Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 660

Letter Brief re 648 Letter Brief, WITHDRAWAL of Defendants Objections Under the Stipulated Protected Order to Plaintiffs Disclosure of Highly Confidential and Confidential Information to Plaintiffs Proposed Experts Christian Hicks and Elysium Digital, LLC filed bySAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. (Related document(s) 648 ) (Cowan, Scott) (Filed on 3/4/2010)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 660

Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document660

Filed03/04/10 Page1 of 2

JONES DAY
717 TEXAS · SUITE 3300 · HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-2712 TELEPHONE: [phone] · FACSIMILE: [phone]

Direct Number: [phone] [e-mail]

March 4, 2010 The Honorable Elizabeth D. Laporte United States Magistrate Judge United States District Court Northern District of California 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Re: Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. SAG AG, et al.; No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL) WITHDRAWAL of Defendants' Objections Under the Stipulated Protected Order to Plaintiffs' Disclosure of Highly Confidential and Confidential Information to Plaintiffs' Proposed Experts Christian Hicks and Elysium Digital, LLC

Dear Judge Laporte: This joint letter confirms Defendants' WITHDRAWAL of their objection under Paragraph 12 of the Stipulated Protective Order (Doc. # 32) ("SPO") to Plaintiffs' disclosure of any materials designated Highly Confidential and Confidential Information by Defendants in this case to Christian B. Hicks ("Hicks"), President of Elysium Digital, LLC ("Elysium"), and Elysium that is contained in Defendants' March 3, 2010 letter brief (Doc. # 648). After further meet and confer, the Parties have agreed that Hicks and Elysium are the only ones who are fully knowledgeable regarding the details of both SAP's engagement of Elysium and Plaintiffs' proposed engagement of Elysium. Plaintiffs and SAP have both received assurances from Hicks and Elysium that their engagement by Plaintiffs will not involve a breach of any duties that Hicks, Elysium or Elysium's agents or representatives may owe SAP. Thus, although the Parties are reserving all of their respective rights, they have determined that Hicks and Elysium are responsible for proceeding in a manner that is proper and avoids any conflict of interest. And, it is on that basis that Defendants withdraw their objection. Plaintiffs have taken exception to the statement in Defendants' March 3, 2010 letter brief that "Plaintiffs equivocated on their earlier assurances" during the Parties prior meet and confer. After further meet and confer, the Parties have concluded that the inability to resolve this issue within the narrow two-day window required by the SPO was simply the result of mutual misunderstandings of the Parties' positions, not a change in position by either party during the meet and confer process.

AT L A N T A I RVI NE ·

·

BEIJING LONDON ·

· ·

BRUSSELS ·

·

CHICAGO · ·

·

CLEVELAND · SHANGHAI ·

·

COLUMBUS · MI L A N

· · ·

DALLAS MO S C O W

·

DUBAI · ·

·

FRANKFURT · · TA I P E I

· ·

HO N G KO N G TO K Y O ·

·

HOUSTON · PA R I S

LOS ANGELES

MA D R I D

ME X I C O CI T Y

MUNICH SYDNEY

NEW DELHI

· N E W YO R K

PITTSBURGH

SAN DIEGO

SAN FRANCISCO

S I L I C O N VA L L E Y

SINGAPORE

WASHINGTON

Dockets.Justia.com

Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document660

Filed03/04/10 Page2 of 2

JONES DAY

The Honorable Elizabeth D. Laporte March 4, 2010 Page 2 Respectfully, JONES DAY By: /s/ Scott W. Cowan Scott W. Cowan Attorneys for Defendants SAP AG, SAP America, Inc., and TomorrowNow, Inc.

In accordance with General Order No. 45, Rule X, the above signatory attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatory below. BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP By: /s/ Geoffrey M. Howard Geoffrey M. Howard Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle International Corporation, Oracle EMEA, Ltd., and Siebel Systems, Inc.