Google, Inc. v. Eolas Technologies Inc. et al

Filing 1

COMPLAINT against Eolas Technologies Incorporated. The Regents of the University of California. Filed byGoogle, Inc.(Filing fee $400.00, receipt number 0971-8262256.). (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, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Civil Cover Sheet)(Mitro, Keith) (Filed on 12/30/2013) Modified on 12/31/2013 (ha, COURT STAFF). Modified on 1/3/2014 (jlmS, COURT STAFF).

Exhibit H

1
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION

2
3

EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

)

4

DOCKET NO. 6:09cv446
-vs-

5
6

ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC.,
ET AL

)

Tyler, Texas
12:42 p.m.
February 8, 2012

7
8
9

TRANSCRIPT OF TRIAL
AFTERNOON SESSION
BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEONARD DAVIS,
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE, AND A JURY

10
11
A P P E A R A N C E S
12
13

FOR THE PLAINTIFFS:

14
15
16
17
18
19

MR. MIKE McKOOL
MR. DOUGLAS CAWLEY
MS. ROSEMARY SNIDER
MR. TOM FASONE
MS. ADA BROWN
MS. HOLLY ENGELMANN
MR. IVAN WANG
McKOOL SMITH
300 Crescent Court, Ste. 1500
Dallas, TX 75201

20
21
COURT REPORTERS:
22

MS. JUDITH WERLINGER
MS. SHEA SLOAN
[e-mail]

23
24
25

Proceedings taken by Machine Stenotype; transcript was
produced by a Computer.

119
1

exploit the patent, especially after we had had very

2

little success in licensing it to others.

3

Q.

4

issued?

5

A.

And that was before the patent had even

Yes.

And that's usually the case.

You know,

6

usually, we try to find a licensee at some point between

7

filing it and issuance of the patent.

8

Q.

Is it common that the university may choose to

9

get its inventions out in the world by entering into an

10

agreement with the inventors to actually form a business

11

around the invention?

12

A.

Yes.

It's quite common that we license to

13

inventor startups.

14

actually, one of the best ways to get early-stage

15

technology out, because the inventors often know the

16

most about the technology and have the best way of --

17

and have the best understanding of how it can be most

18

impactful and used.

19
20

Q.

It's one of the -- one of the --

So what kind of arrangement did the university

enter into with this company, Eolas?

21

A.

22

with Eolas.

23

Q.

What does that mean?

24

A.

We grant the entire right to license the

25

We entered into an exclusive license agreement

technology to Eolas.

So after that point, the

120
1

university does not entertain any other entreaties for

2

licenses from third parties.

3
4
5
6
7
8

Q.

So you won't license it to anybody else,

except Eolas; is that right?
A.

It is licensed exclusively.

We don't deal

with anyone else.
Q.

Okay.

But do you continue -- you, the

University of California, continue to own the patents?

9

A.

We do.

10

Q.

Now, is this kind of arrangement common

11

between the University of California and young

12

companies --

13

A.

This is standard --

14

Q.

-- formed around a patent?

15

A.

Sorry.

16

Q.

And has that original agreement been revised a

17

This is our standard approach.

few times over the years?

18

A.

19

common.

20

Q.

Yes, it has.

Okay.

And that's also been very

Let me show you Plaintiffs' Exhibit 19.

21

Is this a copy of the current license agreement between

22

the University of California and Eolas?

23

A.

Yes, it is.

24

Q.

But even -- even during various revisions to

25

the original agreement, has it always been the case, and

130
1

right?

2

A.

You would get a good education, yes.

3

Q.

Right.

4

And not only that, but you also do

research on this subject matter, right, sir?

5

A.

That is correct.

6

Q.

Okay.

Thank you, sir.

I appreciate you

7

coming here and being the witness for the University of

8

California.

9

time.

Thank you very much.

10

MR. CAWLEY:

11

THE COURT:

12
13
14

Thank you for your

Briefly, Your Honor.
Yes.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. CAWLEY:
Q.

Just a couple of questions, Mr. Tucker.

15

Are you aware that the University of

16

California joined into this lawsuit, which was filed by

17

Eolas, because some of the Defendants complained that it

18

wasn't Eolas that owned the patents?

19

A.

That's right.

20

Q.

And the university agreed to join, because

21

it's the university that owns the patents, correct?

22

A.

That is correct, and we support our licenses.

23

Q.

Okay.

Second thing, of all the many things

24

you were just asked by Google's lawyer that you don't

25

know, you don't know the details of the invention, you

265
1

CERTIFICATION

2
3

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a

4

true and correct transcript from the stenographic notes

5

of the proceedings in the above-entitled matter to the

6

best of our abilities.

7
8
9
10
11

/s/ Shea Sloan
SHEA SLOAN, CSR
Official Court Reporter
State of Texas No.: 3081
Expiration Date: 12/31/12

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

/s/ Judith Werlinger
JUDITH WERLINGER, CSR
Deputy Official Court Reporter
State of Texas No.: 731
Expiration Date 12/31/12