Bedrock Computer Technologies, LLC v. Softlayer Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 634

NOTICE by Bedrock Computer Technologies, LLC re #579 Proposed Pretrial Order, NOTICE OF FILING EXHIBITS TO JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER (Attachments: #1 Exhibit F-2, #2 Exhibit I)(Cawley, Douglas)

Bedrock Computer Technologies, LLC v. Softlayer Technologies, Inc. et al

Doc. 634 Att. 2

Exhibit I

Dockets.Justia.com

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

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Plaintiff, v. SOFTLAYER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., CITIWARE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, LLC, GOOGLE INC., YAHOO! INC., MYSPACE INC., AMAZON.COM INC., PAYPAL INC., MATCH.COM, INC., AOL INC., AND CME GROUP INC., Defendants.

§ § § § § § § § § § § § § § § §

CASE NO. 6:09-cv-269-LED Jury Trial Demanded

PLAINTIFF BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS

Plaintiff Bedrock Computer Technologies LLC ("Bedrock"), pursuant to the Court's Docket Control Order and Orders amending Docket Control Order entered in this case, provides this list of objections to Defendants SoftLayer Technologies, Inc., Yahoo! Inc., MySpace Inc., Amazon.Com Inc., and AOL Inc.'s (collectively "Defendants") rebuttal depositions designations. Bedrock expressly reserves the right to supplement, augment, or otherwise modify the exchanged designations based on circumstances as they may evolve prior to the commencement of trial. Bedrock's objections to Defendants' rebuttal deposition designations are made in reliance on the Defendants' trial witness lists and the labeling of those witnesses as will call. At this time, Bedrock objects to Defendants' rebuttal deposition designations testimony as follows:

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 1
Dallas 320571v1

Yahoo! 30(b)(6) Deposition of Quentin Laurent Barnes January 7, 2011
From (page:line) 13:2 To (page:line) 13:4 Objections 801/802

Deposition of David Barrow - January 6, 2011
From (page:line) 7:11 14:8 15:1 15:24 16:12 16:23 20:17 20:21 24:10 24:21 26:12 26:24 28:4 28:16 29:15 34:25 45:11 47:3 48:17 50:9 52:11 52:18 53:16 66:6 66:10 66:20 86:7 109:2 114:10 122:20 123:21 123:5 130:15 137:12 137:15 To (page:line) 7:14 14:8 15:1 15:24 16:12 16:23 20:17 21:4 24:10 24:24 26:12 25:4 28:4 28:16 29:17 34:25 45:18 47:8 48:22 50:9 52:11 52:18 53:16 66:6 66:16 66:25 86:24 109:14 114:20 122:20 123:21 123:5 130:15 137:13 137:22 Objections

106, IA, INC, IQ

NR; INC

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 2
Dallas 320571v1

Deposition of David Barrow - January 6, 2011
From (page:line) 139:9 139:15 146:18 To (page:line) 139:13 139:22 146:23 Objections

MySpace 30(b)(6) Deposition of Chris Bell ­ January 13, 2011
From (page:line) 20:16 23:13 To (page:line) 21:14 24:1 Objections 801 801, CP (26:5-12)

Yahoo! 30(b)(6) Deposition of Michael Fletcher Christian January 11, 2011
From (page:line) 26:5 38:15 52:4 52:9 55:23 66:2 68:20 89:21 93:7 113:1 To (page:line) 26:11 38:19 52:6 52:11 56:8 66:4 69:2 90:1 93:12 113:12 Objections 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801, CP (12:19) 602, CS, F

Amazon 30(b)(6) Deposition of Matthew T. Corddry January 6, 2011
From (page:line) 20:20 21:14 31:7 77:3 97:22 98:4 98:7 102:11 105:19 108:13 109:9 To (page:line) 21:2 21:17 31:16 77:12 98:2 98:6 98:11 102:20 106:8 109:1 109:18 Objections 402, 403, 801, 802 403, 801, 802, MC 801, 802 801, 802, 402, 403 402, 403, 801, 802 402, 403, 801, 802 402, 403, 801, 802 402, 403, 801, 802 801, 802, 403 801, 802 801, 802

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 3
Dallas 320571v1

Amazon 30(b)(6) Deposition of Matthew T. Corddry January 6, 2011
From (page:line) 114:11 122:9 125:22 136:9 136:12 136:18 154:9 155:16 156:16 157:3 172:25 189:18 192:14 201:19 201:22 216:13 216:21 249:6 259:19 259:23 261:5 261:9 To (page:line) 114:14 122:17 126:11 136:10 136:17 136:23 155:15 156:6 156:21 157:9 173:9 190:4 192:24 201:20 202:5 216:20 217:5 249:8 259:21 260:4 261:7 261:12 Objections 801, 802, 403 801, 802 CS, 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802, WC 801, 802, WC 801, 802, 403 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802

Deposition of Joseph D'Avanzo - December 7, 2010
From (page:line) 84:12 88:16 To (page:line) 84:22 90:1 Objections 88:16 - INC; 89:19 - 90:1 L, AR, 602

Softlayer 30(b)(6) Deposition of Nathan Day - January 4, 2011
From (page:line) 86:10 86:14 103:12 109:4 117:9 125:16 129:9 130:12 To (page:line) 86:12 86:22 103:25 109:15 119:6 126:6 130:6 130:15 Objections 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 4
Dallas 320571v1

Softlayer 30(b)(6) Deposition of Nathan Day - January 4, 2011
From (page:line) 130:17 140:14 140:18 155:20 160:12 160:16 161:25 163:24 166:8 167:2 167:15 167:21 168:25 213:17 214:1 214:23 216:3 216:18 216:23 217:3 229:2 229:24 230:7 230:10 231:14 231:18 231:25 232:21 232:25 233:19 234:4 236:21 237:1 237:16 241:7 244:10 244:13 253:3 253:17 253:23 260:12 260:17 261:16 To (page:line) 130:24 140:16 140:25 156:4 160:14 160:25 163:4 164:21 166:22 167:13 167:19 167:25 169:10 213:16 214:15 215:8 216:7 216:21 217:1 217:8 229:16 230:5 230:8 230:25 231:16 231:23 232:6 232:23 233:3 233:23 234:15 236:24 237:14 237:19 241:9 244:11 244:24 253:11 253:21 254:1 260:15 261:14 261:18 Objections 801, 802 801, 802, NR 801, 802, NR 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802, CS 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802, NR 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 5
Dallas 320571v1

Softlayer 30(b)(6) Deposition of Nathan Day - January 4, 2011
From (page:line) 283:25 To (page:line) 285:2 Objections 801, 802

Deposition of - Ilya Kravchenko - December 17, 2010
From (page:line) 8:14 13:1 13:8 14:7 18:14 33:13 116:2 116:9 116:20 33:13 116:2 116:9 116:20 33:13 116:2 116:9 116:20 20:5 20:19 18:14 20:5 20:19 18:14 23:14 25:3 26:22 27:17 169:18 170:2 23:14 25:3 26:22 27:17 169:18 170:2 34:17 35:2 34:17 To (page:line) 8:20 13:4 14:1 14:20 20:4 33:16 116:6 116:17 116:23 33:16 116:6 116:17 116:23 33:16 116:6 116:17 116:23 20:8 21:2 20:4 20:8 21:2 20:4 23:22 25:17 27:10 28:19 169:22 170:22 23:22 25:17 27:10 28:19 169:22 170:22 34:19 35:19 34:19 Objections 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 INC; 801 801 801 801 801 801 INC; 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 NR; 801 801

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 6
Dallas 320571v1

Deposition of - Ilya Kravchenko - December 17, 2010
From (page:line) 35:2 40:9 63:14 63:18 64:5 40:9 63:14 63:18 64:5 42:21 47:13 34:17 35:2 57:3 64:12 64:12 64:12 64:12 64:12 68:22 72:4 72:12 70:13 76:18 76:24 76:18 76:24 76:18 76:24 76:18 76:24 76:18 76:24 76:18 76:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 To (page:line) 35:19 41:3 63:15 64:2 64:7 41:3 63:15 64:2 64:7 43:2 47:14 34:19 35:19 57:13 65:7 65:7 65:7 65:7 65:7 68:24 72:9 72:24 71:6 76:21 77:6 76:21 77:6 76:21 77:6 76:21 77:6 76:21 77:6 76:21 77:6 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 Objections NR; 801 801 801 801 64:7 - INC; 64:5 - 64:7 - 801 801 801 801 64:7 - INC; 64:5 - 64:7 - 801 602; 801 47:14 - INC; 47:13 - 47:14 801 801 NR; 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 7
Dallas 320571v1

Deposition of - Ilya Kravchenko - December 17, 2010
From (page:line) 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 To (page:line) 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 Objections 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 8
Dallas 320571v1

Deposition of - Ilya Kravchenko - December 17, 2010
From (page:line) 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 87:24 84:17 85:19 87:7 87:20 117:16 117:16 97:11 117:16 97:11 97:11 97:11 49:21 87:7 112:8 112:8 112:8 112:8 112:8 112:8 112:8 112:8 112:8 116:2 To (page:line) 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 87:25 84:22 86:10 87:13 87:22 117:22 117:22 97:18 117:22 97:18 97:18 97:18 50:6 87:13 112:14 112:14 112:14 112:14 112:14 112:14 112:14 112:14 112:14 116:6 Objections 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801; 602 801 801; 602 801; 602 801; 602 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 9
Dallas 320571v1

Deposition of - Ilya Kravchenko - December 17, 2010
From (page:line) 116:9 116:20 116:2 116:9 116:20 116:2 116:9 116:20 188:20 128:10 128:10 188:20 135:5 136:19 137:10 140:19 154:20 155:13 155:22 156:9 156:11 156:15 128:10 129:3 159:21 171:24 128:10 173:16 177:9 177:19 179:1 177:9 177:19 179:1 To (page:line) 116:17 116:23 116:6 116:17 116:23 116:6 116:17 116:23 189:12 128:17 128:17 189:12 135:8 136:25 137:24 140:25 155:8 155:19 156:4 156:9 156:12 156:17 128:17 130:22 160:2 172:23 128:17 173:16 177:16 177:20 179:25 177:16 177:20 179:25 Objections 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801; MC 801 801 801; MC 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801 801

SoftLayer 30(b)(6) Deposition of Jacob Linscott - January 4, 2011
From (page:line) 21:14 21:19 To (page:line) 21:17 21:25 Objections 801, 802 801, 802

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 10
Dallas 320571v1

SoftLayer 30(b)(6) Deposition of Jacob Linscott - January 4, 2011
From (page:line) 22:12 22:16 43:3 49:17 50:4 64:16 66:3 66:7 To (page:line) 22:14 22:19 43:6 49:23 50:8 64:23 66:5 66:13 Objections 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802

Deposition of Alexey Kuznetsov - January 27, 2011
From (page:line) 87:11 99:5 To (page:line) 88:3 99:24 Objections BER, 403 BER, 403

Amazon 30(b)(6) Deposition of Stefan Leigland - January 6, 2011
From (page:line) 31:23 33:1 48:7 60:22 69:24 70:17 71:13 80:2 85:13 85:17 87:22 To (page:line) 32:2 33:18 49:9 61:4 70:8 70:21 72:9 80:9 85:15 85:18 87:24 Objections 801, 802 801, 802, 403 801, 802 801, 802 IQ, 403, attorney comment IQ, 403, attorney comment (70:17-18) 801, 802 801, 802 801, 802, NR 801, 802, NR 801, 802

MySpace 30(b)(6) Deposition of Mimi Nguyen - December 14, 2010
From (page:line) 85:23 86:1 To (page:line) 85:24 86:8 Objections 801/802, BER 801/802, BER

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 11
Dallas 320571v1

MySpace 30(b)(6) Deposition of Mimi Nguyen - December 14, 2010
From (page:line) 86:11 86:23 To (page:line) 86:20 86:24 Objections 801/802, BER 801/802, BER

Yahoo! 30(b)(6) Deposition of Samuel J. Wolff - January 4, 2011
From (page:line) 28:3 53:11 53:21 57:25 58:13 169:21 188:11 189:11 213:12 214:3 214:12 To (page:line) 28:4 53:13 53:21 58:1 58:13 170:10 188:12 189:11 213:14 214:4 214:12 Objections Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment 403, MIL Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment

Yahoo! 30(b)(6) Deposition of Luke Yeh - December 16, 2010
From (page:line) 7:17 27:21 64:2 64:9 65:2 65:25 66:9 66:12 67:14 67:19 77:12 78:23 To (page:line) 7:17 27:21 64:3 64:10 65:3 65:25 66:9 66:14 67:14 67:19 77:12 78:24 Objections Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment Attorney comment

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 12
Dallas 320571v1

OBJECTION KEY TO DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS Code 106 Objection This testimony is objectionable because it is incomplete and the introduction of the remaining portions ought, in fairness, to be considered contemporaneously with it (see F.R.E. 106). This testimony is objectionable because it is not relevant (see F.R.E. 402). Misleading. Confusion of issues. This testimony is objectionable because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Compromise and offer to compromise (FRE 408). This testimony is objectionable because it constitutes testimony on a matter as to which the witness lacks personal knowledge (see F.R.E. 602). This testimony is objectionable because it is opinion testimony by a lay witness that is not reasonably based on perception and helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' testimony or the determination of a fact in dispute (see F.R.E. 701). Hearsay. This testimony is objectionable because it is a statement made by one other than the declarant while testifying at trial, offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted and not subject to any hearsay exception (see F.R.E. 801 and 802). This testimony is objectionable because it concerns a document for which authentication is lacking (see F.R.E. 901). Attorney Client Privilege and/or Work Product Immunity Asked and Answered This testimony is objectionable because it assumes a fact not in evidence. Argumentative (see FRCP 611(a)). Bolstering. This testimony in objectionable because it is improper to bolster the credibility of a witness before credibility is attacked (see FRCP 608(a)). Not best evidence (FRE 1002) Compound Question Calls for Speculation

402 403 408 602 701

801

A A/C AA AF AR B BER CQ CS

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 13
Dallas 320571v1

E

This testimony is objectionable because it constitutes attempted expert testimony from a person who was not designated as an expert and who did not submit an expert report (see FRCP 26). This testimony is objectionable because it lacks foundation. This testimony is objectionable because it constitutes harrassment or it is unduly embarrassing to the witness (see F.R.E. 611(f)). This testimony is objectionable because it is an incomplete answer. This testimony is objectionable because it has characterized a person or conduct with unwarranted suggestive, argumentative, or impertinent language (see FRCP 103(c); 404-405). Improper opinion testimony by expert witness (FRE 702) Incomplete question/answer. This testimony is objectionable because it is an incomplete question. Mischaracterizes witness's testimony Nonresponsive Outside the scope of Rule 30(b)(6) topics. Vague. Waste of time/Cumulative evidence (FRE 403) Leading the Witness (F.R.E. 611(c)).

F H IA IC

IE INC IQ MC NR OS V WC L

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 14
Dallas 320571v1

Dated: March 22, 2011.

Respectfully submitted, McKOOL SMITH, P.C. _/s/ Douglas A. Cawley ________ Douglas A. Cawley, Lead Attorney Texas Bar No. 04035500 [e-mail] Theodore Stevenson, III Texas Bar No. 19196650 [e-mail] Rosemary T. Snider Texas Bar No. 18796500 [e-mail] Scott W. Hejny Texas State Bar No. 24038952 [e-mail] Jason D. Cassady Texas Bar No. 24045625 [e-mail] J. Austin Curry Texas Bar No. 24059636 [e-mail] Phillip M. Aurentz Texas State Bar No. 24059404 [e-mail] Daniel R. Pearson Texas State Bar No. 24070398 [e-mail] McKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 214-978-4044 Sam F. Baxter Texas Bar No. 01938000 McKOOL SMITH, P.C. [e-mail] 104 E. Houston Street, Suite 300 P.O. Box 0 Marshall, Texas 75670 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone]

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 15
Dallas 320571v1

Robert M. Parker Texas Bar No. 15498000 Robert Christopher Bunt Texas Bar No. 00787165 PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C. 100 E. Ferguson, Suite 1114 Tyler, Texas 75702 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 903-533-9687 E-mail: [e-mail] E-mail: [e-mail] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that, on March 22, 2010, the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this notice was served on all counsel who have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A).

/s/ Jason D. Cassady Jason D. Cassady

______

BEDROCK COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES LLC'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' REBUTTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS PAGE 16
Dallas 320571v1