Q. And so this is the table that
4 Q. All right. So you have 4 presents the results of your binomial test,
5 anticipated my next question. Do you see 5 right?
6 in fact this article appears multiple 6 A. Based on your experts'
7 times, one, two, three, four, five, six 7 definition of "value relevant news."
8 times from the Capitol Times and Wisconsin 8 Q. And is the period at issue here
9 State Journal on the 24th of January 2021 9 January 21st through 27th, 2021? And I'm
10 and then another time from the Crossville 10 looking at paragraph 46 and 47.
11 Chronicle that same day, right? 11 A. That is correct.
12 A. Correct. 12 Q. Okay. And the second column
13 Q. All right. And your 13 here headed News Dates, am I right that you
14 methodology intended to eliminate 14 took any date where either Mr. Fischel or
15 duplicates, right? 15 Professor Grenadier in his report analyzed
16 A. That is correct. I mean, we 16 potentially value relevant news?
17 checked that box in Factiva, in Factiva, 17 A. I don't know if I would say
18 yes. 18 they analyzed. They said that there was
19 Q. And in this instance, it 19 value relevant news on those dates.
20 appears that the duplicates were not 20 Q. Okay. You and I may disagree
21 eliminated, right? 21 about the words here, but am I right that
22 A. That's what it appears, yes. 22 this column headed News Dates is a
23 Q. And so this is an article on 23 combination of dates either from
24 the 24th of January, which is right in the 24 Mr. Fischel or Professor Grenadier?
25 middle of that week before the class 25 A. That is correct.
80 (Pages 314 - 317)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 82 of
190
Page 318 Page 320
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. All right. And then the next 2 you are correct, it does not pass the
3 column which is headed Statistically 3 news/no news test.
4 Significant News Days, does that present 4 Q. So do you have an opinion one
5 the number of the news dates in the 5 way or the other if the question is whether
6 previous column that in your regression 6 Trivago was efficient during that one-week
7 analysis based on your one-year estimation 7 period, as opposed to the question you
8 period had a statistically significant 8 answered in your opening report, which was
9 return? 9 whether Trivago was efficient during the
10 A. That is correct. 10 full-year period, if the question instead
11 Q. All right. And then the final 11 is whether Trivago traded in an efficient
12 column calculates a p-value for the 12 market during the one-week period leading
13 statistical significance of the binomial 13 up to January 27th, 2021, do you have an
14 test, right? 14 opinion on that question?
15 A. Correct. 15 A. I believe that based on my
16 Q. All right. And this was a test 16 review of all the information, so all
17 of whether the return was statistically 17 Cammer and Krogman factors, my conclusion
18 significant on the news dates as used in 18 was that it did trade in an efficient
19 this table, right? 19 market during that week.
20 A. Well, I think I would say 20 Q. But you would agree that you
21 "returns," plural. 21 have less certainty about Trivago for that
22 Q. Okay. 22 week than the other six stocks?
23 A. But that sounds correct. 23 A. Do I have less certainty?
24 Q. All right. And you got a 24 Q. Let me ask a better question.
25 p-value of 5 percent or less for six of the 25 Do you agree that you have less
Page 319 Page 321
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 seven stocks you studied, right? 2 confidence in the results as to Trivago for
3 A. That is right. 3 that week than for the other six stocks?
4 Q. Am I right that you did not 4 A. Do I have less confidence?
5 study the two stocks from the original 5 That's not anything I have really thought
6 report here, Koss and Tootsie Roll? 6 about. I don't know. It's not something I
7 A. That is correct. 7 considered. I mean, I looked at the
8 Q. And for Trivago you found no 8 totality of the information and determined
9 statistical significance, right? 9 it was efficient. I didn't think about it
10 A. That is correct. 10 in terms of how confident I was or
11 Q. So you say in paragraph 52, in 11 unconfident I was about my findings.
12 the first sentence, "while the test results 12 Q. So you say at the end of
13 for Trivago were inconclusive." Do you see 13 paragraph 52 on page 22 of your rebuttal
14 that? 14 report "I am inclined to place more weight
15 A. I do. 15 on the results of the more robust study
16 Q. All right. And so the finding 16 performed in the Werner Declaration."
17 of your binomial test was that that 17 Do you see that?
18 binomial test as set forth in Table 7 did 18 A. I'm sorry, paragraph 52?
19 not establish market efficiency for Trivago 19 Q. Yes, the very end of that.
20 during that week immediately before the 20 A. Correct.
21 class period, right? 21 Q. And when you say that you are
22 A. That is correct. But to the 22 inclined to place more weight on the
23 extent that I was only looking at one 23 results of the full-year study in your
24 observation, that's how I arrived at the 24 opening report than on the results of the
25 statement that it was inconclusive. But 25 one-week study in your rebuttal report, are
81 (Pages 318 - 321)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 83 of
190
Page 322 Page 324
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 you indicating that you think a finding of 2 A. I think logically that follows.
3 efficiency for Trivago is a closer call? 3 Q. Okay.
4 A. I'm sorry, what do you -- so a 4 A. Unless -- maybe I'm missing
5 finding of efficiency for Trivago is a 5 something.
6 closer call? 6 Q. No, I don't believe you are.
7 Q. Than for the other six stocks. 7 A. Isn't it tautologically
8 A. Okay. Again, I don't -- I 8 correct?
9 don't think that's anything I considered. 9 Q. I believe it is.
10 I didn't think about degrees of separation. 10 A. Okay, all right.
11 So as I sit here today, I don't know one 11 Q. So your Table 7 does not
12 way or the other. 12 present any results as to the statistical
13 Q. Okay. Now let me go back to 13 significance or not of the returns on those
14 Table 7 on page 21. You don't present any 14 two non-news dates, correct?
15 analysis here of the statistical 15 A. That is correct. That is
16 significance or not of the returns on 16 correct.
17 non-news dates during this one-week period, 17 Q. So there is therefore, in your
18 do you? 18 binomial test as set forth in your rebuttal
19 A. I believe that's correct. But 19 report, there is no comparison between the
20 can you reread the question? 20 statistical significance of the returns on
21 (The record was read.) 21 the news dates on the one hand and the
22 A. Well, I mean, they are baked 22 statistical significance of the returns on
23 into the analysis, but I don't -- to the 23 the non-news dates on the other hand,
24 extent here I have got a column that says 24 correct?
25 Statistically Significant News Days, right, 25 A. I believe that is correct.
Page 323 Page 325
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 I haven't put a column that says 2 Q. Okay. If we just keep this
3 Statistically Insignificant News Days. 3 open, please, and look back to your opening
4 Q. All right. So that's not my 4 report, which we have marked as Deposition
5 question. So let me do a better job of 5 Exhibit 281, and I'm interested in
6 asking my question. 6 particular on Table 9 which appears on the
7 So do you see that for 7 top of page 34.
8 BlackBerry, for example, you say that there 8 A. You said Table 9, right?
9 are three news dates, as we defined that 9 Q. Yes, sir, on the top of page
10 term a moment ago, taking either 10 34.
11 Mr. Fischel's or Professor Grenadier's 11 A. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to
12 study potentially of value relevant news, 12 interrupt you.
13 and then you find that on two of those 13 Q. No. So am I right that Table 9
14 three dates there is a statistically 14 presents the collective test results for
15 significant return based on your regression 15 the one-year period through January 27,
16 for the one-year period before the proposed 16 2021 using your definition of news dates,
17 class period, right? 17 namely the top 10 percent of articles
18 A. That is correct. 18 appearing on those days?
19 Q. All right. If there were three 19 A. That is correct.
20 news dates during this period of five 20 Q. And these are -- this is a
21 trading dates, there also must have been 21 summary of the results of the news/no news
22 two non-news dates, right? 22 test in your opening report, right?
23 A. There must have been two 23 A. That is correct.
24 non-news dates, as defined by your experts? 24 Q. And here you did compare the
25 Q. Yes, sir. 25 statistical significance on the news dates
82 (Pages 322 - 325)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 84 of
190
Page 326 Page 328
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 to the statistical significance of the 2 whether the stock price return on those
3 returns on the non-news dates and from that 3 dates was statistically significant using
4 comparison you calculated a p-value using 4 his regression analysis?
5 Fisher's exact test that you presented in 5 A. That is my understanding of
6 the far right column, right? 6 what this is, yes.
7 A. That is correct. 7 Q. All right. And then if we look
8 Q. Okay. Now, have you seen the 8 at page 2 of Exhibit 288, is it your
9 information Professor Grenadier prepared in 9 understanding that this table presents the
10 response to your binomial test in Table 7? 10 days that Professor Grenadier did not
11 A. So I don't remember seeing that 11 consider to have new potentially value
12 in any of his reports. 12 relevant information during this period and
13 MR. ROSEN: Objection. If you 13 then whether the stock price return on
14 are going to show him something that 14 those dates was statistically significant
15 was produced after the rebuttal reports 15 using his regression analysis?
16 were submitted to each firm, then I 16 A. But, again, so this goes to the
17 object to you using it in litigation 17 problem with your subjective definition of
18 because that is an impermissible 18 news. He completely ignores Dr. Fischel's
19 sur-reply report, and so we object to 19 analysis. So does that mean I should
20 the use of anything that any expert 20 ignore Dr. Fischel's analysis in doing my
21 prepared after the cutoff date for the 21 experiments?
22 rebuttal reports. 22 I mean, he found that some days
23 MR. RYAN: All right. So I'm 23 were statistically -- were value relevant
24 providing now analysis that was 24 and Grenadier found other days were value
25 provided to you in response to your 25 relevant. So why should I ignore that
Page 327 Page 329
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 subpoena before Professor Grenadier's 2 data? Or maybe -- let me ask it a
3 deposition. So I have marked this 3 different way. Do you know why Professor
4 three-page document as Exhibit 288. 4 Grenadier ignored that information? Did he
5 MR. ROSEN: So we object to the 5 think that what Mr. Fischel did was wrong?
6 admission of 288 as an impermissible 6 Or his findings were incorrect?
7 sur-reply and for other reasons. 7 Q. So I'm asking you a much more
8 (Defendant's Exhibit 288 marked 8 limited question. I certainly know why he
9 for identification.) 9 did what he did. But my question is quite
10 Q. All right. Have you seen 10 different.
11 Exhibit 288 before, Dr. Werner? 11 My question is, is it your
12 A. It looks familiar. 12 understanding that page 2 of Exhibit 288
13 Q. Okay. 13 presents the days that Professor Grenadier
14 A. I believe I have. 14 did not consider to have new potentially
15 Q. And do you see that it is 15 value relevant information during this
16 headed Analysis and Response to Werner 16 period and then whether the stock price
17 Rebuttal Report Table 7? 17 return on those dates was statistically
18 A. I do. I do, yes. 18 significant using his regression analysis?
19 Q. And so do you understand that 19 A. That is my understanding, but I
20 on the first page of Exhibit 288, what 20 didn't -- the numbers look all screwed up.
21 Professor Grenadier presents is a version 21 Like I don't -- the binomial test p-values
22 of the binomial test in your Table 7 that 22 look incorrect, or at least I couldn't make
23 shows the days that he, Professor 23 sense of them when I looked at it, nor the
24 Grenadier, considered to have new 24 cumulative distribution p-value.
25 potentially value relevant information and 25 So I have, as I sit here today,
83 (Pages 326 - 329)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 85 of
190
Page 330 Page 332
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 other than being perplexed by exactly what 2 MR. ROSEN: He never explained
3 was done here and whether or not the 3 it, because I didn't depose him on it.
4 analysis was done properly, I have no 4 Q. All right. So let me ask you
5 additional opinion about what that is. I 5 about page 3 of Deposition Exhibit 288. Do
6 mean, sure, if you want to ask me, I mean, 6 you see that Professor Grenadier reports
7 obviously you can ask me whatever you want, 7 here that for the seven stocks combined,
8 I just have no idea whether what's been 8 for 14 total days with news with new
9 done here is accurate or not. 9 potentially value relevant information,
10 Q. Okay. So you see that in your 10 there were statistically significant
11 Table 7 when you had zero out of one -- 11 returns on eight of those 14 days?
12 A. Hold on. 12 A. Well, and, again, so let's be
13 MR. ROSEN: It is page 21 of 13 very specific here. These are days where
14 your rebuttal report. 14 Dr. Grenadier determined that there was
15 A. Here we go. I'm sorry, what 15 potentially value relevant information. It
16 page? 16 is not --
17 Q. Page 21 of your rebuttal 17 Q. Yes, sir.
18 report, Table 7, and paragraph 50. Do you 18 A. It is not, to the best of my
19 see that when you have zero observations 19 understanding, the days that your experts
20 out of one, you have a binomial test 20 collectively determined there was value
21 p-value of 95 percent? 21 relevant information. So I understand why
22 A. Right. 22 he is recreating what he did. I don't know
23 Q. And do you see that that is the 23 why he would then choose to ignore
24 same when Professor Grenadier, for 24 information that is relevant to the
25 different stocks, has zero observations out 25 question that he is trying to address.
Page 331 Page 333
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 of one? Do you see that equivalence in the 2 Q. All right. Do you see, though,
3 p-values that I'm pointing out to you? 3 that on the left part of page 3 of Exhibit
4 A. I see that some of them are 4 288, he reports that there are 14
5 equivalent. 5 observations for days with news with new
6 Q. Right. Do you see that 6 potentially value relevant information --
7 similarly when you have two statistically 7 A. I'm sorry, I apologize, are we
8 significant days out of three, you have a 8 looking at Table 3?
9 p-value of 0.71 percent and when Professor 9 Q. Yes.
10 Grenadier has two statistically significant 10 A. Okay, go ahead, sorry.
11 days out of three, he has a binomial test 11 Q. Do you see that on the left
12 p-value of 0.71 percent? 12 part of page 3 of Exhibit 288, he reports
13 A. Yes, I now see that. 13 that there are 14 days with news with new
14 Q. Okay. Do you still believe 14 potentially value relevant information and
15 that anything looks off with respect to the 15 eight of those 14 days have statistically
16 binomial test p-value column in the chart 16 significant returns?
17 on page 2 of Deposition Exhibit 288? 17 A. Yes, I do see that.
18 A. I mean, I have no opinion one 18 Q. And then do you see that he
19 way or the other, given that I haven't been 19 reports on the right-hand side that there
20 able to examine this document in an 20 are 21 days without news with new
21 academically rigorous way. On the surface, 21 potentially value relevant information
22 yeah, I would need to -- I would need to 22 during this one-week period before the
23 hear how he explained what he did here to 23 beginning of the proposed class period, and
24 fully -- I don't know one way or the 24 13 of those 21 days have statistically
25 other -- 25 significant returns?
84 (Pages 330 - 333)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 86 of
190
Page 334 Page 336
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. According to Dr. Grenadier. 2 That's how I arrived at the decision to use
3 Q. Yes. 3 this, and I believe that that, based on,
4 A. Professor Grenadier. 4 again, both experts' collective definition
5 Q. Yes. And do you see that he 5 of value relevant information, this shows
6 then runs a Fisher's exact test and finds 6 that the stock prices reacted to news
7 there is no statistically significant 7 during that one-week period.
8 difference on the days with news and the 8 Q. Do you agree that the apparent
9 days without news, right? 9 mispricing of GameStop's stock appears to
10 A. Based on his definition of 10 be an intentional manipulation by a group
11 news, again, I haven't had a -- I haven't 11 of investors who all agreed to act
12 examined this thoroughly, but on the 12 irrationally by buying at prices untethered
13 surface that appears to be what it is. 13 to fundamental value?
14 Q. Okay. And when you conducted 14 MR. ROSEN: Objection.
15 your binomial test results for your 15 A. I'm sorry, where are you
16 rebuttal report you did not do this kind of 16 reading from? It sounds like Professor
17 comparison between the news dates and the 17 Grenadier's report.
18 non-news dates during the one-week period 18 Q. I'm asking you a question. Do
19 before the proposed class period, did you? 19 you agree with that statement?
20 A. Right, based on the small 20 A. I would like to see the
21 sample size, that is correct. 21 statement and then I will tell you whether
22 Q. And your second sentence in 22 or not I agree with it.
23 paragraph 51 of your rebuttal report states 23 Q. So I'm just asking you the
24 that "Based on Table 7, we can reject the 24 question regardless of who said it. Do you
25 null hypothesis that the companies' 25 agree that the apparent mispricing of
Page 335 Page 337
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 securities prices behave no differently on 2 GameStop stock appears to be an intentional
3 days with company specific news than on 3 manipulation by a group of investors who
4 days without company specific news." 4 all agreed to act irrationally by buying at
5 Do you see that? 5 prices untethered to fundamental value?
6 A. I do. 6 MR. ROSEN: Objection. It is a
7 Q. But your Table 7 has no 7 compound question.
8 analysis of days without company specific 8 A. Right, it is a compound
9 news, right? 9 question. To the extent you are talking
10 A. No, but, I mean, that's what 10 about manipulation, that's a legal term to
11 the binomial test is testing for. So based 11 the best of my understanding. I have no
12 on these results of the binomial test, that 12 idea how to answer that question.
13 statement is correct. 13 Q. So are you able to either agree
14 Q. All right. Isn't it the case 14 or disagree with that statement?
15 that this sentence is wrong, and that your 15 A. Can you read it one more time?
16 binomial test in Table 7 of your rebuttal 16 Q. Sure.
17 report does not allow one to reject the 17 A. Please, I'm sorry, please.
18 null hypothesis that the companies' 18 Q. The apparent mispricing of
19 securities prices behave no differently on 19 GameStop's stock appears to be an
20 days with company specific news than on 20 intentional manipulation by a group of
21 days without company specific news? 21 investors who all agreed to act
22 A. I don't believe that's correct. 22 irrationally by buying at prices untethered
23 I determined -- I determined that I should 23 to fundamental value.
24 use a binomial test based on the small 24 A. "Fundamental value" defined as
25 sample size that we were looking at. 25 what? What we have talked about in terms
85 (Pages 334 - 337)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 87 of
190
Page 338 Page 340
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 of DCF analysis? 2 happy -- if you want to show me where this
3 Q. How you would define 3 person has written that and the context in
4 "fundamental value"? 4 which they wrote that, I'm happy to look at
5 A. Could you reread the question, 5 it and give you an answer. But just on the
6 please? 6 face of it, I can't commit one way or the
7 Q. Do you agree that the apparent 7 other to whether or not that question is --
8 mispricing of GameStop's stock appears to 8 or that statement is correct.
9 be an intentional manipulation by a group 9 Q. Do you agree that GameStop is a
10 of investors who all agreed to act 10 clear case where for a short period of time
11 irrationally by buying at prices untethered 11 the market was inefficient?
12 to fundamental value? 12 A. Do I agree with that statement?
13 A. I have a lot of problems with 13 Q. Yes.
14 that. But "apparent," you used the term 14 A. "A short period of time" being
15 "apparent mispricing." Apparent to who? I 15 what?
16 mean, someone, whoever wrote that, I don't 16 Q. A number of days.
17 know, maybe it was an analyst or something, 17 A. How many days?
18 believed that the stock was mispriced. I 18 Q. Any number of days that you're
19 guess I would want to see their 19 able to answer.
20 justification or what evidence they cite to 20 MR. ROSEN: What time period
21 suggest in fact that it was mispriced. 21 are you referring to?
22 Q. Do you agree that GameStop's 22 Q. I'm talking about the period
23 stock was mispriced? 23 right before the proposed class period.
24 A. Do I believe that GameStop's 24 A. So right before the proposed
25 price was mispriced? 25 class period?
Page 339 Page 341
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Yes, sir. 2 Q. Right.
3 A. No. 3 A. Right. I determined that -- we
4 Q. Do you agree that financial 4 are talking about GameStop, right?
5 markets have a long history of temporarily 5 Q. Yes.
6 mispriced individual stocks? 6 A. That it traded in an efficient
7 A. Mispriced according to who? 7 market from -- oh, well, all right, let's
8 Mispriced relative to fundamental value or 8 make it easier, based on Dr. --
9 informational efficiency? I don't -- I 9 Mr. Fischel's and Professor Grenadier's
10 mean, there is all sorts of -- first, so I 10 definition of material news, I determined
11 don't have these statements in front of me 11 that the stock traded in a, I'm sorry,
12 that you are reading, and I don't know the 12 value relevant news, that the stock traded
13 context in which these individuals made 13 in an efficient market over that period.
14 these statements. So I don't want to say 14 Q. So you believe that somebody
15 yes, I agree with that and then ah, case 15 who thinks it is a clear case that for a
16 closed, right? So they are very general 16 couple of days before the proposed class
17 statements. I would need much more 17 period here the market for GameStop stock
18 information to give you a proper response 18 was inefficient is wrong?
19 to those questions. 19 A. I have no reason to -- I mean,
20 Q. Okay. So you're not able to 20 I'm sure that's their opinion. Is it right
21 agree or disagree with the proposition that 21 or wrong? That's their opinion, right?
22 financial markets have a long history of 22 Q. You hold a contrary opinion; am
23 temporarily mispriced individual stocks? 23 I right?
24 A. Again, I don't know what you 24 A. Is that the logical conclusion,
25 mean by "mispriced." So, you know, I'm 25 is that the conclusion you are reaching --
86 (Pages 338 - 341)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 88 of
190
Page 342 Page 344
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Well, do you? 2 Q. Do you agree that under the
3 A. Let's go back to the question 3 efficient market hypothesis, stocks have a
4 you asked me, did it trade in an efficient 4 nearly horizontal demand curve?
5 market during that period. I said it did, 5 A. Again, how are you defining
6 informationally efficient. Now, I don't 6 efficiency? So that is probably going to
7 know what whoever is making that statement 7 influence whether or not the demand curve
8 means with regards to efficiency. 8 for any individual stock is horizontal.
9 So I have, again, based on what 9 Q. All right. Under what you call
10 Mr. Fischel and Dr. Grenadier did, 10 fundamental efficiency, do you agree that
11 determined were value relevant days, it 11 stocks have a nearly horizontal demand
12 appears that the stock was efficient during 12 curve?
13 that four or five-day period, or six-day 13 A. What I have defined, and so
14 period, whatever it was. But, yeah, I have 14 when I have defined it, because -- as your
15 nothing else to add. 15 experts have defined fundamental
16 Q. All right. Do you agree that 16 efficiency, is the demand curve for any
17 securities differ from most products that 17 individual stock horizontal?
18 economists study in that they are highly 18 Q. Horizontal or nearly so, yes,
19 substitutable? 19 that's my question.
20 A. I have no idea what you mean by 20 A. Yeah, that's not anything I
21 that. 21 have ever thought about.
22 Q. Okay. Are you aware of 22 Q. Okay. Let me try to ask the
23 academic literature about the 23 question a different way.
24 substitutability of stocks? 24 Do you agree that under the
25 A. It is possible. Off the top of 25 efficient market hypothesis the demand for
Page 343 Page 345
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 my head, I can't think of, what do you mean 2 any individual stock is highly elastic?
3 by substitutability? You tell me and I 3 A. I mean, same answer.
4 will tell you whether or not I'm familiar 4 Q. Okay. That isn't something
5 with the idea. 5 that you have ever thought about?
6 Q. That if somebody wants to make 6 A. Again, based on whatever
7 an investment, the stock of one company is 7 definition of market efficiency that these
8 often a very good substitute for the stock 8 people are using, which I don't know, yeah,
9 of another company. 9 no, that's not anything I have thought
10 A. Well, I mean, to the extent 10 about.
11 that you are talking about idiosyncratic 11 Q. Okay. Do you agree that since
12 risk, it doesn't -- I don't know. I mean, 12 a securities price must be equal to its
13 I would have to know a lot more before I 13 value, prices should not move without any
14 could answer that question. Because each 14 news about the value of the security?
15 company is going to have its own 15 MR. ROSEN: Could you reread
16 firm-specific risk. I mean, so I don't 16 the question?
17 know whether the firms face the same risk, 17 A. Could you reread that question?
18 whether they are in the same industry. 18 (The record was read.)
19 There is all sorts of factors that go in. 19 A. Well, I mean, there is all --
20 So as a general proposition, I can't answer 20 go ahead, Larry.
21 that question. 21 MR. ROSEN: I'm not going to
22 Q. So are you familiar with the 22 say anything.
23 academic literature on substitutability of 23 A. I mean, there is all sorts of
24 stocks? 24 things that go into the valuation of a
25 A. Not as I sit here today. 25 security, right? We have talked about your
87 (Pages 342 - 345)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 89 of
190
Page 346 Page 348
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 client posting price changes of stocks in 2 what your question implies. So without
3 an effort presumably to encourage people to 3 knowing exactly what you mean by things
4 buy and sell stock. So I don't know what 4 that influence or determine value, I can't
5 exact -- what exact information you are 5 answer that question.
6 talking about here, right? So I have no 6 Q. Okay.
7 idea how to answer that question. 7 MR. RYAN: Why don't we go off
8 Q. Okay. So you're not able to 8 the record and I will see how much more
9 state whether you agree or disagree with 9 I have.
10 that sentence? 10 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will
11 A. Reread the sentence. I believe 11 end media unit seven. We are going off
12 the answer is no, I cannot agree or 12 the record at 5:48.
13 disagree with that sentence, because there 13 (Recess taken.)
14 is way too many variables. But go ahead and 14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back
15 reread the question. 15 on the record at 6:07. This will begin
16 Q. Fine. The question is do you 16 media unit eight.
17 agree that since a securities price must be 17 BY MR. RYAN:
18 equal to its value, prices should not move 18 Q. All right, Dr. Werner, do you
19 without any news about the value of the 19 recall that you gave some testimony earlier
20 security? 20 in the day about your belief that there was
21 A. Okay. So define "value" for 21 a potential way to calculate class-wide
22 me. 22 damages based on a regression analysis on
23 Q. How much a security is worth. 23 intraday stock price movements?
24 A. Oh, so how much a security is 24 A. I do.
25 worth? So what goes into determining that 25 Q. And I believe what you were
Page 347 Page 349
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 value? 2 describing there was a regression analysis
3 Q. You are the finance expert, not 3 where the independent variable would be the
4 me. 4 presence of Robinhood PCO restrictions or
5 A. Well, you are using the term 5 not --
6 "value," or whoever is -- 6 A. I'm sorry, dependent or
7 Q. I told you what I meant by it. 7 independent?
8 A. What? 8 Q. Independent.
9 Q. I told you what I meant by it. 9 A. Independent variable, okay.
10 A. Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead, repeat 10 Q. -- and the dependent variable
11 what you meant by it. 11 would be the stock price; is that right?
12 Q. Right. So are you able to 12 A. That was, again, I haven't
13 agree or disagree with the proposition that 13 thoroughly thought through this, but that
14 under the efficient market hypothesis, 14 was one such example that one may -- I
15 since a securities price must be equal to 15 mean, I would have to, again, until
16 its value, prices should not move without 16 discovery is complete, I can't give you
17 any news about the value of the security? 17 exactly the regression I would run if I was
18 A. Oh, so the value in question is 18 asked to do so, but as a simple model, that
19 the price of the security, so let's get -- 19 is descriptive of what I said earlier.
20 again, I mean, we have to go into what 20 Q. All right. And that regression
21 determines the value of the security and 21 analysis that I just described would not by
22 how you are specifically -- you seem to 22 itself account for confounding factors that
23 have some vision in your mind of what 23 might affect the price of these nine
24 determines value, and that that value could 24 stocks, right?
25 somehow deviate from price, at least that's 25 A. Well, I mean, I guess it would
88 (Pages 346 - 349)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 90 of
190
Page 350 Page 352
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 depend upon when -- again, I haven't gone 2 would take on a value of 1 whenever
3 into a lot of detail about this. It might 3 Robinhood's stock -- or whenever there were
4 be dependent upon when one looked -- I 4 PCO restrictions imposed by Robinhood, and
5 don't -- I don't know. I haven't, yeah, I 5 I guess -- I mean, yeah, I would not
6 haven't thought about it to that extent. I 6 necessarily -- I mean, that's not what I
7 mean, if you are asking, would you need to 7 meant.
8 adjust for non-Robinhood-related actions? 8 Q. Okay. So I'm glad I asked you
9 Absolutely. 9 this question. So how, then, are you
10 Q. All right. So that's part of 10 envisioning the independent variable would
11 what I am asking. So let me ask the 11 work in this regression analysis?
12 question this way: Do you agree that that 12 A. Again, look, this is all
13 regression analysis we have described where 13 theoretical. I haven't been asked to do
14 the independent variable would be the 14 this. But it occurs to me that someone
15 presence of Robinhood PCO restrictions and 15 should be able to do it. And I'm not even
16 the dependent variable would be the stock 16 sure that an indicator variable is the
17 price -- 17 right way to go about doing it. It is just
18 A. Oh, I'm sorry. 18 one possible way to go about doing it. But
19 Q. -- that would not account for 19 specifically let's look at -- am I looking
20 potential causality from restrictions by 20 at my report here? Rebuttal report, yeah.
21 other brokers, right? 21 So, for instance, and, again,
22 A. Well, so, I'm not -- maybe 22 this is all theoretical, I don't have the
23 we're at -- I guess I wasn't thinking about 23 complete fact pattern in this case, I could
24 it in terms of the independent variable 24 look at the imposition, and, I'm sorry, I'm
25 having a value of 1 whenever Robinhood's 25 looking at Table 12 in my rebuttal report.
Page 351 Page 353
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 restrictions were in effect. So I would 2 Q. Right.
3 need to do more, if I'm asked to do so, I 3 A. I could look at a time period
4 think that I would need to do a more 4 for the imposition of the Robinhood
5 targeted analysis. 5 restrictions for, let's say, 10 minutes, 15
6 So I don't -- I guess what I 6 minutes, 20 minutes, and see whether or not
7 had in mind when we talked about this 7 the price changed over that period.
8 earlier wasn't necessarily a long indicator 8 So, for instance, I mean, if
9 variable that would be in effect for, you 9 I'm just eyeballing it, right, the
10 know, like two days, or one day. That's 10 restrictions, PCO restrictions come into
11 not what I had in mind. 11 effect and the stock prices go down. If I
12 Q. Okay. So I'm confused, because 12 were to conclude that what caused these
13 I thought I asked you earlier today whether 13 stock price declines were simply
14 the independent variable was going to be 14 Robinhood's alleged misconduct, I would
15 the time from imposition of the Robinhood 15 want to capture that decline as a measure
16 restriction, and you said no, that's not 16 of damage. But, again, this is all
17 what you had in mind, what you had in mind 17 theoretical. But off the top of my head,
18 was a dummy variable for the presence of 18 that might be one way to do it.
19 the PCO restriction. 19 Q. All right. And what if there
20 A. Yeah, right, and I'm saying 20 are other factors such as the end of a
21 that, I'm correcting what I said, right? 21 short squeeze or the bursting of a price
22 Q. I see. 22 bubble, you wouldn't be able to account for
23 A. As you and I talk about it now, 23 those confounding factors, would you?
24 I now realize that what I said could be 24 A. Well, I'm sorry, are you
25 taken to mean that the indicator variable 25 telling me to assume that a short squeeze
89 (Pages 350 - 353)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 91 of
190
Page 354 Page 356
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 occurred or a bubble ended? I don't -- I 2 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, I'm
3 don't -- I mean, look -- 3 looking at Table 12 here.
4 Q. Let me ask the question a 4 A. Sure, until I do -- until I
5 better way. 5 look and see what else was happening during
6 A. Sure. 6 this time period when the stock price, or
7 Q. So using the regression 7 the average of this index fell, right, I
8 analysis you just described, am I right 8 have no reason to think that that --
9 that if the finder of fact finds that there 9 measuring that price drop wouldn't at least
10 were other factors such as the end of a 10 in some way encompass the impact of
11 short squeeze or the bursting of a price 11 Robinhood's PCO restrictions on the
12 bubble, the regression analysis that you 12 underlying stocks at issue in this case.
13 just described would be unable to account 13 Q. All right.
14 for those confounding factors, right? 14 A. But, again, this is all
15 A. No, not necessarily. I don't 15 theoretical, right?
16 know -- I mean, when -- when are these 16 Q. Right.
17 events occurring? When is the bubble 17 A. You know, let's say, like you
18 bursting? I mean, there is all sorts of -- 18 said, let's say the Court determines that
19 I guess your question is too general. I 19 there was a short squeeze or a bubble,
20 would need to know more about this alleged 20 right, that would then be something that
21 short squeeze or bubble bursting in order 21 you would need to take into consideration,
22 to think about how that might affect such a 22 or one would need to take into
23 model. 23 consideration in measuring damages.
24 Q. And you have not studied a 24 Q. All right. And am I right that
25 short squeeze or burst of a price bubble to 25 you haven't given any thought yet as to how
Page 355 Page 357
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 see how that would affect a loss causation 2 you would go about taking such a finding
3 or damages model, have you? 3 into account?
4 A. That's not something I have 4 A. That's definitely not anything
5 been asked to do at this point, right. I 5 I have been asked to do at this point in
6 have just been asked to provide the damage 6 time.
7 methodology framework, if you will. I 7 Q. All right. And you would agree
8 haven't actually been asked to calculate 8 with me that the simple two-variable
9 damages or opine on loss causation. 9 regression model, the intraday regression
10 Q. And you haven't begun to do any 10 model that you have described that you have
11 work on a damages model in using an 11 thought about theoretically doesn't provide
12 intraday regression model, correct? 12 a means to account for those potential
13 A. That is correct. 13 other factors, right?
14 Q. And even just as you have sat 14 A. Well, again, you are assuming
15 here today, you changed your mind now about 15 that to the extent -- if you are making
16 how you might go about constructing the 16 assumptions about those other factors, so
17 independent variable, right, and that shows 17 in your hypothetical, we are going to
18 that this is all very theoretical for you 18 assume that these things occurred. Does my
19 at this point, right? 19 simple model take into consideration
20 A. Well, look, I mean, I don't 20 hypothetical things that might occur or
21 know if I would agree with your statement 21 someone might find occurs? I don't think
22 that it is very theoretical. I mean, this 22 so. But that -- again, it doesn't -- well,
23 shows it all. 23 we will leave it at that.
24 MR. ROSEN: What are you 24 Q. Okay. You cited a report from
25 pointing to? 25 the SEC staff; is that right?
90 (Pages 354 - 357)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 92 of
190
Page 358 Page 360
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 A. I believe that's correct. 2 Q. Do you agree that the price
3 Q. All right. Let me hand you 3 surge in GameStop raises questions of
4 what I have just marked as Deposition 4 market efficiency that relate to short
5 Exhibit 289, a document entitled Staff 5 selling?
6 Report on Equity and Options Market 6 A. Well, I'm trying to remember,
7 Structure Conditions in Early 2021 dated 7 maybe I'm thinking --
8 October 14th, 2021. 8 MR. ROSEN: What paragraph are
9 (Defendant's Exhibit 289 marked 9 you reading from?
10 for identification.) 10 MR. RYAN: The bottom paragraph
11 A. Okay. 11 on page 30.
12 MR. ROSEN: What exhibit is 12 A. Okay. So could you repeat your
13 this? 13 question?
14 MR. RYAN: 289. 14 Q. Yes. Do you agree that the
15 Q. And is this the SEC staff 15 price surge in GameStop raises questions of
16 report that you cite in your expert report? 16 market efficiency that relate to short
17 A. I believe so, but let's just 17 selling?
18 look at my expert report here. I think I'm 18 A. It could.
19 looking at the wrong report here. 19 Q. Okay.
20 Q. Let me direct you to page 30 of 20 A. I mean, again, but yes, it
21 your rebuttal report marked as Exhibit 282 21 certainly could.
22 to this deposition. 22 Q. Do you see that the next
23 A. Page 30, okay. 23 sentence reads "Staff have observed that it
24 Q. Page 31. 24 was unusually costly to borrow shares in
25 A. Oh, 31, sorry. 25 GME"?
Page 359 Page 361
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. Do you see on page 31 the 2 A. I do see that.
3 beginning of Note 50, you cite to the Staff 3 Q. In connection with your work in
4 Report on Equity and Options Market 4 this case, did you look into whether it was
5 Structure Conditions in Early 2021 dated 5 unusually costly to borrow shares in
6 October 14th, 2021? 6 GameStop?
7 A. Correct. 7 A. Did I look into it? I mean, I
8 Q. All right. So does it look to 8 don't -- look, I mean, there was a ton of
9 you as though Exhibit 289 is the same SEC 9 short interest in the stock, so people were
10 staff report that you cited in your 10 obviously shorting the stock regardless of
11 rebuttal report? 11 how expensive it was.
12 A. It does, yes. 12 Q. Right. But I'm asking you
13 Q. So if you could turn, please, 13 about the cost to borrow. Did you look
14 to the bottom of page 30 of Exhibit 289. 14 into --
15 Do you see that the last paragraph on this 15 A. Well, I mean, the cost of
16 page begins "The price surge in GME also 16 borrowing would be included in the cost of
17 raises questions of market efficiency that 17 putting on a short position, correct?
18 relate to short selling"? 18 Q. Did you look into whether it
19 A. I do, yes. 19 was unusually costly at this time to borrow
20 Q. And do you agree that the price 20 shares in GameStop?
21 surge in GameStop raises questions of 21 A. I do not believe so.
22 market efficiency that relate to short 22 Q. Okay. Do you see the next
23 selling? 23 sentence reads "Academic research
24 A. I'm sorry, could you reread the 24 implicates constraints on short selling as
25 question? 25 a possible contributor to bubbles where
91 (Pages 358 - 361)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 93 of
190
Page 362 Page 364
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 stock prices rise above what may be 2 selling as a possible contributor to
3 justified by fundamentals"? 3 bubbles where stock prices rise above what
4 A. Oh, yes, I do see that. 4 may be justified by fundamentals?
5 Q. All right. Do you -- 5 A. I mean, I will defer -- I mean
6 A. And, sorry, it cites to a paper 6 refer to my previous answer.
7 from 1978. 7 Q. Do you see then the SEC staff
8 Q. Uh-huh. 8 writes "To the extent that GameStop was
9 A. Okay. 9 costly and risky to short, the reluctance
10 Q. A fairly well-known paper, 10 to sell short could have contributed to the
11 right? 11 run-up in prices and the subsequent steep
12 A. Speculative Investor Behavior 12 decline"?
13 in a Stock Market with Heterogeneous 13 A. I do, and then see -- I also
14 Expectations. I have heard of Kreps. 14 see "While a short squeeze did not appear
15 Fairly well known? I mean, maybe I read it 15 to be the main driver of events, and a
16 at some point in my life. I don't know -- 16 gamma squeeze less likely, the episode
17 I don't know how to determine whether or 17 highlights the role and potential impact of
18 not it was well known or not. 18 short selling and short cover."
19 Q. As you sit here today I gather 19 Q. So do you agree with the SEC
20 you don't have that paper in mind? 20 staff that to the extent GameStop was
21 A. Oh, you mean in terms of my 21 costly and risky to short, the reluctance
22 familiarity with it? 22 to sell short could have contributed to the
23 Q. Yes. 23 run-up in prices and the subsequent steep
24 A. Oh, yes, I do not, without 24 decline?
25 looking at it, I can't tell you exactly 25 A. I'm sorry, where are you
Page 363 Page 365
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 what was written in that report, or that 2 looking?
3 academic work. 3 Q. The last full sentence of page
4 Q. Do you agree, though, with the 4 30 on Deposition Exhibit 289.
5 general proposition as stated by the SEC 5 A. Oh, sure, that is information
6 staff that academic research implicates 6 that would impact -- I mean, that possibly
7 constraints on short selling as a possible 7 could impact the stock price. I mean,
8 contributor to bubbles where stock prices 8 those are -- those are certainly things
9 rise above what may be justified by 9 that investors would take into
10 fundamentals? 10 consideration when trying to value in this
11 A. Well, again, I mean, there is a 11 case GameStop.
12 lot of statements in there. So I don't 12 Q. All right. And am I right that
13 know what the -- what the SEC meant by 13 you have not performed any analysis to
14 fundamentals. Again, are we talking about 14 study whether or not the reluctance to sell
15 fundamental efficiency or informational 15 short in fact contributed to the run-up in
16 efficiency? I mean, that is certainly 16 prices for GameStop and the subsequent
17 going to impact my answer to that question. 17 steep decline?
18 So without knowing exactly what the SEC was 18 A. Well, I mean, other than what I
19 talking about, I have -- I have a difficult 19 have read, that it is not a short squeeze,
20 time answering that question. 20 there was not a short squeeze, is that a
21 Q. Okay. So is it the case, then, 21 possible factor? It is a possible factor
22 that as a financial economist you are 22 that could have contributed to stock price
23 unable to agree or disagree with the 23 changes.
24 statement by the SEC staff that academic 24 Q. Okay. And you say that it is a
25 research implicates constraints on short 25 possible factor that could have contributed
92 (Pages 362 - 365)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 94 of
190
Page 366 Page 368
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 to the run-up in prices for GameStop and 2 of your two experts that a short squeeze
3 the subsequent steep decline. 3 did not occur. So you are asking me to
4 MR. ROSEN: Mischaracterizes 4 assume -- did I do any searching into
5 his testimony. 5 whether or not a short squeeze occurred? I
6 Q. I take it you haven't studied 6 read people's testimony. I read people's
7 whether it did or not, right? 7 reports. I read what the SEC said. I
8 A. I didn't study whether it did? 8 don't know. Is that under your umbrella of
9 I believe -- 9 investigation? You tell me.
10 MR. ROSEN: Could you reread 10 Q. All right. I take it other
11 the question? 11 than the things you just talked about, you
12 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 12 didn't do any separate analysis of whether
13 (The record was read.) 13 there was actually a short squeeze, right?
14 MR. ROSEN: Objection to the 14 A. Did I do any additional
15 question. 15 analysis? I believe that's correct.
16 A. My belief is that the price of 16 Q. Could you turn, then, please to
17 GameStop and all of these stocks 17 page 28 in Deposition Exhibit 289.
18 incorporated all information that was out 18 MR. ROSEN: So we have about
19 in the public sphere. So to the extent 19 ten minutes left before we are at seven
20 that people may have said there was a short 20 hours, just so you know. I'm giving
21 squeeze, that would be incorporated in the 21 you the ten-minute warning on the
22 stock price. I guess none of this was 22 clock.
23 unknown to the market. Could it have 23 Q. And I'm focused here on
24 affected the price? Absolutely. Because 24 footnote 78 which is a footnote about the
25 that would -- people might take into 25 SEC staff's methodology. Do you see that
Page 367 Page 369
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 consideration how that might affect their 2 footnote, sir?
3 opinion about value. 3 A. I do see the footnote, yes.
4 Q. Okay. And did you study 4 Q. Okay. And do you see that their
5 whether an actual short squeeze, as opposed 5 figure, and they are referring to Figure 6
6 to discussion about a potential short 6 above on this page, shows the total buy
7 squeeze, affected the run-up in price of 7 volume during half-hour intervals from
8 GameStop and subsequent steep decline here? 8 January 19th to February 5th, 2021 of
9 A. Well, so I haven't seen -- 9 traders identified as having a large short
10 other than Mr. Fischel and to some extent 10 position in GME using data from CAT. Do
11 Mr. -- or Professor Grenadier suggesting a 11 you see that?
12 short squeeze may have caused the stock 12 A. Well, along with total buy
13 price run-up, I haven't seen anyone say 13 volume and value-weighted average stock
14 that a short squeeze actually occurred. So 14 price, I do see that.
15 what you are asking me is a hypothetical 15 Look, if you want to ask me
16 question. 16 about this, I'm going to have to look --
17 Q. No, because my question is did 17 I'm going to have to refresh my memory as
18 you study this question. That's my 18 to exactly what was being stated here.
19 question. It is not hypothetical. It is 19 Q. And you understand that CAT is
20 actual -- either you did study it or you 20 the consolidated audit trail?
21 didn't. So my question is did you actually 21 A. I believe that's correct. But,
22 study whether there was an actual short 22 again, since you are asking about a
23 squeeze? 23 specific footnote, usually footnotes are
24 A. I relied on everyone's opinion, 24 extremely specific, and so they deal
25 including your -- including the deposition 25 with -- they need to be looked at in the
93 (Pages 366 - 369)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 95 of
190
Page 370 Page 372
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 context of which they're being used. So 2 look at my documents relied upon.
3 let me look here. 3 Q. So this is page 71 of your
4 Q. Now, do you see that four lines 4 rebuttal report marked as Deposition
5 from the bottom of the page, the SEC staff 5 Exhibit 282. Do you see there the Jones,
6 writes "Note that since the CAT" -- 6 et al, working paper?
7 A. I'm sorry, I'm not -- I'm going 7 A. Yes, I do see it.
8 forward to get some perspective on exactly 8 Q. All right. And do you see in
9 what's going on here since I don't remember 9 the abstract on the first page of Exhibit
10 it. You are now -- now we are talking 10 290 that the authors studied a set of
11 about footnote 78 again? 11 trading restrictions in 38 stocks,
12 Q. Yes, we are talking about 12 including GameStop?
13 footnote 78. 13 A. Yeah, that's what they said
14 A. Okay. 14 they did.
15 Q. So do you see that four lines 15 Q. All right. So the group of
16 from the bottom the SEC staff wrote that 16 stocks that they study is not limited to
17 "Note that since the CAT sample only begins 17 the nine at-issue stocks in this case,
18 on December 24th, 2020 we are not able to 18 right?
19 include FDIDs' inventory positions 19 A. That is correct, yes.
20 accumulated prior to this date"? 20 Q. Did you note in fact that only
21 A. I see that statement, yes. 21 six of the nine stocks at issue in this
22 Q. And do you see that the FDIDs 22 case are included in the group of 38 stocks
23 are the firm designated identifications? 23 studied in Jones, et al?
24 A. Correct. 24 A. I believe that's correct.
25 Q. All right. And so do you have 25 Q. All right. And then if you
Page 371 Page 373
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 the understanding in looking at this SEC 2 could look with me, please, at Table 9,
3 staff report that because of limitations in 3 which begins on page 61 and is entitled
4 the consolidated audit trail sample, they 4 Individual Firm Regressions and continues
5 were not able to include short inventory 5 on to page 62.
6 positions accumulated prior to December 6 A. Okay.
7 24th, 2020? 7 Q. And do you see here that we see
8 A. That's what it states. I have 8 in the left-hand column the list of 38
9 no reason to think that's not correct. 9 stocks that are studied by Jones, et al?
10 Q. Okay. Let me show you then 10 A. Oh, maybe I'm on the wrong
11 another article which you discuss in your 11 page. What page are you on?
12 report. This will be Exhibit 290. This is 12 Q. Page 62.
13 a working paper by Charles M. Jones and 13 A. Oh, I'm on page 60, I
14 co-authors. 14 apologize. Okay.
15 (Defendant's Exhibit 290 marked 15 Q. And do you see we see AMC in
16 for identification.) 16 the second row?
17 A. Okay. I should point out, as 17 A. I do.
18 Professor Grenadier did, Charles M. Jones 18 Q. And I'm looking at what they
19 is no longer with us. 19 call the S1 estimated return. Do you see
20 Q. So I gather. That's 20 that that is not statistically significant
21 unfortunate obviously. 21 for AMC?
22 All right. So is this the 22 A. I do, yes.
23 Jones, et al, working paper that you cite 23 Q. And do you see that the same is
24 in your rebuttal report? 24 true for Bed Bath & Beyond?
25 A. I believe it is. Let's just 25 A. That is correct.
94 (Pages 370 - 373)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 96 of
190
Page 374 Page 376
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. And it is correct for Express 2 A. Okay, all right. So it is what
3 as well, right? 3 I thought they were.
4 A. Let me -- let me refresh my 4 Q. Okay. So now with respect to
5 memory as to exactly what S1 is. 5 the fifth stock at issue in this case,
6 Q. S1 are the PCO restrictions 6 Koss, once again, the S1 return is not
7 such as were imposed by Robinhood. 7 statistically significant according to
8 A. Can you point me to where it 8 Jones, et al, on page 62, right?
9 says that in the report? 9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. If you look at page 15, do you 10 Q. And for the sixth stock at
11 see about eight lines down it says "The 11 issue in this case that's in their group,
12 first set of restrictions (set 1) are 12 do you see that for Tootsie Roll the S1
13 trading restrictions put in place by 13 return again is not statistically
14 Robinhood Interactive Brokers and a few 14 significant?
15 other brokerage firms. These begin before 15 A. Well, so, I'm sorry, I'm
16 trading opens on January 28th"? 16 forgetting, what is S -- so those returns,
17 Do you see that? 17 I don't recall what -- there is a column
18 A. I do see that. 18 one, two, three, essentially four things
19 Q. I want to show you one other 19 over that say IV-RV S1 Estimate, and those
20 thing. 20 things all appear to be statistically
21 A. Go ahead. 21 significant. So I'm trying to remember, do
22 Q. I think this would be genuinely 22 you know where the description of IV-RV in
23 helpful. 23 the context of S1 estimates are?
24 A. Genuinely helpful? 24 Q. Yes. It's on page 61.
25 Q. Yes. If you just look a few 25 A. Oh, well -- oh, on page 61, I'm
Page 375 Page 377
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 lines down on page 15 do you see the 2 sorry.
3 authors say "Increases on margin are 3 Q. Right. The sort of explanatory
4 imposed by a second set of brokerage firms 4 paragraph that explains the table on the
5 (set 2), notably TD Ameritrade"? 5 following page, page 62.
6 So that's my understanding of 6 A. Oh, I've got this backwards.
7 what S1 and S2 mean in the Jones, et al, 7 I'm sorry. Okay, all right, thank you.
8 working paper. 8 Q. So I think I was in the middle
9 A. Okay, all right. 9 of asking for Tootsie Roll, the sixth of
10 Q. So back on page 62, in Table 9, 10 the stocks at issue that are in the
11 we looked at the first three of the stocks 11 Jones --
12 in the Jones, et al, group that are at 12 MR. RYAN: I have one more
13 issue in this case. So I'm now looking at 13 minute. One more minute.
14 the fourth one, GME. Do you see there the 14 Q. For Tootsie Roll, the final one
15 S1 return is not statistically significant? 15 of the six stocks that are in the Jones, et
16 A. Sorry, I'm just looking at 16 al, group the S1 return, again, is not
17 the -- I mean, I assume that's correct. I 17 statistically significant as shown in Table
18 don't -- do you see a discussion as to what 18 9, right?
19 the asterisks mean? 19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. Yes. The asterisk as described 20 Q. And so it's the case, then,
21 on page 61 in the sort of explanatory note 21 that the Jones, et al, working paper for
22 to Table 9, three lines from the bottom, 22 the individual firm regressions in Table 9,
23 one, two and three asterisks denote 23 the S1 returns, which are the returns in
24 significance at the 10 percent, 5 percent 24 response to Robinhood PCO restrictions, are
25 and 1 percent levels respectively. 25 not statistically significant for any of
95 (Pages 374 - 377)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 97 of
190
Page 378 Page 380
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 the six stocks at issue in this case 2 contain value relevant information, I
3 included in their group, right? 3 focused on the frequency of news releases
4 A. Well, again, without going 4 on each day during the relevant period for
5 through the entire paper and refreshing my 5 each Affected Company," so the term "value
6 memory as to exactly what period S1 was 6 relevant information," what did you mean by
7 measured over, so I don't, as I sit here 7 that?
8 today, at the end of seven hours of 8 MR. RYAN: Objection to form.
9 deposition, I don't recall what S1 is. As 9 A. I didn't mean that in the sense
10 a practical matter, just looking at this 10 of fundamental efficiency, I meant it in
11 table, right, all six of those things that 11 terms of information that would be material
12 you mentioned are statistically 12 to investors, and so as we've seen, you
13 insignificant. 13 know, throughout the day, lots of different
14 Q. All right. 14 information that is potentially material to
15 A. What that means, I don't 15 investors, among things, including things
16 remember. 16 like stock prices.
17 MR. RYAN: Okay. Thank you for 17 Again, we are talking about
18 your time, Dr. Werner. 18 people who might be momentum traders or
19 MR. ROSEN: I have got a couple 19 Chartis. So it might be different for
20 of questions for the witness. 20 different -- different people might value
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. ROSEN: 21 things differently, but in terms of what I
22 Q. Do you have your opening 22 meant, I didn't mean in terms of -- I
23 report, Dr. Werner? 23 didn't mean valuation in terms of the
24 A. Declaration, here we go. 24 fundamental valuation that the two defense
25 Q. Could you please go to 25 experts talk about market efficiency. I
Page 379 Page 381
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 paragraph 68, page 28. 2 meant it in terms of what is important to
3 A. Paragraph 68. 3 investors.
4 Q. Yeah. 4 Q. Okay. Let's go to your
5 A. Okay, I'm there. 5 rebuttal report, paragraph 115. It says --
6 Q. Now, earlier you were asked 6 A. I'm sorry, I'm not there yet.
7 questions about this paragraph, and 7 I apologize.
8 specifically there was a sentence in it, I 8 Q. Tell me when you're there.
9 believe it was the second sentence, it 9 A. Okay.
10 reads "To remain as objective as reasonably 10 Q. The first sentence says
11 possible, I broadly defined 'news days' as 11 "Because these markets were efficient
12 any day with news releases about a subject 12 during the immediate pre-class period,
13 company that can be identified through the 13 there is no need to deviate from using
14 news aggregating database, Factiva." I'm 14 market prices to establish the appropriate
15 sorry, it continues on, "In order to" -- 15 but-for price absent the alleged market
16 then it continues on to the sentence that 16 manipulation."
17 reads "In order to isolate a test sample of 17 Now, did you mean by that
18 news days that would be more likely than 18 sentence that if it were determined by a
19 not to contain value relevant information, 19 factfinder that the markets for these
20 I focused on the frequency of news releases 20 stocks, nine stocks, were inefficient, that
21 on each day during the relevant period for 21 the January 7th price would not, market
22 each Affected Company." 22 price, would not be an appropriate but-for
23 So the sentence I just read, 23 price?
24 "In order to isolate a test sample of news 24 MR. RYAN: Objection, leading.
25 days that would be more likely than not to 25 A. I think you said January 7th.
96 (Pages 378 - 381)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 98 of
190
Page 382 Page 384
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 Q. January 27th. 2 believe that the results would be identical
3 A. January 27th. So no, you could 3 to the results here if you eliminated these
4 still use it. I mean, it would be an 4 variables that are irrelevant to the
5 appropriate price. 5 question at hand, which would be how the
6 Q. Okay. My last question, this 6 equity -- how the stock prices changed upon
7 exhibit, the last exhibit, the Jones paper. 7 the implementation of the restrictions on
8 What exhibit number is that? Do you have 8 January 28th?
9 the Jones paper in front of you? Why don't 9 MR. RYAN: Objection to form.
10 you grab it. 10 A. Could you reread the question,
11 A. I have already screwed that up. 11 please?
12 Q. So I want to ask you about 12 (The record was read.)
13 Table 9. Mr. Ryan just showed you Table 9, 13 A. There is no reason to believe
14 and there is a regression, some individual 14 that they would be identical.
15 firm regressions on page 62. 15 MR. ROSEN: Okay. I have no
16 A. Yes, I see that. 16 further questions.
17 Q. So I don't -- I mean, it is a 17 You can redirect on those three
18 complicated table. But is it -- for each 18 issues if you would like.
19 individual stock that is being studied, are 19 MR. RYAN: That's fine. I have
20 the options and the equity and all these 20 no questions.
21 other variables, in other words, does this 21 MR. ROSEN: All right, thank
22 regression include both stock options and 22 you.
23 other securities other than the stock 23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This will
24 itself in the regression so that it is 24 end media unit eight and conclude the
25 capturing effects to more than just the 25 deposition of Dr. Adam Werner. We are
Page 383 Page 385
1 WERNER 1 WERNER
2 stock but effects to option prices as well? 2 going off the record at 6:52, 5-3-23.
3 MR. RYAN: Objection to form. 3
4 A. Right. So it incorporates all 4 [TIME NOTED: 6:52 p.m.]
5 these additional variables, and to the 5
6 extent that these things might be 6
7 correlated, it can -- it is certainly going 7
8 to affect the statistical significance as 8
9 well as the actual returns calculated here. 9
10 Q. All right. So if a financial 10
11 economist wanted to do a regression 11
12 analysis just to see how the restrictions, 12
13 the PCO restrictions, affected these stock 13
14 prices, these nine stock prices, they would 14
15 not include all of this data about options 15
16 volume and bid/ask spreads, they would just 16
17 focus on the stock and they would have 17
18 different results than this regression; is 18
19 that right? 19
20 MR. RYAN: Objection, leading. 20
21 A. I believe the initial step one 21
22 would take -- would be a univariate 22
23 analysis as you described it, so just 23
24 looking at the S1. 24
25 Q. But is there any reason to 25
97 (Pages 382 - 385)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 99 of
190
Page 386 Page 388
1 IN RE JANUARY 2021 SHORT SQUEEZE 1
TRADING LITIGATION 2 CERTIFICATION
2 5/3/2023 - ADAM WERNER, Ph.D. 3
3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF DEPONENT 4 I, TODD DeSIMONE, a Notary Public for
4 I, ADAM WERNER, Ph.D., do hereby declare 5 and within the State of New York, do hereby
5 that I have read the foregoing transcript, 6 certify:
6 I have made any corrections, additions, or 7 That the witness whose testimony as
7 changes I deemed necessary as noted on the 8 herein set forth, was duly sworn by me; and
8 Errata to be appended hereto, and that the 9 that the within transcript is a true record
9 same is a true, correct and complete 10 of the testimony given by said witness.
10 transcript of the testimony given by me. 11 I further certify that I am not related
11 12 to any of the parties to this action by
12 _________________________ _______________ 13 blood or marriage, and that I am in no way
13 ADAM WERNER, Ph.D. Date 14 interested in the outcome of this matter.
14 *If notary is required 15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set
15 16 my hand this 3rd day of May, 2023.
16 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 17
17 ______ DAY OF ________________, 20___. 18 <%3879,Signature%>
18 _______________________
19 19
20 __________________________ 20 TODD DESIMONE
21 NOTARY PUBLIC 21 * * *
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
Page 387 Page 389
1
2 INDEX
1 IN RE JANUARY 2021 SHORT SQUEEZE
3 TRADING LITIGATION
WITNESS EXAMINATION BY PAGE
4 2 5/3/2023 - ADAM WERNER, Ph.D.
WERNER RYAN 5 3 ERRATA SHEET
5 ROSEN 378
6 4 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE_________________
EXHIBITS
7 5 ___________________________________________
DEFENDANT'S DESCRIPTION PAGE 6 REASON_____________________________________
8 Exhibit 281 Declaration of Dr. Adam 22
Werner 7 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE_________________
9 Exhibit 282 Rebuttal Report of 22
Dr. Adam Werner
8 ___________________________________________
10 Exhibit 283 Deposition of Dr. Adam 89 9 REASON_____________________________________
Werner dated 4/24/14
11 Exhibit 284 Declaration of Dr. Adam 161 10 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE_________________
Werner 11 ___________________________________________
12 Exhibit 285 Paper by Ferrillo 210
Exhibit 286 Printout from Factiva 242 12 REASON_____________________________________
13 Exhibit 287 Printout from Factiva 312
Exhibit 288 Analysis in Response to 327
13 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE_________________
14 Werner Rebuttal Report 14 ___________________________________________
Table 7
15 Exhibit 289 Staff Report on Equity 358 15 REASON_____________________________________
and Options Market 16 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE_________________
16 Structure Conditions in
Early 2021 17 ___________________________________________
17 Exhibit 290 Paper by Jones 371
18 18 REASON_____________________________________
DIRECTIONS NOT TO ANSWER 19 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE_________________
19
Page Line 20 ___________________________________________
20 (NONE)
21
21 REASON_____________________________________
22 22
REQUESTS
23 23 _________________________ _______________
Page Line 24 ADAM WERNER, Ph.D. Date
24 (NONE)
25 25
98 (Pages 386 - 389)
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 100
of 190
[& - 1c] Page 1
& 103 125:18 215:19 237:4 156 109:22,25
& 1:15 2:8 3:22 109 213:22 122 90:23 110:2
4:15 41:16 1099 7:14,16,21 91:18 92:19 16 5:14
126:14 197:25 9:4 10:21 93:23 161 387:11
199:18 200:9 254:7,7 123 93:24 16th 22:20
313:10,15,23 10:46 35:11 94:14,20 162:3
316:7 373:24 10:50 35:14 124 89:16,18,18 17 42:18,25
11 137:14,16 89:20 96:3 43:2 94:14,21
0
140:21 98:15,19 172 109:14
0.71 331:9,12 112 212:12 125 89:20 176 179:18
1 115 282:3 90:24 98:20 185:16 196:2
1 13:16,20 283:10 284:21 108:21,25 176.03 109:18
25:19 31:8 286:16,21,22 12:56 136:9,10 18 84:10 92:20
41:5,12 44:18 287:13 381:5 12th 91:22 93:2 19 96:11 98:15
44:20 57:21 117 212:11 115:25 98:19
122:2 159:23 213:2,4 216:3 13 92:20 1978 362:7
180:17 181:5 118 244:8 333:24 1989 170:14
186:3,16 245:19 131 108:19 1993 19:22
196:10,18 118.43 110:5 132 108:4,5,17 19th 91:21
201:2 350:25 119 210:23,24 108:25 92:25 369:8
352:2 374:12 211:7,13,16 138.05 109:7 1:21 1:4
375:25 212:23 213:6 13th 93:9,10 1:38 137:3,6
1,000 294:20,23 213:20 215:19 14 212:16,16 1a 180:5,9
295:12 11:41 76:25 332:8,11 333:4 181:5 184:3,15
10 53:14 65:8,9 11:49 77:4 333:13,15 184:23 199:7
246:8 298:5 12 39:7,9,13,13 143 242:19 200:3 201:2
325:17 353:5 40:10 55:16 149 259:22 1b 180:6
375:24 60:5 125:11,14 260:2 261:10 185:15 186:4
100 39:21 352:25 356:3 14th 358:8 186:16 187:15
110:14,23 120 214:21 359:6 199:7 200:3
276:16 215:7 216:22 15 218:21 201:2
10016 2:4 217:8 235:6 353:5 374:10 1c 180:6 195:24
10019 2:9 237:3 375:2 196:3,10 197:5
102 39:12 121 211:17 150 252:17,22 197:16 199:7
212:7,12,13 212:23 213:6 200:3
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 101
of 190
[2 - 282] Page 2
2 55:7 60:3 21st 317:9 122:12 123:23
2 7:21 31:8 109:6,17 110:4 22 42:11 98:21 124:3,20 128:8
32:3,7,15,21 110:10 112:16 256:3 321:13 128:18,25
46:18 47:12 113:9 115:10 387:8,9 129:8,11,13,22
53:14 159:24 116:8,16 23 98:21 130:8,13,23
211:8 328:8 117:21 119:18 137:14,16 132:3,6 134:4
329:12 331:17 121:23 122:5 139:15 141:12 134:13 135:15
375:5 122:12 123:24 255:13,16 317:9 320:13
2's 33:2,13 124:4 125:6 256:3,4 382:2,3
20 51:23 126:7,13 242 387:12 28 143:20
142:11 213:11 127:19 128:8 24th 89:9,13 153:22 156:3
219:10 225:12 128:19,25 315:9,24 202:7 368:17
246:13 353:6 129:8,13,22 370:18 371:7 379:2
386:17 132:4,7 134:4 25 21:2 51:21 281 21:20,20
2004 190:14 134:13 135:15 68:16 89:17,20 22:8,12,15
203:13 204:4 186:11 227:25 142:11 23:3 25:17
212:2 222:23 228:9 315:9 253 117:14,14 31:9 32:2,9
226:13 227:6 317:9 320:13 26 121:2,6 40:25 41:4
2012 91:22 325:16 358:7,8 122:18 198:24 44:17 46:19
93:2,9 196:12 359:5,6 369:8 200:15 55:12 61:13
2013 93:10 386:1 387:16 26th 97:23,25 107:24 121:3
2014 71:2 389:1 27 122:18 122:2 137:13
89:10 196:13 2022 162:4 132:20,25 201:22 202:22
196:21 197:3 166:15 171:5 325:15 243:3 255:3,7
2015 9:11,24,25 2023 1:9 8:18 275 2:3 325:5 387:8
2016 186:10 22:20 23:5,12 27th 42:3 43:7 282 21:20,22
2019 181:13 177:17 179:21 45:4 54:15,21 22:10,13 23:10
2020 115:25 388:16 55:6 60:3 98:3 32:14,22 36:9
122:4 245:15 21 3:21 40:15 109:6,17 110:4 42:19 55:13
245:20 370:18 65:8,20 316:25 110:10 112:16 66:24 73:23,23
371:7 322:14 330:13 113:9 115:10 257:25 281:23
2021 1:6 3:18 330:17 333:20 116:8,16 286:20 316:13
39:16 42:4,16 333:24 117:21 118:22 358:21 372:5
42:21 43:6,7 210 387:12 119:18 120:10 387:9
45:4 54:21 121:22 122:5
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 102
of 190
[283 - 67] Page 3
283 89:6,11 2:29 179:13 4 52 255:15
387:10 251:2 4 61:14,16 256:23 319:11
284 161:22 3 89:20 98:20 321:13,18
162:2,10 236:6,9 53 199:4
3 1:9 41:6,9
202:21 387:11 4/24/14 387:10 200:15
44:18,20 332:5
285 210:18,20 40th 2:4 5:03 312:23
333:3,8,12
211:3 235:5 41 162:10,11 5:09 313:4
30 162:23,24
387:12 258:2,3 5:48 348:12
163:3,4 172:23
286 242:5,9 44 39:8 125:15 5th 369:8
298:6 358:20
243:12,25 243:5 6
358:23 359:14
245:19 387:12 45 125:20
360:11 365:4 6 185:20,23
287 312:25 126:24 127:8
31 201:22 186:7,18 187:6
313:8 314:6 46 243:5
202:4 203:5,6 187:18 188:20
387:13 317:10
358:24,25 189:19 199:15
288 327:4,6,8 47 317:10
359:2 218:14 219:5,8
327:11,20 4:00 128:13,19
312 387:13 219:14,17,19
328:8 329:12 129:7
316 314:5 220:2,7,11,21
331:17 332:5 4:02 251:14
327 387:13 222:5,15
333:4,12 4th 8:8 43:6
34 140:20 261:16 262:3
387:13
325:7,10 5 369:5
289 358:5,9,14
35 66:24 69:24 5 46:18 96:3 60 373:13
359:9,14 365:4
69:25 140:20 184:18 216:22 61 373:3
368:17 387:15
358 387:15 318:25 375:24 375:21 376:24
28th 23:12
36 73:25 387:4 376:25
39:16 122:4
360 253:10 5-3-23 3:4 62 121:2,4
125:6 126:7,13
37 74:9 385:2 373:5,12
127:19 129:12
371 387:17 5/3/2023 386:2 375:10 376:8
129:19 179:20
378 387:5 389:2 377:5 382:15
245:15,20
38 372:11,22 50 13:18 63 123:18
374:16 384:8
373:8 247:19 296:17 135:24
290 371:12,15
3879 388:18 330:18 359:3 64 256:24
372:10 387:17
39 54:10 50/50 10:9 257:2
2989 1:4 3:21
3:51 251:11 500 252:17 65 10:13
2:24 179:10
3rd 8:9 177:17 51 282:2 67 143:19,21
388:16 286:19 334:23
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 103
of 190
[68 - academic] Page 4
68 153:11 7d 109:23 93 53:8 abnormal
379:2,3 7f 109:14 95 184:20 109:12 111:2,6
6:07 348:15 7th 381:21,25 197:22 330:21 111:9,17,19,20
6:52 385:2,4 8 96 36:16 54:10 111:25 115:25
6a 36:12,14,23 199:10,25 123:21 124:4
8 61:15,19 62:5
38:23 200:14,20 145:8,9 293:12
62:11,22 63:4
6i 36:13,14,23 257:21 258:5 293:13,15,17
94:14,20
38:23 261:7,8 262:8 293:19,23
174:20 175:2
7 9:54 127:3,11 above 362:2
185:19,24
a 363:9 364:3
7 40:14,16,21 186:7,18 187:6
369:6
42:11,12 236:3 187:18 188:19 a.m. 1:9 3:4
absence 131:15
236:9 258:7 189:19 199:14 126:6,13 127:3
148:20,22
316:25 319:18 218:14,20,23 127:11,18
249:24
322:14 324:11 218:25 219:5,8 aaron 314:10
absent 282:9
326:10 327:17 219:13,20 314:19 316:6
283:15 284:4
327:22 330:11 220:2,5,7,11,20 abandon
285:13 287:17
330:18 334:24 222:5,15 232:24
288:12 290:20
335:7,16 82 66:23 69:16 abandoned
381:15
387:14 69:20 70:4,17 232:23
absolutely
700 294:15,22 71:11 72:6 ability 105:25
143:5 169:21
295:11 825 1:15 2:9 195:19 289:6
179:5 187:10
71 132:20 3:23 able 34:23
250:9 312:12
133:5 372:3 84 73:25 46:23 47:13
350:9 366:24
74 203:5,6,8 86 74:8 96:4 120:7
abstract 372:9
75 163:2,7 89 74:10,24 147:12 170:2
absurd 284:14
76 163:2,7 170:8 387:10 208:17 209:14
academia
261:12 9 210:6 214:14
103:6 138:8,18
77 162:18,19 214:16 276:8
9 53:14 325:6,8 139:6
171:4,22 296:24 302:12
325:13 373:2 academic 18:17
172:17,21,22 304:14 307:8
375:10,22 18:21 19:3
173:12 331:20 337:13
377:18,22 33:17,24 34:16
78 368:24 339:20 340:19
382:13,13 49:16 72:24
370:11,13 346:8 347:12
90 276:16 73:8 78:7
7a 107:6 108:7 352:15 353:22
102:9,11
108:17,20 370:18 371:5
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 104
of 190
[academic - adjusted] Page 5
132:21 133:6 account 174:25 action 4:6,20 57:24 66:22
168:2,5,6 189:11,11 13:23,24 14:3 156:20 183:6
169:6,8,18 219:3,3 258:14 14:5,20,23 207:16 248:19
209:21,23 261:18 349:22 15:4,13,16 253:23 267:10
216:11,13 350:19 353:22 22:17 23:5,12 276:23 316:5
257:18 291:17 354:13 357:3 24:18 68:4 355:8 367:14
342:23 343:23 357:12 71:5,8,15 72:9 367:21 368:13
361:23 363:3,6 accounting 77:12 78:2,16 adam 1:12 3:16
363:24 227:7 78:22 141:25 5:12,16 21:21
academically accumulated 277:5 278:20 21:22 89:7
66:16 331:21 370:20 371:6 279:2,13 280:7 162:3 384:25
academicians accurate 7:5 293:24 388:12 386:2,4,13
141:22 9:15 15:2 actions 15:8 387:8,9,10,11
academics 77:14 84:6 61:10 103:25 389:2,24
140:12 142:2 94:18 120:6,23 122:22 123:4 add 342:15
accept 137:21 121:25 128:4 123:11 124:12 adding 51:18
139:20 141:4 133:21 141:20 124:22,25 addition 32:17
141:14 192:8 142:3 143:17 125:4 130:3,14 32:20
acceptable 146:15 181:10 130:21 167:3 additional
194:6 186:24 192:3 167:18,24 24:19,21 25:4
acceptance 200:22 210:10 168:15 169:12 25:8,13 43:16
175:6 210:13 220:4 173:15 287:24 43:21 44:3,10
accepted 103:2 244:6 266:13 350:8 48:2,5,6 57:15
103:6 122:24 268:22 295:7 actual 50:13 95:23 282:17
190:11,12,21 301:10 302:24 185:11 276:12 282:23 283:20
191:20 192:24 307:13 330:9 293:21 367:5 330:5 368:14
193:6,10 accurately 367:20,22 383:5
208:11 93:20 99:14 383:9 additionally
accepting 286:12 302:19 actuality 199:12
192:10,19 303:11 267:12 additions 386:6
accepts 195:12 acknowledge... actualization address 332:25
accident 386:3 314:12 316:7 adjunct 21:4
246:14 act 53:14 actually 6:13 adjust 350:8
accompanied 336:11 337:4 7:25 35:4 adjusted
37:17 337:21 338:10 37:24 38:5 110:18
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 105
of 190
[adjustment - ahead] Page 6
adjustment 383:13 219:10 225:12 265:21 266:10
287:22 affecting 62:17 231:13 323:10 267:21 270:11
adjustments affects 35:24 agree 3:13 271:2,5 273:4
288:2,5 63:13 275:8 62:18 65:10 275:3,3,11
administer 4:4 affiliate 10:22 66:8 68:22 276:15 279:8
admission affiliated 7:3 69:7 75:25 283:22 285:10
327:6 9:4,10 11:9 76:11 82:22 287:20 288:4
admits 67:3 53:7,18 253:13 83:24 84:12 290:17 292:11
adopt 142:12 254:3 282:16 86:11,23 92:21 293:11 295:6
206:22 282:21 283:5 93:25 100:9,14 295:22 297:8
adopted 175:17 affiliation 105:10 110:7 299:3,13 300:5
204:9 205:2,11 10:25 111:5 112:3 301:3,14 302:8
205:13 affiliations 119:6 127:15 305:20 306:18
advised 227:11 4:12 131:13 135:14 320:20,25
affect 34:9 49:3 afield 268:16 138:5,18 139:6 336:8,19,22,25
50:10 59:13 aftermarket 140:2 141:3,13 337:13 338:7
63:18 87:25 128:24 129:6 142:4,17 338:22 339:4
135:7 224:2 afternoon 143:11 149:24 339:15,21
240:9 349:23 137:10,11 150:4,21 340:9,12
354:22 355:2 agarwal 252:3 153:24 158:17 342:16 344:2
367:2 383:8 aggregate 187:2 213:18 344:10,24
affected 25:24 47:21,23 48:8 213:23 214:5 345:11 346:9
25:24 26:5,23 48:10 277:6 215:4,10,13 346:12,17
27:18 36:25 aggregating 217:9,16,18 347:13 350:12
39:15 41:13,25 379:14 219:19 222:17 355:21 357:7
44:23 67:6,8 agitated 311:11 223:11 224:6 359:20 360:2
123:19,22 ago 21:3 51:23 224:23 225:11 360:14 363:4
126:19,20 59:17 81:14 232:5 235:17 363:23 364:19
155:22 156:9 89:14 91:5 236:18 237:8 agreed 273:20
237:7,13,24 99:12 100:15 240:12 244:22 336:11 337:4
238:18 255:24 104:11 105:11 245:25 246:6 337:21 338:10
287:3 292:13 105:16 106:3 246:23 247:11 ah 339:15
310:13,18,25 117:17 162:15 248:8 250:16 ahead 37:7
366:24 367:7 166:15 196:22 250:20,20 59:8,24 69:25
379:22 380:5 216:17 218:22 262:6,14,22 83:11 86:10
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 106
of 190
[ahead - answer] Page 7
88:11 89:14 allow 106:25 93:12 122:19 andre 266:11
152:23 165:3 106:25 335:17 124:18,18 announcement
213:4 215:20 allowed 216:6 129:21 137:19 123:23 148:9
232:9 281:25 309:25 138:3,20 139:8 announcements
303:8 315:3 allows 299:11 139:17 144:20 148:6,8 173:8
333:10 345:20 alluded 18:17 147:10 156:16 173:9 174:17
346:14 347:10 198:18 205:10,10 176:4,23
374:21 alter 76:13 208:11 223:2 177:10,18
akin 124:12 altered 312:2 233:6 241:25 180:20 181:4
aktas 133:12 amc 41:15 248:5 249:24 182:8 218:4
134:6 135:22 108:10 109:7 277:11 292:20 222:20 223:14
al 140:22 110:8 113:11 298:4 301:23 236:17 237:18
203:12 207:2 115:9,11 318:7 322:15 answer 10:20
207:12,22 126:14 199:18 322:23 326:24 15:6 17:2
208:21 211:3 200:9 300:16 327:16 328:4 21:13,14 30:18
214:22 222:21 373:15,21 328:15,19,20 39:5 46:8
223:15 224:24 amend 23:16 329:18 330:4 48:20 69:4
225:15 226:7 ameritrade 335:8 338:2 74:20,24 76:10
235:4 236:2,25 375:5 348:22 349:2 79:7 81:8,9,13
238:6,14 amicus 206:11 349:21 350:13 81:16,18,24
239:10,16 amount 296:4 351:5 352:11 91:8,14 92:17
240:14 371:23 analogous 354:8,12 93:13,19 94:8
372:6,23 373:9 123:7 365:13 368:12 95:17,19 96:10
375:7,12 376:8 analyses 43:21 368:15 383:12 96:11 97:15
377:16,21 44:4,10 61:19 383:23 387:13 98:5,14,18
alex 251:24,25 61:22 67:5 analyst 140:18 99:14,22
alleged 61:9 140:9 256:20 236:8 338:17 100:21,22
282:9 283:15 282:18,24 analyze 27:18 105:24 106:24
284:4 285:14 283:20 298:21 29:3,11 30:3 115:17 116:25
287:17 288:12 298:21 306:6 294:6 118:10 119:22
290:21 353:14 analysis 24:19 analyzed 31:13 128:4,6 131:22
354:20 381:15 24:22 27:16,24 94:2 95:6 134:9 147:12
allen 265:23 28:4,4 31:19 317:15,18 153:8 157:18
268:7,8 40:19,23 43:5 analyzing 157:22,23
43:16 63:11 27:17 91:20 160:11,13
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 107
of 190
[answer - approximately] Page 8
167:14 172:2 311:3 320:8 appear 364:14 82:7,19 85:13
175:22 188:9 answering 376:20 86:4 105:19
195:17 207:16 248:24 307:11 appearance 111:24 165:6
208:17,18,25 308:3 312:14 4:10 215:12 314:4
209:7,8,13,18 363:20 appearances applying 101:9
209:23 210:2,6 answers 59:17 4:11 102:2,7,16,17
210:10 214:14 118:14 130:6,7 appearing 6:3 102:19 103:4,7
214:16 215:25 231:13 307:13 18:20 325:18 103:16,17,18
220:13,15 ante 158:5,15 appears 23:9 appreciate
231:13 238:21 159:13 160:22 23:13 40:15 60:25
249:8 256:16 163:23 173:4 41:5 46:18 approach
256:18 260:16 anticipate 59:4 171:11 188:13 191:2
260:19,19 255:5 183:8 230:20 191:21,21
265:7 272:15 anticipated 244:18 291:8 192:2,7,11,20
273:24 276:7,9 315:5 315:6,20,22 193:11,12
285:21 286:5 antony 2:10 325:6 334:13 194:6 219:8
286:12 291:13 4:14 336:9 337:2,19 233:3
300:2 302:12 anybody 25:7 338:8 342:12 approached
302:19 303:11 223:9 appended 79:10 80:4
304:14,17 anymore 386:8 appropriate
305:3,6,16 107:20 appendix 157:25 158:2
307:8,19 anyway 91:7 242:22 158:11 159:11
309:20 310:2,6 apart 24:16 apple 34:14 160:19 164:3,7
311:15,18,21 74:5 application 167:12 177:3,5
337:12 340:5 apologize 188:7 159:5 196:4 177:12,22
340:19 343:14 257:2 261:11 applied 85:25 233:7 282:8
343:20 345:3 311:13 333:7 163:13 171:25 283:14 284:3
346:7,12 348:5 373:14 381:7 172:16 173:11 285:13 287:16
363:17 364:6 apparent 174:3 176:3 288:11 290:20
387:18 229:19 336:8 applies 46:25 381:14,22
answered 336:25 337:18 180:9 185:18 382:5
21:12 150:18 338:7,14,15,15 291:6 approval 178:9
195:18 270:9 apparently apply 77:12,15 approximately
289:5 300:10 214:11 259:24 79:13 80:8,13 8:17 11:24
300:22 309:14 80:25 81:3,10
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 108
of 190
[approximation - assistance] Page 9
approximation 371:11 60:21 77:18 210:16 213:17
252:16 articles 18:12 81:20 94:15 216:9 239:14
april 8:8,9 89:9 33:17,20,22,25 112:10 140:9 260:11 263:16
89:13 34:17 35:23 150:19,19,20 271:23 273:10
arbitrage 36:4 48:23 160:5 167:14 279:8 284:20
278:17 72:24 132:21 213:7 260:14 289:2,21
area 6:6 276:24 133:6 169:22 260:15,17 299:22 300:17
argue 114:18 170:18,20 266:21 277:2 303:20,22
arguing 265:12 225:2 228:7 281:15 299:2 306:20 309:23
arrive 175:12 229:16 231:17 309:4,10 310:8 310:3 311:19
176:18 236:23 232:22 233:21 311:4,7 342:4 323:6 329:7
241:25 234:24 242:24 349:18 351:3 336:18,23
arrived 232:17 243:16,22 351:13 352:8 350:7,11
319:24 336:2 244:24 246:4 352:13 355:5,6 361:12 367:15
article 19:11,19 246:13,19,24 355:8 357:5 368:3 369:22
74:10 133:9 247:7,8,12,20 379:6 377:9
135:22,25 248:9 250:4,16 asking 18:22 asks 92:21 96:3
136:3 168:10 253:16 254:2 19:4 28:18 aspect 226:6
168:17,20 291:17 295:23 29:14,16,18 assertion 152:8
170:9,15 295:25 296:6,8 51:15 60:16 298:17
203:16,20 296:17,19,22 69:9 71:24 assessing 221:8
204:17 205:17 316:5 325:17 72:4 79:4,24 asset 74:4,18
205:21,24 artificially 88:11 92:5,11 asset's 67:13,15
213:12,12,15 258:16 261:19 93:22,25 94:6 assets 52:6
214:10,12 aryan 2:11 94:10,11 95:9 assign 223:24
223:22 226:7 aside 201:18 101:16 104:12 224:11,15
235:4 241:18 316:11 104:13,14 assignment
241:19,22 asked 15:9 24:5 113:18 116:13 26:13,17 27:25
243:23 244:11 25:6,11 26:3 117:18 118:25 28:7 30:16,22
244:24 245:13 26:13 28:5,14 119:3 120:12 30:25 31:4,6
245:18 246:2 28:15,15 30:7 143:6 152:7 31:20 79:10
247:23 257:4 30:11 37:15 157:10 158:9 80:5
313:18,18 49:25 51:2 158:24,25 assistance
314:9,9,15 57:2,12 58:9 169:7,17 46:22 47:7,8
315:6,23 58:10 60:9,13 172:12 209:16
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 109
of 190
[assistant - based] Page 10
assistant 6:10 attempted average 40:5 backup 37:16
6:20 19:22 155:6 236:15 356:7 242:7
20:18,20,24 attorney 4:13 369:13 backwards
associated attorneys 2:5 avoiding 308:3 377:6
98:11 2:10 312:14 bad 37:7 77:18
association attributable aware 127:22 245:16
8:25 61:9 195:12 227:23 baked 322:22
assume 22:2 attribute 247:6 277:20 bancorp 15:6
24:11 29:4 287:23 294:25 342:22 bank 6:11,20
99:16 177:13 audio 3:11,11 b 19:20
205:20 227:2 audit 369:20 barber 140:21
b 53:14 54:9,12
275:10 289:21 371:4 barely 92:14
243:4 387:6
290:4,10 author 253:9 based 46:6,14
back 5:14
353:25 357:18 authored 50:12 51:12,16
17:18 35:13
368:4 375:17 133:11 254:2 51:19 53:7,12
36:11 41:3
assumes 118:11 authority 55:5 58:20
44:16 48:21
assuming 14:17 203:20 204:18 60:2 68:5
55:16 61:12
221:12 273:18 257:7 265:24 70:23 72:20,20
68:22 69:18
357:14 266:11 77:9,21 96:5
73:22 77:3
assumption authorized 4:4 101:22,23,23
81:19 103:12
217:22 253:7 authors 133:16 103:22 120:9
127:14 133:4
275:21 134:7 170:23 133:20 135:17
137:5 169:14
assumptions 190:13,18 138:16 169:5
179:12,25
48:2,5,7 191:8 203:24 175:6 178:12
204:4,15 227:6
285:18 357:16 214:19 215:4 183:7,21 197:2
237:15 250:25
asterisk 375:20 216:22 217:10 230:4,13,16,18
251:13 255:2
asterisks 223:4,22 233:9 240:5
266:14 281:19
375:19,23 224:24 371:14 247:16 248:3
282:21 285:24
attachments 372:10 375:3 248:17 249:23
286:17 302:6
31:25 available 65:22 274:24 284:18
312:18 313:3
attempt 79:13 82:24 84:2 291:18 292:7
322:13 325:3
80:7,25 81:3 180:18 186:5 298:3 301:20
342:3 348:14
81:10 82:6 216:25 304:23 305:2
375:10
85:12 154:8 avenue 1:15 2:3 310:21 317:6
background
289:8,10 2:9 3:23 318:7 320:15
5:18
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 110
of 190
[based - believed] Page 11
323:15 334:10 232:21 234:21 31:17,23 33:14 236:21 238:12
334:20,24 beginning 4:12 34:2 37:14 239:6,10,16,17
335:11,24 8:12,13 53:17 38:24 40:12 243:15 252:3
336:3 341:8 96:3 98:15 43:22 44:15 257:9 263:12
342:9 345:6 124:11,22 45:15 46:8,15 263:18 264:17
348:22 163:8 211:24 47:19 49:4,17 264:22 265:4
bases 15:20 212:15 217:8 50:14,20,22,25 266:3,13,18
basically 52:5 219:14 237:2 51:6,7 52:14 268:2,5,6
117:14 144:13 333:23 359:3 52:15 59:3,14 269:3 270:3
164:24 189:17 begins 96:11 59:17 60:6 271:8 275:17
219:20 108:20 156:2 62:15 66:13 275:22 276:17
basis 74:19 212:6 228:9 72:13,15 75:10 278:10,10,11
78:8 109:11,20 235:8 359:16 78:17,17 81:11 280:24,25
166:23 168:25 370:17 373:3 82:15,20 84:5 285:16 287:14
181:2 187:22 begun 233:20 84:23 85:4,8 299:9 301:21
189:4 194:4 355:10 88:17 91:5 305:13,20,21
200:17 237:6 behalf 4:20 100:16,17 313:21 316:10
237:12,22 13:6 14:14,22 103:20,21 320:15 322:19
238:17 239:4 15:12,15 104:4 113:12 324:6,9,25
240:21 behave 335:2 123:13 124:16 327:14 331:14
batavia 244:11 335:19 125:7 126:20 335:22 336:3
bath 41:16 behavior 128:22 154:18 338:24 341:14
126:14 197:25 362:12 159:9 160:18 346:11 348:25
199:18 200:9 beholder 222:8 171:20 174:6 358:2,17
313:10,15,23 belief 134:19 176:22 177:17 361:21 366:9
316:7 373:24 194:4 348:20 178:21 179:23 368:15 369:21
bear 281:20 366:16 183:24 185:7 371:25 372:24
283:2 believe 5:22 8:8 190:14 192:14 379:9 383:21
bed 41:16 10:17 12:22 192:15 193:17 384:2,13
126:14 197:25 13:17,22 15:6 194:11,15 believed 45:21
199:18 200:9 15:24 16:7,10 196:21 198:14 104:23 164:2
313:10,15,22 17:2,20 18:2 206:25 207:4 177:5,11
316:7 373:24 19:13,13,17 207:10,21 191:19 218:24
began 10:25 23:6 25:10 210:9,19 211:5 223:9 288:20
125:6 232:20 26:11 27:2 212:5 234:5,25 300:10 338:18
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 111
of 190
[believes - burger] Page 12
believes 221:14 313:10,15,19 blowing 262:19 brings 101:6
221:22 271:9 313:23 316:8 262:21 broad 52:7,8
272:22 373:24 board 19:16 195:13 238:10
benchmark bias 246:15 bolloxed 274:12,13
222:14 bid 383:16 197:13 312:5
beneath 125:19 big 202:25 borrow 117:15 broader 50:7
benefit 233:6 bigger 242:12 360:24 361:5 broadly 379:11
berkeley 7:8,15 biggest 226:23 361:13,19 brokerage
best 74:22 binary 271:24 borrowing 374:15 375:4
99:22 105:25 binder 242:12 361:16 brokers 350:21
106:23 128:21 binomial bother 260:8 374:14
188:5 193:16 316:18 317:4 bottom 121:6 brought 9:17
194:14 195:18 318:13 319:17 153:22 156:2 9:18 14:6,18
195:22 201:15 319:18 324:18 212:7 213:20 21:24 178:24
207:15 209:13 326:10 327:22 237:2 242:18 bubble 262:15
222:9 273:24 329:21 330:20 359:14 360:10 262:23 265:4,9
289:6 297:17 331:11,16 370:5,16 265:11,14,20
332:18 337:11 334:15 335:11 375:22 266:18,22
bettencourt 335:12,16,24 box 315:17 267:2 271:14
252:4 bit 180:16 brad 140:21 271:22 272:5,6
better 27:13 bites 286:13 bradley 13:21 272:10,14
28:23 74:18 blackberries 14:12 353:22 354:2
77:16,17 246:20,24 brain 80:22 354:12,17,21
105:15 113:4 247:24 brattle 7:18 354:25 356:19
174:7 209:23 blackberry break 35:5,18 bubbles 262:19
222:4 233:14 39:21 41:16 75:20 76:22 262:21 263:2,4
320:24 323:5 126:14 242:19 136:6 179:16 263:6,9,12,19
354:5 244:20,25 251:4,4 286:5 264:18,24
beyond 12:24 246:3,4 247:2 311:14 312:13 266:9,15
23:25 41:16 247:20,21 312:15,17 271:17 361:25
59:6 63:2 323:8 313:7 363:8 364:3
126:15 141:21 blackberry's brealey 265:16 building
153:8 190:11 245:3 265:18,22,23 291:17
197:25 199:18 blood 388:13 brief 206:11 burger 313:19
200:9 248:16
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 112
of 190
[burst - case] Page 13
burst 271:15 292:3 142:13,19 14:3,9,10,18
354:25 calculation 143:13 159:5 15:14 16:20
bursting 46:25 50:24 159:10 160:16 17:14,23 20:4
353:21 354:11 55:4 186:13 176:25 177:20 27:3,4,16
354:18,21 187:22,25 187:8 320:17 28:25 29:12,19
bushes 246:21 277:12 cans 264:8,9,10 29:25 30:3
246:25 calculations capable 254:22 44:2,13 49:10
buy 346:4 61:4 185:10,11 254:24 52:24 53:15
369:6,12 200:19,22 capital 82:23 58:17,23 73:7
buying 336:12 call 48:15 72:7 83:25 75:3,6,9,15
337:4,22 77:11,23 78:14 capitalization 76:18 78:6
338:11 78:22 80:25 39:21,22 80:25 82:4,6
c 84:25 85:6 capitol 314:17 82:14 88:15,20
102:19,25 315:8 88:24 89:2,7
c 2:2 14:12
131:6,9,11 captioned 90:5,16,20
cal 7:23 8:5,7
151:19 192:2,6 14:10 89:8 91:19,21 92:15
8:11,23 10:2
322:3,6 344:9 capture 353:15 92:22 93:9,21
19:25 20:6,11
373:19 capturing 94:2,2,25 95:6
21:10,15
called 5:4 32:2 382:25 97:6,20 98:7,9
calculate 47:23
32:15 37:12 car 188:4 98:12,25 99:3
48:8 49:25
40:17 44:24 career 51:5 99:11,14,24
50:16 53:11
88:21 124:24 102:6,14 100:23 101:15
60:9,14,25
126:20 145:5 103:14 101:17,23
145:8 198:10
145:13,19,21 careful 15:20 102:2,4,4
288:24 348:21
161:13 162:4 15:21 17:17 103:11,13
355:8
253:19 272:24 223:24 224:10 104:4,23
calculated
calls 27:22 224:18 225:4 106:14,22
277:4,14
102:22,23 225:16 107:4,10,11
278:19 280:21
131:4 206:19 carrying 112:8 116:7,15
326:4 383:9
cammer 43:4 125:19 147:9 123:8 125:2
calculates
138:2,5,11,17 147:16 126:2,5,12,22
197:5,17
138:19 139:7 carryover 127:2,10,17,23
318:12
139:22 140:3 255:15 130:16 150:14
calculating
141:4,7,15,18 case 1:4 12:11 154:9,25
54:23 61:10
141:21 142:5 12:15 13:7,18 156:20 161:12
280:19 282:13
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 113
of 190
[case - change] Page 14
161:15 162:4 75:7 97:22 causes 76:13 284:6 285:18
163:12,19 138:12,14 caveat 16:8 292:17 293:7
164:4,4,5,7,8 165:9 172:14 17:10 201:18 294:10,19
164:15,16,22 181:4 200:24 ceo 174:24 297:10 298:22
165:2 166:22 201:6,10 189:10 218:24 308:15 309:14
167:7,8,10,12 241:20,21 certain 18:9 310:2,21
171:18 172:25 cash 54:4 66:11 151:3 182:14 313:16 329:8
173:20 174:11 67:16 68:25 182:18,20 360:21 363:16
174:14,21 76:5,14 79:17 219:2 279:21 365:8 383:7
175:7 177:24 80:12 81:6 279:23 280:6 certainty
179:20 181:22 82:10 certainly 11:3 280:11,14,21
188:12 189:4,4 cat 369:10,19 19:7 22:21 320:21,23
191:3 195:11 370:6,17 51:21 52:20 certification
198:13 201:14 causal 288:15 55:17 58:16 165:9 172:15
201:14,15 288:20 63:21 65:13 173:15 176:2
218:22 223:23 causality 76:17 87:7 177:2,21 388:2
224:17 227:19 350:20 88:14 95:14 certified
231:3,5,9,15 causally 284:24 138:13 139:10 193:18 194:16
234:19 239:4,4 causation 142:10 154:6 194:22
241:24 273:12 60:14,15,22 154:17 155:12 certify 388:6,11
275:12 277:15 61:6 355:2,9 157:9,20 chain 247:8,13
277:21 278:19 cause 61:23 158:17 168:4 248:9
282:14 283:6 62:5,7,8,10,13 170:24 171:14 challenged
294:14,20 62:20,20,25 176:7 181:18 122:22 123:4
310:11,16 63:4,5 64:3,6 192:14 194:25 123:11
335:14 339:15 64:10,12,15,21 204:25 205:14 chamber
340:10 341:15 76:15 84:16 206:12 217:23 312:16
352:23 356:12 85:15 130:5 228:17 234:17 championship
361:4 363:21 169:17 255:21 235:21 238:24 314:21
365:11 372:17 308:12 309:5 240:10 243:19 chance 30:23
372:22 375:13 309:11 310:12 247:10 250:8 212:23 247:19
376:5,11 310:17 254:12,16 change 23:16
377:20 378:2 caused 298:12 257:10 263:5,9 31:3 35:23
cases 12:2,20 353:12 367:12 263:15 264:20 49:2 50:8
12:24 13:9 267:25 278:4 64:16 84:16
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 114
of 190
[change - class] Page 15
85:16 120:8,24 charts 36:11 338:20 358:16 52:24 53:15
124:19 130:7 180:5 359:3 371:23 54:22,23 60:8
166:25 167:21 check 9:13 cited 18:18 60:13,21 68:4
389:4,7,10,13 118:15 32:17,20 71:5,8,14 72:9
389:16,19 checked 187:24 200:25 206:10 77:12 78:2,16
changed 21:13 187:25 259:24 206:12 357:24 78:22 91:20
81:8,15 102:16 315:17 359:10 92:4,5,8,9,24
103:15 132:12 chinese 188:4 cites 269:23 92:25 93:8
166:19 167:15 choice 43:10 362:6 94:4,17,24
168:12,23,25 122:20 189:23 citing 53:18 95:4,7,8,12
169:4,10 216:23 218:7 73:21 96:9 97:5,21
170:12 189:8 choices 217:10 civil 13:22 97:23 99:2
204:2 208:6 217:19 claim 16:11 100:2 103:24
226:17 298:19 choose 332:23 clarification 106:16 123:6,7
300:13 353:7 chose 43:23 38:17 61:2 123:9 141:24
355:15 384:6 205:16 183:3 307:11 165:8 167:3,17
changes 34:8 chosen 214:22 307:16,18 167:23 168:14
48:14,14 59:12 292:22 clarifications 169:12 172:15
62:25 63:17 chronicle 43:21 307:17 173:14,15
130:13 144:17 244:16 315:11 clarify 24:22 176:2 177:2,21
170:21 291:20 chunks 286:6 35:19 194:22 227:24
294:13 314:20 circuit 138:14 clarifying 12:8 228:8 229:4
346:2 365:23 circumstances 18:15 19:4 258:17 261:21
386:7 90:19 98:7,8 152:21 277:5,17
characterizati... 98:11 99:24 class 4:20,21 278:20,22
235:2 164:6,14,16 13:22,23 14:2 279:2,13 280:7
charged 244:11 166:22 167:8 14:5,19,23 280:9 282:6,13
charles 371:13 177:24 15:4,7,13,16 283:12,25
371:18 citation 203:11 26:6,15,16,25 284:11 285:9
charlotte 2:12 256:22 257:3 27:6,6,19,20 287:5,8 288:8
4:18 cite 73:19,22 28:2 30:10,12 289:14,24
chart 39:14 84:6 132:21 31:16 42:22 290:12 292:12
331:16 133:6 135:22 43:9,11,18 293:4,24 294:8
chartis 227:7 135:25 201:20 44:7 46:24 295:13,25
312:6 380:19 205:16 280:16 47:2,14 51:9 296:7,19 297:4
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 115
of 190
[class - compared] Page 16
297:24 299:7 clock 368:22 331:16 373:8 112:22,22
299:18 300:9 close 54:14,20 376:17 113:2 174:16
301:8,19 302:2 55:6 60:3 combination 219:5,25 231:2
302:10 304:16 closed 37:5 199:14 317:23 231:10 233:8
306:7,17,19 69:19 97:25 combined 255:24 297:2
308:14,25 224:2 339:16 199:22 200:4 297:22 299:5
309:13 310:14 closely 74:3 202:8 332:7 299:16 300:7
310:20 315:25 closer 322:3,6 come 10:12 301:6,17
316:20 319:21 cma 1:4 3:21 11:15 57:14 308:13,24
323:17 333:23 code 38:16,19 91:7 144:14 309:12 316:19
334:19 340:23 39:2 40:10 151:16,17 334:25 335:18
340:25 341:16 coin 152:10 237:24 239:9 company 97:9
348:21 381:12 coke 264:5 353:10 110:22 123:19
classes 193:18 273:22 comfortable 155:22 156:9
194:16 cokes 273:21 152:7 178:11 188:4
clause 284:23 collateral coming 90:10 188:20 189:9
284:25 285:5 131:11 97:8 163:10 214:24 217:3
clauses 288:21 colleagues 4:17 311:10 217:13 221:14
clear 12:16 72:23 78:5 commentary 221:18,22
23:2 35:25 168:2 169:6 19:14 212:18 244:25 246:5
107:3 118:20 collection commission 247:3,7,14
152:9 165:14 256:9 13:21 14:11 248:11 250:19
245:17 265:7 collective commit 340:6 335:3,4,8,20,21
290:3 340:10 255:22 256:8 common 26:4 343:7,9,15
341:15 256:12,14 26:22 31:14 379:13,22
clearly 214:13 325:14 336:4 46:24 47:14 380:5
clepic 2:13 collectively 52:24 140:23 company's
cleveland 6:11 332:20 255:24 276:20 123:22
6:21 19:21 college 5:21 companies compare
client 226:20 6:13 25:23,24 26:5 145:17 163:14
346:2 column 40:16 26:23 31:15 213:24 325:24
clients 16:13 184:15 317:12 39:15,19 41:13 compared
70:24 71:4,6 317:22 318:3,6 41:15,25 44:23 147:17 149:16
clip 242:13 318:12 322:24 45:9 61:25 149:23 153:5
323:2 326:6 67:6,9 112:15
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 116
of 190
[comparing - constraints] Page 17
comparing con 244:12 conducted consider 12:13
235:9 237:9 concept 182:24 163:14 255:21 12:14 19:7
comparison 267:11 280:13 306:5 316:17 24:5 25:12
197:7 236:19 280:19 334:14 48:17 102:7
238:14 324:19 concern 297:14 conducting 203:19 204:16
326:4 334:17 conclude 46:3 217:20 227:17 232:3 254:21
compensation 96:5 146:9 confidence 270:24 328:11
10:11,14 147:4,13,25 184:20 197:23 329:14
complaint 238:6 353:12 321:2,4 consideration
123:15 128:3 384:24 confident 57:16 356:21
complete 57:3 concluded 321:10 356:23 357:19
167:14 233:2 219:7 284:9 confirm 94:15 365:10 367:2
349:16 352:23 297:20 299:4 confirmatory considered
386:9 299:14 300:5 84:14 85:14 19:5 32:4,10
completely conclusion confirmed 32:16,19,24
146:14 167:7,9 27:22 45:22 94:17 33:10 67:13
287:20 298:14 46:12 104:7 conflict 95:12 71:25 86:24
328:18 105:2 176:18 95:23 208:19 257:7
complicated 236:22 237:25 confounding 321:7 322:9
216:11,13 239:11,17 349:22 353:23 327:24
382:18 240:14 279:7 354:14 consistent
components 293:8,9 301:2 confused 27:10 74:19 174:15
61:4,8 301:4,13,15 103:11 154:22 consistently
composed 320:17 341:24 242:12 268:9 237:20
292:22 341:25 351:12 consolidated
compound conclusions confusion 369:20 371:4
337:7,8 46:7 146:18 169:17 constant 74:11
comprehensive 175:13 299:12 connection consternation
271:10 conditions 229:9 288:15 130:6
compute 46:24 358:7 359:5 307:4,23 361:3 constitutes
47:13 52:23 387:16 conscious 163:19
computer conduct 53:22 233:16 constraints
34:14 240:22 164:3 203:21 consciously 361:24 363:7
computing 204:18,21 102:15 103:15 363:25
38:19
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 117
of 190
[constructed - correct] Page 18
constructed 93:15 94:9 conversations 66:3 67:22,25
49:5,9,12,14 105:13 108:18 3:7 72:20,22 68:2 69:10,12
50:8 59:12 134:23 141:24 conversely 70:18 71:13,17
constructing 171:6 214:7,18 261:13,25 71:20 72:8
48:25 355:16 216:3 262:16 copies 21:24 75:16,17 78:18
consultant 9:6 293:24 305:10 22:2 84:22 85:5,9
230:15 254:8 339:13 340:3 copy 202:13 90:6 100:19
consulted 13:2 370:2 376:23 cornell 74:10 102:12 103:20
consulting 7:4 continually 170:8,14 104:20 109:4
7:8,15 10:5 237:18 cornerstone 109:12,19
contain 153:15 continue 3:12 7:6 110:6,16,20,25
154:4,11 155:4 91:13 176:22 corollary 84:12 111:14 113:12
155:19 156:6 177:17 216:5 106:6 152:9 113:24 114:2
156:22 157:5,8 223:22 236:25 corporate 118:4 119:2
157:15 158:4 continued 265:24 266:12 122:14,15,25
158:13 159:12 137:8 corporation 123:14 124:17
160:21 163:22 continues 189:21 125:7 126:16
173:3,9 231:17 74:24 373:4 correct 6:25 126:19 128:22
379:19 380:2 379:15,16 7:10 8:3,19,24 131:12 138:4,9
contained contradiction 9:12 11:23 138:25 139:18
23:14 62:16 262:7 12:22 14:13 139:25 145:15
154:16 175:14 contradictory 18:2,10 19:23 146:23 149:19
contains 258:7 262:10 20:3 21:8,17 152:11 159:7
313:22 contrary 24:4,12 26:11 163:25 166:13
contaminated 261:15 262:2 27:2 31:10,17 166:17 172:11
133:10 283:23 341:22 31:23 32:11 174:6 180:12
contaminating contributed 33:7 37:2,10 180:14 183:25
133:17 134:5 364:10,22 37:14 38:24 184:17,21
134:14,20,22 365:15,22,25 39:17 40:8,8 185:7,21 186:2
134:23 135:2,5 contributor 42:7 43:13 186:2,8 187:20
135:15,20 361:25 363:8 44:8,15 45:2,6 191:4,6,10,25
content 241:21 364:2 45:15 47:19 194:18 196:8
241:25 248:5 control 123:21 49:4 51:7 55:2 197:12 198:14
context 90:18 214:2 60:6,10,11,24 199:9 200:11
90:24 92:17 61:7 63:14 203:18 205:19
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 118
of 190
[correct - criterion] Page 19
218:11 219:22 377:19 386:9 counterfactual coverage
221:13 225:20 correcting 106:18 140:18
227:22 233:5 351:21 counts 40:6 cra 7:7 254:13
234:6 239:20 corrections county 244:15 crashing
239:22 245:23 386:6 couple 43:20 244:12
247:5 252:11 corrective 188:16 243:18 cravath 1:14
253:12 256:21 97:20,24 291:17 341:16 2:8 3:22 4:14
257:14 259:19 124:14 130:15 378:19 cravath.com
261:5 275:24 correctly 40:25 course 51:22 2:11,12,13
283:8 285:3 77:8,20 94:7,9 52:12 214:25 crazy 86:12,15
291:20 292:10 95:17 96:22 239:19 86:17,24 87:4
294:4 296:21 121:20 218:5 courses 20:11 87:16,20,22,23
296:23 301:22 correlated 58:5 20:12,13,20,21 88:4,8,9,15,18
306:8,11 58:6 63:21 20:21,22 89:21 90:9
313:20 315:12 165:25 383:7 court 1:2 3:20 96:17 100:10
315:16 316:3 correlation 4:2,24 15:15 101:10 104:4
316:10 317:11 56:3,8 15:23 17:15,24 104:11,15,19
317:25 318:10 corresponding 68:6,12 72:24 104:24 105:7,8
318:15,23 121:15 140:7 142:9,24 105:13,16,17
319:7,10,22 cost 233:6 143:9 175:6 106:7,18 107:8
320:2 321:20 361:13,15,16 192:17,23 107:13 110:9
322:19 323:18 costly 360:24 193:10,25 110:12
324:8,14,15,16 361:5,19 364:9 194:2,8,9,10,20 created 293:6
324:24,25 364:21 194:22 195:2 criteria 161:17
325:19,23 counsel 4:10 195:11 356:18 172:17,21
326:7 334:21 25:11 36:4 courts 66:18 177:10 189:24
335:13,22 37:15 53:13 165:12 166:5 191:12 200:6
340:8 355:12 60:8,12,20 190:11,12,21 233:22
355:13 358:2 313:10 191:20 192:10 criterion 158:3
359:7 361:17 count 14:7 193:6,15,17 158:12,19
368:15 369:21 18:20 24:9 194:4,12,15 160:20 163:21
370:24 371:9 316:10 205:2 208:10 176:9,24
372:19,24 counted 39:19 cover 15:20 177:19 181:17
373:25 374:2 39:23 186:12 364:18 183:8,14
375:17 376:9 186:18 187:6
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 119
of 190
[criterion - days] Page 20
187:19 189:23 cumulative 287:23 288:24 334:18
196:7,20 204:9 329:24 292:3,5 348:22 david 5:16
221:9 222:6 current 175:18 355:3,9,11 204:8
230:6,25 185:24 191:20 356:23 davis 5:12
231:25 232:4 currently damned 229:12 13:21 14:12,15
critical 74:15 225:11 229:12 day 8:13 18:17
74:20 curve 344:4,7 dan 252:4 108:9,9 109:2
criticism 222:5 344:12,16 data 38:12 110:15,24
234:8 300:18 cut 168:16 50:13 55:18 111:10,10,16
criticisms cutoff 326:21 56:2 118:3 112:4 116:9,12
233:10 cv 18:8 329:2 369:10 116:17 117:22
criticized d 383:15 119:19 128:8
229:23 231:23 database 128:11,12,13
d 5:3 137:4
232:14 234:3,7 379:14 128:18 129:23
387:2
234:9,14,16 date 22:17 155:21 156:8
daily 115:11,18
criticizing 124:5 317:14 161:17 174:12
damage 59:21
233:11,12 326:21 370:20 175:15 178:19
59:22 282:17
crossville 386:13 389:24 187:7,19 196:6
282:17,23
315:10 dated 179:20 196:19 199:23
284:18 292:2
crowninshield 358:7 359:5 200:7 221:9
353:16 355:6
9:2,10 10:6,12 387:10 222:6 226:24
damages 30:12
10:14,19,23 dates 92:23 226:24 232:6
46:24 47:2,13
11:2,9 25:7 93:11 94:5,16 246:12 247:20
47:17,17,21,24
38:21 251:18 123:23 186:10 291:10,11
47:25 48:8,10
252:10 253:2 223:25 224:11 314:18 315:11
49:25 50:17,23
253:14 254:4 224:12,15 316:5 342:13
52:23 53:11,17
crush 88:21 317:13,19,22 342:13 348:20
54:17,24 58:9
89:8 90:4 317:23 318:5 351:10 379:12
60:9 61:4,11
91:19 93:9 318:18 322:17 379:21 380:4
254:3 277:5,6
94:2,17 95:6 323:9,14,20,21 380:13 386:17
277:7,8,11,15
97:6 99:3 323:22,24 388:16
278:8,20
102:4 104:17 324:14,21,23 day's 224:2
279:22,24
106:14 107:9 325:16,25 days 40:17
280:6,13,19,20
196:13 201:14 326:3 328:3,14 117:14 144:2,4
281:10,11
240:2,2 329:17 334:17 144:4,5,18,18
282:13 284:16
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 120
of 190
[days - defined] Page 21
144:25 145:2,5 242:2 246:8 decision 91:7 238:18 242:9
145:10,10,13 247:22 264:10 142:23 189:20 312:25 327:8
145:15,19,21 271:4 318:4 231:23 232:17 358:9 371:15
146:2,3,7,8 322:25 323:3 233:17,19 387:7
147:2,3,7,8,10 325:18 327:23 234:13,20 defendants
147:16,18,23 328:10,22,24 336:2 1:13 2:10 4:16
147:24 148:10 329:13 331:8 decisions 72:24 defense 24:24
148:10,13 331:11 332:8 229:20 72:21 380:24
149:3,4,9,10,16 332:11,13,19 declaration defer 209:11
149:16,23,24 333:5,13,15,20 13:6,13,17,19 225:7,12
151:21 152:2 333:24 334:8,9 13:20 14:22 272:15 297:5
153:4,5,13 335:3,4,8,20,21 15:11 16:2,16 364:5
154:3,10,20 340:16,17,18 17:7 21:21 define 43:8
155:3,18 156:5 341:16 342:11 22:16 23:4 44:6 71:11
156:21,25 351:10 379:11 32:21 162:3 88:3 105:18
157:4,14 379:18,25 321:16 378:24 144:14 147:7
163:15,16,19 dcf 298:4 338:2 387:8,11 180:20 186:7
165:22,23,25 deal 178:8 declarations 186:18 187:13
166:2 171:21 190:16 218:15 12:19,25 205:8 265:13
174:10 175:14 225:9 233:9,11 declare 386:4 266:22 270:14
176:10,24 369:24 decline 353:15 272:5 274:7
177:11,19 dealing 55:21 364:12,24 277:24 296:10
180:20 181:17 68:15 164:17 365:17 366:3 302:11 303:7,7
182:15,19 dealt 13:24 367:8 307:7,24 338:3
183:14 185:2,2 35:23 188:20 declines 353:13 346:21
185:20 186:7 december deemed 190:18 defined 25:23
186:19 188:24 115:24 245:15 386:7 43:18 84:9
188:24 197:8,9 245:20 370:18 defend 4:22 122:7 144:25
198:11 199:12 371:6 defendant 13:7 145:14 147:8
199:13 200:5 decide 121:13 14:22 15:12,15 147:10,16
214:23 232:6 135:21 140:7 defendant's 148:10 151:11
235:10,12 142:24 188:12 22:8,10 89:11 152:18 156:25
236:4,6,19,20 230:2 161:22 210:20 156:25 198:6
237:9,10 decided 230:4 236:16 237:6 199:13 213:8
238:14,15,24 237:12,23 213:10 228:23
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 121
of 190
[defined - describing] Page 22
242:2 263:8 265:20 266:17 344:4,7,11,16 196:2 210:12
272:10 289:17 267:16,17,21 344:25 235:5 243:3
289:18 303:21 268:25 269:2,4 demonstrate 245:19 257:25
316:22 323:9 270:25 274:9 61:22 255:20 258:21 259:6
323:24 337:24 274:13 292:16 demonstrated 268:13 280:4
344:13,14,15 293:14 297:9 298:18 300:12 281:23 286:20
379:11 302:15,17,21 demonstrating 295:15,16,19
defines 200:4,6 303:10,14,17 137:20 295:20 314:6
203:25 212:9 303:22 304:4 demonstration 316:14 325:4
defining 87:23 304:13,19,20 298:25 327:3 331:17
163:18 304:5 304:22,24 denote 375:23 332:5 358:4,22
305:13 344:5 305:2,4,7,15,23 dense 291:10 365:4 367:25
definitely 84:11 312:3 317:7 denunzio 2:11 368:17 372:4
97:17 159:16 325:16 328:17 4:18 138:25 378:9 384:25
160:2 196:22 334:10 336:4 depend 147:6 387:10
196:22 224:14 341:10 345:7 148:3 151:10 depositions
241:9 357:4 definitions 177:23 283:6 24:23 33:14
definition 39:4 199:23 264:13 350:2 274:24
66:14 69:4,6,8 defrauded dependent derived 50:12
69:10,12 70:15 53:15,16 56:20 57:4 67:20 70:8
76:7 79:20 degree 5:19 349:6,10 350:4 describe 43:23
82:12,18,20 degrees 271:25 350:16 59:23 63:4
84:10,20,24 322:10 deponent 386:3 176:9 208:5,9
95:10,10 delineates 73:6 depose 204:7 described
105:17 135:2 73:9 332:3 58:19 135:23
135:10,14 demand 33:18 deposition 1:12 144:9 208:4
144:15 150:13 34:4,9,13 3:16,22 4:22 292:20 307:2
161:6 172:5,6 35:21,24 48:13 32:8,14 33:24 349:21 350:13
172:9,9 173:19 48:14 49:2 34:24 37:19 354:8,13
177:14 192:8 50:9 51:12,16 66:25 73:23 357:10 375:20
193:4 198:17 52:17 53:12 89:5,7,16 91:4 383:23
211:22 218:16 59:13 60:2 94:12 106:3 describing
218:17 221:12 165:14 166:5 107:2,16,25 62:21 63:6
222:13,13 170:20 291:18 113:8,20 115:8 67:12 192:5
232:7 265:6,11 291:20 292:7 137:13 185:16 234:22 349:2
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 122
of 190
[description - discussed] Page 23
description 335:23,23 200:2 204:9 214:5 225:13
30:6 192:4 341:3,10 207:9 209:7 225:14 228:19
268:23 270:23 342:11 381:18 219:6 227:15 238:5 274:16
303:9 376:22 determines 231:10 260:12 298:16 305:20
387:7 347:21,24 264:13 271:25 317:20 337:14
descriptive 356:18 292:21 293:5 339:21 346:9
305:25 349:19 determining 303:3 308:4,8 346:13 347:13
design 153:25 28:8 142:7,20 329:3,10 363:23
154:9 143:14 223:3 330:25 344:23 disagreement
designated 346:25 380:13,19,20 94:24
370:23 deviate 282:7 380:20 383:18 disclosure
designed 283:13 284:2 differently 84:14 85:13
152:13,25 285:11 287:15 120:16 144:2 97:21,24
153:12 288:10 290:18 146:2,7 147:2 124:14 130:16
desimone 1:16 347:25 381:13 147:23 149:12 218:25
4:3 388:4,20 diet 273:21 149:14 335:2 discounted
despite 274:20 differ 342:17 335:19 380:21 54:4 66:10
detail 188:8 difference difficult 30:5 68:25 76:4
198:20 350:3 53:18 54:8,19 363:19 79:16 80:11
details 314:19 73:11,12 digests 82:24 81:5 82:9
determine 26:4 147:14 148:16 84:2 discovered
27:25 30:7 149:2,22 153:3 direct 74:2 174:21
34:8 40:20 184:25 198:4 137:19 138:6 discovery
55:23 60:14 198:11 236:9 138:20 139:8 349:16
75:3 111:8,24 237:4,10 238:7 139:11,17 discuss 141:23
138:16 143:3 238:15,23 140:13,14 242:23 266:7
144:21 145:4,6 239:12 293:20 141:7,17 269:24 371:11
145:7,25 334:8 358:20 discussed 49:15
221:18 231:21 different 45:17 directed 214:10 182:13 191:11
249:17 305:12 59:21 60:17 direction 64:14 191:15 193:15
348:4 362:17 98:10 120:13 directions 194:3,13 195:2
determined 144:23 150:18 387:18 222:21 223:14
73:17 233:9 151:6 164:15 disagree 91:3 225:21,25
297:7,11 321:8 165:6,9 167:7 119:6 181:2,6 261:16 262:3,8
332:14,20 167:9 175:13 200:18,21 263:9 266:8
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 123
of 190
[discussed - earlier] Page 24
312:5,6 disturbed 89:7 115:23 driving 244:15
discusses 151:18 117:16 137:10 246:2,14
221:21 dmv 5:15 162:3 180:10 drop 356:9
discussing document 23:8 191:9,12 drug 178:2,5,7
133:16 229:25 90:22 125:23 192:12,14,19 drunk 244:19
267:2 129:16 162:2 192:22 193:11 246:14
discussion 163:9 198:23 193:21 196:25 drunken
168:2 174:9 202:23,25 199:16 200:18 244:15 246:2
212:5,11 212:4,14,21,25 208:6 213:18 dui 244:12
247:21 258:5 213:9 242:6 222:25 225:7 duly 5:5 388:8
285:17 300:16 243:9 245:4,9 225:22 226:4 dummy 57:7,19
367:6 375:18 327:4 331:20 226:12,17 123:19 124:3
discussions 358:5 229:25 230:14 124:20 129:21
77:9,22 78:4,5 documents 230:22 242:8 130:4,7,16,17
101:23 174:23 32:3,9,16,19,24 251:19 258:6 131:14,25
228:18 33:10 202:8 258:12,20 132:3,6 133:7
dispute 185:9 220:17 230:5 259:14,23 135:23 351:18
186:15 187:22 241:8 372:2 261:7,12 dunbar 158:20
196:17 259:20 doing 17:19 278:15,16 204:6
distinction 73:2 58:10,12 91:24 297:6,20 299:3 duplicates
159:23 221:2 101:6 174:14 300:5 301:2 315:15,20
distinctions 229:19 328:20 327:11 328:18 duration
155:10 352:17,18 328:20 332:14 270:15
distinctly 33:21 dollar 54:2 334:2 341:8 dylan 252:2
distinguished doubt 181:9 342:10 348:18 e
164:12 186:13,23 378:18,23
e 2:2,2 5:3,3
distinguishing dow 242:17 384:25 387:8,9
137:2,2,4,4
95:4 dr 3:16 4:22 387:10,11
287:24 288:5
distorted 5:8,12,18 draw 104:6
387:2,6 389:3
258:16 261:20 10:16,18,24 105:2 146:19
389:3,3
distribution 11:8,16 18:16 306:25
earlier 102:5
329:24 21:21,22 34:6 drew 38:15
129:19 148:24
district 1:2,3 35:19 37:23 drink 179:4
174:10 181:19
3:19,20 162:6 43:11 67:4 driver 244:19
191:19 231:4
73:4 77:8,21 364:15
348:19 349:19
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 124
of 190
[earlier - efficiency] Page 25
351:8,13 379:6 economics 5:20 64:22 110:21 140:17,23
early 358:7 6:7 7:23 8:23 200:4 255:21 141:23 142:7
359:5 387:16 18:13 19:12 351:2,9 353:11 142:14,21
earnings 20:12,13 29:9 effects 382:25 143:15 146:22
123:22 148:6,8 29:24 50:21 383:2 148:20 149:5
148:9,10,13 166:8 168:10 efficacy 178:9 149:18 150:2,6
151:14,16,20 169:13 215:12 efficiency 27:5 150:23 151:5
166:2 173:8,9 270:18 273:13 27:17,19 29:3 154:14 159:16
174:10,12,17 276:21 29:12 30:3 159:21,25
176:3,14,23 economist 42:13 44:4,11 160:4,9,18
177:9,18 178:6 19:20 58:16 45:16,18 46:2 161:2,7 164:10
178:12 180:11 68:23 69:7 64:20 66:15,19 164:21 165:8
180:19 181:3 72:19 75:25 67:11,17,23 165:13,15
181:16,20 142:5,8,18 68:2,3 69:5,11 166:6 167:2,17
182:8 183:13 143:7,8,12,16 69:13,15 70:3 167:23 168:14
184:6 185:4 189:12 254:23 70:19 71:12,14 169:11,20
199:14 218:3 254:25 263:17 72:7,9 73:2,3,9 171:23 172:4
222:20 223:13 363:22 383:11 73:10 75:15 172:10 173:21
237:16,17 economists 76:8,9 77:11 178:2 183:18
239:8,9 240:3 19:15 72:25 77:24,25 78:15 183:20 187:9
240:3,6 73:15,16,17 78:23 79:11,21 203:22 204:19
easier 9:13 102:25 137:18 79:24 80:6,14 217:21 221:10
21:25 69:23 139:16,20 80:20 81:2,12 223:4 239:23
341:8 140:24 141:4 82:13,18,21 271:25 274:3
eastern 126:6 141:14 205:2 84:21 85:2,7 275:8,14 276:2
126:13 127:3 275:3,11,17,22 85:11 88:2 277:24 278:4
127:11,18 276:11 342:18 97:7 99:9,19 278:17 283:7
128:14,19 ed 244:12 100:18 101:20 297:14 319:19
129:7,14 edible 246:20 101:25 102:8 322:3,5 339:9
easy 61:16 246:25 102:18,20,23 342:8 344:6,10
ebix 196:12 educational 102:24 103:2,5 344:16 345:7
201:14 5:18 103:17,19,25 359:17,22
economic 7:4,8 effect 61:23 104:2 138:7,16 360:4,16
7:15 65:24 62:6,10,14,20 138:21 139:9 363:15,16
66:5 63:4 64:3,7,13 139:11,13 380:10,25
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 125
of 190
[efficient - essentially] Page 26
efficient 16:10 279:4,14,20 emh 212:9 entirety 241:18
16:11,23 18:5 281:7 282:5 emphasize entitled 81:17
26:6,8,9,14,24 283:11 284:10 74:15 81:24 133:10
28:2 30:9 285:8 287:4,8 empirical 51:6 162:2 213:15
31:15 41:14 288:8 289:19 61:19 263:16 216:18 249:4
42:2 44:23 290:6 310:24 263:21,24 314:18 358:5
45:10,19,23 320:6,9,11,18 264:3,6,14 373:3
46:3,13 65:3 321:9 341:6,13 empirically entry 109:2
65:11,21 67:7 342:4,6,12 51:20 envisioning
67:13 73:19 344:3,25 empiricism 352:10
76:2,19,20 347:14 381:11 265:12 episode 364:16
78:9 79:15 efficiently employed 7:11 equal 39:14,18
80:9 82:23 82:24 83:25 employee 7:14 39:24 40:2,4
83:24 84:13 effort 298:11 7:16,21,21 9:5 345:12 346:18
86:14 87:2,9 346:3 10:21 254:6,8 347:15
87:12 89:24 eight 332:11 encompass equity 358:6
90:12 96:9,19 333:15 348:16 70:11 356:10 359:4 382:20
100:13 101:12 374:11 384:24 encompassed 384:6 387:15
104:9 105:5 eighth 1:15 2:9 24:11,14,25 equivalence
137:23 140:5,8 3:23 encompasses 331:2
141:6,16 either 21:11 43:11 70:14 equivalent
150:11 152:4 23:15,24 31:22 encourage 11:8 38:16 131:9
160:25 165:20 46:12 106:23 346:3 185:23 331:5
165:20 176:21 151:7 165:7 ended 42:3 err 234:8,14
178:16 183:6,9 189:18 276:9 97:23 234:10 errata 386:8
207:7 211:22 291:22 292:8 354:2 error 159:24
212:8 213:8 302:13 317:14 engagement errors 23:20,24
215:22 232:13 317:23 323:10 12:12 252:13 24:2 306:13
239:2 240:8 337:13 367:20 254:18 esq 2:5,10,11
255:25 257:8 elastic 345:2 english 116:3 2:12
257:17 261:15 electric 188:4 entire 70:11,14 essence 41:21
262:2 271:22 eliminate 128:11,12 essentially
272:9,13,18 315:14 154:19 208:3 131:4 185:23
273:9,15 eliminated 243:22 289:20 376:18
278:12,13,14 315:21 384:3 306:21 378:5
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 126
of 190
[establish - example] Page 27
establish 67:8 377:15,21 evidence 16:22 90:14,20 93:17
282:8 283:14 eugene 257:4 137:19 139:17 99:13 123:16
284:3 285:12 euphemism 140:14,15 133:22 215:16
287:16 288:11 131:7 141:7,17 221:3 230:7
290:19 319:19 evading 312:18 148:20,22 238:2 242:23
381:14 evaluate 26:22 149:5,17,25 259:7 265:3
esteem 205:21 evaluating 27:4 150:5,20,22 268:11 274:7
estimate 67:22,25 68:3 151:4,6 204:8 278:6 303:5
252:23 376:19 70:19 71:13 236:15 261:15 305:11 330:2
estimated 59:8 72:8 262:3 276:12 348:3 349:17
373:19 event 92:22 299:10 338:20 362:25 363:18
estimates 93:7 94:3 evidently 88:22 369:18 370:8
376:23 108:10 109:6 225:10 271:9 374:5 378:6
estimating 122:19,21 evolution 174:8 examination
33:18 34:3 123:2,6 131:16 evolved 165:11 5:7 137:8
estimation 132:14 133:10 204:11,13 378:21 387:3
121:13,21 134:5,14,20,22 222:25 examine
122:13,23 134:23 135:3,5 ex 158:5,15 143:25 331:20
133:11,17 135:6,16,20 159:13 160:22 examined 5:5
134:5,14 135:7 137:19 138:3 163:23 173:4 334:12
135:16 307:24 138:19 139:7 exact 42:9 example 12:10
318:7 139:16 144:14 58:13 59:9 39:20 53:3,4,9
et 140:21 185:24 203:21 66:21 131:7 55:14 57:23
203:12 207:2 204:18 239:11 144:21 163:14 109:13 140:19
207:11,22 255:22 294:3 173:17 184:5 148:4 150:8
208:21 211:3 events 96:6 184:12 187:3 151:14,14
214:21 222:21 133:17 154:16 187:16 197:6 154:7 155:5,8
223:14 224:24 158:3,13 197:17 198:9 156:17 170:10
225:15 226:7 159:11 160:20 211:25 221:6 175:11 216:24
235:4 236:2,25 163:21 173:3 223:2,6,10 218:3 222:20
238:6,13 270:21 354:17 275:2 283:3 223:13 227:10
239:10,16 364:15 294:12 326:5 236:3,3,20
240:13 371:23 everyone's 334:6 346:5,5 237:16 238:22
372:6,23 373:9 95:10 367:24 exactly 22:4 239:8 242:4
375:7,12 376:8 30:21,22 76:10 244:8 266:8
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 127
of 190
[example - expert] Page 28
272:6 273:19 107:24 108:7 387:12,12,13 150:9 151:17
275:17 278:16 108:15,20 387:13,15,17 239:9 240:4
284:15 288:3 109:14,23 exhibits 21:19 expensive
288:23,23 120:5 121:3 21:19 37:17 361:11
291:5,25 323:8 122:2,3 137:13 112:7 199:5,7 experience
349:14 161:22 162:2 200:2 219:4
examples 86:16 162:10 179:18 exist 224:19 experiments
86:18 88:12,15 180:5,5,6,9 225:5,17 328:21
88:18 106:9 181:5 184:3,15 227:20 228:10 expert 6:3,16
239:21 269:23 184:23 185:15 229:4 9:4 11:25
excel 38:12,14 185:16 186:4 existed 61:23 12:19,25 13:6
except 126:18 186:16 187:15 226:15 228:2 14:21 15:11
219:20 195:23 196:2,3 existence 16:2,15 17:6
exchange 13:21 196:10 197:5 137:22 140:4 29:9,24 46:22
14:11 53:14 197:16 201:2 141:6,16 47:7,9,12
exclude 161:10 201:22 210:18 exists 74:2,19 50:16,18,19
excuse 273:21 210:20 211:3 expand 27:11 67:3 68:18
executive 235:5 242:5,9 expect 66:7 71:10 72:12
218:24 243:2,3,4,11,25 76:17 97:10 88:20,23,25
exhibit 9:16,22 245:19 255:3 158:6,15 102:6,15
13:16,19 21:20 257:25 281:23 159:14 160:23 103:14 159:4
21:21 22:6,8 286:20 312:25 163:24 173:5 161:12 162:14
22:10,15 23:3 313:8,11 314:6 238:2 246:10 165:8 166:7,7
23:10 25:17 314:6 316:13 expectations 168:7 171:6,11
31:9,25 32:3,7 325:5 327:4,8 76:14,16 148:9 172:16 173:13
32:9,14,15,15 327:11,20 148:14 151:20 175:24 178:19
32:21,21 33:2 328:8 329:12 151:23 174:12 179:19 181:13
33:12 36:9,12 331:17 332:5 176:15 237:19 181:14 187:4
36:13,14,23 333:3,12 358:5 237:20 362:14 195:4 215:11
38:23 40:25 358:9,12,21 expected 66:11 218:8 226:12
41:4 42:19 359:9,14 365:4 67:16 68:25 253:23 254:10
44:17 46:19 368:17 371:12 76:4 79:17 254:15 326:20
55:12,13 61:13 371:15 372:5,9 80:11 81:6 347:3 358:16
66:24 73:23 382:7,7,8 82:9 117:12 358:18
89:5,11 107:6 387:8,9,10,11 131:16 132:15
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 128
of 190
[expertise - factors] Page 29
expertise 6:6 109:22 110:4,9 303:23 304:5 237:19 238:22
276:22,23,25 126:15 247:7,9 304:13,15,22 238:23 259:9
experts 24:8,24 247:13,14 305:5,9,13,23 259:16,21
33:15 53:5 248:10,11 306:2,18 307:3 263:6 264:22
175:8,12 193:4 374:2 307:7,25 269:9,16 270:4
232:3 249:23 expressed extreme 190:7 295:7 298:13
274:19 276:20 310:17 190:23 300:21 310:10
308:19 311:23 extent 24:10 extremely 315:6 338:21
311:24 316:22 27:22 37:3 57:10 58:8 352:23 354:9
317:6 323:24 40:7 63:22 170:22 174:17 365:15 372:20
332:19 336:4 66:20 95:21 176:11,12 factfinder
344:15 368:2 98:9 100:21 182:9 285:15 381:19
380:25 102:10 141:25 312:5 369:24 factiva 191:2
explain 96:4 149:15 154:13 eye 222:8 191:21 192:2,7
165:4 174:8 164:23 172:3 eyeball 111:24 192:11 193:12
297:2,23 173:7 176:13 eyeballing 194:6 195:14
298:11 299:6 178:10 189:3 353:9 231:7 240:17
299:17 300:8 189:18 198:3 eyes 59:3 241:3 242:18
301:7,18 205:9 221:17 f 243:13 313:8
explained 237:16 243:14 313:15 315:17
f 61:15,19 62:5
131:16 132:14 246:7,9 263:2 315:17 379:14
62:11,22 63:4
188:8 226:5 271:16 272:20 387:12,13
137:2
258:24 298:20 274:25 291:7 factor 124:11
face 340:6
331:23 332:2 296:21 306:12 130:3,10 138:2
343:17
explains 92:24 308:18 319:23 138:6,15,19
fact 46:23
377:4 322:24 337:9 139:7 141:8,18
106:15 112:24
explanation 343:10 350:6 142:5,19
113:19,22
70:13 241:23 357:15 364:8 143:13 159:5
114:2,10,13,14
explanatory 364:20 366:19 159:10 160:16
114:14 115:14
375:21 377:3 367:10 383:6 177:2,21
116:12,24
explicitly 67:3 extraordinary 183:22 187:8
118:22 157:13
expounded 294:7,10 365:21,21,25
165:2 171:18
41:20 301:25 302:4,9 factors 62:25
176:15 188:24
express 41:16 302:11,15,22 137:21 138:11
190:21 204:12
44:21 45:8 303:2,8,10,14 138:17 139:20
221:20 227:23
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 129
of 190
[factors - finder] Page 30
139:23 140:3 249:12,17 207:11,22 265:24 266:12
140:25 141:5 fama 257:4,6 208:21 211:3 293:15 347:3
141:15,22 familiar 11:17 214:21 222:21 financial 9:2
142:6,13,20,25 184:12 213:13 223:14,22 73:17 137:18
143:14 287:22 250:10,12,14 224:24 225:15 139:16,20
320:17 343:19 253:20 263:5 226:7 235:4 141:3,14 142:4
349:22 353:20 280:12,18,22 236:2,25 238:5 142:8,18 143:7
353:23 354:10 327:12 343:4 238:13 239:10 143:8,12,16
354:14 357:13 343:22 239:16 240:13 189:12 254:22
357:16 familiarity 387:12 254:24 262:17
facts 90:19 362:22 fifth 376:5 263:4,13,17,19
97:19 98:6,8 fantastic figure 12:5 264:19,24
98:11 99:23 312:20 15:22 90:18 266:18 267:23
107:11 164:6 far 74:19 108:13 369:5,5 269:5,17 270:4
164:14,16 184:15 236:11 figured 36:18 271:14 273:13
166:21 177:24 248:7 268:16 file 241:16 274:3 276:20
273:11 295:5 326:6 filed 3:19 339:4,22
fail 148:15 fast 84:9,11 files 241:14 363:22 383:10
178:14 fda 178:9 filing 185:24 financially 4:6
failed 240:5 fdids 370:19,22 186:6 189:18 find 22:17
fails 150:11 february 22:20 filings 199:15 81:22 100:24
237:20 22:22 23:5 220:2 142:10 148:25
fair 53:19,20 369:8 final 235:9,20 165:12 170:6
53:24 168:21 federal 6:11,20 318:11 377:14 174:14 175:5
234:25 19:14,16,20 finance 5:21,23 201:20 229:18
fairly 362:10 feel 6:15 172:7 5:24 6:7 18:13 230:12,20
362:15 feinstein 10:15 19:12 29:9,24 289:16,22
fall 135:19 10:18,24 11:8 50:19,21 65:12 297:21,25
168:4 11:16 65:14,17 66:8 299:4,15 300:6
falls 48:16 fell 356:7 68:23 75:23 301:5,16 305:2
false 151:19 ferrillo 158:20 76:2,8 79:14 312:9 323:13
182:12,17,24 190:14,16 80:8 82:7 357:21
182:25 183:3 191:8 203:12 103:3 166:7 finder 46:22
244:23 246:3 203:15 204:17 168:10,20 354:9
248:14,18 205:17 207:2 169:13 215:11
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 130
of 190
[finding - follow] Page 31
finding 77:25 first 5:4 7:13 329:5 342:10 flat 239:18
146:22 149:20 25:22 39:12 367:10 flip 78:19
156:12 183:20 40:24 64:21 fischel's 18:16 189:15
246:16,16 86:22 124:23 22:23 43:10 flippant 148:5
314:18 319:16 126:4,11,25 67:4 74:9 floor 2:4
322:2,5 357:2 127:9,16 170:6,14 florida 1:3 3:20
findings 199:5 129:18 133:9 268:10,14 flow 34:9 54:4
321:11 329:6 141:11 143:25 270:2 271:6 61:21,24 62:6
finds 184:4,24 152:8 162:25 278:16 301:13 62:8,12,16,19
197:21 334:6 168:17 211:2 323:11 328:18 63:2,7,18,22
354:9 211:20 231:4,9 328:20 341:9 64:5,10,16
fine 83:10 241:17 243:17 fisher 197:17 197:8,9 199:13
107:22 264:16 243:18,24 fisher's 144:20 flows 66:11
271:2 305:17 246:7 256:4 163:14 184:5 67:16 69:2
307:17 346:16 260:12,17,19 184:12 187:16 76:5,14 79:17
384:19 261:11 278:11 197:6 198:9 80:12 81:6
finish 75:23 282:4 283:9 326:5 334:6 82:10
248:21 284:21,23 fishman 52:2 focus 43:5
firm 2:3 7:17 285:5 286:15 fit 249:9 117:17 170:25
11:21 12:2,21 287:12 290:9 five 81:14,21 218:2 222:19
13:3 25:12 302:3 304:10 138:2,6,15,19 223:12 224:9
26:4,18,21 313:17 314:16 139:7 141:8,18 225:3 311:12
28:7 31:21 319:12 327:20 142:5,19 383:17
65:25 66:5,7 339:10 372:9 143:13 159:5 focused 85:22
135:6 140:18 374:12 375:11 159:10 160:16 154:15 155:20
220:6,11,20 381:10 175:15 177:2 156:7 368:23
237:18 242:6 fischel 34:6,7 177:21 179:14 379:20 380:3
253:17,18,18 43:25 44:6 180:18,21 focusing 51:12
326:16 343:16 73:4,6,20,21 181:4,15,18 311:23
370:23 373:4 84:7 102:23 187:5,8 213:19 folks 38:20
377:22 382:15 268:20 269:21 217:8 232:5 follow 14:9
firms 7:4 189:3 278:15,16 251:4,10 252:9 30:18 46:16
189:5,16 297:6 298:9 264:10 315:7 49:18 160:6
297:19 343:17 299:14 301:12 323:20 342:13 166:4 175:20
374:15 375:4 317:14,24 225:24 226:8
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 131
of 190
[follow - fundamental] Page 32
239:12,14,17 forgive 251:22 289:12 292:8 frequently
240:14 309:6 forgot 85:22 308:19 310:23 266:4
309:17 312:17 form 83:2,19 319:8 328:22 front 96:24
followed 288:9 83:21 185:22 328:24 107:19 161:9
following 95:6 185:24 186:6 foundation 313:11 339:11
119:4 125:19 186:18,18 65:12 382:9
130:10 169:2 187:6,18 foundational fruit 246:20,20
171:19 185:15 199:14,15 79:21 80:14,17 246:25 247:21
377:5 218:14,23,25 80:18,21 159:3 fuck 73:4
follows 5:6 219:8 380:8 211:2 full 5:11 45:3
225:22 226:5 383:3 384:9 foundations 111:11 128:8
285:11 287:14 formal 267:16 65:14,16 128:18 155:25
290:18,23 267:17 four 137:7 207:24 214:10
305:23 324:2 format 241:16 148:8,13 179:9 256:4 261:11
footnote 140:20 243:12 181:15 252:9 320:10 321:23
180:17 181:5 formats 243:19 315:7 342:13 365:3
186:3,16 forming 32:24 370:4,15 fuller 70:12
196:10,18 33:11 376:18 fully 192:3
199:10 200:14 forms 96:8 fourth 375:14 331:24
203:8 368:24 185:19 219:5 fraction 258:15 fund 227:11
368:24 369:2,3 formulation 261:18 230:15
369:23 370:11 171:3,5,8 frame 10:11 fundamental
370:13 forth 24:17 framework 66:14 67:17
footnotes 201:2 31:4,7 33:2,12 355:7 69:4,9,10,12,15
369:23 133:4 154:24 fraud 140:22 70:3 71:12
foregoing 171:21 207:11 fraudulent 72:7 73:2,9
386:5 226:6 288:5 53:22 76:7,9 77:11
foreign 185:25 319:18 324:18 fred 204:6 77:24 78:22
188:19 219:21 388:8 frequency 79:23 80:20
foremost 257:7 forward 370:8 144:16,22 81:2,11 82:11
forever 262:15 found 17:11 155:20 156:7 82:12,13,18,21
262:24 23:19 109:5,16 165:23 176:6 84:21 99:17
forgetting 110:3 188:18 193:3 228:13 100:18 101:20
376:16 193:18 194:5 228:14 379:20 102:8,18 103:8
218:23 243:4,5 380:3 103:17 117:7
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 132
of 190
[fundamental - go] Page 33
159:15,25 372:12 106:24 107:11 375:14
164:10,21 gamestop's 107:15 123:14 gnarus 7:7
165:7 171:23 336:9 337:19 128:4 131:7 go 3:13 12:4
172:4 336:13 338:8,22,24 148:3 151:13 14:24 23:7
337:5,23,24 gamma 364:16 157:17 179:2 35:7 37:7 39:9
338:4,12 339:8 gather 250:12 202:13 207:14 41:2 43:9
344:10,15 362:19 371:20 209:7,14 210:9 44:16 54:7,12
363:15 380:10 general 86:21 210:13 220:12 55:13 58:10,11
380:24 191:5 206:23 220:15 236:2 59:23 61:14
fundamentally 208:12 220:8 238:21 260:16 68:21 69:18,25
67:7,10 73:18 220:10,18 265:7 266:17 73:21 81:19
76:19 87:8 273:12 274:2 268:18 270:23 83:11 86:10
165:19 279:16 291:25 272:6 273:23 88:11 89:14
fundamentals 291:25 339:16 295:19 303:9 100:5 133:20
362:3 363:10 343:20 354:19 303:25 304:3 152:23 164:18
363:14 364:4 363:5 304:20 307:13 165:3 169:14
further 248:13 generalize 307:16 339:18 170:9 179:6
384:16 388:11 56:10 340:5 349:16 204:15 211:20
future 66:7,11 generally given 26:17 211:23 212:20
67:16 68:25 122:24 134:11 28:8 160:12 213:2 219:14
76:5,14 79:17 262:25 164:5 207:15 232:9 237:15
80:11 81:6 generate 38:11 209:8 214:8 240:16,18
82:10 38:22 238:22 280:3 243:22 250:25
g generated 282:16 303:15 251:23 256:5
37:12 40:10 331:19 356:25 260:20 266:14
g 251:25,25
generating 386:10 388:10 266:22 268:14
game 17:18
135:8 gives 70:12 281:18,25
gamestop
genuinely giving 156:15 286:11,17
41:17 337:2
374:22,24 305:10 368:20 295:3 303:8
340:9 341:4,17
getting 120:16 glad 352:8 304:9,21 315:2
359:21 360:3
248:7 290:24 glauberson 322:13 330:15
360:15 361:6
give 5:24 22:5 2:17 3:24 333:10 342:3
361:20 364:8
60:21 69:3 global 211:17 343:19 345:20
364:20 365:11
86:18 95:18 gme 359:16 345:24 346:14
365:16 366:2
99:21 106:8,23 360:25 369:10 347:10,20
366:17 367:8
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 133
of 190
[go - guise] Page 34
348:7 352:17 242:5,21 greater 188:8 group 7:8,19
352:18 353:11 248:16 251:10 grenadier 171:9 214:2
355:16 357:2 255:6 267:14 10:16,17 336:10 337:3
374:21 378:24 289:7 304:3 178:20 179:20 337:20 338:9
378:25 381:4 312:17,22 180:17 181:2 372:15,22
goes 5:13 55:9 326:14 343:15 186:4,15,22 375:12 376:11
74:6 93:6 344:6 345:21 187:15 196:10 377:16 378:3
171:23 199:4 348:11 351:14 196:25 197:5 grow 246:25
202:6 221:12 357:17 363:17 197:17 199:11 grown 246:21
221:13 279:4 369:16,17 227:10 230:14 guess 20:25
279:15,20 370:7,9 378:4 230:15 258:6 22:19 39:24
281:8 297:8 383:7 385:2 258:12 292:20 47:9 48:9
328:16 346:25 good 3:2 5:8,9 297:6,20 298:8 54:11 57:7
going 3:3 13:11 75:19 136:4 299:3,25 300:5 71:21 72:23
17:18 22:19 137:10,11 317:15,24 73:20 78:24
35:10 38:18 311:14 343:8 326:9 327:21 79:7 98:8
39:25 59:3 gotta 116:2 327:24 328:10 99:16 106:2
61:5 76:24 grab 382:10 328:24 329:4 151:17 156:17
92:16 95:20 graduate 6:23 329:13 330:24 196:24 204:12
97:16 99:13 20:10,16,18,19 331:10 332:6 215:20 219:23
106:4 107:7,8 20:24 332:14 334:2,4 249:25 252:19
107:9 119:5 graduated 6:9 342:10 367:11 263:16 265:22
127:14 133:4 grammatical 371:18 268:14 269:11
136:8 148:2,15 23:20 24:2 grenadier's 300:14 311:9
148:15 165:24 granted 232:10 43:11 67:4 338:19 349:25
178:13 179:9 granular 184:3,23 185:9 350:23 351:6
182:11 189:5 240:21 185:17 195:24 352:5 354:19
190:5 198:19 granularly 196:17 198:22 366:22
208:14,15 240:25 198:25 200:16 guidance
213:6,16 216:4 graph 38:19 200:19 201:3 180:11,19
225:12 227:5 graphs 36:24 258:20 259:14 181:4,16,20
229:22 230:5 37:12 38:8,11 259:23 261:12 183:13 184:7
231:23 232:14 38:23 39:2 295:10 301:2 185:4
234:8,13 237:3 great 242:25 323:11 327:2 guise 150:12
238:20,21 336:17 341:9
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 134
of 190
[guy - holds] Page 35
guy 94:10 happy 21:23 headlines higher 293:4
189:7 83:7,15 88:13 241:17,21 highest 116:8
gwyn 15:4 92:18 93:16 healthcare 116:12,16
h 99:12,20 101:2 161:13 162:5 117:22
105:14 106:9 180:22 highlighted
h 251:25,25
112:6 116:25 hear 71:22 196:25
387:6 389:3
128:3 133:19 308:6 331:23 highlights
hagerty 52:3
136:2 192:8 heard 362:14 364:17
half 199:7
207:14 220:7 hedge 227:11 highly 111:2,6
229:25 369:7
220:14 259:6 230:15 111:8,17,19,19
halfway 143:22
269:2,20,24 held 1:14 20:5 111:25 165:25
halliburton
270:25 272:7 21:15 89:9 302:16 304:6,7
65:6 68:6 71:2
273:5,23 295:8 help 222:3 342:18 345:2
74:7 78:8 91:6
295:21 340:2,4 helpful 42:17 hire 10:18
100:16 167:5
hartman 15:4 183:11 374:23 hired 10:23
167:19 169:5
head 33:20 374:24 history 339:5
206:10,11
138:13 151:13 hereto 386:8 339:22
212:3 278:3
161:10 168:3 hereunto hit 231:7
hand 89:4
169:25 170:16 388:15 hold 61:16
161:24 324:21
171:17 192:16 heterogeneous 68:17 69:18
324:23 333:19
193:3 221:19 362:13 76:9 89:18
358:3 373:8
252:7 271:11 hey 87:22 92:10 107:14
384:5 388:16
343:2 353:17 hi 88:21 89:8 107:14 109:15
handed 179:17
headed 180:5 90:4 91:19 114:17 199:19
handing 22:13
317:13,22 93:9 94:2,17 205:21 245:7,7
hang 202:20
318:3 327:16 95:6 97:6 99:3 245:16 256:25
happen 269:9
heading 180:13 102:4 104:17 281:24 282:12
269:10 294:24
211:8,15 212:7 106:14 107:9 286:17,24,24
295:2
headline 191:2 196:13 201:14 316:15 330:12
happened
191:21 192:11 240:2,2 341:22
166:24 167:15
193:12 194:6 high 197:8 holds 66:9
167:21 246:12
195:14 217:4,5 199:12 205:21 68:23 75:24
247:19 268:12
217:14,14 228:6,12,13,15 76:3 79:14
269:22 277:23
243:24 313:8 228:16,20,23 80:9
happening
228:25
107:3 356:5
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 135
of 190
[honest - imposition] Page 36
honest 37:25 367:15,19 ignore 138:15 363:17 364:17
honestly 106:7 hypothetically 215:21 328:20 365:6,7
honors 5:20 285:6 328:25 332:23 impacts 65:24
hoping 42:23 i ignored 329:4 impermissible
horizontal ignores 328:18 326:18 327:6
idea 92:12
344:4,8,11,17 ii 65:6 68:6 implement
95:24 241:24
344:18 71:2 78:8 91:6 58:15,18 215:2
242:25 252:15
hour 84:10 100:16 167:5 215:5,14
267:19 296:12
199:7 369:7 167:19 169:5 implementati...
330:8 337:12
hours 127:3,11 206:11 212:3 384:7
342:20 343:5
229:25 252:12 278:3 implicates
346:7
252:25 253:5 illustrative 361:24 363:6
identical
368:20 378:8 55:15 363:25
314:15 384:2
huang 251:24 imagine 249:21 implies 348:2
384:14
huh 152:19 immaterial implying
identification
199:20 362:8 229:22 241:15
22:9,11 89:12
hundred 253:4 immediate 43:8 importance
161:23 210:21
269:17 43:18 44:7 120:17
242:10 313:2
hundreds 282:6 283:11 important
327:9 358:10
241:11 283:24 284:10 116:6,14,18
371:16
hypothesis 285:9 287:4 117:19,24
identifications
65:11 84:13 288:8 289:14 119:16 142:25
370:23
211:23 213:8 289:24 290:12 142:25 145:16
identified
215:22 334:25 381:12 145:22 146:4
166:2 173:2
335:18 344:3 immediately 229:8 260:6,23
180:18 186:5
344:25 347:14 6:13 82:17 381:2
196:11 369:9
hypothetical 319:20 imposed 126:6
379:13
87:16 275:16 impact 55:18 126:12 127:2
identify 120:7
275:21,25 55:23 56:11,15 127:10,23
158:3,13
276:6,12,21 59:5,9 189:2 352:4 374:7
159:11 160:20
277:3 289:4,11 247:18 248:15 375:4
163:21 183:4,5
289:15,22 248:19 249:13 imposition
identifying
290:2,3,16 249:14,18,22 55:19 351:15
171:21
291:5,8,12 250:2,22 352:24 353:4
idiosyncratic
357:17,20 308:21 356:10
343:11
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 136
of 190
[impression - information] Page 37
impression 291:9,12 index 39:15 inefficient 16:4
78:10,14,21 inconclusive 40:2,3 110:18 16:5,18,25
inaccurate 319:13,25 356:7 17:8,16,25
30:23 42:22 inconsistent indicate 57:8 67:18 70:6
220:13 97:6 99:8 131:14 152:3 148:18 150:16
inappropriately 165:18 283:19 184:19 176:19 277:16
67:5 incorporated indicated 57:9 278:9,21 280:8
inclined 321:14 64:25 65:23 indicating 283:24 289:12
321:22 83:17 297:16 322:2 289:16,19,23
include 7:6 297:17 310:22 indications 290:5,11
61:8 220:24 366:18,21 46:2 204:13 340:11 341:18
230:23 233:3 incorporates indicator 381:20
247:7 296:6 383:4 150:10,15 inferring
370:19 371:5 incorrect 7:25 227:9 240:6 226:16
382:22 383:15 71:18 78:11,12 351:8,25 influence 206:5
included 84:24 85:3 352:16 206:17 283:2
182:15,19 188:2 219:15 indicators 344:7 348:4
230:22 244:19 262:13 310:15 45:16,18 influential
245:11 246:9 329:6,22 140:23 205:25 206:3,4
246:19 295:23 increase 295:11 indices 121:16 inform 52:20
300:13 361:16 295:12 308:23 individual 86:13 87:2,6,7
372:22 378:3 309:23 34:12 253:10 87:10 89:23
includes 18:8 increased 339:6,23 344:8 90:11 93:16
42:21 180:21 292:13,18 344:17 345:2 96:19 100:12
224:25 increases 373:4 377:22 101:11 207:5
including 308:12,16 382:14,19 239:22 240:7
367:25,25 309:6,7,11,14 individuals 240:11 307:14
372:12 380:15 309:18 310:3,4 251:17 252:8 information
inclusion 310:12,18 252:10 312:9 32:4,10 61:20
244:23 245:25 311:20 375:3 339:13 62:15,19 63:2
inclusive 175:4 independent industry 63:6,8,12 64:5
189:5 219:9 56:20 349:3,7 110:18 121:16 64:9,16,24
221:25 231:6 349:8,9 350:14 343:18 65:22,24 67:10
incomplete 350:24 351:14 inefficiency 74:14 76:12
276:5 277:3 352:10 355:17 150:20 82:25,25 83:17
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 137
of 190
[information - investigating] Page 38
84:2,3,14,15 333:6,14,21 informed 25:2 intentional
85:14,14 86:13 336:5 339:18 33:15,16 53:12 336:10 337:2
86:25 89:22 346:5 365:5 234:18,18 337:20 338:9
90:10 95:15 366:18 379:19 238:25 interactive
96:18 97:8,14 380:2,6,11,14 informs 111:15 374:14
97:17 100:2,11 informational 205:22 278:4 interest 361:9
101:11 104:5 66:19 73:3,10 initial 12:10 interested 4:6
104:25 137:21 78:15 84:25 13:12,17,19,20 63:25 64:2,20
143:2 144:3 85:6 101:24 22:16,24 23:3 64:21 325:5
151:22 153:15 102:19,22,24 30:8,13 36:2 388:14
154:5,12,17 102:25 103:5,8 53:2 202:16,18 interesting
155:4,20 156:6 103:9,18 104:2 202:20 230:4 164:13
156:23 157:6,8 154:14 159:20 242:23 260:3,4 interfere 3:10
157:16 158:4 160:4,8,17 260:5 268:10 interpret 143:4
158:14 159:12 161:2,7 164:9 298:22 383:21 interpretation
160:21 161:5 164:21 165:7 initially 229:13 291:7
163:22 173:4 165:15 166:6 231:14 interrupt
173:10 174:23 169:20 172:10 inputs 56:22 325:12
175:14,21 189:14 247:24 insignificant intervals 369:7
188:25 197:8,9 297:14 339:9 323:3 378:13 intraday 36:10
199:13 221:2 363:15 installed 57:10 36:23 37:2
225:9 227:4 informational... instance 177:25 39:14 55:18
229:14 230:2,3 65:3 76:19 189:7 298:3 56:2 348:23
230:12 231:18 78:9 87:12 315:19 352:21 355:12 357:9
231:21 232:8 104:9 105:4 353:8 introduced
232:12 256:9 155:11,14 instances 77:15 182:23
276:7 294:11 156:12 160:25 238:13 239:7 introducing
297:15 308:20 165:20 278:13 239:15 240:13 106:17
310:22,25 310:24 342:6 instructions inventory
311:25 313:22 informative 49:19 370:19 371:5
320:16 321:8 142:6,10,19 intake 264:5 inverse 63:16
326:9 327:25 143:13 203:23 intended 147:21
328:12 329:4 204:23 205:15 315:14 investigating
329:15 332:9 227:16 229:18 intention 255:22
332:15,21,24 230:12 288:17
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 138
of 190
[investigation - kindly] Page 39
investigation 156:20 157:4 112:16 113:9 168:10 169:13
368:9 379:17,24 115:10 116:8 314:18 315:9
investment isolated 157:14 116:16 117:21 journals 18:23
219:2 247:2,14 issue 44:12 118:22 119:18 journey 314:11
248:10 250:18 96:16 121:15 120:10 121:22 314:19 316:6
343:7 124:25 126:2,5 122:4,4,12 judge 75:3
investor 229:18 126:11,21,25 123:23 124:3 justification
362:12 127:9,17,23 125:6 126:7,13 338:20
investor's 220:6,11,20 127:19 128:8 justified 362:3
54:16,21 261:14,25 128:18,25 363:9 364:4
investors 273:8 275:9 129:7,13,22 k
161:13 162:5 279:4,15 281:8 130:23 132:3,6
k 185:19,20,23
175:5 180:22 299:6,16 300:7 134:4,13
185:24 186:7,7
188:22 189:14 301:6,17,25 135:15 227:25
186:18,18
227:3,4 230:19 314:2 316:19 228:9 315:9,24
187:6,6,18,18
230:20 258:14 317:8 356:12 317:9 320:13
188:19,20
261:18 336:11 372:17,21 325:15 369:8
199:14,15
337:3,21 375:13 376:5 374:16 381:21
218:14,14,23
338:10 365:9 376:11 377:10 381:25 382:2,3
218:25 219:5,5
380:12,15 378:2 384:8 386:1
219:8,8,19,20
381:3 issued 99:6 389:1
220:2,2,5,7,11
invitation issuer 185:25 job 210:12
220:11,20,21
107:10 219:21 307:12 323:5
222:5,5,15
involve 171:12 issues 384:18 john's 203:12
kane 244:15
involved 235:9 item 35:17 joined 4:16
kathleen 52:2
ipo 34:7 73:7 items 219:7 jointly 19:19
keep 79:22
84:8 iv 376:19,22 jones 242:17
209:16 237:15
irrationally j 371:13,18,23
325:2
336:12 337:4 372:5,23 373:9
january 1:6 kellogg 20:9,16
337:22 338:11 375:7,12 376:8
3:17 39:15 kind 51:14
irrelevant 377:11,15,21
42:3,16,21 144:19 267:18
384:4 382:7,9 387:17
43:6,7 45:4 279:6 286:11
isolate 153:13 journal 18:13
54:14,20 55:6 334:16
154:3,10 155:2 18:19,20,25
60:3 109:6,17 kindly 178:18
155:17 156:4 19:5,8,11
110:4,10
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 139
of 190
[knew - largest] Page 40
knew 11:13 151:18 152:5 272:3,25 275:7 known 84:15
130:5 153:7 155:7 276:19 278:6 85:15 124:16
know 7:19 9:5 160:11 164:12 280:2 282:19 362:10,15,18
9:16 10:15,20 172:2,11 283:18 284:15 knows 106:3
10:22 13:24,24 174:11,16 286:4 291:9 koss 39:22
20:25 28:3,16 175:12 176:5 294:17,18 44:14 45:9
28:16 29:5 177:25,25 296:15 297:13 46:12 109:14
30:14 35:25 180:15 181:12 298:10 300:16 109:17 110:8
37:23 38:14 189:4 190:2 303:6 316:9 126:15 319:6
48:15,16 54:7 192:21 193:2,3 317:17 321:6 376:6
56:9 57:13 193:6 194:2,21 322:11 329:3,8 kreps 362:14
58:12 59:2,4,6 195:7,16,21 331:24 332:22 krogman 43:5
63:20 68:12 201:13 205:3,8 338:17 339:12 138:11,17
70:13,25 71:19 205:13 206:13 339:24,25 139:23 140:3
71:25 77:13,14 206:21 208:7 342:7 343:12 141:5,15,22
79:2,22 81:16 208:10,12,25 343:13,17 142:13 320:17
84:10 85:25 209:6,9,16 345:8 346:4 ks 174:20 175:2
87:14,19 88:6 215:16 220:3 350:5 351:10 189:19 218:20
88:8 90:14 223:16 226:22 354:16,20 219:13,14,17
91:6 92:15 228:12,21,24 355:21 356:17 l
95:22 97:23 229:2,11 230:9 362:16,17
l 2:10
99:10,23,24 231:19 235:19 363:13 368:8
labeled 36:12
103:23 104:10 240:9 241:7 368:20 376:22
lack 99:7
105:6 106:8 242:20 246:13 380:13
149:25 150:5
108:14 112:7 246:18 250:3 knowing
150:22
113:24,25 250:11 252:6 271:14,17
large 110:13
115:23 116:20 252:25 253:23 348:3 363:18
111:4,9,19
119:17,22,24 254:5,8 255:6 knowledge
112:2 119:8,24
120:22 133:22 256:16,18 74:23 168:20
257:13,16
135:18 138:11 259:6,10 263:7 201:7,16
296:3,5,10
138:15 139:12 264:4 265:11 277:18 278:23
369:9
140:11,12,16 265:16 266:6,8 297:17
largest 112:4
140:19,24 266:21 267:3,5 knowledgeable
112:12,20,24
142:10,12 267:8,9,10,12 257:10
113:10 115:3,7
143:3 144:13 270:18 271:12
115:10,14
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 140
of 190
[largest - living] Page 41
116:21,24 72:22 77:10,22 legally 5:12 153:21 156:2
117:10 118:16 78:4 91:25 lepic 2:12 4:18 213:19 217:9
118:23 119:19 166:9 level 184:20 243:18,24
119:25 120:10 lay 274:12 197:23 314:16 370:4
larry 37:25 layman 47:10 levels 375:25 370:15 374:11
119:11 202:13 72:18 library 6:15,19 375:2,22
249:7 345:20 layman's license 5:13 linked 284:24
late 291:11 274:12 life 106:4 list 18:8 25:22
laurence 2:5 layperson 314:20 362:16 32:3,9 373:8
4:19 279:17 likely 135:6 listed 186:10
law 2:3 11:21 lead 183:16 153:14 154:4 313:18
12:2,21 13:2 217:5,14 154:11 155:3 lists 32:16
25:12 26:3,18 246:11,15 155:18 156:5 180:21
26:21 28:7 leading 265:23 156:22 157:5,7 literally 241:5
31:21 68:16,19 266:11 292:12 157:15 178:13 literature
70:21 72:15 320:12 381:24 364:16 379:18 18:17,21 19:3
74:10 75:4 383:20 379:25 19:6 78:7
78:6 101:23 leaked 95:23 limit 217:2,12 101:22 342:23
166:10,19 learn 193:20,24 limitation 343:23
167:2,16,22 leave 176:8 26:12,16 litigation 1:7
168:13 169:11 298:14 357:23 limitations 3:18 6:4 34:7
170:8,13,15 leaving 262:11 371:3 84:8,8 89:9
203:12 242:6 lecturer 7:23 limited 28:19 101:6,8 162:6
253:10 280:13 8:22 21:4 329:8 372:16 169:19 272:24
280:15 led 188:12 line 29:14 326:17 386:1
lawsuit 11:22 left 130:4 89:17,20,20 389:1
32:25 33:11 258:25 259:21 96:3,11 98:15 litinomics 7:7
lawyer 53:6 333:3,11 98:19,20 113:8 little 52:7,8
68:7 78:7 368:19 373:8 216:22 387:19 62:23,24 127:2
92:11,20 93:6 legal 14:4 387:23 389:4,7 127:10 180:16
93:24 96:3 27:22 28:25 389:10,13,16 207:9 286:13
138:10 142:9 68:13 75:14 389:19 lived 270:13,14
219:24 138:9 166:11 lines 38:13,15 270:24
lawyers 71:5,6 168:6 279:7 60:4 92:19 living 15:5
71:8 72:15,21 280:18 337:10 94:14,20 98:21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 141
of 190
[llp - lost] Page 42
llp 1:15 2:8 125:8 128:2 353:3 354:3 159:25 160:4
4:15 133:19 134:8 355:20 356:5 161:2,4 174:20
location 3:21 136:2 138:10 358:18 359:8 178:10 186:20
logarithmic 140:19 141:22 361:4,7,8,13,18 198:3,24 203:4
109:11,11,20 142:2 144:15 369:15,16 204:24 207:16
logic 17:18 145:7,9 150:7 370:3 372:2 207:19 212:6
79:3 155:6,14 373:2 374:10 218:20,22
logical 341:24 162:22 170:20 374:25 219:4,16
logically 46:15 179:24 184:2 looked 33:3,13 230:25 233:7
288:9 324:2 185:14 201:9 33:17 42:8,13 237:17 240:22
long 79:2 188:9 207:13,15 51:10,20 120:4 240:23 242:24
216:10,13 208:5,18 122:3 140:24 243:11,23
271:12 285:15 209:22 210:17 154:16,20 245:14 256:23
339:5,22 351:8 213:14 226:20 155:13 165:22 261:5,6,8
longer 102:17 229:9,11,13 171:3 174:22 269:25 282:2
103:16 188:13 230:5,11 231:9 180:23 181:7,8 286:15 288:6
225:22,24 232:2,9 239:3 186:21 199:6 306:12 314:16
226:5,8 243:16 242:3 243:22 209:10 216:15 316:24 317:10
285:10 290:17 244:7 245:3 216:16 240:2 319:23 333:8
290:22 291:6 247:15 248:4 241:8 276:17 335:25 352:19
371:19 248:20 249:10 284:8 321:7 352:25 356:3
look 5:13 25:18 259:6,25 260:8 329:23 350:4 358:19 362:25
30:20 42:18 261:2,4 268:9 369:25 375:11 365:2 371:2
54:8,13 57:6 269:20 271:6 looking 13:12 373:18 375:13
58:7 66:22 272:7 273:6 13:16 22:23 375:16 378:10
72:25 83:5,14 274:15 275:2,7 33:21 39:11 383:24
83:15 89:16 276:14,18 41:5 42:10,24 looks 162:16
90:15 100:5 280:16,17 44:18 48:24 204:2 249:24
101:2 106:9,25 282:24 295:21 53:2,8 55:18 327:12 331:15
108:18 109:13 300:16 302:18 63:22 66:18,23 loss 60:14,15
109:22 112:6 313:13,25 73:25 95:24 60:22 61:6
113:13,16 314:5 325:3 109:10 124:13 355:2,9
114:2,14 115:4 328:7 329:20 125:11 130:15 lost 51:14
115:18 116:2,4 329:22 340:4 148:6,7 153:10 309:8
116:23 118:3 352:12,19,24 154:14 158:7
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 142
of 190
[lot - market] Page 43
lot 28:13 main 364:15 manipulation 39:20,22 41:14
175:21 178:2 maintain 167:10 282:10 42:2,13 44:4
185:6 278:2 303:21 283:15 284:4 44:11,24 45:10
286:10 295:22 major 216:24 285:14 287:18 45:19,23 46:4
338:13 343:13 majority 10:10 288:13 290:21 46:13 50:10
350:3 363:12 298:21 336:10 337:3 51:9,21,24
lots 380:13 make 9:22 337:10,20 52:4,10,13,15
low 197:9 14:25 29:7 338:9 381:16 54:19 55:5
lp 89:8 47:25 48:5,7 manufacturers 63:9,13 64:20
lrosen 2:6 72:25 105:22 178:3,5,8 64:25 65:11,21
luis 7:24 8:23 118:20 142:23 march 8:18 66:9,15 67:8
10:3 19:25 152:20 162:21 23:12 162:3 67:12,18,22,25
20:6 21:11,16 167:13 183:2 166:15 171:4 68:3,24 69:5
lunch 136:4 198:8 217:20 179:20 69:11,12,15
luncheon 220:2 233:19 margin 131:4,6 70:3,5,19
136:10 268:22 276:11 131:9 375:3 71:14 72:8
lying 59:3 287:21 288:2,5 mark 21:18 74:11,16 75:14
m 289:7 292:5 242:5 76:2,3,8,9,13
298:11 307:4 marked 22:8 77:25 79:11,15
m 5:3 137:4
329:22 341:8 22:10 31:9 79:15,21,24
371:13,18
343:6 32:13 36:9 80:6,10,10,14
macroecono...
makes 9:5,13 89:5,11 107:24 80:20 81:2,4
270:21
205:3 208:12 161:22,25 81:11 82:8,13
made 93:15
236:11 179:18 195:25 82:18,21,23
189:20 218:7
making 118:6 210:20 235:5 83:2,20,25
225:12 229:20
118:21,24 242:9 257:24 84:3,13,15,21
231:23 233:17
152:8 155:10 281:22 312:25 84:25 85:6,11
233:20 234:13
159:22,23 313:8 316:13 85:15 87:25
234:21 241:23
189:22 218:25 325:4 327:3,8 90:10,12 96:9
285:19 339:13
288:15 307:22 358:4,9,21 97:25 99:9,17
386:6
342:7 357:15 371:15 372:4 99:18 100:18
madison 2:3
man 244:11 market 16:3,18 101:13,20,24
magnitude
manage 188:10 17:8,15,24 102:8,22,24,25
294:12 299:20
management 18:4 29:11 103:5 104:2
309:23
20:10,17 30:3 37:9 110:18 121:16
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 143
of 190
[market - mean] Page 44
137:23 138:6 283:7,13,15 381:19 matters 14:20
138:20 139:8 284:2,4,19 marriage 15:10 16:14
139:11,12 285:12,14 388:13 138:9 175:25
140:5,17,22 287:7,15,17 master's 5:23 180:21
141:6,17,23 288:11,12 matches 67:19 mba 20:11,21
142:7,14,20 290:5,7,11,19 70:7 20:22
143:14 146:22 290:21 319:19 material 24:9 mccabe 252:2
149:5,18 150:2 320:12,19 97:8,14,17 md 1:4 3:21
150:5,16,23 340:11 341:7 175:5,14 mean 7:17 9:3
151:5 152:4 341:13,17 188:21 189:21 12:3 13:25
165:13 167:2,9 342:5 344:3,25 220:25 221:14 14:4 20:8 21:2
167:17,23 345:7 347:14 221:16,21,23 27:23,24 28:13
168:14 169:11 358:6 359:4,17 229:16,21 28:14 29:4
173:20 176:20 359:22 360:4 230:3,3 231:17 30:4,20 34:3
176:21 178:16 360:16 362:13 231:22 259:2 34:15 38:10
183:6,9,17 366:23 380:25 259:21 262:11 39:18,23 43:23
187:9 189:22 381:14,15,21 312:10 341:10 45:16,24 47:6
203:21 204:19 387:15 380:11,14 47:9,11,15,25
207:7 211:23 markets 26:6,8 materiality 48:10,12 49:18
213:8 215:22 26:10,15,24 222:8,14 49:18 50:11
217:21 221:10 27:5,17 31:15 matter 3:17 51:19 54:3,4
223:3,25 37:4,5 104:8 14:4 17:5 54:10 55:8
232:13 239:2 105:3 212:8 30:13 46:23 56:8 57:4,5,10
239:23 240:8 261:14 262:17 60:11,15,23 57:20 58:25
255:23 257:8 263:4,13,20 79:10,12 80:5 61:7 62:24
257:17 258:15 264:19,25 80:7 85:12 63:20 64:17
261:19,25 266:19 267:23 105:18,20 65:15 66:4
265:15 271:21 269:6,18 270:4 173:23 174:3 68:2 69:16
272:9,13,17 271:15 274:4 180:22 230:9 70:4,10,23
273:14 275:14 282:5 283:10 232:21 251:19 71:17 72:25
276:2 277:16 283:23 284:9 254:19 264:17 73:3,10,14,19
278:9,21 279:4 285:8 287:3 264:23 271:4 77:14 79:19
279:15,20 288:7 289:12 274:2 310:8 83:13,14,20
280:8 281:8 289:23 339:5 311:5 378:10 84:6 86:5,9,16
282:8,9,25 339:22 381:11 388:14 86:18 87:15,19
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 144
of 190
[mean - media] Page 45
88:11,12 89:2 189:4 195:16 310:23 311:21 150:10 152:17
89:21 90:14 195:17,21 313:25 314:25 265:9 266:25
91:7 93:3 201:8,8 204:5 315:16 321:7 306:4 342:8
95:16 96:12,16 206:9,11 208:2 322:22 325:11 357:12 378:15
96:22 98:4 209:6,15 328:19,22 meant 24:13
99:16,18 215:18,19 330:6,6 331:18 90:21 99:17
100:20,22,23 218:18 220:4 335:10 338:16 104:11 105:15
102:21,23 226:19 228:5,6 339:10,25 113:4 134:18
105:7,22 106:8 228:17,24 341:19 342:20 211:2 347:7,9
110:17 111:18 232:2,10 343:2,10,12,16 347:11 352:7
112:18,23 237:14,22 345:3,19,23 363:13 380:10
115:21 119:23 239:2,24 347:20 348:3 380:22 381:2
120:2 121:24 240:18 241:22 349:15,25 measure 53:16
123:3,6,13 247:15,16,23 350:7 351:25 54:5,17 56:10
124:19,23 249:10,11 352:5,6 353:8 56:14 58:9
128:12,13 252:19,20 354:3,16,18 64:6 121:14
130:9,18 131:3 254:13,15 355:20,22 175:10 264:7
131:6,24 132:9 256:8,10 259:9 360:20 361:7,8 278:8 284:16
133:19 134:21 259:10,25 361:15 362:15 353:15
134:22 135:5 263:24 264:3,4 362:21 363:11 measured
140:6 145:6,7 265:3,16 266:7 363:16 364:5,5 30:12 74:5
146:18 148:2,4 268:6,8 272:4 365:6,7,18 293:20 378:7
151:11,12,17 274:8,15 375:7,17,19 measurements
154:15,18 277:22,23,25 380:6,9,22,23 59:21
155:7,9 156:16 280:10 283:17 381:17 382:4 measuring
156:24 157:21 284:17 287:21 382:17 356:9,23
158:23 160:11 287:22,24 meaning 17:4 mechanism
164:23 167:4 293:15,17,20 183:19 199:16 74:13
170:5 171:8,16 294:24 295:3 meanings media 3:15
172:5 174:7 296:3 297:5,10 303:3 35:10,15 76:24
176:5,8,18 300:13,15 means 40:4 77:5 136:8
178:15 182:5,9 302:5 304:5 45:3 59:23 137:7 179:9,14
182:17,22 305:8,11,14 67:12,17 106:7 211:18 251:10
183:4 184:11 306:11 308:18 106:11,12 251:15 312:22
186:20 188:16 309:24 310:6 114:15,19 313:5 348:11
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 145
of 190
[media - model] Page 46
348:16 384:24 231:6 middle 41:6 misconduct
meet 10:24 methodologi... 211:16 212:16 353:14
131:4 148:13 217:19 218:7 258:11 315:25 mispriced
184:5 200:5 240:21 377:8 74:12 338:18
meeting 11:6 methodologies midway 42:25 338:21,23,25
176:14 53:10 187:12 miguel 252:3 339:6,7,8,23,25
meets 148:9 190:4 288:25 miller 65:15 mispricing
184:11 237:19 292:6 million 292:21 336:9,25
237:20 methodology 293:5 337:18 338:8
member 47:3 46:25 47:14 mind 47:18 338:15
members 53:15 52:25 122:24 50:18 52:23 misquoted
memorized 174:15 175:18 55:4 58:3 258:24 259:5
114:23 208:3 177:3,6,12,22 59:19 135:14 259:11,15,16
269:19 181:21,23,25 187:4 192:19 260:7,25
memory 101:4 182:4 190:17 226:17 243:6 missed 53:5
115:21 125:9 193:19 194:16 289:11 290:16 85:19 97:14
129:15 133:22 194:23 195:5 302:22 303:13 missing 324:4
136:3 162:20 196:23 198:12 303:16,19 misspoke 80:16
211:24 221:5 204:24 205:12 304:13 347:23 176:13 234:2
295:4 369:17 205:25 206:23 351:7,11,17,17 261:10 311:9
374:5 378:6 207:2,10,22,25 355:15 362:20 311:13
mentally 208:3,9,20 minuscule mistake 245:16
117:10 223:19 225:23 249:15 250:23 mistyped 5:15
mention 99:18 226:6 235:18 minute 120:5 misunderstan...
mentioned 41:4 236:23 247:25 208:16 251:4 117:8 300:3
214:24 217:4 292:2 315:14 316:15 368:21 misunderstood
268:6 291:15 355:7 368:25 377:13,13 199:22
378:12 metro 211:17 minutes 81:14 mitigating
merely 72:14 michael 52:2 120:4 214:9 124:11 130:3
143:6 michigan 15:5 218:21 219:10 130:10,11
met 11:5 microphones 353:5,6,6 287:22
151:20,22 3:5,10 368:19 mixed 201:23
174:12 204:23 microstructure mischaracteri... mixing 202:11
method 55:5 51:9,22,25 233:24 366:4 model 48:12,13
74:2 197:19,24 52:4,10,13,16 48:15,18,25
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 146
of 190
[model - need] Page 47
49:6,9,13,14 months 6:12,18 96:14,18 97:5 name 3:24 5:11
50:8 51:12,14 moore 1:15 2:8 97:11 99:4,8 170:2 217:3,13
51:17,19 52:22 3:22 4:15 100:11 101:10 252:3 253:17
53:12,25 54:3 morning 3:2 104:5,15,24 named 253:10
54:4 57:3,11 5:8,9 125:6 105:9 106:16 names 170:23
58:8,13,19 172:7 106:19 107:13 170:24
59:8,12 60:2,2 move 178:7 110:10,12 narinder
67:21 70:9 213:4,24 112:13,19,21 253:10
123:20 131:15 246:10 308:4,8 112:25 114:24 nearly 344:4,11
132:14 209:20 345:13 346:18 115:11 117:21 344:18
291:18 292:7 347:16 119:9 120:10 necessarily
349:18 354:23 moved 189:9 130:2,22 152:2 48:9 85:5
355:3,11,12 movement 58:5 213:25 224:3 134:16,19
357:9,10,19 61:21 88:9,10 226:25 228:18 150:15 152:10
model's 131:17 98:2 113:10 236:5,7 291:19 161:4 165:10
132:15 115:9,15 296:2,9,20,23 167:11 176:17
models 48:2,6 116:22,25 307:25 348:23 178:6,15
49:15 50:12 117:11 118:23 movers 226:23 193:15 194:2
52:17,19 59:18 119:19 174:13 moving 174:24 194:13 205:8
59:23 224:20 225:6 174:24 219:2 221:15 237:21
modern 65:12 225:10,18 300:23 241:15 282:19
65:14,16 226:16 227:21 multi 48:12 282:24 284:13
modigliani 228:3,11 229:5 multiple 159:6 284:17 285:10
65:15 235:11,14 181:12,14 290:17,23
moment 9:23 297:3,23 299:7 218:8 315:2,6 351:8 352:6
14:18 50:3 299:17,21 music 250:10 354:15
161:25 281:20 300:8 301:7,18 250:15 necessary
323:10 movements mute 3:8 78:25 79:5
momentum 56:5 58:20 myers 265:17 386:7
227:9,12 61:24 62:13 265:18,22,23 need 47:25 48:5
230:17,18 64:15 86:12,15 n 48:7 90:25
312:6 380:18 86:17,25 87:17 91:7,8 93:14
n 2:2 5:3 137:2
monitor 240:22 87:20,23,24 95:19 97:18
137:2,2,4
month 245:20 88:4,16,19 98:5,6 106:10
251:25,25
89:22 90:9 107:20 115:18
387:2
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 147
of 190
[need - news] Page 48
134:8 172:7 114:20 150:19 150:9,12,12,13 181:17 182:14
210:11 212:18 268:13 299:23 151:3,3,11,23 182:15,18,19
213:10 226:18 332:2 152:14,14,17 183:14,17,17
276:6 280:13 new 1:15,16,18 152:17,18 184:6,6,7
282:7 283:12 2:4,4,9,9 3:23 153:2,2,4,5,12 185:2,2,3,3,5
283:25 285:11 3:23 6:14,18 153:12,13,25 185:18,19,20
286:11 287:15 65:24 76:12,16 153:25 154:3,9 186:7,19 187:7
288:4,10 90:10 137:21 154:9,10,19,24 187:7,8,13,13
290:18 304:19 144:3 158:4,13 154:24 155:2 187:19 188:18
307:14 331:22 159:12 160:21 155:18,21 188:21,24
331:22 339:17 162:6 163:22 156:4,7,12,16 189:17,21
350:7 351:3,4 173:3 327:24 156:16,19,19 190:9,9,19,19
354:20 356:21 328:11 329:14 156:21,24,25 190:25,25
356:22 369:25 332:8 333:5,13 157:3,3,4,11,11 191:11,11,22
381:13 333:20 388:5 157:14,24,25 191:22 192:2,7
needed 11:18 news 40:17 158:3,10,10,13 192:7,20,20
38:18 131:5 61:24 62:6,8 159:4,4,9,9,11 193:5,5,13,13
165:12 231:9 62:12,16,19 160:16,16,20 193:15,16,23
needs 215:22 63:7,18,22,23 161:16,16,17 193:23 194:3,5
220:6,11,20 64:5,10 96:15 163:13,13,15 194:5,13,13,21
negative 98:16,22 99:5 163:16,19,21 194:21 195:2,2
183:16,19 124:19,19 164:4,4 165:22 195:13,13
negatives 144:4,5,9,9,11 165:23 171:21 196:5,5,6,19
182:12,17,24 144:12,15,17 172:18,18 198:4,4,11,11
183:3 144:18,23,25 173:2,2,2,19,22 198:17 199:12
neither 31:12 145:2,5,10,10 173:22 174:4,4 199:23 200:5,6
67:3 145:13,14,18 174:21 175:4 201:5,5 203:25
neo 174:21 145:19,21 175:10 176:3,3 204:24,24
187:11 188:3 146:2,3,7,8,20 176:10,15,16 205:10,10,23
188:12,17 147:2,3,7,8,10 176:24,25,25 205:23 206:2,2
218:11,13,19 147:16,17,23 177:11,14,19 207:5,5,11,11
218:22 219:12 147:24 148:10 177:20,20 207:23,23
nera 7:7 191:14 148:14,14 178:11,12,14 208:11,11,20
never 15:14 149:3,4,9,9,15 178:14 180:10 208:20 211:9
20:5 21:9,15 149:16,23,24 180:10,20 213:25 214:24
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 148
of 190
[news - november] Page 49
215:12,13 323:3,9,12,20 116:10,18 323:24 324:14
216:23,25 323:22,24 117:13,14,23 324:23 326:3
217:11,20,20 324:14,21,23 126:21 184:4 334:18 350:8
218:3,17 221:9 325:16,21,21 184:24 187:18 nonefficiency
221:15,16,21 325:25 326:3 196:22 197:10 246:17
222:2,6,7,7,19 328:18 332:8 197:19,23 nonsubstanti...
223:13 224:7,9 333:5,13,20 228:7 231:2,10 23:18
224:25 225:3 334:8,9,11,17 233:8 255:23 normally
227:18,18 334:18 335:3,4 256:14,20 293:23
228:7,9 229:3 335:9,20,21 289:13 297:2 northwestern
229:16 234:23 336:6 341:10 297:22 299:5 5:22 6:24
235:10,12,23 341:12 345:14 299:16 300:7 20:17 21:6
235:23 236:4,6 346:19 347:17 301:6,17,24 notably 375:5
236:16,19,20 379:11,12,14 302:8 306:6,16 notary 1:17
237:7,9,9,13,21 379:18,20,24 308:13,24 386:14,21
237:21,24 380:3 309:12 310:12 388:4
238:3,14,15,19 newspapers 310:18 349:23 note 3:5 117:10
238:24,24 216:24 372:17,21 133:5 200:19
240:5,5 242:2 nfc 314:20 381:20 383:14 203:5,6 256:23
242:24 246:8 nfl 314:9 nobel 257:10 257:2 359:3
246:12 247:19 nihat 133:12 257:12,16 370:6,17
247:22 256:11 134:6 nokia 41:17 372:20 375:21
256:11 295:23 nine 25:23 26:5 126:15 250:5,7 noted 385:4
295:24,24 26:23 27:18 250:13,17,18 386:7
296:6,7,18,18 31:14 36:24 314:4 notice 1:14
296:25 297:7 37:17 40:5 non 131:15 36:17 226:14
297:12,21 41:13 43:17 132:14 144:5 noticed 113:7
299:5,15 300:6 44:5,22 49:10 144:18 145:2 113:15 178:4
300:13 301:5 56:5 71:3 145:10,21 noticing 4:13
301:16 316:19 89:13 91:4 146:3,8 147:3 notion 265:10
316:23 317:7 99:11 100:15 147:17,24 266:21
317:13,16,19 101:22 104:11 149:4,9,16,24 november
317:22 318:4,5 105:11,16 153:5 163:16 91:22 93:2,9
318:18 320:3,3 106:3 112:22 185:2 238:15 93:10
322:17,25 112:25 114:25 322:17 323:22
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 149
of 190
[nscc - oh] Page 50
nscc 131:11 337:6 366:14 observing odd 210:14
null 334:25 380:8 381:24 226:11 offering 27:15
335:18 383:3,20 384:9 obvious 175:2 29:10,25
number 36:15 objections 4:8 obviously offices 1:14
69:22 93:11 objective 155:2 24:25 80:22 officially 263:8
125:13 168:24 158:2,12,19 96:23 190:17 oftentimes 16:8
175:24 176:6 160:19 163:20 201:13 223:5 16:12 178:8
187:3,4 211:8 175:10,16 277:25 330:7 189:16 270:18
254:10 318:5 189:23 190:3,8 361:10 371:21 oh 9:18 12:7
340:16,18 190:23 223:18 occasionally 13:23 24:22
382:8 225:19 230:6 268:3 42:9,20 73:15
numbers 36:17 230:25 231:25 occasions 12:23 74:8 75:16
329:20 232:4,16 159:6 76:17 80:18
numerous 11:4 233:13,14,17 occur 15:23 91:2 108:11
170:17 172:6 234:2,4,10,15 270:4,12 271:3 109:9,24 112:5
o 379:10 274:23 275:18 121:10 157:7
observation 357:20 368:3 163:3 171:14
o 137:2,2,2
298:23 319:24 occurred 178:21 191:25
oath 4:4 105:10
observational 188:11 231:22 194:24 201:24
oberlin 5:20
264:15,16,17 268:24 269:13 202:19 223:16
6:9
264:23 269:16,20 224:5 234:7
obispo 7:24
observationally 273:5 274:19 245:15 253:21
8:23 10:3
268:3 269:8 275:4,6 276:13 254:14 261:8
19:25 20:6
observations 276:16,18 265:19 266:24
21:11,16
59:7 298:3,10 311:25 354:2 267:8,24 268:7
object 208:23
330:19,25 357:18 367:14 275:20 280:15
209:4 326:17
333:5 368:5 286:21 287:6
326:19 327:5
observe 113:22 occurring 291:24 309:21
objected
114:10,20 275:19,23 341:7 346:24
208:24
115:8 117:9,16 354:17 347:10,18
objection 27:21
145:12 148:11 occurs 242:20 350:18 358:25
29:13 37:20,21
observed 98:2 352:14 357:21 362:4,21,24
38:2,6 118:9
113:19 115:16 october 358:8 365:5 373:10
131:18,21
117:9 360:23 359:6 373:13 376:25
206:19 233:23
376:25 377:6
326:13 336:14
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 150
of 190
[okay - omega] Page 51
okay 9:7,19 133:4 135:8,9 229:15 234:20 316:11,15,16
10:10 13:9 135:12,21 235:3,22 316:24 317:2
14:17 18:14 137:16 143:21 238:12 242:3 317:12,20
20:23 21:18 145:11,16 242:11 243:6 318:22 322:8
22:7,14 25:20 147:11 152:12 243:10 244:7,9 322:13 324:3
27:14 28:6 152:15,22,23 244:22 245:5 324:10 325:2
29:6,20 31:11 153:10,19 248:13 249:11 326:8 327:13
34:21 36:21,22 156:18 157:24 249:20 251:5 330:10 331:14
39:6,9 41:2,10 161:20 162:19 252:9,18 333:10 334:14
44:16 46:10,17 162:21 163:5 253:22 254:9 339:20 342:22
49:5,8,20 50:2 163:10 164:18 254:21 255:2,6 344:22 345:4
50:15 51:18 166:14,18 255:18 256:5 345:11 346:8
58:2 59:11,16 167:13 169:3 256:22,25 346:21 348:6
59:25 60:7 170:11 171:15 258:3 259:8,20 349:9 351:12
61:16 63:24 171:19 172:24 262:14 264:12 352:8 357:24
64:11 65:4,9 179:2 181:19 265:2 266:5,14 358:11,23
68:7,21 69:25 182:23 184:2 266:24 267:3 360:12,19
71:9,21 76:11 184:14,22 269:14 270:16 361:22 362:9
76:21 79:9 185:8,14 186:3 271:13,20 363:21 365:24
80:23 82:22 186:14,25 272:16 277:4 367:4 369:4
83:3 85:10 187:14 188:3 278:25 280:3 370:14 371:10
86:8 92:13 191:15 192:9 281:3,13,17,24 371:17 373:6
94:13 95:8 192:17,25 281:25 282:20 373:14 375:9
105:21 107:14 193:8,20 283:17 285:23 376:2,4 377:7
107:22 108:5 194:11,24 286:14,25 378:17 379:5
108:11 109:15 195:10,20,23 289:15,24,25 381:4,9 382:6
109:15 111:23 197:15 198:5,8 291:2,14 384:15
114:12 115:20 200:23 201:12 293:13,25 old 5:14
118:2 120:2,12 201:19 203:6 294:5 295:17 omega 161:13
121:9,10,10 203:10,19 296:10,15,24 162:4 163:19
123:2 125:16 207:18 214:20 301:23 302:3 164:4,22 171:4
125:24 127:14 218:6 220:16 304:8,9 306:15 171:22 172:18
127:25 129:17 222:3,11 308:10,17 172:25 173:13
129:20 130:25 225:21 226:10 309:16 310:10 180:22 202:24
131:13 132:19 228:22 229:2 314:7,22,24
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 151
of 190
[once - outlook] Page 52
once 13:8 376:6 operates 8:16 273:6,7,14 opposite
one's 52:21 opine 30:11 274:2 275:13 149:21
84:10 45:18 75:13 276:2 277:2 option 383:2
ones 22:5 140:3 310:8 311:5,7 278:5 279:11 options 358:6
ongoing 200:25 355:9 281:16 283:23 359:4 382:20
201:8,10,15 opined 16:21 285:7 287:2,6 382:22 383:15
open 291:6 opining 27:8 287:14 290:24 387:15
325:3 71:9,16,19,23 307:14 310:17 order 34:8 67:7
opening 25:17 72:5,5 320:4,14 330:5 93:13 98:5
29:15 31:7,8 opinion 6:16 331:18 341:20 143:24 155:17
31:12,22,25 16:3,9,17,24 341:21,22 156:4 160:17
32:8,17 41:3 17:7,16,25 367:3,24 210:9 225:19
41:24 44:17 18:4 25:3 opinions 16:12 231:10 304:17
46:19 55:11 27:15 29:10,25 24:16 29:19 354:21 379:15
61:13 62:12 33:16 41:5,12 32:25 33:11 379:17,24
65:8,20 107:23 41:24 44:18,20 46:6 79:11 ordinary
109:23 121:3,8 44:22 45:8 80:5,24 82:5 302:16 304:6,7
121:9 122:18 46:17,21 47:12 85:11 116:6,14 304:9,10,11,19
132:20 133:2,3 50:16 52:21 116:19 117:20 304:21,24
135:24 137:13 54:23 60:22 117:25 119:17 305:11,22,22
139:15 143:19 71:25 72:11 120:8,17,23 306:2
153:11 154:25 87:6,7,10,25 143:6 165:11 organizations
156:3 174:2 88:13 93:17 191:23 194:8,9 7:12
178:24 198:13 96:8 149:17 194:10 203:25 original 13:13
201:21 202:2 152:24 158:11 204:11 208:7 127:15 169:15
205:17 227:18 165:16 166:5,7 222:24 255:11 274:21
235:24 243:2 192:18 193:10 opportunity 319:5
255:3 261:13 193:25 194:20 93:19 originally
281:18 292:8 205:22 229:10 opposed 40:3 10:19
320:8 321:24 231:11 234:18 47:9 75:6 outcome 4:7
325:3,22 234:19 238:25 146:2 156:13 131:17 132:16
378:22 239:23 240:7,9 181:21 182:24 388:14
opens 37:9 240:11 258:7 233:14 234:11 outlook 65:25
374:16 262:10 271:20 243:23 320:7 66:5 314:20
272:12,16 367:5
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 152
of 190
[outset - paragraph] Page 53
outset 178:18 89:20,20 91:18 286:19,21 pantheon 65:17
233:20 92:19 94:14,20 290:15 314:5 paper 134:2,9
outside 169:18 96:2 98:15,19 316:25 321:13 140:21 158:20
171:6 245:10 98:20 107:19 322:14 325:7,9 158:22 170:7
outstanding 108:3,7,12,14 327:4,20 328:8 190:14,16,18
37:21 108:17,21 329:12 330:13 191:8 204:3
overall 258:15 109:10,14,22 330:16,17 207:14 208:10
261:19 109:24 121:2,5 331:17 332:5 209:21,23,25
overly 227:13 121:6 125:13 333:3,12 210:7,11,15,18
238:10 125:15,20,20 358:20,23,24 211:4 216:11
oversimplified 126:24 127:8 359:2,14,16 216:14 222:23
227:6 132:19,23,25 360:11 365:3 224:24 225:16
overview 132:25 137:14 368:17 369:6 362:6,10,20
156:15 137:15,16 370:5 372:3,9 371:13,23
own 314:11 140:21 143:20 373:3,5,11,11 372:6 375:8
343:15 153:22,22 373:12,13 377:21 378:5
p 156:3 162:10 374:10 375:2 382:7,9 387:12
162:11,22,23 375:10,21 387:17
p 2:2,2 184:16
162:24 163:3,4 376:8,24,25 papers 49:16
184:18 197:18
172:21,23 377:5,5 379:2 49:19,23 50:5
318:12,25
185:15 198:24 382:15 387:3,7 169:18 170:24
326:4 329:21
200:15 201:22 387:19,23 paragraph
329:24 330:21
202:4,6 203:5 389:4,7,10,13 25:19,22 39:12
331:3,9,12,16
203:6 210:23 389:16,19 42:18,25 43:2
p.m. 128:13,19
211:7,11,16,16 pages 90:23 53:8 54:10
129:7 136:10
212:7,10,16,16 93:23 108:25 61:15,18 62:5
137:3 385:4
213:2,4,20 122:17,18 62:11,22 63:3
packed 185:6
214:21 215:7 180:2,3 212:23 65:8,20 66:23
page 13:18
216:22 217:8 213:5,11,21 69:16,19 70:4
36:15,17 39:8
235:6,8 237:3 214:11,12 70:17 71:11
40:15 41:6,7,9
237:3 244:8 241:11 242:19 72:6 73:25
44:18,20 46:18
245:19 255:12 243:5 74:8 121:2,4,4
54:10 61:14,16
255:13,14,16 panda 247:8,13 122:2 123:17
65:7,9 66:24
257:25 258:3 248:9 125:18 132:20
69:22,24 73:25
261:12 282:2 135:24 137:14
74:9 89:16,18
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 153
of 190
[paragraph - performing] Page 54
137:16 139:15 308:15,23 128:9,20 129:2 380:18,20
141:12 143:19 309:3,5,6,14,18 129:8,17,18,23 people's 222:24
153:11 162:18 310:2,4 311:19 130:21 349:4 368:6,6
171:4,22 333:3,12 350:15 351:19 percent 10:13
172:17,22 350:10 352:4 353:10 109:7,18 110:5
173:12 199:4 particular 356:11 374:6 110:14,23
200:12,15 79:22 100:9 377:24 383:13 184:19,20
217:5,7,14 166:21 167:12 pdf 241:8,14,16 197:22 236:4,6
235:7 243:18 183:7,21 218:2 peace 314:19 236:9,10 246:8
255:15 256:23 222:19 223:12 peer 18:12,23 276:16 294:15
257:21 258:5 224:9 225:3 18:24 19:3,6,8 294:21,23,23
258:11 259:22 256:3 275:12 19:11,15 295:11,12
260:2 261:7,10 282:22 309:22 pejorative 296:17 318:25
262:8 282:3,4 325:6 302:4,5 325:17 330:21
283:10 284:21 parties 3:13 pen 117:15 331:9,12
286:16,21 388:12 pennsylvania 375:24,24,25
287:13 317:10 partners 88:21 244:20 percentage
319:11 321:13 89:8 people 66:6,6 235:10,12
321:18 330:18 party 4:5 66:13 131:24 perfect 67:14
334:23 359:15 pass 176:16 140:16 146:19 74:17
360:8,10 377:4 320:2 205:11,12 perfectly
379:2,3,7 past 166:19,24 206:6,12,18,22 151:15 208:2
381:5 167:15,21 206:23 230:11 247:16
paragraphs 168:11,23 230:13 233:11 perform 25:7
31:8 163:2,7,8 169:9 170:13 256:10 263:6,9 28:5 43:5
parallel 306:25 176:7 187:5 267:13 268:6 44:10 50:23
part 5:25 26:16 193:23 206:15 269:21 273:4 55:4 144:19
31:20 42:21 pattern 352:23 273:20 274:16 performed 25:4
70:11 81:19 paying 7:20 274:18 275:3,3 31:19 43:16
95:22 97:14 pco 55:19,20,22 275:5 276:13 44:3 111:7,10
141:19 145:3 56:4,11,17 276:14,16 157:11 166:23
145:11 181:11 57:8,20,22 278:3 312:6,7 292:24 321:16
189:20 242:7 58:4,21 59:9 312:8 345:8 365:13
247:25 257:13 124:24 125:25 346:3 361:9 performing
257:16 277:11 127:20,24 366:20,25 25:13 63:11
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 154
of 190
[performing - please] Page 55
154:23 187:7 227:24 228:8 340:22,23,25 phone 11:4
190:9,24 229:4 232:6 341:13,17 240:24
period 8:21 233:8 245:21 342:5,13,14 phones 3:8,9
26:7,15,16,25 258:17 261:21 353:3,7 356:6 phrase 18:24
27:6,7,19,20 272:10 273:4 378:6 379:21 47:6 98:13,21
28:3 29:2,11 275:2 277:17 380:4 381:12 184:13
30:2,7,10 278:22 280:9 periods 37:4,6 phrased 301:21
31:16 41:15 282:6 283:12 37:8 263:7 physically 11:5
42:3,9,22 43:6 283:25 284:11 294:12 308:21 11:6
43:8,9,10,12,17 285:9 287:5,8 perplexed pick 3:6
43:19 44:5,7 288:9 289:14 330:2 place 3:9,12
44:25 45:11 289:24 290:13 person 147:9 56:17 57:21,22
54:22 84:10 292:12 293:4 147:16 157:11 58:4,22 111:22
91:21 92:4,4,6 294:8 295:13 236:22 340:3 123:5,12
92:8,9,9,24,25 295:25 296:8 personal 124:24 127:18
93:7,8 94:3,4,5 296:19 297:4 174:25 189:10 131:6 267:23
94:17,25 95:5 297:12,24 219:2 268:4 269:5
95:5,7,9,12,23 299:8,18 300:9 personally 25:3 271:22 272:14
96:7,8,10 97:5 301:8,19 302:2 187:25 193:9 272:19,21,23
97:9,21,23 302:10 304:16 226:21 273:16,18,23
99:2,6 100:2 306:7,17,19,22 perspective 274:5,7,8
100:10 106:17 307:5,24 102:10 370:8 275:13,15
109:3 113:11 308:14,25 perusing 23:8 276:4 321:14
114:25 115:12 309:13 310:14 90:22 125:23 321:22 374:13
115:15 116:9 310:20 312:2 129:16 163:9 places 20:9
116:17,22 316:2,21 317:8 212:4,14,21,25 plaintiff 72:21
117:23 119:20 318:8 319:21 243:9 245:4,9 plaintiff's
120:11 121:13 320:7,10,12 ph.d. 1:13 5:3 313:9
121:21 122:3,8 322:17 323:16 5:21 137:4 plaintiffs 2:5
122:9,13,20,23 323:17,20 386:2,4,13 4:21 53:13
123:2,3,7,7,9,9 325:15 328:12 389:2,24 60:8,13,21
133:11 134:6 329:16 333:22 pharmaceutical 71:4,7
134:15 148:7 333:23 334:18 178:11 please 3:5,8,9
155:22 156:8 334:19 336:7 phil 2:17 3:24 4:9,24 5:10
175:15 227:15 340:10,14,20 25:18 28:11
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 155
of 190
[please - present] Page 56
41:3 45:13 pointing 331:3 183:5 191:13 333:14,21
61:14 65:7 355:25 194:25 195:3 380:14
80:3 85:17 pole 244:12 201:11 210:10 powerful 38:19
89:15 107:6 poly 7:24 8:5,7 210:14 223:18 practical
108:3 114:8 8:11,23 10:2 225:20 230:7 378:10
117:17 119:15 19:25 20:6,11 232:16 247:10 pre 43:9,11,18
120:19,25 21:10,16 250:8 252:24 44:7 282:6
137:12 146:12 portfolio 20:13 263:14,15 283:12,25
162:18 163:6 portfolios 264:20 267:24 284:11 285:9
184:9 198:22 292:22,23 267:25 269:7 287:5,8 288:8
211:7 243:8 293:6 269:12,12 289:14,24
285:25 325:3 portion 259:2 272:2,8 278:7 290:12 381:12
337:17,17 259:22 261:24 281:12 282:17 preceding
338:6 359:13 262:11 284:5,6 302:20 82:17 122:20
368:16 373:2 portions 214:9 302:24 303:12 296:18
378:25 384:11 position 20:5 313:16 342:25 precise 42:24
plenty 216:20 20:14 361:17 352:18 361:25 precisely
plural 26:8,10 369:10 363:7 364:2 304:18
318:21 positions 365:21,21,25 precision
point 7:17 267:15 370:19 379:11 266:17
57:13 97:18 371:6 possibly 54:12 predict 291:18
102:5 106:4 positive 151:19 84:11 204:9 predicted
108:14 117:9 221:3 244:23 227:4,8 239:20 293:21
117:12 168:12 246:3 273:24 365:6 premarket
172:5 173:24 positives posting 346:2 129:12
174:19 177:5 182:25 248:14 potential 16:13 premise 285:5
187:11 190:7 248:18 249:12 54:17 348:21 285:8 300:15
190:23 226:13 249:17 350:20 357:12 prepared 326:9
234:12 265:6 possibility 364:17 367:6 326:21
273:3 296:24 157:9,20 potentially presence 96:5
297:13 302:14 possible 15:2 123:21 124:4 131:15 132:14
305:14 310:9 93:20 121:25 317:16 323:12 349:4 350:15
311:5 355:5,19 154:18 157:19 327:25 328:11 351:18
357:5 362:16 171:14 175:17 329:14 332:9 present 2:16
371:17 374:8 177:14 178:13 332:15 333:6 67:15 140:10
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 156
of 190
[present - price] Page 57
181:14 205:9 179:17 190:10 112:25 113:10 283:14 284:3
298:9 318:4 195:25 203:17 114:24 115:9 284:19 285:13
322:14 324:12 209:8,12 314:3 115:11,15,19 287:17 288:12
presentations price 35:24 115:24 116:22 289:16 290:20
59:2 36:11,24 38:22 116:24 117:11 291:18 292:12
presented 39:14 48:14 117:20 118:23 293:21,22
262:10 326:5 49:3 50:10 119:8,19 120:9 294:13 296:2,9
presenting 54:13,16,20,21 130:2,12,22 296:20,23
143:2 55:5,24 56:5 137:20 144:2 297:3,16,18,23
presently 7:23 56:12,12 57:6 145:4,12,18,20 298:5 299:6,17
presents 258:6 58:5,20 59:13 145:25 146:5 299:21 300:8
317:4 325:14 60:3 61:21,25 146:19,25 300:14 301:7
327:21 328:9 62:13,17,25 147:15,21 301:18 307:3,7
329:13 63:13,18 64:8 148:12 149:2 307:25 308:12
press 175:3 64:15,25 65:23 149:14,23 308:22,24
188:19 189:19 66:2,9 67:13 150:8 151:25 309:11 310:23
196:5,19 67:20 68:24 153:4 158:6,16 328:2,13
197:18,24 70:7,8 74:5,13 159:14 160:23 329:16 338:25
198:7 199:15 76:3 79:16 163:15,24 345:12 346:2
218:20 219:16 80:10 81:4 170:21 173:5 346:17 347:15
presswires 82:8 83:2,20 174:13 178:7 347:19,25
216:25 84:4,16 85:16 189:2 211:8 348:23 349:11
presumably 86:12,15,17,24 224:3,20 225:6 349:23 350:17
100:25 253:4 87:17,20,23,24 225:10,18 353:7,13,21
346:3 88:4,9,10,15,18 226:15,23,25 354:11,25
pretty 15:3 89:22 90:9 227:8,16,21 356:6,9 359:16
201:9 243:17 96:14,17 97:4 228:3,11,18 359:20 360:2
253:6 255:5 97:11 98:2 229:5 230:14 360:15 365:7
271:7 293:12 99:4,8 100:11 235:11,13 365:22 366:16
previous 91:16 101:10 104:5 236:5,7,16 366:22,24
218:8 318:6 104:15,24 237:7,13,23,25 367:7,13
364:6 105:9 106:16 238:18 246:11 369:14 381:15
previously 106:18 107:12 258:16 261:20 381:21,22,23
48:22 59:15 110:9,12 267:14 282:9 382:5
70:12 175:25 112:13,19,21 282:25 283:2
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 157
of 190
[prices - proposition] Page 58
prices 67:8,19 printer 241:6 process 5:25 329:3,13
74:3,16 118:12 printout 83:16 135:8 330:24 331:9
213:24 214:2 242:17 387:12 178:9 232:21 332:6 334:4
230:10,11,18 387:13 234:23 284:13 336:16 341:9
282:8,25 printouts processed 83:2 367:11 371:18
283:13 284:2 240:23 241:4 83:19,21 program 37:12
285:12 287:16 prior 8:13 26:6 produced 38:10,22
288:11 290:19 26:15,16 27:5 242:6 326:15 proof 279:21
297:18 298:12 27:19 28:2 production 279:23 280:6
298:13,18 30:9 46:14 314:22 298:25
311:2 312:2,9 121:12 122:21 products proper 95:12
312:11 335:2 170:7 172:6 342:17 116:3 223:24
335:19 336:6 196:21 218:10 professional 224:11,12,15
336:12 337:5 233:24 370:20 1:17 10:4 339:18
337:22 338:11 371:6 professionals properly 91:9
345:13 346:18 private 3:7 74:12 152:13,16,18
347:16 353:11 prize 257:10,13 professor 10:17 152:25 153:9
362:2 363:8 257:16 20:5 21:6,10 330:4
364:3,11,23 probability 178:20 179:19 proportion
365:16 366:2 249:14 250:21 180:17 181:2 228:6,15,16,20
380:16 381:14 probably 6:16 184:3,23 185:9 228:24,25
383:2,14,14 10:9 43:22 185:16 186:4 229:3 296:5,11
384:6 51:22 99:19 186:15,22 296:13
princess 250:5 139:2 142:3 187:15 195:24 proposed 123:9
250:7,13,17 242:22 344:6 196:9,17 197:5 258:17 261:21
314:4 problem 17:22 197:17 198:22 308:14,25
principals 7:18 30:6 38:12 199:11 200:16 309:13 310:14
principle 101:9 161:4 202:9 200:19 201:3 310:19 316:20
280:22 220:22 328:17 227:10 230:14 323:16 333:23
principles problems 257:6 292:19 334:19 340:23
65:16 218:16 338:13 295:10 297:6 340:24 341:16
print 241:9,10 procedure 298:8 317:15 proposition
printed 38:14 215:3,6,15,17 317:24 323:11 79:14 80:8
241:5 proceeding 4:9 326:9 327:2,21 81:4 82:7,16
327:23 328:10 85:13,24,25
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 158
of 190
[proposition - question] Page 59
86:4 143:24 purposes 40:21 28:10,23,25 158:9,25 159:3
339:21 343:20 43:4 55:15,16 29:21 32:6 160:6,12,15
347:13 363:5 159:10 160:17 45:12 46:9 164:13,19
prove 16:21 203:22 204:19 50:6 60:17,18 168:17 169:15
281:9,11 290:5 221:9 68:22 74:15,20 172:3 184:8
proved 280:14 pursuant 1:13 74:24 75:22,23 194:19 195:17
280:20 298:17 put 38:11 56:17 77:16,17 78:24 195:18 204:16
provide 36:4 57:4 93:14 79:8 80:2 207:8 208:17
37:18 220:18 100:17 108:13 81:20,25 82:2 208:18 209:2
355:6 357:11 111:21 124:23 82:2,17 83:7 209:14,17,19
provided 11:25 127:18 131:5 83:17,22 84:18 209:24 210:7
16:17 17:7,14 171:9 176:20 86:22 91:9,11 210:16 211:2
17:23 18:3 214:18 227:2 91:13,16,17 214:15,17
178:18 326:25 241:6 287:25 92:11 93:19 215:25 223:10
providing 292:21 316:11 99:15 100:7,21 229:15 231:16
85:10 326:24 323:2 374:13 103:13 104:16 239:14 245:6
proxies 67:9 putting 26:20 104:18,20,21 245:24 247:18
proxy 63:23 38:13 361:17 105:24 112:11 248:7,25 249:3
74:17,18 q 113:3,5 114:4 249:6,9 256:6
public 1:18 114:5,6,7,18 260:12,15,17
qualifications
6:14,18 366:19 115:2,6,7,17 260:18,20,21
285:19,21
386:21 388:4 117:2,3,5,18,18 260:22 263:17
qualified 50:23
publications 118:5,12,25 263:22,25
qualifying
18:9 253:9 119:4,10,11,15 264:4,6,21
286:10
publicly 65:22 119:23 120:13 266:15 268:17
quantify
180:18 186:5 120:14,18 268:19 270:10
188:23
published 121:18 124:7 271:24,24
quarter 8:13,14
18:12 19:10,19 126:9 127:6,15 273:10,12,13
8:16
52:9 168:11 128:16 129:4 274:3 275:10
quarterback
169:12 220:25 131:19,23 275:24 277:3
314:10
226:21 134:9 139:5 277:24 279:3
question 10:21
purporting 143:11 146:11 279:13,19
12:8,16 14:9
75:13 147:20 149:12 280:5 281:5
15:7 17:2,21
purpose 217:21 150:18 153:8 285:16,22
18:15 19:4,9
153:23 154:23 286:5,12 289:5
23:2 24:14
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 159
of 190
[question - read] Page 60
298:25 299:25 questions 79:25 quoting 74:9 react 146:6,25
300:4,20,22,25 92:18 93:14 154:2 147:22 150:9
301:12,21 95:3 97:16 r 238:3
302:6,7,13 98:6 117:17 reacted 144:2
r 2:2 5:3,3
303:9,11 118:10 143:10 145:18,21
137:2,4,4
304:12,18 158:24 165:4 147:15 336:6
306:13 389:3,3
305:6,17,18 210:2 211:19 reacting 149:3
raises 359:17
306:3 307:9,12 213:7,16,18 149:9 237:25
359:21 360:3
307:19 308:4 216:9 247:15 reaction 130:14
360:15
309:18 311:16 247:17 250:11 130:22 148:12
ran 156:20
311:16 312:15 255:5 260:15 153:4 158:6,16
157:13 161:16
315:3,5 320:5 276:22 302:19 159:14 160:23
165:23 175:7
320:7,10,14,24 312:19 339:19 163:15,24
201:5 256:19
322:20 323:5,6 359:17,21 173:6 211:8
292:20
329:8,9,11 360:3,15 reactions
randomly
332:25 336:18 378:20 379:7 144:22,22
292:22
336:24 337:7,9 384:16,20 reacts 145:5,12
range 245:11
337:12 338:5 quibble 182:5 146:2,8,19
rapidly 82:23
340:7 342:3 272:4 292:15 147:3,24
83:25
343:14,21 quick 35:4 149:14,23
rapper 250:4,7
344:19,23 76:15,22 236:16
250:17
345:16,17 quicker 36:19 read 24:23
rarely 269:9
346:7,15,16 36:20 28:12 30:21
rashi 252:2
347:18 348:2,5 quickly 23:7 45:14 47:4
rather 79:23
350:12 352:9 65:25 84:9 67:2 70:11
230:21 233:18
354:4,19 243:7 81:22 82:16
234:15
359:25 360:13 quite 71:22 83:12,13,18
rdenunzio 2:12
363:17,20 82:2 182:2 84:19 85:18,23
reach 45:21
366:11,15 213:13 256:6 90:13,17,23
46:11 85:21
367:16,17,18 272:2 329:9 91:8,8 92:16
reached 11:11
367:19,21 quotation 93:4,16 96:22
11:16 46:7
382:6 384:5,10 258:10 97:18 98:15,19
299:11
questioning quote 53:17 99:12,21 107:2
reaches 63:12
29:14 92:20 261:23 265:17 114:9 120:18
reaching
113:8 265:18 120:20 121:20
119:17 341:25
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 160
of 190
[read - recall] Page 61
124:8 131:20 94:11,23 95:17 reason 31:18 42:18 43:2,15
135:11 146:17 96:21,23,24 75:11 90:7 44:3,11 55:9
161:17 163:2,6 97:13 121:25 181:6,9 185:9 60:5 66:22
163:11 166:10 125:22 141:9 186:13,15,23 69:17 70:5,17
169:9,18 170:5 153:16,19 186:25 188:2 71:11 72:6
170:7,17,20,22 158:8,19 167:5 188:25 189:12 121:7 125:12
172:6 173:12 167:19,25 196:16 200:21 125:20 126:24
177:4 184:10 168:5 193:24 250:9 261:16 127:8 178:19
193:10 194:8,9 213:11,19 262:9 313:24 178:22,24
204:3 211:15 214:12 274:24 341:19 356:8 179:19 185:17
212:23 213:5 278:2 279:24 371:9 383:25 186:17 195:25
213:15 214:3,6 336:16 339:12 384:13 389:6,9 198:23 200:16
214:9,17 360:9 389:12,15,18 201:3 252:14
215:19,25 reads 41:12 389:21 257:21 260:3
216:2,7,8,14,18 43:3 46:22 reasonable 281:19,22
216:20 218:5 96:11 217:25 67:9 105:23 284:22 286:18
240:24 243:7 255:20 261:13 106:12 217:19 286:19 291:16
258:20 259:13 261:24 282:4 217:22 222:18 292:9 316:12
260:7,13,24 360:23 361:23 223:11,17 316:25 321:13
268:12 280:25 379:10,17 247:17 280:11 321:25 324:18
285:23,25 real 264:22 280:14,21 326:15,22
286:3 291:16 realize 37:25 reasonably 327:17 330:14
303:17,22 38:5 42:20 158:5,15 330:17 334:16
322:21 337:15 351:24 159:13 160:22 334:23 335:16
345:18 362:15 realized 101:21 163:23 173:5 352:20,25
365:19 366:13 really 93:14 279:21,23 358:21 359:11
368:6,6,7 118:16 142:15 280:6 379:10 371:24 372:4
379:23 384:12 201:9 240:25 reasons 131:25 381:5 387:9,14
386:5 256:6 266:2 258:13 327:7 recalculations
readers 206:6,7 268:8 321:5 rebuttal 12:9 200:2
206:18 realm 103:24 21:22 23:11 recall 7:15 11:5
reading 18:16 169:19 24:10,25 29:16 18:6 23:21
54:9 72:17,23 reask 12:16 31:13,22 32:13 25:15 33:19
74:7 78:6 17:21 22:25 36:8,11 39:7 34:11,18 48:24
79:22 94:7,8 40:14,22 42:8 50:14 51:23
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 161
of 190
[recall - regression] Page 62
88:25 91:25 recollection redirect 384:17 reflected 65:25
98:10 99:20 99:21 128:21 refer 24:10 208:8 312:10
100:23 101:14 188:5 193:17 47:16 55:25 reflects 66:10
112:6 114:11 194:15 222:10 61:19 62:4 68:24 74:13
128:2,6 161:15 222:15 76:6 122:9 76:4 79:16
161:19 169:24 record 3:3,14 125:10,17 80:10 81:5
170:18 171:16 4:12 5:11 191:7 256:11 82:9
172:23 191:14 12:17 23:2 266:23 282:21 refresh 99:21
192:16 194:9 28:12 35:8,11 364:6 101:3 125:8
196:23 211:21 35:14 45:14 reference 170:6 129:15 133:22
218:18 219:18 76:25 77:4 referenced 136:3 162:20
221:19 244:2,3 83:12,18 84:19 170:4 211:24 221:5
279:25 292:19 85:18,23 114:9 referred 33:25 295:4 369:17
292:25 293:2 120:20 124:8 57:19 59:17 374:4
294:22,23 131:20 135:11 124:21 288:24 refreshing
295:18 309:9 136:9 137:6 316:18 378:5
348:19 376:17 146:17 179:7 referring 24:2 regarding 44:4
378:9 179:10,13 47:21,24 48:21 44:10 45:8
receive 37:16 184:10 213:11 56:23 131:10 50:8
241:2 307:18 214:13 242:16 190:25 191:9 regardless
received 53:20 245:17 251:11 191:23 192:12 102:3 224:25
53:21 181:8 251:14 260:23 200:13 203:16 336:24 361:10
313:9,14 270:8 286:3 278:7 309:19 regards 33:18
recent 172:16 308:2 312:23 309:21 310:5 49:16 120:21
173:13,18 313:4 322:21 311:7,20 165:13 175:4
192:20 345:18 348:8 340:21 369:5 175:13 188:17
recently 8:4,22 348:12,15 refers 209:19 204:21 215:21
10:2 170:19,22 366:13 384:12 refine 217:25 221:25 222:12
171:12 385:2 388:9 222:18 223:11 239:23 251:22
recess 35:12 recorded 3:16 refines 224:8 282:21 292:16
77:2 136:10 recording 3:12 225:2 298:8 314:3
179:11 251:12 recreated reflect 74:3 342:8
312:24 348:13 232:11 76:16 101:3 registered 1:17
recitation 36:2 recreating 214:13 270:9 regression
332:22 40:19,23 55:17
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 162
of 190
[regression - remove] Page 63
56:2,23 58:2 related 4:5 122:8,9 153:15 206:14,16
60:4 93:12 313:10 350:8 154:5,12,17 207:3,12,23
121:12 122:13 388:11 155:4,11,11,15 208:13,21
122:23 123:20 relates 242:18 155:19,22 209:10
129:21 256:19 316:18 156:6,8,13,13 reliance 279:5
277:11 306:6 relationship 156:23 157:6,8 279:15 281:9
318:6 323:15 61:20,23 62:6 157:16 158:4 relied 241:24
328:4,15 62:21 63:5,16 158:14 159:12 367:24 372:2
329:18 348:22 64:3,13,22 160:21 161:5 reluctance
349:2,17,20 121:14 255:21 163:22 173:3 364:9,21
350:13 352:11 288:20 173:10 182:14 365:14
354:7,12 relative 111:20 182:18 221:7 rely 137:18
355:12 357:9,9 145:9 339:8 227:3 230:19 139:16,21
382:14,22,24 relatively 230:21,23,24 remain 379:10
383:11,18 270:15 232:7 247:2,13 remember 21:3
regressions release 181:17 248:10 250:18 33:21 40:25
373:4 377:22 188:19 196:19 278:14 296:25 88:23 90:16
382:15 197:18,24 297:7,11,21 92:14 93:21
regularly 239:8 299:5,15 300:6 97:19 106:22
215:13 releases 155:21 301:5,16 114:21 116:21
regulations 156:7 174:21 308:20 311:25 170:23 182:2
219:25 220:17 175:3 178:6 312:4,4 313:22 188:18 206:9
rehashing 180:11 181:21 317:7,16,19 218:19 220:23
237:15 183:13 184:7 323:12 327:25 239:25 253:17
rehearing 185:4 189:19 328:12,23,25 259:3,4,5,12
285:20 196:6 198:7 329:15 332:9 326:11 360:6
reit 164:24 199:14,15 332:15,21,24 370:9 376:21
165:5,21 218:20 219:17 333:6,14,21 378:16
reits 171:7,13 239:9 379:12 336:5 341:12 remembering
reject 334:24 379:20 380:3 342:11 379:19 115:5
335:17 relevance 379:21 380:2,4 remembrance
relate 61:5 233:22 380:6 30:24
359:18,22 relevant 6:16 reliable 45:21 remove 224:18
360:4,16 9:21 41:14 45:24 46:6,11 225:5,16
44:24 52:16 205:3,4,5 227:19 281:4
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 163
of 190
[remove - reports] Page 64
285:4,7 29:17 30:8,13 174:2 175:18 281:20,22
removes 262:6 31:7,8,12,13,22 175:19 178:20 284:15,22
removing 31:25 32:8,13 178:25 179:19 286:18,20
225:9 226:14 32:18 33:5,9 179:21,25 289:20 291:16
render 16:9 36:8,12 39:7 181:9 185:17 292:9 295:14
80:24 88:13 40:14,22,24 186:17,23 316:12,25
148:18 150:14 41:3,24 42:5,8 187:11 189:6 317:15 319:6
176:17 231:11 42:19 43:3,15 189:17 195:3 320:8 321:14
273:6,7 281:15 44:3,11,17 195:25 196:12 321:24,25
rendered 82:5 46:19 48:24 196:13 198:13 324:19 325:4
191:23 53:3 55:9,12 198:23 199:2 325:22 326:19
rendering 60:5 61:13 200:16 201:3 327:17 330:14
16:24 72:12 62:12 65:8,20 201:20,22 330:18 334:16
229:9 66:22 69:17 202:2,14,17,19 334:23 335:17
renders 205:14 70:5,18 71:12 202:21 204:3,3 336:17 352:20
205:14 72:3,6 90:16 204:10 205:18 352:20,25
repeat 80:2 100:4,6,25,25 206:24 207:17 357:24 358:6
85:17 126:8 106:24 107:24 207:20 208:4 358:16,16,18
129:3 150:3 109:23 116:2,4 208:15,19 358:19,21
172:8 303:18 120:21 121:3,8 218:11,13,19 359:4,10,11
347:10 360:12 121:9 122:18 223:3,5 224:19 363:2 371:3,12
repeating 125:8,12,20 225:6,17 371:24 372:4
72:14 126:24 127:8 227:19,20 374:9 378:23
rephrase 132:19,20 228:10 229:5 381:5 387:9,14
160:14 133:2,3 135:24 231:5 233:3 387:15
reply 326:19 137:13 139:15 235:24 242:23 reported 219:7
327:7 140:20 143:19 243:3 244:15 226:15 228:2
report 11:25 153:11,17 252:14 255:3 reporter 1:17
12:10 13:6,13 154:25 155:16 255:11 257:22 4:2,24
14:21 15:11,18 156:3 157:2 258:8,25 259:3 reporting
16:2,15 17:6 158:9 161:21 259:23 260:3,4 226:25 230:10
18:16 21:22 162:14 166:14 260:5 261:13 reports 9:21
22:24 23:11 171:4,22 262:8 268:10 12:9,12,13,15
24:11,20 25:2 172:18 173:13 268:15 270:2 12:19,25 17:11
25:14,17 29:15 173:21,25 271:6 281:18 23:15,25 24:6
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 164
of 190
[reports - results] Page 65
24:8,8,17 25:5 required 77:24 respect 31:21 129:18,24
25:9 141:10 78:15,23 331:15 376:4 131:5 261:17
163:11 171:6 219:25 386:14 respectfully 349:4 350:15
171:11 173:13 requires 167:2 118:8 350:20 351:2
173:18 175:8 167:16,22 respectively 352:4 353:5,10
175:24 177:9 168:13 169:11 375:25 353:10 356:11
180:19 181:13 172:4 respond 249:3 372:11 374:6
181:14 186:6 reread 28:10 249:4 374:12,13
186:10,19,21 29:20 32:5 responded 38:3 377:24 383:12
187:3,5,15 45:12 83:6,9 294:11 383:13 384:7
189:8 192:12 84:17 85:20 response 81:23 restrictive
196:11,20 105:12 114:7 137:20 213:25 174:18 176:11
199:11 218:8 124:6 127:5 239:6,13 176:13 181:23
226:12 251:19 131:19 135:10 267:13 311:8 181:25 182:3,4
254:11,15 139:5 146:11 326:10,25 182:9,10
274:22 291:22 146:16 184:8 327:16 339:18 183:15
298:22 326:12 322:20 338:5 377:24 387:13 rests 221:22
326:15,22 345:15,17 responses result 76:12
332:6 333:4,12 346:11,15 302:25 145:17,17
333:19 368:7 359:24 366:10 restate 275:20 151:4,6 183:16
representation 384:10 restaurant 183:19 195:14
67:14 rereading 247:8,12 248:9 200:7
representing 169:5 restriction results 108:10
3:25 4:15 rescind 91:12 57:21,22 58:4 132:11 145:20
repricing 76:15 research 6:10 58:21 258:13 199:16,17
reputable 6:19 9:2 19:21 351:16,19 240:17,24
203:20,23 361:23 363:6 restrictions 241:2 243:13
204:17,20,22 363:25 55:19,20,22 245:3 246:16
205:6,7,7,14 reserve 6:11,20 56:4,11,17 247:18 248:15
208:13 19:14,16,20 57:9 59:9 248:19 249:13
request 37:22 residual 109:7 124:24 125:25 249:15,19,22
requests 109:16 110:3 126:2,5,11,25 250:2,22 313:9
387:22 110:15,17 127:9,16,20,22 313:14 317:4
require 67:5 116:7,15 294:2 127:24 128:9 319:12 321:2
128:20 129:2,9 321:15,23,24
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 165
of 190
[results - right] Page 66
324:12 325:14 377:23 383:9 28:4,9 29:2,3,8 78:13,16,19,23
325:21 334:15 revealed 144:3 29:10,23 30:2 79:4,12 80:7
335:12 383:18 reverse 64:13 30:6,15 31:4,6 80:15,19 81:7
384:2,3 reversed 31:11,18,24 82:6,15 85:12
resumed 137:4 199:17 32:4,7,23 33:8 86:3 88:14
retail 258:14 review 23:20 34:10 35:3 89:4,14 90:3,5
261:17 74:10 78:7 36:3,5,7,22 90:6,12 91:9
retained 14:14 170:9,15 37:9,11 38:11 91:10 93:22,23
16:9 203:13 220:7 38:20,23 39:3 96:13 97:11
retire 8:7 220:15 230:5 39:10,13,24 98:24 101:8
retired 8:4,17 241:2 242:22 40:9,13 41:11 102:14 104:3,6
10:2 320:16 41:23,23 42:17 104:15,25
return 109:7,12 reviewed 18:12 42:23 43:14,14 105:8,10,11
109:17 110:4 18:23,24 19:3 43:22 44:9,21 106:13,19
110:15,17,22 19:6,8,11,15 44:25 45:5,7,7 107:5 108:2,6
115:25 135:8 243:13,14 45:20,23 46:5 108:10,20,21
145:8 235:3 reviewing 46:10 47:4,11 109:3,8,18
293:4,14,16,18 220:16 240:16 47:20 48:20 110:5,7,15,19
293:19,23 240:19 49:3,10 50:20 110:24 111:13
294:2 318:9,17 revocable 15:5 51:3,5 54:18 111:25 113:6
323:15 328:2 right 6:8,17 7:2 54:24 55:9,25 113:11 114:11
328:13 329:17 7:9,22 8:2,20 56:6,9 57:18 114:22 115:22
373:19 375:15 8:20 9:9,25 57:22 58:13,17 116:5 119:5
376:6,13 11:7,20 12:11 59:13 60:7,12 121:5 122:6,16
377:16 12:18 13:15 60:20 61:3,6 123:8 124:2,2
returns 110:19 14:5,8,12,17 61:12 62:4,18 125:3 126:3,18
111:11,16 16:14,19,20 63:3,10,12,19 127:4,12,19,21
116:7,15 17:4,5,9,13 63:25 64:8,11 128:5,10,23
123:22 124:5 18:9,11 19:18 64:19,22 65:19 131:10 132:2,9
145:9 293:12 19:22,24 20:15 66:2 68:10,17 133:14,24
318:21 322:16 21:5,7,9,11,14 68:21 69:20,25 135:4,9,13,24
324:13,20,22 21:16 22:15,25 70:22 71:5 138:3 139:14
326:3 332:11 23:23,23 25:6 72:16 73:6,13 139:17,21
333:16,25 25:16 26:2,3 74:8 75:6,12 140:5,8 141:2
376:16 377:23 26:25 27:16,23 75:12,18 77:7 142:16 144:8
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 166
of 190
[right - right] Page 67
144:11 145:3,5 193:9 195:15 247:3,11,14 295:9 296:9
145:13 146:24 197:4 198:13 248:6,12,12,16 297:24 299:13
147:10,18 198:15,20 249:16 251:7 299:24 300:11
148:19,21,24 199:8 200:10 253:11,25 301:11 304:25
149:6,11,18 201:19 202:21 254:7,17 304:25 305:3,5
150:8,17,25 203:4,7 204:15 255:18 256:20 305:9,24 306:5
153:12,24 205:16,18 257:12,17,18 306:10 307:9
154:6,21 206:25 207:8 257:23 258:4 307:17 309:9
155:23 156:9 207:19 210:8,8 258:21,23 309:17 312:10
159:6,8,18 210:17,22 259:13,24 313:7,19
160:10 161:24 211:6 212:19 260:2,4,9,9,12 314:24 315:4
162:16,17,21 212:22 215:10 261:3,3 262:4 315:11,13,15
163:11,16,24 218:9,12,14 262:12 263:4 315:21,24
164:2,8,19 219:21 220:2,9 263:11 264:9 316:2,8,21
166:3,12,16 220:17 221:10 265:21,24 317:5,13,21
168:7,9,16,19 221:13 223:21 266:10,12,16 318:2,11,14,16
169:22 171:2 224:5,6,16 266:19 267:20 318:19,24
171:13,20,25 225:14,18 268:9,21 319:2,3,4,9,16
172:14,19 226:3,11,18,24 269:25 270:5 319:21 322:25
173:6,15 174:4 227:17 228:3 270:20 272:11 323:4,17,19,22
174:10 175:20 228:11,16 273:25 274:11 324:10 325:8
175:23 176:4 229:7,10 274:16 275:5 325:13,22
176:11 177:3 230:17 231:3,7 276:8,25 326:6,6,23
177:12 179:16 231:12 232:19 277:20 278:22 327:10 328:7
179:24 180:8 232:23 233:16 281:21 282:14 330:22 331:6
180:25 181:11 233:22 234:5 283:7,16 332:4 333:2,19
181:17,23 234:11,12,16 284:11,20,23 334:9,20 335:9
182:25 183:18 234:24 235:24 285:2 286:18 335:14 337:8
184:7,15,20,22 236:12,24 286:22 287:2,5 339:16 340:23
185:20,25 238:4,4 240:3 287:11,18 340:24 341:2,3
186:7 187:9,21 240:12 241:5 288:13 290:14 341:4,7,20,21
188:17 189:16 241:10,13,13 290:22 291:14 341:23 342:16
189:19,25 243:21 244:5 291:19,24 344:9 345:25
190:4 191:3,4 244:25 245:6 292:4,9 293:7 346:6 347:12
191:9,18 192:9 245:10,22 293:8,12 295:2 348:18 349:11
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 167
of 190
[right - ryan] Page 68
349:20,24 59:10 61:10 12:2,21 13:2 355:24 358:12
350:10,21 124:23 126:4 25:12 26:3,18 360:8 366:4,10
351:20,21 126:11,25 26:21 27:21 366:14 368:18
352:17 353:2,9 127:9,16 128:9 28:7,18 29:13 378:19,21
353:19 354:8 128:20 129:2,8 29:20 31:21 384:15,21
354:14 355:5 129:23 226:20 34:25 37:20 387:5
355:17,19 254:19 349:4 41:7 42:11 rosenlegal.com
356:7,13,15,16 350:8,15 51:11 80:16 2:6
356:20,24,24 351:15 352:4 84:17 92:3,7 row 373:16
357:7,13,25 353:4 374:7,14 100:3 107:18 rubric 135:19
358:3 359:8 377:24 108:15 114:17 rules 220:6,10
361:12 362:5 robinhood's 118:9,14 119:7 220:19
362:11 365:12 56:4 122:22 119:12 131:18 run 55:17
365:12 366:7 123:4,11 131:21 138:23 144:13 151:2
368:10,13 124:12,22 139:2 178:18 152:16 153:9
370:25 371:22 130:3,13,21 178:23 198:25 159:4 165:17
372:8,15,18,25 350:25 352:3 200:12 201:25 190:19 205:23
374:3 375:9 353:14 356:11 202:4,9,13,14 294:7,10 302:2
376:2,8 377:3 robust 321:15 202:18 203:2 302:9 304:15
377:7,18 378:3 rocket 38:18 206:14,19 306:18 307:7
378:11,14 rodgers 314:10 208:24 209:18 349:17 364:11
383:4,10,19 314:19 316:6 211:11 212:10 364:23 365:15
384:21 role 143:10 212:15,19 366:2 367:7,13
rigorous 364:17 213:2,14 running 121:12
331:21 roll 44:14 215:24 216:6 157:24 158:10
rise 362:2 45:10 46:13 216:10 233:23 159:9 160:15
363:9 364:3 115:24 126:18 234:3 242:6,14 176:25 177:20
risk 343:12,16 126:23 127:7 248:21 249:2,8 198:9 206:2
343:17 213:22 319:6 251:2 255:12 207:4,10,22
risky 364:9,21 376:12 377:9 260:14 262:18 208:20 222:7
robert 2:11 377:14 300:19 326:13 runs 152:13,25
4:17 rose 294:15,20 327:5 330:13 225:8 334:6
robinhood 4:16 rosen 2:3,5 332:2 336:14 rv 376:19,22
55:21,22 56:11 4:19,19 9:17 337:6 340:20 ryan 2:10 4:14
56:16 58:4,21 9:20 11:21 345:15,21 4:14 5:7 28:21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 168
of 190
[ryan - securities] Page 69
29:18,22 35:7 safe 253:6 222:4,4 237:4 searched
35:16 37:24 sale 54:21 237:6,12,22 216:24 217:11
41:9 51:15 sales 54:16 238:17 239:19 searching
76:21 77:6 sample 153:13 241:16 248:13 368:4
83:11 92:5 154:3,10 155:2 256:13 259:4 sec 14:6,19
118:13,19 155:17 156:4 269:11 287:19 219:24 220:6
119:10,14 156:21 157:4 288:22 301:10 220:10,16,19
137:9 179:6,15 157:14 214:22 305:25 311:12 221:6 357:25
199:3 200:14 334:21 335:25 311:17 351:20 358:15 359:9
202:3,5,22 370:17 371:4 says 41:22 363:5,13,18,24
210:5 211:13 379:17,24 180:17 181:3 364:7,19 368:7
212:13,17 san 7:24 8:23 186:16 242:17 368:25 370:5
216:4,19 10:3 19:25 283:10 322:24 370:16 371:2
248:23 249:5 20:6 21:10,16 323:2 374:9,11 second 24:20
251:6,16 sat 58:12 87:21 381:5,10 25:14 33:5,9
255:13 262:20 355:14 scale 190:3 48:24 138:14
300:21 313:6 saw 86:11,23 school 6:24 145:19 199:19
326:23 348:7 89:21 90:8 8:15 10:5 244:10 245:8
348:17 358:14 92:8 96:17 20:10,16 260:18,20
360:10 377:12 108:11 114:20 science 38:18 281:24 284:25
378:17 380:8 195:3 199:25 scientific 317:12 334:22
381:24 382:13 243:15 258:23 232:16 373:16 375:4
383:3,20 384:9 saying 38:4 scope 28:8,19 379:9
384:19 387:4 64:4 81:3 92:3 screen 138:24 secretary 6:14
s 97:2 99:11 screening section 53:13
113:24 114:2 223:7,10,20 163:8 258:7
s 2:2 137:2,2,2
118:4 120:6,23 screw 66:21 261:16 262:3
376:16 387:6
159:24 160:2 screwed 329:20 securities 4:20
389:3
160:10,24 382:11 13:7,20,22,23
s1 373:19 374:5
165:2 169:8 search 74:11 13:25 14:2,3
374:6 375:7,15
181:10 183:15 217:2,12 218:2 14:11,19,23
376:6,12,19,23
186:24 192:4 222:18 223:12 15:4,7,12,16
377:16,23
193:9 199:24 224:8 225:2 33:19 34:4,9
378:6,9 383:24
200:3 204:12 240:17 313:15 34:13 55:24
s2 375:7
209:22 214:19 59:10 68:4,16
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 169
of 190
[securities - seen] Page 70
68:18 70:21 346:23,24 211:7 214:21 368:25 369:3,4
71:5,7,14 72:9 347:17,19,21 216:21 217:24 369:11,14
74:12 77:12 see 11:12 25:21 220:22 222:22 370:4,15,21,22
78:2,16,21 36:9 40:15 223:21 224:4,5 372:5,7,8
89:9 103:24 41:11,18 42:25 224:16,21,22 373:7,7,15,15
141:24 162:5 46:17,21 48:19 235:7,15 373:19,23
169:12,19 51:8 61:18 236:24 242:4 374:11,17,18
173:14 254:2 62:2 69:14 244:10,14,18 375:2,14,18
277:5,15 89:19,25 90:2 254:14 255:19 376:12 382:16
278:20 279:2 91:18,23 92:9 256:2,13 257:4 383:12
279:13 280:7 92:19 93:5,23 258:4,12,18 seeing 22:18
293:24 335:2 94:13,18 96:2 259:15 260:8 96:24 197:2
335:19 342:17 96:10,13,20,21 260:10 261:2 326:11
345:12 346:17 96:23 97:10,19 261:11,16,22 seem 210:14
347:15 382:23 98:13,18,23 271:13 276:22 230:11 311:11
security 16:3 99:3 100:10 281:3 282:3,11 347:22
16:18 17:8,16 101:9 107:12 287:19 288:14 seemed 53:4
17:25 18:4 115:4 121:11 288:18 292:23 175:9,15
49:13 50:9,10 121:17,18 295:9 313:17 206:22
61:21,25 62:13 122:16 123:17 314:8,13,14 seems 29:7
64:7,15 65:21 123:18 125:21 315:5 319:13 94:22 117:7
65:23 66:2 130:20 133:5 321:17 323:7 133:21 210:3
67:18,19 70:6 133:12 135:2 327:15 330:10 286:9 304:23
70:7 76:15 137:17,24 330:19,23 314:25
121:15 137:20 143:22 144:6,7 331:2,4,6,13 seen 49:22 50:4
137:23 140:5 148:15 180:2,4 332:6 333:2,11 138:12,14
158:6,16 180:8,13,16,23 333:17,18 140:16 175:8
159:14 160:23 183:10 184:14 334:5 335:5 179:21 192:15
163:24 173:5 185:17 186:9 336:20 338:19 226:3,12,21
207:6 271:21 187:14 196:3,9 348:8 351:22 243:16,20
272:13,17 196:13 197:4 353:6 355:2 253:8 280:2
273:15 274:4 197:16,20,21 356:5 359:2,15 281:2 299:10
275:14 276:3 199:4 203:11 360:22 361:2 326:8 327:10
280:7 345:14 207:24 208:16 361:22 362:4 367:9,13
345:25 346:20 210:11,15 364:7,13,14 380:12
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 170
of 190
[sees - show] Page 71
sees 249:9 235:8 237:2 244:24 246:4 270:3,11,13,14
selection 255:20 256:4,8 246:19 247:6 270:15,19,21
172:17,21 258:25 259:2 250:4 319:18 270:24,25
176:10,24 259:22 261:12 324:18 372:10 271:2,10
177:10,19 261:24 262:12 374:12,12 272:18,20,23
187:7,19 282:4,22 283:9 375:4,5 388:8 272:24 273:5
191:12 196:6 284:21,24 388:15 273:15,18,19
196:19 221:9 286:16 287:12 seven 41:12,15 273:20,22
222:6 288:21 289:3 41:25 42:14 274:4,6,10,14
self 314:12 319:12 334:22 43:16 44:5,22 274:17,18,22
316:7 335:15 346:10 61:25 112:21 275:4,4,5,6,12
sell 346:4 346:11,13 186:5,9,19 275:15,18,22
364:10,22 360:23 361:23 229:24 313:5 276:3,13,15,17
365:14 365:3 379:8,9 316:4,9,19 276:25 340:10
seller 53:20 379:16,23 319:2 332:7 340:14 353:21
seller's 54:15 381:10,18 348:11 368:19 353:25 354:11
sellers 53:16 sentences 378:8 354:21,25
selling 359:18 214:17 several 198:19 356:19 359:18
359:23 360:5 separate 253:4 291:15 359:22 360:4
360:17 361:24 214:23 231:2 share 47:17,24 360:16 361:9
363:7 364:2,18 256:19 368:12 50:17 277:6,8 361:17,24
send 34:24 separation 277:15 363:7,25 364:9
sense 29:7 322:10 shares 360:24 364:10,14,18
105:22 134:6 september 361:5,20 364:18,21,22
236:11 329:23 91:21 92:25 shift 131:17 365:15,19,20
380:9 sequentially 132:15 366:20 367:5,6
sensitive 3:6 286:11 shleifer 265:17 367:12,14,22
sentence 39:12 series 36:10 266:11,23,25 368:2,5,13
43:3 67:2 set 24:17 31:4,7 shocked 248:18 369:9 371:5
70:14,17 33:2,12 86:3,6 short 1:6 3:18 386:1 389:1
122:17 141:11 86:7 145:19 101:7 267:3,5 shorting
143:23 155:25 154:19,24 267:7,9,13,16 361:10
171:10,10 171:21 180:4 267:18,21,22 shortly 158:22
182:21 214:18 200:4,7 207:11 268:11,23 show 16:22
217:24 224:17 226:6 232:11 269:4,21,23 88:11 142:14
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 171
of 190
[show - six] Page 72
161:20 208:14 198:10 200:8 146:6 147:2,22 248:8 255:8,17
208:15 209:25 318:13 319:9 similar 34:5,6 264:21 268:17
210:7 218:18 322:16 324:13 90:20 193:11 284:22 289:3
220:4,5,5,13 324:20,22 similarly 32:12 303:16 304:2
226:23 232:12 325:25 326:2 32:14 40:10 306:23 313:11
236:15,20 375:24 383:8 128:23 129:5 314:23 316:12
247:22 265:2,3 significant 299:14 331:7 323:25 325:9
273:19 276:10 40:17 92:23 simple 57:17 332:17 339:2
276:12 295:20 93:11 94:5,16 82:2 256:7 369:2
298:11 308:2 96:6,14,15 349:18 357:8 sit 18:6 50:13
326:14 340:2 97:4,11 98:16 357:19 87:13 88:7
371:10 374:19 98:21 99:4,5,7 simplistic 93:4 95:25
showed 48:13 106:15 144:17 57:11 58:8 100:8 112:5
128:3 187:16 147:14 148:12 227:14 117:12 170:3
382:13 148:16 149:2 simply 40:5 177:16 195:6
showing 151:7 149:15,22 83:23 166:8 228:17,21
283:7 151:25 153:3 226:11 310:3 240:10 244:2
shown 213:9 184:25 235:11 353:13 246:22 263:18
215:23 243:24 235:13 236:5,7 single 48:11 269:15 272:3
377:17 236:10 237:5 170:3 173:24 277:18 291:13
shows 59:8 237:11 238:8 231:7 294:17 296:14
153:6 327:23 238:16 239:12 sir 18:22 25:17 322:11 329:25
336:5 355:17 249:21 252:6 25:21 33:6 343:25 362:19
355:23 369:6 303:2 318:4,8 68:8 72:5 75:2 378:7
shut 257:2 318:18 322:25 81:17 104:12 sitting 142:18
side 78:20 323:15 328:3 107:17 112:14 143:12
152:10 189:15 328:14 329:18 112:17 114:4 situation
234:9,14 331:8,10 115:7 117:25 287:25
333:19 332:10 333:16 119:4 139:24 situations
signature 162:9 333:25 334:7 145:23 150:21 303:4
388:18 373:20 375:15 153:18 155:7 six 6:12,18
significance 376:7,14,21 158:9 162:10 81:21 175:15
40:21 120:2 377:17,25 162:12 168:22 232:6 251:15
184:19 187:17 significantly 174:5 179:22 312:22 315:7
197:7,22 198:2 76:13 144:23 183:23 215:8 318:25 320:22
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 172
of 190
[six - squeeze] Page 73
321:3 322:7 98:17 103:7,10 234:23 375:21 239:21 241:23
342:13 372:21 109:9,24 116:3 377:3 270:17,23
377:15 378:2 124:6 126:8 sorts 86:12 280:16 291:4
378:11 127:5 129:3 89:21 90:8 293:14 303:3
sixth 376:10 132:6,23 133:3 96:17 100:10 332:13 335:3,4
377:9 141:9 146:10 101:10 131:25 335:8,20,21
size 140:18 155:24 163:5 311:10 339:10 343:16 369:23
309:22 334:21 172:20 177:4 343:19 345:23 369:24
335:25 182:16 189:24 354:18 specifically
skip 215:20 199:21 203:2 sounds 22:25 32:2 190:16
sliding 190:3 204:3 232:4 83:3 279:6,24 193:16 194:14
slightly 27:9 243:4 245:7,15 318:23 336:16 209:19 220:23
120:16 250:10 255:4 source 205:4,4 266:25 311:6
slow 213:22 256:2 261:8 205:5 347:22 352:19
slowly 285:25 264:2 267:8 sources 216:23 379:8
small 180:16 268:7 273:21 217:2,11 specifics 102:3
286:6 334:20 278:16 281:19 southern 1:3 speculating
335:24 281:25 286:4 3:20 15:5 12:3 101:18
snide 38:4 299:20 308:6 162:6 speculation
solely 284:18 309:8 311:9 spans 122:17 206:20
solve 119:13 315:2 321:18 speaking speculative
somebody 322:4 325:11 193:21 362:12
11:12 152:13 330:15 333:7 specific 52:8,19 spelling 251:23
152:25 159:2 333:10 336:15 53:23 55:22 spending 278:2
166:11 240:23 337:17 341:11 56:21 57:25 spent 10:4
341:14 343:6 347:10 349:6 58:23 67:20,21 sphere 366:19
somewhat 50:7 350:18 352:24 70:7,8 72:18 spoke 11:3
sophistry 39:25 353:24 356:2 110:22 135:6 spoken 193:22
sorry 9:19 358:25 359:24 158:2,12 spreads 383:16
17:20 30:4 362:6 364:25 160:19 163:20 squared 306:13
32:5 34:6 37:7 370:7 375:16 164:5 165:2 squeeze 1:6
53:16 69:19 376:15 377:2,7 172:4 173:22 3:18 101:7
73:4 74:7 379:15 381:6 206:13 209:20 267:4,5,7,9,16
85:20 90:6 sort 5:25 38:4 209:20,21 267:18,21
94:22 97:12 232:22 233:21 213:7 219:11 268:11,23
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 173
of 190
[squeeze - statistically] Page 74
269:22 272:18 staff's 368:25 15:23 61:22 370:21
272:20,23,24 stand 311:18 224:17 314:17 statements
273:5,16,18,20 standard 67:17 315:9 346:9 93:15 286:10
273:22 274:5,7 67:22,25 68:3 388:5 288:16 339:11
274:10,14,17 70:19 71:13,17 stated 59:14 339:14,17
274:19,22 71:18,20 72:8 69:16 70:4 363:12
275:4,6,6,12,15 75:14 80:13 72:2 103:23 states 1:2 3:19
275:18,23 82:14 101:24 114:13 126:23 180:9 186:4
276:3,13,15,17 101:25 102:7 127:7 129:19 196:4,11
353:21,25 102:16,18,20 132:5,10,11 220:23 334:23
354:11,21,25 103:4,15,17,19 135:20 190:10 371:8
356:19 364:14 103:22,25 221:24 238:10 stating 62:11
364:16 365:19 111:21 171:20 299:10 300:11 72:2
365:20 366:21 211:25 306:13 314:2 363:5 statistical
367:5,7,12,14 standards 369:18 40:20 111:21
367:23 368:2,5 219:6 statement 144:19 184:19
368:13 386:1 standpoint 46:15 66:17 187:17 197:7
389:1 51:7 124:17 70:20 79:23 197:22 198:2
squeezed stands 37:22 84:5,22,24 198:10 200:8
267:14 stapled 202:10 85:5,8 94:7,9 236:23 239:11
squeezes start 13:11 100:19 118:7 318:13 319:9
267:22 269:5 54:11 128:15 118:21,24 322:15 324:12
269:23 270:3 177:7 213:17 135:18 141:20 324:20,22
270:12 271:3 216:2 250:25 143:17 152:21 325:25 326:2
271:11 276:25 started 64:4 158:18 161:11 383:8
st 203:12 229:13,14 194:18 196:17 statistically
stack 178:17 231:14 219:15 225:11 40:17 92:23
staff 357:25 starting 126:6 225:13,15 93:11 94:4,16
358:5,15 359:3 126:12 127:18 235:18 262:22 96:6,14 97:4
359:10 360:23 stat 37:16 283:19 285:20 97:10 99:4,7
363:6,24 364:7 stata 37:13 295:8 319:25 106:15 144:17
364:20 370:5 38:16,22 39:2 335:13 336:19 146:6,25
370:16 371:3 40:10 336:21 337:14 147:14,22
387:15 state 1:18 4:9 340:8,12 342:7 148:11,16,25
4:11 5:10 355:21 363:24 149:15,21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 174
of 190
[statistically - stockholder] Page 75
151:25 153:3 35:25 36:10,23 145:25 146:5 299:6,17,21
184:25 235:11 38:22 48:14 146:11,19,25 300:8,14,14
235:13 236:5,7 49:2,3 56:5,12 147:15,21 301:7,18 307:3
236:10 237:5 57:6 58:5,20 148:12,18 307:25 308:12
237:11 238:7 59:13 62:17 149:2,8,14,22 308:22,24
238:16 318:3,8 63:13,18 64:25 150:8,11,14,16 309:11 310:22
318:17 322:25 66:10 68:24 151:25 152:3 312:2,9,11
323:3,14 328:3 76:3 79:16 153:4 167:8 328:2,13
328:14,23 80:10 81:5 170:21 174:13 329:16 336:6,9
329:17 331:7 82:8 84:16 174:24 176:19 337:2,19 338:8
331:10 332:10 85:16 86:12,14 176:20 178:7 338:18,23
333:15,24 86:15,17,24 183:5 189:2,9 341:11,12,17
334:7 373:20 87:2,8,11,17,20 189:9 213:23 342:12 343:7,8
375:15 376:7 87:22,24 88:4 224:3 226:23 344:8,17 345:2
376:13,20 88:9,10,15,18 226:25 227:8 346:4 348:23
377:17,25 89:21,23 90:9 230:13,18 349:11 350:16
378:12 90:11 92:4 236:16 237:7 352:3 353:11
status 7:20 96:17,19 97:4 237:13,23,25 353:13 356:6
steep 364:11,23 97:11 98:2 238:18,25 361:9,10 362:2
365:17 366:3 99:7 100:10,12 240:8 246:10 362:13 363:8
367:8 101:10,12 255:24 258:16 364:3 365:7,22
step 235:9,20 104:5,15,24 261:20 265:15 366:22 367:12
248:13 383:21 105:9 106:16 267:13,14 369:13 376:5
steven 10:15 106:18 107:12 272:8 273:8 376:10 380:16
178:20 179:19 110:9,12 275:9 278:8,21 382:19,22,23
stickers 22:6 112:13,19,21 279:3,14,19 383:2,13,14,17
stipulate 79:20 112:25 113:10 281:7 289:16 384:6
115:13 117:4 114:24 115:9 290:11 291:18 stock's 140:23
221:20 295:5 115:11,14,19 293:22 294:15 144:2
stipulating 116:21,24 294:20 295:11 stockholder
116:11 117:11,20 295:12 296:2,8 66:12 69:2
stipulation 118:12,23 296:20,23 76:5 79:18
115:18 119:8,19 120:9 297:3,16,18,18 80:12 81:7
stock 16:10,11 130:2,22 140:8 297:23 298:5 82:10
26:4,23 31:14 145:4,12,18,20 298:12,13,18
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 175
of 190
[stocks - submitted] Page 76
stocks 16:23,25 332:7 339:6,23 stuck 80:22 365:14 366:8
25:24 26:14 342:24 343:24 119:25 290:24 367:4,18,20,22
27:18 30:9 344:3,11 346:2 studied 112:22 372:16
36:25 40:5,6 349:24 356:12 112:23 117:24 studying 63:15
42:14 43:17 366:17 372:11 256:14 306:9 63:17 64:12,14
44:5,12 45:17 372:16,17,21 306:14,15 64:18
45:22 49:10 372:22 373:9 308:11 309:4 stuff 142:2
52:5,7 56:5,13 375:11 377:10 309:10 310:11 201:23 311:11
65:2 67:6,9 377:15 378:2 319:2 354:24 subject 379:12
73:15,18 78:9 381:20,20 366:6 372:10 subjective
104:8 105:4 stoneturn 372:23 373:9 84:11 106:2,10
110:23 111:12 253:19,20,21 382:19 189:24 190:4
111:13 114:25 253:24 studies 133:10 218:17 221:15
116:10,18 stop 85:21 178:2 203:21 231:24 232:4
117:13,23 152:15 204:18 232:15 233:12
119:21 126:17 stopped 174:18 study 61:20 233:15,18
126:21,21 stories 213:25 92:8,22 93:7 234:11,16,23
127:17 167:6 217:3,12 218:3 108:10 109:6 328:17
184:4,24 222:19 223:13 111:7,11,15 subjectively
187:18 197:10 223:24,25 112:4 122:19 232:22
197:19,24 224:8,10,11,19 137:19 138:3 subjectivity
199:18 200:9 225:4,5,17 138:19 139:7 223:19 297:9
228:8 232:12 226:14 227:20 139:17 144:14 submission
256:14,20 228:2,10 229:3 147:17 152:14 218:10,12
261:14 262:2 story 217:6,15 152:17 153:2 252:13
287:4,7 289:13 strategy 230:16 204:20,22 submittal 33:4
290:4,6 292:13 street 18:18,20 245:11,12 33:8
292:23 293:3 19:5,8 249:17 250:22 submitted
294:6,9 301:25 stricter 171:24 255:22 263:24 12:11,19,25
302:9 304:15 172:3,8,12 264:5 271:10 13:5 14:21
306:6,16 strictly 204:10 294:3 295:24 15:11,25 16:15
310:13,19,24 strike 9:8 31:5 298:2 309:2,3 17:6,12 22:16
312:11 319:2,5 73:5,5 128:16 309:7 319:5 23:4,11 24:18
320:22 321:3 structure 358:7 321:15,23,25 25:8 162:15
322:7 330:25 359:5 387:16 323:12 342:18 166:15 171:12
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 176
of 190
[submitted - tabak] Page 77
173:14,25 substitutable 150:22 151:4 276:19 286:8
174:2 175:25 342:19 supposed 287:20 288:16
177:8 186:22 substitute 250:11 262:7 289:9 292:5
226:12 231:5 343:8 290:10 308:10 330:6
253:16 326:16 subsumed 7:17 supreme 68:6 337:16 341:20
submitting subtract 54:15 72:24 352:16 354:6
15:18 24:20 sufficient 78:25 sur 326:19 356:4 365:5
25:5,14 291:16 79:6 190:19,20 327:7 surface 59:7
subpoena suggest 338:21 sure 9:14 12:7 331:21 334:13
327:2 suggested 14:25 15:3 surge 359:16
subpoint 54:9 274:20 17:22 27:12 359:21 360:3
subsamples suggesting 29:22 35:2,6 360:15
144:24,24 367:11 35:22 50:11 surprised
148:17 suggests 95:11 55:8 56:18 71:22 171:18
subscribed 202:7 57:14,25 63:23 252:21,23
386:16 suit 14:6 66:16,17 77:19 surrounding
subsequent suitability 27:4 77:19 80:4 98:7,9 164:6
93:7 94:3 96:7 27:10 221:8 83:11 84:7 166:22
96:7 364:11,23 summary 86:9,16 88:12 suss 230:21
365:16 366:3 325:21 88:16 113:6,23 swaine 1:15 2:8
367:8 super 232:11 134:18 136:5 3:22 4:15
subsequently supplemental 146:13,14 swear 4:24
33:16 42:7 24:9 147:8 162:21 sworn 5:5
subset 125:24 supplementat... 164:11 165:24 386:16 388:8
125:25 258:13 24:6,7 167:14,25 symbols 41:21
261:17 supply 34:13 172:13 173:16 synonymously
substantially 50:9 51:16,19 177:7 192:3 294:2
292:14,17 52:17 193:14 194:12 system 8:16
substantive support 11:18 198:9 201:10 systematic
95:19 133:6 135:22 204:7 223:8 244:5
substantively 137:22 140:4 243:17 252:20 t
23:17,22 141:5,16 254:9 255:5
t 137:2 387:6
substitutability 146:21 148:20 257:20 268:22
389:3,3
342:24 343:3 148:23 149:5 269:22 270:6
tabak 158:20
343:23 149:17 150:2,5 271:7 272:2
191:9,12
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 177
of 190
[tabak - tend] Page 78
192:12,14,22 187:2 242:14 97:13 101:19 tautologically
193:21 204:8 251:3 267:22 101:21 120:3 305:24 324:7
208:6 222:25 268:3 269:2,5 129:10,11 td 375:5
225:7,22 226:4 272:11 275:7 134:24,25 teaching 8:5,7
226:12,17 276:18,24 151:24 161:6 10:4 19:25
tabak's 192:19 278:18 284:7 164:24 165:21 20:16,18,19
193:11 311:14 312:7 169:6 173:8 team 253:2
table 39:7,9,12 312:13,15 192:10 201:25 technically
39:13 40:9,14 352:2 356:21 202:15 211:4 7:19 10:23
40:16,21 42:11 356:22 357:19 215:17 219:12 14:2 209:4
42:12 55:16 365:9 366:6,25 219:13,13 235:20 254:6
60:4 125:11,14 368:10 383:22 227:14 239:25 tell 100:6
185:18 211:17 taken 1:13 245:18 262:19 115:22,23
316:25 317:3 35:12 77:2 262:20 270:19 116:23 157:12
318:19 319:18 179:11 251:12 270:22 275:5 192:23 193:5
322:14 324:11 273:18,23 278:13,15 207:20,25
325:6,8,13 312:24 348:13 290:7 293:3 214:4 218:21
326:10 327:17 351:25 295:18 298:7 255:9 268:24
327:22 328:9 talk 53:24 54:7 303:5 337:9 270:3 272:7
330:11,18 97:16 140:17 340:22 341:4 305:14 310:5
333:8 334:24 194:20 270:18 343:11 346:6 311:21 336:21
335:7,16 270:20 351:23 363:14,19 343:3,4 362:25
352:25 356:3 380:25 370:10,12 368:9 381:8
373:2 375:10 talked 35:22 380:17 telling 195:10
375:22 377:4 40:11 48:13 talks 169:19 353:25
377:17,22 263:6 292:6 268:10 temporarily
378:11 382:13 296:22 337:25 tangentially 339:5,23
382:13,18 345:25 351:7 252:5 ten 12:6,8,20
387:14 368:11 target 67:20 81:14 120:3
take 3:12 35:4 talking 35:21 70:7 212:2 213:21
51:24 57:16 37:3 48:23,25 targeted 351:5 214:9 226:23
65:10 75:19 51:13 52:18 taught 20:9,11 368:19,21
76:22 86:4 53:25 54:2,6 20:12,21,22 tend 140:4,13
101:2 106:9 56:3,7 66:25 52:12 146:21 178:7
128:5 136:5 87:16 92:12
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 178
of 190
[tending - thank] Page 79
tending 137:22 380:21,22,23 194:3,5,13,21 testimony
141:5,15 381:2 195:2,13 196:5 17:15,24 48:22
tenure 20:2,14 test 111:24 197:6,18 198:9 90:4,8 107:2
term 8:10 115:22 124:19 201:5 204:25 151:2,9 152:12
69:15 70:2 138:6,20 139:8 205:23 206:2 156:18 159:19
87:12 88:5 139:10,11,12 207:5,11,23 160:7 203:17
100:17 103:2 143:24 144:9 208:21 215:13 210:13 232:19
105:8 106:2,10 144:12,21 217:20 222:7 233:24 259:14
110:12 130:12 145:4,11 225:8 227:18 260:7,24
131:8 134:7 148:14,21 235:23 236:8 295:10,14,16
135:5 140:13 150:2,12 151:2 237:21 240:5 348:19 366:5
161:10 205:4 151:3 153:8,13 241:3 256:12 368:6 386:10
212:9 228:13 153:13,25 256:12 296:7 388:7,10
241:14 254:7 154:3,9,10,24 296:18 316:17 testing 74:3
265:9,14 155:2,17 156:4 316:18 317:4 159:15,20
267:11 270:19 156:19,21 318:14,16 160:8 164:9,20
270:21 281:4 157:3,4,11,13 319:12,17,18 164:25 217:21
293:23 302:4 157:14,25 320:3 324:18 221:10 335:11
305:14,21 158:10 159:10 325:14,22 tests 159:4
307:2 312:5 160:16,17 326:5,10 165:7,16
323:10 337:10 161:16 163:13 327:22 329:21 166:23 172:12
338:14 347:5 163:14 165:24 330:20 331:11 175:6 190:9,25
380:5 172:19 173:2 331:16 334:6 255:22
terms 42:12 173:11,19,22 334:15 335:11 tethered
57:25 64:20 174:4 176:3,16 335:12,16,24 273:11
139:22 140:17 176:25 177:20 379:17,24 text 125:18
152:6 167:2,17 178:12,14 testified 5:5 314:16
167:23 168:14 180:10 183:17 15:14,17 textbook 266:4
174:20 189:6 184:5,6,12 148:25 149:4 266:9
190:6 205:25 185:3,19 187:8 149:13 168:22 thank 22:14
282:12 289:21 187:13,16 181:20 219:10 23:10 35:3
302:25 304:8 188:23 190:8 231:4 36:3,7 162:8
307:15 321:10 190:19,24 testifying 98:25 183:10 242:15
337:25 350:24 191:22 193:13 102:6,15 243:10 286:14
362:21 380:11 193:16,23 103:14 159:3 366:12 377:7
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 179
of 190
[thank - three] Page 80
378:17 384:21 312:8,9 314:3 170:12 172:10 thinking 48:10
thanks 35:20 345:24 348:3 181:24 182:3 48:11 88:8
theoretical 357:18,20 188:2,25 102:10,11
50:12 102:12 365:8 368:11 189:10,13 239:20 350:23
124:17 352:13 376:18,20 190:2 194:24 360:7
352:22 353:17 378:11 380:15 197:11 201:23 thinks 341:15
355:18,22 380:15,21 202:9 204:20 third 314:8
356:15 383:6 205:5 212:17 thorough 167:5
theoretically think 5:24 7:5 218:13 223:5 167:19
357:11 7:14,16 8:12 223:17 226:22 thoroughly
theories 284:18 9:3,12 11:4,10 227:3,5,9,10,13 334:12 349:13
theory 65:12,14 11:10 13:25 231:4 232:19 thought 9:21
65:17 66:9 14:4 16:16,23 238:9 239:7,15 35:18 38:2
68:23 75:24 17:5,19 21:12 243:2 244:6 57:24 87:3,15
76:2,8 79:14 35:20 39:4 247:23 248:6 88:7 108:12
80:9 82:8 46:8 48:19 251:2 252:6 112:10,18,20
140:22 212:8 51:8 52:20 253:6,18 112:23 142:15
248:3 257:8,17 53:10 55:11 262:25 264:6 188:21 229:8
thick 202:23 62:23 66:25 265:19 270:8 233:13 256:17
thing 30:15,15 70:12 75:5 273:7 274:18 259:10 262:9
38:7 165:19 77:17 78:25 275:8 278:3 262:18 271:19
212:20 233:7 84:20 87:22 281:19 282:19 273:2 280:4
261:9 283:4 90:24 100:14 282:20,22 284:13 291:3
307:21 374:20 101:14 102:9 283:3 284:12 299:20 321:5
things 28:2 105:23 106:11 288:14 291:11 344:21 345:5,9
73:24 87:3 106:12 110:11 301:9 305:7 349:13 350:6
130:24 131:2 129:17 138:8,9 308:2 313:24 351:13 356:25
141:21 155:6 138:12,22 318:20 321:9 357:11 376:3
155:12,14 140:11 141:19 322:2,9,10 thousands
167:4,18 141:25 142:2 324:2 329:5 102:24 241:11
168:24 174:24 142:17 143:17 343:2 351:4 three 7:13
188:17 221:24 149:7,8 152:5 354:22 356:8 53:10 59:18,20
222:24 226:19 152:6 164:13 357:21 358:18 59:20,21,25
227:7 306:12 164:25 165:11 371:9 374:22 77:5 111:12
307:6,14 312:7 169:15 170:4 377:8 381:25 112:15 136:8
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 180
of 190
[three - traded] Page 81
153:21 156:2 261:2 263:3,3 228:21 240:10 170:16 171:17
180:2,3,4 263:7,12,13,19 246:22 263:18 192:16 193:2
184:4,24 199:5 263:19 264:18 264:9 269:15 211:16 214:21
200:2,5 216:16 264:18,23,24 272:3 277:19 217:9 221:19
216:17 264:9 267:22,22 291:13 294:18 237:3 246:8
292:5 315:7 269:4,4 273:4 296:14 322:11 252:7 255:14
323:9,14,19 275:2 278:2 329:25 343:25 271:11 325:7,9
327:4 331:8,11 300:24 304:2,3 351:13 355:15 325:17 342:25
375:11,22,23 310:9 311:6,14 362:19 378:8 353:17
376:18 384:17 315:10 337:15 today's 115:8 topic 308:5,9
throwing 340:10,14,20 todd 1:16 4:3 torture 312:16
307:21 351:15 353:3 388:4,20 total 332:8
ticker 41:21 356:6 357:6 together 369:6,12
217:4,13 361:19 363:20 171:10 199:6 totality 321:8
time 3:8 4:10 378:18 385:4 202:11 254:13 toward 281:18
10:4,7,11 times 11:4,25 254:16 292:21 towards 246:16
11:19 18:5 39:22 67:14 told 70:24 314:20
32:16 51:4 81:21 117:14 72:15 166:9 township
56:16 57:13 172:6 192:22 347:7,9 244:20 246:3
75:19 96:16 193:6 198:19 tomorrow track 20:2,14
100:9 102:5,14 291:15 314:17 264:9 264:8
103:14 106:5 315:7,8,8 ton 361:8 trade 45:22
122:3 123:3,10 timing 56:4 took 28:6 51:9 176:21 178:16
124:23 126:6 title 9:4 20:25 51:21 260:25 183:8 230:13
126:13 127:3 21:3,6,10,15 272:23 317:14 287:24 288:5
127:11,19 133:20 tootsie 44:14 290:4,6 320:18
128:14,19 today 4:17 6:3 45:10 46:13 342:4
129:7,14 136:4 18:7 68:9 115:24 126:18 traded 26:5,9
165:11 177:8 71:10,23 74:25 126:23 127:7 26:14,24 31:15
185:19 196:5 87:13 93:4 319:6 376:12 41:13 42:2
204:11,14 95:25 100:8,14 377:9,14 44:23 45:10,19
213:11,24 101:7 105:17 top 33:19 46:18 46:3,13 52:6,6
216:20 219:17 106:7 113:20 137:14 138:13 150:16 152:4
227:15 250:24 117:13 170:3 151:13 161:9 232:13 239:2
253:15,25 177:16 195:6 168:3 169:24 240:8 278:21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 181
of 190
[traded - type] Page 82
320:11 341:6 transcripts 111:21 119:12 33:2,12,15,21
341:11,12 33:24 120:15 138:23 33:23,24 34:16
trader 48:12 translates 142:13 145:24 35:15 36:4
traders 227:9 82:25 84:3 174:14 231:20 44:12 45:9,17
312:7 369:9 tried 58:18 231:20 232:15 45:22 48:23
380:18 trivago 41:17 232:21 233:21 49:16 76:24
trades 65:21 126:15 319:8 240:20,25 118:10 127:2
165:5 176:19 319:13,19 253:17 268:18 127:10 132:21
178:15 183:6 320:6,9,11,21 268:21 289:25 133:6 144:24
207:6 278:9 321:2 322:3,5 302:18,24 148:17 163:8
279:3,14,19 true 75:5,9,10 303:4 306:25 170:20 175:12
280:8 281:7 114:21 115:4 311:12 332:25 187:17 191:16
290:11 140:11 216:12 360:6 365:10 193:23 195:7,8
trading 1:7 231:8 262:5,25 376:21 196:11,20
3:18 48:2,6,15 373:24 386:9 turn 65:7 107:5 199:17 200:8
48:17 50:13 388:9 108:3 120:25 214:11 221:24
54:14,14,20 trust 15:5 137:12 138:24 231:13 232:2
55:6 90:12 174:25 189:11 139:3 162:18 249:22 253:8
101:7,12 219:3 195:23 198:21 260:14 264:8
128:12,13,18 truth 118:11 210:23 211:7 264:10 270:22
128:24 129:6 try 12:4 27:12 244:8 257:21 274:19 278:11
227:12 230:16 28:22 91:10,14 265:16,17 282:16,23
230:17,18 92:17 105:19 359:13 368:16 283:20 288:16
272:9 298:5 117:5,17 turned 107:18 288:21,25
323:21 372:11 118:20 154:22 turning 36:8 315:7 319:5
374:13,16 160:14 197:14 turnstone 323:13,22,23
386:1 389:1 201:20 300:2 253:19 324:14 331:7
traffic 68:12 301:24 303:11 twice 13:8 331:10 351:10
trail 369:20 344:22 197:3 232:20 357:8 368:2
371:4 trying 15:19,21 303:15,21,24 375:23 376:18
training 68:14 15:22 17:17 two 12:11,13 380:24
166:11 22:17 30:5 12:14 16:22,25 type 50:17
transcript 89:6 31:3 34:8 51:8 20:9 21:19 52:16 58:19
91:19 386:5,10 62:9 64:2,6 23:19,25 24:17 159:23,24
388:9 75:22 105:24 24:24 25:5,9 180:15 211:21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 182
of 190
[type - unit] Page 83
223:6,10,20 under 48:16 106:21 125:5 169:10 170:13
298:2 53:13 65:5 131:22 148:23 207:18 210:12
types 59:18,20 78:8,10,13,21 174:7 182:21 220:8,10,19
218:2 222:19 84:20,24 85:5 185:22 194:25 232:18 248:17
223:12 224:9 105:10 127:2 199:25 222:3 257:15 264:13
225:3 127:10 135:19 226:10 231:13 265:8 266:16
typically 144:16 150:12 239:5,13 269:15 272:22
262:15,23 150:13 168:4 240:20,25 274:13,23
270:12 271:3 175:4 189:17 264:3 283:5 278:25 279:9
277:10,13 212:7 218:16 285:6 290:2 279:12,17,18
u 218:16 219:9 299:11 300:15 281:6 282:15
221:25 222:15 301:2,4,13,15 328:5,9 329:12
u 251:25
252:22 282:15 301:24 303:4 329:19 332:19
uh 152:19
344:2,9,24 304:4 305:8 337:11 371:2
199:20 362:8
347:14 368:8 327:19 332:21 375:6
ultimately
undergraduate 369:19 understood
140:7 142:23
5:19 understanding 8:15 30:17
249:10
underlies 39:2 53:7 65:5 31:2 34:23
umbrella 48:17
underline 53:4 66:18 68:5 48:20 175:23
135:19 168:4
underlying 70:21,24 72:10 193:8 198:18
368:8
35:24 55:24 72:19 77:10,23 201:17
unable 45:20
56:13 59:10 78:3,12 79:8 undertaking
46:11 111:23
62:17 74:14,17 95:2,3 102:13 234:21
220:18 266:16
170:21 174:22 103:21 105:13 unfamiliar
270:2 305:12
203:24 210:15 105:15 107:3 219:24 281:4
354:13 363:23
356:12 124:10 126:4 unfortunate
unaffected
understand 6:2 126:10 127:13 371:21
128:9,20,25
18:24 19:2 128:7,17,24 unfortunately
129:8,23
28:24 62:9 129:6,25 74:2 204:6
unaware 23:24
63:11 64:2,23 130:20 133:15 uniformly
278:18
75:2,8 77:7,20 134:4,12,17 273:4
uncertain
81:17 90:25 135:17 165:12 unit 3:15 35:10
164:20
95:19 98:6 166:9,18,25 35:15 76:24
unconfident
99:13,23 167:16,22 77:5 136:8
321:11
106:11,13,19 168:13,23 137:7 179:9,14
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 183
of 190
[unit - valuation] Page 84
251:10,15 132:3,22 133:7 193:19 194:17 233:2,22
312:22 313:5 133:16 135:23 195:5 196:23 267:20 268:25
348:11,16 144:20 158:2 196:24 197:3 269:3 274:9
384:24 158:11,18 198:12 206:13 282:7 283:13
united 1:2 3:19 160:19 176:23 206:23 219:5 284:2 285:12
univariate 177:15,18 221:6 222:6 287:15 288:10
383:22 188:13 192:19 223:2,2 227:11 290:19 293:25
universal 193:11 196:18 230:24 231:6 300:24 302:4
168:19 217:23 222:5 231:24 232:3 305:21 307:15
universally 223:18 227:4,8 232:11 265:4 325:16 326:4
276:15 228:13 230:6 266:4,7 277:10 326:17 328:3
university 5:22 230:25 231:25 288:18 289:18 328:15 329:18
20:7 21:7 232:25 241:14 289:21 291:4 345:8 347:5
unknown 282:24 293:23 292:2 299:23 354:7 355:11
366:23 302:25 326:20 318:18 338:14 369:10 381:13
untethered 335:24 336:2 370:2 usually 144:18
336:12 337:5 382:4 uses 138:3 173:9 369:23
337:22 338:11 used 16:12 185:19 224:7 ute 53:8,18
unusual 295:25 38:21 40:24 using 37:12 282:16,21
296:8,19,22 43:25 44:6 40:10 46:24 283:6
302:17 304:6,8 52:23 80:17,21 47:13 52:24 utilized 173:22
unusually 98:14,20 60:2 67:16 190:13
360:24 361:5 105:10 106:2 95:9 105:25 v
361:19 122:12,24 122:20 135:4
v 14:11 15:5
upper 252:22 123:19 124:3,9 161:16 163:20
vacuum 108:12
ups 294:7,10 131:14 132:5 174:18 175:2
151:24 247:4
306:18 134:7 140:13 180:10 181:20
vague 266:20
use 21:23 38:10 171:2,5 172:20 182:8 183:12
267:10 304:8
40:20 55:14 173:17,19,20 184:5 185:3
305:3,7 307:15
57:7 58:14 173:23 177:9 187:18 194:5
valid 151:15
66:20 69:14 180:19 181:3 194:22 196:5
valuation 53:25
70:2 82:11 181:16,22 197:6,18,24
54:3 67:21
87:11 105:18 186:6,17 187:6 198:6 211:22
70:8 153:15
110:12 116:3 187:12 191:2 211:25 214:22
154:5,12 155:4
129:21 131:24 192:22 193:4 218:14 231:7
155:19 156:6
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 184
of 190
[valuation - want] Page 85
156:13,22 332:9,15,20 variety 7:4 282:12 297:13
157:6,8,16 333:6,14,21 various 215:2,5 villanueva
158:4,14 336:5,13 337:5 215:14 252:4
159:12 160:21 337:23,24 verified 120:5 vision 347:23
163:22 173:3 338:4,12 339:8 verify 113:13 visual 58:25
182:14,18 341:12 342:11 116:23 118:3 vitae 9:13 89:3
296:25 297:21 345:13,14 123:15 295:7 volatility
345:24 380:23 346:18,19,21 verifying 306:10,14,16
380:24 347:2,6,16,17 119:23 120:22 306:21 307:5
value 40:3 347:18,21,24 veritext 3:25 307:22,23
53:19,20,24 347:24 348:4 4:3 volume 369:7
54:2 66:10,15 350:25 352:2 version 174:3 369:13 383:16
67:15 68:25 365:10 367:3 327:21 w
74:3,4,17 76:4 369:13 379:19 versus 10:5
w 5:3 7:21
79:17 80:11 380:2,5,20 13:21 48:11
137:4
81:5 82:9 values 74:14 144:4,18
wait 17:20 51:8
154:16 155:10 184:16,18 145:10 149:9
92:10 94:22
161:5,11 197:18 329:21 180:10 184:6
113:16 139:4
173:10 182:20 331:3 185:3,18 187:8
267:8
189:14 232:7 variable 57:5 216:25 309:23
waiting 209:5
233:22 278:14 57:19 129:22 vertical 38:13
walia 253:11
278:14 297:7 131:14 132:3,6 video 3:11,16
254:3,10,22
297:11 299:4 135:23 349:3,9 videographer
walk 286:6
299:15 300:6 349:10 350:14 2:17 3:2 4:2,23
wall 18:18,20
301:5,16 350:16,24 35:9,13 76:23
19:5,8
308:20 311:24 351:9,14,18,25 77:3 136:7
want 12:4
312:3,4 317:7 352:10,16 137:5 179:8,12
30:20 42:14
317:16,19 355:17 357:8 251:9,13
55:14 57:6,15
318:12,25 variables 56:16 312:21 313:3
58:14 59:22
323:12 326:4 56:19,20 57:8 348:10,14
61:8 64:23
327:25 328:11 57:15 123:20 384:23
79:19 83:5,6
328:23,24 124:3 130:5 videotaped
83:14 91:2,12
329:15,24 131:25 133:7 1:12
91:13 92:16
330:21 331:9 346:14 382:21 view 46:6
95:14,16,18
331:12,16 383:5 384:4 221:15 281:13
97:15 101:2
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 185
of 190
[want - werner] Page 86
105:12 108:18 330:6,7 338:19 256:15 271:13 310:13,19
113:16,25 339:14 340:2 271:17 278:23 315:25 316:20
115:13,17 353:15 369:15 281:14 284:9 319:20 320:6
116:23 117:4 374:19 382:12 284:16 290:25 320:12,19,22
118:2,10,17 wanted 35:18 296:16 298:19 321:3,25
122:8 123:14 175:16 233:9 301:20 302:13 322:17 333:22
127:25 133:20 383:11 320:5 322:12 334:18 336:7
133:21 152:20 wants 115:3 329:3 331:19 weeks 216:16
158:18,23 118:15 249:2 331:21,24 216:17
159:16,19 300:23 343:6 340:6 344:23 weight 321:14
160:2,3,7 warning 346:14 348:21 321:22
161:10 162:20 368:21 350:12 352:17 weighted 39:14
162:22 165:4 waste 213:11 352:18 353:18 39:18 40:2,3,4
167:13 173:18 wasting 304:2 354:5 356:10 369:13
182:5 187:10 304:2 388:13 went 6:23 7:18
192:6 201:9 way 26:20 ways 55:3 218:8 313:25
202:12 207:14 27:13 28:23 59:21 215:2,5 werner 1:12
208:4,16,22 29:5 38:4 215:14 3:1,17 4:1,22
209:18 211:20 40:11 43:22 we've 380:12 5:1,8,13,16,18
213:3 214:13 49:21 50:17 website 226:22 6:1 7:1 8:1 9:1
215:20,25 53:5 54:5,12 251:23 10:1 11:1 12:1
216:11 218:18 54:23 56:10 weed 231:16,20 13:1 14:1 15:1
220:4,12,13 57:14,17 58:11 week 227:24 16:1 17:1 18:1
221:4,20 86:6 93:3 228:8 229:4 19:1 20:1 21:1
223:17 233:10 100:8 104:7 232:14 292:11 21:21,23 22:1
237:14 241:7 105:3 118:17 293:3 294:7,16 23:1 24:1 25:1
249:11 251:6 130:15 141:7 294:21 295:13 26:1 27:1 28:1
270:23 271:8 141:17 151:7 295:24 296:7 29:1 30:1 31:1
272:5 273:3 153:24,25 296:18 297:3 32:1,20 33:1
274:25 276:10 154:23 160:15 297:24 299:7 34:1 35:1,19
280:15,16 164:3 170:19 299:18 300:9 36:1 37:1,23
286:5 287:23 175:10,11 301:8,19 302:2 38:1 39:1 40:1
290:3 292:4,15 176:20 207:20 302:10 304:16 41:1 42:1 43:1
295:3,5,6,19 238:2 244:5 306:19 308:13 44:1 45:1 46:1
302:14 307:16 249:5 252:6 308:25 309:12 47:1 48:1 49:1
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 186
of 190
[werner - werner] Page 87
50:1 51:1 52:1 135:1 136:1 205:1 206:1 274:1 275:1
53:1 54:1 55:1 137:1,10 138:1 207:1 208:1 276:1 277:1
56:1 57:1 58:1 139:1 140:1 209:1 210:1 278:1 279:1
59:1 60:1 61:1 141:1 142:1 211:1 212:1 280:1 281:1
62:1 63:1 64:1 143:1 144:1 213:1,18 214:1 282:1 283:1
65:1 66:1 67:1 145:1 146:1 215:1 216:1 284:1 285:1
68:1 69:1 70:1 147:1 148:1 217:1 218:1 286:1 287:1
71:1 72:1 73:1 149:1 150:1 219:1 220:1 288:1 289:1
74:1 75:1 76:1 151:1 152:1 221:1 222:1 290:1 291:1
77:1,8,21 78:1 153:1 154:1 223:1 224:1 292:1 293:1
79:1 80:1 81:1 155:1 156:1 225:1 226:1 294:1 295:1
82:1 83:1 84:1 157:1 158:1 227:1 228:1 296:1 297:1
85:1 86:1 87:1 159:1 160:1 229:1,25 230:1 298:1 299:1
88:1 89:1,7 161:1 162:1,3 230:22 231:1 300:1 301:1
90:1 91:1 92:1 163:1 164:1 232:1 233:1 302:1 303:1
93:1 94:1 95:1 165:1 166:1 234:1 235:1 304:1 305:1
96:1 97:1 98:1 167:1 168:1 236:1 237:1 306:1 307:1
99:1 100:1 169:1 170:1 238:1 239:1 308:1 309:1
101:1 102:1 171:1 172:1 240:1 241:1 310:1 311:1
103:1 104:1 173:1 174:1 242:1,8 243:1 312:1 313:1
105:1 106:1 175:1 176:1 244:1 245:1 314:1 315:1
107:1 108:1 177:1 178:1 246:1 247:1 316:1 317:1
109:1 110:1 179:1 180:1 248:1 249:1 318:1 319:1
111:1 112:1 181:1 182:1 250:1 251:1,19 320:1 321:1,16
113:1 114:1 183:1 184:1 252:1 253:1 322:1 323:1
115:1,23 116:1 185:1 186:1 254:1 255:1 324:1 325:1
117:1,16 118:1 187:1 188:1 256:1 257:1 326:1 327:1,11
119:1 120:1 189:1 190:1 258:1 259:1 327:16 328:1
121:1 122:1 191:1 192:1 260:1 261:1 329:1 330:1
123:1 124:1 193:1 194:1 262:1 263:1 331:1 332:1
125:1 126:1 195:1 196:1 264:1 265:1 333:1 334:1
127:1 128:1 197:1 198:1 266:1 267:1 335:1 336:1
129:1 130:1 199:1 200:1,18 268:1 269:1 337:1 338:1
131:1 132:1 201:1 202:1 270:1 271:1 339:1 340:1
133:1 134:1 203:1 204:1 272:1 273:1 341:1 342:1
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 187
of 190
[werner - writings] Page 88
343:1 344:1 wide 30:12 85:19,21,24 worked 6:9,13
345:1 346:1 46:24 47:14 104:19 140:13 11:21 12:21
347:1 348:1,18 52:24 54:23 206:13 256:7 191:13 227:11
349:1 350:1 282:13 348:21 284:25 288:18 242:4 251:18
351:1 352:1 widely 122:23 289:19 295:18 252:5,22,24
353:1 354:1 window 122:21 299:23 253:2,18
355:1 356:1 133:18 135:16 worded 120:15 254:10,13,16
357:1 358:1 wisconsin wording 294:14,19
359:1 360:1 314:17 315:8 173:17 221:6 working 38:21
361:1 362:1 wish 23:15 291:5 188:11 371:13
363:1 364:1 withdraw words 28:13 371:23 372:6
365:1 366:1 23:16 91:15 31:3 65:2 375:8 377:21
367:1 368:1 201:4 66:21 96:24 works 253:24
369:1 370:1 withdrawing 154:2 157:12 world 102:12
371:1 372:1 300:19 161:8 171:9 103:3,24
373:1 374:1 witness 4:25 229:17 233:10 264:23
375:1 376:1 5:4 9:18 23:8 241:17 258:6 worried 234:6
377:1 378:1,18 80:18 90:22 281:5 314:11 234:7
378:23 379:1 108:17 125:23 317:21 382:21 worries 203:3
380:1 381:1 129:16 163:9 work 6:19 worry 198:20
382:1 383:1 202:12,16,24 11:17 25:4,8 worth 66:7
384:1,25 385:1 203:3 206:15 25:13 28:9,20 346:23,25
386:2,4,13 208:22 209:3 73:8 82:4,14 write 70:16
387:4,8,9,10,11 212:4,14,21,25 101:5 154:8 122:19 123:18
387:14 389:2 213:3 216:8,19 168:2,6,6 156:11 188:10
389:24 242:15 243:9 169:7,9 174:15 214:22 236:14
werner's 245:4,9 250:24 231:15 232:20 238:6,14
180:10 199:16 251:3,8 356:2 233:2,20 258:12 266:3
whereof 388:15 366:12 378:20 234:21 242:7 286:2
whispering 3:7 387:3 388:7,10 252:12 254:17 writes 258:12
whoa 103:7 388:15 257:13,17 364:8 370:6
108:2 302:23 won 257:9,12 274:16 352:11 writing 226:4
302:23,23 257:16 355:11 361:3 236:22 287:12
305:19,19,19 word 27:10 363:3 writings 265:5
45:25 80:17,21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 188
of 190
[written - zhang] Page 89
written 74:23 99:19 103:6 170:8,14 231:2
168:18,21 108:8,11,22 233:8 245:21
169:16 190:14 109:9 125:22 270:20 306:7
195:4 214:7 129:15,17 306:17,21
215:21 216:12 130:18 132:9 307:5 318:7
220:14,24 157:23 159:16 320:10 321:23
222:23 274:21 162:16 163:4 323:16 325:15
340:3 363:2 167:25 197:2 years 5:14 8:21
wrong 30:15 201:18 202:25 21:3 51:21,23
78:11 109:10 213:21 228:16 68:16 71:3
130:12 222:16 245:2 247:4 89:13 91:4
239:18 261:9 251:8,8,8 99:11 100:15
329:5 335:15 257:19 266:20 101:22 104:11
341:18,21 267:17 276:18 105:11,16
358:19 373:10 282:20 306:13 106:3 142:11
wrote 65:19 314:25 316:15 172:16 181:15
76:10 121:11 331:22 342:14 187:5 191:16
137:17 139:14 344:20 345:8 193:23 196:22
139:19 143:24 350:5 351:20 212:2 225:12
155:16 156:3 352:5,20 254:12 269:17
157:12 163:20 372:13 379:4 270:22
215:9 217:17 year 6:10 42:3 york 1:16,16,18
288:6,7 338:16 45:4 93:8 94:3 2:4,4,9,9 3:23
340:4 370:16 95:5 96:7 3:23 6:14,18
x 109:3 111:11 162:7 388:5
113:11 114:25 yup 44:20
x 1:5,8 265:20
115:12,15 255:18
387:2,6
116:9,17 z
y 117:22 119:20
z 251:25
yeah 19:2 20:8 120:11 121:22
zero 57:20
32:19,22 39:25 122:11,21
264:5 330:11
57:5 59:22 148:7 162:15
330:19,25
60:18 64:23 166:15,19,24
zeros 273:22
73:11 74:8 168:11,19,23
zhang 251:25
92:15 93:3 169:9,16,21
Veritext Legal Solutions
212-279-9424 www.veritext.com 212-490-3430
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 189
of 190
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Rule 30
(e) Review By the Witness; Changes.
(1) Review; Statement of Changes. On request by the
deponent or a party before the deposition is
completed, the deponent must be allowed 30 days
after being notified by the officer that the
transcript or recording is available in which:
(A) to review the transcript or recording; and
(B) if there are changes in form or substance, to
sign a statement listing the changes and the
reasons for making them.
(2) Changes Indicated in the Officer's Certificate.
The officer must note in the certificate prescribed
by Rule 30(f)(1) whether a review was requested
and, if so, must attach any changes the deponent
makes during the 30-day period.
DISCLAIMER: THE FOREGOING FEDERAL PROCEDURE RULES
ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
THE ABOVE RULES ARE CURRENT AS OF APRIL 1,
2019. PLEASE REFER TO THE APPLICABLE FEDERAL RULES
OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION.
Case 1:21-md-02989-CMA Document 568-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/2023 Page 190
of 190
VERITEXT LEGAL SOLUTIONS
COMPANY CERTIFICATE AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Veritext Legal Solutions represents that the
foregoing transcript is a true, correct and complete
transcript of the colloquies, questions and answers
as submitted by the court reporter. Veritext Legal
Solutions further represents that the attached
exhibits, if any, are true, correct and complete
documents as submitted by the court reporter and/or
attorneys in relation to this deposition and that
the documents were processed in accordance with
our litigation support and production standards.
Veritext Legal Solutions is committed to maintaining
the confidentiality of client and witness information,
in accordance with the regulations promulgated under
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act (HIPAA), as amended with respect to protected
health information and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as
amended, with respect to Personally Identifiable
Information (PII). Physical transcripts and exhibits
are managed under strict facility and personnel access
controls. Electronic files of documents are stored
in encrypted form and are transmitted in an encrypted
fashion to authenticated parties who are permitted to
access the material. Our data is hosted in a Tier 4
SSAE 16 certified facility.
Veritext Legal Solutions complies with all federal and
State regulations with respect to the provision of
court reporting services, and maintains its neutrality
and independence regardless of relationship or the
financial outcome of any litigation. Veritext requires
adherence to the foregoing professional and ethical
standards from all of its subcontractors in their
independent contractor agreements.
Inquiries about Veritext Legal Solutions'
confidentiality and security policies and practices
should be directed to Veritext's Client Services
Associates indicated on the cover of this document or
at www.veritext.com.
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flsd.590042.568.15.pdf
- Size
- 5,780,221 bytes
- SHA-256
- 5d055d42c794511aace38abcd4b87c750a5a6be45990f4501fe91865f29862dd
- Original
- archive.org