Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 1329

RESPONSE in Opposition re 1317 Emergency MOTION to Strike DEFENDANTS' LATE-PRODUCED DOCUMENTS, VIDEO DEMONSTRATIONS, SOURCE CODE AND PREVIOUSLY UNIDENTIFIED PRIOR ART filed by Amazon.com Inc., Yahoo! Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Of Andrew L. Perito In Support Of Opposition, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit D, # 6 Declaration Of Scott Walker In Support of Opposition)(Doan, Jennifer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs and Counterdefendants,
)
)
vs.
)
Adobe Systems Inc.; Amazon.com, Inc.; CDW Corp.; )
)
Citigroup Inc.; The Go Daddy Group, Inc.; Google
)
Inc.; J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.; Staples, Inc.;
)
Yahoo! Inc.; and YouTube, LLC,
)
)
Defendants and Counterclaimants.
)
)
)
)
)

Eolas Technologies Incorporated and
The Regents Of The University Of California,

Civil Action No. 6:09-CV-446-LED

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

DECLARATION OF SCOTT WALKER IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFFS’ EMERGENCY MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANTS’ LATEPRODUCED DOCUMENTS, VIDEO DEMONSTRATIVES, SOURCE CODE AND
PREVIOUSLY UNIDENTIFIED PRIOR ART [DKT. 1317]

I, Scott Walker, hereby declare:
1.

I am an e-discovery technician at Yahoo! Inc., and my role is to assist the Yahoo!

legal team with information technology issues and the acquisition of data.

I submit this

declaration based on personal knowledge following a reasonable investigation. If called upon
as a witness, I could competently testify to the truth of each statement herein.
2.

Despite the risks that transport presents to the old and very sensitive

SPARCstation Mode1 10 systems, Yahoo! transported two machines to an office in Tyler, Texas,
for inspection by Plaintiffs.
3.

The bases and drives for these machines arrived in Tyler the morning of

Wednesday, February 1, but monitors did not arrive until afternoon due to a shipping error.
4.

Apparently due to damage that occurred during the shipping process, both the

machines indicated errors at boot time due to failures in the Non-Volatile Random Access
Memory (NVRAM).
5.

Yahoo! personnel and counsel worked diligently but unsuccessfully to get the

machines running. That evening we reached out to obtain replacement machines, contacting an
individual from whom Yahoo! had previously purchased machines from the same era.
6.

That contact provided the name of a new source, an individual located over an

hour from Tyler in Mesquite, Texas, from whom Yahoo! arranged to obtain two additional
SPARCstation Model 10 machines and replacement hard drives for delivery the next day.
7.

Yahoo! also sent two backup, replacement hard drives with an additional copy of

the code necessary to run certain demonstrations from which videos were made.
8.

These replacement hard drives were carried by Yahoo! personnel traveling to

Dallas, Texas, on Thursday, February 2, 2012.

1

9.

On Thursday morning, a temporary solution to the boot problems was identified,

which enabled the machines to start up successfully, access the local network, and communicate
and operate as they previously had when located in Sunnyvale prior to the move to Tyler. At
that point, Defendants notified Plaintiffs that the machines were available for inspection.
10.

However, when Plaintiffs’ representatives arrived, the hard drive on the “client”

machine apparently failed, and the machine failed to reboot properly.
11.

Defendants made numerous attempts to get the machines working, and Plaintiffs

asked a number of questions regarding the configurations of those machines and the steps
necessary to run the demonstrations illustrated in the demonstrative video.
12.

Defendants committed to investigate Plaintiffs’ requests and explained that they

were taking steps to get the machines operating again, and would notify Plaintiffs as soon as
Defendants were again able to provide systems for inspection.
13.

Yahoo! arranged to transport the backup hard drives from Dallas that night and

the two additional SPARCstations ordered on Wednesday arrived that night.
14.

After performing testing enabled by the newly arrived machine, Defendants

confirmed that one of the original hard drives had failed.
15.

The backup hard drives were delivered at approximately 1:00 am on Friday,

February 3, 2012.
16.

Working through the night into Friday morning, and replacing internal hardware,

including hard drives and apparently failing NVRAM, Defendants were able to build two
working machines, “client” and “remote,” in addition to the original “server” and restored
network functionality among the machines.

2

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed:

February 6, 2012

__/s/ Scott Walker (with permission ALP)_____
Scott Walker

3