UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`__________________________
`
`MICROSTRATEGY, INC., )
`
` Petitioner, )
`
` vs. ) Case No. IPR2013-00034 (JL)
`
`ZILLOW, INC., ) Patent No. 7,970,674
`
` Patent Owner. )
`
`__________________________
`
` Deposition of JOHN A. KILPATRICK, Ph.D.,
`
` MAI, FRICS, taken at 1201 Third Avenue,
`
` Suite 4900, Seattle, Washington, commencing
`
` at 9:36 a.m., Thursday, August 8, 2013,
`
` before Donald W. McKay, RMR, CRR, CCR 3237.
`
`JOB No. 1712507
`
`PAGES 1 - 222
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 1
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` 1
`
`MICROSTRATEGY 1022
`Microstrategy, Inc. v. Zillow, Inc.
`IPR2013-00034
`
`
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`__________________________
`
`MICROSTRATEGY, INC., )
`
` Petitioner, )
`
` vs. ) Case No. IPR2013-00034 (JL)
`
`ZILLOW, INC., ) Patent No. 7,970,674
`
` Patent Owner. )
`
`__________________________
`
` Deposition of JOHN A. KILPATRICK, Ph.D.,
`
` MAI, FRICS, taken at 1201 Third Avenue,
`
` Suite 4900, Seattle, Washington, commencing
`
` at 9:36 a.m., Thursday, August 8, 2013,
`
` before Donald W. McKay, RMR, CRR, CCR 3237.
`
`JOB No. 1712507
`
`PAGES 1 - 222
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 1
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` 1
`
`MICROSTRATEGY 1022
`Microstrategy, Inc. v. Zillow, Inc.
`IPR2013-00034
`
`
`
`APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
`
`FOR THE PETITIONER: BY: LAUREN A. DEGNAN, ESQ.
`
` Fish & Richardson P.C.
`
` 1425 K Street, N.W.
`
` 11th Floor
`
` Washington, D.C. 20005
`
` 202.626.6392
`
` degnan@fr.com
`
`FOR THE PATENT BY: RAMSEY M. AL-SALAM, ESQ.
`
`OWNER: Perkins Coie LLP
`
` 1201 Third Avenue
`
` Suite 4900
`
` Seattle, Washington 98101
`
` 206.359.6385
`
` RAlSalam@perkinscoie.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT: BY: JORDAN TALGE, ESQ.
`
` Susman Godfrey LLP
`
` 1201 Third Avenue
`
` Suite 3800
`
` Seattle, Washington 98101
`
` 206.505.3842
`
` jtalge@susmangodfrey.com
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 2
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` 2
`
`
`
` I N D E X
`
`EXAMINATION BY PAGE
`
`MS. DEGNAN.......................................... 4
`
`MR. AL-SALAM........................................ 213
`
`MS. DEGNAN.......................................... 214
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
`NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
`
`Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent No. 7,970,674 B2, dated 61
`
` June 28, 2011
`
`Exhibit 1003 U.S. Patent No. 5,857,174, dated 163
`
` January 5, 1999
`
`Exhibit 1004 U.S. Patent No. US2005/0154657 A1, 155
`
` dated July 14, 2005
`
`Exhibit 1013 Declaration of John Kilpatrick 39
`
` Under 37 CFR 1.132
`
`Exhibit 1014 Uniform Standards of Professional 28
`
` Appraisal Practice and Advisory
`
` Opinions, 2005 Edition, effective
`
` January 1, 2005
`
`Exhibit 1018 The Appraisal Foundation, Appraisal 27
`
` Standards Board, USPAP Q&A
`
`Exhibit 1019 Standard on Automated Valuation 24
`
` Models (AVMs), Approved September
`
` 2003
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 3
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6 7 8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` 3
`
`
`
` Seattle, Washington; Thursday, August 8, 2013
`
` 9:36 a.m.
`
` JOHN A. KILPATRICK, Ph.D., MAI, FRICS
`
` called as a witness in the
`
` above-entitled cause, being
`
` first duly sworn, testified
`
` as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`
`BY MS. DEGNAN:
`
` Q. Good morning.
`
` A. Good morning.
`
` Q. State your name for the record.
`
` A. I'm Dr. John Aaron Kilpatrick.
`
` Q. Can you give me your address, please.
`
` A. Home or business?
`
` Q. Whatever you prefer.
`
` A. Business is Suite 240, 2101 Fourth Avenue,
`
`Seattle, Washington, 98121.
`
` Q. Do you understand you've taken an oath to tell
`
`the truth and it's exactly the same as if you were in a
`
`court?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Is there any reason why you can't give full and
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 4
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` 4
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`complete testimony today?
`
` A. I can't think of one.
`
` Q. Are you on any medication that might impair your
`
`ability to do so?
`
` A. I can't think of any.
`
` Q. I understand you've been deposed before. I'm
`
`sure you are somewhat familiar with the process. But
`
`just so we both have an understanding between us, if you
`
`don't understand my questions, please feel free to ask
`
`me for clarification.
`
` A. I'll do that.
`
` Q. The rules are actually such that if there is a
`
`question pending, I would prefer to get an answer before
`
`we take a break.
`
` A. Sure.
`
` Q. But I will try to take breaks on a regular
`
`basis. If you need one, just let me know.
`
` A. Thank you, very much.
`
` Q. Have you ever provided any expert opinion in a
`
`patent case other than this one?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. How many?
`
` A. I can't recall. At least one in which I've been
`
`deposed a couple of times, but not testified in court
`
`yet. There may be others, but I can only think of one
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 5
`
` 5
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`offhand.
`
` Q. Who were the parties in that case?
`
` A. There were multiple parties on both sides. The
`
`case was captioned Move, M-O-V-E, versus Real, R-E-A-L.
`
` Q. For which party did you provide testimony?
`
` A. This is going to be embarrassing. I can't
`
`remember. It's been so long.
`
` Q. When was it?
`
` A. I was deposed once probably five or six years
`
`ago, and then once again probably about three years ago.
`
` Q. Do you remember where the case was pending?
`
` A. No. I mean, both my depositions were in
`
`New York City, but I don't know that it was pending in
`
`New York.
`
` Q. Do you recall whether you were testifying on
`
`behalf of the party that owned the patent or on behalf
`
`of someone accused of infringement?
`
` A. Again, it's been so long, I can't recall.
`
` Q. Generally, what was the general subject matter
`
`of your testimony?
`
` A. The real estate market. What ordinary
`
`participants in the real estate market would understand
`
`this patent to do. People of ordinary knowledge and
`
`experience, how they would interpret this patent, what
`
`it would do. The nature of the real estate market,
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 6
`
` 6
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`particularly the nature of the computerization of the
`
`real estate market -- and I use market in an overly
`
`broad sense -- over the course of the last say 15, 20
`
`years.
`
` Q. Are you named as an inventor on any patents,
`
`yourself?
`
` A. I don't believe so, no.
`
` Q. Have you ever worked as an appraiser?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. More than once?
`
` A. More than once?
`
` Q. Yes.
`
` A. I have practiced appraisal off and on since
`
`1984, and I'm currently licensed in 49 of the 50 states,
`
`with Montana pending.
`
` Q. Would you say you've done hundreds of
`
`appraisals?
`
` A. Tens of thousands.
`
` Q. As part of your appraisal work, have you made an
`
`effort to learn about the particular properties you were
`
`appraising?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Would you say that's standard practice, to learn
`
`about a property that's being appraised?
`
` A. Yes.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 7
`
` 7
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q. Are there any standards that govern your line of
`
`work that say that one should make an effort to learn
`
`about the property being appraised?
`
` A. There are a host of different standards, some
`
`core, some supplemental, and different standards apply
`
`in different circumstances; but they all do have, to
`
`varying degrees, certain implications about
`
`familiarization in a general sense with the subject
`
`property. They're not really phrased that way.
`
` Q. Are there other predominant or key standards
`
`relating to conducting appraisals?
`
` A. It depends on who you are. If you are a
`
`real estate appraiser, practicing in the United States,
`
`then you are generally -- not always, but generally
`
`required to adhere to, among others, the Uniform
`
`Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Depending
`
`on the situation, again, if you are a real estate
`
`appraiser practicing in the United States, you might be
`
`required to adhere to any one of a number of
`
`supplemental standards.
`
` Now, there are also people who appraise
`
`real estate who are not licensed and certified
`
`appraisers. One might be a, quote, unquote, valuer
`
`practicing before the IRS, in which case the salient
`
`standards are those contained in IRS Reg 170-H as
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 8
`
` 8
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`opposed to the Uniform Standards.
`
` If you're an accountant appraising real estate
`
`before the IRS, then 170-H might apply; but USPAP, as we
`
`know it in the profession, might not.
`
` If you are a non-licensed tax assessor, then the
`
`standards come from the International Association of
`
`Assessing Officers, not USPAP, again.
`
` Then finally, you may be a non-licensee, a
`
`homeowner, valuing your own home. I do a lot of
`
`litigation in a lot of states. A homeowner may value
`
`his or her own home and may offer that up in testimony.
`
`Homeowners are considered, in many states, to be valid
`
`authorities on the value of their home, in which case,
`
`there are no standards which apply to that valuation
`
`exercise.
`
` Q. So this IRS Regulation 170(h) would apply to --
`
`just so I wrote it down correctly -- both a valuer for
`
`the IRS and an accountant for the IRS?
`
` A. It's 170-H. The IRS is, for a lot of reasons,
`
`very peculiar; but in this particular sense, they use
`
`the word valuer, or actually valuator, V-A-L-U-A-T-O-R.
`
`And 170-H would apply to anyone who is allowed to submit
`
`a value of real estate to the IRS.
`
` Now, there are certain other criteria which
`
`govern who might do that. Certainly a real estate
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 9
`
` 9
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`appraiser who is licensed under state law may do that;
`
`but also, under certain circumstances, an attorney might
`
`do that, or an accountant might do that.
`
`BY MS. DEGNAN:
`
` Q. For non-licensed tax assessors, you mentioned
`
`the International Association of --
`
` A. Assessing Officers.
`
` Q. Thank you.
`
` A. IAAO as it's commonly known.
`
` Q. Do real estate appraisers in the U.S. also
`
`comply with these standards put out by this IAAO?
`
` A. If one is doing work which is governed by those
`
`standards. I frequently do work in what's called the
`
`automated valuation model space, in which case I will
`
`not adhere to, but make reference to the IAAO standards
`
`as what we might call supplemental standards in the
`
`appraisal profession.
`
` If one is operating an automated valuation
`
`model, but one is not an appraisal licensee and one is
`
`not doing ad valorem tax work, then the IAAO standards
`
`are good guidance, but they're not required adherence.
`
` Q. Would you say that they're widely accepted as
`
`authoritative for that subject matter of automated
`
`valuation space?
`
` A. No. No. They are widely accepted when an
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 10
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`automated valuation model is used in a property tax
`
`situation, but not -- I mean, we use automated valuation
`
`models for a whole host of things, and only one of the
`
`utilizations of an AVM might be -- I say might be for
`
`property tax purposes, because there are a lot of other
`
`ways you can do property tax valuation that would still
`
`fall under the rubric of those IAAO standards.
`
` Q. So are there other standards that are widely
`
`accepted to be followed when someone is doing an
`
`automated valuation?
`
` A. Not really. I mean, if you are a real estate
`
`appraiser, using any sort of methodology, be it a
`
`traditional appraisal methodology or an AVM or something
`
`else, then there are certain standards which apply as a
`
`matter of law and regulation. However, if you are
`
`someone else using an AVM -- and I would dare say most
`
`of the people who use AVMs are not licensed real estate
`
`appraisers -- then there aren't any regulatorily or
`
`widely accepted authoritative standards.
`
` Q. You mentioned AVM. Just so the record is clear,
`
`does that stand for automated valuation model?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. So today, if we slip into AVM, we'll understand
`
`it means automated valuation model?
`
` A. Yes.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 11
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q. So to the extent there are accepted standards at
`
`all for the use of AVMs, the IAAO standard is the one
`
`you're aware of?
`
` A. Well, there is also, for example, under the
`
`Uniform Standards -- which are called USPAP -- there is
`
`USPAP standard Rule 6. But both the IAAO standards and
`
`USPAP standard Rule 6 apply to a whole host of mass
`
`appraisal situations, only one of which might be an AVM,
`
`and then only under those circumstances in which an AVM
`
`is being used within the confines of what those
`
`standards envision.
`
` Q. So just so I have the list, we've got the USPAP
`
`Rule 6 standard and the IAAO standard that are used in
`
`connection with AVMs, although they also can be used as
`
`other things. Is there any other standard that comes to
`
`mind that is applicable to the use of AVMs?
`
` A. Insofar as you and I are using the word
`
`"standards" to mean the same thing -- because I -- as a
`
`real estate appraiser, I think of standards as something
`
`that's regulatorily established or established by
`
`convention by a professional organization. Certainly
`
`the International Valuation Standards, which are
`
`proffered by the International Valuation Standards
`
`Committee, pays homage to AVMs. There are some
`
`standards I can't recite or give you the exact citation
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 12
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`within International Financial Reporting Standards,
`
`within the -- there are some allusions to AVMs within
`
`the Financial Accounting Standards Board's
`
`promulgations, allusions. I don't know if they actually
`
`specify AVM, but they certainly provide some guidance
`
`that one would want to pay attention to.
`
` I can't think of any others offhand, but that
`
`doesn't mean there aren't any. In other words, that
`
`list is neither exhaustive, nor wholly inclusive.
`
` Q. But those are the ones that come to mind right
`
`now?
`
` A. Off the top of my head.
`
` Q. Sure. So we got off on a little bit -- I was
`
`asking about your experience as an appraiser.
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Tens of thousands. Impressive.
`
` A. Probably more than that, but go ahead.
`
` Q. I understand.
`
` We were talking about in that work, you would
`
`typically become familiar with the property that's being
`
`appraised.
`
` A. To varying degrees. Yes.
`
` Q. What sorts of things did you typically become
`
`knowledgeable about?
`
` A. Well, it really varies. I've used both
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 13
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`individual appraisal models, as well as automated
`
`valuation models. When one is doing a more heuristic
`
`individual appraisal model, one might go out and tape
`
`measure, photograph the property, measure its condition,
`
`measure its square footage, number of bathrooms, number
`
`of bedrooms, those sorts of things. There are also
`
`geographic models which simply utilize the locational
`
`characteristics. In other words, they recognize that
`
`all houses in a given neighborhood tend to be about the
`
`same price. There are models which leverage off of tax
`
`assessment data. In other words, we go in and we test
`
`the tax assessment data against sales prices. If we
`
`find it to be effective and an efficient measure, then
`
`we simply utilize the time adjustment to the tax
`
`assessment within the confines of an automation
`
`valuation model. Goolsby, in 1997, writing in the
`
`Journal of Real Estate Research, discussed that sort of
`
`methodology.
`
` Case & Shiller use what's, in essence, a repeat
`
`sales model. I wrote about that in the Journal of
`
`Housing Research in 19 -- no, 2005, 2006, somewhere in
`
`that time frame, where we don't worry about the
`
`specifics of the house; we simply look at repeat sales,
`
`and we're dependent entirely on time measure. So I say
`
`that because depending on the valuation model one uses,
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 14
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`the conditions may or may not be important. In some
`
`heuristic cross-sectional models, they're very
`
`important. In some longitudinal models, not important
`
`at all.
`
` Q. What is the difference between a heuristic model
`
`and a longitudinal model, just so the record is clear,
`
`for those of us who haven't been doing this for 20 years?
`
` A. Individualized appraisals tend to be fairly
`
`heuristic, even though they come with a very hardened
`
`set of standards and a body of knowledge which dictates
`
`methodology. And in the case of residential financing
`
`appraisals, they're usually done on a
`
`fill-out-the-blanks form, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
`
`proffer forms which one might use for this purpose. But
`
`that having been said, the adjustments, the size and
`
`scope of the adjustments, the choice of comparables, the
`
`weightings, all tend to be fairly heuristic; that is to
`
`say, made up by the appraiser him or herself. So, given
`
`that, those sorts of tools are best utilized by somebody
`
`trained and licensed as a real estate appraiser, so that
`
`one is familiar with the way one's peers in the industry
`
`would do that sort of work. That's actually how we
`
`specify it in USPAP.
`
` On the other hand, in, for example, automated
`
`valuation models, which are something quite different,
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 15
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`we -- the model, itself, captures all of that in a
`
`statistically valid fashion. Therefore, an automated
`
`valuation model could be utilized by someone who is not
`
`trained and experienced or licensed, because the
`
`methodology is already captured in the model. It's not
`
`heuristic; it's statistically validated.
`
` Q. You mentioned the term "longitudinal." What did
`
`you mean by that?
`
` A. Time series. Like Case-Shiller or like my paper
`
`in the Journal of Housing Research where the value of a
`
`house today is simply a function of its value yesterday.
`
` Q. So in terms of things that you looked at
`
`typically, I think you mentioned location of the
`
`property, maybe things like the number of bedrooms, the
`
`number of baths, in your work as an appraiser. Is that
`
`the kind of thing that you also looked at when you used
`
`automated valuation models?
`
` A. Not necessarily. There are some AVMs that look
`
`at those things. There are many AVMs that do not look
`
`at those things. But even when an AVM looks at those
`
`things, it looks at them within the confines of a
`
`statistical validation. In other words, rather than the
`
`appraiser making judgment calls about those things or
`
`ranking or scoring those things, the computer, itself,
`
`does it, utilizing any one of a number of fairly
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 16
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`time-honored algorithms, weighted or ordinary least
`
`squares being more of the two common ones.
`
` Q. In terms of just isolating one of these things,
`
`like location -- I mean, would it be the case that
`
`location is something that is always used in performing
`
`an appraisal?
`
` A. It depends on the kind of appraisal.
`
` Q. How would it depend? Let me ask it a different
`
`way. What kind of appraisal would location be
`
`irrelevant?
`
` A. Well, let's assume for a moment that I'm asked
`
`to appraise your house in a subdivision in which there
`
`are plenty of sales of comparable houses. In that
`
`context, the location of your house is irrelevant.
`
` Q. I mean, aren't you looking at only the
`
`subdivision? Isn't that a geographic location?
`
` A. Sure, but I'm not adjusting for the location.
`
`In other words, I'm not considering location, because
`
`location is implicitly and endogenously embedded in the
`
`heuristic model, itself.
`
` Q. But if you look at comparables only in the
`
`subdivision, aren't you necessarily including location
`
`as a factor in your analysis?
`
` A. Endogenously, but not exogenously. In other
`
`words, I'm not factoring or adjusting for location.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 17
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`See, in appraisal speak, when one considers location, it
`
`means one has to exogenously think about and adjust for
`
`differences in location. But if I can go into a
`
`subdivision and only pick comparables from that same
`
`subdivision in which location is already endogenously
`
`accounted for, then in appraisal speak, I'm not
`
`considering the location, because I don't have to.
`
` Q. What does endogenously mean in your vernacular?
`
` A. It's already built in. It's part of -- a more
`
`technical definition of endogeneity would mean that it's
`
`of the model, itself. So the appraiser is not thinking
`
`about it, because it's already there.
`
` Q. So when you've performed appraisals, is it fair
`
`to say that you have always considered location either
`
`endogenously or exogenously?
`
` A. Hmm. Always considered location -- you know,
`
`I'm trying to reconcile what I know as a real estate
`
`appraiser to a question which I sense is asking me about
`
`something outside of the narrow box of real estate
`
`appraisal. So I hadn't really thought about that.
`
` Q. Would it be unusual to take no account
`
`whatsoever, either endogenously or exogenously, of
`
`location?
`
` A. Of course not. Because -- well, I talked about
`
`Case-Shiller a minute ago, and I talked about my own
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 18
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`repeat sales paper. And I point out mine just to brag,
`
`because there are a whole lot of repeat sales papers out
`
`there in the scholarly literature. They don't ever take
`
`into account location, because a repeat sales model
`
`doesn't need to.
`
` Q. What is a repeat sales model?
`
` A. The value of your house as a function of the
`
`last couple of sales of the house.
`
` Q. Oh, of that particular house.
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. That sits in the same location the entire time?
`
` A. Well, again, I'm thinking in terms of how an
`
`appraiser would think about things. So the fact is we
`
`don't consider location, because it's not part of the
`
`model.
`
` Q. But the location remains constant in that sort
`
`of analysis?
`
` A. But because it's constant, it's not part of the
`
`analysis.
`
` Q. Right. But it does -- just in this particular
`
`question -- it does, in fact, remain constant the entire
`
`time during the analysis.
`
` A. Yes. That's an almost metaphysical question.
`
`It's just not something that an appraiser or somebody
`
`who is used to -- to use the vernacular of patents,
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 19
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`which I'm becoming familiar with -- somebody of ordinary
`
`knowledge in the real estate appraisal profession -- not
`
`something that they would have thought about, therefore,
`
`it's not something that I've really ever thought about.
`
` Q. We were focused on the appraisals and the use of
`
`location. Do AVMs typically take into consideration the
`
`location of property?
`
` A. May or may not. A longitudinal AVM would not.
`
` Q. That's the value of the property over time?
`
` A. Right.
`
` Q. But such a valuation would -- I can't remember
`
`the word -- endonically (sic) or inherently take into
`
`consideration location, because it's the same property
`
`value over time. Right?
`
` A. Well, it's just not relevant. It's just not
`
`relevant. It's just not a relevant consideration.
`
`Therefore, appraisers don't think about things, don't
`
`take the time to worry about things that aren't relevant.
`
` Q. In AVMs that you have used in the past, have
`
`they ever taken into consideration location information?
`
` A. Some do; some don't.
`
` Q. Would you say there are important inputs into an
`
`AVM -- important attributes that a good AVM should
`
`consider?
`
` MR. AL-SALAM: Object to the form.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 20
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` MS. DEGNAN: I think it's compound. Let me
`
`clear it up.
`
`BY MS. DEGNAN:
`
` Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether there are
`
`important attributes that a valid AVM should have?
`
` A. Well, I certainly have an opinion on that, yeah.
`
` Q. So what is your opinion?
`
` A. That there is no universal truth. In other
`
`words, there are a lot of different kinds of AVMs. So
`
`different AVMs may have -- depending on the AVM, itself,
`
`may have different input sets.
`
` Q. Say for a residential AVM, are there, in your
`
`opinion, important attributes that you could consider?
`
` A. There is no universal truth to that. In other
`
`words, there are a lot of different AVMs that measure
`
`residential values, and different AVMs attack the
`
`problem in different ways.
`
` Q. You said there is a lot of different AVMs. Are
`
`there different categories of AVMs?
`
` A. I don't know that there is a taxonomy for
`
`categorization.
`
` Q. So there is no bucket -- there is no big-picture
`
`buckets you can kind of classify an AVM into, this kind
`
`of AVM versus that kind of AVM?
`
` A. Right.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 21
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q. So every AVM has to be named individually,
`
`because it doesn't fall into a class?
`
` A. Right. We tend to trademark them.
`
` Q. How would you define an AVM?
`
` A. Well, the name sort of says it all. It's an
`
`automated valuation model. It utilizes some statistical
`
`algorithm to produce value.
`
` Q. So any statistical algorithm that produces value
`
`can be considered an AVM?
`
` A. I would say so. Sure.
`
` Q. Does an AVM have to be computer generated?
`
` A. Hard to imagine not doing one, but there was a
`
`fellow named Chiang, C-H-I-A-N-G, who wrote a text, the
`
`Mathematics of Econometrics, back in 19, I want to say
`
`24; and he showed that if you tried to solve a matrix --
`
`he said in a footnote that if you try to solve the
`
`determinant of a matrix greater than five by five, you
`
`would, in his opinion, go insane. So I would suggest
`
`that attempting to do an AVM without a computer would be
`
`certainly mathematically possible, but perhaps taxing on
`
`one's soul.
`
` Q. So it's not required to be computer generated,
`
`but it would be helpful, in your opinion.
`
` A. Right. And the earliest works on which ordinary
`
`and weighted least squares depend were by the two
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 22
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`mathematicians, Gauss and Markov, who were writing in
`
`the early and late 1800s, respectively. Gauss and
`
`Markov never conceived of the notion of a mechanical
`
`computer. But the AVMs that we have today are
`
`universally computer driven. I think that's axiomatic.
`
` Q. I understand you have some teaching experience
`
`in the field of appraisals and valuations. Is that
`
`correct?
`
` A. A little bit.
`
` Q. Would you say it's in the field of appraisals or
`
`the field of valuation?
`
` A. All the above. I mean, I've taught valuation to
`
`non-appraisers, and I've taught non-appraisal stuff to
`
`appraisers.
`
` Q. I think your C.V. indicates you've also done
`
`some teaching at some chapters of the International
`
`Association of Assessing Officials?
`
` A. Among other practitioner groups, yes.
`
` Q. How much teaching have you done with that
`
`organization?
`
` A. Not very much. Just a couple of lectures in
`
`front of a couple of their chapters.
`
` Q. And you're a member of that organization?
`
` A. I think so. I've got a woman at the office that
`
`keeps track of all that.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 23
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q. Are there dues you have to pay?
`
` A. I'm sure she does. Then she sends a piece of
`
`paper over to a different woman in a different office
`
`who writes checks. They all do these things, and every
`
`year, they tell me what they did.
`
` Q. Your C.V. also indicates you're a nationally
`
`certified instructor of the Uniform Standards of
`
`Professional Appraisal Practice. That's the USPAP we
`
`talked about earlier?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. That's another sort of teaching position you
`
`have?
`
` A. Yes. Sort of. It's a little more complicated
`
`than that. That's probably a simple way of putting it.
`
` Q. Was there more vigorous training to become a
`
`nationally certified instructor for USPAP than it was to
`
`be able to teach chapters of the IAAO?
`
` A. Yes. Quite a bit more rigorous.
`
` MS. DEGNAN: We talked earlier about some
`
`publications from these organizations or some standards
`
`at least. Just so we can maybe try to put some names to
`
`some standards that might be relevant --
`
` THE WITNESS: Sure.
`
` MS. DEGNAN: -- I have a couple of exhibits.
`
` (Exhibit 1019 premarked for identification.)
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 24
`
`
`24
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` MS. DEGNAN: I'm going to hand you what we have
`
`pre-marked as MicroStrategy Exhibit 1019.
`
` I don't have four of everything, but I have an
`
`extra of this one.
`
` MR. TALGE: Thank you.
`
` MR. AL-SALAM: This is the first exhibit in the
`
`case. Correct?
`
` MS. DEGNAN: I don't think so. Weren't there
`
`exhibits attached to the petition?
`
` MR. AL-SALAM: I see. I was just wondering
`
`where the 1019 came from. There doesn't have to be a
`
`reason.
`
` MS. DEGNAN: I think we can probably put in the
`
`list that says not used, not used, just as you would in
`
`district court, if it turns out there is lots that
`
`aren't used.
`
` MR. AL-SALAM: Okay.
`
`BY MS. DEGNAN:
`
` Q. Dr. Kilpatrick, have you ever seen this standard
`
`before or this document that is entitled, "Standard on
`
`Automated Valuation Models (AVMs)"?
`
` A. Yes.
`
` Q. Are you familiar with it?
`
` A. Yes. I will say that I'm not altogether sure
`
`that that is the most current edition of this document.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 25
`
`
`25
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`This is dated about ten years ago. I think there may be
`
`an update on it. But I am familiar with this one, yes.
`
` Q. You're familiar with the one dated September
`
`2003?
`
` A. Yes.
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
