Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 1 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 · ·1· · · · · · · · ·IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT · · · · · · · · · · SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ·2 · · · · · · · · · · CASE NO. 15-81782-CIV-MARRA ·3· ·______________________________________/ ·4· ·KIM PETER TILLMAN ·5· · · · · · ·Plaintiff, ·6· ·vs. ·7 · · ·ADVANCED PUBLIC SAFETY, ·8· ·INC., and TRIMBLE, INC., ·9· · · · · · ·Defendants. · · ·______________________________________/ 10 11 · · · · · · ·VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JEFFREY RUBENSTEIN 12 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Volume 1 13 · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Pages 1 - 102 14 15 16 17· · · · · · · · · ·Tuesday, February 21, 2017 · · · · · · · · · · · ·9:56 a.m. - 12:13 p.m. 18· · · · · · · · ·1900 N.W. Corporate Boulevard · · · · · · · · · · ·Boca Raton, Florida 33431 19 20 21 22 · · · · · · · · · ·Stenographically Reported By: 23· · · · · · · · · · · ·Terri Becker, CSR · · · · · · · · · · Certified Shorthand Reporter 24 · · · · · · · · · · · · ·U.S.L.S.# 1524272 25 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 2 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 2 to 5 Page 2 Page 4 ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES ·1· · · · · · ·Deposition taken before TERRI BECKER, ·2 · · ·ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF: ·2· ·Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in ·3 ·3· ·and for the State of Florida at Large, in the above · · · · · GUNSTER, YOAKLEY & STEWART, P.A. ·4· · · · 777 South Flagler Drive ·4· ·cause. · · · · · Suite 500 East ·5· · · · · · · · · · · · ***** ·5· · · · West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 ·6· · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We are now going on to · · · · · Rfeicht@gunster.com ·6· · · · BY:· ROGER W. FEICHT, ESQ. ·7· ·the record.· The time is approximately 9:56.· The ·7 ·8· ·date is February 21st, 2017.· We're here at 1900 · · ·ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS: ·8 ·9· ·Northwest Corporate Boulevard, Suite 200 East, in · · · · · SMOAK, CHISTOLINI & BARNETT, PLLC 10· ·Boca Raton, Florida for purposes of taking the ·9· · · · 320 West Kennedy Boulevard · · · · · Fourth Floor 11· ·Videotaped Deposition of Jeffrey Rubenstein in the 10· · · · Tampa, Florida 33606 12· ·case of Kim Peter Tillman versus Advanced Public · · · · · Kcollins@flatrialcounsel.com 13· ·Safety, Inc. and Trimble, Inc. 11· · · · Courtdocuments@flatrialcounsel.com · · · · · BY:· KELLY CHARLES-COLLINS, ESQ. 14· · · · · · ·It is filed in the United States District 12 15· ·Court, Southern District of Florida.· The case 13· ·ALSO PRESENT: 14· · · · AMY MERSKY 16· ·number is 15-81782-CIV-MARRA.· Video and reporting · · · · · Videographer 17· ·services are being provided by U.S. Legal Support. 15 · · · · · RON SCHNELL 18· ·Counsel present please announce your appearance and 16 19· ·then the reporter will swear in the witness. 17 18 20· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· Good morning.· Roger Feicht 19 21· ·on behalf of the plaintiff. 20 22· · · · · · ·MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Good morning. 21 22 23· · · · · · ·Kelly Charles-Collins on behalf of the 23 24· ·defendants. 24 25 25· · · · · · ·THE COURT REPORTER:· Please raise your Page 3 Page 5 ·1· · · · · · · · · · · INDEX OF PROCEEDINGS ·1· · · · right hand, sir. ·2 ·2· · · · · · · · · Do you solemnly swear or affirm the · · ·VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF:· JEFFREY RUBENSTEIN ·3 ·3· · · · testimony you are about to give will be the truth, · · · · · · · · · · · DIRECT· CROSS· REDIRECT· RECROSS ·4· · · · the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help ·4 ·5· · · · you God? · · ·BY MR. FEICHT· · · 5 ·5 ·6· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yes, I do. ·6 ·7· ·THEREUPON: ·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · EXHIBITS ·8· · · · · · · · · · · JEFFREY RUBENSTEIN, ·8· ·PLAINTIFF'S· · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · ·PAGE ·9· ·having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined and ·9· · NUMBER· 1· · · ENGAGEMENT LETTER· · · · · · · ·10 · · · NUMBER· 2· · · INVOICE· · · · · · · · · · · · ·12 10· ·testified as follows: 10· · NUMBER· 3· · · E-MAIL· · · · · · · · · · · · · 18 11· · · · · · · · · · · ·DIRECT EXAMINATION · · · NUMBER· 4· · · EXPERT REPORT· · · · · · · · · ·24 12· ·BY MR. FEICHT: 11 12 13· · · · Q· · Good morning again, Mr. Rubenstein.· Would you 13· ·WITNESS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER:· PAGE 38, LINE 23 14· ·please state your full name for the record. 14 15· · · · A· · Jeffrey David Rubenstein. 15 16· · · · Q· · And have you gone by any other names of any 16· · · · · · · NOTE:· EXHIBIT NUMBER 6 IS NOT ATTACHED TO · · · · · · · · · · · ·THE TRANSCRIPT AND IS NOT IN THE 17· ·kind? 17· · · · · · · · · · ·CUSTODY OR CONTROL OF THE COURT 18· · · · A· · Just Jeff as a shorthand name. · · · · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER. 19· · · · Q· · Do you understand the oath that you just swore 18 20· ·to tell the truth today? 19 20 21· · · · A· · I do. 21 22· · · · Q· · Any reason why you won't be able to tell the 22 23· ·truth today? 23 24 24· · · · A· · No. 25 25· · · · Q· · Are you currently taking any medication or do U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 3 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 6 to 9 Page 6 Page 8 ·1· ·you have any medical issues that may inhibit your memory ·1· ·litigation or legal proceeding? ·2· ·or your ability to answer questions today? ·2· · · · A· · I don't believe so, no. ·3· · · · A· · No. ·3· · · · Q· · I know you're a lawyer and you sat in on Mr. ·4· · · · Q· · What is your current occupation? ·4· ·Schnell's deposition last week, but I'll just go over some ·5· · · · A· · I'm the President and CEO of SmartProcure, Inc., ·5· ·of the basics to make sure we're on the same page going ·6· ·SmartProcure one word, capital S, capital P, SmartProcure. ·6· ·forward today. ·7· · · · Q· · And what is your current address? ·7· · · · · · ·To ensure we have a good transcript, it's ·8· · · · A· · Home or business? ·8· ·critical that you allow me to finish asking my questions ·9· · · · Q· · Home, please. ·9· ·and I'll allow you to finish your answers before moving 10· · · · A· · Home is 17534 Grand Este Way, Boca Raton, 10· ·on to the next question so we're not speaking over each 11· ·Florida 33496.· Work address is 700 West Hillsboro 11· ·other. 12· ·Boulevard, Suite 4-100, Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441. 12· · · · · · ·Please let me know if you cannot hear or 13· · · · Q· · Have you ever given a deposition before today? 13· ·understand one of my questions.· I'll be happy to 14· · · · A· · I have. 14· ·rephrase it.· If you do answer a question, I will assume 15· · · · Q· · When was that? 15· ·that you heard it and understood it; is that fair? 16· · · · A· · Many years ago.· Nothing in the last like five 16· · · · A· · It is. 17· ·or ten years that I can recall. 17· · · · Q· · And please let me know, as I mentioned before we 18· · · · Q· · Do you recall what type of case your previous 18· ·got started, if you need to take a break at any time, as 19· ·deposition was regarding? 19· ·long as there's not a question currently pending, we can 20· · · · A· · I don't.· It was many years past.· I just 20· ·take as many brakes as you need. 21· ·remember being involved, I'm an attorney as well, so I 21· · · · · · ·Is it okay if I refer to the defendant 22· ·remember doing different things, I don't recall what the 22· ·Advanced Public Safety, Inc., simply as APS in my 23· ·depo was, but nothing that I can recall specifically. I 23· ·questions today? 24· ·just don't want to be incorrect, so I believe I have. 24· · · · A· · Yes. 25· · · · Q· · You believe you -- 25· · · · Q· · And is it okay for me to refer to the defendant Page 7 Page 9 ·1· · · · A· · Correct. ·1· ·Trimble, Inc., formally known as Trimble Navigation, ·2· · · · Q· · -- have not just taken it or defended ·2· ·Limited, simply as Trimble in my questions today? ·3· ·depositions as an attorney but sat as a deponent before? ·3· · · · A· · Yes. ·4· · · · A· · I believe so.· I can't recall the specifics of a ·4· · · · Q· · Were you hired by the law firm of Smoak, ·5· ·case, but yes. ·5· ·Christolini & Barnett to provide expert opinions in this ·6· · · · Q· · Do you recall anything about the case at all? ·6· ·matter? ·7· · · · A· · No. ·7· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Chistolini. ·8· · · · Q· · Where it was, the approximate year, what role ·8· · · · A· · Subject to the pronunciation error, the answer ·9· ·you were serving in? ·9· ·is "Yes". 10· · · · A· · No, I remember no specifics.· I just want to say 10· · · · Q· · Okay.· And when were you first contacted by the 11· ·that just to make sure that I'm not inaccurate.· I believe 11· ·law firm regarding this case? 12· ·I have but I can't recall a single incident specifically. 12· · · · A· · It was the Friday before the report was due in 13· · · · Q· · Have you personally been involved in a lawsuit 13· ·January, so somewhere around January 13th, I believe, give 14· ·as either a plaintiff or a defendant? 14· ·or take a day. 15· · · · A· · My company has been sued in the past for sending 15· · · · Q· · Are you referring to the expert disclosure 16· ·a fax, an unsolicited fax, at SmartProcure. 16· ·deadline in this case? 17· · · · Q· · Under the Junk Fax Prevention Act? 17· · · · A· · I believe so. 18· · · · A· · Right, under TCPA. 18· · · · Q· · And what information was communicated to you 19· · · · Q· · That's a very odd statute. 19· ·that you relied on during this initial conversation? 20· · · · A· · I know, unbelievable. 20· · · · A· · I'm not sure I understand the question. 21· · · · · · ·Has there been any other incident?· Possibly 21· · · · Q· · Sure, I can rephrase it.· During this initial 22· ·while at APS/Trimble, Advanced Public Safety/Trimble, 22· ·conversation when you were first contacted was any 23· ·but I don't recall. 23· ·information provided to you that you relied on in forming 24· · · · Q· · Do you have any recollection of being personally 24· ·your ultimate opinions in this case? 25· ·named as either a plaintiff or a defendant in any sort of 25· · · · A· · No, we had a very brief conversation at which U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 4 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 10 to 13 Page 10 Page 12 ·1· ·point they indicated a potential interest in hiring me as ·1· ·APS or Trimble were customers of SmartProcure? ·2· ·an expert, had to go back to the client, and then they ·2· · · · A· · I don't.· We started in 2011 so it would be ·3· ·came back and said that they were going to hire me as an ·3· ·sometime between 2011 and today. ·4· ·expert. ·4· · · · Q· · So sometime in the last six years or so -- ·5· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· I'll ask the court reporter ·5· · · · A· · That's correct. ·6· · · · to please mark this as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1. ·6· · · · Q· · -- APS or Trimble or potentially both were ·7· · · · · · · · · (Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 marked for ·7· ·customers of SmartProcure? ·8· · · · identification). ·8· · · · A· · Potentially.· I don't ever recall seeing ·9· · · · Q· · Mr. Rubenstein, the court reporter has handed ·9· ·Trimble's name and I believe that I saw APS's name. I 10· ·you a document that we've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 10· ·don't recall the initial question, but I believe Peter 11· ·and that is Bates stamped at the bottom of the page 11· ·Tillman was also a customer of SmartProcure, so if that's 12· ·APS-015644 through 646.· Do you recognize this document? 12· ·relevant. 13· · · · A· · I do. 13· · · · Q· · Other than APS and possibly Trimble being 14· · · · Q· · What is it? 14· ·customers of SmartProcure, do you or any entities 15· · · · A· · It is my engagement letter with the firm that 15· ·controlled by you or that you have an interest in have any 16· ·hired me. 16· ·other sort of business relationships or relationships of 17· · · · Q· · And what is your hourly rate for your work on 17· ·any kind with APS or Trimble? 18· ·this matter? 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 19· · · · A· · 495 per hour, billable in quarter hour 19· · · · A· · No. 20· ·increments. 20· · · · · · · · · (Plaintiff's Exhibit 2 marked for 21· · · · Q· · Do you plan on testifying at the trial scheduled 21· · · · identification). 22· ·for August as an expert witness in this matter? 22· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· This is the invoice.· I'm 23· · · · A· · If so requested. 23· · · · going to go through all the files.· I have extra 24· · · · Q· · Other than this engagement agreement that we've 24· · · · copies of some. 25· ·marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 with the law firm that 25· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Okay. Page 11 Page 13 ·1· ·represents both APS and Trimble, do you currently have any ·1· · · · Q· · The court reporter has just handed you a ·2· ·contracts or agreements of any kind with APS? ·2· ·document that we've marked as Plaintiff's 2, and that is ·3· · · · A· · I do not. ·3· ·Bates stamped APS-015684 through 685.· Do you recognize ·4· · · · Q· · Other than this engagement letter with the law ·4· ·this document? ·5· ·firm that represents APS and Trimble, do you have any ·5· · · · A· · I do. ·6· ·other contracts or agreements of any kind with Trimble? ·6· · · · Q· · What is it? ·7· · · · A· · I do not. ·7· · · · A· · It is my January bill to the law firm that hired ·8· · · · Q· · Other than this engagement letter with the law ·8· ·me. ·9· ·firm that represents APS and Trimble, do any entities that ·9· · · · Q· · From January 12th through January 31st did you 10· ·you have an interest in or control over have any contracts 10· ·perform three -- excuse me -- 34.5 hours of time and bill 11· ·or agreements with APS or Trimble? 11· ·the defendant's law firm a total of $17,250? 12· · · · A· · They do not.· Actually, let me rephrase that. I 12· · · · A· · Yes. 13· ·think APS and/or Trimble may be a subscriber to 13· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Just for the 14· ·SmartProcure.· We have many thousands of customers.· At 14· · · · record, for our agreement as to the fact that we're 15· ·one point APS was a client where they paid a few thousand 15· · · · not waiving anything as far as attorney/client 16· ·dollars a year to access the database, like any other 16· · · · privilege or work product with regard to the 17· ·customer.· I do not know if they are still a client. 17· · · · invoice, but we did provide it to you unredacted. 18· · · · Q· · So, at least at some point in time recently the 18· · · · Q· · Your time entry for January 13, the second entry 19· ·defendants in this case, APS or Trimble, were customers of 19· ·down, there is a notation for teleconference with Larry 20· ·your current business, SmartProcure, Inc.? 20· ·Thompson, .25.· Do you see that there? 21· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 21· · · · A· · I do. 22· · · · A· · Potentially. 22· · · · Q· · On January 13th did you have an approximately 15 23· · · · Q· · Okay. 23· ·minute telephone conversation with current Trimble 24· · · · A· · I believe so.· But I don't know for sure. 24· ·employee Larry Thompson? 25· · · · Q· · Okay.· Do you recall approximately when either 25· · · · A· · I don't know -- U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 5 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 14 to 17 Page 14 Page 16 ·1· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·1· ·recognition of SmartConnect? ·2· · · · A· · -- his status at Trimble, but I believe he's ·2· · · · A· · No. ·3· ·still employed there, and yes, I did speak with him for ·3· · · · Q· · Anything else that you can recall during this ·4· ·15 minutes on that date. ·4· ·half hour conversation between you and Jim Fenoglio? ·5· · · · Q· · And what did Larry Thompson tell you during that ·5· · · · A· · No. ·6· ·conversation? ·6· · · · Q· · Did you rely on any of the information provided ·7· · · · A· · That conversation was very brief.· It was mainly ·7· ·by Jim Fenoglio in forming your expert opinions in this ·8· ·about setting up a meeting for that Sunday, which I ·8· ·case? ·9· ·believe was the 15th of January.· That's another -- ·9· · · · A· · No. 10· · · · Q· · Anything else that he informed you at that time? 10· · · · Q· · Other than this telephone call noted in your 11· · · · A· · Nothing specific that I recall. 11· ·invoice, have you spoken to or exchanged any written 12· · · · Q· · Do you recall anything generally else about that 12· ·communications with Mr. Fenoglio regarding this case? 13· ·call that Larry Thompson communicated to you? 13· · · · A· · No. 14· · · · A· · No. 14· · · · Q· · On January 15th there is a time entry for, 15· · · · Q· · What did you tell Larry Thompson during this 15· ·quote, "Meeting to review source code with Larry 16· ·telephone conversation? 16· ·Thompson," and in parentheses the number 4.· Did you meet 17· · · · A· · That I was hired as an expert witness and I 17· ·in person with Larry Thompson for approximately four hours 18· ·needed to do an objective review of Mr. Schnell's expert 18· ·on January 15th? 19· ·report and was reviewing material from the law firm and 19· · · · A· · Yes. 20· ·also wanted to ask him some questions if he had some time 20· · · · Q· · What did you tell Larry Thompson during this 21· ·reference the source code and history -- 21· ·meeting? 22· · · · Q· · Did you -- Sorry. 22· · · · A· · I asked Larry Thompson to walk me through the 23· · · · A· · -- of APS. 23· ·source code of ZebraLoader, ZebraLoader, one word, and 24· · · · Q· · Did you ask any of those questions during that 24· ·QuickTicket. 25· ·initial call or was it during the subsequent meeting? 25· · · · Q· · Anything else? Page 15 Page 17 ·1· · · · A· · It was during the subsequent meeting. ·1· · · · A· · No. ·2· · · · Q· · Okay, we'll get to that in just a second.· Then ·2· · · · Q· · What did Larry Thompson tell you during this ·3· ·that next entry on that date is:· "Conversation REF.SOX," ·3· ·meeting? ·4· ·in all capital letters, slash, "REV/REC with Jim Fenoglio, ·4· · · · A· · He reviewed the code with me and the different ·5· ·previous APS CFO, .50."· What does that particular entry ·5· ·functions that each section of the code performed. ·6· ·mean? ·6· · · · Q· · When you were reviewing this code were you ·7· · · · A· · That was a conversation that I had with Jim ·7· ·reviewing a document on a piece of paper or were you ·8· ·Fenoglio, who was the Chief Financial Officer at APS, also ·8· ·reviewing it on a computer? ·9· ·currently works with me at SmartProcure, reference some ·9· · · · A· · A document on a piece of paper provided by 10· ·questions that I had referencing SOX, which is the 10· ·counsel. 11· ·Sarbanes-Oxley Act.· Sarbanes-Oxley, SOX, Sarbanes-Oxley, 11· · · · Q· · Did it have -- was it called "Supporting Zebra 12· ·and REV/REC standing for Revenue Recognition. 12· ·Printer" and "QuickTicket" at the top? 13· · · · Q· · And what did you tell Jim Fenoglio during this 13· · · · A· · I would have to see it to be sure. 14· ·conversation? 14· · · · Q· · I'll show you in just a few minutes.· We will 15· · · · A· · That I was hired as an expert witness and I had 15· ·get to that.· Based on your review with Larry Thompson, do 16· ·some questions to refresh my memory regarding how we 16· ·you have a good understanding of how that source code 17· ·recognize revenue with SmartConnect. 17· ·operates? 18· · · · Q· · And what did he tell you in response to those 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 19· ·questions? 19· · · · A· · I do. 20· · · · A· · Just answered the questions regarding and 20· · · · Q· · What, if anything else, did Larry Thompson show 21· ·confirming my understanding of recognizing revenue only 21· ·or provide you during this meeting? 22· ·when we delivered the product. 22· · · · A· · Nothing else. 23· · · · Q· · As it regards to the SmartConnect product in 23· · · · Q· · Other than the telephone call on January 13th 24· ·particular that is the subject of this case, did Jim 24· ·and the meeting on January 15th, have you spoken to or 25· ·Fenoglio provide any other information regarding revenue 25· ·exchanged any written communications with Larry Thompson? U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 6 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 18 to 21 Page 18 Page 20 ·1· · · · A· · I may have had one more five-minute phone call ·1· ·case? ·2· ·with Larry Thompson subsequent to this, that meeting, that ·2· · · · A· · It's possible, but I don't recall.· I don't ·3· ·was personal in nature, just saying "Hello" and catching ·3· ·think we did. ·4· ·up.· That was the extent of any further communication I ·4· · · · Q· · Has Jack Siney ever been present during ·5· ·have had with Larry. ·5· ·conversations between you and attorneys representing the ·6· · · · Q· · During that phone call was there any discussion ·6· ·defendants regarding your work as an expert witness? ·7· ·of this case at all? ·7· · · · A· · No, he has not. ·8· · · · A· · There was not. ·8· · · · Q· · Other than the telephone conversation with Jim ·9· · · · Q· · And are you billing the defendant's law firm on ·9· ·Fenoglio, the telephone conversations and meeting with 10· ·a monthly basis so there would be a separate invoice for 10· ·Larry Thompson and the conversation with Jack Siney, have 11· ·the month of February? 11· ·you spoken to, met with or exchanged any written 12· · · · A· · Yes. 12· ·communications with any current or former APS or Trimble 13· · · · · · ·(Plaintiff's Exhibit 3 marked for 13· ·employees regarding this lawsuit? 14· ·identification. 14· · · · A· · There were a bunch of questions there.· Let me 15· · · · Q· · The court reporter has handed you a document 15· ·answer that two-fold.· The conversation with Jim was in 16· ·marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 3 and Bates stamped APS- 16· ·person, not via phone, pursuant to your question, and 17· ·015652.· Did you receive this e-mail? 17· ·Peter Cagnina, C-A-G-N-I-N-A, who was also an employee at 18· · · · A· · I believe so. 18· ·APS, works at SmartProcure currently and was also notified 19· · · · Q· · And is this an e-mail that you received on or 19· ·that I am going to be an expert witness.· No other 20· ·about Monday, January 2nd, from the lawyer for the 20· ·conversations transpired besides him being aware that I 21· ·defendants, Kelly Charles-Collins? 21· ·won't be there today because of this testimony, this 22· · · · A· · Yes. 22· ·deposition. 23· · · · Q· · Her e-mail states in part, quote, "It would be 23· · · · Q· · So Peter Cagnina hasn't provided you with any 24· ·great if Jack could also be available," end quote.· Who 24· ·information regarding Peter Tillman's employment or 25· ·did you understand Ms. Charles-Collins to be referring to 25· ·SmartConnect or any of the other issues in this case? Page 19 Page 21 ·1· ·in that sentence? ·1· · · · A· · He has not. ·2· · · · A· · Jack Siney. ·2· · · · Q· · Have you spoken to any other current or former ·3· · · · Q· · Who is Jack Siney? ·3· ·APS or Trimble employees regarding this lawsuit other than ·4· · · · A· · S-I-N-E-Y.· Jack was I believe the VP of sales ·4· ·those we've already discussed? ·5· ·or a similar title at APS during the time of Tillman's ·5· · · · A· · I don't believe so. ·6· ·employment, Mr. Tillman's employment. ·6· · · · Q· · We'll get into your background as the Founder ·7· · · · Q· · And what is Mr. Siney's current occupation? ·7· ·and President of APS in a moment.· For right now my ·8· · · · A· · He is the VP of sales at SmartProcure. ·8· ·question is:· When did you stop providing any services for ·9· · · · Q· · Jack Siney currently works for you at your new ·9· ·APS or Trimble?· Do you recall what year that is? 10· ·company, SmartProcure? 10· · · · A· · I believe it was on or around Q-3 of 2011. 11· · · · A· · He does. 11· · · · Q· · At that point in time in what role were you 12· · · · Q· · Did you ever have any conversations with Jack 12· ·serving? 13· ·Siney regarding Mr. Tillman's lawsuit or your work as an 13· · · · A· · I was an advisor. 14· ·expert witness? 14· · · · Q· · To what company? 15· · · · A· · Short of notifying him that I was being hired as 15· · · · A· · To APS. 16· ·an expert witness, we did not talk about this at all. 16· · · · Q· · In approximately the third quarter of 2011 you 17· · · · Q· · Has Jack Siney provided you with any information 17· ·finished your role as an advisor to APS? 18· ·regarding this case? 18· · · · A· · I believe so. 19· · · · A· · I don't believe so, no. 19· · · · Q· · And is that because you were starting your own 20· · · · Q· · Have you exchanged any written communications 20· ·company, SmartProcure? 21· ·with Jack Siney regarding this case? 21· · · · A· · Yes. 22· · · · A· · I don't recall.· I think it was verbal, my 22· · · · Q· · Is all the information regarding APS, Trimble, 23· ·conversation with him. 23· ·Peter Tillman and the issues in this lawsuit that you're 24· · · · Q· · Is it possible that you exchanged e-mail 24· ·relying on to form your expert opinions since Quarter 3 of 25· ·messages or text messages with Jack Siney regarding this 25· ·2011 information that you received from the attorneys U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 7 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 22 to 25 Page 22 Page 24 ·1· ·representing the defendants? ·1· ·revenue recognition, but that information did not ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·2· ·influence your opinions one way or another, correct? ·3· · · · A· · My opinion was based on information that I have ·3· · · · A· · Correct, it only confirmed what I already knew. ·4· ·received from the attorneys, my personal knowledge of the ·4· · · · · · ·(Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 marked for ·5· ·case, excuse me, of the business from 2001 when I was the ·5· ·identification). ·6· ·founder, all the way through my tenure in 2011, and any ·6· · · · Q· · The court reporter has handed you a document ·7· ·specific documents that I would have included in my expert ·7· ·that we've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 4.· Is this a ·8· ·report. ·8· ·copy of your expert report? ·9· · · · Q· · What I'm getting at, I think we're agreeing, you ·9· · · · A· · Yes. 10· ·don't have any personal knowledge regarding APS or Trimble 10· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· For the documents 11· ·or Peter Tillman from when you stopped being an advisor in 11· · · · that you don't have a copy for me, just tell me 12· ·2011; is that correct? 12· · · · what it is. 13· · · · A· · That is correct. 13· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Like I said, it's all 14· · · · Q· · All of the information regarding what happened 14· · · · documents I think that either are cited to or 15· ·at APS or Trimble since 2011 is based upon information 15· · · · attached to his expert report. 16· ·that you, or documents that you received from counsel for 16· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· No worries, I have 17· ·APS and Trimble, correct? 17· · · · the folder of them.· If you just tell me the name, 18· · · · A· · That is correct. 18· · · · I can look at it on my computer. 19· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 19· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Will do. 20· · · · Q· · Did you perform any further investigation to 20· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· (Looking through document). 21· ·independently verify any of the information regarding 21· · · · Q· · On page 3 of your report there is a section 22· ·events after your departure in 2011? 22· ·called "Compensation."· It states, quote, "I am being 23· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 23· ·compensated at the rate of $500 per hour, plus costs, for 24· · · · A· · What events are we talking about? 24· ·my work on this case.· These rates are my usual and 25· · · · Q· · Any information that you received regarding 25· ·customary rates."· In what other context have you charged Page 23 Page 25 ·1· ·things that happened at the company after 2011. ·1· ·$500 per hour? ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·2· · · · A· · When I was an attorney working directly as legal ·3· · · · A· · I'm not sure I understand the question. ·3· ·counsel, I would charge $500 per hour. ·4· · · · Q· · Let me rephrase it. ·4· · · · Q· · When was the last time you charged $500 an hour ·5· · · · A· · In regards to Peter Tillman's lawsuit? ·5· ·as an attorney? ·6· · · · Q· · Regarding any of the issues in this case.· Let ·6· · · · A· · When I was working back directly as an attorney ·7· ·me ask you this way:· In forming your expert opinions in ·7· ·outside of my companies in the mid '90's.· Any other ·8· ·this case are you relying upon information regarding ·8· ·compensation would have been part of my work as a business ·9· ·events that took place after you departed the company in ·9· ·executive since then in the various companies that I've 10· ·2011? 10· ·worked for. 11· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 11· · · · Q· · Other than working as an attorney in the mid 12· · · · A· · I am not except in reference to any documents 12· ·1990's, have you charged $500 an hour in any other 13· ·that have been provided to me that I've commented on in my 13· ·circumstances? 14· ·expert report that may be reference to events after 2011, 14· · · · A· · I don't believe so. 15· ·such as responding to Mr. Schnell's expert report. 15· · · · Q· · When you worked as an attorney in the mid 16· · · · Q· · So for information after 2011 you're relying on 16· ·1990's, did you work for a law firm or a business?· What 17· ·the documents provided, correct? 17· ·was your last role that you held? 18· · · · A· · I am. 18· · · · A· · The last role was as general, last legal role, 19· · · · Q· · Did you perform any independent investigation to 19· ·legal position was general counsel of CyberGate, Internet 20· ·verify the information referenced in those documents that 20· ·provider.· C-Y-B-E-R-G-A-T-E, one word, capital G. 21· ·you relied upon? 21· · · · Q· · Were you an employee of CyberGate? 22· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 22· · · · A· · I was. 23· · · · A· · I spoke to Jim Fenoglio and Larry Thompson, as 23· · · · Q· · Who would be charged $500 an hour for your work 24· ·we previously discussed.· Except for that, I have not. 24· ·at that time? 25· · · · Q· · Jim Fenoglio only provided information regarding 25· · · · A· · That was basically the rate that I was charging U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 8 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 26 to 29 Page 26 Page 28 ·1· ·prior to being hired as general counsel.· That was my last ·1· · · · A· · The only other documents I may have reviewed ·2· ·legal role that I was giving you.· The last role besides ·2· ·would have been any other documents that are already part ·3· ·being an employee was with a law firm.· I think it was the ·3· ·of the record of this lawsuit that may have been forwarded ·4· ·Law Firm of Richard Rosenbaum or some similar name to ·4· ·to me by counsel that I did not specifically rely on for ·5· ·that. ·5· ·this report. ·6· · · · Q· · That would have been the last time you charged ·6· · · · Q· · So there are documents that were sent to you by ·7· ·customers or clients $500 an hour, correct? ·7· ·the lawyers representing the defendants that you reviewed ·8· · · · A· · Directly on a bill, except for being an ·8· ·but that ultimately you did not rely upon in forming your ·9· ·employee, that's correct. ·9· ·expert opinions; is that correct? 10· · · · Q· · Appendix C to your report is, "Witness testimony 10· · · · A· · I'm not sure I would go as far as saying I even 11· ·as an expert during the prior four years," and that page 11· ·reviewed it.· I believe there are some other documents 12· ·is blank.· Have you served as an expert witness in any 12· ·they may have sent me that I've deemed -- that I deemed 13· ·cases over the last four years? 13· ·irrelevant and did not review.· So, short of that caveat 14· · · · A· · I have not. 14· ·that perhaps there are some other documents that are part 15· · · · Q· · Have you served as a consulting expert witness 15· ·of the record that were sent to me that I did not review, 16· ·in any cases over the last four years? 16· ·short of seeing what they were, this encompasses all of 17· · · · A· · I have not. 17· ·them. 18· · · · Q· · Have you ever served as a consulting or 18· · · · Q· · Which documents did you review and deem 19· ·testifying expert in any litigation case? 19· ·irrelevant to your opinions in this case? 20· · · · A· · Not that I can recall, although I was doing a 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 21· ·lot of this work both as an attorney and doing some 21· · · · A· · I would have to look.· It would be any other 22· ·consulting years back, prior to these last few businesses 22· ·documents that counsel would have provided me, which were 23· ·that I've started.· So, none that I can recall, with the 23· ·solely documents that had Bates stamps on them, that I 24· ·caveat that if I did it was back in the '90's. 24· ·deemed irrelevant. 25· · · · Q· · In any of your prior work, have you testified in 25· · · · Q· · But you can't name any of those documents? Page 27 Page 29 ·1· ·a deposition or in court as an expert witness? ·1· · · · A· · I can try to look to see what documents were ·2· · · · A· · No. ·2· ·provided to me by counsel and then just read off some of ·3· · · · Q· · Have you ever testified at a trial, arbitration ·3· ·those, if I could find those for you.· An example -- well, ·4· ·or other legal proceeding in any role, fact witness or as ·4· ·I wrote "Exhibits" here "From Peter Tillman," but I would ·5· ·an expert witness? ·5· ·have to look and see if there is anything else that they ·6· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·6· ·sent me. ·7· · · · A· · I don't believe so. ·7· · · · Q· · How would you go about looking for that ·8· · · · Q· · Going back to page 3 on your report, there is a ·8· ·information? ·9· ·section entitled "Sources of Information."· Do you see ·9· · · · A· · I can go on my computer which I have here -- 10· ·that? 10· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· I will not let you 11· · · · A· · I do. 11· · · · go on your computer.· You have all the e-mails. 12· · · · Q· · Other than the documents expressly listed on 12· · · · You can give him the e-mails. 13· ·Exhibit B, page 31, did you review any other documents 13· · · · Q· · Going back to sources of information on page 3 14· ·related to this case? 14· ·of your report, it states that one source of information 15· · · · A· · (No response.) 15· ·was industry sources, "including my own business and 16· · · · Q· · For the benefit of the record, the Sources of 16· ·technical library."· What industry sources, including your 17· ·Information section reads in part, "I obtained documents 17· ·own business and technical library, if any, did you review 18· ·and used resources from; one, the law firm of Smoak, 18· ·in forming your expert opinions in this case? 19· ·Chistolini & Barnett, as more fully detailed in Exhibit B 19· · · · A· · If I relied on any of those, they would have 20· ·and elsewhere in this report."· If you turn to Exhibit B, 20· ·been cited in the report, so if they were not cited, then 21· ·there is a list of documents and the last one is, "All 21· ·I did not rely on any of them. 22· ·exhibits attached hereto."· Other than the documents 22· · · · Q· · The only citation to any industry sources that I 23· ·listed here on Exhibit B and the exhibits that were cited 23· ·saw would be listed on Exhibit D, which is the citation, 24· ·to and attached to your report, have you reviewed any 24· ·looks like to an article, entitled "Beyond Transparency, 25· ·other documents related to this case? 25· ·Open Data And The Future Of Civic Innovation (Chapter VII, U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol Rubenstein 1 04/21/2017 Page 9 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 30 to 33 Page 30 Page 32 ·1· ·Hacking FOIA)," F-O-I-A, (Using FOIA Requests To Drive ·1· ·this report. ·2· ·Government Innovation), October 2013."· Is that the only ·2· · · · Q· · Finally, you list, quote, "Personal knowledge of ·3· ·industry source, including your own business and technical ·3· ·the facts of this case," end quote.· What personal ·4· ·library, that you reviewed in forming your expert opinions ·4· ·knowledge of the facts of the case, if any, did you rely ·5· ·in this case? ·5· ·on in forming your expert opinions in the case? ·6· · · · A· · Exhibit D is in reference to Rule 26 ·6· · · · A· · Ten years of history as an APS employee, but ·7· ·disclosures.· It was not a document that I relied on for ·7· ·most of that as the Founder and President, so I have an ·8· ·forming my opinion here in this report. ·8· ·almost an infinite amount of facts about both APS ·9· · · · Q· · Okay.· And why did you disclose the article ·9· ·operations, Trimble operations, revenue recognition, Peter 10· ·listed there on Appendix D? 10· ·Tillman's employment agreements and most of the details 11· · · · A· · Pursuant to Rule 26 of the Federal Code. 11· ·involved in the case today. 12· · · · Q· · And under which subsection did you think this 12· · · · Q· · You mentioned revenue recognition.· Are you 13· ·was obligated to be disclosed? 13· ·providing any expert opinions on revenue recognition in 14· · · · A· · Any publications that I participated in during 14· ·this case? 15· ·the last four years. 15· · · · A· · No. 16· · · · Q· · So this is an article that you wrote within the 16· · · · Q· · Other than what's expressly mentioned in your 17· ·last four years -- 17· ·report that we've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 4, did any 18· · · · A· · That is correct. 18· ·of your personal knowledge of the facts in the case 19· · · · Q· · -- and so that's why you listed it on Appendix 19· ·influence your expert opinions in this case? 20· ·D? 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 21· · · · A· · That is correct. 21· · · · A· · Can you repeat the question? 22· · · · Q· · But it did not influence your opinions one way 22· · · · Q· · Sure.· Other than what's expressly mentioned in 23· ·or another with regard to this case? 23· ·your report, there is a section, "History of APS," and 24· · · · A· · It did not. 24· ·there is a section, "The Start of Advanced Public Safety," 25· · · · Q· · Are there any industry sources that you reviewed 25· ·there is a section, "Peter Tillman as a Sales Page 31 Page 33 ·1· ·in forming your expert opinions in this case? ·1· ·Representative," other than what's expressly mentioned in ·2· · · · A· · Only ones that I would have cited in the report. ·2· ·your expert report, are there personal knowledge -- is ·3· ·If I did not cite any, I don't recall, I would have to ·3· ·there any personal knowledge of the facts of this case, as ·4· ·look through it again, but if I did not cite any, then I ·4· ·you've termed it, that influenced your expert opinions in ·5· ·did not. ·5· ·this case? ·6· · · · Q· · The next subsection in the Sources of ·6· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·7· ·Information section of your report is, quote, "Standard ·7· · · · A· · Tremendously.· I have ten years of history at ·8· ·business and technical reference materials."· What ·8· ·APS so my entire tenure, career at APS, would have ·9· ·standard business and technical reference materials, if ·9· ·influenced the creation of this report. 10· ·any, did you review in forming your expert opinions in 10· · · · Q· · Okay.· Since it influenced your opinion, I need 11· ·this case? 11· ·to know what those particular facts are, if they are not 12· · · · A· · They would be whatever is specifically cited in 12· ·mentioned in your expert report, so could you please 13· ·my expert report, an example of which would be what was 13· ·identify, now that we're on the record, which facts, based 14· ·already in the record, the Zebra CPCL Programming Manual, 14· ·on your personal knowledge from working for the company 15· ·although that was already Bates stamped and provided to me 15· ·for years and years, influenced your opinions as an expert 16· ·by counsel, but that would have been an example of one. 16· ·witness in this case? 17· · · · Q· · Are there any other standard business and 17· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 18· ·technical reference materials that you reviewed in forming 18· · · · A· · Well, let's go through the documents sentence by 19· ·your expert opinions in this case? 19· ·sentence.· I'm happy to do that.· I don't want to be 20· · · · A· · Only what's cited in my report. 20· ·incorrect and tell you that I had other facts that I'm 21· · · · Q· · The next section of Sources of Information is, 21· ·aware of that influenced but I did not document. I 22· ·quote, "E-mails from your personal archives."· What 22· ·documented everything that I believed was relevant to my 23· ·e-mails from personal archives, if any, did you rely on in 23· ·expert opinion, but I have ten years worth of knowledge, 24· ·performing your expert opinions in this case? 24· ·so if you delve into a series of questions and ask how I 25· · · · A· · Any e-mails that I relied on were referenced in 25· ·may have known something or whatever it may be, it was U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 10 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 34 to 37 Page 34 Page 36 ·1· ·based on personal knowledge, which I'm happy to disclose ·1· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·2· ·or discuss, but everything that I thought was relevant to ·2· · · · A· · No. ·3· ·forming an expert opinion and replying to Mr. Schnell's ·3· · · · Q· · When did you start APS? ·4· ·report I've documented. ·4· · · · A· · 2001. ·5· · · · Q· · Okay.· I need to know, though, anything, not ·5· · · · Q· · You served as the company's Founder, correct? ·6· ·just if you deem it relevant, if you relied upon it as an ·6· · · · A· · Correct. ·7· ·expert witness, it needs to be disclosed to us. ·7· · · · Q· · Did you serve as the company's President, as ·8· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·8· ·well? ·9· · · · He just said it's in his report. ·9· · · · A· · Yes. 10· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· He did? 10· · · · Q· · What years did you serve as the President of 11· · · · Q· · If there's any other facts that aren't mentioned 11· ·APS? 12· ·in here, because what we have is right here, Exhibit 4, we 12· · · · A· · (Looking through document...) 13· ·have a copy of your expert report, if there are any facts 13· · · · · · ·Through 2005, at which point I transitioned to 14· ·that includes your opinion, other than those that are 14· ·a similar role with a different title due to the 15· ·mentioned in the report, we're entitled to know them. 15· ·acquisition of APS by Trimble called General Manager of 16· · · · A· · My opinion, as drafted here today, is supported 16· ·Trimble Public Safety, through 2008, and then I became 17· ·by a set of facts that I documented completely.· If you 17· ·an advisor in 2009 through the rest of my tenure. 18· ·start to ask questions about more detail about what I 18· · · · Q· · And are you referring to page 27 of your expert 19· ·wrote, there may be other facts that I'm aware of that I 19· ·report, the section on experience? 20· ·can bring to your attention to clarify any of the 20· · · · A· · Yes. 21· ·comments, but every statement that I made in the report 21· · · · Q· · And is that an accurate summary of the roles 22· ·was supported by any facts that I was aware of that I thus 22· ·that you held at Advanced Public Safety or Trimble? 23· ·documented in the report. 23· · · · A· · Yes. 24· · · · Q· · So are there any other facts that you have 24· · · · Q· · Did you also serve as the CEO of APS? 25· ·personal knowledge, based on your experience with the 25· · · · A· · I did. Page 35 Page 37 ·1· ·company, that influence your expert opinions but are not ·1· · · · Q· · And was that during the same 2001 to 2005 ·2· ·expressly mentioned in the expert report we've marked as ·2· ·time-frame? ·3· ·Plaintiff's Exhibit 4? ·3· · · · A· · Yes. ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·4· · · · Q· · Other than President, Founder and CEO, did you ·5· · · · A· · I don't believe so, short of explaining any more ·5· ·hold any other jobs at APS? ·6· ·detail that you may have questions on that may not have ·6· · · · A· · No. ·7· ·been clear on the report that we will get to today. ·7· · · · Q· · What were your responsibilities as President, ·8· · · · Q· · Separate from follow-up questions that I may ·8· ·Founder and CEO of APS? ·9· ·have that you may answer based on your personal knowledge, ·9· · · · A· · Running the day-to-day operations of the company 10· ·are there any facts that you have personal knowledge, 10· ·as well as all of its strategic priorities and growth. 11· ·based on your experience with the company, that you relied 11· · · · Q· · Anything else? 12· ·on in forming your expert opinions but that are not 12· · · · A· · Everything else that comes with running a 13· ·expressly mentioned in your expert report? 13· ·start-up firm, beginning to selling it to a multinational, 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 14· ·large public company. 15· · · · A· · I do not believe so, no. 15· · · · Q· · This is your baby, right, APS was your baby? 16· · · · Q· · Pages 4 through 6 of your expert report is a 16· · · · A· · It was. 17· ·section entitled "Summary of Most Pertinent Experience." 17· · · · Q· · When you -- when APS was sold to Trimble 18· ·Is there anything in that section that you now realize is 18· ·Navigation, Limited, did you continue in your role as 19· ·inaccurate or incomplete? 19· ·President of APS for any period of time? 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 20· · · · A· · I don't recall what the formal title was, based 21· · · · A· · No. 21· ·on Trimble documentation, but essentially it was the same 22· · · · Q· · Starting on page 7, there is a section entitled 22· ·type of position as the leader of that now subsidiary of 23· ·"The Start of Advanced Public Safety."· Is there anything 23· ·Trimble. 24· ·in that section that you now realize is inaccurate or 24· · · · Q· · When did Trimble purchase APS?· Do you recall 25· ·incomplete that goes on to page 10? 25· ·that date that became effective? U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 11 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 38 to 41 Page 38 Page 40 ·1· · · · A· · I believe on or about December 31, 2005. ·1· ·those clauses have a requirement that you provide ·2· · · · Q· · Before the sale of APS to Trimble what ·2· ·notice before you disclose that information, so I'm ·3· ·percentage, if any, did you own of APS? ·3· ·not going to have him answer that question. ·4· · · · A· · Plus or minus five percent, I believe it was ·4· · · · · · ·We can bring it up to the Court or figure ·5· ·70 percent. ·5· ·out another way to get the information, but I'm not ·6· · · · Q· · So, to the best of your recollection, you owned ·6· ·going to have him disclose that today without ·7· ·65 to 75 percent of APS before the sale to Trimble? ·7· ·knowing all of, you know -- he has a sense that ·8· · · · A· · Correct. ·8· ·he's not supposed to be disclosing that ·9· · · · Q· · Who or what entities owned the other percentages ·9· ·information. 10· ·of APS, before the sale to Trimble? 10· · · · · · ·So we have until, August is the trial, so 11· · · · A· · I believe Motorola owned 15 percent 11· ·you have until August to explore bias.· That's an 12· ·approximately and stock options to employees for the 12· ·issue that we can look at. 13· ·remainder. 13· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· Okay.· Well, I think we can 14· · · · Q· · Before the sale of Trimble you were the 14· ·agree that, regardless of the confidentiality 15· ·controlling shareholder of APS, correct? 15· ·obligations, by presenting him as an expert witness 16· · · · A· · Correct. 16· ·we would be entitled to go into that issue, and so 17· · · · Q· · After APS was sold to Trimble did you have any 17· ·if we need to come back and depose him a second 18· ·ownership interest in APS? 18· ·time as it relates to the compensation he received 19· · · · A· · No. 19· ·when he sold the company that is a litigant and 20· · · · Q· · After the sale of APS to Trimble did any 20· ·that has engaged him in this case, we will be 21· ·entities controlled by you or to which you were a 21· ·seeking our fees and costs for having to do so. 22· ·beneficiary have any ownership interest in APS? 22· · · · · · ·MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Okay.· So we will 23· · · · A· · No. 23· ·seek our fees and costs for you not turning over 24· · · · Q· · As a result of the sale of APS to Trimble did 24· ·Schnell's invoices and we have to go back and 25· ·you personally receive any money, stock or other 25· ·depose him.· I'm just telling you, I'm not saying Page 39 Page 41 ·1· ·compensation? ·1· · · · that you don't have, that you can't ask about ·2· · · · A· · Yes. ·2· · · · things related to bias.· Whether or not this is ·3· · · · Q· · What did you receive? ·3· · · · actually something that's related to it, that's a ·4· · · · A· · I don't believe I'm permitted to disclose that ·4· · · · whole other question. ·5· ·under the terms of my arrangement with Trimble when we ·5· · · · · · · · · But, as you know as an attorney, if there ·6· ·sold in 2005. ·6· · · · is a confidentiality clause it generally has a ·7· · · · Q· · You're currently serving as an expert witness on ·7· · · · notice provision, and so, since that information ·8· ·behalf of APS and Trimble and so how much compensation you ·8· · · · has not been previously brought to his attention so ·9· ·received from them in 2005, which I imagine is in the ·9· · · · that he could give proper notice to be able to 10· ·magnitude of several millions of dollars, goes to your 10· · · · answer your question, that is my concern about it 11· ·bias in this case and is relevant and discoverable. 11· · · · being on the record today. 12· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· I'm going to object 12· · · · Q· · Are you refusing to disclose the amount of 13· · · · to -- 13· ·compensation you were paid by Trimble when you sold APS 14· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· If -- 14· ·because of the instruction of counsel? 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Go ahead. 15· · · · A· · No, I'm refusing because I believe that I am 16· · · · Q· · If you would like to mark -- if your counsel 16· ·under a confidentiality agreement with Trimble that does 17· ·would like to mark this portion of the transcript as 17· ·require notice and without Trimble telling me that I can I 18· ·confidential so that it can be provided on the record but 18· ·have no intention of telling you. 19· ·not disclosed or publicly filed until we can raise the 19· · · · Q· · Okay.· What document would that obligation be 20· ·issue with the Court, I'm happy to do so, but I think we 20· ·contained within? 21· ·can agree that if you were paid millions of dollars it is 21· · · · A· · One of the many sets of documents that was 22· ·relevant to your role as now an expert witness. 22· ·signed pursuant to the closing of APS on December 30th or 23· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· If he has some type 23· ·31st, 2005. 24· · · · of confidentiality clause where he's not allowed to 24· · · · Q· · Do you have access to those documents through 25· · · · disclose that information particularly, generally 25· ·your computer that you have with you today? U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 12 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 42 to 45 Page 42 Page 44 ·1· · · · A· · I don't. ·1· ·just referencing that I believe held the APS stock. ·2· · · · Q· · Is it your understanding that only Trimble, the ·2· · · · Q· · Did you personally hold any of APS stock before ·3· ·company that's hired you in this case, would need to be ·3· ·the transaction or did the Irving and Edyce Rubenstein ·4· ·given notice before you disclose that number? ·4· ·Family Limited Partnership hold all of the stock of APS? ·5· · · · A· · Correct. ·5· · · · A· · I don't recall 100 percent, but I believe that ·6· · · · Q· · Do you know who at Trimble you're supposed to ·6· ·that entity, which was I believe owned by my parents, ·7· ·notify before disclosing that information? ·7· ·owned the entirety of the stock. ·8· · · · A· · I don't.· I'm sure the notice provision provides ·8· · · · Q· · Are Irving and Edyce the names of your parents? ·9· ·some name and address to send it to, but I wouldn't know ·9· · · · A· · They are. 10· ·who that is, or if that person or persons are still there. 10· · · · Q· · So a trust or, excuse me, a limited partnership 11· ·I'm sure it's their legal department, I would gather. 11· ·in the name of your parents held the stock of APS before 12· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Okay.· Then I would ask 12· ·the transaction in 2005? 13· · · · during the break that you contact Trimble's legal 13· · · · A· · I believe so. 14· · · · department -- 14· · · · Q· · And are you a beneficiary of that limited 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· No. 15· ·partnership? 16· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· ·-- and ask them if this 16· · · · A· · I don't believe so. 17· · · · information can be disclosed. 17· · · · Q· · Are you a partner in that limited partnership? 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· No, I'm not doing 18· · · · A· · I don't believe so. 19· · · · that. 19· · · · Q· · Do you have any relationship whatsoever with the 20· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Okay.· We will bring it up 20· ·Irving and Edyce Rubenstein Family Limited Partnership? 21· · · · with the Court later. 21· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 22· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Okay. 22· · · · A· · I believe so.· I think there was a private 23· · · · Q· · Did you sell APS to Trimble in an all cash 23· ·annuity or some type of private contract that was 24· ·transaction memorialized by a purchase and sale agreement 24· ·established between me or my estate and the Irving and 25· ·in 2005? 25· ·Edyce Family Limited Partnership. Page 43 Page 45 ·1· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·1· · · · Q· · Why is it that the company that you formed and ·2· · · · A· · I don't know what Trimble released in terms of ·2· ·that you're providing expert opinions in this case, APS, ·3· ·the nature of the sale, but the entirety of my holdings in ·3· ·why was that owned by a limited partnership, rather than ·4· ·APS and all the holdings of all the shareholders were sold ·4· ·you personally? ·5· ·to Trimble. ·5· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·6· · · · Q· · Was there a merger agreement involved in this ·6· · · · A· · Based on advice from tax and legal counsel, in ·7· ·transaction? ·7· ·terms of structuring the entity. ·8· · · · A· · There was a purchase agreement involved.· If ·8· · · · Q· · Any other reasons?· Were your parents involved ·9· ·they handled it as a merger, I don't recall the legalities ·9· ·in the operation of APS at all? 10· ·of it. 10· · · · A· · They were. 11· · · · Q· · Did any entities controlled by you receive any 11· · · · Q· · They were? 12· ·compensation as a result of the sale of APS to Trimble? 12· · · · A· · They were. 13· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 13· · · · Q· · Were they employees? 14· · · · A· · Um, I don't recall the legal structure or tax 14· · · · A· · They -- I don't recall how they were 15· ·structure that we had at the time, but I or my family were 15· ·compensated, but my mother was our first salesperson and 16· ·the shareholders or my estate, so, yes, in that regard. 16· ·actually trained Jack Siney, who came on board after we 17· · · · Q· · But you're not willing to disclose how much that 17· ·started and became ultimately our VP of sales. 18· ·was because of potential confidentiality concerns with 18· · · · Q· · So your mother was the first salesperson of APS 19· ·Trimble? 19· ·when the company was first founded? 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 20· · · · A· · Correct, and a bunch of other roles as being the 21· · · · Asked and answered. 21· ·second, quote, "employee" that was there. 22· · · · A· · That is correct again. 22· · · · Q· · Did she hold any other job titles or positions? 23· · · · Q· · What is the Irving and Edyce Rubenstein Family 23· · · · A· · No.· Again, she did everything with me in 24· ·Limited Partnership? 24· ·starting a small company.· I don't recall if there was any 25· · · · A· · I think that was the holding company that I was 25· ·other official title. U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 13 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 46 to 49 Page 46 Page 48 ·1· · · · Q· · Okay.· And what about your father? ·1· · · · A· · Say that question again. ·2· · · · A· · I don't recall his involvement and what role he ·2· · · · Q· · Sure.· Would the legal impact of a finding that ·3· ·played.· He was involved but it wasn't as specific as my ·3· ·the financial statements of APS were impacted by sales of ·4· ·mother. ·4· ·SmartConnect through misleading statements, would the ·5· · · · Q· · Do you recall if your father held any job titles ·5· ·legal ramifications of that finding be reflected in the ·6· ·or positions at APS? ·6· ·transaction documents? ·7· · · · A· · I don't think so. ·7· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·8· · · · Q· · Was he compensated in any way by APS? ·8· · · · A· · I'm not here to discuss the legal ramifications ·9· · · · A· · I don't recall what the arrangement was besides ·9· ·of anything.· I'm here to respond to an expert report. I 10· ·obviously stock. 10· ·don't know what the legal ramifications would or would not 11· · · · Q· · You mean stock through the limited partnership? 11· ·be. 12· · · · A· · Correct. 12· · · · Q· · Other than the transaction documents, were there 13· · · · Q· · Okay.· Did he personally own any stock of APS, 13· ·any oral agreements between you, APS, Trimble or the 14· ·your father? 14· ·Irving and Edyce Rubenstein Limited Partnership? 15· · · · A· · I don't believe so.· I think his holding was 15· · · · A· · No. 16· ·worked through the Irving and Edyce Family Limited 16· · · · Q· · So everything, all of the agreements and all of 17· ·Partnership. 17· ·the representations and warranties and obligations, would 18· · · · Q· · And what about your mother, did she personally 18· ·be reflected in the actual transaction documents, correct? 19· ·own any stock in APS? 19· · · · A· · To the best of my knowledge, yes. 20· · · · A· · I don't believe so.· I think her holdings were 20· · · · Q· · If a jury concludes that APS made material 21· ·through the Irving and Edyce Family Limited Partnership. 21· ·misrepresentations or omissions in the sale of 22· · · · Q· · But as a salesperson in the company was she also 22· ·SmartConnect would any of the compensation received from 23· ·compensated with a salary? 23· ·Trimble from the sale in 2005 have to be returned to 24· · · · A· · I don't recall. 24· ·Trimble? 25· · · · Q· · To close on the transaction by which you sold 25· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. Page 47 Page 49 ·1· ·your interests or the interests of your parents' limited ·1· · · · Beyond the scope.· What does this have to do with ·2· ·partnership did you have to make representations and ·2· · · · anything? ·3· ·warranties to Trimble? ·3· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Bias. ·4· · · · A· · Sure. ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· This is way, way ·5· · · · Q· · Did you have to make representations and ·5· · · · beyond "bias" (indicating quotes) and the questions ·6· ·warranties regarding APS's performance? ·6· · · · that you can ask about bias.· I'll let you ask that ·7· · · · A· · Yes. ·7· · · · question, but if we keep going down this road then ·8· · · · Q· · Did you have to make representations and ·8· · · · I may cut it off.· I'm going to let that question ·9· ·warranties regarding APS's financial statements? ·9· · · · go. 10· · · · A· · Yes. 10· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Can you repeat the 11· · · · Q· · If APS's financial statements were impacted by 11· · · · question? 12· ·the sale of SmartConnect made through deceptive or 12· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Sure. 13· ·misleading statements to customers would the limited 13· · · · · · · · · Would you read it back, please. 14· ·partnership have to return money received from Trimble? 14· · · · · · · · · (The record was read back at this time.) 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 16· · · · A· · I have no idea. 16· · · · A· · I don't believe so.· From what I can recall, 17· · · · Q· · Is it possible, if representations or warranties 17· ·there was some level of -- 18· ·made within the transaction documents were found to be 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Hold on for a 19· ·false, that compensation would have to be returned to 19· · · · second.· Can we take a break for just one second? 20· ·Trimble? 20· · · · I need to clarify something before he answers. 21· · · · A· · I don't know. 21· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Regarding confidentiality or 22· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 22· · · · privilege concerns? 23· · · · Q· · Would those -- would the impact of that be 23· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Yes, yes. 24· ·represented within these legal documents and the 24· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· We'll take a break. 25· ·transaction documents themselves? 25· · · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record, 10:59. U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 14 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 50 to 53 Page 50 Page 52 ·1 ·1· · · · irrelevant and I'm just -- that's the last question ·2· · · · · · · · · (Pause in the proceedings). ·2· · · · I'm going to have him answer on that topic, because ·3· · · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Thank-you.· We're ·3· · · · I think you're going far afield of where you're ·4· · · · again back on the record, 11:03. ·4· · · · able to go. ·5· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Would you please read back ·5· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Can you repeat the ·6· · · · the last question? ·6· · · · question? ·7· · · · · · · · · (The record was read back at this time.) ·7· · · · · · · · · MR. FRECHT:· Sure.· I'm going to have her ·8· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So the answer to the ·8· · · · read it back. ·9· · · · question is:· I don't know. ·9· · · · · · · · · (The record is read back at this time.) 10· · · · Q· · Would the answer to that question be found in 10· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Same objection. 11· ·the transaction documents you referenced earlier? 11· · · · And asked and answered. 12· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 12· · · · A· · If Peter Tillman was fired many years after my 13· · · · A· · I would assume so. 13· ·departure and that firing violated the Florida Whistle 14· · · · Q· · Has Trimble made any demands on you or the 14· ·Blower Act, that would have absolutely nothing to do with 15· ·Irving and Edyce Rubenstein Limited Partnership for 15· ·me and would not reflect on my reputation whatsoever. 16· ·indemnification pursuant to the transaction in 2005? 16· · · · Q· · What if the jury's finding was dependent on a 17· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 17· ·finding that sales of SmartConnect were made during your 18· · · · A· · No. 18· ·tenure as President, CEO and Founder of APS in ways that 19· · · · Q· · Regardless of the financial or legal 19· ·were deceptive or misleading to customers, would you agree 20· ·implications, would you agree that if a jury concludes 20· ·that that finding would reflect negatively on your 21· ·that APS made material misrepresentations to customers in 21· ·reputation? 22· ·the sale of SmartConnect during your tenure as Founder, 22· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Okay, same 23· ·President and CEO, would you agree with me that it would 23· · · · objection, and we're done with that line of 24· ·reflect poorly on your professional reputation? 24· · · · questioning unless you can tell me some reason that 25· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 25· · · · this is relevant, because it's not.· His reputation Page 51 Page 53 ·1· · · · A· · Would it reflect poorly on my professional ·1· ·is not at stake in this lawsuit. ·2· ·reputation? ·2· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· ·He is an expert.· I'm ·3· · · · Q· · Yes. ·3· ·entitled to challenge the believability of an ·4· · · · A· · Not necessarily, no. ·4· ·witness, particularly an expert witness who's being ·5· · · · Q· · Why not? ·5· ·compensated, if the jury's finding could impact his ·6· · · · A· · Because I don't think we did anything incorrect ·6· ·representation since he was the Founder and CEO of ·7· ·with SmartConnect, and I don't know all of the facts of ·7· ·the company.· You're making a -- ·8· ·the case, I was specifically focused on this expert ·8· · · · · · ·MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· What does his ·9· ·report.· I don't believe that it would have any negative ·9· ·reputation have to do with whether or not he is 10· ·repercussions on my reputation if there was some issue 10· ·qualified as an expert and is here to testify as an 11· ·that was formal about rev rec or something else that -- 11· ·expert with relation to SmartConnect and your 12· ·revenue recognition.· I don't think it would have any 12· ·client's allegations that its vaporware are 13· ·impact on my personal reputation, no. 13· ·nonexistent? 14· · · · Q· · So if a jury concluded that Mr. Tillman was 14· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· It's bias. 15· ·terminated for blowing the whistle on sales activities at 15· · · · · · ·MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· It's bias? 16· ·APS that violated Florida's Deceptive & Unfair Trade 16· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· Are you instructing the 17· ·Practices Act, you don't think that that would reflect 17· ·witness not to answer the question? 18· ·poorly on your reputation as the President, Founder and 18· · · · · · ·MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· I'm instructing you 19· ·CEO of the company? 19· ·not to ask any more of these silly questions.· This 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· I'm going to object 20· ·is the last question.· Roger, you're going way 21· · · · to form.· He hasn't been with APS since 2011. I 21· ·beyond -- 22· · · · don't see where this line of questioning goes.· It 22· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· This is my deposition. I 23· · · · doesn't go to bias as an expert.· What the jury 23· ·can ask the question -- 24· · · · does or doesn't do as it relates to his reputation 24· · · · · · ·MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· No. 25· · · · as he's not a party to this case I think is 25· · · · · · ·MR. FEICHT:· -- you can object and you U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 15 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 54 to 57 Page 54 Page 56 ·1· · · · can instruct him not to answer. ·1· · · · Q· · Does your parents' limited partnership have any ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· But you're asking ·2· ·ownership interest in APS or Trimble? ·3· · · · him questions what -- if a jury decides.· If a jury ·3· · · · A· · No. ·4· · · · decides that Peter Tillman is a liar, then what? I ·4· · · · Q· · Do you currently receive any continuing ·5· · · · mean, if the jury determines that Peter Tillman's ·5· ·compensation from APS? ·6· · · · case is frivolous, then what?· I mean, that makes ·6· · · · A· · No. ·7· · · · no sense in relation to whether or not he's here to ·7· · · · Q· · When you stopped working as your role as ·8· · · · testify as an expert. ·8· ·President and CEO in 2005 what was your annual ·9· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Are you instructing the ·9· ·compensation at APS? 10· · · · witness not to answer the question? 10· · · · A· · I don't recall. 11· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· I'm instructing you 11· · · · Q· · Do you recall approximately how much it was? 12· · · · that your questions are irrelevant and beyond the 12· · · · A· · I don't. 13· · · · scope of why he's here. 13· · · · Q· · What about in your role as General Manager of 14· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Duly noted. 14· ·Trimble's Public Safety Division? 15· · · · · · · · · Please answer the question. 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 16· · · · A· · I do not believe my reputation would be affected 16· · · · A· · I don't recall my comp in any of those 17· ·at all from any jury decision in this case regarding any 17· ·positions. 18· ·of the claims that I'm aware of that Peter Tillman has 18· · · · Q· · Was it over $1 million? 19· ·made.· I'm in no way concerned whatsoever. 19· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 20· · · · Q· · After the sale to Trimble did you continue as 20· · · · A· · Was my comp over $1 million?· I don't think so. 21· ·General Manager of Trimble's Public Safety Division? 21· ·My comp, I would assume, would be around 100 to 200,000; 22· · · · A· · I did. 22· ·however, I probably throughout, though, that period of 23· · · · Q· · And until when did you continue in that role? 23· ·time had like restricted stock units and other things that 24· · · · A· · 2008. 24· ·would bump it up and down, I would think, but I don't 25· · · · Q· · How many total years were you employed by APS? 25· ·recall the exact amount. Page 55 Page 57 ·1· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·1· · · · Q· · Was your annual compensation as the President ·2· · · · A· · I don't recall the actual employment entity ·2· ·and CEO of APS ever more than $500,000 a year? ·3· ·after the sale so I was definitely employed by APS from ·3· · · · A· · Prior to the sale venture from Trimble? ·4· ·2001 to 2005.· I would surmise that I was employed by ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·5· ·Trimble starting in 2006, although perhaps tax records ·5· · · · A· · I believe so, yes. ·6· ·would show otherwise, but it was either Trimble or APS ·6· · · · Q· · But you don't recall if it was ever over $1 ·7· ·after the sale.· I don't recall who the entity was that I ·7· ·million, including salary, commissions, stock options, et ·8· ·formally worked for.· I believe it was Trimble but I don't ·8· ·cetera? ·9· ·know. ·9· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 10· · · · Q· · And has that been -- are you referencing in that 10· · · · A· · I don't recall the exact amounts. 11· ·answer both in your role as General Manager and in your 11· · · · Q· · Did you or the limited partnership of your 12· ·role as Strategic Advisor? 12· ·parents sign any SEC Form 4 documents relating to the sale 13· · · · A· · That's correct. 13· ·of Trimble stock? 14· · · · Q· · Would you agree that you worked for either APS 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 15· ·or Trimble from 2001 to 2011? 15· · · · A· · I'm sorry, SEC 4? 16· · · · A· · Yes. 16· · · · Q· · Form 4. 17· · · · Q· · So for 10 years you worked for either of the 17· · · · A· · Form 4?· I don't know what that is. 18· ·defendants; is that correct? 18· · · · Q· · What was your compensation structure as a 19· · · · A· · That's -- 19· ·Strategic Advisor from 2009 to 2011? 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 21· · · · A· · That's correct. 21· · · · A· · I don't recall. 22· · · · Q· · I apologize if I've asked this already. 22· · · · Q· · Were you paid a salary? 23· · · · · · ·Do you currently have any ownership interest 23· · · · A· · I'm pretty sure, yes. 24· ·in APS or Trimble? 24· · · · Q· · You don't recall what your salary was? 25· · · · A· · No. 25· · · · A· · I don't. U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 16 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 58 to 61 Page 58 Page 60 ·1· · · · Q· · Was it over $200,000? ·1· ·that we've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 4? ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·2· · · · A· · No. ·3· · · · A· · I don't recall. ·3· · · · Q· · Have you been requested to provide any further ·4· · · · Q· · You don't recall if it was over or under ·4· ·expert opinions other than what's expressly mentioned in ·5· ·$200,000? ·5· ·Plaintiff's Exhibit 4, your expert report? ·6· · · · A· · I don't. ·6· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·7· · · · Q· · Do you have any retirement benefits or pensions ·7· · · · A· · No. ·8· ·affiliated with Trimble or APS? ·8· · · · Q· · What is your understanding of the common ·9· · · · A· · No. ·9· ·industry definition of vaporware? 10· · · · Q· · Can you recall the annual compensation that you 10· · · · A· · A software product that is announced but does 11· ·earned in any year while working as President and CEO, 11· ·not actually exist. 12· ·General Manager of Trimble's Public Safety Division or 12· · · · Q· · What is that understanding based upon? 13· ·Strategic Advisor during the years 2001 to 2011? 13· · · · A· · Just years of experience in the software 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 14· ·development world. 15· · · · A· · I don't -- I can't recall now. 15· · · · Q· · Okay.· There is no official dictionary 16· · · · Q· · Would those amounts be reflected in your tax 16· ·definition that would define vaporware in the context of 17· ·returns? 17· ·software or technology, is there? 18· · · · A· · Of course, yes.· And I have no objection if 18· · · · A· · I'm sure there's definitions of vaporware. I 19· ·Trimble provides you any of my compensation.· I just 19· ·believe they would be substantially similar to what I just 20· ·happen to not -- don't remember the number.· It has 20· ·described, something that is announced but doesn't really 21· ·fluctuated up and down tremendously over the years as an 21· ·exist. 22· ·entrepreneur, then working for Trimble.· I just simply 22· · · · Q· · Where would those definitions that you 23· ·don't recall what my compensation plan was. 23· ·referenced be memorialized? 24· · · · Q· · So your compensation, your work as APS and for 24· · · · A· · I don't know, different dictionary websites on 25· ·Trimble would be reflected in documentation that those 25· ·the Internet and industry articles and... Page 59 Page 61 ·1· ·companies would likely still have possession of, correct? ·1· · · · Q· · What is your definition of vaporware?· Do you ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·2· ·have a personal definition of vaporware? ·3· · · · A· · I can't comment if they would likely still have ·3· · · · A· · Yes, a product that is announced but does not ·4· ·it, but should they have it, I have no objection to them ·4· ·exist. ·5· ·providing it to you.· I would have to confirm with my ·5· · · · Q· · Was part of your assignment looking into whether ·6· ·counsel, however. ·6· ·SmartConnect actually exists or is a software product that ·7· · · · Q· · Going back to your report on page 7, there is a ·7· ·was announced but that doesn't actually exist? ·8· ·section entitled "Assignment." ·8· · · · A· · Can you repeat the question? ·9· · · · A· · Yes. ·9· · · · Q· · Sure.· Was part of your assignment analyzing 10· · · · Q· · Could you please read into the record the first 10· ·whether the SmartConnect product sold by APS actually 11· ·two sentences there and I'll ask you some questions about 11· ·existed or was instead a software product that was 12· ·that. 12· ·announced but that doesn't exist? 13· · · · A· · "My assignment was to read and review certain 13· · · · A· · Yes. 14· ·records and documents in this matter and then enter expert 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 15· ·opinions, if any, as to whether SmartConnect was a product 15· · · · Q· · Did you conclude that SmartConnect was a product 16· ·that did not actually exist or, in common industry 16· ·that existed and, therefore, did not meet your definition 17· ·parlance, vaporware.· In addition, my assignment included 17· ·of vaporware, based on your review of the source code 18· ·providing rebuttal, if any, to Mr. Schnell's opinions. 18· ·entitled "Supporting Zebra Printer & QuickTicket"? 19· · · · Q· · Does this report that we've marked as 19· · · · A· · The answer is, yes, I determined it was not 20· ·Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 contain all of the opinions you 20· ·vaporware based on a multitude of factors.· That was one 21· ·intend to offer in this matter? 21· ·of them. 22· · · · A· · Unless asked specific questions by you or by 22· · · · Q· · Moving on to page 11 of your expert report, 23· ·defendant's counsel, yes. 23· ·there is an excerpt of the November 7, 2007 meeting 24· · · · Q· · Have you been asked to perform any further 24· ·minutes where SmartConnect was introduced by the company. 25· ·analysis other than what's reflected in your expert report 25· ·Do you see that? U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 17 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 62 to 65 Page 62 Page 64 ·1· · · · A· · I do. ·1· · · · Q· · Did Mr. Tillman have the authority to adjust the ·2· · · · Q· · Is this quotation directly from the APS company ·2· ·pricing for SmartConnect without approval from a project ·3· ·minutes that were cited and footnoted as Exhibit 2 to your ·3· ·manager? ·4· ·expert report? ·4· · · · A· · I believe so. ·5· · · · A· · Yes. ·5· · · · Q· · And what is that understanding based upon? ·6· · · · Q· · Could you please read number 6 listed there into ·6· · · · A· · My personal knowledge of Peter being our lead ·7· ·the record? ·7· ·sales guy at the time and coming up with very customized ·8· · · · A· · "SmartConnect will be required for all QT and ·8· ·creative packages to sell to customers.· He was intimately ·9· ·PC," which stands for QuickTicket and PocketCitation, ·9· ·involved in product decisions, pricing decisions. 10· ·"sales as of January 1st, 2008, PM," which stands for 10· · · · Q· · Have you seen any documents by which Peter 11· ·project management, "Will kick back purchase orders 11· ·Tillman removed the SmartConnect from an order without 12· ·without SmartConnect." 12· ·receiving approval from a project manager? 13· · · · Q· · Is that statement accurate? 13· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 14· · · · A· · I believe so. 14· · · · A· · I have not.· You would just need to look at 15· · · · Q· · Did APS project managers kick back purchase 15· ·orders. 16· ·orders that did not include the extra charge for 16· · · · Q· · Because right here it says SmartConnect would be 17· ·SmartConnect after January 1st, 2008? 17· ·required for all QuickTicket and PocketCitation sales as 18· · · · A· · I believe that the project managers and the 18· ·of January 1, 2008.· PM will kick back purchase orders 19· ·salespeople had tremendous discretion on whether to charge 19· ·without SmartConnect.· You said those sentences were 20· ·that product or not, so they may have in some cases and 20· ·accurate.· Are you now saying that project managers did 21· ·may not have in other cases. 21· ·not kick back purchase orders without SmartConnect? 22· · · · Q· · In what cases would APS charge the additional 22· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 23· ·fee for the SmartConnect product? 23· · · · A· · What I said is I believe, based on what I read 24· · · · A· · In any cases where a Zebra printer was to be 24· ·and can recall, this represents the minutes that were 25· ·used as part of our application. 25· ·taken of that meeting.· Do minutes always contain every Page 63 Page 65 ·1· · · · Q· · So in any case in which a Zebra printer was used ·1· ·single detail of every sentence said during the meeting? ·2· ·the customer was charged for SmartConnect? ·2· ·No.· There may have been some context associated with the ·3· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·3· ·number 6. ·4· · · · A· · In any case the Zebra printer was used the ·4· · · · · · ·What the scribe wrote or chose not to write is ·5· ·customer was using a SmartConnect license and should have ·5· ·outside of my control.· So this is where some of my ·6· ·been charged unless it was decided not to by some person ·6· ·personal knowledge and history of understanding how ·7· ·with authority to not charge that. ·7· ·sales worked at that time influenced my decision here. ·8· · · · Q· · And who had authority to remove SmartConnect ·8· ·This is, I believe, an accurate representation in ·9· ·from orders?· Is that the project manager, PM? ·9· ·general of the minutes of the meeting, yes, but in 10· · · · A· · I don't recall the exact people, but at that 10· ·practice there was a lot of flexibility provided to key 11· ·stage of our company we were pretty flexible with any of 11· ·employees. 12· ·our senior leaders, so senior top salespeople, I don't 12· · · · Q· · Are you aware of a former APS employee, Lisa 13· ·recall what roles the PM played, if they were able to make 13· ·Swanson, being disciplined for taking SmartConnect off a 14· ·that decision or not, other executives in the company. 14· ·purchase order without the approval of her project 15· · · · Q· · Is it your testimony today that a sales 15· ·manager? 16· ·associate could remove SmartConnect based on their own 16· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 17· ·independent decision -- 17· · · · A· · I'm not. 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 18· · · · Q· · Did you ever talk to Lisa Swanson about that 19· · · · Q· · -- without the approval of a project manager? 19· ·scenario where she was disciplined for removing 20· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 20· ·SmartConnect from a purchase order? 21· · · · A· · A sales associate had a lot of flexibility in 21· · · · A· · Not that I recall, no. 22· ·pricing and a number of the sales associates, including 22· · · · Q· · Are you aware that Peter Tillman knew while he 23· ·Mr. Tillman, who sold a ton for Advanced Public Safety, 23· ·was employed by APS that a co-worker had been disciplined 24· ·had a lot of flexibility in determining what was charged 24· ·for not including SmartConnect on a sales order? 25· ·and at what rate. 25· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 18 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 66 to 69 Page 66 Page 68 ·1· · · · A· · I'm not aware, no.· Peter would have been in a ·1· ·on APS or did they first have to be reviewed by both a ·2· ·different class, though, compared to Lisa.· Lisa was a ·2· ·project manager and the finance department before a ·3· ·regular, normal salesperson.· Peter had a unique ·3· ·contract would be signed? ·4· ·relationship with APS.· He was able to do a lot of ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·5· ·customized solutions. ·5· · · · A· · I think in a number of cases, from what I can ·6· · · · · · ·In fact, most of his sales were million dollar ·6· ·recall, they were binding prior to any of those parties ·7· ·plus sales of products we didn't even sell.· He would ·7· ·seeing it. ·8· ·just invent new things that we would then build.· He had ·8· · · · Q· · In what circumstances are those? ·9· ·a lot of flexibility because of his tremendous success ·9· · · · A· · One example that I can think of was Peter 10· ·at APS. 10· ·determined we needed to carry a product that would secure 11· · · · Q· · Have you seen any documentation that suggests 11· ·the Zebra printer to a police car using, or motorcycle, 12· ·that Peter Tillman was given flexibility, as you termed 12· ·using a metal mount versus a plastic mount and had a 13· ·it, regarding whether or not to include SmartConnect on 13· ·series of discussions with the manufacturer about building 14· ·sales of QuickTicket? 14· ·it and then selling it.· I do not recall how far he took 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 15· ·it, in terms of closing that sale, but I remember sending 16· · · · A· · I don't have any particular document that I've 16· ·him a note that I didn't even know we sold metal printer 17· ·seen, no. 17· ·mounts, at which point he told me he was working with a 18· · · · Q· · Have you received any information or do you have 18· ·manufacturer and we are. 19· ·personal recollection of any facts that would suggest that 19· · · · Q· · Can you recall any other instances where a sale 20· ·Peter Tillman was specifically provided with flexibility 20· ·was actually made by Peter Tillman without that sale being 21· ·as it relates to whether or not to charge the additional 21· ·approved by a project manager and separately approved by 22· ·fee for SmartConnect on sales of QuickTicket? 22· ·finance? 23· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 23· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 24· · · · A· · Yes, I can tell you that, as President of the 24· · · · A· · Uh, I would say that there were many sales that 25· ·company, we gave Peter Tillman a tremendous amount of 25· ·were made without finance or project management approving Page 67 Page 69 ·1· ·flexibility to close certain deals, and he would utilize ·1· ·it; however, most would have been approved by someone else ·2· ·that flexibility in many different ways. ·2· ·if it was something custom that was something we didn't ·3· · · · Q· · But do you have a specific recollection of any ·3· ·actually sell.· So in terms of the unique deals that Mr. ·4· ·information in utilizing that flexibility to remove ·4· ·Tillman did, from what I can recall in terms of unique ·5· ·SmartConnect from an order, even though the meeting ·5· ·products, he would run those by myself or someone in ·6· ·minutes say that it's required? ·6· ·development and have other people look at it. ·7· · · · A· · I remember multiple conversations with Peter ·7· · · · · · ·I don't know and believe it would have been a ·8· ·throughout the years about his ability to modify sales ·8· ·specific project manager or perhaps finance, if there ·9· ·orders and to sell things that he would deem would be ·9· ·was a revenue recognition issue, but in general, short 10· ·something that we would be able to deliver. 10· ·of pricing modifications, changing the price of 11· · · · Q· · My question is, do you recall any specific 11· ·SmartConnect, including it or not or prices of printers, 12· ·information that would suggest that Peter Tillman was 12· ·any more complex deals he typically would run by 13· ·instructed that he had flexibility specifically regarding 13· ·someone, but he wouldn't necessarily have to or did it 14· ·the sale of SmartConnect? 14· ·just for pricing changes. 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 15· · · · Q· · Is it your testimony that Peter Tillman as an 16· · · · A· · In terms of a pattern of conduct and a pattern 16· ·independent contractor in 2008 had the authority to change 17· ·of discussions, Peter had flexibility in any of our 17· ·prices of APS products without receiving approval from 18· ·products.· I do not recall a date or time or a specific 18· ·management? 19· ·conversation where the word "SmartConnect" came up, 19· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 20· ·itself, as a product besides just in general that Peter 20· · · · A· · In practice, I think in some cases, from what I 21· ·was able to not only modify any portions of our sales 21· ·recall, he did, and actually led to some issues with 22· ·orders but literally even invent new ones that we don't 22· ·Trimble whereas we were having trouble allowing him to 23· ·even sell for us to then build and deliver. 23· ·remain as an independent contractor.· There was 24· · · · Q· · When Peter Tillman created customized sales 24· ·discussions that were had over the course of many months, 25· ·orders did those sales orders automatically become binding 25· ·if not years, that, based on the law, he would need to be U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 19 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 70 to 73 Page 70 Page 72 ·1· ·an employee and had to be transferred at some point, I ·1· · · · Q· · Was there ever a separate license document? ·2· ·don't recall what year, but there were some discussions ·2· · · · A· · Like a licensing agreement? ·3· ·where the level of control was high enough that he wasn't ·3· · · · Q· · (Nods). ·4· ·going to be an independent contractor any more and had to ·4· · · · A· · I don't believe so.· I don't know if we had a ·5· ·be an employee. ·5· ·licensing agreement on any of our products. ·6· · · · Q· · Are you referring to when Mr. Tillman was hired ·6· · · · Q· · So your reference to a customer was provided a ·7· ·as a Trimble employee in 2012? ·7· ·license, you're referring to statements on invoices or ·8· · · · A· · I wasn't there when that happened.· I already ·8· ·purchase orders that indicate that the licenses were being ·9· ·left.· But I know there were discussions prior to that. ·9· ·purchased? 10· · · · Q· · Do you have any recollection of Peter Tillman 10· · · · A· · That's correct. 11· ·being hired as a Trimble employee before you left in 2011? 11· · · · Q· · No additional documentation that would suggest 12· · · · A· · I don't. 12· ·the -- or provide the details regarding the licensing 13· · · · Q· · So, going back to my last question, when he 13· ·arrangement? 14· ·worked as an independent contractor, did Peter Tillman 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 15· ·have the authority to change the price of products without 15· · · · A· · Terms and conditions type licensing information? 16· ·the approval of APS management? 16· ·I don't believe that was provided on any of our products, 17· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Objection, asked 17· ·to my recollection.· I believe just marketing materials 18· · · · and answered. 18· ·and then the proposal which showed the itemization of the 19· · · · A· · Yes. 19· ·different licenses that a customer was purchasing was the 20· · · · Q· · Have you seen any documentation or reviewed any 20· ·evidence of a transaction that we used. 21· ·information to suggest that Peter Tillman was, after this 21· · · · Q· · Prior to this company-wide meeting in which 22· ·November 7, 2007 meeting in which SmartConnect was 22· ·SmartConnect was introduced to the entire company on or 23· ·introduced, was given flexibility to not add SmartConnect 23· ·about November 7, 2007, do you have any documentation or 24· ·to purchase orders of QuickTicket? 24· ·personal knowledge to suggest that Peter Tillman had any 25· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Objection, asked 25· ·knowledge whatsoever regarding the SmartConnect product Page 71 Page 73 ·1· · · · and answered. ·1· ·before it was announced? ·2· · · · A· · No written documentation that I'm aware of. ·2· · · · A· · Yes. ·3· · · · Q· · Part of the sale of SmartConnect -- let me ask ·3· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·4· ·it this way.· You mentioned SmartConnect license.· What ·4· · · · Q· · What documentation or personal knowledge do you ·5· ·did you mean by that? ·5· ·have? ·6· · · · A· · SmartConnect was sold as a license per Zebra ·6· · · · A· · I have personal knowledge that this product was ·7· ·Machine that was used with one of our ticketing products, ·7· ·discussed with Peter, amongst other salespeople.· It was ·8· ·either QuickTicket or PocketCitation.· After this date it ·8· ·in response to a set of issues that we were having during ·9· ·was no longer included as part of the QuickTicket or ·9· ·that year, because we sold Zebra printers at retail 10· ·PocketCitation package. 10· ·typically. 11· · · · Q· · So essentially the customer was purchasing a 11· · · · · · ·We knew that we embedded a lot of technology 12· ·license to be able to use that functionality lawfully? 12· ·into the whole printer communication module and in order 13· · · · A· · Correct. 13· ·to recover that cost we were selling it as part of the 14· · · · Q· · Is the SmartConnect license a written document? 14· ·printer price, but then some folks were deciding to buy 15· · · · A· · I believe so.· There's marketing materials 15· ·the printer elsewhere and we weren't getting compensated 16· ·similar to our other products that talk about licensing of 16· ·for the printer software that we developed and had to 17· ·products. 17· ·continue to develop and maintain, so strategically it 18· · · · Q· · So, when the customer purchased SmartConnect 18· ·was discussed with the salespeople and some other 19· ·were they given a written document that says, "You can now 19· ·members of the company how to best handle that 20· ·have a license to use this SmartConnect product"? 20· ·situation, so we decided to modify our pricing. 21· · · · A· · They were.· They were.· It was shown identically 21· · · · · · ·I don't recall the exact amounts.· I think 22· ·as other licensed products on our proposals and then I 22· ·SmartConnect was 149 and I believe that we reduced the 23· ·would assume following through on invoices, but at a 23· ·printers by 149 or thereabouts and continued to offer 24· ·minimum on the signed proposals and then subsequently on 24· ·that product and productized it as SmartConnect from a 25· ·purchase orders issued by customers. 25· ·marketing perspective and then were able to sell the U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 20 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 74 to 77 Page 74 Page 76 ·1· ·printers at a more competitive rate out of the ·1· ·the introduction of SmartConnect they wouldn't have ·2· ·marketplace. ·2· ·known anything different.· There was no other printer. ·3· · · · Q· · Is it your testimony today under oath that you ·3· ·There was a Zebra printer you would take out of the box, ·4· ·had conversations with Peter Tillman before November 7th, ·4· ·you would click a button and load our software product ·5· ·2007 regarding the SmartConnect product? ·5· ·on a hand-held, it would do the work and update the ·6· · · · A· · Yes, that is my recollection. ·6· ·printer to the proper specifications, which includes a ·7· · · · Q· · What were the dates of those conversations? ·7· ·series of things that I'm happy to talk about. ·8· · · · A· · I do not recall. ·8· · · · Q· · Okay.· We'll get to that later.· My question for ·9· · · · Q· · Who else was present during those conversations? ·9· ·you now, and I'll move to strike the last answer as 10· · · · A· · I do not recall. 10· ·nonresponsive, isn't it true that the idea for 11· · · · Q· · Where did these conversations occur? 11· ·SmartConnect arose after a customer came to APS and stated 12· · · · A· · Typically on the phone.· He was a remote 12· ·that printers purchased from APS at a higher price 13· ·employee. 13· ·performed the same as a printer purchased elsewhere for 14· · · · Q· · So you have specific recollection of telephone 14· ·less? 15· ·conversations with Peter Tillman, possibly with other 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form.· He 16· ·people, possibly without other people on the line, before 16· · · · answered your question specifically and then he 17· ·November 7th, 2007 discussing the SmartConnect product? 17· · · · gave an explanation, so I'm going to object to your 18· · · · A· · Yes, I do. 18· · · · motion to strike, I'm going to say, "Asked and 19· · · · Q· · How can you recall so specifically that it was 19· · · · answered," and she can read back his answer because 20· ·before this November 7th, 2007 date? 20· · · · he specifically answered this question. 21· · · · A· · A decision of this magnitude would have been 21· · · · Q· · Can you answer the question, please? 22· ·discussed with Peter because he was intimately involved in 22· · · · A· · The sales group was instrumental in us creating 23· ·this process.· I believe it was actually Peter who 23· ·this product, so if I understand your question correctly 24· ·initiated the request for this because this was an issue 24· ·was there was a salesperson that came to us and said 25· ·with sales.· What started this process was the inability 25· ·people are buying printers from us, they could buy it Page 75 Page 77 ·1· ·of sales to effectively sell the printer at the price that ·1· ·elsewhere, we're losing the printer sales, what do we do? ·2· ·we were charging and -- ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· That's not... ·3· · · · Q· · Wasn't it -- I'm sorry, go ahead. ·3· · · · Q· · Wasn't the -- wasn't the comment from a ·4· · · · A· · Go ahead. ·4· ·salesperson, "My customers are telling me they are buying ·5· · · · Q· · Were you finished with your answer? ·5· ·their printers elsewhere because they are priced lower"? ·6· · · · A· · Yes. ·6· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· I'm going to object ·7· · · · Q· · Wasn't it a different salesperson that raised ·7· · · · to form.· Roger -- ·8· ·the fact that a customer of APS had provided a side-by- ·8· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· You can object to the form. ·9· ·side printing comparison of one Zebra printer purchased ·9· · · · Are you instructing him not to answer? 10· ·from APS and another Zebra printer purchased elsewhere and 10· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· No, I'm thinking 11· ·determined there was no difference in the quality of the 11· · · · because I'm going to say something to you, so allow 12· ·printing which then led to the discussion of SmartConnect? 12· · · · me to think so I can say what I need to say.· The 13· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 13· · · · question, your, the premise of your question, I 14· · · · A· · No, that's not the case at all.· Prior to this 14· · · · think you need to think about the time-frames that 15· ·date and it being announced there was no question about 15· · · · you're asking and who you're asking.· Do you 16· ·how a printer functioned with our product.· You would 16· · · · understand what I'm -- I don't want to like... 17· ·download our product, QuickTicket or PocketCitation.· You 17· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· I understand. 18· ·would download our product, QuickTicket or PocketCitation, 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Okay?· Because the 19· ·I believe we started with PocketCitation first with the 19· · · · time-frame that you're relying on for that witness 20· ·Zebra printers, and it would all happen automatically. 20· · · · that testified to that is subsequent to him even 21· · · · · · ·One of the basic tenents of how APS was 21· · · · being at APS. 22· ·successful was this was software by cops, for cops, and 22· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· I'll see what the witness 23· ·we knew that every extra click took time, so we spent a 23· · · · says. 24· ·tremendous amount of time building software that 24· · · · Q· · Are you aware of a salesperson at APS coming to 25· ·automated the every process.· To a customer, prior to 25· ·the company and pointing out that customers had U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 21 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 78 to 81 Page 78 Page 80 ·1· ·communicated to that salesperson that they were purchasing ·1· ·serving as a corporate representative? ·2· ·their printers elsewhere because they were priced at a ·2· · · · A· · No. ·3· ·lower price than APS? ·3· · · · Q· · Okay, I'll represent to you that she was. ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Page and line? ·5· · · · That's a different question. ·5· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· I'm referring to page 41, ·6· · · · A· · It appears you're speaking of a specific ·6· · · · line 18. ·7· ·incident that I do not recall, but I can say, to provide ·7· · · · Q· · The question is: ·8· ·as much clarity as I could, that SmartConnect's creation ·8· · · · · · ·"Who conceived of the idea to separate out ·9· ·was a confluence of events.· It was based on sales ·9· ·SmartConnect as its own separate product? 10· ·complaining that they were having competitive sales issues 10· · · · · · ·Answer from Ms. Bartlett: 11· ·selling the Zebra printer and our realization that the 11· · · · · · ·"To our knowledge, and everyone that I've 12· ·amount of work that was required to maintain the software 12· ·spoken to, it was Jeff Rubenstein," end quote. 13· ·to connect to the printer and the various new models of 13· · · · · · ·Do you disagree with that testimony? 14· ·printers coming out and the complexities with the Zebra 14· · · · A· · No, and it was very likely me.· I didn't want to 15· ·product specifically, since we did not use their driver, 15· ·take credit for something that I may not have come up with 16· ·was becoming burdensome, and that confluence of events is 16· ·the original idea, but even if I didn't come up with the 17· ·what created SmartConnect, as a marketing product. 17· ·original idea, as President of the company, any of those 18· · · · Q· · Who first came up with the idea to sell 18· ·decisions would have been run through me completely, so... 19· ·SmartConnect as a separate product? 19· · · · Q· · The next question and answer on lines 22 through 20· · · · A· · I don't know. 20· ·25, on the same page, the question is: 21· · · · Q· · Did you read the deposition of Jacqueline 21· · · · · · ·"Have you seen any documents or did anyone 22· ·Bartlett? 22· ·definitively tell you that Jeff Rubenstein conceived of 23· · · · A· · I was provided it, and I may have glanced 23· ·the idea to separate out SmartConnect as its own 24· ·through it, but I didn't read it thoroughly. 24· ·product? 25· · · · Q· · Did you review page 41 of Ms. Bartlett's 25· · · · · · ·"Answer:· That is to the best of our Page 79 Page 81 ·1· ·deposition where she testified as follows -- ·1· ·knowledge." ·2· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· That is which ·2· · · · · · ·To the best of your knowledge, were you the ·3· · · · deposition? ·3· ·one who conceived of SmartConnect as its own separate ·4· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· August 30, 2016. ·4· ·product? ·5· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· What page and line ·5· · · · A· · To the best of my knowledge, yes.· I just ·6· · · · numbers? ·6· ·wouldn't want to take credit if someone sent me an e-mail ·7· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· 41... sorry. ·7· ·suggesting the idea, but I either conceived of it or drove ·8· · · · Q· · Her deposition dated November 17, 2016, did you ·8· ·that process. ·9· ·review the second volume of her transcript?· It's listed ·9· · · · Q· · So you don't disagree with Ms. Bartlett's 10· ·under Exhibit B as one of the documents you reviewed. 10· ·testimony on behalf of the company in that regard, do you? 11· · · · A· · Then I did. 11· · · · A· · I do not. 12· · · · Q· · Okay.· Do you recall the following testimony -- 12· · · · Q· · Was it your idea to separately charge customers 13· ·and were you aware of Ms. Bartlett serving as the 13· ·for SmartConnect despite the fact that its functionality 14· ·company's 30(b)(6) designee regarding the development of 14· ·was contained within the QuickTicket software that 15· ·the SmartConnect product? 15· ·customers separately purchased? 16· · · · A· · What is a 30(b)(6) designee? 16· · · · A· · Yes.· You also then talked about that it was 17· · · · Q· · You're an attorney, right?· You're not familiar 17· ·contained separately within the software that customers 18· ·with that term? 18· ·purchased such as QuickTicket.· It was also contained in 19· · · · A· · I'm not, no. 19· ·PocketCitation and some other products, but, yes. 20· · · · Q· · Okay, 30(b)(6) is when the company designates a 20· · · · Q· · In all of those products the functionality sold 21· ·specific employee, in this case Ms. Bartlett, to testify 21· ·as the SmartConnect product was delivered to customers 22· ·on behalf of the company. 22· ·either within QuickTicket or PocketCitation, which are 23· · · · A· · Okay. 23· ·products that customers separately purchased, correct? 24· · · · Q· · So in this -- were you aware when Ms. Bartlett 24· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 25· ·was testifying in both of her depositions that she was 25· · · · A· · Correct. U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 22 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 82 to 85 Page 82 Page 84 ·1· · · · Q· · It wasn't Peter Tillman's idea to separate and ·1· ·or Printek printer? ·2· ·sell SmartConnect as a product, was it? ·2· · · · A· · Not to my knowledge. ·3· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·3· · · · Q· · So that sentence, would it be more accurate that ·4· · · · A· · Unless he says it is and started that discussion ·4· ·it was required for all new software purchases of ·5· ·and then I took over it, I wouldn't want to take credit ·5· ·QuickTicket and PocketCitation when a customer is using a ·6· ·for that, but assuming he said -- assuming we have no ·6· ·Zebra or Printek, P-R-I-N-T-E-K, printer? ·7· ·evidence to the contrary, it would have either been my ·7· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·8· ·idea or I would have then heard it from someone and said, ·8· · · · A· · I don't recall the details regarding Printek, ·9· ·"That's a great idea," and then would have taken ·9· ·although that printer was a printer designed to emulate 10· ·responsibility for it. 10· ·Zebra's code, but in terms of Zebra, yeah, the entire 11· · · · Q· · But you've never seen any documentation to 11· ·SmartConnect product was only related to those folks that 12· ·suggest that it was Peter Tillman's idea to sell 12· ·had a Zebra printer. 13· ·SmartConnect as a separate product, correct? 13· · · · Q· · Were Zebra brand printers the most commony used 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 14· ·printers by APS customers? 15· · · · A· · No. 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 16· · · · Q· · I think we have a double negative there, so let 16· · · · A· · Not at that time, no. 17· ·me make sure the record is clear.· No, you haven't seen 17· · · · Q· · Did they become the most commonly used printers 18· ·any documentation, correct? 18· ·because of their small size? 19· · · · A· · Correct. 19· · · · A· · Yes, they did, and because of other reasons as 20· · · · Q· · Thanks.· You mentioned that the price of 20· ·well, but yes, they did. 21· ·SmartConnect was $149.· The meeting minutes that are 21· · · · Q· · Do you recall approximately when Zebra brand 22· ·quoted in your expert report reflect that it would be 22· ·printers became the best selling printer for APS 23· ·$175.· Can you explain that difference for us? 23· ·customers? 24· · · · A· · I can't.· It may have changed over time.· It was 24· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 25· ·in that range, 149, 175.· What I do recall was that it was 25· · · · A· · I don't. Page 83 Page 85 ·1· ·designed to offset whatever discount we gave for the ·1· · · · Q· · Was it sometime after the introduction of the ·2· ·hardware approximately and it was in that range.· Maybe ·2· ·SmartConnect product -- ·3· ·the price changed over time.· I don't recall. ·3· · · · A· · I don't know. ·4· · · · Q· · Do you recall being involved in the ·4· · · · Q· · -- in 2007? ·5· ·conversations to determine that price to compensate for ·5· · · · A· · I don't recall when. ·6· ·the change in the Zebra price? ·6· · · · Q· · Do you know approximately what percentage of APS ·7· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·7· ·customers used Zebra or Printek printers? ·8· · · · A· · I don't recall a specific conversation, but I ·8· · · · A· · I don't. ·9· ·would have been involved, sure. ·9· · · · Q· · Was it a significant portion of APS's customer 10· · · · Q· · And was the plan for the company and the intent 10· ·base? 11· ·in separating out SmartConnect as a separate product to 11· · · · A· · I don't know for sure.· The most popular 12· ·reduce the sale of Zebra printers so that they would be 12· ·printers, most popular printer that we started using, was 13· ·more competitive with other distributors of the Zebra 13· ·an Epson printer.· That was the sole printer we used for a 14· ·brand printers while then separately adding on a 14· ·long time. 15· ·comparative product and price for the separate 15· · · · Q· · Starting in 2001 you're referring to now? 16· ·SmartConnect product; is that accurate? 16· · · · A· · Correct. 17· · · · A· · Yes, that was one of the goals, that was one of 17· · · · Q· · Okay. 18· ·the goals for SmartConnect. 18· · · · A· · Or thereabouts when we released the first 19· · · · Q· · The meeting minutes state that SmartConnect 19· ·QuickTicket product.· Then there was Zebra which came on 20· ·would be, quote, "required for all new software purchases 20· ·the scene and started to grow throughout the years.· There 21· ·of QuickTicket and PocketCitation," end quote.· Is that 21· ·were customers that continued to use Epson.· There were 22· ·sentence accurate? 22· ·customers that would purchase inkjet printers or thermal 23· · · · A· · That is accurate, yes. 23· ·printers like a Brother inkjet printing, you would find it 24· · · · Q· · Did APS ever charge a customer purchasing 24· ·off of *** Steepo, or a, what they call a Pentax, 25· ·QuickTicket or PocketCitation that was not using the Zebra 25· ·P-E-N-T-A-X, printer, which was a thermal printer that we U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 23 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 86 to 89 Page 86 Page 88 ·1· ·used, but Zebra printers over time were the most popular. ·1· · · · A· · Correct. ·2· · · · Q· · And so then eventually, once Zebra printers grew ·2· · · · Q· · Were you involved in any way in the discipline ·3· ·in popularity, they became a significant portion of the ·3· ·of Peter Tillman in 2014? ·4· ·printers used by your company's customers, correct? ·4· · · · A· · No. ·5· · · · A· · That's correct.· They became the most popular ·5· · · · Q· · Were you involved in any way in Peter Tillman's ·6· ·printer to be used by our customers. ·6· ·termination in 2014? ·7· · · · Q· · Isn't it true that during the time in which you ·7· · · · A· · No. ·8· ·served as President and CEO of APS that APS was the number ·8· · · · Q· · When did you first hear that Peter Tillman had ·9· ·one distributor of Zebra brand printers in the United ·9· ·raised allegations regarding the SmartConnect product? 10· ·States? 10· · · · A· · I don't recall.· I became aware that Peter 11· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 11· ·Tillman was suing Trimble sometime between 2011 and 12· · · · A· · I don't know actually but... it would be nice if 12· ·whenever the defendant's attorney contacted me on 13· ·so.· It may be.· I don't know. 13· ·January 2nd.· I don't recall if the word "SmartConnect" 14· · · · Q· · It is certainly possible, given the popularity 14· ·ever came up.· I didn't know much about the litigation. 15· ·of the Zebra printers, that APS could have been one of the 15· · · · Q· · Who first informed you that Peter Tillman had 16· ·major distributors of Zebra printers during those years, 16· ·filed a lawsuit against Trimble and APS? 17· ·correct? 17· · · · A· · I don't know.· I guess it was more scuttlebutt. 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 18· ·We have a lot of people who work at SmartProcure who used 19· · · · A· · Oh, we definitely sold a lot of Zebra printers. 19· ·to work at APS.· It was probably just water cooler 20· ·I'm hard pressed to believe we were the leading seller. 20· ·discussion with somebody and I heard it. 21· ·When you now clarified your question and said one of the 21· · · · Q· · Do you know what year you heard these water 22· ·major ones I would assume we were, but I don't know who 22· ·cooler discussions regarding Peter Tillman suing APS or 23· ·else they sold to, like Hertz used them, so I would assume 23· ·Trimble? 24· ·companies like that would be much bigger users of Zebra 24· · · · A· · I don't. 25· ·printers, but at least in public safety I would say we 25· · · · Q· · It was interesting to you at least as the Page 87 Page 89 ·1· ·were. ·1· ·Founder that one of its former employees had sued the ·2· · · · Q· · Were you aware of APS receiving the best price ·2· ·company, correct? ·3· ·from Zebra regarding purchasing the Zebra RW-420 printers ·3· · · · A· · Sure. ·4· ·for resale to APS's customers? ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·5· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·5· · · · Q· · You just don't recall when that conversation ·6· · · · A· · I'm not sure we even bought Zebra printers ·6· ·was? ·7· ·through Zebra.· We may have bought it through different ·7· · · · A· · It was a number of years ago, but I don't recall ·8· ·distributors. ·8· ·when.· I don't even know when he actually sued them so I ·9· · · · Q· · What distributors would you have bought Zebra ·9· ·don't... 10· ·brand printers from during the time frame of 2005 through 10· · · · Q· · Do you recall the year that you first heard 11· ·2011? 11· ·about it? 12· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 12· · · · A· · I don't.· I could say it was more than a year 13· · · · A· · I wouldn't know anything beyond 2008 probably. 13· ·ago, and it was less than five years ago, but I don't know 14· · · · Q· · Why is that? 14· ·when it was filed. 15· · · · A· · Because I wasn't leading the company at that 15· · · · Q· · You can't get any more specific than that? 16· ·time.· I was advising on other special projects and 16· · · · A· · I can't. 17· ·wouldn't have been involved at all in that.· But if we 17· · · · Q· · You do specifically remember that over ten years 18· ·didn't buy from Zebra, which we may have, I just don't 18· ·ago you had a conversation with Peter Tillman before 19· ·recall, I do know that we bought from other distributors 19· ·November 7, 2007, regarding the SmartConnect product? 20· ·like ScanSource, one word, S-C-A-N-S-O-U-R-C-E, and I 20· · · · A· · I do, and the reason why was hearing in passing 21· ·believe BlueStar, common spelling, one word. 21· ·sometime in the last four years that Peter is suing 22· · · · Q· · You just don't know if the APS purchased Zebra 22· ·Trimble for something of which no one knew any of the 23· ·printers that it ultimately sold to its customers were 23· ·details was not something that I would kind of burn in my 24· ·purchased directly from the manufacturer Zebra or through 24· ·head a date and a time.· To your question about would I 25· ·a distributor such as ScanSource or BlueStar, correct? 25· ·have had a conversation or do I recall a conversation with U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 24 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 90 to 93 Page 90 Page 92 ·1· ·Peter discussing something so significant with our lead ·1· · · · A· · No, with the caveat that Peter actually did ·2· ·salesperson responsible for millions of dollars in ·2· ·development, so he wasn't, as part of the team he was ·3· ·revenue, I can assure you that it did happen, and I do ·3· ·always to my knowledge in the sales group, but Peter was ·4· ·recall it. ·4· ·very helpful, even to the point where if I had work to do ·5· · · · Q· · So the conversation you recall sometime before ·5· ·one evening in coding something like modifying a form, he ·6· ·November 2007 was burned into your memory with regard to ·6· ·would actually do some of the work for me. ·7· ·being before a particular date, but that same employee ·7· · · · Q· · Do you have any information to indicate that ·8· ·suing the company within the last five years, you can't ·8· ·Peter Tillman personally worked on any of the software ·9· ·recall even what year it is, is that accurate to say? ·9· ·code that was described and sold by the name of 10· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 10· ·SmartConnect? 11· · · · A· · That's accurate, yes, yes.· These were decisions 11· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 12· ·that I was involved in while President of the company with 12· · · · A· · I don't think Peter would have had access to or 13· ·my senior salesperson.· Um, my management style is to 13· ·worked on that type of code.· He more worked on either 14· ·involve my people, and if we're going to make a decision 14· ·ancillary projects with some third parties, so let me 15· ·like this, especially because it was driven by salespeople 15· ·clarify the prior question.· There was a few instances I 16· ·concerned that they were losing out on revenue and it 16· ·believe where we did work with another third-party firm. 17· ·would have an impact on Peter Tillman's commission, I 17· ·I don't actually recall even what the software was, but I 18· ·remember those conversations. 18· ·think the gentleman's name was Russ or something similar. 19· · · · · · ·Peter had a set of very high commissions when 19· ·Peter can confirm it. 20· ·he started working with us and they went down over time 20· · · · · · ·He passed away during our time at APS, but he 21· ·as he built a ramp -- as he ramped up his pipeline and 21· ·did some work for us on something, and Peter was 22· ·so forth.· And there was a period of time, I believe 22· ·intimately involved in working with him because he had a 23· ·around this time, where he had a sliding scale, and that 23· ·personal relationship with him, although I can't 24· ·was probably likely one of the reasons that I remember 24· ·remember what the software was.· But to your question 25· ·it, was that it had an impact on his commissions and it 25· ·about SmartConnect, I don't believe Peter had any Page 91 Page 93 ·1· ·was very important to him. ·1· ·involvement in SmartConnect whatsoever. ·2· · · · · · ·I care about Peter very much and we spent a ·2· · · · Q· · Okay.· So that his development work where he ·3· ·lot of time making sure that his commission plan made ·3· ·helped out members of the development team and helped out ·4· ·him happy. ·4· ·you and helped out the company with this project involving ·5· · · · Q· · Who were the other salespeople that were losing ·5· ·Russ, none of that had anything to do with the ·6· ·revenue by virtue of the fact that APS's sales price for ·6· ·SmartConnect product, correct? ·7· ·the Zebra brand printers were higher than other ·7· · · · A· · That's correct. ·8· ·distributors? ·8· · · · Q· · Do you have any information to suggest that ·9· · · · A· · Well, presumably, it would have been all of ·9· ·Peter Tillman was ever given access to the smart code, the 10· ·them. 10· ·source code, of SmartConnect? 11· · · · Q· · Do you remember the names of the other 11· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 12· ·salespeople working for APS in 2007? 12· · · · A· · I don't think he did or would have been given 13· · · · A· · I don't. 13· ·access to the source code. 14· · · · Q· · You can't recall any of their names? 14· · · · Q· · Do you have any information to suggest that 15· · · · A· · Well, I don't know who worked exactly in 2007, 15· ·Peter Tillman was shown that the functionality that APS 16· ·but lead salespeople we had that were pretty significant 16· ·was marketing as SmartConnect was contained within the 17· ·in my memory were, obviously, Jack Siney, Tommy Lopez, 17· ·software package that was separately sold to customers as 18· ·Erin Quinn, Erin, E-R-I-N, and then Quinn, Q-U-I-N-N. I 18· ·QuickTicket? 19· ·don't recall any others.· And again I don't know if they 19· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINGS:· Object to the 20· ·were with me in 2007, per se, but... 20· · · · form. 21· · · · Q· · Did Peter Tillman have any supervisory authority 21· · · · A· · Yes, with 100 percent certainty, Peter 22· ·over other APS contractors or employees? 22· ·understood, as I do, what SmartConnect does, which again 23· · · · A· · Not to my knowledge. 23· ·at the right time I'm happy to explain to you when you ask 24· · · · Q· · Was Peter Tillman a member of the APS 24· ·me, how SmartConnect functioned and what it did and the 25· ·development team at any time? 25· ·purpose for it. U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 25 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 94 to 97 Page 94 Page 96 ·1· · · · Q· · When was Peter -- but he wasn't ever shown the ·1· ·code that not only then got installed on a laptop machine ·2· ·code that demonstrated that the version of QuickTicket ·2· ·but specific components for a customer. ·3· ·delivered to customers never changed, correct? ·3· · · · · · ·Their forms, their ticketing forms for their ·4· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·4· ·jurisdiction, settings for their computer, what they ·5· · · · A· · I don't understand the question. ·5· ·want to have showing an officer, what they don't want to ·6· · · · Q· · Let me rephrase it.· When a customer purchases ·6· ·show an officer were all embedded as part of this ·7· ·SmartConnect they receive the same version of QuickTicket ·7· ·application. ·8· ·as a customer who does not purchase SmartConnect, correct? ·8· · · · Q· · Did customers who paid for SmartConnect ·9· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·9· ·separately get a license key that was different that 10· · · · A· · Um, that is correct. 10· ·indicated that they had purchased SmartConnect? 11· · · · Q· · Was Peter Tillman ever shown the source code 11· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 12· ·that would demonstrate that the versions of QuickTicket 12· · · · A· · No.· A customer would have been provided a 13· ·that were sold to customers that paid for SmartConnect and 13· ·license key which was similar in form to say a 16 digit 14· ·those that did not pay for SmartConnect were identical? 14· ·key with dashes between every four, four digits.· That 15· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form 15· ·license key is what provided all of the licensed software. 16· · · · A· · Peter, first of all, I'm not sure they were 16· ·If someone bought a SmartConnect product for one single 17· ·completely identical because they were not settings that 17· ·user, there was nothing stopping them necessarily from 18· ·were involved in a particular customer's build, meaning 18· ·installing that on other machines, just like if they 19· ·when we built -- let me describe it. 19· ·bought a QuickTicket license for a single user for them 20· · · · · · ·To answer your question specifically, I don't 20· ·installing it on multiple machines. 21· ·believe Peter had any access to that source code 21· · · · Q· · If a customer bought a QuickTicket license and 22· ·regarding SmartConnect. 22· ·was given a 16 digit license key, when they entered that 23· · · · · · ·Your other question was, the way the software 23· ·16 digit license key, did they receive the same 24· ·was delivered, was we would compile a program called 24· ·functionality regarding SmartConnect as a customer who 25· ·VP.EXE -- 25· ·purchased SmartConnect separately? Page 95 Page 97 ·1· · · · · · · · · THE COURT REPORTER:· EXE? ·1· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. ·2· · · · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· EXE. ·2· · · · A· · SmartConnect was incorporated in the VP.EXE. ·3· · · · A· · -- that software would contain all of our ·3· · · · Q· · Regardless of whether the customer paid for it, ·4· ·customers' licenses and would be customized on a per ·4· ·correct? ·5· ·customer basis, meaning the VP.EXE program was available ·5· · · · A· · Correct.· Every one of our laptop applications ·6· ·on the web, every customer downloaded the exact same ·6· ·were included in the VP.EXE.· The question was, were they ·7· ·product.· Based on the license key that they entered, ·7· ·legally permitted to use it and was it turned on.· A great ·8· ·certain features would be turned on or not turned on, ·8· ·example, and I do recall, I don't recall if there was a ·9· ·certain tickets would be included or not included, and ·9· ·particular setting for SmartConnect, but we offered the 10· ·thus would build the package on their laptop machine that 10· ·ability for people to use mag stripe readers so, for 11· ·they would use. 11· ·example, when you pulled a car over if you picked up the 12· · · · Q· · Did entry of a license key impact the delivery 12· ·person's driver's license you could have a small mag 13· ·of the source code sold as SmartConnect? 13· ·stripe reader, like you would for a credit card attached 14· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 14· ·to the USB to your computer, and you could swipe their 15· · · · Q· · Or were all customers given the same source code 15· ·driver's license, it would, we, our software would grab 16· ·regardless of whether they entered a license key that 16· ·the driver's license number in the state and then run it 17· ·reflected they separately paid for SmartConnect? 17· ·on your machine. 18· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 18· · · · · · ·Somebody may have chosen to buy that feature 19· · · · A· · The source code was compiled into an EXE file 19· ·or not, they may have bought the software or hardware 20· ·called VP.EXE.· Every customer downloaded from the same 20· ·from somewhere else, just like the printer, or not, but 21· ·link, VP.EXE.· I should clarify, I'm also talking about 21· ·either way they had a license they would have needed to 22· ·the laptop software here, the hand-held software is 22· ·purchase from us called Smart Swipe.· All of that was 23· ·delivered differently, but in terms of the laptop 23· ·included, again may be turned off, turned on or not 24· ·software, they would download VP.EXE.· Inside of that 24· ·turned on.· In the Smart Swipe case it actually required 25· ·compile -- inside of that installer is a bunch of compiled 25· ·a complete settings change where it had to have been U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 YVer1f Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 26 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 98 to 101 Page 98 Page 100 ·1· ·turned on in our application to use it, but there was ·1· · · · · · ·(Thereupon, at 12:13 o'clock, p.m., a ·2· ·nothing stopping people from copying that software for ·2· ·recess was taken and the deposition is continued in ·3· ·SmartConnect. ·3· ·Volume 2.) ·4· · · · · · ·I think it was so automated that it would ·4 ·5· ·auto-sense the Zebra printer and I don't believe there ·5 ·6· ·was a particular setting that required you to turn it ·6 ·7· ·on.· We were just basing our sales on the trust of these ·7 ·8· ·government agencies that they wouldn't be violating our ·8 ·9· ·software license by using it. ·9 10· · · · Q· · There's no way to turn on or turn off 10 11· ·SmartConnect, correct? 11 12· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. 12 13· · · · A· · I don't believe so.· I believe SmartConnect was 13 14· ·all automated as part of the process. 14 15· · · · Q· · So when you spoke earlier about the possibility 15 16· ·that if SmartConnect was turned on, was that based on 16 17· ·anything or did you just misspoke? 17 18· · · · A· · No, no, I -- 18 19· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to the form. 19 20· · · · A· · -- I gave you the example of Smart Swipe which I 20 21· ·happen to remember required a setting.· SmartConnect may 21 22· ·or may not require a simple settings change.· If so, it's 22 23· ·a simple small settings change in a text file. 23 24· ·Regardless, I don't believe it did have one.· I believe 24 25· ·that part of our whole process was to automate everything 25 Page 99 Page 101 ·1· ·so it wouldn't require that. ·1· · · · · · · · · · · CERTIFICATE OF OATH ·2 ·2· · · · Q· · If SmartConnect had that functionality, which · · ·STATE OF FLORIDA· · · ) ·3· ·I'm not saying it did because the testimony we've seen is ·3· ·COUNTY OF PALM BEACH· ) ·4· ·to the opposite -- ·4 ·5· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Objection to form. ·5· · · · · · ·I, TERRI BECKER, Certified Shorthand Reporter, ·6· · · · Q· · -- if it did have the functionality to be turned ·6· ·Notary Public, State of Florida, certify that JEFFREY ·7· ·on and off, what would that be like? ·7· ·RUBENSTEIN personally appeared before me on February 21, ·8· ·2017 and was duly sworn. ·8· · · · · · · · · MS. CHARLES-COLLINS:· Object to form. ·9· · · · · · ·Signed this 15th day of March, 2017. ·9· · · · Move to strike. 10 10· · · · A· · It would typically be a setting in an INI file, 11 11· ·which is like a text file, INI, like the letter, INI, 12· · · · · · · · · · · _____________________________________ 12· ·turning something off or on.· We were very -- we were not · · · · · · · · · · · · Terri Becker, CSR 13· ·very security conscious because of the customer base that 13· · · · · · · · · · · Certified Shorthand Reporter 14· ·we had, that they were going to abuse any licensing, so in · · · · · · · · · · · · Notary Public, State of Florida 14· · · · · · · · · · · Commission No.:· FF177109 15· ·the Smart Swipe example, which is analogous to the way we · · · · · · · · · · · · Expires:· March 13, 2019 16· ·did printers, you simply would just put "swipe equals yes" 15 17· ·instead of "swipe equals no," as an example.· I think 16 18· ·SmartConnect auto-sensed the type of printer connected and 17 19· ·Zebra would perform the functions automatically.· I don't 18 20· ·think there was a particular setting we had to turn on, 19 20 21· ·that I can recall. 21 22· · · · · · · · · MR. FEICHT:· Let's take a break.· Off the 22 23· · · · record. 23 24· · · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the record.· The 24 25· · · · time is 12:13 p.m. 25 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document Rubenstein 148-4 Entered on FLSDVol 1 04/21/2017 Page 27 of Docket 140 February 21, 2017 102 Page 102 ·1· · · · · · · · · · CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER ·2 · · ·STATE OF FLORIDA· · · ) ·3· ·COUNTY OF PALM BEACH· ) ·4 ·5· · · · · · ·I, TERRI BECKER, Certified Shorthand Reporter, ·6· ·do hereby certify that I was authorized to and did ·7· ·stenographically report the Deposition of JEFFREY ·8· ·RUBENSTEIN, pages 1 through 102, and that the transcript ·9· ·is a true record of my stenographic notes. 10· · · · · · ·I further certify that I am not a relative, 11· ·employee, attorney, or counsel of any of the parties, nor 12· ·am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' 13· ·attorneys or counsel connected with the action, nor am I 14· ·financially interested in the action. 15· · · · · · ·Dated this 15th day of March, 2017. 16 17 18· · · · · · · · · · · ·____________________________________ · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Terri Becker, CSR 19· · · · · · · · · · · ·Certified Shorthand Reporter 20 21 22 23 24 25 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 28 of February 140 21, 2017 ·1 17 79:8 2012 70:7 $ 175 82:25 2013 30:2 5 17534 6:10 2014 88:3,6 $1 56:18,20 18 80:6 2016 79:4,8 50 15:5 57:6 1900 4:8 2017 4:8 $149 82:21 1990's 25:12, 21st 4:8 6 $17,250 13:11 16 22 80:19 $175 82:23 1st 62:10,17 25 13:20 6 35:16 62:6 $200,000 80:20 65:3 58:1,5 2 26 30:6,11 646 10:12 $500 24:23 27 36:18 65 38:7 25:1,3,4,12, 2 12:20 13:2 2nd 18:20 685 13:3 23 26:7 62:3 88:13 $500,000 57:2 200 4:9 7 200,000 56:21 3 0 2001 22:5 7 35:22 59:7 36:4 37:1 3 18:13,16 61:23 70:22 015652 18:17 55:4,15 58:13 21:24 24:21 72:23 89:19 85:15 27:8 29:13 70 38:5 1 2005 36:13 30 79:4 700 6:11 37:1 38:1 30(b)(6) 75 38:7 1 10:6,7,10, 39:6,9 41:23 79:14,16,20 7th 74:4,17, 25 64:18 42:25 44:12 30th 41:22 20 10 35:25 48:23 50:16 31 27:13 38:1 55:17 55:4 56:8 87:10 31st 13:9 9 100 44:5 41:23 56:21 93:21 2006 55:5 33441 6:12 90's 25:7 10:59 49:25 2007 61:23 70:22 72:23 33496 6:11 26:24 11 61:22 34.5 13:10 9:56 4:7 74:5,17,20 11:03 50:4 85:4 89:19 12:13 99:25 90:6 91:12, 4 A 12th 13:9 15,20 13 13:18 2008 36:16 4 16:16 24:4, ability 6:2 13th 9:13 54:24 62:10, 7 32:17 34:12 67:8 97:10 13:22 17:23 17 64:18 35:3,16 absolutely 149 73:22,23 69:16 87:13 57:12,15,16, 52:14 82:25 2009 36:17 17 59:20 abuse 99:14 15 13:22 14:4 57:19 60:1,5 access 11:16 38:11 2011 12:2,3 4-100 6:12 41:24 92:12 15-81782-CIV- 21:10,16,25 41 78:25 79:7 93:9,13 94:21 MARRA 4:16 22:6,12,15,22 80:5 accurate 15th 14:9 23:1,10,14,16 495 10:19 36:21 62:13 16:14,18 51:21 55:15 64:20 65:8 17:24 57:19 58:13 83:16,22,23 16 96:13,22, 70:11 87:11 84:3 90:9,11 23 88:11 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 29 of February 140 21, 2017 ·2 acquisition 43:6,8 72:2,5 98:1 69:17 70:16 36:15 agreements applications 75:8,10,21 Act 7:17 11:2,6,11 97:5 76:11,12 15:11 51:17 32:10 48:13, approval 77:21,24 78:3 52:14 16 63:19 64:2,12 83:24 84:14, activities ahead 39:15 65:14 69:17 22 85:6 86:8, 51:15 75:3,4 70:16 15 87:2,22 actual 48:18 allegations approved 88:16,19,22 55:2 53:12 88:9 68:21 69:1 91:12,22,24 add 70:23 allowed 39:24 approving 92:20 93:15 adding 83:14 allowing 68:25 APS's 12:9 69:22 approximate 47:6,9,11 addition 85:9 87:4 59:17 amount 32:8 7:8 91:6 additional 41:12 56:25 approximately 66:25 75:24 4:7 11:25 APS- 18:16 62:22 66:21 72:11 78:12 13:22 16:17 APS-015644 amounts 57:10 21:16 38:12 10:12 address 6:7, 11 42:9 58:16 73:21 56:11 83:2 APS-015684 analogous 84:21 85:6 13:3 adjust 64:1 99:15 APS 8:22 APS/TRIMBLE Advanced 4:12 7:22 7:22 8:22 analysis 11:1,2,5,9, 32:24 35:23 59:25 11,13,15,19 arbitration 36:22 63:23 analyzing 12:1,6,13,17 27:3 advice 45:6 61:9 14:23 15:5,8 archives ancillary 19:5 20:12,18 31:22,23 advising 21:3,7,9,15, 87:16 92:14 arose 76:11 17,22 22:10, arrangement advisor and/or 11:13 15,17 32:6,8, 39:5 46:9 21:13,17 announce 4:18 23 33:8 36:3, 22:11 36:17 72:13 announced 11,15,24 55:12 57:19 60:10,20 article 29:24 37:5,8,15,17, 30:9,16 58:13 61:3,7,12 19,24 38:2,3, affected 73:1 75:15 articles 7,10,15,17, 60:25 54:16 annual 56:8 18,20,22,24 affiliated 57:1 58:10 39:8 41:13,22 assignment 58:8 annuity 44:23 42:23 43:4,12 59:8,13,17 affirm 5:2 44:1,2,4,11 61:5,9 answers 8:9 affirmed 5:9 49:20 45:2,9,18 associate 46:6,8,13,19 63:16,21 afield 52:3 apologize 55:22 48:3,13,20 associates agencies 98:8 50:21 51:16, 63:22 agree 39:21 appearance 4:18 21 52:18 assume 8:14 40:14 50:20, 54:25 55:3,6, 50:13 56:21 23 52:19 appears 78:6 71:23 86:22, 55:14 14,24 56:2,5, Appendix 23 agreeing 22:9 9 57:2 58:8, 26:10 30:10, 24 61:10 assuming 82:6 agreement 19 62:2,15,22 assure 90:3 10:24 13:14 application 65:12,23 41:16 42:24 62:25 96:7 attached 66:4,10 68:1 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 30 of February 140 21, 2017 ·3 24:15 27:22, 52:8,9 59:7 benefit 27:16 built 90:21 24 97:13 62:11,15 benefits 58:7 94:19 attention 64:18,21 bias 39:11 bump 56:24 34:20 41:8 70:13 76:19 40:11 41:2 bunch 20:14 attorney 6:21 background 49:3,5,6 45:20 95:25 7:3 25:2,5,6, 21:6 51:23 53:14, burdensome 11,15 26:21 Barnett 9:5 15 78:16 41:5 79:17 27:19 bigger 86:24 burn 89:23 88:12 Bartlett bill 13:7,10 burned 90:6 attorney/ 78:22 79:13, 26:8 business 6:8 client 13:15 21,24 80:10 billable 11:20 12:16 attorneys Bartlett's 10:19 22:5 25:8,16 20:5 21:25 78:25 81:9 billing 18:9 29:15,17 30:3 22:4 base 85:10 binding 67:25 31:8,9,17 August 10:22 99:13 68:6 businesses 40:10,11 79:4 based 17:15 blank 26:12 26:22 authority 22:3,15 33:13 Blower 52:14 button 76:4 63:7,8 64:1 34:1,25 35:9, blowing 51:15 buy 73:14 69:16 70:15 11 37:20 45:6 76:25 87:18 91:21 60:12 61:17, Bluestar 87:21,25 97:18 auto-sense 20 63:16 buying 76:25 64:5,23 69:25 board 45:16 98:5 77:4 78:9 95:7 Boca 4:10 auto-sensed 99:18 98:16 6:10 automate basic 75:21 bottom 10:11 C 98:25 basically bought 87:6, 25:25 7,9,19 96:16, C-A-G-N-I-N-A automated 20:17 75:25 98:4,14 basics 8:5 19,21 97:19 Boulevard 4:9 C-Y-B-E-R-G-A- automatically basing 98:7 6:12 T-E 25:20 67:25 75:20 basis 18:10 box 76:3 Cagnina 99:19 95:5 brakes 8:20 20:17,23 aware 20:20 Bates 10:11 brand 83:14 call 14:13,25 33:21 34:19, 13:3 18:16 84:13,21 86:9 16:10 17:23 22 54:18 28:23 31:15 87:10 91:7 18:1,6 85:24 65:12,22 66:1 Beach 6:12 71:2 77:24 break 8:18 called 17:11 BECKER 4:1 24:22 36:15 79:13,24 87:2 beginning 42:13 49:19, 88:10 24 99:22 94:24 95:20 37:13 97:22 behalf 4:21, bring 34:20 40:4 42:20 capital 6:6 B 23 39:8 79:22 15:4 25:20 81:10 Brother 85:23 brought 41:8 car 68:11 baby 37:15 believability 97:11 back 10:2,3 53:3 build 66:8 67:23 94:18 card 97:13 25:6 26:22,24 believed 95:10 care 91:2 27:8 29:13 33:22 40:17,24 building career 33:8 beneficiary 49:13,14 68:13 75:24 carry 68:10 38:22 44:14 50:4,5,7 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 31 of February 140 21, 2017 ·4 case 4:12,15 changing 67:15 68:4,23 click 75:23 6:18 7:5,6 69:10 69:19 70:17, 76:4 9:11,16,24 chapter 29:25 25 72:14 73:3 client 10:2 11:19 15:24 charge 25:3 75:13 76:15 11:15,17 16:8,12 18:7 62:16,19,22 77:2,6,10,18 client's 19:18,21 63:7 66:21 78:4 79:2,5 53:12 20:1,25 22:5 81:12 83:24 80:4 81:24 clients 26:7 23:6,8 24:24 charged 24:25 82:3,14 83:7 close 46:25 26:19 27:14, 25:4,12,23 84:7,15,24 67:1 25 28:19 26:6 63:2,6, 86:11,18 29:18 30:5,23 87:5,12 89:4 closing 41:22 24 68:15 31:1,11,19,24 charging 90:10 92:11 32:3,4,5,11, 93:11 94:4,9, co-worker 25:25 75:2 65:23 14,18,19 15 95:14,18 33:3,5,16 CHARLES- 96:11 97:1 code 14:21 COLLINGS 16:15,23 39:11 40:20 98:12,19 42:3 45:2 93:19 99:5,8 17:4,5,6,16 51:8,25 54:6, Charles- Chief 15:8 30:11 61:17 17 63:1,4 collins 4:22, 84:10 92:9,13 23 9:7 11:21 Chistolini 75:14 79:21 93:9,10,13 12:18,25 9:7 27:19 97:24 94:2,11,21 13:13 14:1 chose 65:4 95:13,15,19 cases 26:13, chosen 97:18 17:18 18:21, 96:1 16 62:20,21, Christolini 22,24 68:5 25 22:2,19,23 coding 92:5 23:2,11,22 9:5 comment 59:3 69:20 24:10,16 27:6 circumstances 77:3 cash 42:23 28:20 29:10 25:13 68:8 catching 18:3 commented 32:20 33:6,17 citation 23:13 caveat 26:24 34:8 35:4,14, 29:22,23 28:13 92:1 20 36:1 comments cite 31:3,4 34:21 CEO 6:5 36:24 39:12,15,23 cited 24:14 37:4,8 50:23 40:22 42:15, commission 27:23 29:20 90:17 91:3 51:19 52:18 18,22 43:1, 31:2,12,20 53:6 56:8 13,20 44:21 commissions 62:3 57:7 90:19,25 57:2 58:11 45:5 47:15,22 86:8 Civic 29:25 common 59:16 48:7,25 49:4, certainty 15,18,23 claims 54:18 60:8 87:21 93:21 50:12,17,25 clarified commonly 51:20 52:10, 86:21 84:17 Certified 4:2 22 53:8,15, clarify 34:20 commony 84:13 cetera 57:8 18,24 54:2,11 49:20 92:15 communicated CFO 15:5 95:21 challenge 55:1,20 9:18 14:13 56:15,19 clarity 78:8 78:1 53:3 57:4,9,14,20 class 66:2 communication change 69:16 58:2,14 59:2 70:15 83:6 clause 39:24 18:4 73:12 60:6 61:14 41:6 communications 97:25 98:22, 63:3,18,20 23 clauses 40:1 16:12 17:25 64:13,22 clear 35:7 19:20 20:12 changed 82:24 65:16,25 83:3 94:3 82:17 66:15,23 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 32 of February 140 21, 2017 ·5 comp 56:16, 83:13 confirmed 13:23 14:6,7, 20,21 compile 94:24 24:3 16 15:3,7,14 companies 95:25 confirming 16:4 19:23 25:7,9 59:1 compiled 15:21 20:8,10,15 86:24 95:19,25 confluence 67:19 83:8 company 7:15 complaining 78:9,16 89:5,18,25 19:10 21:14, 78:10 connect 78:13 90:5 20 23:1,9 complete connected conversations 33:14 35:1,11 97:25 99:18 19:12 20:5,9, 37:9,14 40:19 completely conscious 20 67:7 74:4, 42:3 43:25 34:17 80:18 99:13 7,9,11,15 45:1,19,24 94:17 83:5 90:18 consulting 46:22 51:19 complex 69:12 26:15,18,22 cooler 88:19, 53:7 61:24 22 62:2 63:11,14 complexities contact 42:13 78:14 copies 12:24 66:25 72:22 contacted components 9:10,22 88:12 cops 75:22 73:19 77:25 copy 24:8,11 79:20,22 96:2 contained computer 17:8 41:20 81:14, 34:13 80:17 81:10 copying 98:2 83:10 87:15 24:18 29:9,11 17,18 93:16 89:2 90:8,12 41:25 96:4 context 24:25 corporate 4:9 97:14 60:16 65:2 80:1 93:4 conceived continue correct 7:1 company's 36:5,7 79:14 80:8,22 81:3, 37:18 54:20, 12:5 22:12, 7 23 73:17 13,17,18 86:4 concern 41:10 continued 23:17 24:2,3 company-wide 26:7,9 28:9 72:21 concerned 73:23 85:21 54:19 90:16 30:18,21 comparative continuing 36:5,6 38:8, 83:15 concerns 56:4 15,16 42:5 compared 66:2 43:18 49:22 contract 43:22 45:20 comparison conclude 44:23 68:3 46:12 48:18 75:9 61:15 contractor 55:13,18,21 compensate concluded 69:16,23 59:1 71:13 83:5 51:14 70:4,14 72:10 81:23, compensated concludes contractors 25 82:13,18, 24:23 45:15 48:20 50:20 91:22 19 85:16 46:8,23 53:5 conditions contracts 86:4,5,17 73:15 72:15 11:2,6,10 87:25 88:1 compensation conduct 67:16 contrary 82:7 89:2 93:6,7 24:22 25:8 confidential control 11:10 94:3,8,10 39:1,8 40:18 39:18 65:5 70:3 97:4,5 98:11 41:13 43:12 confidentialit controlled correctly 47:19 48:22 y 39:24 40:14 12:15 38:21 76:23 56:5,9 57:1, 41:6,16 43:18 43:11 cost 73:13 18 58:10,19, 49:21 controlling costs 24:23 23,24 confirm 59:5 38:15 40:21,23 competitive 92:19 conversation counsel 4:18 74:1 78:10 9:19,22,25 17:10 22:16 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 33 of February 140 21, 2017 ·6 25:3,19 26:1 77:4,25 deciding demonstrated 28:4,22 29:2 81:12,15,17, 73:14 94:2 31:16 39:16 21,23 84:14, decision departed 23:9 41:14 45:6 23 85:7,21,22 54:17 63:14, department 59:6,23 86:4,6 87:4, 17 65:7 74:21 42:11,14 68:2 court 4:15,25 23 93:17 90:14 departure 10:5,9 13:1 94:3,13 95:15 decisions 22:22 52:13 18:15 24:6 96:8 64:9 80:18 dependent 27:1 39:20 customers' 90:11 52:16 40:4 42:21 95:4 deem 28:18 depo 6:23 95:1 customized 34:6 67:9 deponent 7:3 CPCL 31:14 64:7 66:5 deemed 28:12, 67:24 95:4 depose 40:17, created 67:24 24 25 78:17 cut 49:8 Deerfield deposition creating Cybergate 6:12 4:1,11 6:13, 76:22 25:19,21 defendant 19 8:4 20:22 creation 33:9 7:14,25 8:21, 27:1 53:22 78:8 D 25 78:21 79:1,3, creative 64:8 defendant's 8 credit 80:15 dashes 96:14 13:11 18:9 depositions 81:6 82:5 Data 29:25 59:23 88:12 7:3 79:25 97:13 database defendants describe critical 8:8 11:16 4:24 11:19 94:19 current 6:4,7 date 4:8 14:4 18:21 20:6 designates 11:20 13:23 15:3 37:25 22:1 28:7 79:20 19:7 20:12 67:18 71:8 55:18 designed 83:1 21:2 74:20 75:15 defended 7:2 84:9 custom 69:2 89:24 90:7 define 60:16 designee customary dated 79:8 definition 79:14,16 24:25 dates 74:7 60:9,16 61:1, detail 34:18 customer David 5:15 2,16 35:6 65:1 11:17 12:11 day 9:14 definitions detailed 63:2,5 71:11, day-to-day 60:18,22 27:19 18 72:6,19 37:9 definitively details 32:10 75:8,25 76:11 80:22 72:12 84:8 deadline 9:16 83:24 84:5 deliver 89:23 85:9 94:6,8 deals 67:1 69:3,12 67:10,23 determine 95:5,6,20 delivered 96:2,12,21,24 December 38:1 83:5 41:22 15:22 81:21 determined 97:3 99:13 94:3,24 95:23 customer's deceptive 61:19 68:10 47:12 51:16 delivery 75:11 94:18 95:12 customers 52:19 determines decided 63:6 delve 33:24 54:5 11:14,19 demands 50:14 12:1,7,14 73:20 determining decides 54:3, demonstrate 63:24 26:7 47:13 50:21 52:19 4 94:12 develop 73:17 64:8 71:25 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 34 of February 140 21, 2017 ·7 developed 73:7,18 74:22 48:6,12,18 embedded 73:16 discussing 50:11 57:12 73:11 96:6 development 74:17 90:1 59:14 64:10 employed 14:3 60:14 69:6 discussion 79:10 80:21 54:25 55:3,4 79:14 91:25 18:6 75:12 dollar 66:6 65:23 92:2 93:2,3 82:4 88:20 dollars 11:16 employee dictionary discussions 39:10,21 90:2 13:24 20:17 60:15,24 67:17 68:13 double 82:16 25:21 26:3,9 difference 69:24 70:2,9 download 32:6 45:21 75:11 82:23 88:22 75:17,18 65:12 70:1,5, differently distributor 95:24 7,11 74:13 95:23 86:9 87:25 downloaded 79:21 90:7 digit 96:13, distributors 95:6,20 employees 22,23 83:13 86:16 drafted 34:16 20:13 21:3 digits 96:14 87:8,9,19 Drive 30:1 38:12 45:13 DIRECT 5:11 91:8 65:11 89:1 driven 90:15 91:22 directly District driver 78:15 25:2,6 26:8 4:14,15 employment driver's 19:6 20:24 62:2 87:24 Division 97:12,15,16 54:21 56:14 32:10 55:2 disagree drove 81:7 80:13 81:9 58:12 emulate 84:9 due 9:12 encompasses discipline document 36:14 88:2 10:10,12 28:16 13:2,4 17:7,9 duly 5:9 end 18:24 disciplined 54:14 65:13,19,23 18:15 24:6,20 32:3 80:12 30:7 33:21 83:21 disclose 30:9 34:1 39:4,25 36:12 41:19 E engaged 40:20 40:2,6 41:12 66:16 71:14, engagement 19 72:1 e-mail 18:17, 10:15,24 42:4 43:17 documentation 19,23 19:24 11:4,8 disclosed 81:6 30:13 34:7 37:21 58:25 ensure 8:7 66:11 70:20 e-mails enter 59:14 39:19 42:17 71:2 72:11,23 29:11,12 entered 95:7, disclosing 73:4 82:11,18 31:22,23,25 40:8 42:7 16 96:22 documented E-R-I-N 91:18 entire 33:8 disclosure 33:22 34:4, earlier 50:11 72:22 84:10 9:15 17,23 98:15 entirety 43:3 disclosures documents earned 58:11 44:7 30:7 22:7,16 East 4:9 entities 11:9 discount 83:1 23:12,17,20 Edyce 43:23 12:14 38:9,21 discoverable 24:10,14 44:3,8,20,25 43:11 39:11 27:12,13,17, 46:16,21 entitled 27:9 discretion 21,22,25 48:14 50:15 62:19 28:1,2,6,11, 29:24 34:15 effective 35:17,22 discuss 34:2 14,18,22,23, 37:25 48:8 25 29:1 33:18 40:16 53:3 effectively 59:8 61:18 discussed 41:21,24 75:1 21:4 23:24 47:18,24,25 entity 44:6 45:7 55:2,7 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 35 of February 140 21, 2017 ·8 entrepreneur 24:4,7 27:13, explanation 39:14 40:13 58:22 19,20,23 76:17 42:12,16,20 entry 13:18 29:23 30:6 explore 40:11 49:3,12,21,24 15:3,5 16:14 32:17 34:12 expressly 50:5 53:2,14, 95:12 35:3 59:20 27:12 32:16, 16,22,25 Epson 85:13, 60:1,5 62:3 22 33:1 35:2, 54:9,14 77:8, 21 79:10 13 60:4 17,22 79:4,7 equals 99:16, exhibits extent 18:4 80:5 99:22 17 27:22,23 29:4 extra 12:23 Fenoglio Erin 91:18 exist 59:16 62:16 75:23 15:4,8,13,25 error 9:8 60:11,21 16:4,7,12 61:4,7,12 20:9 23:23,25 essentially F 37:21 71:11 existed figure 40:4 established 61:11,16 file 95:19 F-O-I-A 30:1 44:24 exists 61:6 98:23 99:10, fact 13:14 11 estate 43:16 experience 27:4 66:6 44:24 34:25 35:11, filed 4:14 75:8 81:13 17 36:19 39:19 88:16 Este 6:10 91:6 60:13 89:14 evening 92:5 factors 61:20 expert 9:5,15 files 12:23 events 22:22, facts 32:3,4, 10:2,4,22 Finally 32:2 24 23:9,14 8,18 33:3,11, 14:17,18 finance 68:2, 78:9,16 13,20 34:11, 15:15 16:7 22,25 69:8 eventually 13,17,19,22, 19:14,16 financial 86:2 24 35:10 51:7 20:6,19 21:24 15:8 47:9,11 evidence 66:19 22:7 23:7,14, 48:3 50:19 72:20 82:7 15 24:8,15 fair 8:15 false 47:19 find 29:3 exact 56:25 26:11,12,15, 85:23 57:10 63:10 19 27:1,5 familiar 73:21 95:6 79:17 finding 48:2, 28:9 29:18 5 52:16,17,20 EXAMINATION 30:4 31:1,10, family 43:15, 53:5 5:11 13,19,24 23 44:4,20,25 46:16,21 finish 8:8,9 examined 5:9 32:5,13,19 33:2,4,12,15, father 46:1, finished excerpt 61:23 21:17 75:5 exchanged 23 34:3,7,13 5,14 35:1,2,12,13, fax 7:16,17 fired 52:12 16:11 17:25 19:20,24 16 36:18 feature 97:18 firing 52:13 20:11 39:7,22 40:15 features 95:8 firm 9:4,11 excuse 13:10 45:2 48:9 10:15,25 February 4:8 22:5 44:10 51:8,23 53:2, 11:5,9 13:7, 18:11 4,10,11 54:8 11 14:19 18:9 EXE 95:1,2,19 Federal 30:11 25:16 26:3,4 59:14,25 executive 60:4,5 61:22 fee 62:23 27:18 37:13 25:9 62:4 82:22 66:22 92:16 executives explain 82:23 fees 40:21,23 five-minute 63:14 93:23 Feicht 4:20 18:1 Exhibit 10:6, explaining 5:12 10:5 flexibility 7,10,25 12:20 35:5 12:22 24:13, 63:21,24 18:13,16 19 34:10 65:10 66:9, U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 36 of February 140 21, 2017 ·9 12,20 67:1,2, 82:3,14 83:7 75:16 93:24 4,13,17 70:23 84:7,15,24 functions H flexible 86:11,18 17:5 99:19 63:11 87:5,12 89:4 Future 29:25 Hacking 30:1 Florida 4:3, 90:10 92:5,11 half 16:4 10,15 6:11,12 93:11,20 G hand 5:1 52:13 94:4,9,15 95:14,18 hand-held Florida's gather 42:11 76:5 95:22 51:16 96:11,13 97:1 98:12,19 gave 66:25 handed 10:9 fluctuated 76:17 83:1 13:1 18:15 58:21 99:5,8 formal 37:20 98:20 24:6 focused 51:8 general handle 73:19 51:11 FOIA 30:1 25:18,19 26:1 handled 43:9 formally 9:1 folder 24:17 55:8 36:15 54:21 happen 58:20 folks 73:14 55:11 56:13 75:20 90:3 formed 45:1 84:11 58:12 65:9 98:21 forming 9:23 67:20 69:9 follow-up 16:7 23:7 happened 35:8 generally 22:14 23:1 28:8 29:18 footnoted 14:12 39:25 70:8 30:4,8 31:1, 62:3 41:6 happy 8:13 10,18 32:5 form 11:21 34:3 35:12 gentleman's 33:19 34:1 12:18 14:1 92:18 39:20 76:7 forms 96:3 17:18 21:24 give 5:3 9:13 91:4 93:23 forward 8:6 22:2,19,23 29:12 41:9 hard 86:20 23:2,11,22 forwarded giving 26:2 hardware 83:2 27:6 28:20 28:3 glanced 78:23 97:19 32:20 33:6,17 found 47:18 50:10 goals 83:17, head 89:24 34:8 35:4,14, 18 founded 45:19 hear 8:12 20 36:1 43:1, God 5:5 founder 21:6 88:8 13,20 44:21 22:6 32:7 good 4:20,22 heard 8:15 45:5 47:15,22 36:5 37:4,8 5:13 8:7 82:8 88:20,21 48:7,25 49:15 50:22 51:18 17:16 89:10 50:12,17,25 51:21 55:1,20 52:18 53:6 government hearing 89:20 56:15,19 89:1 30:2 98:8 held 25:17 57:4,9,12,14, frame 87:10 grab 97:15 36:22 44:1,11 16,17,20 FRECHT 52:7 Grand 6:10 46:5 58:2,14 59:2 Friday 9:12 great 18:24 helped 93:3,4 60:6 61:14 frivolous 82:9 97:7 helpful 92:4 63:3,18,20 54:6 grew 86:2 hereto 27:22 64:13,22 full 5:14 group 76:22 Hertz 86:23 65:16,25 92:3 high 70:3 66:15,23 fully 27:19 functionality grow 85:20 90:19 67:15 68:4,23 growth 37:10 higher 76:12 69:19 72:14 71:12 81:13, 20 93:15 guess 88:17 91:7 73:3 75:13 76:15 77:7,8 96:24 99:2,6 guy 64:7 Hillsboro 78:4 81:24 functioned 6:11 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 37 of February 140 21, 2017 ·10 hire 10:3 impacted infinite 32:8 instructing hired 9:4 47:11 48:3 influence 53:16,18 10:16 13:7 implications 24:2 30:22 54:9,11 77:9 14:17 15:15 50:20 32:19 35:1 instruction 19:15 26:1 important influenced 41:14 42:3 70:6,11 91:1 33:4,9,10,15, instrumental hiring 10:1 inability 21 65:7 76:22 history 14:21 74:25 information intend 59:21 32:6,23 33:7 inaccurate 9:18,23 15:25 intent 83:10 65:6 7:11 35:19,24 16:6 19:17 intention hold 37:5 incident 20:24 21:22, 41:18 44:2,4 45:22 7:12,21 78:7 25 22:3,14, interest 10:1 49:18 include 62:16 15,21,25 11:10 12:15 holding 43:25 66:13 23:8,16,20,25 38:18,22 46:15 included 22:7 24:1 27:9,17 55:23 56:2 holdings 59:17 71:9 29:8,13,14 interesting 43:3,4 46:20 95:9 97:6,23 31:7,21 39:25 88:25 Home 6:8,9,10 40:2,5,9 41:7 includes 42:7,17 66:18 interests hour 10:19 34:14 76:6 67:4,12 70:21 47:1 16:4 24:23 including 72:15 92:7 Internet 25:1,3,4,12, 29:15,16 30:3 93:8,14 25:19 60:25 23 26:7 57:7 63:22 intimately informed hourly 10:17 65:24 69:11 14:10 88:15 64:8 74:22 hours 13:10 incomplete inhibit 6:1 92:22 16:17 35:19,25 introduced INI 99:10,11 incorporated 61:24 70:23 97:2 initial 9:19, 72:22 I 21 12:10 incorrect 14:25 introduction idea 47:16 6:24 33:20 76:1 85:1 51:6 initiated 76:10 78:18 invent 66:8 74:24 80:8,16,17,23 increments 67:22 10:20 inkjet 85:22, 81:7,12 82:1, investigation 23 8,9,12 indemnificatio 22:20 23:19 n 50:16 Innovation identical invoice 12:22 29:25 30:2 94:14,17 independent 13:17 16:11 23:19 63:17 inside 95:24, 18:10 identically 69:16,23 25 71:21 invoices 70:4,14 installed 40:24 71:23 identification independently 96:1 72:7 10:8 12:21 18:14 24:5 22:21 installer involve 90:14 indicating 95:25 identify involved 6:21 33:13 49:5 installing 7:13 32:11 industry 96:18,20 43:6,8 45:8 imagine 39:9 29:15,16,22 instances 46:3 64:9 impact 47:23 30:3,25 59:16 68:19 92:15 74:22 83:4,9 48:2 51:13 53:5 90:17,25 60:9,25 instruct 54:1 87:17 88:2,5 95:12 instructed 90:12 92:22 67:13 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 38 of February 140 21, 2017 ·11 94:18 job 45:22 large 4:3 70:3 involvement 46:5 37:14 liar 54:4 46:2 93:1 jobs 37:5 Larry 13:19, library involving Junk 7:17 24 14:5,13,15 29:16,17 30:4 93:4 jurisdiction 16:15,17,20, license 63:5 irrelevant 96:4 22 17:2,15, 71:4,6,12,14, 28:13,19,24 jury 48:20 20,25 18:2,5 20 72:1,7 52:1 54:12 50:20 51:14, 20:10 23:23 95:7,12,16 Irving 43:23 23 54:3,5,17 law 9:4,11 96:9,13,15, 44:3,8,20,24 jury's 52:16 10:25 11:4,8 19,21,22,23 46:16,21 53:5 13:7,11 14:19 97:12,15,16, 48:14 50:15 18:9 25:16 21 98:9 issue 39:20 26:3,4 27:18 licensed K 69:25 71:22 96:15 40:12,16 51:10 69:9 lawfully licenses Kelly 4:23 71:12 74:24 18:21 72:8,19 95:4 issued 71:25 lawsuit 7:13 licensing key 65:10 19:13 20:13 issues 6:1 95:7,12,16 71:16 72:2,5, 20:25 21:23 21:3,23 23:5 12,15 99:14 96:9,13,14, 28:3 53:1 23:6 69:21 15,22,23 limited 9:2 73:8 78:10 88:16 37:18 43:24 kick 62:11,15 lawyer 8:3 itemization 64:18,21 44:4,10,14, 72:18 18:20 17,20,25 45:3 Kim 4:12 lawyers 28:7 46:11,16,21 kind 5:17 lead 64:6 47:1,13 48:14 J 11:2,6 12:17 90:1 91:16 50:15 56:1 89:23 57:11 Jack 18:24 leader 37:22 knew 24:3 lines 80:19 19:2,3,4,9, leaders 63:12 65:22 73:11 12,17,21,25 leading 86:20 link 95:21 75:23 89:22 20:4,10 45:16 87:15 Lisa 65:12,18 knowing 40:7 91:17 led 69:21 66:2 knowledge Jacqueline 75:12 list 27:21 22:4,10 32:2, 78:21 left 70:9,11 32:2 4,18 33:2,3, January 9:13 14,23 34:1,25 legal 4:17 listed 27:12, 13:7,9,18,22 35:9,10 48:19 8:1 25:2,18, 23 29:23 14:9 16:14,18 64:6 65:6 19 26:2 27:4 30:10,19 62:6 17:23,24 72:24,25 42:11,13 79:9 18:20 62:10, 73:4,6 80:11 43:14 45:6 literally 17 64:18 81:1,2,5 84:2 47:24 48:2,5, 67:22 88:13 91:23 92:3 8,10 50:19 litigant Jeff 5:18 legalities 40:19 80:12,22 43:9 litigation L legally 97:7 8:1 26:19 Jeffrey 4:11 5:8,15 letter 10:15 88:14 laptop 95:10, Jim 15:4,7, 22,23 96:1 11:4,8 99:11 load 76:4 13,24 16:4,7 97:5 letters 15:4 long 8:19 20:8,15 level 49:17 85:14 23:23,25 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 39 of February 140 21, 2017 ·12 longer 71:9 12 65:15 member 91:24 modify 67:8, Lopez 91:17 68:2,21 69:8 members 73:19 21 73:20 losing 77:1 managers 93:3 modifying 90:16 91:5 62:15,18 memorialized 92:5 lot 26:21 64:20 42:24 60:23 module 73:12 63:21,24 Manual 31:14 memory 6:1 moment 21:7 65:10 66:4,9 manufacturer 15:16 90:6 Monday 18:20 73:11 86:19 68:13,18 91:17 money 38:25 88:18 91:3 87:24 mentioned 47:14 lower 77:5 mark 10:6 8:17 32:12, month 18:11 78:3 39:16,17 16,22 33:1,12 monthly 18:10 marked 10:7, 34:11,15 months 69:24 10,25 12:20 35:2,13 60:4 M morning 4:20, 13:2 18:13,16 71:4 82:20 22 5:13 machine 71:7 24:4,7 32:17 merger 43:6,9 mother 45:15, 95:10 96:1 35:2 59:19 messages 60:1 18 46:4,18 97:17 19:25 marketing motion 76:18 machines met 20:11 71:15 72:17 motorcycle 96:18,20 metal 68:12, 68:11 made 34:21 73:25 78:17 16 93:16 Motorola 47:12,18 mid 25:7,11, 38:11 48:20 50:14, marketplace 15 74:2 mount 68:12 21 52:17 million 54:19 68:20, material mounts 68:17 56:18,20 57:7 25 91:3 14:19 48:20 66:6 move 76:9 mag 97:10,12 50:21 millions 99:9 magnitude materials 39:10,21 90:2 moving 8:9 39:10 74:21 31:8,9,18 61:22 minimum 71:24 maintain 71:15 72:17 multinational minus 38:4 73:17 78:12 matter 9:6 37:13 minute 13:23 major 86:16, 10:18,22 multiple 67:7 59:14,21 minutes 14:4 96:20 22 17:14 61:24 make 7:11 8:5 meaning 94:18 62:3 64:24,25 multitude 47:2,5,8 95:5 65:9 67:6 61:20 63:13 82:17 medical 6:1 82:21 83:19 90:14 medication misleading N makes 54:6 5:25 47:13 48:4 making 53:7 meet 16:16 52:19 named 7:25 91:3 61:16 misrepresentat names 5:16 management meeting 14:8, ions 48:21 44:8 91:11,14 62:11 68:25 25 15:1 50:21 nature 18:3 69:18 70:16 16:15,21 misspoke 43:3 90:13 17:3,21,24 98:17 Navigation manager 36:15 18:2 20:9 models 78:13 9:1 37:18 54:21 55:11 61:23 64:25 necessarily 65:1,9 67:5 modifications 56:13 58:12 69:10 51:4 69:13 63:9,19 64:3, 70:22 72:21 96:17 82:21 83:19 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220 Jeffrey Case 9:15-cv-81782-KAM Document 148-4Rubenstein VolDocket Entered on FLSD 1 04/21/2017 Page 40 of February 140 21, 2017 ·13 needed 14:18 17:18 22:2, obtained 64:15,18,21 68:10 97:21 19,23 23:2, 27:17 67:9,22,25 negative 51:9 11,22 27:6 occupation 70:24 71:25 82:16 28:20 32:20 6:4 19:7 72:8 negatively 33:6,17 34:8 occur 74:11 original 52:20 35:4,14,20 October 30:2 80:16,17 nice 86:12 36:1 39:12 odd 7:19 owned 38:6,9, Nods 72:3 43:1,13,20 11 44:6,7 44:21 45:5 offer 59:21 nonexistent 73:23 45:3 47:15,22 ownership 53:13 48:7,25 49:15 offered 97:9 nonresponsive officer 15:8 38:18,22 50:12,17,25 55:23 56:2 76:10 51:20 53:25 96:5,6 normal 66:3 55:1,20 official Northwest 4:9 56:15,19 45:25 60:15 P Notary 4:2 57:4,9,14,20 offset 83:1 notation 58:2,14 59:2 omissions P-E-N-T-A-X 13:19 60:6 61:14 48:21 85:25 note 68:16 63:3,18,20 Open 29:25 P-R-I-N-T-E-K noted 16:10 64:13,22 operates 84:6 54:14 65:16,25 17:17 p.m. 99:25 notice 40:2 66:15,23 operation package 71:10 41:7,9,17 67:15 68:4,23 45:9 93:17 95:10 42:4,8 69:19 72:14 operations packages 64:8 73:3 75:13 Pages 35:16 notified 32:9 37:9 20:18 76:15,17 paid 11:15 77:6,8 78:4 opinion 22:3 notify 42:7 30:8 33:10,23 39:21 41:13 81:24 82:3,14 57:22 94:13 notifying 83:7 84:7,15, 34:3,14,16 19:15 opinions 9:5, 95:17 96:8 24 86:11,18 97:3 November 87:5,12 89:4 24 16:7 21:24 61:23 70:22 23:7 24:2 paper 17:7,9 90:10 92:11 72:23 74:4, 93:11,19 28:9,19 29:18 parentheses 17,20 79:8 94:4,9,15 30:4,22 31:1, 16:16 89:19 90:6 95:14,18 10,19,24 parents 44:6, number 4:16 96:11 97:1 32:5,13,19 8,11 45:8 16:16 42:4 98:12,19 99:8 33:4,15 35:1, 57:12 58:20 62:6 objection 12 45:2 parents' 47:1 63:22 65:3 52:10,23 59:15,18,20 56:1 68:5 86:8 58:18 59:4 60:4 parlance 89:7 97:16 70:17,25 99:5 opposite 99:4 59:17 numbers 79:6 objective options 38:12 part 18:23 14:18 57:7 25:8 27:17 obligated oral 48:13 28:2,14 61:5, O 30:13 order 64:11 9 62:25 71:3, oath 5:19 obligation 65:14,20,24 9 73:13 92:2 74:3 41:19 67:5 73:12 96:6 98:14,25 object 11:21 obligations orders 62:11, participated 12:18 14:1 40:15 48:17 16 63:9 30:14 U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT (561) 835-0220
Enter the password to open this PDF file:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-