Free Response in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

EXHIBIT F

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 1 of 34

Page 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA HYPERCOM CORPORATION Plaintiff, Vs. VERVE L.L.C. and OMRON CORPORATION, Defendant(s). § § § § § NO. CIV 04-0400 PHX PGR § § § § §

******************************************************* ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF RAYMOND GALASSO March 11, 2005 Volume 1 of 1 ******************************************************* ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION of RAYMOND GALASSO, produced as a witness at the instance of the Plaintiff, and duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on the 11th of March, 2005, from 9:02 a.m. to 12:24 p.m., before Pamela Nichols, CSR in and for the State of Texas, reported by computer-aided machine shorthand, at the offices of Fulbright & Jaworski, 600 Congress Avenue, 23rd Floor, Austin, Texas, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the provisions stated on the record or attached hereto.

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 2 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1

March 11, 2005
Page 4
EXHIBITS CONTINUED
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

APPEARANCES FOR THE PLAINTIFF: Mr. Sid Leach SNELL & WILMER, L.L.P. One Arizona Center Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202 (602) 382-6000 FOR THE DEFENDANT VERVE L.L.C.: Mr. Gregory S. Donahue SIMON, GALASSO & FRANTZ, PLC 6300 Bridgepoint Parkway, Building One Suite 410A Austin, Texas 78730 (512) 231-1311 ALSO PRESENT: Corey Bailey, Videographer

NO. DESCRIPTION

PAGE

23................................................. 114 E-mail, 1/6/2005, Herbert Kerner to Ray Galasso 24................................................ 116 E-mail, 1/10/2005, Herbert Kerner to "Jeff" 25................................................. 117 E-mail, 1/5/2005, Kevin Imes to Herb Kerner 26................................................. 120 E-mail, 7/1/2004, Ray Galasso to Herbert Kerner PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS REFERENCED

12

NO. PAGE 13 14 3............................................... 40 5............................................... 42 15 9............................................... 51 8............................................... 56 16 12.............................................. 59 15.............................................. 75 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 3
1 INDEX 2 Appearances......................................... 2 3 Stipulations (attached)............................N/A 4 KEVIN IMES Examination by Mr. Leach........................ 6 5 6 Signature and Changes............................. 124 7 Reporter's Certificate............................ 126 8 9 EXHIBITS 10 NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE 11 16.................................................. 96 12 E-mail stream, Ray Galasso/Herb Kerner 6/3&4/2004 13 17................................................. 100 14 Letter from Raymond Galasso to Herbert Kerner dated 3-19-04, w/ appendix 15 18................................................. 103 16 Letter, 4/23/2004, Herbert Kerner to Raymond Galasso 17 19................................................. 104 18 Letter, 4/23/2004, Herbert Kerner to Raymond Galasso, updated 19 20 20................................................. 104 Various E-mails Re: Verve-Omron Patents 21 21................................................. 108 22 E-mail, 12/17/2003, R. Galasso to Herbert Kerner w/ attached draft proposal 23 22................................................. 113 24 E-mail, 11/16/2004, Raymond Galasso to Haruo Okada 25

Page 5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the videotaped deposition of Raymond Galasso, taken in the matter of Hypercom Corporation Vs. Verve L.L.C., et al, Civil Action No. 04-0400 PHX PGR, for the United States District Court, District of Arizona, held in the offices of Fulbright & Jaworski, at 600 Congress Avenue, in Austin, Texas. The videographer's name is Corey Bailey. The court reporter's name is Pam Nichols. Today's date is March 11th, 2005. We're on the record at 9:01 a.m. Would counsel please introduce themselves. MR. LEACH: I am Sid Leach and I am representing Hypercom Corporation. MR. DONAHUE: I'm Greg Donahue from Simon, Galasso & Frantz, and I'm representing Verve, who is the defendant in the litigation. RAYMOND GALASSO, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: EXAMINATION BY MR. LEACH: Q. What is your name, please? MR. DONAHUE: Oh, excuse me. Let me just get a couple of things out of the way so that I don't have to object as we get going. I just want to make sure that we're

2 (Pages 2 to 5)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 3 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

agreeing to the same things as we did yesterday. No. 1, I guess, was that any exhibits and any testimony that is entered into the record, Verve reserves the right to designate it as confidential later, and if you want to challenge the designation after we enter a protective order, that's fine. I think the other issue that I'd like to raise is, obviously we disagree on what the proper scope of personal jurisdictional discovery is. So I think just in the interest of getting through this, we'll proceed like we did yesterday; but I just want to point out that to the extent we get outside the bounds of that, we may raise the issue with the judge and attempt to strike some of the deposition testimony as being in violation of his order on the discovery. MR. LEACH: All right. Q. (BY MR. LEACH) What is your name, please? A. Raymond M. Galasso. Q. Are you one of the principals of Verve L.L.C.? A. I am. Q. What is your percentage interest in Verve L.L.C.? A. Fifty percent. Q. And is Kevin Imes the other principal? A. That's correct.

Q. If there was such a document, where would it be? A. I don't know. Q. Let me ask the question this way. A. Uh-huh. Q. If you were trying to find out whether there was such a document, where would you search, who would you ask, how would you go about trying to determine that? A. Well, I'd ask Kevin, so -- and just check -- generally check whatever records I may have, "I" meaning Verve may have. So ... Q. Okay. Does Verve L.L.C. have any offices at the moment? A. Yes. Q. Is that at 6300 Bridgeport Parkway? A. Bridgepoint Parkway. Q. Excuse me, Bridgepoint Parkway? A. Yes. Q. Building One, in Austin, Texas, correct? A. Building One, in Austin, Texas, correct. Q. Now, when did Verve obtain that office space? A. When? Q. Yes. A. Maybe within the last month or so.

Page 7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. When was Verve L.L.C. incorporated or created? A. In October of 1998. Q. At the time Verve L.L.C. was incorporated in October 1998, were you the sole owner of the entity? A. Yes, I was. And let me just -You used the word "incorporated." It's an L.L.C., so it's not a corporation, so -- but just I think, you know -Q. Could you explain what an L.L.C. is, please? A. A limited liability company. Q. And is it organized under Texas law? A. Yes. Q. Were you the sole principal in Verve L.L.C. up until the time that Kevin Imes became a principal? A. Yes. Q. When did Kevin Imes become a principal in Verve L.L.C.? A. In roughly the -- late 2002. Q. Do you remember what month? A. No, I do not. I'm sorry. Q. Is there any writing or document that evidences the moment or the time when he became a principal? A. There may have been, but I don't specifically recall.

Q. So in approximately February, March of 2005? A. In that time frame generally, approximately, yes. Q. And is Verve's address Suite 410B? A. That's correct. Q. Now, your law firm, Simon, Galasso & Frantz, recently moved into new office space, correct? A. Correct. Q. And is that also at 6300 Bridgepoint Parkway, Building One, in Austin, Texas? A. Correct. Q. And the law firm's address is Suite 410A, correct? A. That's correct. Q. What is the difference between Suite 410A and Suite 410B? A. I don't understand your question. Q. Are they physically separate enclosures? A. I still don't understand your question. Q. Is Suite 410A separate from Suite 410B? A. Yes. Q. How? A. One is Suite 410A and one is Suite 410B and they're two different suites. Q. How are they separate?

3 (Pages 6 to 9)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 4 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. I don't understand your question. Q. A separate building? Is there a wall between them? Is there a door you have to open to go from one to the other? A. Sure, yes. Q. Well, would you tell me what it is, please? A. Tell you what what is? Q. Describe it for me. A. There's a suite that's 410A and there's a suite that's 410B. There's doors. There's doors that separate the suites. That's all I -- I don't know what else you're looking for. Q. If you're outside in the parking lot and you want to go into 410A, which door do you go through? A. Which door? Q. Uh-huh. A. Go to the building's front door, yeah. Q. Okay. So there's an inside lobby of some sort? A. Of this building? Q. Yes. A. Of course, yes. It's a commercial building. Q. All right. So you go into a lobby on the first floor or go up to the fourth floor to get to your offices; is that right?

Q. Is the law firm fully moved in yet or are you still in the process of moving? A. I'm not sure what you mean by that, but we're there. We're operating the Austin office of Simon, Galasso & Frantz there, yes. Q. Do you still have any furniture boxes or other materials at the other location that haven't been moved yet? A. No. Q. What was the specific date that the law firm's furniture and boxes were moved to the new facility? A. I don't remember. I think it was towards the end of February, which would make sense, yeah. Q. Okay. Now, if you go in the door to Suite 410, where would you then proceed if you wanted to find Suite 410B? A. I don't understand your question. Q. Well, we were just talking about getting on the fourth floor of the building, you want to go to Suite 410A. You walk through a certain door into a room. Where would you then proceed if you wanted to go to Suite 410B? A. There would be another door that you'd proceed to or through. Q. Okay. And would that be a different door that

Page 11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 13
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Correct. Q. All right. And you get out of the elevator or the stairs on the fourth floor, and is there some door you would then go into in order to enter Suite 410A? A. Yes. Q. And if you want to enter 410B, do you go through the same door or a different door? A. Initially, you'd go through the same door. Q. Okay. And when you go through that door, do you encounter a receptionist? A. Not currently. Q. Okay. But the idea is to have a receptionist there? A. In other words, we're just going to be speculating at this point, so -- I mean in terms of what is and what isn't there. It's brand new office space. Q. Okay. Well, what is there at the moment? A. There's no reception desk, period. Q. Is it empty space? A. When you first walk in? Q. Uh-huh. A. Generally it is, yes. Q. There's no furniture in the room? A. No, not when you first walk in.

you would go through if you want to go through 410B? A. A different door if you wanted to go through 410B or 410A? I think you misspoke. I think you meant 410A. Q. Actually, you may not have understood my question. If you're on the fourth floor of 6300 Bridgepoint Parkway, we talked about you go through a door to go into Suite 410. A. Uh-huh. Q. And I asked you then do you go into a different door if you want to go into 410B, and is that a door that you would not go through if you wanted to proceed to 410A or, say, to your office? A. Yes. Q. All right. How many square feet of space does Verve L.L.C. have? A. Oh, probably somewhere in the order of 700 to 1,000 square feet, maybe. I don't know for sure. Q. Isn't that something that you would normally know if you were leasing space, how many square feet you have? A. Well, I just told you I know it's roughly 700 to 1,000 feet. So it's -- I do know. You're -- yeah,

4 (Pages 10 to 13)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 5 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

so ... Q. Do you have a written lease for Verve L.L.C.? A. No, we do not have a written lease. It's a month-to-month lease. Q. Does Simon, Galasso & Frantz have a written lease for their space? A. Yes. Q. And who is Simon, Galasso & Frantz leasing space from? A. I don't remember the specific entity. I believe it's referred to as REIT, R-E-I-T. Q. Now, is the space that is being used by Verve L.L.C. included in the space that is encompassed by the lease between REIT and Simon, Galasso & Frantz? A. Yes, it is, and -Q. So Verve is, in effect, leasing the space or getting the space from Simon, Galasso & Frantz; is that right? A. Subleasing the space, that'd be correct, with -- and REIT is fully aware of that, too. Q. Sure. And is there a written lease between Simon, Galasso & Frantz and REIT? A. A written -- I think you -Q. Is there some sort of writing or --

A. I don't know if it has a listing. It has telephone numbers. Q. Does it have a telephone number that's specifically for Verve L.L.C.? A. I believe so, yes. Q. Do you know what that number is? A. I don't remember it offhand. Q. Who answers that telephone when it rings; do you know? A. Maybe a person or -- what do you mean? I don't -- you know, I mean, I'm going to try to answer your questions today, but a lot of times -- you're asking a lot of real open-ended questions and a lot of things that don't seem to relate anything to personal jurisdiction. But I'll be happy to try to keep answering your questions. Q. Does the phone number for Verve L.L.C. ring at Suite 410B? A. I don't know. Maybe check with SBC, I don't know. Q. Okay. But you don't know where the phone is located that if you call that number, where the phone rings? A. Where the phone rings? Q. Yes. Is there -- what physical location

Page 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 17
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. I think you already asked that, yeah. Q. And you said yes? A. I said yes, that's correct. Q. Do you know the date of that lease? A. I don't know the specific date. I want to say maybe January of this year, roughly. Q. Who signed that lease on behalf of Simon, Galasso & Frantz? A. Myself. Q. Are you the senior partner in the Austin, Texas office? A. I don't know what you mean by that. Q. Well, you're the guy that signed the lease. Are you sort of the principal person, the managing-type person, sort of the senior guy who would sign things like that? A. Under authority from Frank Simon as the managing member of Simon, Galasso & Frantz, perhaps. So I'd certainly -- you know, it's not something I could run off and go do without bringing it to the managing member's attention. Q. Does Verve L.L.C. have a telephone number now? A. Does -- I'm sorry? Q. Does Verve L.L.C. have a telephone listing now?

that's associated with? A. Where the phone would ring, it would ring into Suite 410B. Q. Right. That was my question. A. Yes, okay. So is that -Q. And is there someone there that answers the phone? A. Sure. Q. Who? A. It would be an auto-attendant or Kevin Imes, perhaps. Q. Is the auto-attendant the same machine that answers the phone for Simon, Galasso & Frantz sometimes? A. I don't know. Q. Prior to October 1998, did the Verve business exist in any form or fashion before the time that you created the L.L.C.? THE WITNESS: Could you repeat that unclear question? I can't -(Requested portion was read.) THE WITNESS: No, no. Q. (BY MR. LEACH) There was no partnership venture? A. No, no.

5 (Pages 14 to 17)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 6 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. All right. When you created Verve L.L.C., was the principal place of business located in Austin, Texas? A. When I created it? Yes. Q. Has it remained in Austin, Texas up until today? A. No. I think it's changed to at points be in Michigan or be shared between Michigan and Austin, so ... Q. When did you first meet Kevin Imes? A. When did I first meet Kevin Imes? 19 -somewhere in the 1990's, late 1990's, roughly. Q. And what were the circumstance under which you met him? Were you both working at the same place or -A. Yes, we were working at Thompson & Knight. Q. When was the first time that you had any communications or discussions with Mr. Imes concerning the possibility of him participating in Verve L.L.C. in some fashion? A. 2002, roughly. Q. Do you remember what month? A. No, huh-uh. Q. Who contacted whom? A. I don't know. I mean, we were pretty -- I mean, we would stay in contact with one another; so it

Q. Answer my question, please. A. What did we talk about? We talked about his interest in -- my desire and his interest of possibly becoming a part of Verve. Q. Okay. What else? A. That's it. Q. He just said, hey, I think I may want to become a part of Verve, and the next day you guys signed a deal? A. No, we -Q. Is that your testimony? A. No, that's not my testimony. Q. Then what did you talk about? A. We talked about the -- what that would look like and what sort of things he could help with and what sort of terms and things he would join Verve. Q. Okay. Then tell me what it was that you talked about it would look like and the terms and things. A. I don't understand your question. Q. Then explain your answer further. I want some more details. MR. DONAHUE: Objection, confusing. THE WITNESS: I don't understand your question.

Page 19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

would be hard to delineate who contacted or initiated that. Q. What were the discussions between you and Mr. Imes that led up to him becoming a principal; what was the proposals or the substance of your negotiations? A. I don't understand your question, I'm sorry. If you could just ask a little more specific question and I'll answer whatever -- what kind of question you have, but I don't understand what your question is. Q. Well, what did you and him talk about? A. When? Q. Well, I think it's quite apparent I'm asking about that led up to him becoming a principal. A. Okay. So we're in the time frame leading up to when -Q. Uh-huh. A. What did we talk about? We talked about a lot of different things. Q. Okay. Tell me. A. Sports, weather. Q. No, you know what I'm asking about. I'm asking about what did you talk about in connection with him becoming a principal. A. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that.

Q. (BY MR. LEACH) All right. You said that you talked about what it would look like. You said you talked about terms and things, using your language. Tell me what those were. A. I don't remember. Q. Did you eventually reach an understanding or an agreement with Mr. Imes prior to him becoming a principal in Verve? A. Understanding or agreement with Mr. Imes prior to him becoming -- that led up to the reason he became or what -Q. Yes. A. I don't understand your question. Q. What is it that's so hard? A. It sounds like you're asking whether there was like prior agreements prior to -Q. Well, what was the agreement? A. I'm sorry? Q. What was the agreement when he became a principal? A. For him to become a principal in Verve. Q. Uh-huh. A. That was the agreement. Q. That's it? A. Fifty percent ownership in Verve.

6 (Pages 18 to 21)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 7 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. That's it? A. I don't remember anything else. You're asking about a long time ago; so that's what I recall. Q. All right. There was no discussion about what responsibilities he would have, what he would do, what responsibilities you would have, what business you were pursuing, nothing along those lines? A. Not that I specifically recall. But, I mean, I'm sure there was discussions like that. I don't at this time recall anything specifically. Q. Was there any discussion of Omron Corporation at that time? A. No. Q. Did Kevin Imes contribute any capital to Verve L.L.C. in connection with him becoming a principal? A. Did Kevin Imes contribute -- what was the question -Q. Contribute any capital. A. Capital, like what type of capital? Q. Any kind of capital. A. Monetary? Money? Q. Anything. A. I don't know. I don't -- I don't specifically recall any, as I understand your question. Q. Did he pay any money to become a principal?

THE WITNESS: Yeah, I can't, either. Can you? I'm sorry. Q. (BY MR. LEACH) Do you know what month in 2003? A. What month? Q. Yes. A. No, I do not. I don't specifically recall. Q. What were the circumstances under which you first met Herb Kerner? A. The circumstances that I first met Herb Kerner was in connection with -- in his capacity as a Hunton & Williams attorney. Q. Was Hunton & Williams representing Verve at that time? A. Yes. Q. Did Herb Kerner do work for Verve? A. I don't know. Q. Do you have any knowledge or information concerning when Herb Kerner left Hunton & Williams? A. When he left? Q. Yes. A. It was sometime in 2004, I believe. Q. Do you know what month? A. No, I do not. Q. Up until the time that Mr. Kerner left Hunton & Williams, was Hunton & Williams continuing to

Page 23
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Not that I specifically recall. Q. Did he receive any shares of stock? A. Did he receive shares of stock? Q. Yes. A. Verve is an L.L.C., so, no. And I still don't understand what any of these questions have to do with personal jurisdiction, but I'll keep answering them. Q. Was there any written agreement or any writing that evidenced Mr. Imes becoming a principal? A. I think you already asked that question before. Q. There isn't -- or you don't know, right? A. I said there may be, but -Q. When was the first time that you met Herb Kerner? A. Herb Kerner, the first time I met him? Face-to-face? By phone? Q. In any fashion. A. In any fashion. Q. Telephone, face-to-face, e-mail. A. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. 2003. Q. Do you know what month in 2003? MR. DONAHUE: Could you speak up? I can't really hear.

represent Verve? A. Up -- could you repeat that? Q. Up until the time that Mr. Kerner left Hunton & Williams, was Hunton & Williams continuing to do work for Verve, represent Verve? A. Up to the time he -- Yes. Q. And Hunton & Williams continued after that, correct? A. Correct. Q. Was Mr. Kerner doing any work for Verve up until the time he left Hunton & Williams; do you know? A. It was Verve, my impression, yes. So to answer your question, yes. He's a Hunton & Williams attorney. He would be -- as you know, there was an agreement that was negotiated and it's my understanding he worked on it. So I don't have the internal records of Hunton & Williams; so I can't answer and I can't speak for Herb or Hunton & Williams. But it's Verve's understanding that he, Hunton & Williams and others at Hunton & Williams were Verve's attorneys. Q. And what's the agreement you were talking about that was negotiated; the agreement with Omron? A. Yeah. As you know, there's many different agreements; so it would have been the first agreement. Q. Did it involve the '895 patent?

7 (Pages 22 to 25)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 8 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 28
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. I mean, it would have been -- it would have been all agreements; but if we're talking that specific time frame when I first met Herb Kerner or -- then, okay? Q. Sure. A. Okay. Q. Let me show you a document that was previously marked as Imes Exhibit 2. Is this one of the agreements you were referring to between Verve and Omron? A. Could you give me a minute to look it over? Q. Absolutely. A. Thank you. (Witness reviews document.) Yes. This is at one stage of -- it looks like Herb Kerner was sending Ray Galasso of Verve L.L.C. a letter: "Please find enclosed a copy of the above-referenced agreement which has been executed by Omron," and this is from Herb Kerner as an attorney with Hunton & Williams. And it's "With your review and approval, please execute both agreements and forward one original executed agreement to me on behalf of Omron." Q. Now, at the time of this correspondence, Mr. Kerner was still with Hunton & Williams, correct? A. Yes. As I understand it, yes.

A. By Verve, yeah. Well, what time frame? Q. Prior to September 11, 2003. A. Prior to -- sure. Q. And Omron knew in advance that Hypercom would be one of the companies that Verve was going to sue in Michigan on September 11, 2003? A. I don't know. Q. But Omron knew in advance that Hypercom was one of the targets that Verve was going after? A. I don't know, you'll have to ask them. Q. Well, did you tell them? A. I don't remember. I don't know. Q. Did you tell Herb Kerner that Hypercom was one of the targets that Verve was going after? A. I don't think so. Q. Who if anyone did any investigation of Hypercom products prior to September 11, 2003? A. Could you repeat the question? Q. Who if anyone did any investigation of Hypercom products accused of infringement prior to September 11, 2003? A. Who? Q. Yes. A. That would have probably been primarily Verve and its counsel.

Page 27
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 29
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. And was Mr. Kerner representing Verve at this time? A. I think you just got done asking that question, and from Verve's perspective, yes. Q. Okay. The agreement of Exhibit 2 appears to have been signed by Mr. Nakano for Omron Corporation on August -- and it's dated August 13, 2003. Did you also sign this agreement? A. I believe I did. Q. Do you recall the date you signed it? A. I don't recall the specific date, but it would have been certainly within this time frame, within days, maybe, or a day or -- I'm not sure. Q. Okay. Now, Verve sued Hypercom in Michigan on the Omron '895 patent on September 11, 2003. Did Mr. Herb Kerner know in advance of Verve's intention to sue Hypercom in Michigan? A. I don't know. Q. Did Omron know in advance of Verve's intention to sue Hypercom? A. I don't know. Q. Had Hypercom already been identified as a target to Omron? A. By who? Q. By Verve or anyone.

Q. I'm asking for people, please. A. People? Q. Yes. Would that have been Kevin Imes or you? A. It would have been primarily Kevin Imes and the attorneys, Simon, Galasso & Franz, primarily Chris Walton, and I think that's it. I don't specifically recall. It's been a long time ago. Q. What was the basis on which Verve -- that Verve relied upon to accuse Hypercom products of infringement prior to September 11, 2003? A. I don't -- I don't remember. Q. Did you do any independent investigation of Hypercom products that were accused of infringement in the Michigan suit filed on September 11, 2003? A. Did I personally? Q. Yes. A. I think I did. Q. What did you do? What did you do prior to September 11, 2003? A. Prior to 11 -- I think I -- well, I -- I can't really get into what I did because I think it's attorney-client privileged. So I don't know what else to tell you, so ... Q. Well, I'm going to ask. You can refuse to answer. I think that's appropriate procedure. But I

8 (Pages 26 to 29)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 9 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 32
either be with Verve's -- in Verve's records and/or -I'm assuming it's counsel's records. Q. The Verve records you're referring to, where are they physically located? A. In its offices or various offices or its counsel's offices. Q. Where is that? A. Could be Michigan, could be Austin, Texas, could be -- I think it'd primarily be Austin, Texas and Michigan, primarily, I believe. Q. Okay. Where in Austin, Texas? A. Where? Q. Yes. A. For what? Q. Verve records. A. Verve records? In the office that we talked about at length, the new -- Verve's office, Suite 410B. Perhaps home offices. Q. Where are the home offices? You mean Mr. Imes' home office; is that what you mean? A. Yes, Mr. Imes'. Q. Do you have a home office as well -A. I do. Q. -- that you use for Verve? A. Well, use for Verve, sure.

do want an answer. 1 A. Okay. Well, to the extent you're asking for 2 attorney-client privileged-type communications, I guess 3 I'm refusing to answer. 4 Q. All right. But what did you do? 5 A. What did I do? 6 Q. Yes. 7 A. I don't understand what -8 MR. DONAHUE: Yeah, can I ask for 9 clarification of the question. 10 Q. (BY MR. LEACH) What investigation did you make 11 personally prior to September 11, 2003, concerning any 12 Hypercom products accused of infringement of the '895 13 patent? 14 A. Well, I think the answer to that question asks 15 for attorney-client privileged information, so I guess 16 I need to refuse to answer it. 17 Q. Okay. Can you tell me what anyone else did 18 to investigate Hypercom products prior to September 11, 19 2003, concerning the Omron '895 patent? 20 A. What anybody else did? 21 Q. Yes. 22 A. Such as? 23 Q. Anybody who did any investigation. 24 A. For those that I'm familiar with, I think it's 25

Page 31
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 33
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

all attorney-client privileged information. So, no, I'm refusing, I can't answer. Q. Did you obtain a copy of the file history for the '895 patent prior to September 11, 2003? A. I don't remember. And I'd just like to clarify that if I don't remember, it doesn't mean that the file wrapper wasn't of course acquired prior to the -- I would assume that it was, but -So I just want to make sure that there's no inferences drawn from that. Q. Would you have any record of the -- that would evidence when the file history for the '895 patent was obtained by Verve? A. Would I? Possibly, but I don't remember. I don't know. Q. Where would those records be if they exist? A. They would be -- I'm assuming they would be either in Verve's records or Simon, Galasso & Frantz's records. But again, if they're not -- if they're not in existence, it wouldn't be necessarily a fair characterization meaning that it didn't occur. So ... Q. Right. But if you wanted to try to find it, where would you look for the records? A. Well, I just -- I just told you: It would

Q. You also use it for your law firm practice? A. No, that's not a fair characterization. Q. Okay. Are there any Verve records in Suite 410A? A. Are there any Verve records in Suite 410A? Q. Yes. A. I believe there would be. Q. At some point in time, did you have a meeting with representatives of Omron? A. Yes. Q. Was there only one meeting that involved Mr. Nakano? A. A face-to-face meeting? Q. Yes. A. Yes. Q. When did that meeting take place? A. It was sometime in 2003, I believe somewhere in the middle of the year, roughly. Q. Did that meeting take place in the Washington, D.C. area? A. Yes. Q. Or more specifically, in Arlington, Virginia? A. I don't remember. Q. All right. Did it take place at Mr. Nakano's office?

9 (Pages 30 to 33)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 10 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 34
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 36
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. I think it did. Well, Mister -- Omron's offices in and around the Washington, D.C. area, yes. Q. All right. Who attended that meeting? A. Who attended that meeting? Let me try to remember. It was myself, Kevin Imes, Herb Kerner of Hunton & Williams, and Tom Anderson of Hunton & Williams, and Mr. Nakano of Omron. Q. During this meeting was Herb Kerner representing Verve? A. Same question as before and same answer from Verve's perspective. I think from Verve's perspective, yes, they were -- Herb Kerner was with Hunton & Williams and he was representing Verve. Q. And was Tom Anderson representing Verve? A. Yes. Q. What was discussed at this meeting in mid2003? A. What was discussed? Generally, the interest by Omron to sell some of their patents and Verve's interest in buying those patents. Q. Prior to this meeting, had you had any direct communications with Mr. Nakano of any type? A. No, not -- no. Q. And this meeting was more or less your introduction to Mr. Nakano?

A. Well, it would have been between myself and Hunton & Wililams, and actually probably mostly through Tom Anderson, but possibly Herb Kerner, too, but I really don't remember. But both -- in Verve's mind or viewpoint they were one in the same. They're from the same law firm representing Verve and Verve's interests. Q. Sure. How did you first learn of the Omron patents? A. From Tom Anderson. In fact, he called me. Q. Can you tell me what -- the substance of what he said to you about the Omron patents when he called you? A. It was something to the effect that, hey, we have another client that has some patents that they have a desire to sell; are you guys interested in entertaining an interest in buying them. And I said, sure, we'll take a look at it. Q. Did you do any investigation or analysis of the -- any of the Omron patents prior to this first meeting in mid-2003? A. Do any -Q. Did you look at the Omron patents, do any kind of investigation? A. Prior to when?

Page 35
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 37
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. I suppose so. I don't -- you'd have to ask them, but it was -- yeah, it was our first meeting with him. Q. Did you discuss any more specific proposals other than just the general interest in Verve buying the patents? A. I don't recall what other specifics we talked about. Q. Did you talk about any percentages of revenue sharing? A. I don't -- I don't -- I don't recall. We could have, but I just don't remember. It was a long time ago. Q. Were there any negotiations between Omron and Verve concerning this subject matter prior to this meeting? A. There could have been. I don't remember. Wait. Negotiations? I mean, I don't -- I mean, possible outline of, you know, what it might look like for them to sell the patents and for us to buy the patents. That's all. It's possible, but I really don't remember. It was a long time ago. Q. If there were any communications or negotiations or discussions, would they have been between you and Herb Kerner?

Q. Prior to the meeting. A. Prior to the meeting? I'm sure we did, but I don't recall what we did or -- but, I mean, it would make sense that we at least looked at the patents that they were proposing to sell to see if we had any interest, so ... Q. Was Kevin Imes already a principal of Verve prior to this meeting? A. Yes. Q. Was Kevin Imes already a principal of Verve prior to the first phone call that you received from Tom Anderson mentioning the Omron patents? A. Yes. Q. Did you have any written proposals that you provided to Omron either prior to or during the meeting that took place? A. Prior to or during the meeting? I don't -- I don't really remember. I know there's proposals, I just don't remember the time frame, if those came after or before this meeting, so ... Q. Okay. A. And again I have to say if there's -- you know, because I don't remember doesn't mean that it's one thing or the other, it's just I don't remember. Q. Now, the meeting that we've been talking

10 (Pages 34 to 37)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 11 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 38
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

about, it took place prior to the date of Exhibit 2, correct? A. That would be my best recollection, and I believe that's correct. Now that we've been talking about it and I see this Exhibit 2, I think the meeting might have took place sometime in July of 2003, if that's helpful. Q. Do you have any records that would help you establish the date of the meeting with Omron such as plane tickets, expense reports, anything like that? A. I don't -- I don't know. I really don't know. There could be. Could have been, I don't know. Q. If you were to try to look for such records to try to nail down the date of this meeting, where would you look? A. Probably -- perhaps in Verve's records, perhaps a printout of an e-mail or something like that. I mean, I don't know. I don't know if, you know, I just -- I don't know. Q. And when you say you'd look in Verve records, would you look in records at your home, would you look in records at Suite 410B, Suite 410A, Mr. Imes' home? A. Probably primarily Suite 410 -- Well, I take that back. I probably actually would look at -- check with our counsel, too. You could check with Hunton &

A. Livonia, Michigan. Q. Livonia? What negotiations took place between Verve and Omron other than the meeting that we've talked about that led up to the agreement of Exhibit 2? A. What negotiations? I don't specifically recall, but I'm sure that this agreement was produced at some point and the terms were looked at, and this discussed and decided upon, so ... Q. Who drafted this document? A. Actually, I believe Hunton & Williams. Q. Who did you talk to about the terms and conditions of this document? A. Primarily, Tom Anderson and Herb Kerner of Hunton & Williams, and possibly -- I didn't talk necessarily directly to Mr. Nakano other than that meeting, so -- but it's possible that I -- I mean, I didn't talk with him after that meeting, but it's possible that communications were passed back and forth through him, or to him, via Hunton & Williams. Q. Let me show you Exhibit 3 that was marked yesterday. This is a one-page document relating to the assignment of the '895 patent, correct? A. Actually, this is the assignment. Q. Okay.

Page 39
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 41
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Williams. So I guess their records and Suite 410B, primarily. It's just -Q. Does Verve use an accountant or someone to maintain any financial records or do tax returns? A. Yes. Q. Who is the accountant that Verve uses? A. David Rea. And again, I really don't understand what any of this has to do with personal jurisdiction, but I'll keep indulging your questions and try to be as cooperative as possible. Q. And is David Rea an accountant in Austin, Texas? A. Actually, no, he's not. Q. Where is he located? A. In Michigan. Q. Is he with a firm? A. I believe he is. Q. Do you know what the name of his firm is? A. Rea and Shoemaker (phonetic). Q. And do you know where in Michigan his office is located? A. Where in Michigan? Q. Yes. A. I believe it's Livonia, Michigan. Q. I'm sorry?

A. This is the assignment of the '895 patent. Q. And was this signed on or about September 5, 2003? A. I'm reading Exhibit 3 and it's got the signature of Mr. Nakano and he signed it on September 5th, 2003; so, yes. Q. At the time that this document was signed by Mr. Nakano, was Omron aware that Verve was about to file suit against Hypercom? A. Was Omron? I don't know. Q. Was Herb Kerner aware? A. I don't know. Q. And this was -- September 5 was just six days before the lawsuit was filed, correct? A. If that's what -- I don't remember when the lawsuit was filed, so it could be. Q. I think it's undisputed it was September 11, 2003. A. Okay, great. Then it was six days after. Q. Was the complaint against Hypercom already drafted? A. Was the complaint -- I don't know. Q. Had the Hypercom products already been investigated by September 5, 2003, if any investigation was done?

11 (Pages 38 to 41)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 12 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 42
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 44
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. I don't remember and I don't know. Q. Do you know who drafted the complaint that was filed in Michigan against Hypercom on September 11, 2003? A. I don't remember. Q. Let me show you the document that was marked as deposition Exhibit 5 during the deposition of Mr. Imes. This is another agreement between Verve and Omron, correct? A. Correct. This is another agreement between Omron Corporation and Verve. It looks like it's dated October 14, 2003. Q. Was this agreement actually signed on October 14, 2003? A. I don't remember. I don't have any reason to believe it wasn't. Q. Do you have any recollection if this agreement was backdated in any respect? A. No. Q. It appears that Mr. Nakano's e-mail to Japan asking for authorization to sign this agreement was dated around October 27. Do you have any knowledge or information about the timing between Mr. Nakano getting authorization from Japan to do this deal and the date that Exhibit 5 was signed?

negotiations or discussions that led up to the agreement of Exhibit 5, correct? A. Negotiations or discussions that led up to -I suppose, yes. Q. My question is, who were the discussions between? I take it on behalf of Verve you were involved in the discussions that led up to this? A. Was I involved, yes. Q. Who else? A. Kevin Imes, Hunton & Williams, including Tom Anderson and Herb Kerner. Q. Did you do most of the discussions between Verve and Hunton & Williams? A. Did I do most of the discussions between Verve and Hunton & Williams, yes. Q. Was Mr. Imes involved in talking directly to Hunton & Williams? A. Directly? He could have been on some calls. I don't remember, but it's certainly possible. Q. Did the discussions take place by telephone? A. Primarily, I think. Q. Were there e-mail communications? A. There could have been, but I -- I doubt it. Q. Did you exchange any draft agreements or did

Page 43
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. No. Q. As far as you know, when Mr. Nakano signed Exhibit 5 he already had authorization? A. As far as I know, when he signed this agreement, on the date that he signed it he had authorization, yeah. Of course. Why would I believe anything else? Q. And the agreement of Exhibit 5 involved the Omron '340 and '341 patents, correct? A. Yes. Q. Why were those patents not included in the initial agreement, if you know? A. Why were they not included in the initial agreement? Because they weren't included in the initial agreement. I mean, it's pretty much -- it's just that simple. They just weren't part of that agreement, so ... Q. Was there any reason why Omron and Verve did this in two separate agreements rather than doing them all at the same time? A. I don't know from Omron's perspective. From -- and I can't speak for them. But from Verve's perspective, because that's what was being offered. So it's just pretty much that simple. Q. Now, I assume that there had to be some

these documents go through any revisions prior to being signed? A. Which documents? Q. Any of these agreements, the Exhibit 2 or Exhibit 5? A. I don't -- I don't really recall a bunch of back and forth. I think it was pretty much here's the agreement, and maybe switch a term here; but I didn't remember a bunch of documents, you know, redlined documents or anything going back and forth. So that's what I recall. Q. Do you have any drafts or letters or correspondence or e-mail or anything relating to the negotiations or drafts leading up to either Exhibit 2 or Exhibit 5? A. I don't -- I don't know. I mean, there could be, but -Q. If you were going to look for such records to ascertain whether they exist, where would you look? A. I would probably first turn to my counsel, Hunton & Williams; then possibly at my other counsel, Simon, Galasso & Frantz; then perhaps Verve's records, again Suite 410B; maybe a home office, I don't know. But that would be pretty comprehensive. Q. What good faith basis did Verve have for

12 (Pages 42 to 45)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 13 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 46
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 48
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

accusing any Hypercom products of infringement of the '340 patent prior to October 15, 2003? A. Which patent? Q. The '340. A. The '340? Before which date? Q. October 15, 2003. A. From Verve's perspective? Q. Uh-huh. A. We believe that they're infringing the patent. Q. And what was the basis for that belief? A. I mean, I'm not going to be able to get into the attorney-client privileged information; so I can't answer. I don't know what else you want me to answer, what specific questions. Q. I'd like to know the facts that Verve relied upon, if any, to support any good faith basis for accusing the Hypercom products of infringement prior to that date of the '341 patent. A. Opinions of counsel. Q. Are there any written opinions of counsel? A. I don't know. Q. Any other facts? A. I mean, there could be, and if there was, I'm not -- you know, it's privileged information. You need to know that.

Q. Why do you say that you're sure? A. Oh, it just -- I think that it just seems like it would have been under a file wrapper that got ordered. It just seems -- I'm not sure. Q. Without speculating, do you have any actual knowledge of a file wrapper having been ordered? A. For which patent? Q. For the '340 patent. A. Do I have any -- no, I don't have any specific recollection. It doesn't mean, you know -- again, you can draw inferences. Q. What good faith basis did Verve have for accusing any Hypercom products of infringing the '341 patent prior to February 4, 2004? A. Which patent? Q. The '341 patent. A. Which good faith basis? Q. Yes. What good faith basis did Verve have for accusing any Hypercom products of infringing the '341 patent prior to February 4, 2004? A. So my good faith -- my personal good faith basis? Q. Good faith basis of Verve. A. Good faith basis of Verve? Q. Yes.

Page 47
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 49
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. Are there any other facts? A. What's that? Q. Are there any other facts that formed the good faith basis for accusing Hypercom products of infringement of the '340 patent prior to October -A. Any other facts? I don't specifically recall. I don't remember. Q. Had you obtained a copy of the file history for the '340 patent prior to October 15, 2003? A. Did I? Q. Yes. A. And by the way, today's deposition, is it myself personally or is it on behalf of Verve? Q. It's you personally today. A. Did I? Probably not. I don't -- I don't recall. Q. Do you know whether Verve did? A. Possibly. Q. Do you have any knowledge or information that anyone on behalf of Verve obtained a copy of the file history for the '340 patent prior to October 15, 2003? A. Do I have any knowledge? Q. Yes. A. I'm sure that somebody did, but I don't have any other knowledge that I remember.

A. Verve believed Hypercom's infringing that patent. Q. Based on what facts or information? A. Opinions of counsel. Q. Were there any written opinions? A. I don't know, I don't remember, specifically recall. Q. What facts, if any, were such opinions based upon, if any opinions exist? A. What's that? Q. What facts, if any, were such opinions based upon if, in fact, opinions exist? A. The fact that Hypercom's infringing the patents, in Verve's beliefs. Q. What facts would those be? A. There's a patent and there's products and you simply compare the two, and those are the facts. Q. So what would be the functions, features and characteristics of the Hypercom products that Verve relied upon? A. The ones that are contained in the '341 patent, and it would be the same answer for '340 or any of the other patents. Q. And what are those? A. They're in the '341 and '340 patents, and the

13 (Pages 46 to 49)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 14 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 50
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 52
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

other patents as well. The functions that are in there and are in the products of the Hypercom. Q. What functions are in the products of the Hypercom -A. I don't specifically recall right now. Q. Did you personally do any comparison between the claims of the '341 patent and any Hypercom products prior to February 4, 2004? A. Did I personally? Q. Uh-huh. A. Which patents? I don't -Q. '341. A. It's possible. Q. But you don't know? A. I don't know? I think I've certainly looked at the patents and I looked at Hypercom products, concluded in my mind that Hypercom was clearly infringing those patents. Q. Are there any documents or evidence of that? A. No, I don't think so. Q. Had Verve obtained any Hypercom products for purposes of testing them to see if they infringed any Omron patents prior to February 4, 2004? A. Did -- I don't know. Did Hyper -I'm sorry, could you repeat that?

acquaintance myself with it? Q. That's the idea. Take your time to look at it. That's what I meant. A. Thank you. I appreciate it. (Witness reviews document.) This was a point-of-sale portfolio assessment of market analysis that was prepared by Verve and provided to Hunton & Williams relating to Omron patents. Q. Was this provided to Hunton & Williams after the date of the agreement of Exhibit 5? A. After the date of Exhibit 5; so after October 14, 2003? I don't -- I don't know. I don't remember. Do you have anything to refresh my memory? I just don't remember. Q. If you look at Page 18 of Exhibit 9 -A. Uh-huh. Q. -- there's a list of patents, and the '340 and '341 patents have parentheticals underneath them suggesting that this document was after Exhibit 5. A. So it's -- yes, it's possible that this document was created or prepared after October 14th, 2003. Q. Do you have any independent recollection of the sequence between providing Exhibit 9 to Omron and the other agreements that we've identified already?

Page 51
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 53
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. Had Verve obtained any samples of Hypercom products to test them for purposes of determining whether they infringed any Omron patents prior to February 4, 2004? A. Prior to February 2004 obtained -- I think my answer -- I think my answer stays the same, but it's certainly possible that -- and I'm not sure what you mean by your question, too. So that's why I'm answering the way I am. Q. All right. If Verve had obtained any samples of Hypercom products, would there be any records of it? A. If Verve had obtained? Q. Uh-huh. A. Possibly. Q. And where would those records be if they exist? A. With its counsel's records, in Verve's records, possibly. Probably with its counsel's records. Q. Let me show you a document that was marked as deposition Exhibit 9 during the deposition of Mr. Imes. This is a written proposal that was provided to Omron by Verve, correct? A. Can I ask you a favor? When you give me a document, could you give me a chance to at least

A. Providing Exhibit 9 to Hunton & Williams? Q. Right. A. And? Q. And the dates that the Exhibit 5 was signed. A. And the dates that exhibit -- no, I don't. I don't have anything else that sparks my memory. Q. Were there any other communications or negotiations going on between Verve and Omron subsequent to the date of Exhibit 5 in connection with any continuing proposals by Verve such as Exhibit 9? What I'm looking for is any other thing that went back and forth other than just this document of Exhibit 9. A. I don't know. I don't remember. Q. Did those discussions and communications take place between you and Herb Kerner? A. Wait a minute. I just said I don't remember and you're -- so you assume that I just said I do remember and that there are discussions and communications. Q. Were there any -- anything that you -- were you talking to anybody about any further proposals or any additional Omron patents prior to the date that Exhibit 9 was provided to Hunton & Williams? A. Could you repeat that? Do you want to repeat

14 (Pages 50 to 53)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 15 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 54
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 56
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

it or do you want her to? Q. Yeah. A. Okay. Q. Did you have any discussions with anybody; were you talking with anybody about the other Omron patents, or did Exhibit 9 just appear out of the blue? A. Oh, I don't -- yeah, I mean, I don't think it appeared out of the blue. I think there was interest of -- on Verve's part as -- as -- I'm assuming as well as on -- I can't speak for Omron, but I'm assuming on their part to sell additional patents. So there was -at least there was that interest expressed by both sides, yes. Q. Okay. And you were participating in any discussions that took place on behalf of Verve? I'm trying to identify who was talking to whom. A. Myself personally, right, on behalf of Verve, correct. Q. And who were you talking to, if anyone? A. Hunton & Williams, again Tom Anderson and Herb Kerner. Q. Herb Kerner? A. Uh-huh. Q. All right. And you weren't having direct

Omron in this transaction? A. Are you asking my personal -Q. Yes, your awareness. A. My personal awareness or what I believed? I believed there was -- yeah, there was a joint -Yes, they were representing both. That's my understanding. Q. Did you sign any kind of a written waiver or memorialize any kind of a waiver in writing of them representing both parties? A. Actually, I didn't, no. They never presented one. Q. All right. A. Maybe they should have, but I -Q. Did they ever expressly ask you for any sort of a waiver? A. No, no. Q. Let me show you a document that was previously marked as Imes Deposition Exhibit 8. A. (Witness reviews document.) Q. Take a minute to look at it. I'm going to ask you if this was a subsequent agreement between Verve and Omron. A. (Witness reviews document.) Okay. Q. Looking at Page 9 of Exhibit 8, is that your

Page 55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 57
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

communications with Mr. Nakano about any of these subsequent Omron patents; is that correct? A. None that I recall. I think most of that communication was through our counsel, Hunton & Williams. Q. Okay. Was Herb Kerner representing Omron during this -- these discussions? A. I don't know. Q. As far as you were concerned he was representing Verve? A. Well, right, of course. Yes, absolutely. Now, whether he was also representing or Hunton & Williams was also representing Omron, I don't know; you'll have to ask them. Q. But if they were representing Omron, you were not aware of it at that time; is that right? A. If they were representing -- no. I mean, I was aware that Omron was a client, as I previously had mentioned. When Tom Anderson first called me, he says, we have another client that has some patents they're interested in selling. So I think from Verve's perspective, I think we understood that Omron was a client of Hunton & Williams. Q. But as far as this transaction was concerned, was it -- were you aware that they were representing

signature to this agreement? A. Yes. Q. And did you sign this on March 17th, 2004? A. Yes. Q. And this was a subsequent agreement between Verve and Omron relating to some additional Omron patents, correct? A. Could you repeat that one more time? Q. This agreement of Exhibit 8 included additional Omron patents that had not been included in Exhibit 5 and Exhibit 2, correct? A. Correct. Q. And was Exhibit 8 entered into after the date of Exhibit 9? A. I don't know. I don't know the date. It's certainly possible, probable. Q. Do you have any knowledge or information of the date that Exhibit 9 was provided to Hunton & Williams? A. No, other than -- just based on what we just got done talking about, it seems like it would have been sometime after October 14th, 2003, probable prior to March 19, 2004. So ... Q. How did you deliver Exhibit 9 to Hunton & Williams? Did you send it by e-mail? Did you FedEx

15 (Pages 54 to 57)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 16 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 58
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 60

1 okay. it? Did you mail it by US Mail? Do you have any 2 knowledge? Q. Now, what did Verve receive as consideration 3 for signing Exhibit 12, if anything? A. No, I don't remember. 4 Q. Would there be any record that would establish A. What did Verve? 5 the date that you provided Exhibit 9 to them? Q. (Nods head affirmatively.) 6 A. Possible. Probably. A. I'm not sure. I don't know. I think it calls 7 for a legal conclusion or opinion, but I don't -- I Q. Where would you look? 8 don't know. A. Probably in Hunton & Williams' records or -9 which would include billing records -- possibly Verve's Q. Let me just ask you a couple of questions 10 about your background. You're licensed to practice records. 11 law, correct? Q. During this period of time was Hunton & 12 Williams providing invoices or statements to Verve in A. Yes. connection with the legal work that Hunton & Williams 13 Q. You're an attorney in Texas, correct? 14 was doing for Verve? A. Correct. 15 A. During this time, yeah. Q. Are you licensed in any other state other than 16 Texas? Q. And did they have -- were they giving you 17 statements that would -- that listed the dates on which A. In Michigan and in United States Patent and 18 Trademark Office. people did things and a description of what was done, 19 sort of what we call "show and tell" billing? Q. All right. So you're also registered to 20 practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, A. Yeah. 21 correct? Q. Okay. Does Verve still have those records? 22 A. I don't know. I mean, with Verve -- I mean, A. Correct. Hunton & Williams has them, you know. I don't know. I 23 Q. And in order to obtain that registration, you 24 had to pass a test administered by the U.S. Government don't know if we have a copy of them still, I don't 25 on patent procedure and practice, correct? know, "we" being Verve.

Page 59
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 61
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. Right. Does your accountant have copies of them? A. I'm sorry? Q. Does your accountant have copies of them? A. Maybe. I don't know. Q. Let me show you one additional document that was identified yesterday. This is Imes Deposition Exhibit 12. Take a look at that. I believe this is an addendum to the agreements between Verve and Omron. A. Okay. Q. Is Exhibit 12 an addendum to the agreement that we've marked as Exhibit 8? A. Yes. Q. And was this addendum of Exhibit 12 entered into with an effective date of April 1, 2004? A. That's what Exhibit 12 says, yes. Q. The second page of Exhibit 12 contains your signature, correct? A. Yes. Q. Did you sign this on May 5, 2004? A. Yes, as far as I know. Q. Do you have any information about why your signature is dated May 5 on an agreement that was to have an effective date of April 1? A. No, just that's when it got signed. That --

A. Correct. Q. Where did you go to law school? A. University of Detroit Mercy. Q. And where did you go to undergraduate school? A. University of Michigan and United States Air Force Academy and Lawrence Technological University. Q. And what undergraduate degrees did you receive? A. Undergraduate? Q. Yes, sir. A. Bachelor's in electrical engineering. Q. Okay. And you're currently a resident of Texas, correct? A. Correct. Q. And do you reside in the Austin, Texas area? A. Yes, I do. Q. How long have you been a resident of Texas? A. How long have I been a resident of Texas? Q. (Nods head affirmatively.) A. Since -- I mean, I've been a resident at different points in time, so ... Q. Could you give me the time periods, please. A. Roughly, August of 2003 to the present, and prior to that it would have been roughly April 1st of two -- well, I say roughly. Actually that would be

16 (Pages 58 to 61)
(512) 328-5557 Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES Fax (512) 328-8139
78746 (800) 880-2546 3101 Bee Caves Road #220 AUSTIN, TEXAS

Document 141-7

Filed 08/28/2006

Page 17 of 34

6d8befa3-a028-4fcd-b902-9dd93b19f8e0

RAYMOND GALASSO
Page 62
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

March 11, 2005
Page 64
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

specifically April 1st of 2000 and -- I'm sorry -- 1996 through sometime in 2001. Q. And where were you a resident between 2001 and August 2003? A. Michigan. Q. During the time that you've been practicing law, have you ever had any cases in the state of Arizona? A. Not that I'm aware of. Q. Have you ever been admitted pro hoc vice in any court located in the state of Arizona? A. In any court in the state of Arizona? Q. Yes. A. No. Q. Have you ever had any clients in the state of Arizona? A. Not that I'm aware of. Q. Other than Hypercom, are any of the targets identified for the Omron licensing patent enforcement program, are any of them located in the state of Arizona other than Hypercom? A. For which? Q. Any of the targets that have been identified in connection with the Omron patents. A. I don't know. None -- are you talking about

Simon, Galasso & Frantz law firm, correct? A. I'm a member. No. So it's -Q. Is Simon, Galasso & Frantz a professional corporation of some sort? A. No. Q. How -- what sort of business entity does the law firm operat