Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al
Filing
1157
Declaration of Tharan Gregory Lanier in Support of 1156 Opposition/Response to Motion Declaration of Tharan Gregory Lanier in Support of Defendants' Oppositions to Oracle's Motions in Limine filed bySAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23)(Related document(s) 1156 ) (Froyd, Jane) (Filed on 5/10/2012)
EXHIBIT 12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BEFORE THE HONORABLE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, JUDGE
ORACLE CORPORATION, ET AL.
)
)
PLAINTIFFS,
)
)
VS.
)
)
SAP AG, ET AL.,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
____________________________)
JURY TRIAL
NO. C 07-01658 PJH
VOLUME 7
PAGES 1188 - 1420
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2010
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
APPEARANCES:
FOR PLAINTIFFS:
BY:
BINGHAM MUCCUTCHEN LLP
THREE EMBARCADERO CENTER
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111-4607
ZACHARY J. ALINDER,
HOLLY A. HOUSE,
GEOFFREY M. HOWARD,
DONN P. PICKETT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
BY:
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
1999 HARRISON STREET, SUITE 900
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94612
DAVID BOIES,
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(APPEARANCES CONTINUED NEXT PAGE)
REPORTED BY:
RAYNEE H. MERCADO, CSR NO. 8258
DIANE E. SKILLMAN, CSR NO. 4909
RAYNEE H. MERCADO, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR, CCRR (510) 451-7530
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
26d3e825-e0fc-447f-987f-8e38dc183faa
Page 1296
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
19
Q.
20
EXCLUDED CUSTOMERS."
21
A.
THAT'S CORRECT.
22
Q.
AND YOU LISTED THE REASONS FOR EXCLUSION.
23
A.
THAT'S CORRECT.
24
Q.
AND ONE OF THE REASONS YOU LISTED WAS CAUSATION, CORRECT?
25
A.
I BELIEVE THAT'S ON THERE; THAT'S CORRECT.
AND YOU PREPARED ONE SCHEDULE THAT WAS CALLED "SUMMARY OF
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
26d3e825-e0fc-447f-987f-8e38dc183faa
Page 1301
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
2
Q.
3
BECAUSE OF SERVICE GAP ARE CUSTOMERS WHO JUST HAPPENED TO HAVE A
4
SERVICE GAP OF FOUR YEARS OR LONGER; IS THAT CORRECT?
5
A.
6
ADOPTED A SERVICE-GAP METHODOLOGY.
7
Q.
8
SERVICE-GAP BASIS?
9
A.
BUT AS IT TURNED OUT, THE ONLY CUSTOMERS YOU EXCLUDED
NO, THERE'S STILL ONE IN THAT'S OVER FOUR YEARS.
OKAY.
I NEVER
WELL, WHY DIDN'T YOU EXCLUDE THAT OTHER ONE ON A
BECAUSE THEY WERE TAKING TOMORROWNOW SERVICE THAT BUT FOR
10
TOMORROWNOW, THEY DIDN'T HAVE A SERVICE PROVIDER THAT CAN
11
PROVIDE VENDOR-LEVEL SERVICE.
12
Q.
WHAT WAS IT ABOUT THE TWO YOU EXCLUDED?
13
A.
I --
14
Q.
-- HAD BEEN GONE FOR MORE THAN FOUR YEARS.
15
A.
I MENTIONED SIEBEL A FEW MINUTES AGO.
16
CUSTOMER LEFT SIEBEL IN 2002, AND THEN FIVE YEARS LATER, THEY
17
GO -- THEY TAKE A CONTRACT WITH -- WITH TOMORROWNOW.
18
MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, SAP BEGAN OFFERING TOMORROWNOW SERVICES
19
I BELIEVE IN THE FALL OF 2006.
20
THEM OUT, JUST BASED ON THOSE FACTS.
THE EVERGREEN
AND AS I
SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, I TOOK
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
26d3e825-e0fc-447f-987f-8e38dc183faa
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BEFORE THE HONORABLE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, JUDGE
ORACLE CORPORATION, ET AL.
)
)
PLAINTIFFS,
)
)
VS.
)
)
SAP AG, ET AL.,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
____________________________)
JURY TRIAL
NO. C 07-01658 PJH
VOLUME 9
PAGES 1512 - 1695
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2010
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
APPEARANCES:
FOR PLAINTIFFS:
BY:
BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
THREE EMBARCADERO CENTER
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111-4607
ZACHARY J. ALINDER,
HOLLY A. HOUSE,
GEOFFREY M. HOWARD,
DONN P. PICKETT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
BY:
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
1999 HARRISON STREET, SUITE 900
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94612
DAVID BOIES,
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(APPEARANCES CONTINUED NEXT PAGE)
REPORTED BY:
RAYNEE H. MERCADO, CSR NO. 8258
DIANE E. SKILLMAN, CSR NO. 4909
RAYNEE H. MERCADO, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR, CCRR (510) 451-7530
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1518
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
18
MR. PICKETT:
THIS -- WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS A VERY
19
NARROW SLICE OF THIS.
20
MR. CLARKE PURPORTS TO RELY UPON WHICH WERE PRODUCED AFTER THE
21
DISCOVERY DATE AND, INDEED, AFTER HIS EXPERT REPORT CAME IN.
22
THEY ARE LISTED HERE ON THE DEMONSTRATIVE.
23
DECLARATIONS WERE -- WERE PRODUCED LATE.
24
25
THERE ARE FIVE CUSTOMER DECLARATIONS THAT
THESE FIVE CUSTOMER
AND THEN MR. CLARKE SUPPLEMENTED HIS EXPERT REPORT TO
REDUCE HIS DAMAGES BASED ON THESE LATE-PRODUCED FILINGS.
NOT
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1519
1
ONLY -- DEFENDANTS, OF COURSE, KNEW WHO THESE CUSTOMERS WERE.
2
THEY DISCLOSED THEM IN DISCOVERY IN JULY 2007.
3
DECLARATIONS OBVIOUSLY IN 2010 ARE VERY LATE INDEED.
4
AND THESE
THE RULES ARE THAT EXPERT CANNOT RELY ON THIS, AND
5
YOUR HONOR, OF COURSE, WILL RECALL THAT OUR DAMAGES EXPERT WAS
6
NOT PERMIT TO RELY ON DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PRODUCED WELL
7
BEFORE -- A YEAR BEFORE THE DISCOVERY DEADLINE.
8
CASE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE'S JUST NO QUESTION THAT THESE
9
LATE-PRODUCED DOCUMENTS CANNOT FORM THE BASIS FOR HIS OPINION.
10
THE COURT:
11
MR. McDONELL:
ALL RIGHT.
SO IN THIS
RESPONSE?
YES, YOUR HONOR.
MR. CLARKE HAS
12
RELIED ON DECLARATIONS FROM CUSTOMERS.
13
WERE PRODUCED AND PROVIDED TO PLAINTIFFS PRIOR TO THE DEPOSITION
14
OF THEIR EXPERT, MR. MEYER.
15
EXCEPTION OF THAT ONE -- I CAN'T BE SURE ABOUT THAT -- BUT MOST
16
OF THEM WERE ACTUALLY USED IN EXAMINATION OF THEIR EXPERT.
17
THE COURT:
18
MR. McDONELL:
ALL BUT ONE OF THOSE
THE VAST MAJORITY WITH THE POSSIBLE
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THESE FIVE?
YES.
THEY WERE PART OF HIS
19
DEPOSITION.
20
APPROPRIATE.
21
TRIAL THAT IT IS HIS PRACTICE AND HE BELIEVES IT'S APPROPRIATE
22
TO RELY ON SWORN STATEMENTS IN DOING THIS KIND OF WORK, SO I
23
DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER IT'S THE TYPE OF
24
INFORMATION A DAMAGES EXPERT IN A CASE LIKE THIS WOULD RELY
25
UPON.
AND MR. CLARKE HAS RELIED ON THEM, WHICH IS
I COULD -- MR. MEYER HIMSELF TESTIFIED IN THIS
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1520
1
2
SO THE ONLY QUESTION, I THINK, IS WHETHER MR. CLARKE,
TOO, CAN RELY ON THEM IN THIS CASE AND HE CAN.
3
THE -- THE --
4
THE COURT:
5
THE WHOLE OBJECTION IS THAT THEY WERE
DISCLOSED AFTER THE DISCOVERY CUTOFF.
6
MR. McDONELL:
THEY WERE -- THEY WERE WRITTEN AFTER
7
THE DISCOVERY CUTOFF.
8
BELIEVE, ONE, THEY WERE COMPLETED BEFORE THE DEPOSITION OF
9
MR. MEYER AND PROVIDED TO MR. MEYER, AND HE HAD A CHANCE --
10
11
THE COURT:
BUT, AGAIN, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF, I
BUT IT'S MR. CLARKE WHO RELIED UPON THEM,
CORRECT?
12
MR. McDONELL:
THIS IS TRUE.
AND IT WAS WELL BEFORE
13
MR. CLARKE'S DEPOSITION THAT THEY WERE -- MR. MEYER WAS DEPOSED
14
FIRST.
15
MR. CLARKE WAS.
16
17
HE HAD THE DECLARATIONS.
THE COURT:
A MONTH OR TWO LATER,
WAS MR. CLARKE DEPOSED ON THESE
DECLARATIONS?
18
MR. McDONELL:
I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER IF THEY ASKED
19
HIM QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM.
20
TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM.
21
22
THE COURT:
SO THE DECLARATIONS WERE PRODUCED TO
PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL BEFORE MR. CLARKE'S DEPOSITION.
23
MR. McDONELL:
24
THE COURT:
25
BUT THEY HAD THEM, AND THEY WERE FREE
THAT'S TRUE, YOUR HONOR.
WAS HIS DEPOSITION AFTER HIS SUPPLEMENTAL
REPORT?
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1521
1
2
MR. McDONELL:
HIS DEPOSITION WAS AFTER HIS MAY 7
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT, YES.
3
THE COURT:
OKAY.
4
ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON WHY -- I
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
MEAN, YOU RECEIVED THESE.
MR. PICKETT:
WELL, LET ME -- IF I COULD GO BACK TO
THE DEMONSTRATIVE -(SIMULTANEOUS COLLOQUY.)
THE COURT:
HOLD ON.
COULD I ASK MY QUESTION --
(SIMULTANEOUS COLLOQUY.)
THE COURT:
IF, INDEED, YOU RECEIVED THESE AFTER THE
12
DISCOVERY CUTOFF DATE AND HAD THEM IN ORDER TO USE THEM FOR ANY
13
EXAMINATION ON DEPOSITION OF MR. CLARKE, WHY WAS NO MOTION FILED
14
WITH RESPECT TO THESE?
15
16
MR. PICKETT:
THERE WAS A MOTION, YOUR HONOR.
IT WAS
OUR MOTION IN LIMINE AND --
17
THE COURT:
18
MR. PICKETT:
WITH RESPECT TO THESE?
YES, IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION TO
19
EXCLUDE PORTIONS OF MR. CLARKE'S TESTIMONY, WHICH YOU DENIED
20
OUTRIGHT, WITHOUT DEALING WITH THE SEPARATE ISSUES.
21
THE COURT:
22
MR. PICKETT:
23
THE COURT:
IT WAS IN THE DAUBERT MOTION?
YES.
24
MR. PICKETT:
AS OPPOSED -- DID YOU SPEAK
SPECIFICALLY TO EACH --
25
OH, OKAY.
EACH ONE OF THE FIVE.
IT WAS THE LAST
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1522
1
TWO PAGES OF THAT MOTION.
AND AS TO -- THESE DOCUMENTS WERE NOT
2
PART OF THE EXPERT REPORT.
THEY CAME IN -- THE FIRST FOUR CAME
3
IN -- MR. MEYER'S DEPOSITION WAS MAY 10TH.
4
IN A MONTH BEFORE.
5
DEPOSITION.
SO ONE OF THEM CAME
THREE OF THEM CAME IN THE WEEK OF HIS
6
THE AUGUST 4 CAME IN AFTER BOTH OF THEM.
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, THE -- THE SPICE -- PROJECT SPICE
7
REPORT THAT YOUR HONOR HAS NOT PERMITTED OUR EXPERT TO RELY ON
8
WAS PRODUCED IN 2009.
9
OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT EVEN WITH THE FACT WITNESSES, SO I DON'T
10
THERE WAS PLENTY OF DEPOSITION
UNDERSTAND HOW THE STREET ISN'T A TWO-WAY STREET HERE.
11
MR. McDONELL:
THAT'S APPLES AND ORANGES ENTIRELY,
12
YOUR HONOR.
13
LITIGATION BEFORE JUDGE LAPORTE.
14
THAT THING HE'S TALKING ABOUT WAS SUBJECT OF
YOUR HONOR, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, WE WERE NOT PLANNING
15
TO OFFER THESE DECLARATIONS INTO EVIDENCE WITH MR. CLARKE.
16
MR. CLARKE WOULD, CONSISTENT WITH RULE 703, DESCRIBE GENERALLY
17
ALONG WITH HIS DESCRIPTION OF THE BODY OF INFORMATION THAT HE
18
HAD AVAILABLE TO HIM IN FORMING HIS OPINIONS, TESTIFY TO THE
19
FACT THERE WERE SWORN STATEMENTS OF CUSTOMERS THAT HE RELIED
20
UPON.
21
IF THEY'D LIKE TO.
BUT
AND THEN THEY'D BE FREE TO CROSS-EXAMINE HIM ABOUT THAT
22
THE COURT:
23
MR. McDONELL:
OKAY.
BUT THERE'S NO REASON THIS EVIDENCE
24
SHOULD NOT BE AT LEAST PART OF WHAT HIS RELIANCE MATERIALS
25
INCLUDE.
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1523
1
THE COURT:
2
MR. PICKETT:
OKAY.
TWO QUICK POINTS.
WE COULD NOT TAKE
3
THESE CUSTOMERS DEPOSITIONS WITH THESE NEWLY FOUND INFORMATION
4
BECAUSE DISCOVERY HAD CLOSED.
5
ORACLE EXECUTIVES ON PROJECT SPICE, WE COULDN'T TAKE THE
6
CUSTOMERS' DEPOSITIONS TO SEE WHETHER THESE DECLARATIONS WERE
7
TRUSTWORTHY, WHAT THE BACKGROUND WAS, WHETHER THERE WAS ANYTHING
8
TO THEM.
9
UNLIKE THEIR ABILITY TO TAKE THE
AND, SECONDLY, WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE HE SAYS,
10
WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPECIFICALLY CALL THEM OUT.
11
DIDN'T HAVE TO CALL OUT THE PROJECT SPICE, COULD HAVE TESTIFIED
12
THAT THE DAMAGES WERE $2.156 BILLION WITHOUT CALLING THEM OUT,
13
AND YOUR HONOR DIDN'T PERMIT IT.
OUR EXPERT
14
MR. McDONELL:
15
ONE SMALL POINT, IF YOU WANT A COMPLETE HISTORY, THEY
16
TOO GOT CUSTOMER DECLARATIONS, MOST OF WHICH WERE PROVIDED TO US
17
WITHIN DAYS OR A COUPLE OF WEEKS BEFORE THE CLOSE OF FACT
18
DISCOVERY.
19
OF OPPORTUNITIES TO TAKE DEPOSITIONS OF THESE PEOPLE.
20
21
AGAIN, THAT'S DIFFERENT, YOUR HONOR.
SO THERE'S REALLY NOT THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE IN TERMS
MR. PICKETT:
"BEFORE" THE FACT DISCOVERY CUTOFF.
THIS WAS MONTH, MONTHS AFTER.
22
THE COURT:
23
HE CAN REFER TO THEM.
24
25
OKAY.
ALL RIGHT.
THEY WILL NOT COME IN AS
EVIDENCE.
MR. McDONELL:
THANK YOU.
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1524
1
THE COURT:
THAT'S MY RULING.
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1535
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
23
Q.
24
GENERAL WHAT WORK YOU DID ON THIS CASE.
25
A.
OKAY.
YES.
LET'S TURN TO THIS CASE NOW.
WOULD YOU DESCRIBE IN
THE FIRST THING I DID WAS TO START GATHERING
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1536
1
DOCUMENTS.
2
IN THIS CASE, THERE WAS A MOUNTAIN OF -- OF DOCUMENTS THAT WE
3
GATHERED, 12 AND A HALF MILLION PAGES OF DOCUMENTS, IS WHAT WE
4
GOT, WHICH IS A PILE ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF HIGH IF YOU JUST
5
STACK IT UP.
6
THE WORK IS BASED ALMOST ENTIRELY ON DOCUMENTS.
AND
AND WE STARTED TO ANALYZE THAT INFORMATION.
LATER ON, WE GATHERED MORE INFORMATION FROM THE
7
COMPANIES ABOUT THEIR OPERATIONS, THEIR FINANCIAL CONDITION, THE
8
AMOUNT OF PROFIT THAT THEY MAKE.
9
TIME, DEPOSITIONS WERE BEING TAKEN WHERE SOMEBODY WOULD TELL
10
EITHER WHAT THEY KNEW AND WHAT THEY'D SAID AND DONE, OR THEY
11
WERE TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY AND SAYING THIS IS WHAT
12
THE COMPANY DID.
13
THOSE, TOO.
14
SO I READ THOSE.
AND ALSO DURING THAT LATER
AND THERE WERE MANY OF
AND THEN THERE WERE CUSTOMERS' DECLARATIONS, SOME OF
15
WHICH TALKED ABOUT HOW THEY MADE THE DECISION TO GO TO
16
TOMORROWNOW OR MAKE SOME OTHER DECISION.
17
IN ADDITION, I SHOULD POINT OUT THAT VIRTUALLY ALL OF
18
THE INFORMATION I WAS LOOKING AT WAS REALLY FOCUSED ON THE 358
19
TOMORROWNOW CUSTOMERS AND THE 86 SAP CUSTOMERS.
20
Q.
NOW, MR. CLARKE, WHY WERE YOU FOCUSING ON THE CUSTOMERS?
21
A.
THIS CASE IS ALL ABOUT CUSTOMERS.
22
Q.
WHEN YOU REFERRED TO THE 12 AND A HALF MILLION PAGES, DID
23
YOU HAVE ANYONE HELP YOU REVIEW THAT INFORMATION?
24
A.
I DID.
25
Q.
AND HOW MANY STAFF MEMBERS DID YOU HAVE WORKING ON THIS FROM
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
Page 1537
1
TIME TO TIME?
2
A.
3
THIS ENGAGEMENT.
4
IN JUNE, I COUNTED THEM UP.
5
WHO WORKED ON THE ENGAGEMENT.
6
OF INFORMATION TO LOOK AT, IT'S JUST VERY TIME-CONSUMING, SO WE
7
HAD A LARGE TEAM OF PEOPLE.
AT ANY ONE TIME, THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN 50 PEOPLE WORKING ON
OVERALL, JUST BEFORE MY DEPOSITION, WHICH WAS
AND THERE WERE 121 DIFFERENT PEOPLE
YOU CAN IMAGINE WITH THAT VOLUME
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
cee31611-03a0-413a-a8ed-ca4c321dc01a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BEFORE THE HONORABLE PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, JUDGE
ORACLE CORPORATION, ET AL.
)
)
PLAINTIFFS,
)
)
VS.
)
)
SAP AG, ET AL.,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
____________________________)
JURY TRIAL
NO. C 07-01658 PJH
VOLUME 10
PAGES 1696 - 1879
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2010
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
APPEARANCES:
FOR PLAINTIFFS:
BY:
BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
THREE EMBARCADERO CENTER
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111-4607
ZACHARY J. ALINDER,
HOLLY A. HOUSE,
GEOFFREY M. HOWARD,
DONN P. PICKETT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
BY:
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
1999 HARRISON STREET, SUITE 900
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94612
DAVID BOIES,
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(APPEARANCES CONTINUED NEXT PAGE)
REPORTED BY:
RAYNEE H. MERCADO, CSR NO. 8258
DIANE E. SKILLMAN, CSR NO. 4909
RAYNEE H. MERCADO, CSR, RMR, CRR, FCRR, CCRR (510) 451-7530
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1784
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
3
Q.
4
CALCULATION FOR INFRINGER'S PROFITS.
5
PROFITS ATTRIBUTABLE TO TOMORROWNOW'S INFRINGEMENT.
YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT THE CHANGE IN YOUR NUMBERS, YOUR
6
THOSE ARE SAP'S SOFTWARE
YOU REMEMBER THAT?
7
A.
I DO.
8
Q.
AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO WITH YOU IS HAVE YOU TELL US WHY YOU
9
CHANGED THE NUMBERS.
SO LET'S START WITH -- YOUR FIRST REPORT
10
WAS DATED MARCH 26 OF THIS YEAR, CORRECT?
11
A.
THAT'S CORRECT.
12
Q.
AND IN THAT REPORT, YOU HAD FOUR COMPANIES -- FOUR CUSTOMERS
13
IN THIS CATEGORY AND THE AMOUNT OF THE PROFIT WAS APPROXIMATELY
14
$38 MILLION.
15
A.
THAT'S CORRECT.
16
Q.
AND YOU DID A SUPPLEMENT IN MAY, AND THE NUMBER DROPPED FROM
17
FOUR TO THREE?
18
A.
YES.
19
Q.
WOULD YOU TELL US WHY THAT NUMBER DROPPED?
20
A.
BECAUSE I HAD A CUSTOMER DECLARATION THAT INDICATED THAT
21
TOMORROWNOW HAD NOT PLAYED A ROLE IN -- IN THEM MAKING THAT --
22
THAT CHANGE.
23
Q.
DO YOU RECALL THE NAME OF THAT CUSTOMER?
24
A.
NOT OFFHAND.
25
Q.
OKAY.
IS THAT RIGHT?
LET ME SHOW YOU WHAT'S BEEN MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1785
1
A6891.
2
A.
(REVIEWING DOCUMENT.)
3
(OFF-THE-RECORD DISCUSSION.)
4
MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
I'VE GOT A COPY FOR THE COURT.
5
Q.
AND WOULD YOU TELL US WHAT THIS DECLARATION IS, SIR.
6
A.
YES.
7
AND IT'S -- HE WAS THE SENIOR VICE-PRESIDENT OF BUSINESS
8
EXCELLENCE AND CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER AT A COMPANY CALLED
9
NEWPAGE CORPORATION.
10
IT'S A DECLARATION FROM A DANIEL CLARK, NO RELATION,
11
DO YOU WANT ME TO CONTINUE TO DESCRIBE IT?
Q.
YES.
12
13
MR. BOISE:
OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
EVIDENCE, AND IT CAN'T GO IN EVIDENCE.
14
MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
15
THE COURT:
16
IT'S NOT IN
ONE?
I THINK --
HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS
I DON'T REMEMBER THIS CUSTOMER.
17
MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
I THINK THEY'VE OPENED THE DOOR BY
18
MAKING THE POINT THAT HE CHANGED THE NUMBER, THE NUMBER WENT
19
FROM FOUR TO THREE WITHOUT ASKING HIM WHY.
20
DIRECTLY TO WHY.
21
SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHY HE DROPPED THIS CUSTOMER, BUT I
22
THINK THIS ALSO SHOULD COME INTO EVIDENCE.
23
RELIED ON.
24
25
AND THIS GOES TO --
THIS IS THE DECLARATION, AND I THINK NOT ONLY
MR. BOISE:
IT'S SOMETHING HE'S
YOUR HONOR, IT'S NOT EVEN DATED.
LOOKS LIKE THE STAMP SIGNATURE.
IT
HE DIDN'T EVEN REMEMBER IT
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1786
1
BEFORE.
2
THE COURT:
OKAY.
WELL, THE RELIANCE RULE ONLY GOES
3
WHEN THE OPPONENT IS OFFERING THE EXHIBIT.
4
REFER TO IT, BUT IT'S NOT PROPERLY ADMISSIBLE AS AN EXHIBIT.
5
BY MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
6
Q.
7
ON TO REMOVE THIS COMPANY.
8
TALKS ABOUT NEWPAGE COMPLETING ITS ACQUISITION OF ANOTHER
9
COMPANY.
OKAY.
10
11
I WILL ALLOW HIM TO
WOULD YOU TELL US WHAT IN THIS DECLARATION YOU RELIED
MR. BOISE:
AND YOU'LL NOTE IN PARAGRAPH 3, IT
OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
HE CAN'T READ THE
DOCUMENT WHEN IT'S NOT IN EVIDENCE.
12
THE COURT:
13
HE CAN SIMPLY REFER TO THE FACT THAT HE RELIED UPON
14
HE CAN SIMPLY -- SUSTAINED.
THE DOCUMENT.
15
MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
MAY I ASK HIM IN WHAT RESPECT?
16
MEAN, WHAT DID THE -- WHY DID HE REMOVE THEM BASED ON THIS
17
I
DOCUMENT?
18
THE COURT:
YEAH.
I'LL LET YOU ASK THAT QUESTION.
19
BY MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
20
Q.
21
DAMAGE CALCULATION BASED ON THIS DECLARATION?
22
A.
23
NEWPAGE WAS A LONG-TERM USER OF SAP.
24
DESCRIBED TO YOU THAT IF A COMPANY WAS ACQUIRED, VERY OFTEN THE
25
PARENT COMPANY WOULD REQUIRE THE NEW SUBSIDIARY TO CHANGE TO
WHY DID YOU REMOVE THIS CUSTOMER, STORA ENSO, FROM YOUR
I DID THAT BECAUSE STORA ENSO HAD BEEN ACQUIRED BY NEWPAGE.
SO IF YOU REMEMBER, I
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1787
1
THEIR SOFTWARE.
2
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.
AND, ACTUALLY, IT IS DATED MAY 4TH, 2010.
3
Q.
SO IT'S DATED THREE DAYS BEFORE YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT?
4
A.
CORRECT.
5
Q.
AND IF YOU'D LOOK AT THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH AND TELL US
6
WHETHER THAT PROVIDED ANY ADDITIONAL REASON WHY YOU EXCLUDED
7
THEM?
8
A.
YES, IT DOES.
9
Q.
AND WHAT'S THE FURTHER REASON?
10
A.
THAT MR. CLARK SAYS THAT THE -- THE SUPPORT FROM TOMORROWNOW
11
WAS NOT INFLUENCED IN ANY WAY -- DID NOT INFLUENCE IN ANY WAY
12
THE DECISION TO GO TO SAP.
13
Q.
OKAY.
14
AND THEN YOU WERE ASKED WHETHER YOU TOOK ANOTHER
15
CUSTOMER OUT IN YOUR OCTOBER SUPPLEMENT.
16
A.
I DO.
17
Q.
AND YOU SAID YOU TOOK ANOTHER CUSTOMER OUT, AND SO THE --
18
THE PROFITS OWED TO ORACLE DROPPED BY A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS.
19
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
20
A.
I DO.
21
Q.
AND I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT SECOND SUPPLEMENT.
22
I THINK COUNSEL FOR ORACLE ASKED YOU TO REFER TO THIS TO REFRESH
23
YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHAT YOU HAD DONE.
24
AT IT AND TELL ME THE REASON THAT YOU REMOVED A CUSTOMER.
25
I THINK --
I'D LIKE YOU TO LOOK
MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1788
1
THE COURT:
YES.
2
BY MR. MITTELSTAEDT:
3
Q.
(HANDING DOCUMENT.)
4
A.
THANK YOU.
5
Q.
NOW, THAT'S THE SECOND SUPPLEMENT YOU FILED IN OCTOBER?
6
A.
I BELIEVE THIS WAS A -- THIS WAS A JUNE CHANGE, ACTUALLY.
7
Q.
OKAY.
8
A.
THE SECOND SUPPLEMENT WAS DATED JUNE 4TH.
9
Q.
WELL -- OKAY.
ACTUALLY, I THINK WHAT HAPPENED WAS COUNSEL
10
SAID HE WOULD SKIP OVER THE JUNE ONE IN THE INTEREST OF TIME.
11
A.
YES.
12
Q.
SO --
13
A.
THAT'S THIS ONE.
14
Q.
AND DOES THAT EXPLAIN WHY YOU DECREASED FROM THREE TO TWO?
15
A.
CORRECT.
16
Q.
AND IS THERE A DECLARATION ATTACHED TO THAT SECOND
17
SUPPLEMENT?
18
A.
YES, THERE IS.
19
Q.
AND WHO IS THAT BY?
20
A.
IT'S FROM MR. BIRRENBACH.
21
Q.
OKAY.
22
A.
I'M PROBABLY GOING TO BUTCHER THIS NAME, BUT I'LL DO MY BEST
23
ROTK-PPCHEN SEKTKELLEREI.
24
Q.
25
REASON WHY YOU REMOVED THAT COMPANY FROM THE DAMAGE CALCULATION?
AND WHAT COMPANY IS HE WITH?
IT'S A GERMAN COMPANY.
AND IN YOUR SECOND SUPPLEMENT IN JUNE, DID YOU DESCRIBE THE
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1789
1
A.
YES.
2
Q.
AND WHAT REASON DID YOU PROVIDE?
3
A.
I GAVE AS THE REASON THIS DECLARATION.
4
DECLARATION, WHICH IS -- IT'S ONLY JUST OVER HALF A PAGE LONG, I
5
WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY FIVE DIFFERENT EXCLUSION REASONS FOR
6
EXCLUDING THIS CUSTOMER.
7
AND BASED UPON THE
THEY SPECIFICALLY WANTED THE SAP FUNCTIONALITY.
THEY
8
SAID THEY DIDN'T LIKE FUSION IN THE FUTURE FOR JDE WORLD
9
PRODUCTS, WHICH IS WHAT THEY WERE USING AT THE TIME; THAT THEY
10
HAD EVALUATED OTHER PROVIDERS.
11
PRIOR TO JOINING TOMORROWNOW.
12
MY EXCLUSION POOLS.
13
GOING TOO FAR.
14
Q.
15
TOMORROWNOW PLAYED A ROLE IN THEIR DECISION TO GO TO SAP?
16
A.
YES.
17
Q.
AND WHAT INFORMATION DID YOU RELY ON?
18
A.
MR. BIRRENBACH SAID THAT IF TOMORROWNOW HAD NOT BEEN
19
AVAILABLE, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE REPLACED THE JDE WORLD PROGRAMS
20
THEY WERE USING WITH SAP.
21
Q.
THEY HAD DECIDED TO JOIN SAP
IF YOU REMEMBER, THAT WAS ONE OF
AND ALSO FOR OTHER REASONS, WHICH MAY BE
DID THEY -- DID YOU RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER
OKAY.
22
SO THAT GETS US TO JUNE, OCTOBER, WHEN YOU'RE DOWN TO
23
TWO.
24
ORIGINAL THAT HAD BEEN INCLUDED IN THE FOUR?
25
A.
WERE THE REMAINING TWO AT THAT TIME PERIOD TWO OF THE
YES.
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Page 1790
1
Q.
2
FOUR, BUT COULD YOU TELL US AGAIN JUST BRIEFLY WHY YOU ADDED TWO
3
BACK?
4
A.
5
PREPARATION FOR THE CASE WHERE YOU SORT OF SHINE A BRIGHTER
6
LIGHT ON EVERYTHING, THESE TWO CUSTOMERS APPEARED TO ME TO BE SO
7
CLOSE THAT I DIDN'T CARE TO TRY TO EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY I HAD
8
EXCLUDED THEM.
AND THEN YOU'VE EXPLAINED ALREADY WHY IT WENT BACK UP TO
YES.
9
I ADD THESE TWO CUSTOMERS BACK BECAUSE IN THE
SO EVEN THOUGH I THINK THERE'S -- THERE'S REASON TO
10
DO SO, THEY WERE SO CLOSE, I -- I CAME ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
11
DECISION AND DECIDED TO INCLUDE THEM IN THE DAMAGE CALCULATION.
12
Q.
13
THE INFRINGER'S PROFITS ANALYSIS ARE TWO FROM THE ORIGINAL; YOU
14
DROPPED OUT TWO BECAUSE OF THE DECLARATIONS THEY PROVIDED; AND
15
THEN YOU ADDED TWO DIFFERENT ONES IN?
16
A.
THAT'S CORRECT.
17
Q.
AND THAT MAKES THE FOUR NOW?
18
A.
CORRECT.
OKAY.
AND SO THE -- THE FOUR THAT YOU ARE INCLUDING NOW IN
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION
Raynee H. Mercado, CSR, CRR, FCRR & Diane E. Skillman, CSR, RPR, FCRR
9bf78bca-2814-4f8c-93d0-595ef6167f63
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?