Interserve, Inc. et al v. Fusion Garage PTE. LTD

Filing 179

Memorandum in Opposition re 164 MOTION to Compel Withheld Information and Documents filed byFusion Garage PTE. LTD. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Joshua L. Sohn, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F)(Pennypacker, Evette) (Filed on 9/23/2010)

Interserve, Inc. et al v. Fusion Garage PTE. LTD

Doc. 179 Att. 4

EXHIBIT C

Dockets.Justia.com

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

1 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

4 5

INTERSERVE, INC., dba TECHCRUNCH, a Delaware corporation, and CRUNCHPAD, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiffs, 7 vs. 8 9 10
11 FUSION GARAGE PTE, LTD., a Singapore company,

No. CV-09-5812 RS (PVT)

Defendant.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 Confidential videotaped deposition of Brian Kindle,.taken on behalf of Defendant Fusion Garage PTE, LTD, at 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor, Redwood Shores, California, beginning at 9:12 a.m. and ending at 5:55 p.m., on Thursday, August 19, 2010, before SUZANNE F. BOSCHETTI, Certified Shorthand Reporter No. 5111.

25

2
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

10:29:38

1

interviewed to come in and run, be the head of -- act as the head of the department for hardware engineering and manufacturing operations for CrunchPad BY MR. STERN:

10:29:44 2 10:29:46 3 10:2948 4 10:2949 5 10:29:49 6 10:29:50 7 10:29:52 8 1029:55 9 103000 10 103004 11 103006 12 10:3006 13 10:3008 14 10:30:11 15 10:30:14 16 10:30:17 17 10:30:20 18 10:30:20 19 10:30:23 20 10:3031 21 10:3033 22 103035 23 103035 24 10:3042 25

Q. A. Q.

Did -- the CrunchPad tablet specifically. And let me be actually clear. Prior to July

8th, 2009, did you contribute any ideas of any kind toward the CrunchPad device?
MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. I want to be absolutely certain about this. Objection. Vague.

No, I don't believe so.

Prior to July 8th, 2009, did you participate in the development of CrunchPad in any way, shape or form? MR. BRIDGES: ambiguous. THE WITNESS: In the interview there were Objection. Vague and

some questions asked about the CrunchPad, but I don't believe there were any development type questions that were asked. BY MR. STERN: Q. Okay. And do you understand that Mr.

Rathakrishnan was the head of Fusion Garage?

74
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

11:35:05

1

total number. BY MR. STERN: Q. Can you tell me that the total number of

11:35:05 2 113506 3 113508 4 113510 5 113516 6 1135:17 7 1135:19 8 11:35:20 9 11:35:20 10 11:35:22 11 11:35:26 12 1135:30 13 113533 14 113535 15 113537 16 113544 17 113547 18 113549 19 113549 20 113551 21 113553 22 11:3557 23 113601 24 1136:06 25

prototypes between the orange prototype and the time that you left was closer to three prototypes than 15 prototypes? MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. Well, since you can't remember the number of Same objection. I'm -- I'm not sure.

prototypes, I take it you are incapable of -- well, let me ask you, can you in your own mind identify the differences between any of the prototypes that existed after the orange prototype and the time that you left? MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: Same objection. If I'm -- I'm truly not under-

-- I -- I don't understand the question. BY MR. STERN: Q. The question is: Can you tell me the

differences between the various prototypes that you saw at CrunchPad between July 2009 and the time you left in December 2009?
MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: Same objection. No.

118 SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

1146:03 1 1146:05 2 1146:07 3 1146:08 4 1146:09 5 11:46:13 6

prototype, is it plastic?
MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. A. plastic. Q. Were any of the cases of any of the Any of them. Yes, I believe the orange case was -- was Same objection. Which prototype?

11:46:16 7 11:4617 8 11:4619 9 114623 10 114633 11 114633 12 114634 13 11:46:34 14 1146:37 15 1146:46 16 1146:51 17 1146:52 18 1146:53 19 1146:55 20 11:47:00 21 11:47:03 22 11:47:03 23 11: 4 7: 04 24 11:47:10 25

prototypes a substance other than plastic? MR. BRIDGES: ambiguous. THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. Well, was the prototype that was to reflect I -- I don't recall. Objection. Vague and

the final form factor, was that plastic or metal? A. I believe there were versions of each.

Q. A. Q.

So just that I think -- we're clear, the prototype that was to

reflect the final form factor had two versions, one that was plastic and one that was metal; is that your testimony? MR. BRIDGES: testimony. Objection. Misstates Lacks foundation.

Vague and ambiguous.

THE WITNESS:

There were different cases.

128 SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

11:47:13

1

There were some quick turn cases that were routed, and then I believe the final form factor was to be tooled , hard tooled.

11:47:18 2 11:47:21 3 11:4724 4 11:4724 5 1147:26 6 1147:28 7 1147:33 8 1147:37 9 1147:42 10 11:47:46 11 1147:46 12 1147:54 13 11:47:54 14 1147:56 15 1147:58 16 1147:58 17 114800 18 114803 19 114803 20 114805 21 114807 22 114809 23 11:4810 24 11:4811 25

BY MR. STERN: Q. What ' s the difference between routed and

hard tooled? A. So in the case of a routed case, they would

load the design into a router device that would use different bits and a CAM program to physically route out the final form factor out of a solid piece of material. Q. Was the material metal or plastic? MR. BRIDGES : THE WITNESS : MR. BRIDGES: ambiguous. THE WITNESS: I can't remember if the routed one was plastic or -- or metal. I think it was metal , BY MR . Q. but I -- I -- I really don't recall. STERN: What about the hand tooled product , was that Objection. I don ' t know. Lacks foundation. Vague and

plastic or metal? MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS : BY MR. STERN: Same objections. I don ' t recall.

129 SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

11:48:11

1

Q.

So you can't recall whether the final form

114813 2 114817 3 11:4818 4 114822 5 1148:23 6 11:48:23 7

factor was plastic or metal, is that right? MR. BRIDGES: testimony. Objection. Misstates Lacks foundation.

Vague and ambiguous .

THE WITNESS : BY MR. STERN: Q. And did Mr .

I don't recall.

Arrington -- well, let's talk Describe the plastic to me. What

114826 8 114829 9 114834 10 114835 11 114835 12 11:4836 13 11:4837 14 11:4837 15 11:4841 16 11:4841 17 11:4842 18 11:4843 19 11:4844 20 11:4845 21 11:4846 22 11:4849 23 11:4850 24 11:4852 25

about the plastic .

was the description of the plastic that was used? MR. BRIDGES: MR. STERN: BY MR. STERN: Q. plastic? MR. BRIDGES : ambiguous. THE WITNESS : I don't recall the Objection. Vague and Do you have the specifications of the Objection. Withdraw.

specifications of the plastic. BY MR . Q. metal? MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS : Same objection. No, I don't recall the STERN: Do you recall the specifications of the

specifications of the metal. BY MR. STERN:

130
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

11:48:52 11:48:54 11:48:55 11:48:58

1 2 3 4

Q. glass?

Do you recall the specifications of the

MR. BRIDGES:

Same objection.

THE WITNESS : specifications. Q.

No, I don't recall the

11:48:59 5 11:49:00 11:49:03 11:49:06 6 7 8

Just so we're clear, do you recall the

specifications of any of the shell plastic for any of the prototypes that followed the orange prototype? MR. BRIDGES: ambiguous. THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. Do you recall the specifications of any of No. Same objection. Vague and

11:49:09 9 11: 4 9: 11 10 11:49:11 11 11:49:13 12 11:49:13 13 11:49:16 14 11:49:19 15 11:49:21 16 11:49:24 17 11:49:24 18 11:49:24 19 11:49:27 20 11:49:31 21 11:49:35 22 11:49:36 23 11:49:37 24 11:49:37 25

the shells that were metal for any of the prototypes that followed the orange prototype? MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. Do you know who was the person or persons Same objection. No.

who specified what sort of plastic or metal should be used for the shell for any prototype? MR. BRIDGES: THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. Did you? Vague and ambiguous. No.

131
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

1149:40 1 1149:43 2 1149:43 3 11:49:49 4 1149:51 5 1149:54 6 1149:57 7 11:49:58 8 BY MR . Q.

MR. BRIDGES : THE WITNESS: STERN:

Same objection. I don't believe I did, no.

Do you know if anybody at Fusion Garage

specified the type of plastic or metal that would be used for the shell of any of the prototypes? MR. BRIDGES : THE WITNESS: BY MR. STERN: Q. You ' re saying you don't know? MR. BRIDGES : THE WITNESS : Same objection. You asked me if I knew if Same objection. No.

11:50:00 9 11:50:00 10 11:5002 11 11:5005 12 11:5007 13 1150:08 14 1150:08 15 1150:08 16 1150:10 17 1150:14 18 1150:14 19 1150:20 20 11:50:23 21 11:50:25 22 11:50:33 23 11:50:34 24 11:50:42 25

anyone at Fusion Garage -BY MR. STERN: Q. A. Right. -- had speci- -- had specified the materials

for the plastics or the metal. I said no, I didn't know. Q. Okay . Was there somebody that you were

working with at CrunchPad that wasn ' t associated with Fusion Garage that was supposed to be working with you on the hardware design and manufacturing of the CrunchPad? MR. BRIDGES : ambiguous. Objection. Vague and

132 SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

0228:33 1 0228:36 2 0228:39 3 0228:45 4 0228:48 5 0228:50 6 02:28:52 7 02:2855 8 02:2859 9 02:29:01 10 02:29:03 11 02:29:05 12 02:29:09 13 02:29:13 14 02:29:16 15 0229:19 16 0229:25 17 0229:29 18 0229:31 19 02:29:37 20 02:29:37 21 02:29:40 22 02:29:45 23 02:29:48 24 02:29:50 25

Q.

What is your understanding -- withdraw that. What events, if any, prompted your receipt

of this email, if you know? A. I don't know for certain. It may be a

collection of the emails and conversations that happened up to that point, but I'm really not sure. Q. Well, I can put together a story. Let me

ask you the story. Did Mr. Arrington express to you frustration that he thought that Mr. Rathakrishnan was not providing detailed information about the development of the CrunchPad project, and so he wanted you and Mr. Cubrilovic to go to Singapore to see what was going on?

A.

So I seem to recall -- again, I don't recall

the details, but I seem to recall having a conversation with Mr. Arrington to fly over there to get the detailed information so that we could have more meaningful conversations with Best Buy and be able to talk more intelligently about the project, I guess. Q. Just so that we're clear, you and

Mr. Cubrilovic were flying over to Singapore and Taiwan so that you could have more meaningful conversations with Best Buy and to be able to talk more intelligently about the project?

208
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

0229:56 1 0229:59 2 0230:01 3 0230:04 4 0230:07 5 0230:10 6 02:30:12 7 0230:15 8 0230:17 9 0230:20 10 0230:27 11 0230:30 12 -02:30:32 13 02:30:37 14 02:30:39 15 02:30:45 16 02:30:49 17 02:30:55 18 02:30:59 19 02:31:04 20 0231:11 21 0231:15 22 0231:17 23 0231:21 24 0231:25 25

A.

I'm not sure -- I don't recall why
I was under

Mr. Cubrilovic was flying over there .

the impression that I was going over there to understand the details of the hardware development, and I believed he was going over there to understand the details about the software development. Q. What was -- you mentioned Best Buy. What

did Best Buy have to do with this? A. So I believe some of this -- some of it was

related to Best Buy wanting to see a -- a functional -a functional unit and wanting to know

that the product was real based on that prior exhibit that we were talking about. But I can't state that those were the -- the only reasons. Q. Did anybody tell Mr. Rathakrishnan that Best

Buy was willing to do a deal with CrunchPad of some sort , but that it first required that Fusion Garage

show that they had a working prototype? MR. BRIDGES : Objection. Lacks foundation.

I think misstates the document and testimony. Argumentative and vague and ambiguous. THE WITNESS : I'm not certain if -- what if

any communications happened between anyone on the CrunchPad project and -- including Chandra on this topic.

209
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855

BRIAN KINDLE CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

8/19/2010

02:3423 1 02:3427 2 02:3430 3 02:3434 4 02:3434 5 02:3440 6 02:34:41 7 02:34:42 8 02:34:45 9 02:34:49 10 02:34:52 11 02:34:54 12 02:34:57 13 02:35:00 14 02:35:04 15 023505 16 023513 17 023516 18 023520 19 02:35:20 20 02:35:23 21 02:35:25 22 02:35:31 23 02:35:31 24 02:35:32 25

Q. A.
Q. A. Q. Taiwan?

And where was Pegatron located? Pegatron is located in Taiwan.
And did you in fact go to Taiwan? Yes. How long -- how many days were you in

A.
Q.

I believe it was one day.
So is it accurate that your entire trip to

Singapore and Taiwan was for three days, two days in Singapore, one day in Taiwan? A. Yeah, there were some -as I recall, there

were some delays with the travel. The total duration of the trip might have been a bit longer, but the usable time was two days in Singapore and one day in Taiwan. Q. Okay. When were you -- withdraw that.

Do you know when Mr. Cubrilovic stopped working at TechCrunch or CrunchPad? A. Q. No. Do you know if Mr. Cubrilovic contributed to

.the development of CrunchPad? MR. BRIDGES: ambiguous. THE WITNESS: I don't know what his Objection. Vague and

contributions were in detail for the -- for the

213
SARNOFF COURT REPORTERS 877.955.3855