This document is available in two formats: this web page (for browsing content) and PDF (comparable to original document formatting).To view the PDF you will need Acrobat Reader, which may be downloaded from the Adobe site. For an official signed copy, please contact the Antitrust Documents Group.

Claude F. Scott, Esq.
Pam Cole, Esq. (CA Bar No. 208286)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ANTITRUST DIVISION
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Rm. 10-0101
San Francisco, CA 94102-3478
(415) 436-6660
(415) 436-6683 (Fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiff the United States of America

Also filed on behalf of 7 Plaintiff States (see signature block)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO JUDICIAL DISTRICT



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,    

                  Plaintiffs,

                  v.

ORACLE CORPORATION,

                  Defendant.


|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|         

CASE NO. C 04-0807 VRW

Filed May 18, 2004

PLAINTIFFS' WITNESS LIST

PLAINTIFFS' WITNESS LIST

Witness Name Witness Affiliation Description of
Testimony Subjects
Estimated Time of Direct
Scott Hatfield Cox Communications, Inc.
  • Cox Communications' HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Bob Bullock CH2M Hill Inc.
  • CH2M Hill's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Richard A. Bergquist PeopleSoft, Inc.
  • PeopleSoft, its products and its focus on "enterprise customers";
  • the requirements of "enterprise customers"
  • competition among PeopleSoft, Oracle and SAP for the enterprise customer
  • entry and repositioning conditions for mid-tier vendors
  • role of competition between PSFT and Oracle in new products and innovations
2
Nancy Thomas IBM Global Services, Business Consulting Services
  • software selection and implementation services provided to clients for ERP systems, including HRM and FMS
  • vendor characteristics, attributes of ERP systems offered by vendors and the functional needs and requirements of clients
  • alternatives available to clients for HRM and FMS systems needs
  • selection process for HRM and FMS systems, including information obtained and disclosed
1.5
Laurette Bradley Verizon Communications Inc.
  • Verizon's HRM/FMS system needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Phillip Maxwell Neiman Marcus Group
  • Neiman Marcus' HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Ken Johnsen Pepsi Americas
  • Pepsi Americas' HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition to meet systems needs
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Scott Wesson Apartment Investment and Management Co.
  • AIMCO's HRM/FMS system needs
  • decision/plans regarding licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Perry E. Keating






BearingPoint, Inc.
  • software selection and implementation services provided to clients for ERP systems, including HRM and FMS;
  • vendor characteristics, attributes of ERP systems offered by vendors and the functional needs and requirements of clients
  • alternatives available to clients for HRM and FMS systems needs;
  • selection process for HRM and FMS systems, including information obtained and disclosed
1.5
Douglas Burgum Microsoft Corp.
  • Microsoft business software, its competition and significance
1.25
Richard Cichanowicz Nextel Communications
  • Nextel's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Leonard Disimone Metro North, New York
  • Metro North's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans regardng licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Phillip Wilmington PeopleSoft, Inc.
  • the sales process for high-function enterprise software
  • competition among enterprise software vendors, including competition between PeopleSoft and Oracle
  • the significance of other software vendors or other alternatives
  • conditions relevant to possible new entry or repositioning by mid-tier vendors to serve enterprise customers
2
Geoff Penney Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.
  • Charles Schwab's HRM/FMS system needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Curtis Wolfe



State of North Dakota
  • North Dakota's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Scott Elliott




Kerr-McGee Corporation
  • Kerr-McGee's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Arthur Teelak, Jr.




Erie County, New York
  • Erie County's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Michael Gorriz DaimlerChrylser AG
  • DaimlerChrysler's HRM/FMS systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM/FMS systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Mary Glover Greyhound Lines, Inc.
  • Greyhound's HRM systems needs
  • decision/plans/experience in licensing and implementing systems and system enhancements
  • consideration of available options for HRM systems needs
  • competition among Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP
  • likely impact of proposed transaction
.75
Lynn E. Anderson Cap Gemini Ernst & Young U.S. LLC
  • software selection and implementation services provided to clients for ERP systems, including HRM and FMS
  • vendor characteristics, attributes of ERP systems offered by vendors and the functional needs and requirements of clients
  • alternatives available to clients for HRM and FMS systems needs
  • selection process for HRM and FMS systems, including information obtained and disclosed
1.5
Marco Iansiti Harvard Business School
  • Enterprise requirements for FMS/HRM software, and capability and suitability of various vendors to provide applications to meet these requirements
  • For further detail, see expert report.
3
Richard Allen former PeopleSoft, Inc.
  • J.D. Edwards, Inc.'s unsuccessful attempt to enter the market for enterprise customers.
2
Kenneth Elzinga University of Virginia
  • Economic analysis of proposed transaction.
  • For further detail, see expert report.
3
Preston McAfee California Institute of Technology
  • Economic analysis of competitive effect of proposed transaction.
  • For further detail, see expert report.
2
REBUTTAL      
Mark Zmiejewski University of Chicago; Chicago Partners
  • Rebuttal of efficiencies evidence anticipated from Oracle.
  • For further detail, see expert report
2

Plaintiff also intends to introduce witness deposition testimony, including video testimony, pursuant to the Case Management Order.


Dated: May 18, 2004 Respectfully submitted,


       
____________________________
Claude F. Scott, Esq.
Pam Cole, Esq. (CA Bar No. 208286)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
ANTITRUST DIVISION
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Rm. 10-0101
San Francisco, CA 94102-3478
(415) 436-6660
(415) 436-6683 (Fax)

Counsel for Plaintiff
United States of America

_______________/s/________________
Mark Tobey, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
P.O. Box 12548
Austin, Texas 78711-2548
(512) 463-2185
(512) 320-0975 (Fax)

Mark J. Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General
State of Hawaii
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
(808) 586-1600
(808) 586-1239 (Fax)

Ellen S. Cooper, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Chief, Antitrust Division
State of Maryland
(410) 576-6470
(410) 576-7830 (Fax)

Timothy E. Moran, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 727-2200, ext. 2516
(617) 727-5765 (Fax)

Kristen M. Olsen, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General of Minnesota
445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1200
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2130
(651) 296-2921
(651) 296-9663 (Fax)

Jay L. Himes, Esq.
Chief, Antitrust Bureau
Office of the Attorney General of New York
120 Broadway, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10271
(212) 416-8282
(212) 416-8942 (Fax)

Todd A. Sattler, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division
600 E. Boulevard Ave., Dept. 125
Bismark, ND 58505-0040
(701) 328-2811
(701) 328-3535 (Fax)

Counsel for Plaintiff States