Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 782

Declaration of Scott W. Cowan in Support of 780 MOTION Defendants' Notice of Motion and Motion to Partially Exclude Testimony of Kevin Mandia and Daniel Levy filed bySAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L)(Related document(s) 780 ) (Froyd, Jane) (Filed on 8/19/2010)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 782 Att. 5

EXHIBIT E

Dockets.Justia.com

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL

A p r i l 3 0 , 2010 ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 1

UNITED STATES D I S T R I C T COURT NORTHERN D I S T R I C T OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO D I V I S I O N ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, ORACLE USA, I N C . , a Colorado corporation, and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a C a l i f o r n i a corporation, Plaintiffs, vs. SAP AG, a G e r m a n c o r p o r a t i o n , SAP AMERICA, INC., a Delaware c o r p o r a t i o n , TOMORROWNOW, INC., a Texas corporation, a n d DOES 1 - 5 0 , i n c l u s i v e , Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

) No. 07-CV-1658 (PJH)
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

----------------)

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DANIEL LEVY, P H . D .

FRIDAY, A P R I L 3 0 , 2 0 1 0 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

REPORTED BY:

HOLLY THUMAN, CSR N o . 6 8 3 4 , RMR, CRR (1-427360)

Merrill Legal Solutions (800 ) 869-9132
4a47542f-Off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 24

Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

;

j

09:36:12 09:36:14

24 25

Q. Correct?

And y o u ' r e not a c o p y r i g h t e x p e r t .

Merrill Legal Solutions
[phone]
4a47542f-Off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 25
09:36:15 09:36:18 09:36:18 09:36:21 09:36:21 09:36:23 09:36:25 09:36:26 09:36:28 09:36:35 09:36:39 09:36:42 09:36:45 09:36:46 09:36:48 09:36:49 09:36:53
1

A. anyway. Q. either. A. Q. Right? A.

That's not the expertise I'm using here,

2
3

And y o u ' r e not a l i c e n s i n g expert here Right? No, I'm not. And y o u ' r e not a software e x p e r t .

4

5
6

Okay.

7

8

I do a l o t of work in software, but I'm

9

not using that expertise in that regard here. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A.
Q.

10
11

Have you ever written any PeopleSoft code? No, I h a v e n ' t w r i t t e n PeopleSoft code. A n y JD E d w a r d s c o d e ?
I

12
13

don't think so.

14 15 16
17

Any Siebel code? Any what? Siebel? No.

A.

Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]
4a47542f-Off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 47
Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

10:07:48 10:07:50 10:07:53 10:07:54

4 5
6

Q. that

A n d how d i d y o u m a k e a d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t what you looked a t was a c t u a l l y

contaminated? A. I d i d n ' t do t h a t .

7

Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

Merrill Legal Solutions
[phone]
4a47542f-Off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 48

Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

10:09:43 10:09:44 10:09:46 10:09:50 10:09:51 10:09:54 10:09:54 10:10:06 10:10:11 10:10:14 10:10:19 10:10:20 10:10:20 10:10:24 10:10:27 10:10:33

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

You're not providing any opinions

regarding the ultimate determination of whether or not Defendants infringed any of Plaintiffs' copyrights. Is that correct? Objection. Ambiguous.

MR. P I C K E T T : THE WITNESS:

I'm providing a
I:~

quantification of the number of times that contamination or impermissible cross-use were found in the data t h a t Mr. Mandia looked a t . that, that. MR. WILKES: Q. And you d i d n ' t do Is that correct? And so i n

,

1
! j '!

,I

I'm providing information that's related to

anything to check Mandia's data. A. Q. A.

I d i d n ' t do anything to check his what? Data. Well, I received his data, and the data I

Merrill Legal Solutions
[phone]
4a47542f-otf4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 49 i
10:10:37 10:10:41 10:10:43 10:10:45 10:10:47 10:10:49 10:10:51 10:10:54 10:10:56 10:10:57 10:10:58 10:11:00 10:11:04 10:11:07 10:11:11 10:11:16 10:11:20 10:11:23 10:11:24 10:11:26 10:11:28 10:11:30 10:11:33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13
6

received I looked at.

Q.

Other than receiving i t ,

you d i d n ' t do

anything to independently verify the numbers that he had arrived a t . A. Ah, sorry. Is that correct? I d i d n ' t understand what you

were saying. No. analysis. We d i d n ' t g o a n d r e d o M r . M a n d i a ' s

I
And so i s i t - To check t h a t . Is i t f a i r to say t h a t you were assuming

Q.
A.

Q.

contamination based on your discussion with Mandia? A. is, No. I d o n ' t t h i n k I am. What I'm doing

~ ~
,

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

I'm quantifying what the - - the measures are A n d I am i n s o m e c a s e s

t h a t Mr. Mandia provided.

counting them up in t o t a l , and i n some cases I'm extrapolating to a broader population based on those numbers. I'm not really making an assumption e i t h e r way.
~

~

Q.

And y o u ' r e not making an assumption, then, Same t h i n g ?

e i t h e r way on cross-use, e i t h e r . A.

Similar - - similar answer for cross-use.
Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

Merrill Legal Solutions
[phone]
4a47542f-off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 197

Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

15:38:58 15:39:02 15:39:04 15:39:07 15:39:10 15:39:11 15:39:16 15:39:19 15:40:00 15:40:06 15:40:19 15:40:23

14 15 16
17

Q.

Back on page 8, number 6, i t says:

Specifically, Dr. Levy offered the wrong interpretation of confidence intervals. Do y o u s e e t h a t ? A. Q. A. Yes. Do y o u d i s a g r e e w i t h t h a t s t a t e m e n t ? L e t me s e e p r e c i s e l y w h a t h e i s t r y i n g t o 6 point
I

18 19 20
21

get at there.

22 23 24 25

Well, in that paragraph,

-- he's

--

sorry, on 6.25, h e ' s saying on page 2 - - 24, t h a t the underlying variation in the - - well, no, i t ' s not sampling error.
{
~

~

Merrill Legal Solutions
[phone]
4a47542f-Off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 198
15:40:43 15:40:46 15:40:50 15:40:53 15:41:00 15:41:06 15:41:09 15:41:13 15:41:17 15:41:22 15:41:26 15:41:31 15:41:35 15:41:37 15:41:41 15:41:47 15:41:52 15:41:54 15:41:57 15:42:01 15:42:08 15:42:13 15:42:16 15:42:18 15:42:21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11

Well, the point i s , sort of combined, maybe, there are a couple - - I c a n ' t really t e l l . But t h e r e ' s some discussion here of whether or not t h e - - I c o u l d k n o w t h a t t h e d a t a p r o v i d e d t o me b y Mr. Mandiant i s accurate. I t ' s my u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t t h e d a t a t h a t Mr. Mandiant provided took a l o t of work on h i s p a r t and among his team. I d i d n ' t independently go
ij
~

and redo the t a s k t h a t he did, which took many months, and I believe a large amount of dollars. T h a t w a s n ' t my j o b h e r e . talked about earlier, So I d i d n ' t a s we that he

~

,
j
~

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21

I didn't assume or

was r i g h t or wrong i n t h a t .

I took the numbers,

i!

! i

though, and calculated what they represented. So I used those numbers as the information that I reported. The second thing i s , I think, in t h i s statement here, I believe that the description of

true and population value i s something that I quoted to page numbers out of a book by I think i t ' s - - I think i t ' s Paul Levy and Lemeshow. i t ' s the terminology that they used there. And so i n o r d e r t o - - i n r e f e r e n c i n g what I was doing, I was t r y i n g to use the same language And

22 23 24 25

so t h a t i t was easy to reference in the material

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]
4a4 7542f-Off4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D . April 30, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 199
15:42:25 15:42:27 15:42:29 15:42:37 15:42:41 15:42:49 15:42:52 15:42:57 15:43:01 15:43:03 15:43:08 15:43:11 15:43:17
1

t h a t I was c i t i n g . S o I t h i n k t h e s t a t e m e n t t h a t my confidence i n t e r v a l s a r e wrong because t h e r e may be some issue about the q u a l i t y of data t h a t Mr. Mandiant used i s a very confusing statement a t least, and one that, i f there's any issue about the quality of the data in the case, i t ' s beyond the tasks I was hired to address. address them in the case. I f there were changes, those changes could certainly be put through the process that I c o n s t r u c t e d , a n d n e w c a l c u l a t i o n s i n my r e p o r t would occur. Someone e l s e would

2
3

4

5
6
7

8
9

10 11 12
13

Text Removed - Not Relevant to Motion

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]
4a47542f-Qff4-4ad4-a96e-8a9124f3b059

DANIEL LEVY, P H . D .
HIGHLY

Aptil 30, 2010

CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' E Y E S ONLY

17:03:08 17:03:12 17:03:14 17:03:15 17: 03: 17

1
2

r e c a l l t h a t t h e r e was an e r r o r in i t . that there isn't. MR. W I L K E S :

I can't say

3
4

T h a t ' s a l l t h e q u e s t i o n s we

have for new.
MR. PICKI:TT: Okay. Thank you. Going off the record,

5
6 7

17:03:19

THE VIDEO OPERATOR:
t h e time now i s 5 03. of Tape 4. (Time noted,

17;03:20
17:03:24 17:03:26

This also is the conclusion

8

9

5:03 p.m.)
--000--

17:03:32
17:03:32 17:03:32 17:03:32
17:03::32

10
11

I

decla:~e

under p e n a l t y of p e r j u.ry t h a t

12
13

the foregoing i s true and correct.

Subscribed at

14
15
16

2010.

17:03:32
17:03:32

17: 03: 32

17
18 1:>
20

E:- (~ 'h,

~ (<( I<-..d

J"~ tOJ ;;..o/()

~bs

DANIEL LEVY, PH.D.

21
22

23
24 2S

Merrill Legal Solutions (BOO) 8 6 9 - 9 1 3 2

1

C E R T I F I C A T E OF REPORTER
I , HOLLY THUMAN, a C e r t i f i e d S h o r t h a n d

2 3 4

Reporter, hereby certify that the witness in the f o r e g o i n g d e p o s i t i o n w a s b y me d u l y s w o r n t o t e l l the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in the within-entitled cause; That s a i d d e p o s i t i o n was taken down i n shorthand by me, a d i s i n t e r e s t e d person, a t t h e time and place therein state, and that the testimony of s a i d witness was t h e r e a f t e r reduced t o typewriting, b y c o m p u t e r , u n d e r my d i r e c t i o n a n d s u p e r v i s i o n ; That before completion of the deposition review of the transcript

5

6
7
8

9
10
11

12

13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

OK]

was

[ ] was not requested. (and

If

requested, any changes made by the deponent

provided to the reporter) during the period allowed are appended hereto. I f u r t h e r c e r t i f y t h a t I am n o t o f c o u n s e l o r attorney for either or any of the parties to the s a i d d e p o s i t i o n , nor in any way i n t e r e s t e d i n the e v e n t o f t h i s c a u s e , a n d t h a t I am n o t r e l a t e d t o any of the parties thereto.

\ 25

HOLLY THUMAN, CSR