Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 830

Declaration of Tharan Gregory Lanier in Support of 829 Memorandum in Opposition, 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, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Exhibit 25, # 26 Exhibit 26)(Related document(s) 829 ) (Froyd, Jane) (Filed on 9/9/2010)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 830 Att. 5

EXHIBIT 5

Dockets.Justia.com

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION --O0o-ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation; ORACLE, USA, INC., a Colorado Corporation, and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a California Corporation, Plaintiffs, Vs. No. 07-CV-01658-PJH (EDL)

SAP AG, a German Corporation, SAP AMERICA, INC., a Delaware CORPORATION, TOMORROWNOW, INC., a Texas Corporation, and DOES 1-50, Inclusive, Defendants. _____________________________/

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF PAUL PINTO ___________________________ Wednesday, May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Reported By: Job 427372 WENDY E. ARLEN, CSR #4355, CRR, RMR

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 42
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

09:51

5 6 7 8 9

Q.

Did they provide the sorted and stratified

code to you in some form? A. They did not provide the code to me. I

provided the ISO files to them which contained the code. Q. Right. And, I'm sorry, then you said they

09:51

10 11 12 13 14

stratified -- they sorted and stratified, et cetera. A. Q. Correct. They actually extracted, say, COBOL code and

put that in one file, I assume, and they extracted maybe, I don't know -A. Q. A. Q. C. C code? Correct. Did they then provide that COBOL and that C

09:51

15 16 17 18 19

09:52

20 21 22 23 24

to you in some form? A. names. Q. A. Q. Listing of the file names? Yes. Did they provide the files to you? They provided me a listing of those file

09:52

25

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 43
1 2 3 4 09:52 5

A. Q. A.

No. And did you ask them to? No, and again this was voluminous. So these

came to me from Bingham on hundred meg external drives.

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 69

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

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

Q.

Understood.

Have you reviewed

Mr. Neuendorf's function point count? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. Do you believe it to be accurate? I believe it to be his function point count. Right. Do you believe it to be an accurate

function point count? A. I believe it to be accurate from his

perspective. Q. You have no independent view on whether it's

accurate or not? A. I -- I do not have an independent view on

whether it's accurate or not and that wasn't the point of me having him do the analysis.
TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 103

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

6 7 8 9 11:15 10 11 12 13 14 11:15 15 16 17 18 19 11:15 20 21

Q. is? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.

MR. BUTLER:

Okay.

Do you know what IFPUG

The International Function Point User Group. Are you a member? I am a member. When did you become a member? Recently. April 22nd? That sounds correct. You were not a member at the time you wrote

your report. A. Q. A. Correct. Okay. Why did you join recently? One, in exercising

In -- well, two reasons.

an abundance of caution, I joined IFPUG, but more so so I could research some of the claims by Mr. Garmus.

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 119

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

8 9 11:34 10 11 12 13 14 11:34 15 16 17 18 19 11:34 20 21 22 23 24

Q.

Your assessment here is what it would have

cost SAP and TomorrowNow to develop the four suites of products. Did you consider whether they would

develop -- and it's a hypothetical, right? A. Q. Yes. Okay. And in that hypothetical, the suites

of products that would be produced after this effort would be identical, in your view, the code would? Not identical to the suites of products that you've recited. A. not. Q. Do you believe, in your experience, that it I can't answer if it would be identical or

would be possible to undertake a development effort of this magnitude and end up with code that's identical to the four suites of products? A. No, I don't believe that would be the case.
EXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

T

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 212

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

12 13 14 14:22 15 16 17

Q.

Are you aware of any certified function point

specialists who backfire source lines of code to function point? A. So in response to the first part, I know of

no certified function point hand-counters who perform backfiring.

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 221

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

17 18 19 14:33 20 21 22 23 24 14:33 25

Q.

Do you know one way or another whether IFPUG

approves of backfiring? MS. HOUSE: THE WITNESS: Objection, vague as to approve. It's my understanding as

reported that IFPUG does not sanction backfiring, which is entirely understandable given that IFPUG is focused on servicing the hand-counting community. Q. MR. BUTLER: Okay. Do you know -- so your

testimony is that you believe that IFPUG does not

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85

PAUL PINTO May 19, 2010 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 222
1 2

sanction backfiring, right? A. That is my belief.

TEXT REMOVED - NOT RELEVANT TO MOTION

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

63fbeb92-7127-4813-80a2-8e390ce17b85