Christian Holmes

FederalFederal Criminal TrialAug 31, 2021 – Jan 3, 2022

Christian Holmes appeared in testimony as a Theranos employee involved in operational communications, physician complaints, redraw decisions, and disputed-result inquiries.

Day 6

Sep 14, 2021

DirectErika Cheung — DirectErika CheungJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Erika Cheung described Edison limitations, Theranos's reliance on third-party analyzers and outsourced testing, ongoing assay validation, and discrepancies she observed in her own vitamin D results.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 9

Sep 21, 2021

DirectAudra Zachman — DirectAudra ZachmanJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Audra Zachman testified that conflicting Theranos HCG results led her to warn Brittany Gould of a likely pregnancy loss, while later Quest results and a successful pregnancy caused her to doubt Theranos and stop HCG referrals.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 11

Sep 24, 2021

DirectAdam Rosendorff — DirectAdam RosendorffJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Theranos laboratory director Adam Rosendorff testified about rushed validation, recurring assay and quality-control failures, disputed patient results, management awareness, and the professional conflict that led him to preserve emails and leave the company.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 12

Sep 28, 2021

DirectAdam Rosendorff — DirectAdam RosendorffJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Adam Rosendorff testified that unresolved assay discrepancies, inadequate proficiency testing, constrained patient transparency, inspection practices, and management responses led him to seek removal as Theranos's laboratory director and later speak with a journalist.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 14

Oct 1, 2021

CrossAdam Rosendorff — CrossAdam RosendorffLance A. Wade2highlightsMentioned

Summary

Defense counsel challenged Adam Rosendorff with AAP policies, laboratory emails, physician-call records, and meeting calendars. Rosendorff accepted substantial laboratory-director responsibility but maintained that proficiency-testing implementation and data access were incomplete and that management sometimes exceeded its qualifications.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Highlights (2)

confrontationThe defense confronted Rosendorff with delayed physician callbacks and his decision to have Christian Holmes handle a renewed testosterone inquiry; Rosendorff said he was frustrated by his inability to explain discrepant results.Open in transcript →

Quote“I, I CAN EXPLAIN. I DIDN'T FEEL I HAD A GOOD EXPLANATION FOR THE DISCREPANT TESTOSTERONE VALUES, AND I REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I COULD TELL THE PHYSICIAN MORE THAN I TOLD HIM ON THE FIRST PHONE CALL.”— Adam RosendorffRosendorff explained why he referred a renewed physician inquiry to Christian Holmes instead of personally returning the second call.Open in transcript →

CrossAdam Rosendorff — Cross ResumedAdam RosendorffLance A. WadeMentioned

Summary

Defense counsel challenged Adam Rosendorff about his HCG hold, later notice of Edison use, an Immulite reagent backlog, the six-tip averaging practice he approved, and his handling of physician complaints.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 15

Oct 5, 2021

CrossAdam Rosendorff — CrossAdam RosendorffLance A. WadeMentioned

Summary

Defense counsel challenged Adam Rosendorff with assay records, prior sworn testimony, job-search documents, and personal emails, while Rosendorff maintained that recurring laboratory problems and professional risk—not financial motive—drove his concerns and departure.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

RedirectAdam Rosendorff — RedirectAdam RosendorffJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Adam Rosendorff defended his motives and signed validation reports, distinguished validation from later clinical performance, and used newly admitted HCG emails to explain unresolved Edison accuracy, quality-control, and laboratory-authority concerns.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 16

Oct 6, 2021

RedirectAdam Rosendorff — RedirectAdam RosendorffJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Adam Rosendorff testified that Theranos-specific and fingerstick testing presented recurring reliability problems, clarified the limits of the company's proficiency testing, and described a gap between his regulatory responsibility and management's practical control of laboratory operations.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 19

Oct 14, 2021

CrossNimesh Jhaveri — CrossNimesh JhaveriKevin M. DowneyMentioned

Summary

Jhaveri testified that Walgreens's ambitious Theranos rollout remained conditional on operational metrics, while patient surveys were strong and an escalated accuracy concern reportedly satisfied Walgreens medical officers.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 20

Oct 15, 2021

ProceduralExhibit 1496 Admissibility HearingMentioned

Summary

The defense challenged Exhibit 1496, an email reporting comments from a military meeting, while the prosecution argued it bore on Holmes's knowledge and state of mind; the court left admissibility unresolved pending context and foundation.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

DirectDaniel Edlin — DirectDaniel EdlinJohn C. Bostic1highlightMentioned

Summary

Daniel Edlin described Theranos's information controls, Walgreens work, staged visitor tours, and technology demonstrations, then used an admitted August 2013 email chain to explain null protocols, separate laboratory processing, and a demo application that concealed protocol failures.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Highlights (1)

testimony highlightEdlin testified that information was compartmentalized on a need-to-know basis under directions he received from Christian Holmes, Elizabeth Holmes, and Ramesh Balwani.Open in transcript →

Day 21

Oct 19, 2021

DirectDaniel Edlin — DirectDaniel EdlinJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Daniel Edlin described concealed demonstration errors, selective removal or reframing of test results, third-party processing, and internal technical problems. He also linked Holmes to report review, revised external communications, and detailed approval of website content while qualifying the limits of his own technical knowledge.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

DirectDaniel Edlin — Direct (Resumed)Daniel EdlinJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Daniel Edlin linked Holmes to the review and approval of media responses, investor materials, patient-response messaging, and military communications. He also qualified his knowledge of technical claims, describing military devices that could perform only a subset of tests and complaint processes outside his responsibilities.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

DirectDaniel Edlin — Direct (Resumed)Daniel EdlinJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Daniel Edlin distinguished Theranos's military research, evaluation, and cybersecurity testing from clinical deployment, contrasted presentation claims with his limited knowledge and demonstration experience, and described Holmes's role in military planning, resource allocation, and decision-making alongside Ramesh Balwani.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 22

Oct 20, 2021

CrossDaniel Edlin — Cross (Resumed)Daniel EdlinKevin M. DowneyMentioned

Summary

Daniel Edlin described Theranos's collaborative process for sourcing, reviewing, tailoring, and revising investor, website, media, and patient-facing claims. The court admitted numerous supporting emails and presentations, excluded a collective of customer-feedback reports on relevance grounds, and admitted an email concerning an external technology advisory board.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 24

Oct 26, 2021

DirectLisa Peterson — DirectLisa PetersonRobert S. LeachMentioned

Summary

Lisa Peterson traced the Theranos materials, Holmes conversations, and Palo Alto meeting that informed RDV's investment review, including claims about fingerstick testing, validation, Walgreens expansion, and execution risk.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

CrossLisa Peterson — CrossLisa PetersonLance A. WadeMentioned

Summary

Peterson acknowledged major limits on RDV's independent Theranos diligence while disputing that enthusiasm or informal emails replaced formal approval of the approximately $100 million investment.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 26

Nov 2, 2021

RedirectLisa Peterson — Redirect (Resumed)Lisa PetersonRobert S. LeachMentioned

Summary

Peterson defended RDV's reliance on claimed outside validation, acknowledged limits on its Walgreens diligence, and explained the approval document required before funding its $100 million Theranos investment.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

sidebarSidebar on Admissibility of Exhibit 2065Mentioned

Summary

The court sustained the defense objection to admitting Exhibit 2065 through Lisa Peterson at that time, citing timing and foundation while leaving broader evidentiary questions unresolved.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 28

Nov 4, 2021

DirectChristopher Lucas — DirectChristopher LucasJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Christopher Lucas testified that BDV invested approximately $5.35 million in Theranos after relying heavily on Holmes, shareholder communications, public coverage, and claims about Theranos's technology. He acknowledged unusually limited transparency but said his relationship with Holmes and Theranos's partnerships increased his confidence.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 35

Nov 18, 2021

DirectRoger Parloff — DirectRoger ParloffJohn C. BosticMentioned

Summary

Parloff tied Holmes's statements, recordings, emails, and Theranos materials to his 2014 Fortune profile and testified that significant device limitations and third-party analyzer use were not disclosed to him.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 42

Dec 7, 2021

CrossElizabeth A. Holmes — CrossElizabeth A. HolmesRobert S. LeachMentioned

Summary

Holmes acknowledged that Theranos devices were not clinically deployed with the military, that the company used third-party analyzers, and that key disclosures to investors, Walgreens, and Roger Parloff omitted or misstated aspects of actual laboratory operations. The prosecution also confronted her with divergent revenue projections, laboratory warnings, prototype limitations, special investor-visit workflows, and her knowledge of the troubled 2015 CMS inspection.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 47

Dec 17, 2021

ClosingClosing Argument by the Defense — ContinuedKevin M. DowneyMentioned

Summary

The defense argued that investor losses and laboratory problems did not establish fraudulent intent, relying on investor-risk disclosures, diligence, real but prospective military programs, financial context, and Holmes's asserted reliance on laboratory directors.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

About

Trial Record (24)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (2)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Highlights (1)

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary

Summary