1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 FOR THE NORTHERN ...

2012345678910111213141516171819202122232425would be multiple devices at more or less the same time;the second would be multiple shocks from the samedevice, in other words, multiple cycles; and the thirdwould be prolonged shock, in other words, longer thanfive seconds. Did any of those settlements involve anyof those three things, as far as you know?A. No.Q. So is it true, and this is kind of asked andanswered but I just want to wrap this up, but is it truethat TASER has never settled a case with a plaintiff whoclaims that he or she was injured by the device in afield setting?A. I believe that's correct.Q. And to your extent, the only such offer thatwas made under those circumstances was one that was madeagainst the wishes of TASER in the Alvarado case?MS. GIBEAUT: Objection; misstates testimony.MR. BURTON: Okay.MS. GIBEAUT: He testified about the Powerscase as well.MR. BURTON: But the Powers was not a fieldcase.MS. GIBEAUT: But that wasn't part of thequestion.MR. BURTON: I think it was, but I can re-ask