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)
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