1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 CASE NO.: ED CV 05-15 RGK (SGLx) 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 5 PAUL MINNICK, : 6 Plaintiff, : 7 vs. : 8 NELNET CORPORATION; : 9 NELNET-I TRUST; EQUIFAX : 10 INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC; : 11 EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,: 12 INC.; TRANSUNION, LLC; and : 13 DOES 1 to 10, : 14 Defendants. : 15 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 16 17 Deposition of ALICIA FLUELLEN 18 (Taken by Plaintiff) 19 Atlanta, Georgia 20 August 31, 2005 21 22 Reported by: Mary K. Caldwell 23 Court Reporter 24 25 2 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 2 For the Plaintiff: 3 ROBERT STEMPLER, ESQ. (By telephone) 4 Law Office of Robert Stempler 5 3400 Inland Empire Boulevard 6 Suite 101 7 Ontario, California 91764-5577 8 (909) 972-6841 9 stempler@earthlink.net 10 11 For Defendant Nelnet: 12 PAUL F. DONSBACH, ESQ. (By telephone) 13 Kutak Rock 14 18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1100 15 Irvine, California 92612-1077 16 (213) 996-8478 17 paul.donsbach@kutakrock.com 18 19 For Defendant Equifax Information Services: 20 AMY GREENSTEIN, ESQ. 21 Kilpatrick Stockton 22 1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800 23 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 24 (404) 815-6500 25 3 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 2 (Continued) 3 For Defendant TransUnion: 4 KIRSTEN HEIKAUS WEAVER, ESQ. (By phone) 5 Crowell & Moring 6 3 Park Plaza, 20th Floor 7 Irvine, California 92614-8508 8 (949) 263-8400 9 kheikausweaver@crowell.com 10 11 12 Deposition of ALICIA FLUELLEN, taken by 13 the Plaintiff, at Kilpatrick Stockton, 1100 14 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800, Atlanta, Georgia, on 15 the 31st day of August, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., before 16 Mary K. Caldwell, Court Reporter. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 1 CONTENTS 2 THE WITNESS: ALICIA FLUELLEN 3 EXAMINATION PAGE 4 BY MR. STEMPLER: 5 5 BY MS. WEAVER: 161 6 BY MR. STEMPLER: 162 7 8 9 INDEX OF EXHIBITS 10 (No exhibits were marked for identification.) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 P R O C E E D I N G S: 2 ALICIA FLUELLEN, 3 having been first duly sworn, was examined and 4 testified as follows: 5 CROSS-EXAMINATION 6 BY MR. STEMPLER: 7 Q Ms. Fluellen, could you please state and 8 spell your name for the court reporter and the 9 record. 10 A It's Alicia, A-L-I-C-I-A, last name 11 Fluellen, F-L-U-E-L-L-E-N (spelling). 12 Q And are you employed by Equifax? 13 A Yes. I'm employed by Equifax Information 14 Services, LLC. 15 Q Do you mind if we simply refer to your 16 employer as Equifax today? 17 A Okay. 18 Q Great. How long have you been employed by 19 Equifax? 20 A Since September 27th, 1993. 21 Q And since September 27th, 1993, what 22 positions have you held within Equifax? 23 A I've held -- I started as a customer- 24 service representative. I've held the position of 25 maintenance reviewer. I've held the position of 6 1 consumer relations specialist. I have held the 2 position of quality-assurance observation 3 specialist. I've held the position of function 4 coordinator, which is a front-line supervisor. And 5 then I've held the position as supervisor, I've held 6 the position of manager, and I've held currently the 7 director position. 8 MR. DONSBACH: I'm sorry. The current 9 position is director of what? 10 THE WITNESS: Director of customer care. 11 MR. DONSBACH: Thank you. 12 BY MR. STEMPLER: 13 Q Ms. Fluellen, how often have you had your 14 deposition taken? 15 A I would speculate to say it might be 30 to 16 40 times. 17 Q Is that an estimate or is that a guess? 18 A It's both. It's my educated guess. 19 Q Well, as you know, at a deposition, the 20 important part is that I ask you questions. Your 21 attorney has a chance to pose any objection. And 22 other counsel may pose an objection, as well. And 23 then -- and all the while -- and then you have a 24 chance to answer, assuming you've been instructed 25 not to answer the question due to some privilege or 7 1 some other basis. 2 And the court reporter, all the while, is 3 typing everything down. Please be mindful of that, 4 because what you just said was extraordinarily fast. 5 The last time we met, which was about two years ago, 6 I don't recall you talking this fast. 7 A Really? 8 Q Yeah. Maybe it's the additional cups of 9 coffee this morning. 10 A I don't drink coffee. 11 Q Anyway, how long have you been director of 12 customer care? 13 A Since early part of 2003. 14 Q So has it been about two years or more 15 than two years? 16 A Well, it's, what, October or -- September 17 of 2005, so a little over two years. 18 Q And before that your position was 19 supervisor -- 20 What did you say you were supervising at 21 the time? 22 A Just prior to that, I was a manager. And 23 I managed the telephone customer service, along with 24 the mail room. 25 Q Along with the what? 8 1 A Mail room. 2 Q I'm sorry. I'm really having a hard time 3 hearing what you just said. 4 A Mail room. 5 Q Mail room? 6 A Yes. 7 Q I'm sorry. And how long did you manage 8 telephone customer service and the mail room? 9 A I believe that started in the latter part 10 of 1999 up until the time I became a director, which 11 was in 2003. 12 MR. STEMPLER: Is there any way you could 13 move the telephone to be just a little bit more 14 directly in front of the witness? 15 THE WITNESS: It's on top of me. 16 MR. STEMPLER: Oh, okay. 17 THE WITNESS: Is that better? We turned 18 the volume up. 19 MR. STEMPLER: That is -- that is a little 20 better. I don't know if your volume is going 21 to assist how counsel and myself hear you over 22 the phone, but I appreciate your speaking into 23 the microphone. Thank you. 24 THE WITNESS: It's okay. I mean, I am 25 literally on top of the phone. 9 1 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. Thank you. 2 BY MR. STEMPLER: 3 Q Presently, what do your duties with 4 Equifax include as the director of customer care? 5 A I oversee the office of consumer affairs, 6 and I also oversee the reinvestigation process. 7 Q How many employees report to you in 8 connection with your duties as director of customer 9 care? 10 A There are approximately 25. 11 Q And these are the people that report to 12 you? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Do you know how many people are, on behalf 15 of Equifax, whether employed directly or at one of 16 Equifax's outside contractors, are involved in the 17 process of reinvestigating consumer disputes? 18 A Yes. There's currently about 850. 19 Q And of those 850, how many are direct 20 employees of Equifax? 21 A Approximately a hundred. 22 Q The 750 that are not directly employed by 23 Equifax, is there a particular company for whom they 24 are employed? 25 A Yes. There are ICT, Convergys and DDC. 10 1 Q What are those initials, again? 2 A D like David, D like David, C like cat. 3 Q Do you happen to know what the initials of 4 those two companies with initials stand for, the ICT 5 and the DDC? 6 A Well, from my understanding, the ICT 7 doesn't stand for anything. That's their company 8 name. And DDC is Direct Data Capture. 9 Q Is there any specific company that handles 10 telephone calls from consumers with respect to a 11 dispute of an Equifax credit report? 12 A That would be Convergys and ICT. 13 Q And what about disputes by mail? 14 A That would be Convergys and DDC. 15 Q What about disputes from a consumer by 16 fax? 17 A That would be ICT. And fax is used to 18 supplement disputes that were processed by mail, 19 e-mail or phone -- or I didn't mean e-mail, but I 20 meant internet. 21 Q Okay. So ICT handles the faxes, although 22 is it correct that a fax may go to the others to 23 supplement something that was a previous dispute? 24 A No. Currently, the faxes are being 25 processed by ICT. But what I stated was, we don't 11 1 normally have a mechanism where the consumer can fax 2 in a dispute. If the consumer calls in in regards 3 to a dispute and has some information that they 4 would like for us to review, then at that point we 5 would offer the fax number; and then the fax number 6 is processed at ICT. And then we have some faxes 7 that are processed in Atlanta, as well. 8 Q By employees of Equifax? 9 A Correct. 10 Q What about disputes that are received via 11 the internet? Who would handle those? 12 A Yeah. Those are actually being handled by 13 the consumer. The consumer is, through the web, 14 interfacing with our ACIS system. 15 Q So your understanding is that when the 16 consumer goes onto Equifax's website and interfaces 17 with ACIS, there's no need for any Equifax employee 18 or one of its subcontractors to forward the dispute 19 to the appropriate party, such as a furnisher, and 20 then make sure that the information is processed 21 later on? 22 A That is correct. If a consumer logs into 23 the internet and lodges a dispute, at that point 24 what they enter in is forwarded to the credit 25 grantor. 12 1 Q And when the credit grantor responds to 2 the investigation or the verification request, who 3 handles that? 4 A It could be handled in an automated 5 fashion. If it's not handled in an automated 6 fashion, then we have verification processors who 7 will enter that information into ACIS. 8 Q I'm sorry. So is it an employee of 9 Equifax that handles that if it's not handled in an 10 automated fashion? 11 A Yes. There are employees of Equifax that 12 will handle that. 13 Q We were just talking about the interface 14 of consumers telephonically via fax or mail by 15 Equifax and these various subcontractors of Equifax. 16 When there is a response by a furnisher of 17 information to a verification request, who would 18 handle those or is it the company that sent out the 19 verification request initially? 20 A I'm sorry. I don't understand your 21 question. 22 Q Okay. Let's talk about ICT as an example. 23 A Uh-huh. 24 Q ICT handles the telephone calls, many of 25 the telephone calls, from consumers regarding 13 1 Equifax disputes. 2 When ICT sends out a verification request 3 to the furnisher and the furnisher responds to that 4 request, does ICT also handle the credit-report 5 update or is that handled somewhere else? 6 A That would be handled somewhere else. 7 Q Okay. Where was -- where would that be 8 handled? 9 A The majority of the verification 10 processors that we have are in Costa Rica, and those 11 are Equifax employees. 12 Q So if Equifax -- 13 A I'm sorry. I apologize. I just wanted to 14 go back a little bit because, as I think about the 15 timeframe of this dispute, we did have another 16 vendor, which was ACS, but we don't do business with 17 ACS anymore; but I do have to mention it because I 18 believe that's -- could have been some disputes that 19 may have been handled. I don't remember. 20 Q Well, when did ACS get phased out from 21 Equifax's dispute process? 22 A Mid April of 2005. 23 Q So was it before April 1st, 2005? 24 A No. It was mid April, around the 15th. 25 Q And what kinds of disputes did ACS handle 14 1 prior to April 15th, '05? 2 A They did handle mail disputes. 3 Q Any other types of disputes? 4 A No. They didn't handle phone disputes or 5 faxes. 6 Q And the employees of Equifax in Costa 7 Rica -- 8 How many employees does Equifax have in 9 Costa Rica? 10 A That's a moving target. That staff is 11 growing a bit. Last I knew, it was about 50. 12 Q That's what it is presently? 13 A Yes, as of about a month ago; but I 14 believe there might be some new staff that's going 15 to be added, or has been added, in the next couple 16 of weeks. 17 Q Approximately how many? 18 A Maybe 20. I'm really guessing there. I 19 haven't -- I have not looked to check that out. 20 Q So the Costa Rica office of Equifax, 21 that's where the reinvestigation process is 22 completed and the responses from the furnishers are 23 correlated with respect to the consumer reports? 24 A No. In Costa Rica, there is some 25 disputing. There is some fulfilling or processing 15 1 requests for consumers who want a copy of their 2 credit file. And then there is where the majority 3 of our verification processors are, but they don't 4 close out the reinvestigation process. That's the 5 maintenance phase, and the maintenance phase is in 6 Atlanta. 7 Q How many employees handle that maintenance 8 phase? 9 A The maintenance phase? There are 10 approximately, if I'm not mistaken, about 80 now. 11 And I need to correct myself. There is 12 some of that being processed at DDC, as well. 13 Q You said UTC? 14 A DDC, the vendor we talked about earlier. 15 Q Oh, okay. So Equifax employees in Atlanta 16 handle the maintenance phase in addition to some 17 employees of DDC? 18 A Correct. 19 Q Would you please describe the maintenance 20 phase one more time, as far as you understand it. 21 A Oh, sure. I used to do it, so I can -- I 22 can describe it. That's where the reinvestigation 23 is closed out, as you put it. Once we -- the 24 consumer's dispute is entered into ACIS and the 25 verification is -- or the request for verification 16 1 is forwarded to the credit grantor and we receive 2 the response, the maintenance phase is where we make 3 sure that the credit report looks like it's supposed 4 to look, make sure that all the policies and 5 procedures are followed by Equifax; and we send out 6 the final copy to the consumer at that point. 7 Q So, ultimately, all of the credit reports 8 in response to a consumer-dispute reinvestigation 9 request come from Equifax in Atlanta or do some of 10 them also come from DDC? 11 A Well -- okay -- the database is in 12 Atlanta; but, yes, the actual processing could be 13 from -- some from DDC and some from Atlanta. That's 14 correct. 15 Q Where is DDC located? 16 A DDC is located in the Philippines. 17 Q Pardon me? 18 A The Philippines, Manila. 19 Q Manila? 20 A Yeah. 21 Q Oh. The Philippines? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Are any of the credit reports prepared in 24 the Philippines by DDC? 25 A No. Well, can you define "prepared"? 17 1 Q Well, you described part of the 2 maintenance phase as making sure that the credit 3 reports are in acceptable form to be sent out to the 4 consumer after a reinvestigation has been completed. 5 I wanted to find out if any DDC employees 6 do that function from Manila, Philippines. 7 A Yes. They do the function in Manila, but 8 the actual updating of the database and the 9 initiating of the printing is in Atlanta. They 10 don't have the capability to print a credit report 11 and send it out. 12 Q Have you been shown the Notice of 13 Deposition -- 14 A Yes. 15 Q -- in the matter? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Have you reviewed the subject matters? 18 There are approximately -- there are 52 subject 19 matters that are listed in the Notice. 20 A Yes. I did notice that. 21 Q Are there any subject matters for which 22 you will not be testifying? 23 MS. GREENSTEIN: Robert, this is Amy, 24 obviously. She will not be responding to the 25 ones that we objected to, to the extent we 18 1 objected to them. We sent that notice to you 2 via fax on Monday, I believe. 3 MR. STEMPLER: Yes. I received your 4 objections, and I was asking for -- obviously, 5 I understand about it not -- being notwith- 6 standing the objections. But I wanted to find 7 out if there were any subjects for which she 8 will not be testifying -- 9 COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. Could you 10 restate that. 11 THE WITNESS: That was the court reporter. 12 MR. STEMPLER: I wanted to find out, 13 notwithstanding the objections, whether there 14 were any subject matters specified for which 15 she will not be testifying at all or is not 16 capable of testifying at all. 17 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. Well, there were 18 several -- this is Amy again. There were 19 several subjects that I told you we would not 20 be providing testimony on -- I'm looking -- I 21 didn't bring my objections -- the costs of 22 reinvestigation. 23 MR. STEMPLER: Which -- could we talk 24 about subject-matter number, please. 25 MS. GREENSTEIN: 44, 45, 46, 47, 48. I 19 1 mean, you know, for that matter, you can ask 2 her. I don't know if she knows the answer to 3 those questions, anyway. 4 MR. STEMPLER: 44 through 48? 5 MS. GREENSTEIN: Let me let her look 6 through the thing -- through the exhibit -- 7 through the request, you know. She -- you can 8 ask, and I'll just put the objection on the 9 record if -- because there's just so many right 10 now, that she may not have knowledge. 11 MR. STEMPLER: Well, it's pretty 12 traditional for the witness to just say what 13 she can't testify to. 14 MS. GREENSTEIN: That's why she's looking 15 at it right now. 16 THE WITNESS: (Witness reviews document). 17 Yeah. That would be it, the cost on the 18 information. Okay. Yeah, 44 through 48. 19 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. So -- 20 THE WITNESS: 52, the net worth, I have no 21 idea. 22 MR. STEMPLER: Is that the witness 23 talking? 24 THE WITNESS: It's me, yes. That's it. 25 MR. STEMPLER: Let's -- do you have, Amy, 20 1 the documents that have been produced by 2 Plaintiff in this case? 3 MS. GREENSTEIN: I believe I do. 4 MR. STEMPLER: Great. I'd like to -- 5 MS. GREENSTEIN: Actually, you know what, 6 hang on one second, Robert. Hang on one 7 second. I think I may have left those 8 inadvertently in my office. I have some of 9 them, so let me know -- 10 MR. STEMPLER: I wanted to go from the 11 numbers that are itemized as 337-01 through 12 357-01. 13 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. Hang on one 14 second. I have 337-01 through 349-0 -- 349-14. 15 Let me just -- 16 MR. STEMPLER: You know what, why don't we 17 just start with those documents. And when we 18 take a break, you can be getting those other 19 documents. 20 MS. GREENSTEIN: That's great. Thank you. 21 BY MR. STEMPLER: 22 Q Okay. Do you have those documents out, 23 Ms. Fluellen? 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q Great. Other than the handwriting that 21 1 appears on 337-01, does that exhibit appear to be 2 one that was prepared through Equifax's -- one of 3 Equifax's websites? 4 A Yes. From what I could tell, this was a 5 document that was prepared by Equifax Consumer 6 Services, which is another company of Equifax -- but 7 the consumer -- that sells credit reports to 8 consumers or credit files to consumers. And that 9 appears to be what this is. 10 Q So, would you tell me, is Equifax Consumer 11 Services a wholly-owned subsidiary of Equifax? 12 A Yes. 13 Q And that's the interface that the consumer 14 sees when they go online to try to get directly from 15 Equifax their consumer report? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And so is it correct that with respect to 18 Exhibit 337-01, the consumer paid $9 for the Equifax 19 consumer report to this Equifax Consumer Services? 20 A That's what it appears here, yes, that 21 there was $9 that was charged. 22 Q With respect to 337-02 through 337-18, 23 other than the faxes, there are some highlighting 24 and maybe a few extraneous marks that have been 25 added. 22 1 Does this document appear to be a consumer 2 disclosure prepared by Equifax through its Equifax 3 Consumer Services website? 4 A Yes. I don't know if you heard me. I did 5 say yes. 6 Q Yes. And -- 7 A Oh. 8 Q -- how would you verify that the informa- 9 tion contained in this credit report is the actual 10 information derived from Equifax's data files? 11 A I actually -- I can't. I just don't have 12 reason to believe that it's not, but I can't. 13 Q Why do you have reason to believe that it 14 is? 15 A Well, I'm recognizing the format of what's 16 before me. And it is the format of an Equifax 17 credit report printed by Personal Solutions, which 18 is Equifax Consumer Services. 19 Q Have you ever seen other credit reports 20 that were prepared, to your knowledge, directly from 21 this website? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Now, on Page 337-02, there is a -- in the 24 upper left-hand corner, there is a report confirma- 25 tion number. 23 1 Do you know if that corresponds to any 2 information available at Equifax that would tie this 3 report to maybe one of the documents that was 4 produced in discovery through your law firm? 5 A No. If I'm not mistaken, we wouldn't -- 6 we don't -- we -- Equifax Information Services, we 7 don't keep a copy of what the consumer gets because, 8 remember, I told you, it's a different company. 9 Equifax Consumer Services, they may have a 10 copy of this. I'm not quite sure, but we don't have 11 a copy of that -- of this. 12 Q In the production of the documents through 13 your law offices, there were several documents that 14 refer to the credit-report information. I'm 15 referring specifically to EIS001 through -- well, 16 let's see. 17 Which of these documents are the ACIS 18 cases? 19 A Okay. The ACIS cases are 001 through 20 005 -- and I don't have this in any particular -- 21 well, okay, I've put it in order -- 006 through 22 0012. That's a case, a separate one. Okay. And 23 then I have 0013 through 0022. Okay. And then 24 there is 0023 through 0030, 0031 -- 25 This is what you're asking for; right? 24 1 Q I am. Thank you very much. 2 A Okay. I was just making sure. Okay. 3 -- through 0038, 0039 through 0046 and 4 then 0047 through -- one second -- 0065. 5 Those are all ACIS cases. 6 Q The frozen scans that are included at 7 EIS067 through EIS085 -- 8 A Uh-huh. 9 Q -- are not considered ACIS cases; is that 10 correct? 11 A No. They're not ACIS cases. 12 Q Nor are the frozen scans at EIS0193 13 through EIS0233; correct? 14 A Okay. Hold on one second. Amy is looking 15 flustered right now. 16 MS. GREENSTEIN: You're referring to the 17 frozen scans; correct? I don't have the Bates- 18 labeled ones in here. 19 But you're just talking about frozen 20 scans; correct, Robert? 21 MR. STEMPLER: Correct. I'm making sure 22 that I'm excluding -- that those can be 23 excluded from the ACIS cases discussion. 24 A Yes. They're -- yes. They're 25 independently different from one another. 25 1 BY MR. STEMPLER: 2 Q This might be a good time for you to 3 please explain, what is the difference between an 4 ACIS case and a credit report or consumer 5 disclosure? 6 A Okay. 7 Q Would you, please. 8 A Yes. An ACIS case is our report or a copy 9 of what transpired through the reinvestigation 10 process. And then a disclosure is the snapshot of 11 how a consumer's credit file looked that day that's 12 sent to the consumer. 13 Q Is it correct that the ACIS case includes 14 a snapshot of the consumer's disclosure at the time 15 the revised disclosure is sent to the consumer 16 following the reinvestigation? 17 A Yes. That is very right. 18 Q So in looking at this disclosure that 19 appears, as we've been discussing a few minutes ago, 20 at 337-02 through 337-18, that does not correspond 21 directly to anything that was produced by Equifax 22 through the law offices of Kilpatrick Stockton? 23 A No. That's correct. 24 Q Is it correct that Equifax does not have 25 an independent copy of disclosures that were 26 1 provided to the consumer at the consumer's request, 2 other than the reinvestigation consumer disclosures? 3 A That is correct, yes. 4 Q Turn, please, to Exhibit 338-01. And I 5 think it actually starts on Page 01 and goes through 6 338-11. 7 A Okay. 8 Q Does this document appear to be from one 9 of Equifax's websites concerning the reinvestigation 10 process for a consumer? 11 A Yes. 12 Q From reviewing this document -- 13 Well, does this document here, 338-01, 14 correspond to one of the ACIS cases that were 15 produced through Kilpatrick Stockton? 16 A Well, this actual form is -- hold on one 17 second. 18 Yes. It corresponds with 001 through 005. 19 Q There is a number, called the research 20 request form for disclosure number, appearing on 21 338-01 -- do you see that -- towards the middle? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Does that number correspond to anything on 24 the ACIS case produced as EIS001 through EIS005? If 25 I'm -- if I'm omitting a zero, I apologize for that. 27 1 It's probably three zeroes and a one. 2 A No. That's okay. 3 From my understanding, the number that's 4 on 001 is the disclosure number. A disclosure does 5 have a confirmation number so -- but it does not 6 correspond -- that number does not correspond with 7 001. It's the number that's on 340-01 that 8 corresponds with 001. 9 Q Do you know what, I'm not seeing it. 10 There's also a number on EIS001 at the top. At the 11 very top on that, it says 4124018453. 12 A Right. That's -- that's what I was 13 talking about. If you look at 340-01 -- which I 14 guess I'm jumping ahead of you -- but that number 15 corresponds with the number you just pointed out to 16 me. 17 Q Oh, okay. So is it correct that 340-01 is 18 an Equifax-produced document following the start of 19 the investigation request which is indicated at 20 338-01 through 338-11? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Okay. So Equifax's online system, at the 23 end of the session by the consumer, it then provides 24 the consumer with a reference number. And that 25 reference number is correlated on the ACIS case that 28 1 you have here at EIS001 through EIS0005; correct? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Page -- or Exhibit 339-01 refers to an 4 Equifax credit report. 5 Does that page appear to be an actual page 6 prepared by Equifax Consumer Services online? 7 MS. GREENSTEIN: What page are you asking 8 her about? 9 THE WITNESS: 338-02; is that right? 10 MR. STEMPLER: No. I'm at 339-01. 11 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Hold on. Hold 12 on. 13 MR. STEMPLER: No problem. 14 THE WITNESS: Okay. I apologize. I'm 15 back. Can you repeat your question? 16 BY MR. STEMPLER: 17 Q Yes. I just was asking if this document, 18 339-01, appears to be a genuine document prepared by 19 Equifax Consumer Services' website? 20 A Yes. 21 Q By the way, I should have said at the 22 beginning, Ms. Fluellen, when you or somebody in the 23 room there needs to take a break, please let me 24 know. We'll take a break as required for you. 25 A Okay, because I -- 29 1 Q When you want -- 2 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. I need to take a 3 break. 4 MR. STEMPLER: Then, let's do that. At 5 this time, also, if I could ask Ms. Greenstein 6 if she would get those other documents so -- 7 MS. GREENSTEIN: Absolutely. 8 MR. STEMPLER: -- that in five minutes 9 we'll have that. 10 MS. GREENSTEIN: Perfect. I'll go do that 11 right now. 12 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. We're going off 13 record. 14 (Whereupon, there was a recess 15 in the deposition.) 16 MS. GREENSTEIN: All right. I believe, 17 Robert, that I have the entire file; so let's 18 hope that's true. 19 MR. STEMPLER: I haven't heard that 20 Kirsten is back on the line. 21 Kirsten, are you there? 22 MS. WEAVER: Yes, I am here. 23 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. Let's go ahead and 24 start and go back on the record. 25 BY MR. STEMPLER: 30 1 Q Turning, please, to Exhibit 341-03 -- 2 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. Hang on. We've 3 got to find it. It's not in there. 4 MR. STEMPLER: Just one second, please. 5 Well, actually, let's start at 341-01. 6 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. Hang on. We're 7 looking for it. 8 Where was the other -- where was that 9 stack that you were dealing with earlier of his 10 stuff that we -- oh. That's 337. 11 THE WITNESS: Here it is. I have it. I 12 have it. 13 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. 14 BY MR. STEMPLER: 15 Q Is that an authentic copy of the results 16 of the Equifax reinvestigation dated May 3rd, 2004? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Is it correct that this document 19 originates in Atlanta through Equifax Information 20 Services, LLC? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Are you able to tell, either from looking 23 at this or from the ACIS case to which it relates, 24 where the processing was done for the reinvestiga- 25 tion, in particular, the maintenance? 31 1 A It appears that the maintenance was done 2 in Atlanta, and the processing -- the actual 3 processing was done via the internet. 4 Q So you can tell, from the ACIS case which 5 is at exhibit -- which is at Bates No. EIS0001 6 through EIS0005, that this is an online consumer 7 dispute? 8 A Yes. 9 Q What on the ACIS case indicates that to 10 you, please? 11 A On 0005, team I.D., AIT. 12 Q What does AIT mean? 13 A I don't know what the initials mean. I 14 don't believe they mean anything, but that is the 15 queue in which the internet disputes are processed 16 in. 17 Q What other team I.D.'s might appear 18 depending upon the -- where the reinvestigation was 19 initiated? 20 A There are quite a few, sir. 21 Q Well, let's talk about each one that I can 22 think of. 23 A Okay. 24 Q What if it was sent in by mail from the 25 consumer? 32 1 A Well, it's not necessarily by mail. I 2 would have to look at it. I know NP-1, NP-2, NP-3. 3 There are many, many different queues. Just because 4 the queue -- it's in a particular queue doesn't 5 necessarily mean it's by mail or by phone. I would 6 have to look at the case. It's not that simple. 7 Q Okay. We'll take each one as it comes. 8 A Okay. 9 Q Included at Exhibit 341-01 through 341-08 10 is a consumer report, starting on Page 03. 11 Do you see that? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Does that appear to be the actual credit 14 file pertaining to Paul C. Minnick, Jr., as of May 15 3rd, 2004? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And it was prepared by Equifax out of 18 Atlanta; is that correct? 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Q Turn now, please, to Exhibit 342-01 21 through 342-10. 22 A Okay. 23 Q Does this appear to be the authentic 24 results from Equifax of another reinvestigation 25 request originated by Paul C. Minnick, Jr.? 33 1 A Yes. 2 Q Does it correlate to any of the ACIS cases 3 that were produced through Kilpatrick Stockton? 4 A Yes, 47 through 66. 5 Q So you're referring to Bates No. EIS0047 6 through EIS0066? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And looking at the ACIS case that we've 9 just discussed, EIS00047 through 66, can you tell 10 how the dispute was lodged by the consumer? 11 A Yes. It was also lodged or initiated via 12 the internet. 13 Q And where do you see that indication, 14 please? 15 A 0057, where it says disclosure type, www. 16 Q There is a page that we're looking at 17 right now, EIS0057, that refers to ACRO maintenance 18 transaction summary. 19 Could you please explain what ACRO means? 20 A ACRO is automated credit reporting online. 21 Q Is an ACRO maintenance transaction summary 22 prepared for every ACIS case that is processed from 23 an online consumer dispute? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Should there be an ACRO maintenance 34 1 transaction summary for the other ACIS case that we 2 reviewed appearing on EIS001 through EIS0005? 3 A Yes. And we have one. It's on 005. 4 Q There is a difference, apparently, of four 5 days. 6 How come the format appears different? 7 A I don't know. That's one of my age-old 8 questions. That's a technical question. I truly 9 don't know, because if you'll notice that the -- the 10 copy of the credit file, it's formatted differently, 11 as well. 12 Q The other question I have is: In looking 13 at the ACRO maintenance transaction summary on 14 EIS0057, it appears that it refers to the online 15 dispute that was lodged on April 18th, 2004. I 16 believe that's the same dispute for which the ACIS 17 case is printed at EIS0001 through 5. 18 Is that your understanding, as well? 19 A You'll have to repeat that, because I 20 don't see a correlation. 21 Can you just restate that question, 22 please? 23 Q Yes. In looking at EIS0001 through 5 -- 24 A Uh-huh. 25 Q -- I don't see a date on which the 35 1 consumer dispute was received by Equifax. 2 Do you? 3 A Yes. You can tell two ways. If you look 4 at the EIS0005, up in the left-hand corner it says, 5 date received, May 3rd, 2004. 6 And then, also, if you look at where the 7 consumer's name and Social Security number is, where 8 it says comments, that also confirms the date in 9 which it was processed. 10 So it looks as though it was -- we started 11 the investigation and received the request for the 12 investigation on May 3rd, 2004. On the other one, 13 the one -- the 47, the 00047 ACIS case, that 14 appeared to have been received and started on April 15 18th, 2004. 16 Q Well, what I find confusing -- and maybe 17 you have an explanation, maybe you don't -- 18 A Uh-huh. 19 Q -- is that the ACIS case, as reflected on 20 the ACRO maintenance transaction summary on EIS0057, 21 was started in mid April and completed on May 7th, 22 whereas, the ACIS case that is on pages EIS0001 23 through 5 was started on May 3rd and finished on May 24 3rd. I'm not able to reconcile how that is. 25 Perhaps, you can do a better job. 36 1 A Well, those are the dates. I mean, 2 that's -- that is -- is what's happened. 3 It appears as though, on EIS0005, the only 4 update that was being made was the date of birth, 5 where we changed the year from 1952 to 1953; so that 6 took a shorter amount of time as opposed to on the 7 00047. Yeah, it started earlier, but there were 8 some accounts that were being reinvestigated during 9 that time; so that might explain why the investiga- 10 tion that started later ended earlier. 11 Q Okay. So your understanding, from review 12 of the ACIS case at EIS0001 through 5, that the only 13 thing that Mr. Minnick had requested be corrected or 14 updated was the date of his birth? 15 A That's correct. And if you look at that 16 maintenance sheet summary, that's it. But if you 17 look at the maintenance sheet summary that started 18 on -- for the 0047 case, it starts on 0057 and goes 19 through 00066. Those were the requests at that 20 time. 21 Q Okay. So just to -- just to go back to 22 the Plaintiff's documents, is it correct that the 23 Exhibit 342-01 through 342-10 is following the -- in 24 response to the online dispute of April 18th, 2004, 25 by Mr. Minnick? 37 1 A No. The 341, from 1 through 10, that's -- 2 that's in correspondence to the 001 because, 3 remember, if you look at the dates, you know, that 4 one was closed out on May 3rd, 2004, and then the 5 date on that letter is May 3rd, 2004. 6 So then the 342-01, you know, the date on 7 that letter is May 7, 2004. It corresponds with the 8 reinvestigation that is EIS0047 because it closed 9 out on May 7, 2004. 10 Q And the May 7 report, ACIS case, appears 11 to be originated from a dispute online on April 12 18th. 13 A Yes, sir. 14 Q Is it correct that the Exhibit 342-05 15 through 342-10 is a reflection of Equifax's database 16 as of that date for Mr. Minnick? 17 A Yes. Let me just make sure that we still 18 have the same order here. Yes, because we have the 19 same date on the credit file, which is May 7th. 20 Q Turning to Exhibit 343-01 through 343-19, 21 could you verify that that is -- appears to be an 22 actual document that originated with Equifax 23 Consumer Services' website? 24 MS. GREENSTEIN: Robert, hang on one 25 second. You said through 343-19? 38 1 MR. STEMPLER: Yes. Did you say 343-01? 2 THE WITNESS: Okay. I have -- yes. I 3 have 343-01, but mine ends through 343-15. 4 Do I need to look at my attorney 5 cross-eyed again? 6 MR. STEMPLER: I hope you're not doing 7 that. 8 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. Wait, wait, wait. 9 Here's some more. They were a different 10 production. Hang on. So -- okay. Hold on -- 11 I'm pulling out 343-16 through 343-19, which 12 were in a different production for us; so hang 13 on. I'm going to hand those to the witness. 14 THE WITNESS: Okay. I have them now. 15 BY MR. STEMPLER: 16 Q Great. Have you had the chance to look at 17 the documents from 343-01 through 343-19? 18 A Yes. I'm looking at them now. I have 19 them. 20 Q The question, again, is: Does this appear 21 to be a actual document processed by Equifax through 22 Equifax Consumer Services for Mr. Minnick, a credit 23 report dated May 10th, 2004? 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q Does the -- do the pages 343-01 through 15 39 1 appear to be an accurate representation of Equifax's 2 database for Mr. Minnick as of the report date May 3 10th, 2004? 4 A Yes. 5 Q On Page 343-16 through 343-19 is informa- 6 tion referring to Mr. Minnick's FICO score. 7 A Okay. I'm sorry. Maybe the phone cut 8 out. 9 But you asked me is this information 10 regarding Mr. Minnick's FICO score? 11 Q Yes. 12 A Yes. It appears to be a product that 13 Mr. Minnick purchased from it looks like myFICO down 14 here at the bottom -- or Score Power. I'm sorry. I 15 see Score Power. 16 Q Do you know if this is -- 17 Can you tell, from looking at these pages, 18 if this is derived from Equifax's database, if the 19 FICO score is based on the Equifax credit data? 20 A Well, the FICO score that's purchased via 21 Score Power is -- it's, like, a partnership. It's 22 Fair Isaac's scoring model based on the content of 23 the consumer's credit file in the Equifax credit 24 report. 25 So the answer to your question is yes. 40 1 Q So the statement on Page 343-16 that, 2 quote, your FICO score of 531 summarizes the 3 information on your Equifax credit report as of May 4 10th, 2004, period, close quote, that is an accurate 5 statement, as far as you know? 6 A Yes, sir. 7 Q I'm sorry. Did you answer or did you say, 8 I need some time? 9 A Oh, no. I said, yes, sir. 10 Q Okay. Thanks. 11 Are you familiar with the interrelation- 12 ship between myFICO.com and Equifax or Equifax 13 Consumer Services? 14 A Yes. I'm a little familiar with it, yes. 15 Q Is there a link, internet link, between 16 the Equifax Consumer Services' website and the 17 myFICO.com website? 18 MS. GREENSTEIN: I'm going to object just 19 to the extent that I believe this is outside 20 your depo Notice. But if she knows the answer, 21 she can answer. 22 A From my understanding, there is a link. 23 And that is as far as I understand. 24 BY MR. STEMPLER: 25 Q Have you ever used personally this website 41 1 for yourself or somebody you know? 2 A Yes. 3 Q So does it appear that these pages here 4 are actual pages from myFICO.com? 5 A Yes. It's familiar from what I -- I got 6 when I went online and got Score Power. 7 Q Are you familiar with the risk assessment 8 that appears on Page 343-16 concerning the score of 9 531? 10 A Just from what I read when I go onto the 11 website. 12 Q Turning now to Page 344-01 through 13 344-05 -- 14 A Okay. One moment, please. 15 THE WITNESS: I need 344-01. 16 MS. GREENSTEIN: I'm sorry. 17 THE WITNESS: Through 344-05, is that what 18 you said, Mr. Stempler? 19 MR. STEMPLER: Yes, I did. 20 THE WITNESS: Okay. I had to wake her up 21 again. Maybe I should just take the stack. 22 Okay. I'm sorry. Here I am. 23 BY MR. STEMPLER: 24 Q First of all, does 344-01 appear to be an 25 actual page obtained from Equifax's Consumer 42 1 Service's website? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Do the pages that follow at 344-02 through 4 344-03 appear to be some of the pages that 5 originated at the same time that an order was placed 6 for an Equifax consumer report, as reflected on 7 344-01? 8 A Yes. I was actually going to say, it 9 looks a little bit thinner than what I had looked at 10 previously; so, yeah, it looks like some of the 11 pages. 12 Q Turning to 345-01 -- 13 A Okay. Yes. I have that. 14 Q -- does that appear to be an actual page 15 of an Equifax disclosure for Mr. Minnick dated 16 August 26, 2004, other than, of course, the hand- 17 written notations and the fact that some of the 18 sections are highlighted? 19 A (Witness reviews document). 20 Yes. This is the results of a 21 reinvestigation that we sent to the consumer. 22 Q Does this result page dated August 26, 23 2004, correlate to any of the ACIS cases that were 24 produced with the document production by Equifax? 25 A Yes, sir. It correlates with 006 through 43 1 012. 2 Q Can you tell, from looking at the ACIS 3 case at 006 through 12, what the date of the dispute 4 was from Mr. Minnick? 5 A Yes. It's August 26, 2004. 6 Q And do you know the manner in which -- how 7 the dispute was lodged by Mr. Minnick? 8 A From what I could tell, it's -- it appears 9 to be a fax dispute or information that the consumer 10 faxed. ICT processed it. 11 Q I'm sorry. I did not catch what you just 12 said. 13 ICT is what? 14 A Oh. Processed the dispute. 15 Q So that leads you to conclude it was a fax 16 dispute? 17 A Well, yeah. It's saying -- I tell you 18 what concludes -- or what leads me to conclude it 19 was a fax dispute, was that they're saying that they 20 received bankruptcy discharge and paperwork. And 21 ICT takes, you know, majority of phone calls; so, of 22 course, they wouldn't receive that via a phone call. 23 So I am at this point speculating that it was a fax 24 or mail that was received by ICT. 25 Q So it was either fax or mail? 44 1 A Yes, sir. 2 Q And do you know where the maintenance was 3 performed on this particular ACIS case? 4 A It would be in Atlanta. It was later in 5 the year, much, much later, before DDC began 6 processing maintenance for us, if not the earlier 7 part of this year; so I believe the majority of -- 8 or, actually, all of the cases that we have here 9 would be processed in Atlanta. 10 Q What is your understanding of when DDC 11 began handling the maintenance-phase function? 12 A It was either -- if it was in 2004, it was 13 around December. If not, it was the early part of 14 the year -- oh, man. That's a good question. I 15 want to say March or April. I believe it was closer 16 to March or April of 2005. I don't think it was any 17 of 2004. Well, I could be wrong. I'm sorry. I 18 need to research that date, but, anyway -- 19 Q Okay. Was a consumer report provided in 20 connection with the August 26th disclosure? Can you 21 tell from the ACIS cases? 22 A No. At that time, we would send the 23 consumer the results, a confirmation letter of -- 24 explaining the results of their reinvestigation, 25 along with how the trade line looked, a report of 45 1 how the trade line looked that they were disputing. 2 Q So the only thing that was provided on the 3 August 26th disclosure to the consumer was the one 4 item that was disputed? Would that be -- 5 COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. I'm having a 6 bit of a problem hearing you on here. I'm the 7 court reporter. 8 THE WITNESS: No. Your phone cut -- the 9 phone cut off. Okay. 10 COURT REPORTER: Could you just restate 11 the question? 12 BY MR. STEMPLER: 13 Q So the only item provided with the 14 disclosure dated August 26, 2004, was the item that 15 was disputed, being CBUSA/Sears? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Please take a look at Exhibit 346-01 and 18 2. 19 Does that appear to be an actual document 20 prepared by Equifax for Mr. Minnick as of September 21 9th, 2004? 22 A Yes, sir. I said yes. 23 Q Does this relate -- 24 A I don't -- okay. 25 Q I'm sorry? 46 1 A No. I was just going to say, I said yes. 2 I don't know if my phone cut off. 3 Q Does this appear to be based on an ACIS -- 4 or reflected in an ACIS that was produced by 5 Equifax? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Which one, please? 8 A 31 through 38. 9 Q And can you tell, from looking at the ACIS 10 case, when the dispute was received and the manner 11 in which the dispute was made to Equifax? 12 A (Witness reviews document). 13 I believe it was in the same manner as the 14 previous case, where that we either have -- probably 15 fax. It was processed by ICT. 16 Q As to the previous one, you said it could 17 either be fax or mail? 18 A And that stands true, too, but I believe 19 that it's probably fax. 20 Q And the date received seems to be 21 indicated on EIS0037 as 8/25/2004? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q Is it correct that the maintenance phase 24 was performed by Equifax in Atlanta? 25 A Yes. 47 1 Q Exhibit 347-01 through 02, other than the 2 handwritten notations and additional highlighting 3 that are apparent, does this appear to be a genuine 4 document prepared by Equifax from Mr. Minnick's 5 credit file dated September 14th, 2004? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And to which, if any, ACIS case does this 8 refer in the documents produced by Equifax? 9 A 39 through 46. 10 Q Could you please tell me, from your review 11 of the documents, particularly the ACIS case, when 12 and the manner in which Equifax received the dispute 13 from the consumer? 14 A It looks as though it was September 14th, 15 2004, processed by ICT, either mail or fax; but, 16 there again, I believe it was via fax. 17 Q And, again, the maintenance was done most 18 likely or probably in Atlanta? 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Q Turning to page -- or Exhibit 348-01 21 through 348-06, does that appear -- 22 COURT REPORTER: Mr. Stempler -- 23 MR. STEMPLER: I'm sorry? 24 COURT REPORTER: -- I hate to interrupt 25 again, but there -- do you have the handset up 48 1 to your ear or -- because it seems like you're 2 fading away or something, and I'm having a hard 3 time hearing. 4 Are y'all having a hard time hearing? 5 MR. STEMPLER: Are you having a hard time 6 hearing? 7 MS. GREENSTEIN: Just the beginning of 8 some of your sentences. 9 COURT REPORTER: Yeah. I mean, it seems 10 like there's some problem. You get louder, but 11 at first it's kind of faint. 12 MR. STEMPLER: I'll speak up. 13 COURT REPORTER: Sorry to have to 14 interrupt, but I want to make sure I get an 15 accurate transcript. 16 MR. STEMPLER: I would like an accurate 17 transcript. If you can't hear anything, let me 18 know; and I'll speak up. Perhaps, I was 19 getting lower in voice. I apologize. 20 THE WITNESS: Okay. You asked about 348 21 through -- or zero dash -- excuse me -- -01 22 through 06? 23 BY MR. STEMPLER: 24 Q Correct. 25 A Okay. I have that. 49 1 Q Does that appear to be an actual document 2 prepared by Equifax through Equifax Consumer 3 Services' website? 4 A Yes, sir. 5 Q And is this document, as you can -- as you 6 view it, does it appear to be an accurate -- a 7 reflection of the Equifax database for Mr. Minnick 8 as of October 9th, 2004? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Exhibit 349-01 through 349-14, does that 11 appear to be an actual document that was prepared by 12 Equifax for Paul C. Minnick as of October 22nd, 13 2004? 14 A Yes, sir. This appears to be a 15 disclosure. 16 Q And do you believe that to be an accurate 17 reflection of Mr. Minnick's credit file of Equifax 18 at the time? 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Q Page 350, or Exhibit 350, through -- 21 A Okay. 22 Q -- 350-04, 350-01 through 350-04. 23 A Okay. One moment, please. Okay. I have 24 that. 25 Q Would you please explain what this 50 1 document is. 2 A It appears to be confirmation of Equifax 3 adding a fraud alert to the consumer's credit file, 4 along with a summary -- 5 Q Is this your -- 6 A -- I'm sorry -- along with the summary of 7 rights. 8 Q Does it -- so it appears that this is a 9 document that originated with Equifax and was sent 10 to Mr. Minnick? 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q Next is 351 -- Exhibit 351-01 through 16. 13 MS. GREENSTEIN: 351-01 through 06? 14 MR. STEMPLER: Yes. 15 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. That's -- 16 Do you intend to cut a document off half 17 way? It appears to go through -- 18 MR. STEMPLER: 16. 19 MS. GREENSTEIN: 16. I'm sorry. Thank 20 you. 21 BY MR. STEMPLER: 22 Q Other than the cover letter by Kilpatrick 23 Stockton, which is on pages 01 and 02, do the 24 documents starting at 351-03 through 351-16 appear 25 to be an actual credit report for Mr. Minnick dated 51 1 March 8th, 2005, prepared by Equifax? 2 A Yes, sir. 3 Q Can you tell, from looking at this, if 4 this is in response to an investigation request? 5 A No. This is a disclosure copy. If it was 6 in response to a reinvestigation request, it 7 would -- the cover letter would read thank you -- or 8 please find enclosed the results of your investiga- 9 tion. 10 Q Can you tell, from looking at this or 11 looking at the cover letter that was included at 12 351-02, how this Equifax credit report -- why this 13 credit report was prepared for Mr. Minnick? 14 A (Witness reviews document). 15 Well, evidently, at this particular point 16 in time, we received notice of a lawsuit. And it's 17 our attorney's attempt to -- along with Equifax, to 18 get a copy or -- to the consumer so we can try and 19 resolve the issues that were brought forth during 20 the lawsuit. 21 Q Do you know if an ACIS case would have 22 been generated in connection with either the lawsuit 23 or this credit report? 24 A I don't recall seeing an ACIS case during 25 this time in my research. 52 1 Q Do you have a record of all the ACIS cases 2 for Mr. Minnick since January 1st, 2004? 3 A Yes, and they would -- they would show on 4 the disclosure copies. 5 Q So is it correct that all of the ACIS 6 cases are appearing at EIS0001 through EIS0066? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q That's the only ACIS cases prepared by 9 Equifax, are for responses that were generated on 10 May 3rd and May 7th, 2004, August 26, 2004, 11 September 9th and September 14th, 2004? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Exhibit 352-01. 14 A Okay. One moment, please. Okay. I have 15 that. 16 Q Do you know if Equifax received this fax 17 approximately August 24th, 2004? 18 A It may be in reference to some of those 19 ACIS cases that we've seen. 20 MR. DONSBACH: This is Paul Donsbach. 21 Can you read the question back? 22 (Thereupon, the designated 23 portion was read back by the 24 court reporter.) 25 MR. DONSBACH: Thank you. 53 1 A Yeah. I believe, if I'm not mistaken, 2 that it may be in correspondence to the ACIS case in 3 the documents 0031 through 0038. 4 BY MR. STEMPLER: 5 Q Does Equifax retain faxes that are 6 received concerning a reinvestigation from a 7 consumer? 8 A Yes. That would be retained -- I believe 9 it was processed by ICT and sent to ICT. We should 10 have a copy of that. Yes, sir. 11 Q Do you know if your attorneys were given a 12 copy of the documents that received -- if documents 13 were received by fax, from Mr. Minnick dated August 14 24th, 2004? 15 A I don't believe they were. To be honest, 16 I just realized that these were fax disputes. When 17 I saw ICT, I assumed they were phone. So I don't 18 know -- and I'll have to take the brunt of this. I 19 don't know if my office has requested that fax from 20 ICT. 21 Q Let's talk about Exhibit 353-01. 22 Can you tell, either from looking at the 23 ACIS cases or other documents that you may have, was 24 this document received by Equifax on approximately 25 August 26, 2004? 54 1 A Okay. One moment. 2 (Witness reviews documents). 3 Okay. What I'm doing is -- it's probably 4 going to take me a second. I have to go back 5 through these documents that we were looking at 6 earlier because -- I'm going back through. I don't 7 know if you remember when I was saying that, you 8 know, it was probably mail or fax. But seeing these 9 faxes is definitely confirming my initial reaction, 10 was it was fax; so I've got to match up these faxes 11 to these previous ACIS cases. 12 Q Take your time. 13 A Okay. Okay. What I believe has happened 14 here is, if you look at 0037, they're making 15 reference to receiving -- I believe that says same 16 Nelnet's fax. 17 I have three dates within this ACIS case. 18 I have the August 25th, and then I have another 19 reference to a fax received on August 26, and then I 20 have another fax in reference -- or I have another 21 date in reference to a fax received on August 27th. 22 So within this case, I have quite a few 23 reference to faxes that were received or documents 24 that were received. It's not saying faxes -- well, 25 some do say faxes, but, anyway -- 55 1 Q So it appears to you that there was a call 2 or there was a contact, either fax or mail, on 3 August 25th, and then there was a subsequent contact 4 or fax on August 26th? 5 A Yes. If you look at -- I don't know if 6 you're looking at 0037 or not. But if you go down 7 to where you see the consumer's address, there are 8 some notes there. And if you look to the right, 9 that's when the dates are recorded for those notes. 10 Q Yes. I see what you're talking about. 11 Under the comments? 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q Below his address? 14 A Yes, sir. So I have three different dates 15 in which they're making reference to receiving 16 documents. 17 Q Have you ever heard of a part of Equifax 18 called Team 2? It's referenced on Exhibit 353-01. 19 A Yes. I do know that our customer-service 20 teams break up or -- break up into teams so that 21 when the consumer makes reference to speaking to 22 someone or the consumer wants to have the agent 23 identified of who they spoke to, they'll say, you 24 know, I'm on Sherry Team 2 or I'm on Alicia Team 4 25 so that if there was any question, they know who to 56 1 go to. 2 Q So in this particular instance, the team 3 leader is referenced; so it would be -- they would 4 have said it was Sherry at Team 2. 5 That wouldn't have been the individual 6 customer-service representative? 7 A It could have been or it could have been 8 the team leader, if, you know, the team leader took 9 the call or came in on the call. 10 Q Do you recognize the fax number (866) -- 11 or do you recognize the number as being a fax for 12 Equifax, (866) 244-1477, which appears at the top of 13 Exhibit 353-01? 14 A To be honest, we have a couple of fax 15 numbers. I don't have them committed but -- to 16 memory, but I would assume that it is a Equifax fax 17 number. I shouldn't, but I don't -- 18 Q Would you recognize also as a fax number 19 the one that appears in the line for fax on this 20 cover sheet of (866) 491-0294? 21 A I'd better double check. I really -- I'm 22 sorry. I just don't have those fax numbers 23 committed to memory. They change, and they 24 certainly have changed since 2004 so -- 25 Q Turning to page -- Exhibit 354-01. 57 1 A Okay. 2 Q Is there a way for you to tell if this fax 3 was received by Equifax from Mr. Minnick? 4 A (Witness reviews documents). 5 This has a lot of the same information 6 from the previous faxes that we received. Actually, 7 it looks like the same letter. 8 Q It is very similar. 9 A Yeah. It's very similar. The only thing 10 I can say is, I see the notes that reference to the 11 same things that this particular letter says, which 12 leads me to believe that we did receive at least 13 one, if not both, of them. 14 MR. STEMPLER: Could we go off the record 15 for a moment? 16 MS. GREENSTEIN: Sure. 17 (Whereupon, there was a recess 18 in the deposition.) 19 BY MR. STEMPLER: 20 Q Turning, please, to page -- or Exhibit 21 355-01. 22 A Okay. 23 Q It's a fax dated August 27th. 24 Do you know if Equifax received that on or 25 about August 27th? 58 1 A One moment, please. Let's see here. I'm 2 sorry. I put the documents down when I went to the 3 restroom, and I've got to pick them back up. All 4 right. Here we go. 5 (Witness reviews document). 6 Did the consumer fax it twice? 7 Q You said did the consumer fax what? 8 A No. I was just making mention to -- well, 9 Amy had given me all the other ones; so I was 10 looking -- kind of looking ahead. I saw the result 11 as being an error on 355-02. 12 Q Oh. Yeah. Maybe there was a problem. 13 Do you see that number that appears on 14 355-01 as a confirmation number? 15 A Uh-huh, yes. I see it. 16 Q Does that number relate to any of the ACIS 17 case numbers that have been produced by Equifax or 18 some other number? 19 A Hold on. Let me try and find the best way 20 to answer that. Now, it could be also a disclosure 21 number that the consumer got on the credit file -- 22 on the -- on the internet because they have numbers, 23 as well. 24 I don't at this time see a ACIS case 25 number that relates to that, but I bet if I -- I 59 1 might -- I don't know, if I'd go back and look at 2 the credit reports, if I'd see that same number. I 3 don't see a ACIS case number. 4 Okay. Was there another question on the 5 table that I didn't answer? 6 Q No. 7 A Okay. 8 Q I was just seeing if I could find that 9 number, but it probably will take too long. 10 Exhibit 356-01, there is an attachment 11 referring to an error in transmission. 12 But can you tell me, from looking at the 13 ACIS case, whether Equifax received this fax? 14 A Okay. Let's see. I'm looking at that 15 same ACIS case. And I see on August 27th, they said 16 they received the same Nelnet fax. And then on 17 September 8th, 2004, they're saying something about 18 receiving cover page NND. That's all I see right 19 there in reference to the faxes. Hold on. 20 And we also talked about, on 0006 through 21 00012, they received the -- what I thought was a fax 22 at the time we first discussed this case number -- 23 or -- on August 26. 24 Q So it's hard to know specifically, 25 assuming that the fax was re-sent by Mr. Minnick, 60 1 which of these faxes around August 26 and August 2 27th relate to the ACIS cases? 3 A Yes. But I will tell you this, though, 4 because I really just -- it just clicked today that 5 these are faxes and not phone calls. And it truly 6 is my fault. But I can immediately, you know, have 7 my office request these from ICT to know exactly 8 what they received. 9 Q That would be appreciated if -- 10 MS. GREENSTEIN: We will, of course, 11 produce them once we receive them from her 12 office. 13 THE WITNESS: I truly believe this was my 14 fault. I'm sorry. 15 BY MR. STEMPLER: 16 Q Thank you. Turning to Exhibit 357-01, a 17 September 9th fax, can you tell from the ACIS cases 18 whether Equifax received this cover sheet and the 19 associated documents? 20 A Yes. One moment. 21 (Witness reviews documents). 22 Now, I believe this one is a result of the 23 ACIS case 0039 through 0046. 24 Q Even though the fax is dated September 9th 25 and the ACIS case seems to indicate a dispute of 61 1 September 14th? 2 A Yes, a five-day processing. That's right. 3 Q Let's go back, please, to Exhibit 337-04. 4 A I have it. Okay. Yes. I have that. 5 Q Do you see the references to Nelnet LNS? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And in the column to the -- the next-to- 8 the-last column from the right, do you see it says, 9 for each of those Nelnet accounts, 120-plus days 10 past due? 11 A Yes. I see that. 12 Q Looking at the heading, which appears at 13 the bottom of Page 337-03, does it seem correct to 14 you, in reviewing these documents, that the column 15 in which 120-plus days past due is the account 16 status column? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q What would be the source of that account 19 status field? 20 A That would be information received from 21 the data furnisher. 22 Q In this case, Nelnet; correct? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Is there any way that Equifax would have 25 added that notation to these trade lines had Nelnet 62 1 not provided the information to Equifax? 2 A No. I can't think of a circumstance in 3 which we would. 4 Q What about the column -- two columns to 5 the left of that, which refers to 02/2002? 6 Is that the date reported by Nelnet of 7 those accounts? 8 A For some reason, I don't see that. 9 Q See the column with 120-plus days past 10 due? 11 A Okay. Yes, sir. I'm sorry. I do see 12 that now. 13 That is the date reported. 14 Q So is it correct that that was the last 15 time that Nelnet provided the information about this 16 account to Equifax? 17 A Well, yes, as of the -- as of the date of 18 that report, yes. 19 Q Turning to pages 337-06 at the bottom, 20 which seems to continue on to the top of 337-07. 21 Does that appear to be a more complete 22 representation of one of the Nelnet accounts 23 reported by Nelnet concerning Paul Minnick? 24 A Yes. If I'm not mistaken, what you can do 25 on the internet is expand the trade line and get 63 1 more information. And it appears as though that's 2 what's been done here. 3 Q So online the consumer has several 4 options, one of which is the columnar format that 5 appears on 337-03 through 04 or a more detailed 6 format, which starts on 337-05 and continues on? 7 A Yes. That's what it appears here, yes. 8 Q Is the information the same with respect 9 to the -- the account status, that these four 10 accounts reported by Nelnet Loan Services is 11 120-plus days past due? 12 A Yes. That's the same. 13 Q There's also a box on pages 337-07 and 14 337-08 for the high credit of these Nelnet accounts. 15 Do you see that box? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Do you know what information is provided 18 when Equifax reports the box for high credit? 19 A Normally, for an installment allow -- an 20 installment account, it is the loan amount. 21 Q And, also, that information has with 22 the -- the account status field originated with 23 Nelnet at the time -- correct -- or, actually, from 24 February 2002? 25 A I'm sorry. I didn't follow that. 64 1 Q Is it correct that this -- that 2 information originated from Nelnet from February 3 2002? 4 A I'm not sure when it originated, but I'm 5 showing the date reported as February of 2002, the 6 last date reported. 7 Q How does that relate to the last 8 information -- 9 Well, how does that relate to this 10 particular account reporting by Nelnet, that field 11 of February 2002? 12 A I mean, that field represents the last 13 time we received information from the data 14 furnisher. 15 Q Regarding this account? 16 A Regarding any account. I'm just going 17 over the date reporting; but, yes. 18 Q Well, I mean, isn't it possible that 19 Nelnet has reported other account information for 20 other consumers since February 2002? 21 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, calls for 22 speculation. This is Paul Donsbach. 23 A Well, I guess I should go back to the 24 previous question, when you're saying for that 25 account. 65 1 When we're looking at a specific trade 2 line, then, yes, the answer is yes. For that 3 account, that is the last date that we received 4 information. 5 BY MR. STEMPLER: 6 Q Going to Page 338 -- 7 A You mean Page 8? 8 Q No, 338 -- 9 A Oh, okay. I'm sorry. That's a whole 10 nother document now. Sorry. 11 THE WITNESS: Oh, I have it. 12 MS. GREENSTEIN: You do have it? 13 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. 14 A Okay. I'm sorry. I have it. 15 BY MR. STEMPLER: 16 Q I'm trying to find the Nelnet accounts 17 that were disputed by Mr. Minnick on these pages. 18 Okay. I believe that the Nelnet accounts start on 19 Page 338-06 at the bottom -- you see the -- it has 20 student loan assigned to government -- and continues 21 on through Page 338-08. The account number was 22 redacted because it includes a -- includes a Social 23 Security number as part of the account number. 24 For some reason, the credit-grantor box 25 does not appear to be filled in on the printout that 66 1 Mr. Minnick obtained. 2 Does it appear that these are the Nelnet 3 accounts that were reported on the credit report 4 that we just saw at 337? 5 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, calls for 6 speculation. 7 A Let me get that out. Okay? 8 (Witness reviews document). 9 Well, to be really honest, since the 10 account numbers have been redacted, it's really kind 11 of hard to tell. The only thing that I can match up 12 are the comments that the consumer made in the 13 boxes. 14 BY MR. STEMPLER: 15 Q Can you find those comments appearing on 16 any of the ACIS cases that have been produced by 17 Equifax? 18 A I'm looking at 0062. And starting with 19 the Nelnet loan, at the very bottom of that block of 20 information, it says FCRA comments. And it just 21 matches what's here for the student loan assigned to 22 government. That's all I could match it up to. 23 Q Okay. So looking at the ACIS case for May 24 7th, 2004, are the Nelnet disputes reflected on the 25 bottom of Page EIS0062 and going to the top of 67 1 EIS0065? 2 A Yes. 3 Q At the bottom of 0062, where it says FCRA 4 comments, quote, I have all documentation on this 5 loan from inception to payoff. I have never been 6 late on this loan period. Records available upon 7 request, period, close quote. 8 Is that what Mr. Minnick entered into the 9 Equifax dispute -- the online dispute of the form? 10 A Well, I see part of that on Page 338-07 11 through 08, and that is what the consumer does enter 12 in. 13 Q That appears to be the same comments at 14 the bottom of EIS0062 for Nelnet's account and on 15 0063 for the Nelnet account there and 0064 for that 16 Nelnet account and 0065, or the top part of that, 17 for the Nelnet account; is that correct? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q Is that comment directly communicated to 20 Nelnet once the consumer is complete making their 21 disputes online? 22 MR. DONSBACH: Can you read that back, 23 please. 24 (Thereupon, the designated 25 portion was read back by the 68 1 court reporter.) 2 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, vague and 3 ambiguous, unintelligible. 4 A The FCRA comments that are a part of the 5 dispute are also part of the consumer-dispute 6 verification form. They're there under the FCRA 7 relevant comments section. 8 MR. STEMPLER: Move to strike as 9 nonresponsive. 10 BY MR. STEMPLER: 11 Q I wanted to find out if the information in 12 that -- that appears as FCRA comments was 13 communicated directly to Nelnet as part of the 14 reinvestigation process of these four accounts? 15 A Yes. My previous answer stated so, yes. 16 Q And can you tell, from reading, how Nelnet 17 responded on the first trade line that appears -- 18 well, the disputed account on EIS0062? 19 A Verified as reported. 20 Q So is it correct, from your reading of the 21 ACRO maintenance transaction summary, EIS -- 22 EIS0062, that Nelnet verified this individual 23 account as being accurately reported with 120-plus 24 days late? 25 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, no foundation 69 1 and calls for speculation. 2 THE WITNESS: Do I answer? 3 MS. GREENSTEIN: Yeah -- 4 THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. 5 MS. GREENSTEIN: -- if you can. 6 A Well, the response to the reinvestigation 7 request was that it was verified correct as 8 reported. 9 BY MR. STEMPLER: 10 Q Did Nelnet verify the account as 120-plus 11 days late on or about April 26, 2004? 12 A Yes. That status was verified. 13 Q Turning your attention, please, to 14 EIS0063. Well, let's go back one more time to 15 EIS0062. 16 Can you tell the account number of the 17 Nelnet loan appearing on that page? 18 A 5639285. 19 Q Is there any way to tell what the last 20 digits are, because there are some digits at the end 21 which -- that's part of Mr. Minnick's Social 22 Security number, and the last digit varies for the 23 account number. 24 Is there any way to tell what the last 25 digits are? 70 1 A (Witness reviews documents). 2 Okay. This account number is on Page 50, 3 0050, 5632 -- excuse me -- 56392856103. 4 Q Okay. So it's -- this account appears, as 5 you understand it, at the bottom of EIS0049 and 6 continuing at the top of EIS0050? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And it's the one -- the account with the 9 digit ending in 03 -- or the two digits ending in 10 03; correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q It appears also -- is that correct -- that 13 the original balance reported by Nelnet is the same, 14 11,728; is that correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Turning to the next page, EIS0063, and the 17 Nelnet account reported there, is it correct that 18 the account reported on this page by Nelnet has an 19 original balance of $10,000? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Does it also correlate to the account 22 reported or appearing on EIS0050 and ending with 01 23 at the top of that page or towards the top of that 24 page? 25 A Yes. 71 1 Q How did Nelnet respond to the verification 2 request with respect to this account, which I will 3 call 01? 4 A Verified as reported. 5 Q So is it correct that Nelnet verified on 6 April 26, 2004, that this account 01 was correctly 7 reported with 120-plus days late? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Do you know, with respect to account 01, 10 the manner used by Nelnet to respond to the 11 reinvestigation request? 12 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, calls for 13 speculation, no foundation. 14 A E-OSCAR. It was a automated E-OSCAR 15 response. 16 BY MR. STEMPLER: 17 Q How can you tell that from looking at any 18 of these documents, that it was using E-OSCAR? 19 A The log-in that's next to the response is 20 EOS, and that's a automated response. 21 Q Which page are you actually viewing when 22 you say -- oh, I see. 23 Is it EOS on Page EIS0063? 24 A Yes. 25 Q The comment next to that date of 4/26/04 72 1 and the EOS is VER correct as reported. 2 Does that mean verified correct -- 3 correctly as reported? 4 A Yes. 5 Q What is the comment directly above that 6 line VER correct as reported? What is that informa- 7 tion? 8 A That is the comment that was sent as to 9 what the consumer was disputing. 10 Q Is that -- was that comment forwarded to 11 Nelnet? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Was it forwarded to Nelnet on April 18th, 14 2004? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Was it forwarded in addition to the FCRA 17 comments that appear on that page? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Who typed in or controls that comment, 20 quote, disputes current/prev status/M, as in Mary, O 21 P, as in Peter, space RAT./PAYM pattern, close 22 quote? 23 Who entered that information? 24 A When the consumer checked off, I have 25 never paid this account late, that is what was 73 1 translated to the credit grantor. 2 Q Is that done automatedly (sic) or is that 3 done by somebody at Equifax or one of its 4 contractors? 5 A No. It's done in an automated fashion. 6 Q So it translates portions of the FCRA 7 comments into these other comments and also go to 8 the furnisher along with the FCRA comments? 9 A Well, it will -- it won't translate the 10 comments. It will transmit the comments that the 11 consumer free-forms in directly. And then as the 12 consumer is checking off one of the boxes, it will 13 translate it into a standardized dispute. 14 Q Oh. So these refer, going back to our 15 Exhibit 338-07, to a box that was checked on the 16 online form? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q So Mr. Minnick checked the box that says, 19 I have never paid this account late, and that's how 20 that is forwarded to -- that's how that comment is 21 forwarded to Nelnet? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q Looking at EIS0064 -- and we're going to 24 break in a few minutes because I know it's almost 25 noon your time -- this is a Nelnet loan that had 74 1 been reported with an original balance of 6,722. 2 Can you tell, from looking at the other 3 pages of this ACIS case, which account number that 4 is? 5 A You want me to give the full account 6 number or the last three? 7 Q It is the last two digits, actually. 8 A Okay. 04. 9 Q And after receiving the verification 10 request from Equifax, how did Nelnet respond to 11 this -- to Nelnet account 04? 12 A They enter it was verified correct as 13 reported. 14 Q So is it correct that it verified that 04 15 was correctly reported having a 120-day-plus late- 16 payment history? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q And their response -- the response from 19 Nelnet was received by Equifax on April 26th, 2004? 20 A Yes. 21 Q I just have one more question, and we'll 22 conclude for the morning. 23 Turning to Page EIS0065, that's the Nelnet 24 loan having an additional balance of 8,500 -- is 25 that correct -- reporting as having -- 75 1 A Well, I was going to say, that's not the 2 balance spot. That's the high-credit loan amount. 3 Q Original amount? 4 A Yes, sir, 8,500. 5 Q Following the verification request from 6 Equifax to Nelnet, how did Nelnet respond to 7 Equifax? 8 A It's verified as reported. 9 Q So is it correct that Nelnet verified to 10 Equifax that the prior paying history of 120-days- 11 plus late was accurate for account 02? 12 A Yes. 13 Q It says on EIS0065, I-5 with respect to 14 the Nelnet loan. 15 Do you see that? 16 A Yes. 17 Q What does that I-5 indicate to you? 18 A The I is installment, and the five is -- 19 refers to 120 days past due. 20 Q Is that on a scale, such as, zero through 21 nine? Zero through ten? One through -- 22 A Yes, yes. 23 Q What is the scale? 24 A I was going to say sort of, but it doesn't 25 go through ten. 76 1 Q What is the top of the scale as far as 2 best for a particular account such as an installment 3 account? 4 A An installment account, the best would be 5 paid as agreed, which would be one. 6 Q And what is the worst? 7 A The worst would be, as some consider, it 8 would be charged off, which would be a nine. 9 Q And this is in the middle because it's 10 120-days-plus late but not a charge-off or a 11 collection account; is that correct? 12 A Well, a five can be considered as a 13 collection account. 14 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. Well, why don't we 15 break at this juncture and reconvene at 1:00 16 o'clock Atlanta time. 17 MS. GREENSTEIN: Okay. 18 (Whereupon, there was a lunch 19 recess in the deposition.) 20 BY MR. STEMPLER: 21 Q Okay. Ms. Fluellen, let's turn to Exhibit 22 341-06. 23 A Okay. One moment. Let me refamiliarize 24 myself with the order of this -- 25 MS. GREENSTEIN: Is that something we've 77 1 looked at previously? 2 MR. STEMPLER: No. 3 MS. GREENSTEIN: Oh, okay. 4 THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. 5 MR. STEMPLER: I mean, we looked at it 6 this morning. 7 MS. GREENSTEIN: Yeah. That's what I 8 mean, because we have that stuff in a different 9 pile. 10 MR. STEMPLER: Okay. It was looked at -- 11 it was reviewed this morning. 12 THE WITNESS: Okay. I have it. 13 BY MR. STEMPLER: 14 Q You have Page 341-06? 15 A Yes, sir. 16 Q And is it correct that that is the 17 sixth -- the sixth page of an eight-page consumer 18 report prepared by Equifax for Paul C. Minnick, Jr., 19 dated May 3rd, 2004? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Do you see on the Nelnet trade lines where 22 it says additional information in bold? 23 A Yes. 24 Q After the -- well, I said bold. I meant 25 upper case. 78 1 And after the upper-case additional 2 information, it then says, consumer disputes, 3 hyphen, reinvestigation in process. 4 What is the source of that additional 5 information? 6 A That would be Equifax. I believe during 7 this time period, we had a couple of reinvestiga- 8 tions going on at the same time. I believe the one 9 that this may be reference to is the one that 10 started on April 18th, 2004. 11 Q So other than that additional information 12 and the information that follows, the comment that 13 follows, as to the four Nelnet accounts that appear 14 on Exhibit 341-06, is the source of all the -- all 15 of the other information, Nelnet Loan Services? 16 A Yes. 17 Q So just to verify, as to each of those 18 accounts, it says current status has been over 120 19 days past due. 20 Is that -- is that information provided by 21 Nelnet Loan Services? 22 A Yes. 23 Q In the times that you've had your 24 deposition taken for Equifax, have any of those 25 cases, as you can recall, involved Nelnet Loan 79 1 Services or any organization named Nelnet? 2 MS. GREENSTEIN: Objection. 3 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, beyond the scope 4 of discovery, not reasonably calculated. 5 MS. GREENSTEIN: And I believe beyond the 6 scope of the 30(b)(6) Notice. 7 A Not that I can recall. 8 BY MR. STEMPLER: 9 Q Turning now to Exhibit 342, it says on -- 10 A Oh, wait a minute. I'm sorry. I don't 11 have it. 12 MS. GREENSTEIN: We're looking for it. 13 MR. STEMPLER: 342. 14 THE WITNESS: Okay. I have it now. 15 BY MR. STEMPLER: 16 Q It references on Page 342-02 four trade 17 lines referenced as UNIPAC at 3015 S. -- which 18 probably stands for South -- Parker Road, Aurora, 19 Colorado, 80014-2904. 20 Do you know if that is the same company as 21 Nelnet? 22 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, no foundation, 23 calls for speculation. 24 A I don't have firsthand knowledge of that, 25 no. 80 1 BY MR. STEMPLER: 2 Q Do you know what the subscriber number is 3 for the company called UNIPAC? 4 A No. 5 Q Would that be on any of the ACIS cases 6 that may relate to this credit report from Equifax 7 dated May 7th, 2004, concerning Atlanta? 8 A No. 9 Q So the subscriber number does not appear 10 anywhere on EIS0047 through EIS0066? 11 A No, it doesn't. 12 Q Turning again to 342-07 and -08. 13 A One moment, please. Okay. I have that. 14 Q In reporting accounts that have late pays 15 or collection in their -- in their trade line, is 16 there a way that Equifax, in the consumer report, 17 shows that separately from the other accounts, other 18 than just reporting that information in the trade 19 line? 20 A I'm sorry. I'm not following that 21 question. 22 Q Well, for example, in other credit reports 23 by other bureaus, such as, Experian and I believe 24 also TransUnion, they have a separate way of 25 indicating items with a native connotation, such as, 81 1 late pays or collection accounts. They show them, 2 perhaps, in a separate section or they distinguish 3 them some way. 4 Does Equifax have a similar characteriza- 5 tion of such accounts on the credit report? 6 A If I recall correctly, on the Equifax 7 Consumer Services' website, they are categorized 8 according to certain categories. 9 Q What categories do you recall? I mean, if 10 you want to look back at the Equifax report that 11 Mr. Minnick obtained from Equifax Consumer Services, 12 such as, the one at 337 -- 13 A (Witness reviews document). 14 Well, I'm looking at 337-13. And they're 15 categorized as open accounts, closed accounts. And 16 it goes so on and so forth through 15, where they 17 have accounts categorized in certain categories. 18 Q But a closed account under this 19 categorization may also include accounts that were 20 closed without any adverse indications; correct? 21 A It looks as though they have both types of 22 accounts, that were paid as agreed and charged off 23 as closed. 24 Q So getting back to Exhibit 342-07, please 25 take a look at the first -- the first Nelnet account 82 1 which appears on that page. And the distinction 2 is -- the one that I want you to see is the one that 3 had a high-credit balance of 11,728. 4 That's the first account? 5 A Yes. 6 Q I don't know if it's account one or not, 7 but that's just the first one appearing on this 8 page. 9 A Okay. 10 Q The current status indicated is over 120 11 days past due. 12 Is that information reported by Nelnet? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And then there's additional information 15 which says -- there's an additional-information area 16 which then says, student loan assigned to 17 government, semicolon, account transferred or sold, 18 semicolon. 19 Do you know what the source of that 20 additional-information field is? 21 A That would be provided by the data 22 furnisher, by the credit grantor. 23 Q So in this particular account instance, 24 that would be Nelnet Loan Services? 25 A Yes. 83 1 Q Is the same true for the next account on 2 that page, which had a high-credit balance of 3 $10,000? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Turning now to Page 342-08. 6 A Okay. 7 Q Looking at the first account on that page, 8 which is the Nelnet Loan Services high-credit 9 balance of 6,722. 10 Who provided the information that says, 11 current status, over 120 days past due? 12 MR. DONSBACH: Objection, no foundation, 13 calls for speculation. 14 A The current status is provided by the data 15 furnisher. 16 BY MR. STEMPLER: 17 Q In this case, that would be Nelnet Loan 18 Services; correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q There's a field there which says type of 21 loan and then the field that's filled in with 22 education loan. 23 How come the -- that particular field 24 doesn't appear on the loans on the preceding page 25 for Nelnet? 84 1 A That information wasn't provided for those 2 loans. 3 Q And at the end of that account that we're 4 viewing at the top of Page 342-08, there's 5 additional information which says, account closed at 6 consumer's request, semicolon, collection account, 7 semicolon, charge-off, hyphen, check presented was 8 uncollectible, semicolon. 9 What is the source of that additional 10 information on this trade line? 11 A From what I could tell, the reports that 12 were entered or the reinvestigation that was 13 completed during that time, that was a E-OSCAR 14 response. And I just want to double check that that 15 was provided via E-OSCAR -- one moment, please -- 16 from the credit grantor. 17 (Witness reviews documents). 18 Q What does it mean in that box for that 19 account where there's a one under months reviewed? 20 I believe that's what the words mean, MNTHS REVD. 21 A The months reviewed is technically meant 22 or defined as the number of accounts -- or the 23 number of times an account was reviewed for late- 24 payment history, but the one there is information 25 that's provided from the data source. 85 1 Q On the previous -- loans on the previous 2 page, 342-07, the two Nelnet Loan Service accounts 3 that appear on that page say months reviewed, 58. 4 And the other one says months reviewed, 70. 5 Do you see those? 6 A I do see that. 7 Q As to those two loans, how would you 8 interpret those two -- 9 COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. What was the 10 last thing? 11 BY MR. STEMPLER: 12 Q How would you interpret those two fields? 13 A I mean, as the number of months that were 14 reviewed. 15 Q Meaning what? 16 A I guess Nelnet would have to be the one to 17 explain that. I don't know. 18 Q There isn't a -- there isn't a standard 19 meaning for that particular field? 20 A Right. That's what I explained earlier. 21 Q I guess I didn't quite understand the 22 prior explanation. 23 A Yes. The technical definition of months 24 reviewed would be the number of times that the 25 credit grantor reviewed the account for late 86 1 payments, if that's the definition that Nelnet used. 2 I mean, I don't know. But that's what it means, and 3 we see 58 here. 4 Q So the meaning, as you understand it, 5 technical meaning for that field, is the number of 6 months that somebody paid late? 7 A No, no, that the -- that the credit 8 grantor reviewed the account. 9 Q So would it be the number of months that a 10 person had an opportunity to make payments on a 11 particular account? 12 A No. It doesn't have anything to do with 13 the payment history. It's the number of times the 14 credit grantor reviewed the account. It would be an 15 internal thing for the credit grantor. 16 Q Okay. So if on the next page it means -- 17 it says one month reviewed, that means it was only 18 one time that Nelnet reviewed the account for a late 19 payment? 20 A And that's the technical definition, yes. 21 Q The next Nelnet Loan Service account on 22 Page 342-08 has the high-credit balance showing of 23 $8,500. 24 Is it correct that the additional 25 information that appears for that account of, quote, 87 1 account closed by consumer, semicolon, collection 2 account, semicolon, student loan assigned to 3 government, semicolon, close quote, was provided by 4 the furnisher, Nelnet Loan Services? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Is that a yes? 7 A Yes. That was a yes. 8 Q Okay. Please turn to Page 343-05 through 9 343-07. 10 A Okay. One moment. Okay. 11 Q