11-02-09 336 Million 55 Million Quantum Currency Ex

Gary Joseph Bonas II 25794Covala Court Valencia, California 91355 November 02,2009 Judge William Pauley For the Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007-13-12 Re: c: Ambassador Sylvie Lucas United Nations Department of Public Information New York NY 10017 dpi_ dis_unit@un.org In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Lit Master File no. m21-95; MDL No. 1409 Greetings Honorable Justice Pauley & Clerk McMahon: "When the [key] facts [presented] change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" John Maynard Keynes Here, a request for an award was mistakenly denied. It was denied based on an incorrect assumption of fact - the characterization of Mr. Bonas as pro se and, therefore, without a client. 1 Due to that initial misstep, the court concluded Mr. Bonas was ineligible for a "1988" award. Mr. Bonas's claim was also expressly made pursuant a preliminary qui tam disclosure, quantum meruit and the rules of ethical price candor. A. The Wrong Assumption Of Fact - Pro Se v. With Client The court incorrectly concluded, verbatim: [O]ne pro se objector [Mr. Bonas II], who is an attorney .... 2 The second part of the court's above sentence, however, is correct: [Mr. Bonas II], who is an attorney, seeks attorney's fees.3 Mr. Bonas II represents one or more clients: the beneficiaries of his estate executor designation in his '97 "Traba Trust", the BONAS artificial person, Polly Anna Cooper, The Estate Of Rosemarie Bonas ('05 - RIP), The Estate of Gary Joseph Bonas ('03 - RIP) and/or a group client base of all those that passed during the relevant period (like IRAQ Military heros, may they RIP)).4 Those who passed during the Class Period 1 have an estate with a potential claim to funds here. Notice to this group was not expressly provided (to the heirs or beneficiaries), which records defendants maintain in the course of their "business enterprises." The base "pro se" mistake incorrectly rendered the remainder ofMr. Bonas' award inquiry moot. Correcting this first step revives or awakens the court's power to a corrective analysis. That analysis could entail simply identifying material facts like: 1) The court shaved lead counsel's attempted fee by nearly half, based on ... ; & 2) The court denied lead counsel's request for back interest, based on .... Those facts might knit into the base "value" ofMr. Bonas' time and expense in briefing this honorable court on what both lead counsel refuse to address - correct price accounting and compliance in fixing the prices charged to clients. B. Bonas Is Eligible For a 42 V.S.C. 1988 &/or Possible False Claim Act (Invitation To File) Award Mr. Bonas does represent clients and is not pro se. See section A above. He is, therefore, eligible for an award under 42 U.S.C. 1988 ifhe conferred informational "value" to the honorable court. Mr. Bonas supplemented his 42 U.S.C. 1988 motion by preliminarily submitting under common law and codified false claims bodies. Significantly, the claim here was also specifically made pursuant to the equitable doctrine of quantum meruit. The claim is based on the preservation of client owners' funds held in custody or fiduciary trust by private government counsel. This unique situation was not the case in any opinion the court cited in denying the subject motions: See In Re Texaco Shareholder Derivative Litig., 123 F. Supp.2d 169, 173 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), aff'd 28 Fed. App'x 83 (2d. Cir. 2002); Pietroangelo v. U.S. Army, 568 F.3d 341 (2nd Cir. 2009) (denying fees to pro se attorney); Zucker v. 2 Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 374 F.3d 221,228-29 (3rd Cir. 2004) (holding that a shareholder objector who represents himself as a pro se lawyer is not entitled to attorney's fees under the common fund doctrinej.' The above cites confuse materially distinguished realities, as explained above.6 a. Qui Tam Invitation In common law, a writ of qui tam is a writ whereby a private individual who assists a prosecution can receive all or part of any penalty imposed. Its name is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase meaning "[he) who sues in this matter for the king as [well as) for himself." The False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. § 3729-3733, also called the "Lincoln Law") is an American federal law which allows people who are not affiliated with the government to file actions against federal [court class] contractors claiming price fraud against the government. 7 b. Quantum Meruit Quantum meruit is a Latin phrase meaning "as much as he has deserved". This claim is also referred to as "unjust enrichment." It means something along the lines of: "Reasonable value of services." In the United States, the elements of quantum meruit are determined by common law. For example, to state a claim for unjust enrichment in New York, a plaintiff must allege that (1) defendant was enriched; (2) the enrichment was at plaintiffs expense; and (3) the circumstances were such that equity and good conscience require defendants to make restitution. c. Ethical Duty To Report The disclosures and corresponding request here were professionally made pursuant to the ethical duty to report "under certain circumstances": 3 DR 1-103(A) & the rules (Rule 8.3(a)) require lawyers to report misconduct of other lawyers under certain [complex] circumstances. All Judge esquires are under the same obligation. Code of Judicial Conduct (1990) (Section 3(D)(2).8 The circumstances here involve complex price litigation actors, who are the field hourly price market makers. Counsel has omitted material evidentiary compliance proof to support their own claimed numbers, which have been presented under penalty of perjury as "compliant" with correct price protocol, but are not. Core issues follow. C. The Price Issue Presente Issue: Maya court government pay class counsel's un-supported hourly prices from client funds absent some price math showing of correct price compliance? Rule: Rule: "It is not for the courts to determine whether in particular settings [counsel] ... price-fixing serves an honorable or worthy end!,,9 You ... determine the [hourly] price [one by one] ... based on the [cost] characteristics of [the service] .... 10 Analysis: Here, the simple inconvenient truth is that just like those they've sued, lead counsel does not have an in house "what is correct price compliance" manual. This twin chain testimony illustrates, verbatim: Q. A. Q. A. Did you ever discuss antitrust [price right] compliance with any of those people reporting to you? No, I didn't. Did you have an antitrust [price right] compliance program ... ? Not that I'm aware of. 11 Mr. Bonas learned that two lead counsels in the complex field "had no idea" what correct price protocol is. About this material topic, Mrrs. Francis Scarpula (Zell) and Mr. Douglas Richards (Cohen Milstein), respectively, wrote to Mr. Bonas, verbatim: • I have no idea what you are talking about [this price right law thing]. 12 • I have no idea what you're saying [about correct hourly price proof]. 13 4 After learning of this current lack of correct price compliance knowledge, Mr. Bonas drafted and furnished, by receipt confirmed mailings, key parts of his hourly price compliance manual to this honorable court. He did so "representing." Conclusion: In the late 1990's Pete Wilson wrote a letter mantling the BAR (British Associated Republic) "a medieval guild." In practice, the BARs complex lit members have divined unto themselves "price law making" powers - a power expressly granted or delegated to "A" D.C. Senate/Congress. The law making these agents engage in the ordinary course is designed to cut around contract price consideration measures. To illustrate, had Counsel properly submitted the "costs" that make up their hourly prices, one elementary, faithful showing might identify these forecasted "expenses": Phone Filing Fee Photocopy Hotel/Food Airline Taxi Lit Fund Expert Total Price Costs Price Costs Price Costs Price Costs Price Costs Price Costs Price Costs Price Costs $10 $20 $20 $10 $5 $10 $10 $15 hr forecasted hr forecasted hr forecasted hr forecasted hr forecasted hr forecasted hr forecasted hr forecasted $100 hr forecasted to cover costs of lit bus. This nature of showing hourly price accounting was entirely skipped in counsel's application, which led the court to conclude the following, with bracketed clarification: B. Expenses [A Preference Of Un-Cost Based Hourly Price Tags?] Class counsel additionally seek ... $3,708,072 in expenses. "Attorney's may be compensated ... out of pocket expenses [not covered in their hourly price] .... ,,14 In short, some words of wisdom by Economist J. Maynard Keynes, again: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" Ex's A-D are CV guides. Respectfully Submitted, Gary Joseph Bonas II ~B.%•. 5 All. by definition, are "authorized agents" for themselves in connection with their ARTIFICIAL PERSON TWIN, i.e., the "transmitting utility" - the all cap name company created at birth *Truth In Lending Act! 2 3 10-22-09 Currency Order, at page 41 's footnote 6. 10-22-09 Currency Order, at page 41 's footnote 6. Client-Estate Death Certificates are available on request. That evidence is publicly available information that Mr. Ben Bernanke (Reserve State), Mr. Ken Lewis (B of A), James Dimon (Chase), Edward Kelly (Diners) and Mr. David Nelms (Discover), among others, are all keyed into, business-wise, as the claimed "owners" of those United States Native Born Citizen Accounts. 4 5 10-22-09 Currency Order, at page 41 's footnote 6. Moreover, this is not a case where a court was asked to entertain Article 1 counterfeit coin (stock), which all shareholder derivative lit involves. The act of filing such actions is informally called "whistleblowing." Persons filing under the Act stand to receive a portion (15-25%, like counsel in the class field, who grafted qui tam payouts into their award papers) of any recovered damages. The Act provides a legal tool to counteract fraudulent price tag billings turned in to the Federal court and other Government departments. Claims have been filed by persons with inside knowledge of false claims. Regulation of Lawyers: Problems of Law & Ethics, at page 682, 3rd Ed., Spephen Gillers, Prof. of Law new York University. 9 6 Witkin, Summary of California Law Ninth Edition, Contracts § 555. A UCLA lead economist, Lew Solmon, under oath at page 1751:6-10. Twin chain testimony, by Bill Gensemer, on trial at page 2571:12-25. 10 11 Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:29:52 -0800 - "Francis O. Scarpulla" FScarpulla@zelle.com"Gary Bonas" , joseph hobo@yahoo.com 12 13 Thursday, June 19,2008 10:55 AM From: "J. Douglas Richards" To: antitrustbar@yahoo.com 10-22-09 Currency Order, at page 37. 14 6 EXA EXA II. ANALYSIS We review the district court's methodology de novo "to determine whether it reflects procedure approved for calculating awards. ,,] Our review of the final award is for an abuse of discretion, which "occurs when the court reaches an erroneous conclusion of law, fails to explain a reduction or reaches a conclusion that no [price) evidence in the record supports as rational.,,2 The Goal The honorable ih Circuit correctly noted the aim in compensating contingent or delayed payment actions, verbatim: [T]he goal in awarding a reasonable attorneys' fee is to give the lawyer what he would have received in an arms-length negotiation.3 About arms length negotiation, the en mass fiduciary relation governs fundamental disclosures to the client & the clients' guardian, which, in the unique complex lit arena, is the honorable court. Class Market Makers Make The Market Prices, In Concert First, the phrase "market rates" is a hollow conclusion. Any prudent inquiry into what that means requires a real simple check as to who set the rate prices and exactly how those rate prices were fixed. This elusive "market rate" standard has been sold to the courts, by agreement with lead defense masters. It is based exclusively on what top class action market makers, in concert, predict, after "meeting, talking and agreeing" on the number, calculate the court, not their clients, might be willing to pay. The tops roof or ceiling umbrella, under which all other class market makers fall in line, is upped every year or two max, in lockstep. Clients have no clue what "correct pricing" is and have no idea what the price schedules of the Class Action Market makers are." Second, there is A practice some leads engage: charging in the $200 per hour range for "doc clerks", aka, "professional staff." Coughlin's Enron claim illustrates: 165-210 160-270 220-260 Per Hour - Document Clerks (without names or CVs) Paralegal I, II, II (without names or CV s - doing what?) Summer Associate (un-named) I Harman v. Lyphomed, Inc., 945 F.2d 969, 973 (7th Cir. 1991). 2Id. 3 re Cont'llll.Sec. Litig., 962 F.2d 566, 572 (7th Cir. 1992). 4 Indeed, to the extent that the Lerach like "kick back" puppet figure says to the contrary, that rep most certainly does not speak for absent class members - many of whom have asked for their fiduciaries price schedules but are denied access to those numbers, roundly. fu 1 ----) Name Meyerhoff Albert Pierce, Job71 Schrieber, Sol Alexander, Susan K. Byrd, Kristin Dawson, Dee Edmiston, Laura Ekelof, Charlotta Essa, Farzeen Fuller, Krista Greer, John Hardaway, Jerri1yn Hays, Shawn Hobbs, Allen Hurst, Lamonika Ibironke, Caroline Kamavas, Stephanie Lewis, M. Coiby Mandlekat, Rajesh A. Mitchell, Jennifer Stephens, Jennifer K. Triplett, Sara Forensic AccoUlttant Economic Analyst Investigator Law Clerk Summer Associate Paralegal, r, II & ill Document Clerk Total (P) Partner (A) Associate (OC) Of Counsel (SC) Special Counsel (CA) Contract Attorney " Title (OC) (or) ,,....,,~J Hours 304.00 Rate 525 3,316.65 50.00 64.25 650 575 550 (OC) (SC) (eA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) (CA) 1,931.75 1,920.75 2,901.25 2,749.75 86.50 2,819.25 3,094.00 12,316.75 6,109.75 2,072.50 2,426.00 2,350.75 2,388.25 2,952.75 2,603.25 422.25 459.75 2,661.25 7,14750 3,531.75 1,977.00 620.50 254.00 22,239.90 8,346--W 248,803.91 z15 400 275 275 280 275 275 425 500 300 295 275 275 275 400 235 195 275 12$ - 450 . 240 - 315 200 - 360 165 - 260 220 -260 160 - 270 165-210 I I "'4'\ «'A Lodestar 159~600.00 2,155,822.50 28,750.00 35,337.50 532,881.25 768,300.00 797,843.75 756,181.25 24,220.00 775;293.75 850,850.00 5,234,618.75 3,054,875.00 621,750.00 715,670.00 646,456.25 656,768.75 812,006.25 1,041,300.00 99,228.75 89,651.25 731,843.75 2,955,863.75 1,011,807.50 581,500.00 140,273.75 59,530.00 5,417,714.25 1,619,368.25 113,251,049.40 N••• Stewarts Damis 1. (P) (P) (A} Roan 2.2S Rate ,..,.,... 1,181.25 230.00 69~825~OO 2()6.2S S2S 460 300 h.... S ,BonnyE. O.so 232.75 0.75 ,MidtUll. 0ra1ewski, Robert J. 0Uait0tf Stewart. BD.ea. Tal'lor, SUIBD. G. Simo~.Lecmard B. (A) (Al '(A) o.so 295.15 8.2S 275 430 300 215.00 ~72.S.oo S~l97.SO 2,83Sno 5,810JM) SIIJ~~AA (OC) ~) .(tQ TOTAL: 630 2.l.l.I..... Gorrza1es. Ka1herioe Vakmuela, Rachel A. (P}Pam. (A) Assode (0C)6f~ J$.5O - 41.50 rl40 J ~ 595..15 ."", - (PL) ParaIesal (DC) Doanneat CIetk ;, ...• BERNSTEIN UTOWITZ BERGER & GRssMANN LLP LODESTAR REPORT .Nick DeFiIfppis '-I... ~-. ---------- WoddCom _J.O-:~ z, =--J FrankBarajas James CJOWdes ElysiaMenard ProfI •• IonalTypr. ~ David KIeInbard _!_ _ 15.00 ~ "i 250.00 Lodestar 3,750.00 ,.197.00 2.50 42.50 150.00 160.00 150.00 479,55CUXl 400.00· 6,375.00 Inveatlptor 26.50 250.00 6,625.00 ProaIIcmaITp: IIItbIIIIg CoordInator Alexander oxa C 381.75 175.00 63,306.25 Prvf_1onII Tp: ParaIIpI Michelle Denny Rachel Dower Maureen Duncan 7.00 4.332.75 31.25 6.50 160.00 175.00 185.00 175.00 185.00 155.00 175.00 185.00 185.00 185.00 175.00 160.00 185.00 175-00 175.00 185.00 175.00 175.00 185.00 185.00 175.00 6f10f2005 1.120.00 758,231..25 5.781.25 .1.137.50 10,175.00 1,182.50' 775._.25 43.567.50 1,234.709.04 . RcyEsh Judy GoIdfien Matt Leonard Naitrani L.ugo Dwayne Lunde Eileen McNerney 55.00 11.50 4.41.35 235.50 :6,874.10 58.25 1~231.00 693.75 154.25 22.75 22.75 1.674.26 87.00 8.00 EItzabattr Metcalf Jeffery Price Michaei Rodriguez· s.a Schaeff8r Andrew .SeIcJenbarg Andrae G.·Sharkey Larry Si1ves1ro 10.40625 215,425.00 111.000.00 28.536.25 3,981.25 3.981.25 309.738.25 11.725.00 1.400.00 358.985..25 20.76625 27.518.75 Brandon walker Theresa WatIs Gary Weiton Natalie WDIiama . 1.929.Ei6 112.25 . 157.25 Charles Westphal BERNSTEIN LlTOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN llP LODESTAR REPORT Williams Companies Name Professional Typ Number of Hours Rate Lodestar ~ Martin Braxton Ralph Carter Lowell~:. 702.00 693.25 30.00 195 225 A 22£;.. ~ - 136,890.00 155,981.25 6,750.00 Professional Type: Of Counsel Tony Gelderman 91.75 600 55,050.00 Professional Type: Paralegal Dena Bielasz Roy Esh Amanda Figueroa Sylvia-Rebecca Gutierrez Cathleen Laporte Dawn larkin-Wallace Lauren laRocca Naitrani Lugo Dwayne Lunde Kaye A. Martin Eileen McNerney Elizabeth Metcalf Jeffery Price Brandy Roberts Sara Genua Andrew Seidenberg Andrea G. Sharkey Larry Silvestro Kristina Sousek Gary Weston Charles Westphal 2,132.00 686.50 352.00 1,573.00 9.00 24.50 47.25 17.00 1,53825 11.75 7.50 222.75 1.746.50 1,411.50 47.00 41.25 9.75 537.00 19.75 42.75 241.50 195 175 195 205 205 415,740.00 120,137.50 68,640.00 322,465.00 1,845.00 4,777.50 9,213.75 3,315.00 315,341.25 2,408.75 1,537.50 41,208.75 340,567.50 275,242.50 8,695.00 8,043.75 1,706.25 110,085.00 3,851.25 8,763.75 49,507.50 195 195 195 205 205 205 185 195 195 185 195 175 205 195 205 205 Professional Type: Project Associate Eric B. Alspaugh Dominic Auld Neil Bahnemann 474.00 323.50 9.50 275 350 300 130,350.00 113,225.00 2,850.00 111212007 \ \ :,:, " '.' -.. EXHIBITIA Inre NOftelNetworks Corp. Securities Litigation, Censelidated Civil Action No.: 2001-CV-1SSS (RMB) Lq,YELL STEWART HALEBIAN LLP TIME REP.\~:r- Inception through June 30, 2006 Name PARtNERSI Christopher Lov~lI 'JohnHalebian ,," A B C D > " " E F G H I Total ' Hrs, 0.,10 199.70 1;40 36.20 115.30. 104.2S 49.00. S.80 2.00 22.50 6.42 '. Hourly . Rate .,$625.00 515.00 Total . Lodestar '62,50 114,827.50 , 700..0.0. 17,919.00. 51,885.0.0. 45,870..00. 11,850..0.0 1,073.00 370.00 3,937.50 962.50. 75.0.0. 3,750.00. 90.0..0.0. • .. .- ... ', '. 0.1, 196 -,. ..; 3.7 , ' .;~ TTPRN'EYS: ..:: FtederickW. Gerkens, m t1 Roy Jacobs. & Associates· James V. Bashian, Bsq•.•. Robert Rodriquez Dan Lapinski, Esq.· PROFESSIONAL SUPPOR~ STAFF: David Leifer Ken Smith Lindsey MiU'silio Jeremy Fourteau Mark Schwartz Matthew Pawling , ZackFadem TOTAL LODESTAR .: CATEGORIES. , 1.4 2.3 22.9 115.3 104.25 49 S.8 2 22.5 6.42 0.5 .. ' ,·.500.00. 495.00.. 450.00. 440.00. 300..00 18S.00 185.00. 175.0.0. 150.00 150.00 ~5o..OO )SO.OO.. " 2S 6 r. ". .50 25.00 , ' 6.0.0. '. 574.17 . - ~S4,182~OO A. B. C. D. I}. -. F. G. H. Pre-Filing Investigation, Pleadings Briefs, Motions; Pleadings After Initial Complaint, Legal Research Class Certification Merits Discovcl'}' IIltd Post-Filing Fact Investigati.on Bxperts! Consultants Settlement Court Appearances & Preparation Class Member Coriespondence '\ 4 . .-,.. Cooper & Bonas 21355 Bungalow Court Valencia, California 91355 Judge Stephen P. Friot & Clerks U.S. District Court Western District of Oklahoma Rm 3102, Courtroom 305, Third Floor 200 N.W. Fourth St. Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Date: Re: 04-11-08 In Re Williams Stt. Lit Disclosures Greetings honorable Justice Friot, Magistrate McCarthy & Clerks: We write in the spirit of owed disclosure relating to extremely higb stake actions of capital public concern. Here, we respectfully present some fundamental basics with regard to strict counting rules, which Lead Securities counsel know well, but openly overlooked in this & other actions. The attached CD contains law Ciphers that control this filed, which, unfortunately were not disclosed to this honorable court in any pleadings, from opening to closing. First, to illustrate, on 01-12-07, Mr. Chad Johnson, on behalf of the named & un-named . partners at Bemstien Litowitz in his motion' for attorneys' fee prices and expense prices wrote this the honorable court, verbatim: Rear Admiral James W. Houck Commander, Naval Legal Services 1322 Patterson Avenue, Suite 3000 W A. Navy Yard, DC, 20374 - 5066 F. THE EXPENSES REQUESTED NECESSARY WERE REASONABLE AND TO THE PROSECUTION OF THIS ACTIO~ Lead Counsel also apply forreimbursement of $10,564,124.41 million of litigation expenses incurred in prosecuting this action. Johnson Deel, ~12. The potential accounting fraud & disclosure concerns with regard to this sample are triggered by the following real simple rules & facts, for example: • Setting up each Esquires sticker price tag, one by one, demands employing correct price protocol, which is a composite of all basic overhead "cost" or "expenses" elements, like telephone calls & eating "cost" elements, e.g.' Ex A (4 one page Ex Kit - Fiduciary Hourly Price Right Client Disclosure - One By One) • Here, un-leads swore to have paid leads for "expenses," verbatim: • • $625,000.00 (Assessment - Lit Fund - 4 Expenses - Kirby) $4,249,000.00 (Cash Contribution to Lit Fund - 4 Expenses - Bernstein) Now I might have missed something, but it looks like Mr. Berger, e.g., paid himself over $4 mil to cover "expenses" then asked you to pay him both his actual "expenses" and the overS4 mil. I've attached a sample the same "mistake" Mr. Fran Scarpulla made in another case, who wasn't available for comment to clear up any misunderstanding, like Mrrs Shulman & Berger. Ex B. Gary Joseph Bonas II 1 See LEAD COUNSEL'S MOTION FOR AN AWAJID OF ATIORNEYS' FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSES AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW. 2 This rule is taught in econ 101, which Bernstein's Partner Mr. Blair Nicholas majored & knows well. OF UTIGATION Gary Joseph Bonas II 25794 Covala Court Valencia, California 91355 Re: In Re Foreign Currency Overcharge Case Counsel's 10-30-09 Court Solicitation Series Absent correct price ethical court business price compliance proof, may a court entertain a complaint that does not allege exactly what correct price proof (a seller's burden) is? On 10-30-09, by false hourly price pretences in the extreme, Patrick Coughlin and Mr. Berger (co-leads) wrote (but hid by having his paralegal sign it), and high crime solicited this honorable court of United justice to sign an order stating, verbatim: A) 4) There is no just [Coughlin/Berger overcharging or fixing prices to clients] reason for delaying payment to me of over $51 million; Here, counsel's failure to provide correct hourly price compliance, like Bonas did, might be viewed as a just reason for delaying payment to counsel - to correct the record with this base evidentiary showing. Another reason to delay payment might be to consider whether Couglin, e.g., may bill clients in the neighborhood of $200 an hour for "document clerks," whatever that means. (See Ex A) B) 3) Without affecting finality in any respect, this [Pauley Court] reserves [POWER] jurisdiction over any matters related to or ancillary to this Order; Co-lead Counsel shall allocate the attorney's fee award among all Plaintiffs' counsel based on [Co-lead Counsel Coughlin & Berger's] ... reasonable assessment of the relative contributions of such counsel to the prosecution of the case on behalf of the [Polly CooperlKathy O'BrienlDavid S. et al] Classes; C) 2) Here, based on firsthand experience, some lead counsel view "contributions" to cases, in core part, based on creatively writing around real simple supreme price rules. One such rule is the forbidden calling a rival, getting his hourly prices and matching those prices in lieu of correct, good faith price cost addition and division. U.S. v. Container v. U.S., 393 U.S. 333 1 (1969). That was exactly the situation that Bonas personally "discovered" as a Class discovery agent in the Nasdaq Market Makers price fixing case. And that was exactly the factual situation in how Bonas was set up to playa role in the fixing of his $150 per hour intern price tag - by calling Milberg, Weiss, Hynes & Lerach and asking how much they charge for summer interns. Attached as Ex B are some firm documents revealing how lead counsel (Mel Weiss, Lerach, Coughlin & Len Simon) in the Nasdaq case "assessed" other counsel's "contributions" to the case for a payout. In lieu of simple pro rata mathematics, which is what the court based its four multiplier on (loadstar), lead counsel decided to see if they could get away with paying small, hungry firms a 1 or 1.2 multiplier. D) 1) The Court awards to ... [all] Counsel reasonable and appropriate attorney's fees in the amount of$51,250.000 plus interest earned thereon at the same rate as that earned by the Settlement Fund as a whole from October 22,2009 unit payment is made; & Having considered all of the ... motions ... and all of the submissions ... with respect thereto [hourly price and expense price compliance proof or foundation] [it is] ordered that [see above]. E) 0) F) Staff paid $20 (Cost) per hour, but billed to the court-government & clients $200 Here, there might be just reason for delaying the below multi-million dollar extra payment to Mrrs. Berger & Coughlin (who leverage/exploit) their rental commodities (called staff). In part, this staffing cost runs about $20 per hour (perhaps under the table). In turn, counsel bills the court government/clients at ten times that "cost." (See Ex 1) In reality, that upcharge is a multiplier on counsel's base price tags. Canon 1 A. An independent and honorable [correct price proof] judiciary is indispensable to [price right proof] justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of [correct price proof] conduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of is not compromised. 2 EX 1 How Leads Slice The Big Client Money Pie • "Lerach [Jerry S. Cohen & Lovell like leads] divided the pie however. [t]he[y] wanted--and firms claiming similar hours sometimes got widely disparate fees. Though Lerach was regularly doling out millions of dollars, the subordinate firms [and courts] were not allowed to know how much anyone else was being paid." • "I have the greatest practice of law in the world, once boasted. "I have no clients. "). • II Lerach [and all other leads] "You can always find a document to incriminate them," he says. I EX 1 1 http://money.cnn.comlmagazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2000/09/04/28680 l/index.htm ---- ... ~---------------- r I 9S06 ~Sl 09l-WCJd KE:XDRICK & NCTLEY .1\ T LAW A TTOR~lo,(S June 9, zouo VIA FACSIlvHLE Russ J;L Hyslop McKenna & Cuneo, 1" P L 750 B street. Sle. 3300 San Diego, C A 92101 Fa~simile: (619) SgS-S4S0 Re: KHl'\ Dis~olution Attached is the NASDAQ Agreement which w« have previously discussed. Please have 50 Cash sign the agrt:!ement and return the original we Cnn return the errtirc agreement U1 our office on Monday, June 12,2000 that 1.0lead co'urtsel , which as you can see is the prereq ursitc for our being paid. Thank yOL~ fOT your assistencc in this matter. Very truly yours. JGKI Anachment. cc: Ben Nutley c"",\\:lt'II:l.'\fi·ij·UO h~sl[lp corr 1(I!(JSU.01'!1f\\'I.'l'l.Sllll 100(1. S!\'\QII(,t':.C"I.v:!IOI T"I 61 C),G87 ()UXO ' F \:\ (,I (},6gi.O[)SS 9SIZl6-vSL-09L 'ON Xtl.::l WDi::L .0 .JL.I'I-I!IS-20013 i.l!Ed 1.~! -4& d11 08UnJ W -eUUilP~'-Ol KENT'll"! I 0<: 9506 '51 091-WO.l, waEZ: ~O 00-60-unr ~196ar5729 pihliJiij ~.~~ 9l:NI=IS NUTLEy Mn.BiAG WEISS BERSHAC HYNES & L.ERAOHLLP ONI:. PENNSVLVANiA PLAZA NEW YORl(, NY 1011s-eU15 FAX: (212) 8I&12&i 121Ii S94-GQg CI~"U~ (Z12) !l4t!l310 lit lIQI/n"" F;deral Egreis Benjamin Nutley, E~q, Kendrick Bonu HanQoGk & Nyt.ley 1010 Second Avenue, Suite 1720 San Diego, C~a 5)21.01 RECE1VED _ '_Il~ 3 7 ,Utili Dear Benjamir.: Pursuant to your May 25 letter. 1 en~D&ea reVlSeQ preposed ibrm DI Agreemcn~. Pieue retUrn a cop>,of the ~cmt to me, rnaJ'luallysisned by each of the panners ofKl:fidrick BoftU Hanc:ock &.Nutley listsd on the nwiaeci Agreement, ind t will arrange for the payments to bel made. Thank. you. cc Artbur M_ lCa.p11U'l,!.Iiq Cbtiatopher Lovell, EiCl Lc:c1IATQ:a. Sjmo~ .Esq. l\obert A, Skimigk. £~q. ~d Wd6c:t0 000c 60 'unr 9S06-~SL-09L 'ON xtJ.:j /1:)Ii::fCIN3/1·~·.r WOo. - ---- ----::-- ----------- d1' 09Un~ t gUUa~Ow-o~ "e:NCR t CK 5i:J'iAS HU11..EY AGREEMENT It is hero~ agreed by aad between J. Garrett Kendrick, Cuh J. Bonas, and Senjamlll Nutley, personally and on behalf of the la.w finn ofK2ndrlck BOllCl5 Ham:,gck & Nutl<=y its pr&:ld~csllors, successors &ftd assigns (IllQ c:a~h gf'thcir mmnbers) (colleaively "the Finn") on the LitigatWa. on the other hand. 1bat. 1. Plaint:i.tfs' eo-Leael Counsel agree to pay an tu!hanl;cmc:nt :5302.,884.30 to the Finn (wtn;h will be paid in ;WQ in the tct21 amount of 10 cbecks. payahle "Kendru:k gV~ Bonas Hancc~k & Nu.Ucy- one for $257,4S2.30 and an.cthcr for $4S,4~2), anl1 above Ute fee ];lflwlQu51y allocated ~d disttiDu~Gd to tM Firm.. on the fallowing condiiio~ each gt'which is agreed to be a material cOtUidera.tionfor the 2. 'I"ltR Finn agrees mat it will not. under any circumstances, request or receive any over and above the amoun~ set furtber C'fIhAo~nt tanh in rhls Agr=mem, and accepts this enhancement M.d lhe prior allo,,~tion in fUll iSDdfillid satisfaCtion of any \;btirn5 tllilt it cthetwU.;o mlSh" ~ve in these regards. 3. The Firm. ee:rtifies and agrc;;~ that it has 1 ami will (;cntinuc to keep litrictly con6.dazrdil the fact and subStant;c of all c1iscussioDS with Pimntitl'a' Co-Lead Counsel in these regards. and that it will keep $trictly confidential the fact ann amount of the enhancfilment, and £lli-..her asrees th&t it will not ciirectly or indirectly 1 axoept fOr a cenversatton ,,,,,,"era!months aiD with Mario Alioto. 9S06-trs~-09,- 'ON Xtl.:l ._-----_._-- - - .. SO lI!ed d" oiunJ 7 euui~~W.O! i<.."ENC:~l HCl'I~S HuTLEy' CK JWN-~;-~0 ~3:3~ say er de aJlyth1nS that mi:,ht csase or encouraga Bt1y O~f:!rfirm to requeSt or I 4, 'The persons ~ on behalf of the Firm (as C1efineQ above) represent that they I I are .utboMed to enter into this agrllement on behalf of the Firm. ant! thoge signm:ori.ea 1Ul4 the Firm jointly ~d severally agree to hold PlaitUi1D' Co-Lead IUlJ.i Counsel harmless tram any all claims relating to the k- re Nasdw:. MarketII fonnet" Mnkers AntitNzl Litigation by or on het.s.lf ofR.obert W. Hancock" member of the Firm J. Garrett Kendrigk Cash 1. Bonas Leonard B Si.."'non 4.ml Benjamin Nutl;y Arthur M Kaplan Ch.'i!topher Levell Robert A Skimic:k Individually and 0["- behalf of Kendrick Bgnu Hancock &. Nutley (and its predecessors. successors ami Assisn:i) 1010 Second Avenue S~ 1720 S.an DiegQ,California 9:1.101 Dated: _ 9S06-P'S,--09L 'ON Xtl.::l EXB Issue Dodgers EXB B. The BAR AbuselPrice or Overcharge ~r Malpractice - Issue Presented Issue: Absent correct price ethical business compliance proof, may a court entertain a complaint that does not allege exactly what correct price proof (a seller's burden) is? Issue: Maya court government pay class counsel's un-supported hourly prices from client funds absent some price math showing of correct price compliance? Issue: Are Pat Coughlin, Berger - Steve Susman like class counsel's prices (from top to bottom) felony fixed like those they roundly sue for pricing wrong? Issue: May any Counsel simultaneously swear under oath that they are compliant with correct hourly contract price implied covenant and fail to tender that proof? Rule: Rule: Rule: "It is not for the courts to determine whether in particular settings [counsel] ... price-fixing serves an honorable or worthy end!"l You ... determine the [hourly] price [one by one] ... based on the [cost] characteristics of [the service] ... ? [W]ith direct evidence "the fact finder is not required to make inferences to establish facts. ,,3 Analysis: Q. A. Q. A. [About in firm hourly prices,] Did you ever discuss antitrust [price right] compliance with any of those people reporting to you? No, I didn't. Did you have an antitrust [price right] compliance program ... ? Not that I'm aware of.4 About this material contract term and fitness of BAR association counsel topic, Mrrs. Francis Scarpula (Zell), Mr. D. Richards (Cohen Milstein) & R. Robinson(A.G. Wall Street Player), in very harassing and threatening ways, wrote to Bonas, respectively and verbatim: ·A [FS] I have no idea [LIE] what you are talking about [this price right law thingj.' ·B [DD I have no idea [FIB] what you're saying [about correct hourly price proof]." ·C [RR] I have no interest in receiving any more emails from youas Lfind them largely unintelligible [defense gibberish lie] and entirely irrelevant [defense gibberish lie] to my work as an Assistant United States Attorney," Conclusion: When the [key] facts [& law presented] change, I change my mind. What do you do sir?" John Maynard Keynes l Witkin, Summary of California Law Ninth Edition, Contracts § 555. 2 3 A UCLA lead economist, Lew Solmon, under oath at page 1751 :6-10. JACOB BLINDER & SONS v GERBER PROD CO, Filed January 12, 1999 - UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT (Nos.: 97-5609 & 98-5125) - aka - In Re: Baby Food Antitrust Litigation. Twin Finn testimony, by Bill Gensemer, on trial at page 2571:12-25. - "Gary 4 5 Wed, 21 Nov 200707:29:52 -0800 - "Francis O. Scarpulla" FScarpulla@zelle.com Bonas" , joseph hobo@yahoo.com 6 Thursday, June 19,2008 10:55 AM From: "J. Douglas Richards" To: antitrustbar@yahoo.com 7 Subject: RE: Unauthorized Practice of Law by Cash J. Bonas, disbarred California attorney Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 20:42:32 -0400 FROM: RICHARD.ROBINSON@USDOJ.GOV To: cashbonas@hotmail.com CC: swilliams@smallbusinesslaw.org Scott Williams, a "CA" Republic Barrister Mercy Gary Joseph Bonas II 25794 Covala Ct. Valencia, California 91355 September 17,2009 Robert Wallner Milberg, LLP One Pennsylvania Plaza 49th Floor New York, New York 10119 Re: Re: Lawdragon Inc. 600 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 870 Los Angeles, CA 90017 katrina@lawdragon.com Mortgage Tenant's & Un-Backed Price Mathematic Compliance My Lennar-Madison's Quarters - A-SAP P-Iease Us - Tenants 'Right To Exclusively Possess Three Madison Units On The HouseCs)/Hause In Quiet Enjoyment Until All Sellers Proves P=C Compliance Greetings fellow United Citizens: We have yet to hear back from you in response to our short series of communications about the funds you hold in constructive trust for Me and others, which directly hinge on many points, including your material breach of retainer contract(s): A material, fundamental price breach of a contract, sometimes known as a repudiatory breach, is a breach so fundamental that it permits the distressed tenant party to terminate [payment] performance of the contract, in addition to entitling that [tenant] party to sue for damages.' The price in retainer contracts is always material, and must be negotiated at arms length, as you know. In your offensive moves for money, you expressly represented to the court that the numbers claimed and hunted for were checked, by you, and found to be compliant with correct rent price protocol. This is a brief follow-up on our position. First, again, in failing to file any correct price compliance materials in your court(s), you seem to have failed to conduct a real simple "prudent price person" inquiry before attempting to secure the big money in big class lit at the end of the rainbow so to speak. Specifically, from the hollow record you made, as a pretty big double dip point, you failed to account for general business overhead in a single one of your hourly prices. Then, your flipped that cost into an "expense" and collected for phone calls, photocopies and a whole lot of other "basic business overhead". The cost of doing business, as you know, is owed to be rolled up in one or more of your price tags. 1 http://en. wikipedia.orglwikllFundamental_ breach 1 Second, I outline the law of attempt in the criminal price context by way of advancing or aiding and abetting a rigged, fixed, or overcharge made pursuant to any retainer's void hourly sticker price(s): The essence of the crime of attempt is that the defendant has failed to commit the actus reus (the Latin term for the "guilty act") of the full offense, but has the direct and specific intent to commit that full offense. The normal rule for establishing criminal liability is to prove an actus reus accompanied by a mens rea ("guilty mind") at the relevant time .... Here, out of court, you claim you owe no proof of lawful price compliance prior to taking the steps to secure a signature on a retainer agreement. Then, in court you boast about what magical price mathematic wizards you all are. Then, again with zero proof that the material price term(s) acted on were actually legally based, you take further steps by making claims on funds that you expressly state were not "padded", hourly wise, rate wise and expense wise.' Third, with our four one page it briefings, dated 12-03-07 (two) 03-31-08 & 0405-08, to you directly in mind, after being on actual notice and illustrations of what the sole lawful price evidence safe-harbor is, you "acted", again, with a lot of your filings after 04-05-08 and across '09 partner team signatures. Fourth, about what seems to be your "attempt" role here, it is that overcharging, called gouging, price fixing or whatever, is a crime temporally rooting at the inception of the lease-contract, or a "from go material breach". Again, that fundamental breach is the seller drafter of the lease-contract's "consideration" or "roughly equal" values being both measured and, upon execution, exchanged - money for costs dropped into property. To remind, on attempt the loaded point is outlined: Whether the actus reus of a price wrong attempt has occurred is a question of fact for the jury to decide after having heard the judge's instructions regarding the law. In English law, the test of proximity was: that the [attempt-or] ... must have " ...crossed the rubicon, burnt his boats, or reached a point of no return". 3 Cheers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempt Joseph, Gary Bonas ----------------------2 (2/) ~ You are like new and used car salesmen in a big way ~ your and Mr. Coughlin's 4 & Yz hour presentation is a classic example. Did I congratulate you on that 700 million times three (2.1 billion with interest) exposure you boys bought yourself, in concert with Ms. Harmon? Ifnot, congrats! 3 opp v Stonehouse, [1977] 2 All ER 909 per Lord Diplock. 2 G. Joseph Bonas II 26255 Bungalow Court Valencia, California 913 55 June 10,2008 Mr. Obama & Team Intel Donation (LLP Keys - AZ-McCain) P.O. Box 802798 Chicago, IL 60680 Greetings honorable Obama & Team: Thank you for inviting this fact verified under oath presentation about a sweeping public concern before you now & to be before you in the future. To begin, this short presentation keys on the fact of perfect price structure alignment set up, increased, stabilized and maintained by Top Brand Name Niche Esquire. The subject prices are regularly discussed, agreed upon & maintained for a constant one or more year period before being lifted, in concert, again. Brand Name Firms' Sticker Price Structure Rig In '04, under oath, the following men swore to the following prices: G. Saveri F. Scarpulla J.M. Alioto Joseph Cooper Rear Admiral James W. Houck Commander, Naval Legal Chicago, 1322 Patterson Avenue, Suite 3000 WA. Navy Yard, DC, 20374 - 5066 $650 $650 GD (F.S.) $650 D. Mogin $650 $47'5 G. Kendrick L. Saveri (Guido) $47'5 G. Rushing (Guido) $450 $450 $450 Our Reserve Barrister Lip's Un-Complex Depo - A Parallel Preview Q. [D]id you ever say to them, "How do we do this? How are we increasing the [hourly] prices ... ? Are you going in and talking about [hourly sticker prices], winking and nodding to these guys and putting a thumbs up on [prices from interns, associates, junior to senior partners A-Z] ... ?" Absolutely .... 1 A. Second, how these prices are structurally inflated & aligned, in concert, I detail exactly & simply. I do so as a first hand eye-witness thanks to the fact that Kendrick & 1 Mogin actually told me & showed me exactly how they do it. They do it in concert with their main class market maker rivals price schedules in lieu of correct price protocol sequences - that's the common denominator as to why both sides (A.G, P & D-BAR) doubled teamed me: A) I was present, on speaker phone and in house, during the Complex Lit Rival price "talks/meetings held by Gary Kendrick and many others, like Fran Scarpulla - for court application/pay day purposes; I was personally present, in & out house, witnessing talks that went like this, paraphrased, "Fran, is it O.K. ifI bump my price to $350 per hour even though I do not bill my hourly clients, like Encel or anyone else that? The ceiling measure is, aka/verbatim, "what we think the court might pay us without looking to greedy." A. I ... I never gave them instructions, "D 0 NOT TALK to our competitors [about prices]." But it was quite understood in our [and all LLP complex lit gator] company that if you did something like [and got caught] that your job was [is] history.' B) C) Third, the Real Simple facts as to how an hourly price is fixed is the exact subject referred to as "price-checking," the reality of which is the core pact not to present in any price class action. This twin testimony seals it, verbatim: "[Dones)] won't ... argue ... or our economist or anyone else ... that they [defendants] were aware of their [rival] prices and that they checked them and A) B) have that information [and use it to move in tandem prices by zone]; MEETs the standard .... [Defense] ... counsel pointed out that the appellants [Sheri & Cash's Counsel] had suggested in a pre-trial brief that they MIGH"r CLAIM that an "agreement to permit J!!jce checking is an agreement that's prohibited under the ... Act." [Polly, Sheri & Cash's] ... counsel responded ... "[i]t's not that [no, I, with Stone, Noonan & Spooner not present that], Your Honor.,,2 C) D) Fourth, exactly what the above means We & the judiciary now know. It means that they agreed, in house & out house, without telling us, their clients, not to raise in a 2 pricing case what "correct pricing is." Had we known that un-disclosed, anti-trust traders secret reality we would never have retained Don Howarth. Fifth, the price right or price wrong pros employ exactly the same cartel "scheduled rival price list" protocol on all fours with and supremely banned 73 years in Sugar, 297 U.S. 553, 603, (1936). This current testimony illustrates: A. Our scheduled strategies are made with & based on core rivals [not costs] They are developed at very high levels & include all [level prices] within specific [Esq.] categories. All [hourly] item lines within all [hourly] categories are included.3 Sixth, the identifying mark of a price fixing agreement is sealed by perfect price parallelism, as illustrated, by declaration in the Cosmetics case price fixing files - see above prices. A synonym for "parallel" pricing is the word "match" or "narrow ambit" rival pricing, as articulated in Container, 393 U.S. 333 (1969). Container is a criminal (90%) , not a civil (51 %) standard rig case. It expressly forbids "match" or "narrow ambit" price off a rival's pricing in lieu of correct, isolated & independent price proof. Seventh, to be clear, this presentation is about THE MARKET MAKERS (Of Class Actions), i.e., the very top & lead Complex Lit Esquires - The Price Rig Mechanic Pros. This parallel testimony marks the class market situation: Q. Now, in [correct pricing contract law, called] economics is there or is there not an on a market that has collusion, is there a market effect on other sellers who are not part of the collusion going on? Yes. The fact that the principal sellers are charging a certain price, perhaps high, gives other sellers license, if you will, to charge higher than the competitive rate. In other words, there's no downward pressure on their competition, by competition. So probably in a market where there is a collusively high price by dominant sellers, it's highly likely that all prices would be a little high.4 Warmest Regards, Gary Joseph Bonas II 3 A. 1 Bill Gensemer trial transcript at page 2571 :3-7. 01-16-01 Defense Opposition To APpeal, at page 34. Ed Heredia Live Trial Test, @1876:25-1877:1. PHD Price Doctor Lew Solmon, under oath at page 1781 :18-28. 2 3 4 4 EXC C. t:1 Real Simple Direct Price Discovery Shells & Facts On Firm/Chain Rival Zone Based Price Alignment- A Field Trade Secret? "Trade secret" is defined as: 1) information that would allow a business to direct sales efforts to customers of a competitor, 1 information that has value to rivals, which rivals are unaware of and could put it to beneficial use.' and information that would permit a competitor to target its business rival' customers is trade secret." On Ken Lewis et al CEO banks' rival based pricing structure region rigsr' 4 & rival based pricing [Ijf a co-Irival chain bank] ... learned where it conducts its surveys and how it schedules its price surveys such information could result in "non-competitive" prices [or overcharges] being charged to [to US,] consumers.6 A. [About this,] An independent and honorable [correct price proof] judiciary is indispensable to [price right proof] justice in our society. Canon 2 A. A. [About it,] A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of [price wrong] impropriety in all of the judge's activities. [About duty,] A judge shall respect and comply with the law* and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. Canon 1 A. An independent and honorable [correct price proof] judiciary is indispensable to [price right proof] justice in our society. On how top leads gain pole "favor" with the Piper Rudnick's Shirley Weiss SS D-BARit is based on collateral case discovery leveraging into both like and new big $ cases: Bernstein's B. Nicholas & S. Coffey both know. EXC t:I Expert Price Wrong Witness • An Expert [Price Tag/Fee/Award] Witness is defined as: "A witness qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training 0 R education to provide a scientific [price related], technical or other specialized opinion about the evidence or a [hourly price rig] fact issue [at final approval hearings]." -Federal Rules of Evidence 702-706. The Daubert Test is a method that federal district courts use to determine whether expert testimony is admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 702, which generally requires that expert testimony consist of scientific [correct price setting direct proof sequences], technical or other specialized [price] knowledge that will assist the factfinder in understanding the evidence or determining a [price/fee/rate/charge) fact in issue.' Specialized Price Or Charge Fixing Knowledge 11. The term "specialized [price wrong identifying] knowledge" is not defined in the Act. However, at common law "two principles govern the question of whether the field is one on which expert evidence can be called": Cross (1996 § 29050). In R v Bonython (1984) 38 SASR 45, King CJ at 46-47 stated the two relevant questions as: (a) whether the subject matter of the opinion is such that a person without instruction or experience in the area of knowledge or human experience would be able to form a sound judgment on the matter without the assistance of witnesses possessing special knowledge or experience in the area, and (b) whether the subject matter of the opinion forms part of a body of knowledge or experience which is sufficiently organised or recognised to be accepted as a reliable body of knowledge or experience ... 12. The first limb of King CJ's formulation reflects the test at common law as stated by Dixon CJ in Clark v Ryan (1960) 103 CLR 486 at 491 whereby: ... the opinion of witnesses possessing peculiar skills is admissible where the subject-matter of the inquiry is such that inexperienced persons are unlikely to prove capable of forming a correct judgment upon it without such assistance. 2 The classic ... statement of the role of [price] expert evidence is found in Kelliher (Village oj) v. Smith, ([1931] S.C.R. 672), concluding that in order for testimony to be considered "expert": [T]he subject matter of the inquiry must be such that ordinary people are unlikely to form a correct judgment about it, if unassisted by persons with special knowledge. (p. 684). [And] ... the evidence must be necessary to enable the trier of fact to appreciate matters in issue due to their technical [price wrong fact] nature. (p. 23). 3 I • the 2 3 http://www.impactforensics.comlservices/expert-witness/ http.z/www.lawlink.nsw.gov .au/lawlinklSupreme _ Courtlll_sc.nsf/pages/SCO http://www.economicaca/ew04_2p2.htm _ mcdougall130204 CosmicXpress SecretoTlsf SOI"'VICBS SUPERIOR FOR COURT THE OF THE COUNTY STATE OF SAN OF CALIFORNIA DIEGO SHERI I. and ~ -- ~--McCAMPBELL ; On Behalf of themselves all Others Similarly Situated, ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) vs. ) CASE ) NO. 703666 RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, a ) corporation; THE VONS COMPANIES, ) INC., a corporation; LUCKY STORES, ) INC., a corporation; and Does 1-50,) \ Defendants. CONFIDENTIAL - FOR TRIAL COUNSEL ONLY CONDENSED DEPOSITION LOS TRANSCRIPT GERALD ORR OF MARK ANGELES, JULY CALIFORNIA 24/ 1998 FRIDAY, REPORTED BY: SANDRA M. FERNALD CSR NO. 4417 FERNALD COURT REPORTERS 28805 Charreadas Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 (949)365-1077 ~. .Condenseltl Page 5' 1 1"l-t Page 7 J 2 3 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA. FRIDAY, JULY 24.1998 Q Would you say that it is an employment case? 2 9:23 A.M. 3 4 5 a 6 located at 3605 West MacArthur Boulevard, Santa Ana, 7 California. My name is Dave Vaccaro. I am videotechnician employed by the C~omon Group, THE VIDEOGRAPHER: 4 .. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 This is the videotaped deposition of Mark Orr, beginning at 9:23 on July 24, 1998, in the matter of Sheri McCampbeU versus Ralphs Grocery Company. The case number is 703666, taken at 700 South Flower Street, Los Angeles., California. This deposition is taken on behalf of the Plaintiff. May 8 9 10 11 12 • 13 : 14 13 14 we please have introductions beginning with the witness. THE WITNESS: Mark Orr. MS. LACKEY: Sandra Lackey. MR.. BONAS: 15 16 17 18 · ]5 16 · 17 18 19 Cash Bonas. Would the reporter swear the TIlE VIDEOGRAPHER: witness. 20 1/ 19 21 1/ : 20 21 22 22 II 23 /1 24 II 25 II 23 24 25 Yes. Q. That's good enough. A. Can I interrupt a second. This laptop is a bit of a distraction. MR. BONAS: Let's go off the record. fHE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 9:25 and we're off the record. ., (Recess) THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 9:27 and we are back on the record. MR. BONAS: Can you read back where we left off. (The record was read by the reporter as follows: "Q. Would you say that it is an employment case? "A. Yes.") Q. BY MR. BONAS: N.L.r. Orr, is there any reason that you wouldn't be able to give your best testimony today? A. No. Q I am g0Jr,g to ask you. briefly about your educational b<,:,~kgnu~d. Did you go tv college? A. Yes. Q. Can you tell me where you went to college. A. Page 6 1 Page 8 1 A. MARK GERALD ORR, I graduated from the University of Redlands. 2 3 4 5 6 BY 7 8 9 10 11 having been first duly SWQ.fD, was examined and testified as follows: E~ATION 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MR. BONAS: 'Q. Good morning; Mr. Orr, Would you please state your full name for the record. A Mark Gerald orr. Q. Orr is spelled Orr-r? A. 9 Yes. III 12 13- 110 Q. Mr. Orr, have you ever had your deposition taken before? . 14 A Yes. 15 Q. You understand that your testimony is 16 subject to the penalty of perjury just as if you are 17 testifying in a court of law? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Can I ask when the last time you had your 20 deposition taken was? 21 A. I believe it was about last October. 22 Q. What kind of a case was that in connection 23 with? 24 A. It's a case involving my employer. 1 don't 25 know how much detail.. 12 13 14 15 16 17 ! i8 , 19 .20 .21 · 22 23 .• 24 • 25 What was your major? Business and management. Q. What year did you graduate from the University of Redlands? A. '92. Q. Did you receive a B.A. there? A. B.S. Q. Did you attend any colleges after that? A. No. Q. Prior to the University of Redlands did you attend any universities? A. Yes. Q. What university? A. Chaffey Junior College, Cal Poly Pomona and UC Irvine. Q. Did you receive any degrees from any of those schools? . A. No. Q. Just so I am clear, your degree was in business? . A. Business and management . Q. Mr. Orr, what is your current position at Ralphs today? A. Vice PresidentIMarketing Information Q, A. Page 5 - Page 8 . CondenseIt! . Page n.t 91 I Page II Services. 2 Q. How long have you held that position? 3 A. By title, since June of '95. 4 Q. Prior to that, were you employed by Ralphs? 5 A. Food4Less. 6 Q. Food4Less? 7 A. Which merged with Ralphs at that time. 8 Q. What position did you hold at Food4Less? 9 A. It was a similar position. It was Vice 10 President of Retail Support Services, Ithink was what 11 it was called. 12 Q. Vice PresidentIRetail Support Services? 13 A. Yes. l4 Q. How long were you with Food4Less? 15 A. Since March of '92. 16 Q. Did you hold the position of Vice 17 PresidentlRetail Support Services from '92 to '95 at 18 Food4Less? 19 A. No. .. 20 Q. What was your position prior to your last . 21 position at Foad4Less? 22 A. March '92 to approximately June '93 was Vice 23 President of Inventory Manage :T'.:mt. 24 Q. And prior to 1992, were you working for 25 another grocery company? 1 I A. Bonas: Can you read back the last two 2 answers for me. 3 (The record was read by the reporter 4 as follows: 5 "A. Administrative Assistant at 6 the headquarters. There was a 7 Purchasing User. Liaison position. 8 And then Reorder Department Supervisor. -,9 "Q. Reorder Department Supervisor 10 after the Administrative Assistant? 11 "A. After the User Liaison for 12 Purchasing.") 13 THE WTINESS: I don't even remember the exact 14 title of that. 15 Q. BY MR. BONAS: That's okay. 16 After your position at Stater Brothers as 17 Reorder Department Supervisor, what position did you 18 hold? 19 A. That was the final. 20 Q. Okay. And do you recall generally the years 21 that you were Reorder Department Supervisor at Stater 1 . Mr. 22 23 Brothers? A. Q. Approximately the last ~0 to i2 years. So that would be between '80 and '92, 25 thereabouts? 24 Page 10 Page I2 Yes. I A. Probably more like' ,82 to 92. 2 Q. And what grocery company was that? 2 Q. Okay. And your position as User Liaison 3 A. Stater Brothers Markets. 3 with Purchasing? 4 Q. How long did you work for Stater Brothers? 4 A. Approximately a year. 5 Q. And Administrative Assistant at 5 A. 16 years. 6 Q. Do you recall what year you started? I 6 headquarters? 7 A. Ithink about two years. 7 could probably do the math. 8 A. 1976. 8 Q. And the other years were filled in as Boxboy 9 and Clerk? 9 Q. I'm sorry? 10 .A. Approximately. 10 A. 1976., 11 Q. And what was the position that you started 11 Q. Okay.' Canyou describe for me what your 12 with at Stater Brothers? 12 current responsibilitiesare as vice President of 13 Marketing Services at Ralphs? 13 A. Boxboy. 14 Q. Do you recall the next position after that? 14 A. Yes. 15 A. Clerk in the stores. 15 Q. Can you do that for me, please. 16 Q. I am going to try to fill in the 16 years. 16 A. Pardon me? 17 It doesn't have to be -- as specific as you can 17 Q. Can you briefly do that for me, please. 18 remember is all I am asking for. 18 A. I have a collection of departments that 19 And after clerk? 19 service all of the various divisions of marketing, 20 A. Administrative Assistant at the . 20 grocery, deli, liquor and so on. One is price 21 headquarters. There was a Purchasing User Liaison 21 integrity, second would be what we call corporate 22 position. And then Reorder Department Supervisor. 22 pricing, third would be marketing analysis; a fourth, 23 Q. Reorder Department Supervisor after the "23 electronic marketing; and, fifth, scan integrity. 24 Q. What was the fourth one again? 24 Administrative Assistant? 25 A. Scan integrity. 25 A. After the User Liaison for Purchasing. t Page 9 - Page 12 _Condenseltl Page 13 1 2 Q. I have that as the fifth. 1 w. Page 15 Q. Can you describe for me generally -- strike 2 that. 3 4 Electronic marketing. Q. Can YQUtell me what price integrity A. A. I'm sorry. is? 3 4 A. Docs Mr. Rizzi report to you'? Yes. Q. Can you tell me generally what type of Primarily the maintenance of the main frame 5 pricing systems as opposed to the store systems. 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 7 pricing 15 16 17 of the main frame systems mean? A. We have a central price file on QUI main frame at the headquarters. Thousands .of prices change every week. Those need to be inputted. Q. And what are your responsibilities in connection with the main frame pricing system? Is it making sure -" is it fair to say it is making sure that the data is entered correctly? A. That's right.. Q. Do you know how long that data is maintained? Q. What does maintenance 6 information he reports to you? .; A. Are you talking about reporting function or 8 are.you talking about what reports he produces and 9 gives to me? Can you be more specific. 10 Q. That's fair. Let's start with what type of 11 reports he provides t.o you, L 2 A. Can you be mere specific. 13 Q. Is he involved with pricing at all? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And what is the nature of his responsibility 16 with regard to pricing? 17 A. He is in charge of price integrity in the 18 corp orate pricing area that I mentioned. 19 Q. If I go about it this way, it might be 20 easier. Can you describe for me what corporate pricing • 21_~~S. .: i~ A. Can you be more specific. Q. On the main frame. The data that is input, 20 is there -- does the computer system have a date at 18 19 21 which it discards information that is input? 21 t... eaning retail history? M t'-' ~'_"'. '-.:~ ... ~~. ~ /. . 7.3 24 25 Q. Retail history. A. It does. I am not sure if it is date-based nperitrve 23 price checking that we do and ali of the analysis work 24 that we do with competitive pricing and the price ·H .• Yes, I. :.:.:... . - ,=.. ~:... -"- crh ..·.. ,CJ~."i~:es the '·-:---:::t~-·--·--·" C() » ", or if it is based on, you know, after -- if it holds I P~14 • 25 modeling that we do comparing our pricing to competitor j Page 16 / .: , what sort of pricing actions we __.._ . ~3'.'''·---~trYQti'1>rieflyaeScnbe'forme ;bat 4 marketing analysis is', 5 A. Marketing analysis works with basically 6 three sources of data: Store scan data; store 7 transaction data; which is essentially scan data 8 attached to customer orders, includes additional 9 information such as how the order was paid for and the 10 date and the time and coupons that were used, 'that sort 11 of thing; and geodemographic data. 12 Using those three sources individually and 13 in combination, they provide ad hQC and regular reports 14 to a .number of people throughout the company. 15 Q. Those reports, who do you send them to? 1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 the last eight price changes, for example, or the last. 10. There is a certain amount of history in it, but I don't recall exactly what it is. Q. DQ you know who would know? A. I could name several people that probably would. Q. If you could name a couple that YQu think probably would know. A. Probably Frank Rizzi. Certainly programmers in the MIS department. Q. Do you have -- are there people that you supervise at Ralphs? A. Yes. Q. People that report to you? A. Yes. Q. Can you tell me who those people are? A. Frank Rizzi, pricing to determine / 2 might want to take in the future. 16 Larry Sharp, Tom Montano and Tom Mon -- is )7 18 19 20 \21 A. Anybody and everybody. Q. SQ it is a long list? 18 Jeanne Leslie. Q. Can yQU tell me what position 20 it Montano? 19 21 22 A. Yes. A. A very long list. that contains that list? Q. Is there a document A. No. No. Q. These reports, Q. What his position is. A. Director of Electronic Q. And Jeanne Leslie? A. Department 22 reports what -- are there many that you circulate to anyone and everyone? 23 24 25 Marketing. Secretary, 23 A. There are many reports that the department 24 produces. There is a wide -- if you take all the 25 reports together, there is a very wide distribution Page 13 - Page 16 · CondenseIt! 1 list 2 TM Page 19 to talk just -A. I will clarify that. Not every report goes Q. Q. I didn 't think so. r want 3 5 6 4 to anyone and everyone. Are any of these reports that you circulate do any of them have to do with pricing, 8 retail pricing? 9 A. Some. 1 to some people. 10 12 13 15 Q. Do you know how many reports of these 11 reports deal with retail pricing? A. Icouldn't give you a number. Q. Do you recall some of the names of these 14 reports? A. Probably the most common report produced by 16 the department would be reporting scan movement on. some 11 small group or large group of items. either in item 18 detail form or in summary form, and would have some 19 sort of name that corresponded with a group of items 20 that was being reported. 21 different names. So there is many, many ~2 Q. D" yOl.' mow who )'01) send ~te~e !"ep0r'::-; to? 23 The pricing-related reports. 24 A. I don't. 25 Q. Let me back up and try to make this a little Page 18 more focused. 2 Do any of these reports that you generate 3 deal with dairy/deli department at Ralphs? 1 4 A. Page 20 share would be a percent of total market, however that 2 is defined, that a given player sold. 3 Q. BY MR. BONAS: Does Ralphs receive market 4 5 Certainly. 5 Q. Do you recall any of the names of the 6 reports that you circulate that deal with the 1 dairy/deli department? share data? A. Can you be more specific. Q. Can Ralphs request IRL for the record, 6 7 IRI? 8 market share data from 8 10 11 12 13 A. One thing I should clarify is that I don't Larry Sharp would be the one. these reports? 9 circulate the reports. I don't recall any names off the top of my head. Q. Do you generate A. meaning Information Incorporated. And if it is okay, I will use 10 that acronym if that ever comes up. 11 A. That's fine. 9 Resources I do not. Q. What function do you -- what role do you 14 play with regard to these reports? 15 A. I am generally copied on them. Sometimes 16 the request 17 Oftentimes Objection. Lack of foundation. You can answer. 14 Also, just for the witness, unless your 15 attorney instructs you not to answer, you can go ahead 12 MS. LACKEY: 13 Q. BY MR. BONAS: for the information might come through me. not. Very small role. 16 and answer. A lot of the objections 17 record and for trial. 18 A. are stated for the Q. The store scan data, what is the nature of -- general nature of that 20 information? 18 19 that information 21 A. Can you be a little more specific. I understand. Could you restate the 19 question, please. 20 Q. Does -- can Ralphs receive market share data 21 from IRl? 22 A. We do receive market Q. 22 24 Q. With regard to the dairy/deli department, have you -- strike that. Does store scan data -- can store scan data share data from IRI. 23 what reports 23 25 Can that market share data be broken down specific product? I am almost certain it can. 24 into product, A. 25 contain market share? Page 17 - Page 20 Condenselt! Page 21 TM Page 23 1 [ 2 Q. Can it be broken down into UPC codes? A. That is basically that Ralphs has hired to survey its competitor's that I am aware of that I recall that we used a third-party. Are you A. There is only one instance the same question you understanding. uPcs, you can break by each individual UPC? seeing market share data 2 prices? 3 4 3 already asked me to my 4 Q. So if there are 13 5 market share data down 6 A. I don't recall ever 7 reported 9 product below the category level, but I am almost 8 certain that it could be reported at the UPC or at the level. one of your general responsibilities · j 5 talking about that instance? Q. Any other instances. 7 A. None that I am aware of. 6 8 10 1 12 Q. Does Ralphs A. Yes. survey its competitors' egg 9 prices? 10 11 Q. Another you mentioned earlier was electronic marketing. 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Can you tell me what that is. 14 A. It is primarily the administration of the 15 Ralphs I am going to mark as the next in order -- I don't know where we're at. I think we're at 158. Q. THE REPORTER: MR. BaNAS: 157 .. I am going to mark as Plaintiffs' 13 14 Club program. was put in l5 Exhibitf 16 Grocery 18 16 18 Q. Do you know when that program A. October 157 ~- this document Company to Plaintiffs' is Response by Ralphs Second Set of Special 17 place at Ralphs? • 17 Interrogatories. of '96 I think was the date. I'm Q. Mr. Orr, I would guess you haven't seen this 19 sorry. October of '97. 20 Q. I am going to come back to I believe it was 21 the second general category that we were talking about in your current 23 position, corporate pricing. And one of the overall 24 responsibilities that you mentioned was competitive 25 price checks. 22 in regard to your responsibilities A. Yes. Q. Can you tell me what that means? A. We survey before. Maybe you have, though. I will ask · 20 you that question first. Have you ever seen this • 19 document 21 document · 22 23 before? A. I don't think. so. 24 .25 (Whereupon the document referred to was marked as Plaintijf's Exhibit 1.57 for identification.) ; Page 24 Q. BY MR. BONAS: Why don't you take a few minutes and just look over it so that we can be sure. A. I am confident I haven't seen it. Q. I am going to -- if you'd turn to Page 2, and just above the middle of the page it says "responses." Right below that to the left it says "Interrogatory No. 1." Page 22! , I 2 3 4 i 1 i 2 3 4 our competitors to see what their with its I prices are. 5 Q. Does Ralphs survey its competitors A. Yes. 5 6 7 6 own employees? 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 use any third parties to survey its competitor's prices? A. I recall one time that we did. Q. Do you remember when that was? A. I would say about two years ago. I probably should make a clarification to that. This was a Santa Barbara surveythatwas on behalf of Ralphs, but we technically did Q. Does Ralphs Would you read the sentence below 9 Interrogatory No.1. 10 A. You want me to read it? J1 Q. Not out loud. To yourself. 12 13 A. Okay. Q. Can you identify 8 14 are familiar for me all methods that you with that Ralphs has used to monitor the 15 conducted 16 not contract with the third-party. A real estate 17 development firm contracted with them on behalf of 18 Ralphs. So based on that, you might say we never used 19 a third-party. Q. Does Ralphs hire people to conduct its price 21 surveys? 22 A Yes. 20 23 24 the one we just mentioned 15 retail price of eggs of its competitors? 16 A. Can you be a little more specific about ·17 "method"? 18 Q. We talked about third parties. We talked 19 about employees. AIe there any other -- I am using 20 those as methods. 21 ·AIe you familiar with any other methods? 22 MS. LACKEY: Let me just interpose the Q. Do you recall any of the people aside from -- that was just mentioned any of the third parties 2J objection. I think it is still vague and ambiguous, 24 over broad. And in addition to the problem with the 25 word "methods," it is vague and ambiguous as to what 25 with regard to Santa Barbara, Page 21 - Page 24 : Condenseltl Page 25 1 TM Page 27 l /<. ! J would constitute monitoring retail prices. I is surveyed on a regular basis? You can answer to the extent you 2 A. There is. Idon't know the streets. J Q. That's okay. And do you know how long this 3 understand. 4 Lucky in Riverside has been surveyed by Ralphs? 4 THEWITNESS:Based on what you just said about A. Approximately a year-and-a-half. 5 outside service versus our own employees, Ican't think. 5 6 of any other approach. 6 Q. Do you recall any other stores?l 7 A, A Lucky in La Mirada. ..-J __ 7 Q. BY MR. BOI'-lAS: ave you ever instructed any H 8 Ralphs employees to monitor any competitor's retail 8 Q. Is it fair to say there is a single Lucky in' \ 9 prices? ·'9 La Mirada that is surveyed on a regular basis? \ " 10 ,A. Well, we have a group of 20 people and a ' 10 A;I don't know for sure. The answer is yes~ II I am nbi sfu-6 if there is more than one Lucky in . • 11 supervisor and ultimately a director. That's basically 12 their entire job. It is not something I go out and. 12 La Mirada, but we do survey the same one ocassionally. 13 Q. Okay. Thank you. And do you know how long ' 13 tell them to do each day of the week, but I think they 14 that store has been surveyed by Ralphs? i 14 all understand that is their job. 15 A. One to two years or more. 15 Q. So do Ralphs employees go out each day of 16 the week to survey competitors' prices? 16 Q. Can you think of any others? 17 A. I will clarify "each day of the week." They 17 A. Stater Brothers in Colton. 18 could go out each day of the week, but any given week 18 Q. In Colton? 19 A. Yes. It's the one on LaCadena.--------, 19 it's not every day of week. . 20 Q. In any given week, would you say it is three 20 Q. In LaCadena? Is that Stater's? . 21 times a week, or at least? 21 A. The street is LaCadena. There is more than 22 A. Probably three or four day" a week we ot. 22 one Stater's in Colton. \ 23 p~ ut in If . 23 Q. Do you know how long that -\, ~. . Z4 Q. Do you know to what stores these employees A. I don't believe that is right. There is two i 25 go to survey prices? in Colton. I don't remember which one it is. ..J. 2 I me 1 ! I I (.1 '- 1 2 3 4 5 6 j i 7 / 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I 25 MS.LACKEY:At what point in time? MR, BONAS:At present. THEWITNESS:The schedule changes weekly. And could tell you some stores that they go to on a regular basis. Q. BY MR. BONAS:Let's start with.those. A. Vons in Lakewood. Q. Is that a specific Vans in Lakewood? A. Ibelieve it is the only one in Lakewood. Actually, I am not sure if it is the town of Lakewood or the street of Lakewood. ·l Q. Okay. Do you know how long that specific store has been surveyed by Ralphs? 1 1 A. Idon't remember exactly. j Q. Do you -- has it been more than a year? A. I would answer yes. ~ Q. Do you know whether it has been more than two years? A. I'm not certain. Q. Any other stores that Ralphs regularly surveys? A. A Lucky in Riverside. Q. Is that the only Lucky in Riverside? A. I don't think. it is. Q. Is there a specific Lucky in Riverside that II I I I Page 28 That's okay. You don't have to recall 2 exactly. 3 Do you recall about how long Ralphs has 4 surveyed the Stater in Colton? 5 A. Couple years or longer. 6 Q. Any others that you recall? 7 A. There are other regular ones. I couldn't 8 name them. '-:-\ 9 Q. Are there more than five other regular ones? j lOA. No. I'd say there are more that are done on \ 11 a regular basis. Smaller surveys. I couldn't name 12th~-.-~ 13 Q, Wouldit be fair to say that these four \ 4 stores are the main competitor stores that are surveyedr 15 ona.regularbasis? \' I Q. I ... 1 :t»:.tfes. ---_ •..... \ ~ 17 18 19 20 21 2:> 23 24 25 MS. LACKEY:Objection. Vague as to "main" and "regular." - . i THE WITNESS:These of the biggest surveys that i we conduct each week. _..1 Q. BY MR.BONAS:Do you know why Vans' Lakewood store is surveyed on a regular basis? A. Yes. . Q. Can you explain that to me. A. When we look for a survey store, generally Page 25 - Page 28 .Condenselt! . ( 1\ · Th{ 1 we're Page 29 looking for a store that we believe to be in a We're 1 Q. Does Ralphs ever to your knowledge A. Not that Page 31 receive 2 certain price region for that competitor. 3 looking for a store that 2 price survey 3 4 is larger, newer, and has good close to the price checkers 1 j I.. 4 variety. And we're looking for a store that is reasonably information from egg suppliers? Iam aware of. Q. Have you ever beard of a company called A. 5 geographically 6 who survey it. 5 Retail Data Services? 6 i 7 '9 (\ \ 10 11 Q. You mentioned A. Different ,)3-ee~nre-regioo.. \ 12 I 13 14 8 retail price data -- competitors' retail price data competitors have different prices ""r--,9 from RDS? on different items in different geographies. We may be A. I mentioned previously that a fino had looking for their lowest priced area. We may be 11 !ontracted with them on behalf of Ralphs sometime looking for their highest priced area. We may be 12 ack. I believe that was RDS at the time, which took looking for a middle of the road area. There's 13, out the open question of whether that was Ralphs or generally some criteria that we are looking for when we 1~' whether that was the outside -- the other firm that did you look for stores in a ..W:Q,~tdoes ~a!.g!e.~~~ . .. -, 7 Yes. Q. Do you know whether Ralphs has ever received 1\ : 15 pi~Sl!ry~ "10-18 Q. Do you know what cntena A. Middle A. 17 store fits into? , -----.-.-.---.--~. the Vons Lakewood 'i5 18 business with them. 16 Q. Do you know whether Vons knows that Ralphs its Vons Lakewood store? Objection. Lack of foundation. THE WITNESS Could you restate that or rephrase MS. LACKEY: 17 surveys of the road is what we believe. 19 20 Q. How about the Lucky Riverside? 19 20 I don't recall what the objective was when it, 21 we selected that store. 22 (Interruption in proceeding) 23 ~::k.Bm"AS; Let' go off the reccrd. 24 THE VillBOGR.A?HER: The time is 10:04 and we are 25 off the record. 21 Q. BY MR. BONAS: When Ralphs goes to the Vons ·''---7 ! store to survey it') prices, how long does that \ 13 process take? \,, 24 A. One to two days. \ 22 Lakewood 25 Q. How many people are there for one to two Page 32 \ Page 30 1 2 3 4 (~ss) MR. BONAS: Back on. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: 1 2 days from Ralphs? A. Four to eight. The time is 10;14 and we are on the record. 5 7 8 9 10 11 6 criteria Orr, do you recall what were used in determining to survey the Lucky La Mirada store? A. I don't remember. Q. How about the Stater Brothers Colton store, same question. A. I don't remember. Q. BY MR. BON AS: Mr. Q. Why does Ralphs Q. Are those four to eight people -- do they take with them any devices? 5 A. Yes. 3 4 6 7 Q. What type of device do they take in? 8 9 11 13 Presently? tvJ.R.BONAS: At present. MS. LACKEY: THE WITNESS: A symbol handheld electronic 10 device. Q. BY MR. BONAS: Do you know about how big A. Approximately 12 that device is? 12 14 15 17 18 20 survey the Stater Brothers in the area. 13 Colton store? A. We have competitors Q. four inches by eight inches by by Ralphs, has 14 two inches. 15 Q. Since you have been employed 16 Ralphs sent these four to eight people to Vons Lakewood Does Ralph consider Stater Brothers a .' 16 competitor? A. Yes. Q. A. Is Stater Brothers a competitor in 19 La Mirada? I don't recall if they have stores in 21 La Mirada. '. how long we have been 19 surveying there. For the most part, it would have been \ 20 weekly during that time period. There may have been a\, 21 few weeks that we missed. _ .,'18 A. You asked previously 17 store weekly? l 22 23 24 25 Q. And Riverside? A. Yes. 22 23 Q. Do you know whether these four to eight people that survey the Vons Lakewood store have been by a Vons employee inquiring what they are Q. And Lakewood? A. No. 24 approached 25 doing? Page 29 - Page 32 ·Condenseftl Page 33 A. I have never been in the store at the time they were doing the surveys. 3 Q. Have you ever heard one of Ralphs employees 4 mention that a Vons employee approached them? 5 A I don't recall an exact -~ any exact 6 specific reference to that. . 7 Q. Do you recall any general reference to that? 8 A. I~,~on~· '.!;t.:.--_-9 Q.'Just SO I am clear, sometimes this process 10 takes two days, the surveying of Vans Lakewood store. 11 A. I believe currently we're on a one-day 12 schedule. In the past, I know we have been on a 13 two-day schedule. 14 Q: Is that an eight-hour day? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Do you know the names of those four to eigh 17 people that survey the Vons Lakewood store? 18 A. I don't. 19 Q. Do you know who would? 20 A. Frank Rizzi. It may not be the same each 21 week. 22 Q. Do you kno .•..• : how many Ralphs employees are 23 deployed to survey the Lucky Riven.idestore? 24 MS. LACKEY: Presently? 1 2 MR ._B_O_N_AS __ __:_A_t_p_re __ __t_. sen rM I \ 1 ) .. ( 1 \ Page 35 I 1 bit. Next item that you mentioned was analysis. Can 2 you tell me what that analysis is. 3 k . would primarily consist of price . It 4 comparisons between ourselves and competitors,between 5 competitors and/or price comparisons across time for 6- ourselvesor for our competitors or for both. 7 MR. ,BONAS: Read back the Iast.enswer, 8 (The record was read by the reporter as follows: 10 "A. It would primarily consist of II price comparisons between ourselves. 12 and competitors, between competitors 13 and/or price comparisonsacross time 14 for ourselvesor for our competitors 15 or for both.") 16 Q. BY MR. BONAS: What role do youplay in . 17 analyzing these price.comparisons? 18 A. We publish several of the key price. 19 comparisons each week under my name. My secretary puts 20 most of them together 21 Q. When you say ·pUblishthese price 22 comparisons,what does that mean? . 23 A. For distribution to other members 24 company, primarily in the marketing department. pi~ .... ;r.,he r2_5 \ I -r2_5 I Q_._D_o_y_o_u_kn__ili_e_m __o_w_w_h_at__ ar_k_eh_'n_g_d_e_p_artm~,~en_t ~ Page 34 don't know exactly. 2 Q. BY MR. BONAS: Is it more than four? 3 A. I am not sure what the survey schedule is. 4 If it's one day, it is probably more than four. If 5 it's a couple days, it probably is right around four. 6 Q. Is it fair to say that, like Lakewood, the 7 survey of Lucky Riverside store is eighthours a day? THE WITNESS: I 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 / Page 36 does with these price comparisons? 2 A. No. 3 Q; Is it fair to say that your function really 4 is -- one of your responsibilities generally is to 5 gather the information and put (t;ttigether in a 6 readable format and send it off to whatever departments 7 need it?' .... A. Yes. 8 A. We provide information. That's accurate, Q. With regard to the Lucky La Mirada store 9 Q. Just a little while ago we were talking that Ralphs surveys, do you know what schedule, one or 10 about the stores that Ralphs surveys of Vons, Lucky and two-day schedule, Ralphs' survey of that store is? 11 Stater Brothers. Four of those stores, anyway. A. Are you asking if it is oneday or two day? 12 ~~st'galp1l:5;KiI'G.w.::Whe1her;i~CaIi you give me ad example of an occasion 10 that your department would run a gross margin report? 11 A. We have a process ~- it kind of long . is a 12 answer. lam trying to think where to start and what If you would like me -- if or like me to rephrase anything, 13 you 14 are exactly asking. Q. Take' your time. 15 you have any questions 16 just let me know. 17 A 16 vouchers were used. 17 Q. When we were talking about WIC earlier -- 18 going back to our conversation when we were talking 19 ISgeneral 19 about WIC. do you know whether Ralphs is reimbursed for • On a periodic basis -- let me st~ statement~~ 20 WIC purchases? A. Idon't know how the -- 20 know the 22 details of the program. I think the descriptions that 23 I have given you today of the program are just my 24 understanding conceptually of how I think the [.rngrair. . 25 works, bUI I have never seen ani details. 21 r don't 21 ) As part of managing the prices on the items base-l, if you will, we Page 22 23 .24 25 that :1;"';; more margin 1 Q. Do you know who would be familiar A. I don't specifically. Page 74 with tho. 76 \ 2 details within Ralphs? 3 4 ! ' I periodically produce reports that show what the current 2 margin is on those items. 3 Again, I don't think it would be hard for me to find out, but I just don't 5 know off the top of my head. 6 Q. Thank you. 7 When your department 8 model-9 10 11 12 is running a price 9 10 tf.'!,•••~~l II ~tWO~ds? 12 13 14 15 A. A. Uh-huh. Q. -- does it ever use cost data? . A. Not normally. Q. Can you give me an example of when your r 13 department 14 mgtl? 15 would use cost daca in running a price ......., A. When we first began the modeling, which was 16 actually prior to the merger back at Foad4Less, I 17 recall that we did originally. I'm talking four to 18 five years ago. It is just the way we did the modeling 19 at that time. 20 It's evolved to where we calculate the gross 21 margin dollar impact the way I previously described 22 haven't 16 17 18 19 20 -=~,,_'~_ .._. Q. ~.;; , ~.,.,. .•••,•••• -"",,~~.~~. rI!:O. and 21 23 ""::""~=~'""'. Y=:""""'-·,=~.W~~~' i do and used cost. I don't remember any time, you 23 know, from those initial times four or five years ago process. ')(' Q. Is there a reason that Ralphs wouldn't use 2ziijej~Q.'fWE~:@I..:tzfi~~i A. Yes. I guess the answer is yes, Q. Thank you. 24 yes, they do. 24 that we have used cost in the modeling 25 25 Page 73 - Page 76 5 6 7 8 9 10 II: 12 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at California, this , day of ,1998. ~l " II ""\ 13 14 15 MA..RK GER..<\LDORR "-, .> 16 17 18 ... .. ::: ;'" :.') !9 20 21 -. ,~ . '.- .,," 22 23 I-I "A:~-:'~.'" 2 COmfTY OF OR&\iGE " !2'; !25 Page 821 ) ) ss, I 1 ) 13 4 I. Sandra M. Fernald, Certified Shorthand Reporter, do bereby certify: That the witness named in the foregoing 7 deposition prior to being examined, was by me first 8 duly sworn; 9 That said deposition was taken before me at the 10 time and place herein set forth and was taken down by 11 me in shorthand and thereafter transcribed; 12 That said deposition is a true record of the 13 testimony given by the witness and of all objections 14 made at the time of the examination. 15 I further certify that I am neither counsel for 16 nor related to any party to said action, nor in anywise 17 interested in the outcome thereof. 18 IN W:rrNCSS WHEREOF. I have subscribed my name 19 this day of , 1998. ., 6 20 21 122 15 24 25 Page 81 - Page 82 t:I EXD D. The Price Wrong Wilderness - Condensed Price Math And Ethical Price Reads On Court Price Security From Master Class D-Price Fraud ~ [Until now,] t]he [We & the] judiciary have had little price right experience .... "[T]he ... Act, so far as price-fixing agreements are concerned, establishes one uniform rule applicable to all industries alike.,,2 1 ill (7) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law*. Lulu Self Publishing - Published Works 6479666 6449795 6355664 6352593 6351174 Price Psychology & Temptation 101 Bernanke On AIG & Lerach On Price & Ratzinger's Cardinal Bar Sins Price Angles & Top Price Cheaters Currency Price Law Lulu "Bonas" Book Store link: http://www.lulu.comlbrowse/ search. php ?search _ forum=1&search _ cat=2&show Jesults=topics&retum _ chars=200&search_ keywords=&keys=&header _ search=true&sitese arch=lulu.com&q=&fSearch=bonas&fSearchFamily=2&fSubmitSearch.x= 11&fSubmitSearch. y=7 A) B) C) D) E) F) G) H) I) J) On Tax Price Tricks & CAP NAME Classification Fraud (NEW) 34 Ex Files & Conviction Fraud Oh My Buca Deep IPO Clues Chapter A Romeo Executive Con Inside Ops Proof On My VP Mirror Facts & Rule Crossing B 300 Deep Blue Law Print BU CA's BETTIN GAMBLE FACTS PART B I 8 Year George Bpsh Con - Proof BUCA VP - A-Z RETALIATION REALITY VP VON BUCA [-NO CRIMAL PRIVACY - ED Bonas I-Proclaim Book Store Link EX D - Mar!shal Court Security Ed 1 Arizona, 457 U.S. 332, 332-333 (l98~). 'ld., oiling United States v, Socony-Vacuum Oil C0I350, 222.