Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 509

DECLARATION of RUCHIKA AGRAWAL in Opposition to 496 MOTION in Limine No. 5, 494 MOTION in Limine No. 3, 492 MOTION in Limine No. 1, 493 MOTION in Limine NO. 2, 495 MOTION in Limine No. 4 filed byGoogle Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-1, # 2 Exhibit 1-2, # 3 Exhibit 1-3, # 4 Exhibit 1-4, # 5 Exhibit 1-5, # 6 Exhibit 1-6, # 7 Exhibit 1-7, # 8 Exhibit 1-8, # 9 Exhibit 1-9, # 10 Exhibit 1-10, # 11 Exhibit 1-11, # 12 Exhibit 1-12, # 13 Exhibit 2-1, # 14 Exhibit 2-2, # 15 Exhibit 2-3, # 16 Exhibit 2-4, # 17 Exhibit 2-5, # 18 Exhibit 2-6, # 19 Exhibit 2-7, # 20 Exhibit 2-8, # 21 Exhibit 2-9, # 22 Exhibit 2-10, # 23 Exhibit 2-11, # 24 Exhibit 2-12, # 25 Exhibit 2-13, # 26 Exhibit 2-14, # 27 Exhibit 2-15, # 28 Exhibit 2-16, # 29 Exhibit 2-17, # 30 Exhibit 3-1, # 31 Exhibit 3-2, # 32 Exhibit 3-3, # 33 Exhibit 3-4, # 34 Exhibit 3-5, # 35 Exhibit 3-6, # 36 Exhibit 3-7, # 37 Exhibit 3-8, # 38 Exhibit 3-9, # 39 Exhibit 3-10, # 40 Exhibit 3-11, # 41 Exhibit 4-1, # 42 Exhibit 4-2, # 43 Exhibit 4-3, # 44 Exhibit 5-1, # 45 Exhibit 5-2, # 46 Exhibit 5-3, # 47 Supplement 5-4)(Related document(s) 496 , 494 , 492 , 493 , 495 ) (Kamber, Matthias) (Filed on 10/7/2011)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT 3-11 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Page 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 4 5 ORACLE AMERICA, INC., 6 Plaintiff, ) ) 7 vs. ) 8 GOOGLE, INC., ) 9 Defendant. 10 No. CV 10-03561 WHA ) ____________________________) 11 12 -- HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL, ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY-- 13 14 Videotaped Personal Capacity deposition of 15 EDWARD SCREVEN, taken at Morrison & Foerster, LLP, 16 755 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, California, 17 commencing at 9:42 a.m., on Friday, July 29, 2011, 18 before Leslie Rockwood, RPR, CSR No. 3462. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PAGES 1 - 119 Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Exhibit 3-11 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Page 70 Page 72 1 general, we are more successful in business than Sun. I 1 Java, right, they -- they've now shipped on millions and 2 mean, Sun built some great technologies, but they weren't 2 millions of handsets; right, and that's going to make it 3 particularly good at bringing them to market and, you 3 difficult for Oracle or anyone else who wants to ship a 4 know, I have every confidence that, you know, Oracle will 4 licensed Java implementation for smartphones to succeed. 5 succeed with Sun's assets in a way that Sun never could 6 simply because we manage them better. 7 8 9 11:32:29 5 Q. Why hadn't Sun already gotten into that 6 7 A. We're very focused on making money, so we're "that market," the smartphone market, given it's success 8 Q. BY MR. WEINGAERTNER: How does Oracle manage better than Sun? in the feature phone market? 9 10 very focused on building technology and then selling it 11 to our customers and supporting it well, right, while 11 12 making sure our costs are not out of control. MR. NORTON: Objection to form. 12 13 11:32:45 Q. Was there a perception that Sun was -- and 11:35:13 market before Google had given that it -- when I say 10 THE WITNESS: You have to ask their prior 11:35:27 management. Q. BY MR. WEINGAERTNER: Well, I guess that will 13 happen later today since you'll be speaking on behalf of 14 I'm going to use your characterization and please correct 14 Oracle America. 15 me if I haven't done it correctly. 15 A. Yes -- 16 11:33:06 Was it your perception that Sun was less 11:35:41 16 MR. NORTON: Objection, that's not correct. 17 focused on making money than Oracle is focused on making 17 Mr. Screven in the 30(b)(6) portion of his deposition 18 money? 18 will be testifying on behalf of Oracle America, but the 19 30(b)(6) notice seeks Oracle's -- we understood and 20 understand this was discussed at Nedim's deposition -- 21 that it's from the perspective of Oracle, it's the 22 acquisition of Sun. 19 20 21 22 MR. NORTON: Objection to the form of the question. 11:33:17 THE WITNESS: Yes. Q. BY MR. WEINGAERTNER: At the time of the 23 acquisition, what was the perception as to -- by Oracle, 23 24 as to what Sun was focused on? 24 25 A. I think Sun had lost their way in terms of 1 strategy. I mean, they -- while certainly they were 11:33:24 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 So the suggestion that Mr. Screven will be testifying as Sun's prior management is not correct. 25 Page 71 1 for-profit company and, you know, sought to sell and 2 sought to profit, I think that they, you know, had no 3 strategy for how it is that they were going to actually 4 add value to their customers beyond, you know, beyond 11:33:44 5 what other folks were doing. 6 Now, they did have a very strong focus on 7 engineering; right, and they created some very good 8 technology assets. But the thing that they didn't really 9 have is a way to tie them together and bring them to 11:34:02 10 market in the way that would be most appealing to their 11 customers. 12 Q. At the time of the acquisition or since then, 13 does Oracle have a specific strategy or ability other 14 than its general business acumen that you referred to, 11:34:22 15 for succeeding in the smartphone market or the mobile 16 platform? 17 A. I think Android has basically foreclosed 18 that. I don't believe that there is a strategy that we 19 could adopt at this point, right, to displace Android 11:34:39 20 given that they've sucked all out of the air out of the 21 room for Java on smartphones. 22 Q. What do you mean by "sucked out all the air 23 out of the room"? 24 A. Well, they are in the market with a clone of 11:34:52 25 11:36:00 MR. WEINGAERTNER: Okay, and noted that we 11:36:11 Page 73 have a difference of view on that and we can take it up off the record. MR. NORTON: But just we can have a difference of view, but we're the ones putting up the witness, and so he will not be testifying as Sun's former 11:36:21 management and the suggestion otherwise is incorrect. MR. WEINGAERTNER: Okay. We disagree. I won't ask any further questions, but my understanding is the witness isn't prepared on those and that's -- I understand why now. 11:36:34 Just to follow up on Mr. Screven's answer, when you refer to prior management, would that be someone like Mr. Schwartz, Mr. Jonathan Schwartz? THE WITNESS: Yes, yes. MR. WEINGAERTNER: I'd like to provide the 11:37:42 witness with a copy of a document which has previously been marked in this case as Exhibit 60, which is a letter to Mr. Schwartz, Jonathan Schwartz, then chief executive officer and president of Sun although the address doesn't indicate that on this document. 11:38:04 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. Q. BY MR. WEINGAERTNER: And I would ask the witness to take a moment to look at the document. A. Yes. Q. Is it a document that you recognize, 11:38:12 19 (Pages 70 to 73) Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services 866 299-5127 Exhibit 3-11

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?