Prison Phone Justice

o EXPEDITE
2
3
4

(if filing within 5 court days of hearing)

Ii[ Hearing is set:
Date:
~D~e...;;...;ce;;;...;..m~b;;"",,;;;;;;e...;....r9..;;;;...J"....;;;;;2;",;;;",O....;...11~
Time:
--..;.1...;""";;;:3~O~p....;,,;,,,.m;..;.;..
_
J udge/Calendar: _......;,H...,;,.;;o;.,;"",;;n..;...,,;.P;". ";a; ; ;.; .;u;",;"; ; la;. ",; C; ;, . ,; ; a.;. ; ; .se.; ; ., lY,---

5
6

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON
FOR THURSTON COUNTY

7
8

AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE
PACIFIC NORTHWEST, INC.,

9

10
11

Petitioner,
v.
WASHINGTON STATE UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION,
Respondent,

13
14

NO. 11-2-00992-8
and
NO. 11-2-00998-7

DECLARATION OF CHRIS R. YOUTZ
IN OPPOSITION TO PETITIONS FOR
JUDICIAL REVIEW

and
SANDY JUDD and TARA HERIVEL
Intervenors,

15

and
16

T-NETIX, INC.,
17
18

Interested Party.
T-NETIX, INC., a Delaware corporation,

19

20
21

22

Petitioner,
v.
WASHINGTON STATE UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION,
Respondent.

23
24
. 25

26

DECLARATION OF CHRIS R. YOUTZ IN OPPOSITION
TO PETITIONS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW - 1

SIRIANNI YOUTZ SPOONEMORE
999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3650
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
TEL. (206) 223-0303 FAX (206) 223-0246

Chris R. Youtz declares:
2
3
4

5
6

7
8
9
10

1.

I am a partner at Sirianni Youtz Spoonemore and am one of the attorneys

for Sandy Judd and Tara Herivel, plaintiffs in Judd v. AT&T et ai., King County Cause
No. 00-2-17565-5 SEA, and intervenors in this matter.
2.

Attached as Exhibit A to this declaration are true and correct excerpts

from the deposition of Scott Passe taken on April 15, 2009, before the Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and accurate to the
best of my knowledge.
DATED: October 31,2011, at Seattle

11
1.2
13
14

15
16
17
18

19

20
21

22
23
24

25
26

DECLARATION OF CHRIS R. YOUTZ IN OPPOSITION
TO PETITIONS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW - 2

SIRIANNI YOUTZ SPOONEMORE
999 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3650
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104

TEL. (206) 223-0303 FAX (206) 223-0246

Exhibit A

1

1

BEFORE THE

2

WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND

3

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

4

5

Certified
SANDY JUDD and TARA HERIVEL,
Plaintiffs,

6

*
*
*
*
*

7

VS.

8

AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE
*
PACIFIC NORTHWEST, INC., and *
T-NETIX, INC.,
*

*

9

10

Transcript
DOCKET NO.
UT-042022 RECEIVED

*

Defendants.

*

11

12
13
14

********************************************************
ORAL DEPOSITION OF
SCOTT PASSE
APRIL 15, 2009
********************************************************

15
16

ANSWERS AND DEPOSITION of SCOTT PASSE, a witness

17

produced on behalf of the Defendant AT&T Communications,

18

taken in the above styled and numbered cause on the 15th

19

day of April, 2009, from 9:02 a.m. to 5:08 p.m., before

20

Rachel D. Chavez, a Certified Shorthand Reporter in and

21

for the State of Texas, taken in the offices of Bennett

22

Weston & Lajone, P.C., 1750 Valley View Lane, Suite 120,

23

in the City of Dallas, County of Dallas, State of Texas,

24

in accordance with the Washington Utilities and

25

Transportation Commission.

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

236
1

2

Q.

Does that indicate to you that this was a call

flow example as of 2002?

3

A.

Or perhaps earlier.

4

Q.

Are you able to tell me from personal knowledge

5

whether this flow -- call flow pattern would have

6

actually been in effect say in 1999 or 2001?

7

A.

No.

8

Q.

Okay.

9
10

This seems -- I

think this is the only

example of one of these that we've seen.

Did the

company over time produce similar call flowcharts?

11

A.

I

12

Q.

Who would -- do you know who would have

13
14

don't recall.

prepared Exhibit 9?
A.

I

don't know who prepared the exhibit.

I

don't

15

really know who prepared the exhibit or the -- or the

16

call flow.

17
18

Q.

Okay.

seeing call flow examples prior to 2002?

19

A.

20

frames.

21

Q.

Okay.

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q.

Okay.

24
25

Just to make sure, do you remember ever

Yes, but I don't recall the time -- the time

But you did see some prior to 2002?

But I

take it you can't tell me whether

you saw them as early as 1996, or can you?
A.

I

cannot.

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

255

Q.

1

2

If you'd take a look, please, at Exhibit 15.

Fifteen is -- it's an AT&T document.

3

MR. PETERS:

4

MR. YOUTZ:

5

THE WITNESS:

10

No, that's his e-mail

I've got 14 to 16.

How did

that happen?
MR. PETERS:

8

9

Yeah.

dated February 3.

6
7

Today's letter.

It should be one page.

want me to look through some?
know.

Do you

The one-page yellow one I

Here it is.

11

THE WITNESS:

12

MR. PETERS:

13

A.

Okay.

14

Q.

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

Sorry about that.
Not a problem.

When Mr. Peters was asking you

15

some questions about this, I think he asked you about

16

to some extent about paragraph three.

17

sentence there says, "Message currently deployed states

18

that 'You will be charged $4.94 for the first minute'"

19

and so on.

And the second

20

A.

Uh-huh.

21

Q.

Now, do you have any knowledge one way or the

22

other about whether that announcement was being made

23

within the state of Washington?

24

A.

I do not.

25

Q.

Okay.

And is it correct that even though on a

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

256

1

national basis, a P-III unit might have the capability

2

say for rate disclosure, that doesn't mean that that

3

ability will be used in all locations; is that correct?
A.

4

I can't comment about that because it -- that

5

would be regulatory.

6

have to do that universally and -- or may have had to do

7

that universally.

8

9
'10

d'

Q.

Okay.

In other words, we -- we would

I couldn't comment on that.

But it's possible that certain rate

features might be used in one location and not the
other?

11

MR. PETERS:

12

MR. YOUTZ:

13

A.

Objection, foundation.
You can go ahead and answer.

The capa- -- the device is capable of that, but

14

I can't comment on whether -- as to whether that was

15

ever done.

16

Q.

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

Okay.

Because there might be

17

regulatory reasons for not doing that, but other than

18

for reg- -- from a hardware/software perspective, it's

19

possible for a rate disclosure provision in the P-III to

20

be working one way in one state, differently in another

21

state?

22

A.

23

Q.

Okay.

24

A.

I guess.

25

It would be possible to program it that way.

l

I mean, maybe even rethinking that, I

mean, it might -- it might have been a universal feature

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

257

1

once it was turned on.

2

version for sure.

3

. Q.

Okay.

So I can't even state that

And in-state -- how would you

4

differentiate if you had to give local rates and the

5

rates were different within different states?

6

A.

I'm sorry?

7

Q.

In other words, if say in the state of Idaho

8

the local rate was different than the state of

9

Washington for a local call.

10

MR. PETERS:

11

particular facility in Idaho versus --

12

Q.

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

You talking about from a

If a facility in Idaho is using

13

P-III and a facility in Washington is using a P-III and

14

the rates for local calls are different in Idaho than

15

they are in Washington, would there have to be an

16

adjustment made between those two systems?

17

A.

Not any chip change adjustment.

You would --

18

the device would be programatically instructed to pull

19

whatever it needed to.

20

Q.

Okay.

And then if a state didn't require

21

disclosure of the rates for local calls, would that even

22

be necessarily switched on in that state?

23

MR. PETERS:

24

MR. YOUTZ:

25

A.

Objection, foundation.
Go ahead.

I can't really comment about that, whether
VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

258
1

~e

-- whether we did or didn't quote rates after -- I

_____________________________

mean

3

quote rates universally and

4

we did do that.

5

6

after a certain

Q.

have

int we

2

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

__

~~~c~'w=~~'"'_~~~,~

---_-_ ~~

ust decided to

I can't comment whether

So you just don't know one way

or the other; is that fair?

7

A.

Yeah.

8

Q.

For all these questions that the two of us have

9
10
11

been asking, you just don't know the answer one way or
the other; is that correct?
A.

Yeah.

12

MR. FERRETTI:

13

MR. PETERS:

14

17
18
19

I'll object to the form of

that question.
MR. YOUTZ:

·15

16

Objection

Q.

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

He answered it.
And so now what I'd like you to

do is -A.

What the -- I'm sorry.

What did -- what did I

answer to?

20

Q.

Do you want to have it read back?

21

A.

Yeah.
Read back my question.

22

MR. YOUTZ:

23

(Requested portion was read back.)

24
25

A.

I

I -- no,

I disagree with that.

You'd have

to qualify what questions you're --

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

259

Q.

1

2

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

5

As I listen to the

question, that was a pretty bad question.

3
4

I'm sorry.

In terms of the questions Mr. Peters and I
have been asking about what you mayor may not know
about the actual rate announcements in the various

"

6

states, it's correct that you don't know what was done

7

one way or the other?

8

MR. PETERS:

9

MR. FERRETTI:

10
11
12
13

A.

Objection.

You can answer.

I don't have specific knowledge about what

was quoted in terms of rates.
Q.

(BY MR. YOUTZ)

Okay.

Or whether even rates

were quoted or not; is that correct?
MR. FERRETTI:

14
15

I

Objection, form.

A.

Objection, form.

I know that I enabled the -- provided the --

16

enabled the equipment to quote rates.

17

was quoted and not quoted, I can't -- I have no

18

comment

19

Q.

20

How -- where it

I have no knowledge, direct knowledge.
(BY MR. YOUTZ)

Okay.

That's fine.

If you take a look back at Exhibit 15 on --

21

there's a paragraph that's the next to the last

22

paragraph that says, "AT&T is aware that correcting the

23

rate quote will require significant T-Netix -- T-Netix

24

resources" and so on.

25

There's a -- let's see.

Something that --

VERITEXTCORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

270

1

A.

Uh-huh.

2

Q.

Do you recall that general line of questioning

3

that he asked you about?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q.

Do you have any reason to believe as you sit

6

here now that the flow processor sequence was different

7

in the period of time 1996 to 2000, other than what's

8

shown on AT&T Exhibit 9?

9

MR. YOUTZ:

10
11

A.

I

Objection, lack of foundation.

have no reason to believe it was any

different.
Q.

12

(BY MR. PETERS)

As you sit here right now, do

13

you believe that what's shown in AT&T Exhibit 9 does

14

accurately describe the flow process as it existed in

15

'96 to 2000?

16
17

MR. YOUTZ:

Objection, lack of foundation.

Go ahead.

18

A.

I

19

Q.

(BY MR. PETERS)

20

A.

Because I -- I can't say that all -- each one

21
22

25

And why is that?

of these functions was when -- each one of those

.. functions
Q.

23
24

can't attest to that.

was part. of the call flow.
Do you have any recollection of any of these

functions being included in the call flow after 1996?

.......

A.

I do not .

....- -.- - - - -

-.J

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658

271

1

Q.

Do you have -- okay.

2

MR. PETERS:

That's all.

3

MR. YOUTZ:

4

(Deposition concluded at 5:08 p.m.)

That's all.

5
6
7

8
9

10
11
12

13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20

21

22
23

24
25

VERITEXT CORPORATE SERVICES (800) 567-8658