Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 1148

REDACTION to #1122 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, #1046 Declaration in Support, EXHIBITS TO CORRECTED DEARBORN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF ORACLES MOTION TO EXCLUDE PORTIONS OF KEARL REPORT [REDACTED] by Oracle America, Inc.. (Holtzman, Steven) (Filed on 5/14/2012)

EXHIBIT A
FILED UNDER SEAL
PURSUANT TO THE
PROTECTIVE ORDER

EXHIBIT B

Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
-------------------------ORACLE AMERICA, INC., )
Plaintiff, )
vs.
) No. CV 10-03561
GOOGLE, INC.,
)
Defendant. )
-------------------------HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Videotaped Deposition of Andrew Rubin, taken at
633 Battery Street, San Francisco, California,
commencing at 9:39 a m., Friday, April 27, 2012,
before Ashley Soevyn, CSR 12019.

Reported by:
Ashley Soevyn, CSR. 12019
Job No. 143660
PAGES 1 - 80

Page 3
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

Friday, April 27, 2012; San Francisco, California
---O0O--THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. We are on
the record. The time is 9:39 a m. on April 27th, 09:39:28
2012. This is the video-recorded deposition of
Andrew Rubin. My name is Aaron Watley here with our
court reporter Ashley Soevyn. We are here from
Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
at the request of counsel for plaintiff.
This deposition is being held at 710
Sansome Street, San Francisco, California. Caption
of this case is Oracle America, Inc., versus Google, 09:39:57
Inc.
Please note that audio and video recording
will be taking place unless all parties have agreed
to go off the record. Microphones are sensitive and
may pick up whispers, private conversations, and
cellular interference. At this time, will counsel
and all present please identify themselves for the
record.
MS. RUTHERFORD: Alanna Rutherford, Boies,
Schiller & Flexner for Oracle America.
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Scott Weingaertner of
King & Spalding for Google.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you. The witness

Page 2
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

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
FOR THE PLAINTIFF ORACLE AMERICA, INC.:
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
BY: ALANNA C. RUTHERFORD, ESQ.
575 Lexington Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, New York 10022
[phone]
[e-mail]
FOR THE DEFENDANT GOOGLE, INC.:
KING & SPALDING
BY: SCOTT T. WEINGAERTNER, ESQ.
1185 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-4003
[phone]
[e-mail]
ALSO PRESENT:
AARON WATLEY, Videographer
SUSAN KIM, Google Litigation Department
RACHEL CALFLIN, Legal Assistant King & Spalding

Page 4
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

can be sworn in and we can proceed.
ANDREW RUBIN,
the witness, having been duly sworn, testified as
follows:
EXAMINATION
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. Good morning, Mr. Rubin.
A. Good morning.
Q. Could you just state your name and title
again for the record?
A. Sure. Andrew Rubin. I am SVP of mobile
for Google.
Q. Thank you. When were you contacted by
Dr. Cox to assist him in his report
reinvestigations?
A. Allan Cox and I had a brief conversation on 09:40:57
the phone probably about four, five days ago.
Q. How long was that brief conversation?
A. Probably less than 30 minutes.
Q. Who else was on the line?
A. There were other people, but I didn't -- I
didn't catch their names.
Q. Do you know why you were contacted by
Dr. Cox?

1 (Pages 1 to 4)

Page 5
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

A. I was there to, you know, answer his
09:41:30
questions and make sure that he was well-informed
about how we manage our costs on Android.
Q. Did you do anything to prepare for that
phone call?
A. Nothing other than refer to a spreadsheet,
Excel, on the exhibit.
Q. You are pointing to the document in front
of you?
A. Yeah, I haven't reviewed this document, but
I have a P&L that we shared with him. And we both 09:41:58
had that on each side of the phone call.
Q. Was there any follow up after that phone
call?
A. No.
Q. So you were not contacted again in any
way?
A. No.
Q. Did you have any discussions with anybody
prior to your conversation with Dr. Cox to prepare
for that conversation?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Going to object and
instruct the witness not to answer questions
regarding communications with counsel.
09:42:29
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:

Page 7
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

Q. What accounting system is used to keep
track of Android expenses?
A. I don't know.
Q. Do you use SAP, for example?
A. I don't know.
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection to form.
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. Who are the members of Android's accounting
team?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: I'm going to refer
counsel to the order that the Court issued, which
basically imposed an instruction that the deposition 09:43:57
is going to be limited to the subject of the
interviews and information provided to the expert
and its accuracy.
MS. RUTHERFORD: My understanding is
Mr. Rubin's just testified that he relied on the
spreadsheet. Let me ask it this way.
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. Who prepared the spreadsheet that you used
to -- that you -- strike that.
Who prepared the spreadsheets that you
discussed with Mr. Cox?
A. I don't know.
Q. You don't know? You just received them?

Page 6
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

Q. Did you have any conversations with anybody
aside from counsel -A. No -Q. -- in preparation for that call?
A. -- I didn't.
Q. Have you reviewed Dr. Cox's report?
A. I have not.
Q. Were you told why you were meeting with
Dr. Cox, aside from any conversations you had with
counsel?
A. Yes, to, you know, to document the cost
associated with developing Android.
Q. Do you know Android senior financial Aditya 09:42:59
Agarwal?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Do you work with him on a regular basis?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you believe that you're more fully able
to respond to the questions about Android's expenses
than Mr. Agarwal?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection, form.
THE WITNESS: In certain areas. My -- my
expertise is in the cost to develop Android, his
expertise is in finance and accounting.
09:43:25
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:

Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

A. That's right.
Q. Who did you receive the spreadsheets
from?
A. My attorneys.

09:44:29

2 (Pages 5 to 8)

Page 9

3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Q. You keep pointing to that exhibit, so let's
just introduce it.
(Exhibit TX1079 marked for identification.)
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. All right. You have before you Exhibit 09:45:29
1079. Would you just verify that that's the
spreadsheet that you've been discussing that you
reviewed with Dr. Cox?
A. This is -- well, let's see. There is many
pages here and I think there's actually different
spreadsheets here. So let's review it for a second.
Q. Okay.
09:45:59
A. It's an "I" chart. This is -- I mean, it
seems to be kind of some of the same data, but it's
not in the exact form, probably just because of the
way it was printed. For example, my spreadsheet had
the names of tabs for one of these reports, and this 09:46:27
doesn't have it.
Q. You were looking at that spreadsheet on a
computer; is that correct?

Page 11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Page 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection to form.
THE WITNESS: I looked at a version of this
spreadsheet that was projected on the screen from a
computer because the numbers are really small. And,
um, I'm trying to figure out if this is just one 09:46:50
spreadsheet or more than one spreadsheet. I
don't -- I don't know if this is the identical
document that I reviewed. I guess that's my
conclusion.
MS. RUTHERFORD: Okay. Counsel, if it's
not the identical document, we ask that you produce
that.
MR. WEINGAERTNER: We believe it's the
identical document.
THE REPORTER: I'm sorry, I kind of
couldn't hear you.
MR. WEINGAERTNER: We believe it's the
identical document.
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:

Page 12

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

Q. Could you explain what the accounting
system is?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection, form.
THE WITNESS: I don't have -- I'm not an
accountant, so I don't have the depth of detail on
what the accounting system is. We discussed
09:49:58
earlier, I don't know the name of the accounting
system or software they use.
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. Do you know the methodology?
A. I -- as I understand it, it's standard
accounting procedures.
Q. Google doesn't have its own procedures for
how it divides, for example, overhead?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection, form.
THE WITNESS: I don't know.

3 (Pages 9 to 12)

Page 13
1
2

Page 15

BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. You don't know.

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

Page 14

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. Okay. You mentioned in your trial
09:53:57
testimony that Android purchased a small company
called Visual Design. Would you amortize the cost
of that acquisition?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: I'm going to object to
the extent that that exceeds the Judge's order,
which limits the questioning to the intervenors, the
information provided to the expert, its accuracy.
To the extent the question goes beyond that, I
instruct you not to answer.
THE WITNESS: I'm not familiar with that
company.
Page 16

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

MS. RUTHERFORD: I thought you mentioned it
in your trial testimony, Visual Design, no?
09:54:28
A. I know they bought a company called Visual
Design.
Q. Okay. Well, we heard during trial that you
hired Noser to work on behalf of Android?
A. Yes.

4 (Pages 13 to 16)

Page 21

1

Page 23

project and was free for use.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

1

25

Q. And because you made a distinction, Android
Page 22

1
2
3
4
5
6

generates revenue through advertising business,
correct?
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection to form.
THE WITNESS: Android contributes to
10:00:59
advertising revenue.
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:

11
12
13
14
15
16

MR. WEINGAERTNER: Objection to the form of
the question and to the extent it calls for
testimony outside of the discussion with Dr. Cox or
the accuracy of the numbers in the exhibit.

18
19
20
21
22
23

Page 24

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

MR. WEINGAERTNER: Well, let's not be
argumentative. I'm just -10:01:30
MS. RUTHERFORD: All right.
MR. WEINGAERTNER: -- making an objection
for the record, Counsel.
MS. RUTHERFORD: Okay. Thank you.

6 (Pages 21 to 24)

Page 29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

correctly, so I'll move on to a new one and I'll
come back to that one. If you can turn to the last
page of Exhibit 1079.
A. Okay.
10:10:25

Page 31

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Page 30

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Page 32

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

8 (Pages 29 to 32)

Page 49

Page 51

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Page 50

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Page 52

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

13 (Pages 49 to 52)

Page 53

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Page 55

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Page 54

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Page 56

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

14 (Pages 53 to 56)

Page 61

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

MS. RUTHERFORD: You can take your break.
MR. WEINGAERTNER: Thank you.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:46 a.m.
We are off the record.
10:46:36
(Recess taken.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:05 a.m.
We are back on the record.
BY MS. RUTHERFORD:

Page 63

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Page 62

Page 64

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

BY MS. RUTHERFORD:
Q. Okay. Turning to -- again, to the second
page, which is ending in Bates number 804 in Exhibit
1079.
A. Yes.
11:09:28
Q. Could you explain to me what this page
is?
A. I'm sorry, Exhibit 8 -- exhibit ending in
804?

16 (Pages 61 to 64)

Page 73

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Page 75

1

t

Page 74

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Page 76

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

MS. RUTHERFORD: Okay. Thank you.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This concludes today's
deposition and tape one of the deposition of Andrew
Rubin. We are off the record at 11:24 a.m.

19 (Pages 73 to 76)