Free Proposed Pretrial Order - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04—cv—00148-GI\/IS Document 67-8 Filed 08/15/2005 Page 1 ef 3
E3

Case 1 :04-cv-00148-GIVIS Document 67-8 Filed 08/15/2005 Page 2 of 3
TAB 6
DEFENDANT’S LIST OF PERCIPIENT WITNESSES
Mr. Mike Ward (will call) ·
Mr. Mike Zava (will call)
Objection - the witness, an Ingram .
Mr. Stephen Gadsey (may call) Entertainment employee, lacks personal
knowledge as to any fact that is of
consequence to the determination of this "
actions (F.R.E. 401, 402, 602), and was never
identified by Defendant as a potential
witness in disclosures or discovery or
designated by Defendant as an expert
witness. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 & 33.) See l
Motion in Limine. Q
Objection - the witness, a Dell employee, E
Mr. Michael Keller (will call) lacks personal knowledge as to any fact that
is of consequence to the determination of P
g this actions (F.R.E. 401, 402, 602), and was
never identified by Defendant as a potential
witness in disclosures or discovery or
designated by Defendant as an expert
witness. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 & 33.) See (
Motion in Limine. 1
Objection — the witness, a Dell employee, p_
Mr. Major Horton (may call) lacks personal knowledge as to any fact that
is of consequence to the determination of
this actions (F.R.E. 401, 402, 602), and was
never identified by Defendant as a potential
witness in disclosures or discovery or
designated by Defendant as an expert
witness. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 & 33.) See
. Motion in Limine. _ _;
Objection —- the witness, an expert witness
Mr. Steve Thomas (may call) disclosed in the Dell action, lacks personal Q
knowledge as to any fact that is of
consequence to the determination of this S
actions (F .R.E. 401, 402, 602), is not 1
qualified to provide expert testimony on any
issue of consequence to the determination of
this action (F.R.E. 702), and was never
42125-u0axoocs_LA;i4sz96.z

Case 1 :04-cv-00148-GIVIS Document 67-8 Filed 08/15/2005 Page 3 of 3
identified by Defendant as a potential
witness in disclosures or discovery or _
designated by Defendant as an expert
witness. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 & 33.) See
Motion in Limine.
Objection ~ the witness, a Lexmark 2
Mr. Kevin Sarkeisan (may call) employee, lacks personal knowledge as to
any fact that is of consequence to the
determination of this actions (F.R.E. 401,
402, 602), and was never identified by
Defendant as a potential witness in
disclosures or discovery or designated by
Defendant as an expert witness. (Fed. R. p
Civ. P. 26 & 33.) See Motion in Limine.
Ms. Elaine Agee (may call) A
Mr. Thomas Fitzpatrick (may call) i
Mr. Lazarus Krikorian (may call) 2
Mr. Richard Oshlo (may call)
Mr. Gerald Gagliardi (may call) hh
Mr. Ben Wells (may call)
Any other percipient witness who appears at I
trial on Plaintiff’s behalf (may Call)
42125-003\DOCS_LA:l43296.3 2

Case 1:04-cv-00148-GMS

Document 67-8

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00148-GMS

Document 67-8

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00148-GMS

Document 67-8

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 3 of 3