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.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,    

                              Plaintiffs,

              v.

ORACLE CORPORATION,

                              Defendant.


|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|         

CASE NO. C 04-0807 VRW


STIPULATION REGARDING
AUTHENTICITY AND ADMISSIBILITY
OF DOCUMENTS

The parties to the above-entitled action, having met and conferred, and upon determining that good cause exists for the foregoing, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. Documents produced to a party to this action by another party or a third party in response to compulsory process (e.g., subpoena, Civil Investigative Demand), a document request served upon a party pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34, or otherwise in connection with Plaintiffs' investigation of this transaction shall be deemed authentic for the purposes of this lawsuit only, absent good cause. Good cause would include issues relating to the completeness of the document (e.g., missing or incomplete pages) or any conditions in the actual document or the manner in which it was produced that brings into question whether the document was actually generated by the relevant party or third-party.

2. Documents produced to a party to this action by another party or third party in response to compulsory process (e.g., subpoena, Civil Investigative Demand), a document request served upon a party pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34, or otherwise in connection with Plaintiffs' investigation of this transaction that were generated by the party or third party that produced such documents, or by that party's or third-party's agent, shall be presumed admissible for the purposes of this lawsuit only, absent good cause. This provision shall not apply to analysts' reports regarding the industry at issue. Good cause would include circumstances under which the source of the information featured in the document or the circumstances of its preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness (as noted in Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)). To the extent a document would be considered admissible under this stipulation, both sides would still retain the right to argue that a particular document contains hearsay within hearsay that is not admissible.

SO STIPULATED.


Dated: June 10, 2004 ____________/s/____________
Claude F. Scott, Esq.
Conrad J. Smucker, Esq.
Pam Cole, Esq. (Cal. Bar No. 208286)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division
450 Golden Gate Avenue
Room 10-0101, Box 36046
San Francisco, CA 94102
Counsel for Plaintiff United States


Dated: June 10, 2004 ____________/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)

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) 282-5437 (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) 416-6015 (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)

Steven M. Rutstein, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
55 Elm Street
Hartford, CT 06106
(860) 808-5169
(860) 808-5033 (Fax)

Paul F. Novak, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General In Charge
Special Litigation Division
Michigan Department of Attorney General
P.O. Box 30212
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 335-4809
(517) 373-9860 (Fax)

Mitchell L. Gentile, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Antitrust Section
Office of the Attorney General
150 E. Gay St., 20th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-4328
(614) 995-0266 (Fax)

Ellen S. Cooper, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Chief, Antitrust Division
State of Maryland
200 St. Paul Place, 19th Floor
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 576-6470
(410) 576-7830 (Fax)

Counsel for Plaintiff States
Counsel for Plaintiff States


Dated: June 10, 2004 ____________/s/____________
Daniel M. Wall, Esq.
J. Thomas Rosch, Esq.
Gregory P. Lindstrom, Esq.
LATHAM & WATKINS, LLP
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 1900
San Francisco, CA 94111

Dorian Daley, Esq.
Jeffrey S. Ross, Esq.
ORACLE CORPORATION
500 Oracle Parkway, 7th Floor
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Counsel for Defendant Oracle Corp.