Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 988

UPDATED OBJECTIONS AND DEFENDANTS RESPONSES RE CUSTOMER TESTIMONY AND RELATED EXHIBITS re 943 Objections by Oracle International Corporation, Oracle USA Inc., Siebel Systems, 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)(Howard, Geoffrey) (Filed on 11/15/2010) Modified on 11/16/2010 (kc, COURT STAFF).

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 988 Att. 4

EXHIBIT D
Dockets.Justia.com

JEFFREY O'DONNELL September 15, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL) ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, ORACLE USA, INC., a Colorado corporation, and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, PLAINTIFFS VS. SAP AG, a German corporation, SAP AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation, TOMORROWNOW, INC., a Texas corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, DEFENDANTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DEPOSITION TAKEN ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS

BY:

NOTICE

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY WITNESS: JEFFREY O'DONNELL

********* The deposition of JEFFREY O'DONNELL was taken before Robyn Barrett, CSR, Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Kentucky at Large, and by videotape recording, at the offices of Stoll, Keenon & Ogden, located at 250 West Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky, on Tuesday, September 15, 2009, commencing at the approximate hour of 9:00 a.m. Said

examination was taken pursuant to notice for any and all purposes consistent with the Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure.

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

JEFFREY O'DONNELL September 15, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Page 27

10:45:00 10:45:04 10:45:08 10:45:10 10:45:16 10:45:25

4 5 6 7 8 9

Q

Were you involved in negotiating the terms of Exhibit 646, the TomorrowNow agreement?

A Q

Support services agreement, yes. And without getting into the substance, did you have assistance of counsel in negotiating that agreement?

10:45:26 10 10:45:26 11 10:45:28 12 10:45:31 13 10:45:36 14 10:45:37 15

A Q

Yes. And when I say assistance of counsel, that means there was an attorney that Lexmark had either hired or in-house that you could seek help from, correct?

A

Yes.

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

JEFFREY O'DONNELL September 15, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Page 28 10:46:05 10:46:12 10:46:20 10:46:20 10:46:31 10:46:35 10:46:38 10:46:39 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A A Q Q Did you provide TomorrowNow with a copy of your contract with Oracle for JDE OneWorld? No. You satisfied yourself that what TomorrowNow was going to do under this contract was acceptable under your JDE OneWorld contract? MS. MACDONALD: Objection, vague and

ambiguous and leading. Clarification on the question. Are you --

10:46:41 10 10:46:45 11 10:46:49 12 10:46:52 13 10:46:54 14 10:46:56 15 10:47:00 16 10:47:00 17 10:47:03 18 10:47:05 19 10:47:07 20 10:47:12 21 10:47:14 22 10:47:16 23 10:47:17 24

you're asking myself if I felt that the services to be provided under TomorrowNow were sufficient or equal to the services provided by Oracle? Q Well, let's start with that. yourself to that? A Q Yes. Okay. Did anyone raise a concern about Did you satisfy

whether what TomorrowNow was going to do under this contract was okay under the terms of your JDE OneWorld license? MS. MACDONALD: Objection, vague and

ambiguous and leading. A No.

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]