Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 641

Declaration of Tharan Gregory Lanier in Support of 640 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Defendants' Notice of Motion and Motion For Partial Summary Judgment filed bySAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-1, # 2 Exhibit A-2, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F, # 8 Exhibit G, # 9 Exhibit H, # 10 Exhibit I, # 11 Exhibit J, # 12 Exhibit K, # 13 Exhibit L, # 14 Exhibit M, # 15 Exhibit N, # 16 Exhibit O, # 17 Exhibit P, # 18 Exhibit Q, # 19 Exhibit R, # 20 Exhibit S, # 21 Exhibit T, # 22 Exhibit U, # 23 Exhibit V, # 24 Exhibit W, # 25 Exhibit X)(Related document(s) 640 ) (Froyd, Jane) (Filed on 3/3/2010)

Download PDF
Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al Doc. 641 Att. 10 Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 Filed03/03/10 Page1 of 10 EXHIBIT J Dockets.Justia.com Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 Filed03/03/10 Page2 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 B I N G H A M M c C U T C H E N LLP D O N N P. P I C K E T T (SBN 72257) GEOFFREY M. H O W A R D (SBN 157468) H O L L Y A. H O U S E ( S B N 136045) Z A C H A R Y 1. A L I N D E R (SBN 209009) B R E E H A N N ( S B N 215695) Three E m b a r c a d e r o C e n t e r San Francisco, C A 9 4 1 1 1 - 4 0 6 7 T e l e p h o n e : (415) 3 9 3 - 2 0 0 0 F a c s i m i l e : (415) 3 9 3 - 2 2 8 6 donn.pickett@bingham.com geoff.howard@bingham.com holly.house@bingham.com zachary .alinder@bingham.com bree.hann@bingham.com D O R I A N D A L E Y ( S B N 129049) J E N N I F E R G L O S S ( S B N 154227) 500 Oracle Parkway MIS 50p7 Redwood City, C A 94070 T e l e p h o n e : (650) 5 0 6 - 4 8 4 6 F a c s i m i l e : (650) 5 0 6 - 7 1 1 4 dorian.daley@oracle.com jennifer.gloss@oracle.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs O r a c l e U S A , Inc., O r a c l e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Corporation, Oracle E M E A Limited, and Siebel Systems, Inc. U N I T E D STATES D I S T R I C T C O U R T N O R T H E R N D I S T R I C T OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ORACLE USA, INC., et. aI, Plaintiffs, Case No. 0 7 - C V - 1 6 5 8 ( P J H ) EDL 22 23 24 v. S A P AG, e t al., P L A I N T I F F S ' T H I R D SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED I N I T I A L DISCLOSURES Date: n / a Time: n / a Judge: The Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton C o u r t r o o m : TBD 25 26 27 Defendants. 28 N73187211.1 CONTAINS I N F O R M A T I O N DESIGNATED I D G H L Y C O N F I D E N T I A L PURSUANT T O PROTECTIVE ORDER Case No. 07-CY-1658 (PIH) EDL P L A I N T I F F S ' T H I R D S U P P L E M E N T A L AND A M E N D E D I N I T I A L D I S C L O S U R E S Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 Filed03/03/10 Page3 of 10 1 D i s c o v e r y a n d O r a c l e ' s i n v e s t i g a t i o n a r e o n g o i n g . If, a s t h e c a s e d e v e l o p s , Oracle identifies additional d o c u m e n t s o r c a t e g o r i e s o f d o c u m e n t s t h a t s u p p o r t its position, it will i d e n t i f y t h e m i n s u p p l e m e n t a l d i s c l o s u r e s as r e q u i r e d u n d e r Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e). 2 3 4 III. C O M P U T A T I O N O F DAMAGES! I n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h its F o u r t h A m e n d e d Complaint, Oracle seeks d a m a g e s against 5 6 7 D e f e n d a n t s S A P A G , S A P A m e r i c a , I n c . , a n d T o m o r r o w N o w , I n c . ( c o l l e c t i v e l y r e f e r r e d t o as " D e f e n d a n t s " ) r e s u l t i n g f r o m D e f e n d a n t s ' r e p r o d u c t i o n , distribution, p u b l i c display, a n d p r e p a r a t i o n o f d e r i v a t i v e w o r k s f r o m c o p y r i g h t e d Oracle w o r k s , i n c l u d i n g its software, S o f t w a r e and S u p p o r t Materials ( " S S M s " ) , software containing S S M s o r other copyrighted works, f r a u d u l e n t a c c e s s t o , t h e f t of, a n d f u r t h e r m i s u s e o f O r a c l e ' s u n d e r l y i n g s o f t w a r e a p p l i c a t i o n s a s w e l l as S S M s a n d n o n - c o p y r i g h t a b l e s u p p o r t m a t e r i a l s , as w e l l as r e l a t e d u n f a i r b u s i n e s s practices, interference w i t h O r a c l e ' s b u s i n e s s relationships, breaches o f contract, a n d unjust e n r i c h m e n t a t t h e e x p e n s e o f Oracle. B a s e d o n O r a c l e ' s i n v e s t i g a t i o n t o date, D e f e n d a n t s ' actions h a v e resulted i n the following categories o f harm: Lost, diminished, or delayed current a n d prospective c u s t o m e r revenues a n d p r o f i t s , i n c l u d i n g as t h e y r e l a t e t o s u p p o r t a n d m a i n t e n a n c e a n d s o f t w a r e a p p l i c a t i o n s licensing; H a r m e d current a n d prospective c u s t o m e r relationships, even w h e r e they d i d n o t result i n a loss o f a c u s t o m e r support contract o r software licensing; D e v a l u a t i o n o f O r a c l e ' s 'intellectual p r o p e r t y a n d o t h e r i n t a n g i b l e assets a n d O r a c l e ' s i n v e s t m e n t i n the development and/or p u r c h a s e o f the same, i n c l u d i n g d o w n w a r d p r e s s u r e o n t h e v a l u e o f l i c e n s e s for, h a r m t o t h e c o n f i d e n t i a l n a t u r e of, m i n i m i z e d c o m p e t i t i v e a d v a n t a g e s r e g a r d i n g , d e s t r u c t i o n o f O r a c l e ' s e x c l u s i v e e x p l o i t a t i o n o f a n d r e m u n e r a t i o n of, a n d t h e d e n i a l o f O r a c l e ' s l i c e n s i n g r i g h t s a n d r e v e n u e s r e g a r d i n g t h e same; 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I O r a c l e a l s o s e e k s i n j u n c t i v e relief. 49 Case No, 07-CV-1658 (PJH) EDL 28 A/73187211.1 PLAINTIFFS' THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED INITIAL DISCLOSURES Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 Filed03/03/10 Page4 of 10 1 L o s s o f goodwill, including reputational h a r m and costs associated w i t h addressing D e f e n d a n t s ' illegal conduct; 2 3 4 H a r m to O r a c l e ' s overall m a r k e t cap; H a r m and i m p a i r m e n t to O r a c l e ' s c u s t o m e r s u p p o r t websites a n d u n d e r l y i n g c u s t o m e r s u p p o r t data, i n c l u d i n g i m p a i r e d a c c e s s t o t h e s a m e b y O r a c l e a n d its l e g i t i m a t e c u s t o m e r s , h a r m t o O r a c l e ' s control o f a n d the ability to use the s a m e by Oracle a n d its customers for t h e p u r p o s e s for w h i c h t h e y w e r e intended, i n c l u d i n g to i m p r o v e O r a c l e ' s c u s t o m e r s u p p o r t processes, and h a r m t o t h e f u n c t i o n a l i t y o f t h e s e s y s t e m s ; and, 5 6 7 8 9 10 C o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i n v e s t i g a t i n g , m i t i g a t i n g ( i n c l u d i n g for e x a m p l e l o w e r e d prices, t i m e and effort to r e t a i n c u s t o m e r s , or to address reputational h a r m ) and litigating a g a i n s t all these activities. 11 12 13 14 15 T h e h o s t o f o t h e r d a m a g e s a t t e s t e d t o b y O r a c l e w i t n e s s e s , i n c l u d i n g , e.g., J u e r g e n R o t t l e r , s u c h as t h e a b a n d o n m e n t o f e x i s t i n g P e o p l e S o f t c u s t o m e r c o n t r a c t s t e p - u p r e n e w a l p r i c e escalations, t h e early a d o p t i o n a n d generous t e r m s o f O r a c l e ' s Lifetime S u p p o r t a n d A p p l i c a t i o n s U n l i m i t e d programs, a n d additional spends o n c u s t o m e r support enhancements. 16 17 18 19 S o m e o f the a b o v e t y p e s o f d a m a g e i n c l u d e e l e m e n t s t h a t a r e i r r e p a r a b l e i n nature. O r a c l e is still i n t h e p r o c e s s o f g a t h e r i n g a n d c u l l i n g d o w n t h e e v i d e n c e r e l e v a n t to its damages internally, from t h i r d parties (e.g., customers) a n d from Defendants. F o r instance, t h e s c o p e o f D e f e n d a n t s ' i n f r i n g e m e n t a n d m i s u s e o f O r a c l e p r o p e r t y is still b e i n g d e t e r m i n e d b e c a u s e o f the o n g o i n g a n d l a t e p r o d u c t i o n o f D a t a W a r e h o u s e a n d o t h e r v o l u m i n o u s t e c h n i c a l m a t e r i a l s a n d D e f e n d a n t s ' u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o s t i p u l a t e t o e x a c t l y w h a t t h e y did. D e f e n d a n t s h a v e yet t o p r o v i d e r e q u e s t e d e v i d e n c e r e l e v a n t t o S i e b e l , O r a c l e ' s D a t a b a s e p r o d u c t s , a n d o t h e r Oracle applications - a n d indeed, h a v e o p p o s e d s u c h discovery. While the Parties a g r e e d o n a case e x t e n s i o n t h a t a l l o w e d t h e i n c l u s i o n o f S i e b e l claims, D e f e n d a n t s o p p o s e d t h e i n c l u s i o n o f O r a c l e ' s D a t a b a s e - r e l a t e d claims. T h e C o u r t h a s n o w r u l e d t h a t t h e s e c l a i m s s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d AJ73187211.1 50 C a s e No: 07-CV-1658 (PJH) EDL PLAINTIFFS' THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL A N D AMENDED INITIAL DISCLOSURES 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 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 26 27 Filed03/03/10 Page5 of 10 in this case, leading to Oracle's Fourth Amended Complaint and the further supplementation regarding Siebel and Database claims below. Further, O r a c l e ' s ability to calculate its damages obviously is hampered by not knowing the full scope o f the unlawful conduct related to the allegations i n O r a c l e ' s F o u r t h A m e n d e d Complaint. D e f e n d a n t s have n o t p r o v i d e d relevant requested Safe Passage information or information about their valuation o f IP acquired l e g a l l y information that bears o n the value o f TN and o f T N ' s IP-theft based business model to SAP, which may be relevant to the fair market value o f what SAP should have paid for a hypothetical license. Moreover, Defendants' use o f the attorney/client privilege to shield the actions and knowledge o f SAP and its officers and directors continues to hamper assessment o f punitive damages. Extensive meet and confers on these issues and other damages-related discovery are ongoing and motions to compel may be required and/or are scheduled for briefing and hearing. In addition, both sides are still responding to and even serving new discovery relevant to damages. Thus, there is ongoing relevant discovery that could and likely will affect assessing and computing appropriate damages. To complete their analysis and computations, Oracle's damages experts are waiting for the additional factual material yet to be produced and analyzed; moreover, they have not finalized their methodologies or computations o f Oracle's damages. In addition, legal rulings (such as on Defendants' pending summary judgment motion on Oracle's fair market value license measure o f infringement damages and o n O r a c l e ' s objections to Magistrate Laporte's Rule 37 Order) may affect the final damages methodologies and computations. Oracle's damages report and expert opinions will be provided in accordance with whatever schedule is then in place in the action. Thus, the following description does not constitute Oracle's damages analysis or demand and does not in any way bind Oracle, but merely provides O r a c l e ' s c u r r e n t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e d a m a g e s here. O r a c l e h a s t e n c a u s e s o f action; s o m e o f t h e d a m a g e s d e s c r i b e d o v e r l a p a n d different plaintiffs bring different causes o f action. Oracle would not seek or be entitled to d u p l i c a t e r e c o v e r y , t h o u g h it w i l l l i k e l y s e e k d a m a g e s i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e . A. A/73187211.1 28 In connection with its Copyright Infringement cause o f action, Oracle has 51 Case No. 07-CY-1658 (PJH) E D L P L A I N T I F F S ' T H I R D S U P P L E M E N T A L AND A M E N D E D I N I T I A L D I S C L O S U R E S Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 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 26 27 28 Filed03/03/10 Page6 of 10 alternative measures o f its damages available to it under the law. Oracle reserves its right to elect statutory damages for Defendants' infringement at the appropriate time, but currently does not envision that it will do so. Rather, it currently seeks from Defendants the value o f the copyrighted material Defendants infringed both through the fair market value o f licensees) and, in the alternative, through lost profits and/or infringers' profits analyses. Oracle expects to seek to recover damages based on the fair market value licensees) for the PeopleS oft, J.D. Edwards, Siebel, and Database applications and support material infringement by Defendants. The legal tests and the authorities in support are set out in detail in Oracle's September 2 3 , 2 0 0 9 Opposition to Defendants' pending Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Re Oracle's [Fair Market Value] Hypothetical License Damages Claims. In summary, the value o f the PeopleS oft, J.D. Edwards, Siebel, and Database hypothetical licenses are determined by the objective fair market value o f t h e rights being licensed or received, as evidenced by the circumstances at the time (e.g., for Oracle - the fact that Oracle had just paid significant amounts for the companies, the anticipated value to Oracle o f t h e PeopleSoft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel acquisitions, Oracle's cross-sell and up-sell and service renewal history; for Defendants - the fact that the acquisitions significantly increased Oracle's threat to SAP, the anticipated value to SAP o f the TN acquisition, the amount that would not have to be expended by Defendants to legitimately create what they would instead license (which will also be the subject o f expert analysis and relied upon by Oracle's damages experts), SAP's cross-sell and up-sell and service renewal history). Based on the evidence to date, Oracle anticipates valuing the hypothetical licenses in total in the billions o f dollars. While no formal computation has been completed, it is being finalized. Oracle's alternative lost profits and infringers' profits analyses for its copyright infringement claims against Defendants are ongoing and incomplete. The lost profits and infringers' profits measurements overlap in part with t h e lost profits measurements stemming from Oracle's alternative claims (described below). The combined lost profits and infringers' profits analyses currently will encompass all the lost profits associated with the parties' long agreed upon list o f support customers who left Oracle, PeopleS oft, J.D. Edwards, or Siebel for N73187211.1 52 Case No. 07-CV-1658 (pJH) EDL PLAINTIFFS' THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED INITIAL DISCLOSURES Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 Filed03/03/10 Page7 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 S A P a n d T N , i n c l u d i n g l o s t l i c e n s e sales a n d o t h e r c r o s s - s e l l a n d u p - s e l l l o s t profits. B a s e d o n D e f e n d a n t s ' representations - u p o n which Oracle is relying - and O r a c l e ' s review o f the scant e v i d e n c e p r o d u c e d b y D e f e n d a n t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r i n f r i n g e m e n t o f O r a c l e ' s D a t a b a s e software, O r a c l e is n o t c u r r e n t l y a w a r e o f a n y a d d i t i o n a l l o s t c u s t o m e r - r e l a t e d D a t a b a s e l i c e n s e o r s u p p o r t r e v e n u e d u e to D e f e n d a n t s ' i n f r i n g e m e n t o f O r a c l e ' s D a t a b a s e s o f t w a r e o r D e f e n d a n t s ' use o f that software to support O r a c l e ' s Database customers o r to transition those customers to competing database products. Accordingly, while Defendants infringed O r a c l e ' s Database software to support the PeopleSoft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel software customers referred to above and below, Oracle does n o t currently e x p e c t to value any additional customer-specific lost profits o r infringers' profits (beyond those customers already lost due to the PeopleSoft, J.D. E d w a r d s , a n d S i e b e l i n f r i n g e m e n t ) , t h o u g h O r a c l e does e x p e c t t o s e e k t h e f a i r m a r k e t v a l u e o f a license from Defendants for t h e i r infringement o f O r a c l e ' s Database products as described in accordance w i t h the fair market license value analysis described above. Evidence relevant to O r a c l e ' s lost profitslinfringers' profits analyses is contained, for example, i n Defendants' m u l t i p l e internal a n d external r e p o r t s o f the r e v e n u e s t a k e n a w a y from Oracle b y T N a n d b y the S a f e P a s s a g e p r o g r a m a n d in r e q u e s t e d p r o d u c t i o n s f r o m D e f e n d a n t s c o n c e r n i n g g r o s s r e v e n u e s , expenses, a n d m a r g i n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h those p r o g r a m s a n d w i t h the l i s t o f r e l e v a n t customers, i n t h e v o l u m i n o u s c u s t o m e r c o n t r a c t s a n d r e l a t e d f i l e s p r o d u c e d b y t h e p a r t i e s , in t h e c u s t o m e r financial reports t h a t t h e p a r t i e s h a v e c r e a t e d a n d p r o d u c e d , i n O r a c l e ' s A t R i s k reports a n d T N w i n - b a c k s p r e a d s h e e t s , a n d i n t h e e x t e n s i v e d o c u m e n t s o n s u p p o r t r e n e w a l c a n c e l l a t i o n s and l i c e n s e w i n s a n d l o s s e s a g a i n s t S A P a n d TN. O r a c l e w i l l a l s o b e p r o v i d i n g a d d i t i o n a l a n a l y s i s r e l i e d u p o n b y its e x p e r t s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h its d a m a g e s e x p e r t r e p o r t , i n c l u d i n g a n a l y s i s o f the purchasing history o f its PeopleS oft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel customer base posta c q u i s i t i o n . B a s e d o n t h e e v i d e n c e t o date, O r a c l e a n t i c i p a t e s t h a t t h e l o s t r e v e n u e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s u p p o r t l o s s e s a n d w i t h l o s t c r o s s - s e l l a n d u p - s e l l o p p o r t u n i t i e s as t o t h e a g r e e d u p o n l i s t o f T o m o r r o w N o w c u s t o m e r s e x c e e d $ 1 5 0 m i l l i o n dollars. O r a c l e ' s i n f r i n g e r s ' p r o f i t s a n a l y s i s i n c l u d e s t h e p r o f i t s o n t h e r e v e n u e s SAP and T N m a d e f r o m t h e i r c o p y r i g h t i n f r i n g e m e n t , including some o r all o f the approximately $40 million T N reported as revenues, and a portion o f A/73187211.1 53 Case No. 07-CV-1658 (PlH) EDL P L A I N T I F F S ' T H I R D SUPPLEMENTAL AND A M E N D E D INITIAL DISCLOSURES 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 1 2 3 4 Filed03/03/10 Page8 of 10 the approximately $500 million i n license revenue associated with S A P ' s leverage o f TN and Safe P a s s a g e i n t h e s a l e o f l i c e n s e a p p l i c a t i o n s . F u r t h e r e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t o f t h i s a s p e c t o f O r a c l e ' s damages is described i n section E below and Defendants owe Oracle information to analyze the same. B. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Portions o f O r a c l e ' s damages from Defendants' violations o f the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, o f the Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, and in connection with Defendants' Trespass to Chattels were testified to b y Dr. Koehler i n his Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 30(b)(6) deposition. He also provided a written outline o f harm and damages to O r a c l e ' s computer systems, databases, data, and network, Ex. 167, from which he testified. Oracle refers Defendants to that testimony and the accompanying exhibits. Further; Defendants have set a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition related to the harm to the Siebel computer systems and data for October 1 5 , 2 0 0 9 , and Oracle refers Defendants to that testimony. Further, Defendants own extensive records o f their computer access and fraud, and their o w n deposition testimony related to these issues confirms the damage to O r a c l e ' s computers, data, and systems. I n addition, Defendants' actions adversely impacted O r a c l e ' s goodwill and caused i t to lose business. These damages overlap i n large measure with those described below related to Defendants' breach o f contract and interference with O r a c l e ' s prospective economic advantage; they are not bounded by Defendants' infringement o f copyrighted materials. While no formal computation has been completed, it is being finalized. Any additional evidence in support (e.g., salary information associated with members o f the investigations team, the cost o f the associated laptops) will be provided in connection w i t h O r a c l e ' s expert report or before. In addition, as allowed by statute or law, Oracle will seek its tens o f millions o f dollars o f associated attorneys' fees and other litigation costs, as well as punitive damages, i n an amount to be proved at trial. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 c. O r a c l e ' s damages from Defendants' breaches o f contract overlap with its 25 26 27 28 l o s t p r o f i t s a n a l y s i s , d e s c r i b e d b e l o w . M o r e o v e r , t h e b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t d a m a g e s are d i s t i n c t from Defendants' infringement o f copyrighted materials, as described in O r a c l e ' s responses to Defendants' Fifth Set ofInterrogatories. While no formal computation has been completed, it is b e i n g finalized. A./73 I 872 I l . l 54 Case No. 07-CV-I658 (PJH) EDL P L A I N T I F F S ' T H I R D S U P P L E M E N T A L AND A M E N D E D INITIAL DISCLOSURES Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 Filed03/03/10 Page9 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 D. The harm from Oracle's interference claims overlaps in part with its alternative infringement lost profits analysis, described above, albeit with different plaintiffs. However, as described in detail in Oracle's responses to Defendants' Fifth Set o f Interrogatories (and as highlighted in a number o f t h e bullet points above), Defendants have interfered with Oracle's current or prospective customer relationships, in ways that do not solely involve copying, distribution, public display, or creation o f a derivative work, causing further and additional lost profit damages and other types o f harm like harm to goodwill and other reputational harm. While no formal computation has been completed, other than as built into the analysis above, it is being finalized. Because o f the willfulness o f Defendants' interference, including TN and S A P ' s knowledge o f the illegality o f T N ' s method o f service delivery and their lengthy failure to correct and make legal that business delivery despite knowing o f its existence from due diligence and continuing that illegal business model for over a year and a h a l f after being sued by Oracle, Oracle will also be seeking significant punitive damages, in an amount to be proved at trial. E. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants were also unjustly enriched and received ill-gotten gains at the expense o f Oracle, other than as described in its copyright infringement action, by all the illegal conduct and other unfair business practices listed i n Oracle's Fourth Aniended Complaint and as described in Oracle's responses to Defendants' Fifth Set ofInterrogatories. These include gains and/or profits SAP and TN made from those unjust, unfair, illegal, and deceptive activities, including some or all o f the approximately $40 million TN reported as profits, and a portion o f the approximately $500 million in license revenue associated with S A P ' s leverage o f TN in the sale o f license applications, reputational harm, and the amount that Defendants saved in taking from Oracle the above-described material rather than legitimately creating it (which will also be the subject o f expert analysis and relied upon by Oracle's damages experts), and attorneys' fees as provided by statute or law. While no formal computation has been completed, it is being finalized. Evidence relevant to Defendants' unjust enrichment and the ill-gotten gains received through their unfair business practices is primarily contained in Defendants' internal analyses and presentations on Safe Passage and SAP TN and the customer contracts and related files and N7318721 1.1 55 Case No. 07-CV-1658 (pJH) EDL PLAINTIFFS' THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED INITIAL DISCLOSURES Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document641-11 1 2 Filed03/03/10 Page10 of 10 sequentially b y its respective attachment o r attachments a n d the a t t a c h m e n t ' s metadata. For all electronic documents, including e m a i l a n d e m a i l attachments, Oracle will provide black/white group IV single p a g e TIFF images w i t h a standard Summation DII delimited load file. For any c o l o r d o c u m e n t s , O r a c l e w i l l i n i t i a l l y p r o d u c e d o c u m e n t s i n b l a c k / w h i t e format, b u t w i l l at D e f e n d a n t s ' r e q u e s t p r o v i d e c o l o r J P E G i m a g e s w h e n t h e c o l o r is n e c e s s a r y t o d e c i p h e r t h e d o c u m e n t . O r a c l e w i l l p r o v i d e M i c r o s o f t E x c e l a n d s i m i l a r f i l e s ( o n e s t h a t are o n l y r e a s o n a b l y u s a b l e i n t h e i r n a t i v e format) i n n a t i v e format w i t h the o r i g i n a l u n - m o d i f i e d metadata. Oracle will n o t provide corresponding TIFF images for files p r o d u c e d i n native format, such as M i c r o s o f t E x c e l files. A p l a c e h o l d e r i m a g e w i l l b e i n s e r t e d i n t h e e l e c t r o n i c p r o d u c t i o n for a n y native f o r m a t documents. VI. CERTIFICATION 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 P u r s u a n t to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g)(1), counsel for Oracle certifies t h a t t o the best o f its k n o w l e d g e , i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d b e l i e f , f o r m e d a f t e r a n i n q u i r y t h a t i s r e a s o n a b l e u n d e r t h e circumstances, these supplemental a n d amended Initial Disclosures are complete and correct as o f t h e t i m e O r a c l e m a k e s them. 13 14 15 16 DATED: N o v e m b e r 2 , 2 0 0 9 17 B i n g h a m M c C u t c h e n LLP 18 19 By: 20 21 22 23 BreMann ---A t t o r n e y s for P l a i n t i f f s O r a c l e U S A , Inc., O r a c l e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o r p o r a t i o n , Oracle E M E A Limited, and Siebel Systems, Inc. ~~ MUA JJ 24 25 26 27 28 A/73187211.1 57 Case No. 07-CV-1658 (PJH) EDL P L A I N T I F F S ' T H I R D SUPPLEMENTAL A N D A M E N D E D INITIAL DISCLOSURES

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?