Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 263

Declaration of Joshua Fuchs in Support of 262 Response in Support of Motion to Compel Discovery Concerning Third Party Support Provided by Oracle's Partners filed bySAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. (Related document(s) 262 ) (McDonell, Jason) (Filed on 1/27/2009)

Download PDF
Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al Doc. 263 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 26 27 28 Robert A. Mittelstaedt (SBN 060359) Jason McDonell (SBN 115084) Elaine Wallace (SBN 197882) JONES DAY 555 California Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 626-3939 Facsimile: (415) 875-5700 Tharan Gregory Lanier (SBN 138784) Jane L. Froyd (SBN 220776) JONES DAY 1755 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Telephone: (650) 739-3939 Facsimile: (650) 739-3900 Scott W. Cowan (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Joshua L. Fuchs (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) JONES DAY 717 Texas, Suite 3300 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (832) 239-3939 Facsimile: (832) 239-3600 Attorneys for Defendants SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and TOMORROWNOW, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ORACLE CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants. Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH REPLY DECLARATION OF JOSHUA FUCHS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY CONCERNING THIRD PARTY SUPPORT PROVIDED BY ORACLE'S PARTNERS Date: February 10, 2009 Time: 2:00 PM Courtroom: E, 15th Floor Judge: Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte FUCHS DECL. ISO OF REPLY Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH 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 26 27 28 I, JOSHUA FUCHS, declare: I am an attorney with the law firm of Jones Day and counsel for Defendants in the abovecaptioned matter. I make this declaration based on personal knowledge and, if called upon to do so, could testify competently thereto. 1. Based on Defendants records of production is this case, the discovery burden has not been equal. Defendants have been required to review and produce far more data and been required to prepare and present many more witnesses for deposition than Plaintiffs. 2. To date, Defendants have reviewed in excess of 6 million documents for potential production from custodian files. Out of that, Defendants have produced approximately 4,364,049 Bates numbered pages from 72 different custodians. In addition, Defendants have produced in excess of 10 terabytes of native data including entire portions of TomorrowNow servers and key services databases which have required thousands of man hours of review and processing time. In contrast, Plaintiffs to date have only produced approximately 312,743 Bates numbered pages from 41 custodians. In addition, much of the native data Plaintiffs have produced consists of log files and software release and updates which do not have the potential to contain privileged data and, therefore, do not require review for privileged content. 3. As for depositions, to date, Defendants have been required to prepare and present 30 witnesses totaling nearly 200 hours of deposition time. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, have been required to present 11 witnesses totaling nearly 51 hours of deposition time. 4. To date, Oracle has served 102 subpoenas duces tecum upon 99 former customers of TomorrowNow. Of those 99 customers, 49 customers have produced approximately 389,900 Bates numbered pages and 77,012 documents. Defendants review each document produced by a third party to appropriately designate any confidential or highly confidential information that may be contained therein. // // // // 2 FUCHS DECL. ISO OF REPLY Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH 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 26 27 28 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of Texas that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 27th day of January 2009 in Houston, Texas. /s/ Joshua Fuchs Joshua Fuchs 3 FUCHS DECL. ISO OF REPLY Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH

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?