Joint Appendix One

!
I
I
i
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Case 2:10-cv-07678-JFW-DTB Document 58
#:1144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
wanted it divided out, so...
Filed 09/28/11 Page 17 of 21 Page ID
MR. ROUNDS: Could you read that answer back, please. (The reporter read the
record as follows: "A. Well, actually I think they would have had both. Coca-Cola
would have then had to specify they are paying the fees and we would have hard
costs for the raw materials which would have then been broken out into that piece
cost, is how they wanted it divided out, so...")
Q. BY MR. ROUNDS: Can you describe for me to the best of--
A. Sorry.
Q. -- the best you can who issued the November P.O. and what it would have
included?
A. Okay. Since I don't have the P.O., I'm going to -- based upon what I can surmise,
it would have fees and the costs for the -- included as another line item for the Beta
units.
Q. Okay. So it would have included the fees of 23,500 plus some additional costs;
is that fair?
A. That's what I'm probably believing from what I can gather.
Q. And then the second P.O. that's being refen'ed to in April of 2000 would have
been for the 24 units at a price of $850 each.
A. They would effectively have asked us not to bill them on their first P.O., the
Coca-Cola USA side, and instead bill CCE, Coca-Cola Enterprises basically, since
they were doing the - conducting the field trial under Coke. (Exhibit 128 was
marked.)
Q. BY MR. ROUNDS: Let me show you what live marked as Exhibit 128, which is
a FutureLogic Shipping Kit Checklist dated April 14th of 2000. Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. Does this document reflect the 24 VM units that were shipped to Coca-Cola?
A. I'm assuming it does. It looks like it's -- it references that, and it has the
quantities and some of the different pieces that were in the assembly, so it looks
Nanoptix' - 17-
Excerpts of
Deposition
-A0312-