IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
             IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING
  
  SALLIE J. HOLMES,       )
                          ) Case No. 06-2-38099-1 SEA
              PLAINTIFF,  )
                          ) NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF
  VS.                     ) CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE
                          ) OF DEFENDANT EMC MORTGAGE
                          ) CORPORATION UNDER FRCP
  EMC MORTGAGE            ) 30(b)(6)
  CORPORATION; QUALITY    )
  LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION)
  OF WASHINGTON; JPMORGAN )
  CHASE; WELLS FARGO HOME )
  MORTGAGE, INC., KEVIN   )
  AND ARLENE SCOTT,       )
                          )
                          )
              DEFENDANTS. )
  ----------------------------------------------------
                   ORAL DEPOSITION OF
                  BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER
                     APRIL 3, 2008
  ----------------------------------------------------
        ORAL DEPOSITION OF BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER,
  produced as a witness at the instance of the
  Plaintiff, and duly sworn, was taken in the
  above-styled and numbered cause on the 3rd day of
  April, 2008, from 3:33 p.m. to 4:33 p.m., before
  Sarah Bina, CSR in and for the State of Texas,
  reported by stenographic method, at the Courtyard
  Marriott, 2701 Lake Vista Drive, Lewisville, Texas
  75067, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
  Procedure and the provisions stated on the record or
  attached hereto.

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

                 A P P E A R A N C E S
  
  FOR THE PLAINTIFF
        Ms. Melissa A. Huelsman
        LAW OFFICES OF MELISSA A. HUELSMAN, P.S.
        The Hoge Building
        705 Second Avenue
        Suite 501
        Seattle, Washington 98104
  
  FOR THE DEFENDANT EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
        Mr. M. Owen Gabrielson
        GRAHAM & DUNN, P.C.
        Pier 70
        2801 Alaskan Way
        Suite 300
        Seattle, Washington 98121-1128
  
  FOR THE DEFENDANTS KEVIN AND ARLENE SCOTT
        Ms. Amy Phillips (Via Telephone)
        KELLER ROHRBACK, L.L.P.
        1201 3rd Avenue
        Suite 3200
        Seattle, Washington 98101-3052

  FOR THE DEFENDANT EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
        Mr. Jeffrey W. Tschirhart
        ATTORNEY AT LAW
        2780 Lake Vista Drive
        Lewisville, Texas 75067-3884

  ALSO PRESENT:
        Ms. Mary Jacque Thompson

  
                         INDEX
                                           PAGE
  Appearances ..........................     3
  Stipulations .........................     5
  WITNESS:  BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER
        Examination by Ms. Huelsman ....     6
  
  Witness' Signature/Corrections Page ..    55
  
  Reporter's Certificates ..............    56
  
                        EXHIBITS
                                           PAGE
  NUMBER      DESCRIPTION                 MARKED
    28        Mortgage Loan Purchase        17
              Agreement
  
    29        Pooling and Servicing         46
              Agreement
  
     (Exhibits attached at the end of the original
        and certified copies of the transcript.)

  

  

  
  
                S T I P U L A T I O N S
               THE REPORTER:  We're on the record at
  3:33.  Would you like the same agreements?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Yes.
               (The following excerpt was taken from
                the Oral Deposition of Mary Jacque
                Thompson, and by agreement of all
                parties will also apply for this
                deposition.)
               MR. GABRIELSON:  If -- if -- if
  everyone could speak up, that would be great.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Can you hear us, Amy?
               MS. PHILLIPS:  I can hear you.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.

  

  

  

                 P R O C E E D I N G S
                  BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER,
  having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
                      EXAMINATION
  BY MS. HUELSMAN:
      Q.   Can you please state and spell your name.
      A.   Brian, B-R-I-A-N, Neiser, N-E-I-S-E-R.
      Q.   Do you have a middle name?
      A.   Joseph, J-O-S-E-P-H.
      Q.   Okay.  I assume that your attorney has gone
  over the rules of depositions with you, but I'm just
  going to remind you that we cannot talk over each
  other or the nice court reporter is going to kill
  both of us.  You have to make sure that I'm finished
  asking my question before you answer it so we don't
  talk over each other.  Also, even if you think you
  know the question I'm going to ask you, wait until I
  finish asking it, because we have a written record
  here and we can't suppose or guess at what my
  question was.  I want your best testimony, which can
  include your best estimate, but I don't want you to
  guess.  So if you don't know the answer to a
  question, I don't know is a perfectly acceptable
  answer.  Okay?
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   Okay.  And you have to remember to say yes
  or no, because uh-huh or huh-uh, things like that,
  are vague and ambiguous when they're written down.
  Okay?
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   All right.  And if I ask you a question and
  you don't understand it, ask me to rephrase it.  I
  will do my best to ask you questions that you
  understand, but I don't want you guessing at my
  questions either.  Okay?
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   All right.  Can you please give me -- I'm
  sorry.  And you also recognize that you're here
  today testifying on behalf of EMC Mortgage, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  So when I say you, once we get past
  the initial personal information about you
  personally, I'll be asking for you to give me an
  answer on behalf of EMC, and that's who you're
  providing the answer on behalf of.  Is that your
  understanding?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  So if during the course of that
  there's any of my question as to -- any confusion as
  to whether you need to answer the question on behalf
  of yourself personally or EMC, ask me for
  clarification, and let's make sure that we're both
  on the same page so that we understand each other.
  Okay?
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   All right.  Have you had your deposition
  taken before?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Can you tell me how many times?
      A.   Once.
      Q.   And was it on behalf of EMC?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  Can you tell me what kind of case it
  was in connection with?
      A.   It was a group of neighbors against Beazer
  Mortgage.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Can you give me just a
  synopsis of your educational background after high
  school?
      A.   I have a bachelors in business
  administration -- or, I'm sorry, bachelors in
  business administration and business management.
      Q.   Okay.  And where did you get that degree?
      A.   Texas A&M.
      Q.   What year?
      A.   I graduated in '93.
      Q.   Any other higher education?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  Certifi -- professional
  certifications, licensing, things like that?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Received any professional training?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  Would you give me your job
  background after you got your college degree?
      A.   I worked, briefly, for my mom's company in
  Houston, and then I was hired by Bear Stearns as a
  junior underwriter in due diligence.  At that point,
  probably five to six years later, I moved into a
  trading support role, which I currently have the
  same function.
      Q.   Okay.  So you're an employee of Bear
  Stearns, not of EMC?
      A.   EMC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bear
  Stearns.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   I was hired by EMC.  Sorry.
      Q.   Okay.  So you're -- you are employed as a
  junior underwriter in due diligence with EMC?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And I do understand that it's a
  wholly-owned subsidiary, but still wholly-owned
  subsidiaries have their own employees, so that's why
  I'm trying to get clarification --
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   -- okay?  All right.  So you are actually
  an employee of EMC?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And, I'm sorry, what, again, is your
  current position that you transitioned into?
      A.   Trading support.
      Q.   And that's also as an employee of EMC?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Why don't you give me a
  brief description of your job duties when you were a
  junior underwriter.
      A.   I was responsible for reviewing assets that
  we were potentially going to purchase and submitting
  those to the traders to analyze the information.
      Q.   Okay.  Did you receive training to perform
  that job?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  What kind of training did you
  receive?
      A.   Training from other senior underwriters, so
  I was hired as a junior and I was trained by the
  seniors.
      Q.   And can you describe that training to me?
      A.   It was, basically, on-the-job training.  I
  would -- they would send me to a job site, and the
  senior underwriters would inform me of whatever I
  needed to know.
      Q.   Okay.  What did you need to know?
      A.   Where the -- what a note was, what a
  mortgage was, just general information reviewing
  residential assets.
      Q.   Okay.  And you said you went to job sites?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   So outside of EMC's offices?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   And what sort of job sites would these be,
  sort of places would they be?
      A.   Other institutions selling their assets --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- so --
      Q.   Could be a bank, could be a len -- just a
  consumer lender, just some other institute that was
  selling?
      A.   Typically, yeah.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  And was it only -- was
  your work only focused on residential mortgage
  loans?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And you said you were conducting due
  diligence; is that correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  So what else did you have to review
  in addition to the notes and Deeds of Trusts and/or
  mortgages in order to conduct due diligence on those
  assets?
      A.   We look at the notes, the mortgage, the
  title policies.  We'd look at all the documents that
  were in the file at origination, all the origination
  documents.
      Q.   Okay.  And were -- were you reviewing
  selected -- selected loan files from a larger pool
  of loans?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  So, you know, say, like, five out of
  100, or something like that, some kind of ratio, I
  mean?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  You weren't looking at
  every single loan file?
      A.   Certain deals required us to look at every
  loan file, but deals did not.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   So that -- that was set up -- I mean, at
  that point, that was set by whoever was negotiating
  the deal.
      Q.   Okay.  And what years were you employed by
  EMC as a junior underwriter?
      A.   '94 through -- I can't remember the exact
  date I moved to the trading side, but probably 2000,
  2001.
      Q.   Okay.  And you've been on the trading side
  since 2001?
      A.   Trading support side, yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And, I'm sorry, when you were still
  over in underwriting, did you ever acquire another
  job title besides junior underwriter?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  And what is your job title now?
      A.   Vice president in trading support.
      Q.   And how long have you held the title vice
  president?
      A.   I cannot remember when I got the title.
      Q.   What was your title when you first started
  in trading support?
      A.   Trading support.  There really was no
  title.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  And can you describe to
  me your job duties in trading support?
      A.   I work with the traders in New York to
  analyze potential loan packages for purchase, and
  then I work on some whole loan sales as well.
      Q.   Okay.  And what training did you receive to
  perform that -- this job, the one in trading
  support?
      A.   No formal training, just on-the-job.
      Q.   Again, what did that constitute?
      A.   Just -- they would give me a task, and I
  would do the task.  And they would inform me along
  the way of what things -- additional steps need to
  be taken to perform that task.
      Q.   Okay.  Well, what kind of task do you do in
  trading support?
      A.   I -- I work with the traders on evaluation
  of potential loan pools for purchase and sale.  So
  they would give me a file, I would look at the file,
  provide them some reports that they ask for, and
  then that would be it.
      Q.   Okay.  And what sort of reports were those?
      A.   Just performance reports, status reports.
      Q.   So performance reports would be how the
  loans have already been performing; is that...
      A.   Well, in general, what the package looks
  like.  So if somebody was looking to sell a package,
  we would provide the information and we would
  analyze that and provide post-stratified summary
  reports of -- of types of loans.  So these are --
  these are mostly current loans, these are mostly
  nonperforming loans, these are mostly in bankruptcy,
  these are in foreclosure, property types, things of
  that nature.
      Q.   Okay.  Would there also be categories for
  the type of loan -- in other words, a Prime, Alt-A,
  Subprime loans as well?
      A.   Typically, we would buy subprime.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   All right.  What percentage of the
  purchases are subprime?
      A.   I don't know an exact estimate.
      Q.   Your best estimate is fine.
      A.   I'd say most of the deals we purchase are
  subprime.
      Q.   Okay.  So 80, 85 percent?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      A.   I -- I really don't -- I don't know --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- what the percentage would be.
      Q.   Okay.  And who are the traders in Wall --
  excuse me -- in New York that you work with?
      A.   With Tom Tarantino and Jason Beigel.
      Q.   Can you spell the last names?
      A.   T-A-R-A-N-T-I-N-O.  And Jason Beigel,
  B-E-I-G-E-L.
      Q.   And these are also EMC employees, or are
  these Bear Stearns' employees?
      A.   I believe they're -- they're probably Bear
  Stearns' employees.
      Q.   Okay.  Excuse me.  Okay.  And did your job
  description change once you became a vice president?
      A.   No.
      Q.   You just had a nicer title?
      A.   Exactly.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  All right.
  Okay.  What are we on?
               THE REPORTER:  28.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Oh, I forgot to call
  Amy.  Sorry.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Can we just come off
  the record?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Sorry.  Yeah.
               (Recess from 3:46 p.m. to 3:47 p.m.)
               MS. HUELSMAN:  So what -- I'm sorry.
  What exhibit are we on?
               THE REPORTER:  28.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.
               (Exhibit No. 28 marked.)
               MR. GABRIELSON:  And, Counsel, did you
  have a -- an opportunity to look at that protective
  order that I set?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Yes.  And then these
  are the only documents that you're suggesting --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Yeah, those are the
  documents I set out.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I'm fine with marking
  them confidential for now, but my -- I didn't have
  it in front of me -- but my understanding was is
  that these are available on e-OSCAR, and, if so,
  then they --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  If you could show
  that to me?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Yeah.  Yeah.  I know.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  That's fine.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I didn't have a chance
  to do that.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Okay.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I started looking for
  them.  So, Amy, what we're doing is we're -- I am
  agreeing to mark the Pooling and Servicing
  Agreements as confidential, pending my confirmation
  that I think these are publicly available documents,
  and, if so, then they would no longer be
  confidential.
               MS. PHILLIPS:  Yeah.  I have no
  position or -- I'm not going to object or anything
  at this point, so...
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  They usually are
  available, so that's why -- okay.  So, I'm sorry,
  what exhibit are we on?
               THE REPORTER:  28.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Thank you.  So I'm
  marking as Exhibit 28, Amy, the Mortgage Loan
  Purchase Agreement, which is EMC 224 through 353.
               MS. PHILLIPS:  224 through 253?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  224 through 353.
               MS. PHILLIPS:  353?  Okay.  Got it.
  Thanks.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.
      Q.   So you have Exhibit 28 in front of you?
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   Can you tell me what this document is?
      A.   This would be a Mortgage Loan Purchase
  Agreement.
      Q.   Okay.  And what is its effect, or what does
  it do?
      A.   This is the contract that we use to buy the
  the -- the asset or the -- the pool of loans.
      Q.   Okay.  So once you have completed your
  review working with the traders --
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   -- this would -- document would constitute
  the agreement between, in this case, EMC and Wells
  Fargo for EMC to purchase the loans that are
  documented inside this document; is that correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And this document is dated
  March 30th, 2005, and it is marked as an execution
  copy.
      A.   (Nods head.)
      Q.   So is it your understanding that that's its
  effective date?
      A.   Yes.  This was -- yeah.  Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And it regards pools of loans that
  were designated as WFHM Pools 6288, 6289, 6290,
  6291, 6292, 6293, 6294, and 6295; is that correct?
      A.   That's correct.
      Q.   Okay.  So are you familiar with this
  document?
      A.   The document is -- is -- the attorneys
  between EMC and Wells Fargo are the ones that
  produce this document.  I have seen it before,
  but --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- they're the ones that produce this
  document.
      Q.   Okay.  Did you -- did you review anything
  before you came here today to provide testimony?
      A.   Not really.
      Q.   Okay.  But you're familiar with this
  document or just these doc -- these kinds of
  documents in general?
      A.   I'm familiar with these kinds of documents.
      Q.   Okay.  But you -- do you have any
  particular familiarity with this actual loan
  document -- or, I'm sorry, sales agreement?
      A.   I'm familiar with the -- the deal --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- and some of the terms, but that's my
  familiarity with the document.
      Q.   Okay.  And did you participate in this
  deal?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  I want you to turn to EMC
  Document No. 231.  At -- at the bottom they're
  numbered, so that's what I'm going to use to keep us
  moving along.
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   Okay.  So I'm going to point your attention
  to -- well, okay, so what's your understanding of
  the purchase and sale provisions contained in
  Number 1, in summary --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection.  The
  document speaks for itself.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I recognize that.
      A.   1A?
      Q.   Yeah.
      A.   It's, basically, a -- they're noting the
  cut-off date of the -- the balances --
      Q.   Uh-huh.
      A.   -- which is March 28th, 2005.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   They're noting the date in which this --
  the sale occurred --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- on March 30th, 2005 --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- and they're noting the price (sic) of
  99.250.
      Q.   Okay.  So this is setting the parameters, I
  guess, as of March 30th, 2005, that's the date by
  which the transfer's occurring and the closing date
  for how the balance on those loans are measured --
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   -- correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  And it's probably
  especially important as to loans that might be
  delinquent because it sets a cut-off date, correct?
      A.   Cut-off date is -- is a date that you use
  to buy the balances on, a systatic (phonetic) point
  and time.
      Q.   Yeah.
      A.   It's -- it's equally important on
  performing and nonperforming assets.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  And was there any --
  when you are working in trading support --
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   -- is there different parameters that
  you're looking for when you're looking at loans
  which are in default when they're being purchased as
  opposed to performing loans?
      A.   Evaluation of nonperforming assets is -- is
  you're looking at statuses, foreclosure, bankruptcy.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   What status the loan is currently in as
  well as property evaluation.
      Q.   Okay.  So kind of how bad is it?  At the
  moment, how bad is the default?
      A.   Exactly.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Okay.  Now, the -- what
  is -- what is your understanding of when the actual
  sale of the assets occurs?
      A.   The sale occurs on the -- the March 30th
  date, and that's the date that we send the wire.
  So --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- the sale of the asset occurs when we --
  when the contract is signed and dated and the -- the
  wire is sent.
      Q.   Okay.  So the contract's signed and dated,
  money is paid and received, that's it, the sale is
  now in effect, and the loans that are part of -- are
  documented, say in this agreement, have now been
  transferred -- the ownership has been transferred
  from Wells Fargo to EMC, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  What happens to the original notes
  when that sale occurs that underlie or represent the
  amounts that are owed?
      A.   The -- they would get transferred to EMC.
      Q.   Are they physically transferred?
      A.   Yeah.  The -- the document would be sent to
  EMC --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- or collateral -- or another collateral
  agent that we may have, so it's sent to us or our
  custodian.
      Q.   Okay.  And if it's a custodian, it's just
  somebody who's acting for EMC's benefit to hold it?
      A.   Exactly.
      Q.   Okay.  And then what happens to the -- any
  other information about the loan, so, in other
  words, prior payment histories, all that kind of
  stuff?
      A.   This contract also sets forth the transfer
  date.  And --
      Q.   Uh-huh.
      A.   -- on that day, we would expect to have all
  the information from the prior servicer to EMC.  So
  they would send us a tape of all the information,
  and -- and that's what we would load in our system.
      Q.   Okay.  So that -- that information is
  transmitted in an electronic form on a tape?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      A.   I can't answer that question, specifically.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   It comes in tapes or -- I don't know how it
  comes.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   That's not my area.
      Q.   Okay.  But it's -- the information is
  supposed to be transmitted to EMC so it can know
  where to start from when it starts servicing it --
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   -- from Day 1?  Yes?
      A.   That's correct.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Now, are assignments --
  individual assignments of the loans executed
  concurrently with the execution of this document?
      A.   Not usually.
      Q.   Okay.  Is there a reason for that?
      A.   Typically, we require the assignment -- we
  require to have an assignment at funding, but I
  don't know that they're executed by both parties on
  that date.
      Q.   Okay.  So part of the requirement of these
  types of contracts is that the assignments have been
  executed, but they may not be?
      A.   We require an assignment from Wells Fargo
  to EMC at the time of -- of funding.
      Q.   Okay.  And I just want to make sure I'm not
  confusing you.  I'm referring now to an individual
  assignment for each of the loans.
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   That's your understanding?
      A.   We would -- we would require that for
  funding or we would note it on the side schedule
  that it would be missing.
      Q.   Okay.  And do you know how those actual,
  physical assignments are transmitted from, in this
  case, Wells Fargo to EMC or its custodian?
      A.   It would be shipped with the collateral.
      Q.   What do you mean shipped with the
  collateral?
      A.   It would be shipped along with the other
  documents that we would need for closing, the
  original note, the original mortgage.
      Q.   Okay.  So I just want to be clear -- clear
  since, in this case, I don't think we can ship the
  real property, so I wanted to be sure what you meant
  by collateral.  Okay?
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   All right.  So are you involved at all in
  the actual negotiation or -- for the purchases?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  I'm sorry.  I'm looking for my page.
  I want to turn your attention to Page 7 of this
  document, which is EMC 232.  Actually -- actually,
  go back to Page 6 for a second.  Sorry.  So we have
  the transfer of ownership paragraph, and then the
  heading, delivery of mortgage loan documents, and
  then it goes to Page 7?
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   Okay.  So this is the paragraph where it
  says you're supposed to -- you know, that Wells
  Fargo is supposed to transfer the note and the
  assignment --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to --
      Q.   -- correct?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  -- form.
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And then down on Para --
  Subparagraph D, which starts at the bottom of Page 7
  and it goes to Pay 8 -- Page 8, is this the document
  that documents -- is this the paragraph that
  documents the requirement that the original
  assignment is supposed to be included in the loan
  file when it gets transferred over to EMC?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Can you repeat the
  question, Counsel?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I'm asking him if this
  is the paragraph which documents the requirement,
  for, in this case, Wells Fargo to provide EMC with
  an executed assignment when it's sending the rest of
  the loan documents in order to complete the sale.
      A.   Can I --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection.  Paragraph
  says what it says.
      Q.   Go ahead.
      A.   Can I read the paragraph?
      Q.   Yes, you can.
      A.   (Reading document.)  Could you repeat the
  question again?
      Q.   Is this the -- the paragraph that documents
  the requirement of Wells Fargo to provide EMC with
  the assignments when it transfers the loan file
  and/or -- I guess I should add and/or -- to have
  them recorded already before it transfers it over?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  And it also has a
  provision here where it says, at the purchaser's
  option they can agree to get the assignments and
  record them themselves later.  Did you see that?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  Is that what usually happened?  Do
  you know?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      A.   I'm not familiar with the process of the
  assignments.  Once we buy the assets, that -- I
  don't --
      Q.   Your involvement ends?
      A.   Exactly.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Do you know anything
  about what happens if an assignment has not been
  recorded or is not in the loan file when it gets
  transferred over?
      A.   (Shakes head.)  No.
      Q.   No?  Okay.  And you said that there was --
  there could be in here a notation on some of the
  files.  And I can't remember the phrase you used a
  few minutes ago.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection --
      Q.   There would be a notation about some of the
  loans that were in default --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   -- do you recall that?
      A.   I don't recall.
      Q.   And I should have made a note of what you
  said.  And I'll turn your attention to Document
  No. 255, at the bottom of this.  Are you involved at
  all in the creation of this part of these
  agreements, the one that sets forth the mortgage
  loan file requirements?
      A.   No.
      Q.   No?  Okay.  So, again, you're just --
  you're involved in the larger picture and not in the
  creation of the documentation that documents what
  actually has to be transferred over during the sale?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And so I'm assuming that your answer
  is the same as to Exhibit C, Document EMC 358, which
  talks about REO files?
      A.   Correct.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  Okay.  Okay.
  And, actually, I guess I'm going to go ahead and
  break up --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  We have Bates, that
  way you can just keep going with the Bates number.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.
      Q.   So we're at Document EMC 264, which is the
  Interim Servicing Agreement.
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   Are you familiar at all with the contents
  of this document?
      A.   On a general scale.
      Q.   And is this part of the transaction that
  you help negotiate or facility in the transfer
  support department (sic)?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   Or trade -- trading support.  I'm sorry.
  Wrong place.
      A.   Could you rephrase the question for me
  again?
      Q.   Sure.  Is -- is this -- the information
  that's contained in this Interim Servicing
  Agreement, is this part of what you are involved in
  in trading support, this part of the transaction,
  the servicing?
      A.   No.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   No?  Okay.  So you don't know anything
  about how the loans that are part of this purchase
  and sale agreement are served during this -- the
  interim basis that's described in this document?
      A.   Repeat the question again.
      Q.   I'm asking you if you know anything about
  how the loans are serviced during the interim period
  between -- which would be outlined in this Interim
  Servicing Agreement.
      A.   Wells Fargo would still be servicing the
  assets for us with the interim part of the
  agreement.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Do you have -- okay.
  Well, I'll ask you questions about it.  Okay.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Just to interrupt,
  Counsel, you'll note that the -- there's a
  difference -- this is dated March 30th, and I think
  EMC took on serving of the loan at a later date,
  so...
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Yeah.  I'm just asking
  if he knows anything.  I'm trying -- if I should ask
  him questions about it.  That's all.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  I don't think he'll
  be confident to testify as to how Wells Fargo
  serviced the loan prior to May 1st, and that's my --
  my only point.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I'm not asking him
  about Wells Fargo servicing.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Continue.
      Q.   Okay.  So it's your understanding, based on
  this agreement, that Wells Fargo was continuing the
  servicing through May 1st, 2005, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And -- but you weren't involved
  in -- or wouldn't be involved in the negotiation of
  this part of the transaction, the Interim -- the
  Interim Servicing part, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  I want you to turn to
  EMC 278.  Are you familiar with the information
  contained on this document?
      A.   The information behind this document?
      Q.   Correct.  Would this be information that
  you are reviewing and looking at when you're
  providing trading support and making a determination
  about purchasing the assets?
      A.   Page 279, yes.
      Q.   From -- from Page 279 onwards?
      A.   Page 279 through -- you mean, in -- in
  piece of this contract?  Let's see.  So 279 through
  probably -- through 308, that would be --
      Q.   308?
      A.   -- this would be considered the loan -- the
  loan schedule.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.
      A.   This was produced by Wells Fargo.
      Q.   So those documents would be produced by
  Wells Fargo to EMC?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And would these be updated through
  to March 30 when this is executed, or would these
  have been the same documents that you would be
  looking at in trading support when you're evaluating
  it -- the purchase?
      A.   This would be as of the cut-off date that
  was established earlier in the contract.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  Can you tell me what
  AlltelMaster Record Report is?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  Can you explain to me the
  information that's contained on the mortgage loan
  schedule, just in general what it is?
      A.   General loan -- general features of the
  loan --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- the -- the contract is going to rep
  to --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- provide reps and warranties to.  So they
  were saying that the -- the balances, in fact -- you
  know, the first one, 14,524, the due date for that
  loan is 10/01/2004, basic -- basic details behind
  the asset.
      Q.   Okay.  Now, I notice that on the first, I
  guess, six pages, seven pages, that on all these
  there's a whole bunch of actual next dues --
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   -- and then the schedule's next due all say
  zero --
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   Yes?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  Is there a reason for that?  Are
  these all --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  What docket number
  are we looking at, Counsel?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  EMC 279 through 284.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Great.  Thank you.
      A.   There are two types of deals.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   There are servicing-released and
  servicing-retained.  This is a servicing-release
  deal.  So in the servicing-release deal, you would
  not have a scheduled next due, because everything is
  actual.  We're buying actual information.  If it was
  a servicing-retain deal, then they would submit us
  the scheduled balances for those.
      Q.   Okay.  I just want to make sure I
  understand you.  So when these loans are being sold,
  you're just acquiring -- I guess, EMC's just paying
  for whatever is actually owed?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  But EMC is going to take over
  servicing for these loans in about a month, right?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   So wouldn't they need to know what the next
  due amount is?
      A.   The next due amount will be the same as the
  next due amount supplied under the underlying
  documents, the note, the mortgage, whatever they
  call for.
      Q.   Okay.  But there's a whole bunch of these
  that are delinquent as of March 30th, 2005 --
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   -- which is our cut-off date, right?
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   Okay.  Yes?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  So there are balances owing because
  people are behind -- you know, I can -- I can random
  any one of these, right?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  So why aren't those amounts -- the
  past-due amounts listed?
      A.   Until the loans transfer, the information's
  going to change --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- so this is as of a certain date.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   We would -- we would start tracking the
  amounts as of our serving of the asset.
      Q.   Okay.  I see.  So because Wells Fargo's
  going to keep that Interim Servicing for a month,
  that's why there is nothing here on the scheduled
  next due, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And then as soon as that
  transferring obligation transfers over to -- or,
  excuse me, as soon as that servicing obligation
  transfers over to EMC, then these amounts will
  change?
      A.   This is a -- this is servicing-retain -- a
  servicing-release deal, so on a servicing-release
  deal you wouldn't have, like, a scheduled next
  due --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- because it's not a -- that's not the
  type of deal it is.  You're -- they're scheduling a
  due date forward to a certain date that they are
  going to remit to you that amount.  So --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- they're basically saying, this is what
  you're going to be owed as a certain date.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   On a release deal, you don't have that.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  So let's turn to
  EMC 285, and this document appears to go through
  290.  And then it looks to me -- I'm just verifying
  that this is just a continuation of the other pages,
  so I would stick them together side by side to get
  the full scope to match up each loan?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  So this is the part of
  the printout, then, where it shows the current
  interest rate, what the principal and interest is,
  original loan amount, et cetera, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  You -- the sales value information
  that's listed here -- do you see that column?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Do you know where that information comes
  from?
      A.   This is the actual sales price of the house
  when it was closed --
      Q.   Oh, okay.
      A.   -- so this is a -- the ones that have sales
  values are purchase transactions.
      Q.   Okay.  And the ones where there is none,
  then it's a refinance?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  Ms. Thompson testified earlier today
  that when EMC was acquiring information from
  previous servicers and/or owners, that along with it
  would come evaluations or dollar amounts of how much
  the property is estimated to be worth.  Would that
  information appear anywhere on these documents?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  And when you're doing your job
  analyzing these transactions, do you have that
  information available to you?
      A.   Typically, not.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  So EMC 291 through 296
  appears to me -- tell me if I'm wrong -- to be
  another printout regarding all these same loans.  Am
  I right?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And I'm corresponding them with the
  loan numbers, so that's -- I'm doing that correctly?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And what's the reason for this
  different printout, I guess?
      A.   This is just a continuation of the other
  pages --
      Q.   Oh, okay.
      A.   -- so it's just a -- it's just a long sheet
  of paper, basically.
      Q.   Okay.  So all of these would kind of go
  side by side by side together matching them up with
  the loan numbers?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  To give more information about the
  loan?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And same is true from EMC 297
  through 302, more information about the loan?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  And 303 through 308, again,
  more information about the same loans?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  The foreclosure stop code column
  there, can you tell me what that is?
      A.   Which page is this on?
      Q.   I'm sorry.  Starting on 303.
      A.   Okay.  That's their description of what
  status the foreclosure's currently in.
      Q.   Okay.  So when we have first legal action
  or sale date set, that would indicate that the
  loan's in default and some action's being taken?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And so did you tell me that there
  was any separate notation or flagging of defaulted
  accounts in these purchase and sale agreements, or
  no?
      A.   No.
      Q.   Okay.  Mixed in with current ones?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  Turning to EMC 309 through
  311, can you tell me what this is, if you can
  read...
      A.   This would be the funding schedule.
      Q.   Okay.  Explain to me what that means.
      A.   Funding schedule is the schedule that sets
  out the amount that we need to wire them to complete
  the transaction.
      Q.   Okay.  So this is how much EMC is going to
  pay Wells Fargo for each one of the loans we've
  previously looked at over here on the other
  documents?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  EMC 312 through 317, can you
  tell me what this document represents?
      A.   This would be a missing -- or missing
  document schedule.  And during due diligence, this
  would give you all the documents that we found to be
  missing at the time of purchase.
      Q.   Okay.  So can you tell me what they are?  I
  see -- can you -- obviously, we have the loan
  number.  What is LSN referred to?
      A.   Loan number --
      Q.   What's that called?
      A.   -- is the seller's loan number.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   LSN would be our internal number.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  So I see about midway down
  the page is my client's last name, Holmes?
      A.   Uh-huh.
      Q.   Yes?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   And then on the next column over it's
  entitled MTGINV, and there's a C in that column
  across from the Holmes' name.  Can you tell me what
  that means?
      A.   The MTG would stand for mortgage.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   This -- the heading sort of tells you the
  documents, so please provide the original recorded,
  or certified copy of the recorded security
  instrument.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   And for Holmes, the C would indicate we had
  a copy of the mortgage.
      Q.   Okay.  And so Washington is a Deed of Trust
  State, so it's -- there's a note and a Deed of
  Trust, so what would that mean?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   Do you know?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection.
      A.   It would be --
      Q.   In other words, when you say mortgage, what
  do you mean?
      A.   It would be either -- whatever the
  security -- the recorded security instrument for
  that state --
      Q.   Okay.  So the Deed of Trust in Washington?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  And then on 314, there's
  a new category started.  Can you tell me what this
  category's for?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection.
      A.   The one in the middle of the page?
      Q.   Right.  It looks to me like just a title
  policy --
      A.   Okay.
      Q.   -- but --
      A.   It says, please provide the original, or
  duplicated original, or copy of the title policy
  complete with all schedules and endorsements.  TPINV
  would stand for that document.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   And --
      Q.   Holmes is almost at the bottom and next to
  it is a TC, so does that mean that the title policy
  did come with her loan?
      A.   On that document, we had the title
  commitment only.  There was no title --
      Q.   Title commitment?
      A.   We did not have the title policy with
  that --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- asset.  We had the title commitment.
      Q.   Okay.  Okay.  Just double-checking.  I
  don't think she had anything else on any of these.
  Okay.  Okay.  Turning to 322, can you tell me what
  322 through 325, what this document represents?
      A.   This appears to be a copy of the mortgage
  loan schedule that we looked at earlier.
      Q.   Okay.  Just another copy of it?  It's
  somewhat different, but...
      A.   I think it just starts out at a different
  point.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   Schedule balance part of the last
  document --
      Q.   Uh-huh.
      A.   -- but then this is the first couple pages.
      Q.   Okay.  And -- okay.  EMC 350, is this the
  same document we were looking at before, just
  another copy?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And --
      A.   (Reading document.)
      Q.   Okay.  I'll wait until you're done.
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And this last page, is that the --
  that -- I just want to make certain that's a
  continuation and a totaling of the previous pages?
      A.   These documents appear to be different.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   The -- the last page is like it's for
  something else.
      Q.   Oh, okay.
      A.   If I look at this page, the proceeds is
  4 -- 40 million -- it's very hard to read --
      Q.   Yeah.  It looks like 42 million --
      A.   -- the other page is 39.
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   Looks like they're slightly different loan
  counts.
      Q.   Okay.  Same program, just different --
  maybe some different information or sheet or
  whatever?
      A.   I'd have to...
      Q.   Yeah.
      A.   Okay.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  And -- okay.
  Mark this one as 29.
               (Exhibit No. 29 marked.)
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Amy, you still there?
               MS. PHILLIPS:  Yes.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.
               MS. PHILLIPS:  Yeah.  Yeah.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  So Exhibit 29 is
  EMC 354 through 493.
               MS. PHILLIPS:  Okay.  Thanks.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  And Owen and I will
  have to share this one because I didn't get sent
  with enough copies, and it was taking him too long
  to photocopy it, but...
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Tell you what,
  Counsel, I think I have a copy that I can refer to.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Oh, okay.  It's the
  Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  So are you familiar with
  this document?
      A.   I'm not involved in the creation of this
  document at all --
      Q.   Oh.
      A.   -- but I have -- I have seen the titles
  before, yes.
      Q.   Okay.  So you can't provide me with any
  testimony about this document?
      A.   This document --
      Q.   I don't want you guessing.  That's my --
      A.   No.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  Who's going to
  provide me with testimony about this document?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  He can testify about
  the certain pooling and securitization of the loan
  as far as the contents of the document.  We have to
  get an EMC lawyer.  But I think the document speaks
  for itself.  I'm not -- not sure what you want him
  to testify to.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I know it speaks for
  itself, but --
      Q.   So are you involved in the creation or
  negotiation of these documents?
      A.   No.
      Q.   No?  Okay.  Do you know who at EMC -- EMC
  is involved in creating this part of the agreements?
      A.   Not specifically.
      Q.   Okay.  So is it your understanding that, as
  of March 30th, 2005, the loans that we just looked
  at in that -- in those pools were purchased by EMC
  from Wells Fargo?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And so as of April 1st or
  March 30th, 2005, EMC was the owner of those loans?
      A.   As of March 30th, yes.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  So this document then
  has EMC selling those loans to JPMorgan Chase Bank
  as trustee for a pool trust.  Is that your
  understanding?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And in the trading support center,
  you're not involved in those kinds of transactions
  where EMC is selling?
      A.   We're involved in putting the basic loans
  together, and then sending them off to our
  securitization desk --
      Q.   Okay.
      A.   -- to securitize and analyze.
      Q.   Can you explain that to me?
      A.   We would go through our inventory and
  provide them a list of loans that meet their
  criterias, and they would securitize the assets.
      Q.   After they've already been sold to EMC?
      A.   After we've already purchased the asset.
      Q.   Okay.  And so what do you mean by them
  securitizing the asset?
      A.   Basically, where you take the loans,
  package them in pools.  They would get rated by the
  agencies and put them into different bonds and sold
  to the investors.
      Q.   Okay.  So in the transaction that we were
  just looking at a few minutes ago, the -- I want to
  make sure I say the name -- Mortgage Loan Purchase
  Agreement, at that point, those loans have not been
  rated by a bond agency -- the pools have not been
  rated by a bonding agency?
      A.   Correct.  These loans that we purchase
  under this were not rated under a bond agency.
      Q.   Okay.  So it's when it goes into the
  securitization department at EMC, that that part of
  the process takes place?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   The securitization part of the process and
  then ratings?
      A.   Yes.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Counsel, I'm just --
  I'm not trying to bust your chops there.  I'm
  just -- I'm continually asking, where is this going
  with the ratings for the Plaintiff's claims?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I'm just asking about
  the securitization process and how it got from --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  What does bond --
  bond ratings?  I don't know what that has to do with
  anything that has to do with liability or damages in
  this case -- I mean, claim.  I'm just -- I'm just
  asking.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  It has a lot to do with
  the manner in which all these businesses have been
  conducting their businesses, which is why we have a
  collapse on Wall Street, so --
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Can you explain to
  me, though, what it has to do with the claims made
  to this case?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Were you objecting to
  my question?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  I'm asking you why --
  why you're asking about bond ratings and
  securitization, what it has to do with allegations
  and liability in this case?
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Well, it's got to do
  with the ownership.  I'm not going to argue with you
  about it.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  What does bond
  ratings have to do with --
               MS. HUELSMAN:  I have asked him one
  question of bond rating.  He's already answered it.
  I'm not asking him any more questions regarding bond
  ratings.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  I'm just going to ask
  you to keep this on to a relevant testimony towards
  the allegations made to the complaint.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Well, as much as you
  would like to limit the scope of my deposition, I
  can ask whatever I want in a deposition.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Well, you can ask
  whatever you want limited by the scope of your
  30(B)(6), which is quite broad.  But I don't
  think --
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Yes.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  -- it goes as far as
  bond ratings, so please continue.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  It does when they're
  part of the securitization process.
      Q.   So going back, again, to the securitization
  process, you provide analysis of the pool -- and
  you, I'm talking about the -- the support -- you go
  through and pick out loans that meet certain
  criteria, and then recommend them for the
  securitization process.  Is that your -- is that --
  am I understanding you correctly?
      A.   Yes.
      Q.   Okay.  And so if my client's loan became
  part of the securitization process, it would have
  been identified as being a loan that met that
  criteria and then would have then gone through the
  securitization process, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And what was that criteria for this
  particular Pooling and Servicing Agreement?
      A.   This was a performing security, so the loan
  would have had to have been performing at the time
  of securitization.
      Q.   Okay.  So that was the criteria for this
  particular Pooling and Servicing Agreement
  performing?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  Was there any other criteria?
      A.   Our list would have been sent to them based
  on that, and the people that securitize the assets
  would pool loans from the deal as they -- as they
  need to.
      Q.   Okay.  All right.  So then it gets
  securitized, which then causes it to be sold to the
  new pooled trust, correct?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   And new, I don't mean necessarily it's new
  in creation, but just new to the transaction.  So
  it's the JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Trustee Pooled
  Trust, and that's going to have an identifier down
  here, correct (indicating)?
      A.   Correct.
      Q.   Okay.  And is an assignment executed
  concurrent with the execution of this document?  An
  assignment of the loan executed concurrent with the
  assignment to the JPMorgan Pooled Trust?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Objection to form.
      A.   I'm not aware of that process.
      Q.   Okay.  And is that a requirement of the
  agreement?
               MR. GABRIELSON:  He just testified
  he's not aware of the process.  Objection to form.
      A.   Not that I'm aware of.
      Q.   Okay.  And is that then -- once you've
  identified what loans are going to go into the
  securitization process, is that the end of your
  involvement in the securitization process?
      A.   Yes.
               MS. HUELSMAN:  Okay.  I don't think
  there's -- I think that's all for you.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  Amy, any questions?
               MS. PHILLIPS:  No.  Thanks.
               MR. GABRIELSON:  We'll -- we'll
  reserve signature.
               (Proceedings ended at 4:33 p.m.)
  
                 CHANGES AND SIGNATURE
  PAGE  LINE         CHANGE                REASON
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
  ____________________________________________________
        I, BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER, have read the
  foregoing deposition and hereby affix my signature
  that same is true and correct, except as noted
  herein.
  
                     BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER
  
  THE STATE OF             )
  COUNTY OF                )
        BEFORE ME                      on this day
  personally appeared BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER known to me
  (or proved to me on the oath of
  or through                    ((description of
  identity card or other document)) to be the person
  whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument
  and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same
  for the purposes and consideration therein
  expressed.
  Given under my hand and seal of office this
  day of                   , 2008.
  
                     NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE                     STATE OF TEXAS
   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
             IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING
  
  SALLIE J. HOLMES,       )
                          ) Case No. 06-2-38099-1 SEA
              PLAINTIFF,  )
                          ) NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF
  VS.                     ) CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE
                          ) OF DEFENDANT EMC MORTGAGE
                          ) CORPORATION UNDER FRCP
  EMC MORTGAGE            ) 30(b)(6)
  CORPORATION; QUALITY    )
  LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION)
  OF WASHINGTON; JPMORGAN )
  CHASE; WELLS FARGO HOME )
  MORTGAGE, INC., KEVIN   )
  AND ARLENE SCOTT,       )
                          )
                          )
              DEFENDANTS. )
  ----------------------------------------------------
                   ORAL DEPOSITION OF
                  BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER
                     APRIL 3, 2008
  ----------------------------------------------------
        I, Sarah Bina, a Certified Shorthand Reporter
  in and for the State of Texas, do hereby certify
  that, pursuant to the agreement hereinbefore set
  forth, there came before me on the 3rd day of April,
  2008, at the Courtyard Marriott, 2701 Lake Vista
  Drive, in the City of Lewisville, County of Denton,
  State of Texas, the following named person, to wit,
  BRIAN JOSEPH NEISER, who was by me duly cautioned
  and sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth and
  nothing but the truth of his knowledge touching and
  concerning the matters in controversy in this cause;
  and he was thereupon carefully examined upon his
  oath and his examination reduced to writing under my
  supervision; that the deposition is a true record of
  the testimony given by the witness, same to be sworn
  to and subscribed by said witness before any Notary
  Public, pursuant to the agreement of the parties.
        I further certify that I am neither attorney
  or counsel for, nor related to or employed by, any
  of the parties to the action in which this
  deposition is taken, and further that I am not a
  relative or employee of any attorney or counsel
  employed by the parties hereto, or financially
  interested in the action.
        In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my
  hand and affixed my notarial seal this         day
  of                  , 2008.

                          Sarah Bina, CSR #8075
                          Expiration Date:  12/31/09
                          TLC & ASSOCIATES
                          P.O. Box 520
                          Denton, Texas  76202
                          (972) 219-5161
                          (940) 320-1992
  Taxable Cost:  $