Amazon v. Brian Hall - Response Re: Google Cloud Next

The Honorable Sean O’Donnell
1 FILED
2 2020 JUN 10 09:00 AM
KING COUNTY
3 SUPERIOR COURT CLERK
E-FILED
4 CASE #: 20-2-08977-0 SEA
6 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

7
IN AND FOR KING COUNTY
8
AMAZON.COM, INC., No. 20-2-08977-0 SEA
9
Plaintiff, DEFENDANT BRIAN HALL’S
10 OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF
v.
AMAZON.COM, INC.’S MOTION
11 FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
BRIAN HALL,
ORDER
12
Defendant.
13
14 INTRODUCTION
15 The majority of Amazon’s motion argues baselessly Brian Hall cannot work in his
16 permanent role as Vice President of Product Marketing, Cloud at Google LLC. In practical
17 terms, however, this motion has nothing to do with Hall’s anticipated permanent role, and neither
18 Google nor Hall have suggested in any way to Amazon that Hall will imminently begin work in
19 that role. Rather, as Google and Hall have repeatedly informed Amazon, Google will continue
20 voluntarily to hold Hall out of his permanent role until the Court has an opportunity to rule on
21 Amazon’s forthcoming motion for a preliminary injunction.
22 Instead, the issue before the Court today is a narrow one. Amazon has asked the Court to
23 enjoin Hall (1) from editing a series of speeches that Google has already prepared for an
24 upcoming conference; and (2) from continuing an organizational advice role to which Amazon
25 has already consented—and which Amazon itself admits in its motion is a “non-competitive”
26 position. To be clear, those are the only two projects on which Google currently seeks to have
27 Hall work. Nevertheless, Amazon believes (to borrow a phrase from its motion’s introduction)
ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC
DEFENDANT BRIAN HALL’S OPPOSITION
121 S.W. Morrison Street, Suite 400
TO PLAINTIFF AMAZON.COM, INC.’S MOTION Portland, Oregon 97204
FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER - 1 Telephone: (503) 954-2232
Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 that, somehow, its “entire confidential . . . cloud product roadmap” will be compromised if a
2 former employee is permitted to edit prewritten speeches and advise on how best to structure the
3 marketing organization.
4 Could that possibly be true? To ask the question is all but to answer it: Amazon has failed
5 to offer any evidence that, in working on those two narrowly-defined projects, Hall inevitably
6 will use or disclose any particular confidential information, or that he otherwise will threaten any
7 of Amazon’s legitimate business interests. Amazon is seeking, in other words, to co-opt the
8 Court into imposing a naked and unjustifiable restraint on competition by a former employee.
9 Amazon’s motion should be denied for that reason. Its motion also should be denied on
10 grounds that Amazon is equitably estopped from enforcing the noncompetition agreement on
11 which its claims are based, and has waived its right to do so.
12 LEGAL STANDARD
13 “The law is well settled that to obtain injunctive relief, a plaintiff must establish (1) he
14 has a clear legal or equitable right; (2) he has a well-grounded fear of immediate invasion of that
15 right by the entity against which he seeks the injunction; and (3) the acts about which he
16 complains are either resulting or will result in actual and substantial injury to him.” Nw. Gas
17 Ass’n v. Wash. Utilities & Transp. Comm’n, 141 Wn. App. 98, 115 (2007). “To establish a clear
18 legal or equitable right, the moving party must show that it is likely to prevail on the merits.” Id.
19 at 116 (quoting San Juan County v. No New Gas Tax, 160 Wn. 2d 141, 154 (2007)) (internal
20 quotation marks omitted). Courts disapprove of injunctions that would bar an employee from
21 practicing his or her chosen profession. See Cerro Fabricated Prod. LLC v. Solanick, 300 F.
22 Supp. 3d 632, 657–58 (M.D. Pa. 2018) (“[T]he public interest, including the risk of causing an
23 employee significant economic harm and preventing him from engaging in his chosen
24 profession, as well as preventing an employer from hiring the person of its choice, weigh against
25 any injunctive relief barring [an employee] from working for any period of time.”); PSC, Inc. v.
26 Reiss, 111 F. Supp. 2d 252, 253 (W.D.N.Y. 2000) (“Such a remedy—barring a person from
27

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 working in his chosen field or profession—is generally disfavored except in the most unique
2 circumstances.”).
3 FACTS
4 Hall began his prior role at Amazon on June 18, 2018. Ariel Kelman, AWS’s Vice
5 President for Worldwide Marketing, interviewed and hired Hall into the role. (Decl. of Brian
6 Hall (“Hall Decl.”) ¶ 4.)
7 At the start of Hall’s employment, Amazon required Hall to sign a Confidentiality,
8 Noncompetition, and Invention Assignment Agreement (the “Agreement.”) (Id. ¶ 5.) During
9 conversations with Kelman regarding the Agreement, he advised Hall that he believed the
10 Agreement’s noncompetition provisions were unenforceable. (Id. ¶ 6.) Kelman also told Hall that
11 he had never seen Amazon enforce these provisions against a marketing employee, even though
12 several such employees had previously departed for competitors. (Id.) Kelman gave these
13 statements to Hall both before and after Hall executed the Agreement. (Id.)
14 Hall decided in early January of 2020 that he would resign from Amazon. (Id. ¶ 8.) His
15 last day of substantive work at Amazon was February 13, 2020, and his employment formally
16 concluded at the end of March. (Id.) Hall later decided to join Google LLC in a senior marketing
17 role, and when he did so, he immediately and forthrightly informed Amazon of his plans. (Id. ¶
18 11.) In response, Amazon led Hall to believe — seemingly in confirmation of Kelman’s earlier
19 comments — that it had no objection to the new role. Paz Patel, the Amazon human resources
20 executive responsible for all of AWS’s thousands of marketing employees, “had a feeling that
21 [Hall] would land there” and told Hall that he was “[v]ery happy to hear this news.” (Id. ¶ 12.)
22 AWS CEO Andy Jassy echoed Patel’s comments in a subsequent email, telling Hall that he
23 “underst[ood] [his] perspective” on wanting to depart Amazon and “wish[ing] [him] nothing but
24 the best.” (Id. ¶ 13.) Nowhere in those communications did Amazon suggest that, in spite its
25 well-wishes, a lawsuit over Hall’s new role would soon follow. (Id. ¶¶ 12–13.)
26 Google hired Hall as a Vice President of Product Marketing, Google Cloud. Since joining
27 Google on May 4, 2020, Hall has been sidelined from virtually all substantive work due to

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 Amazon’s contention that his role would violate the Hall’s noncompete agreement with Amazon.
2 (Declaration of Alison Wagonfeld (“Wagonfeld Decl.”) ¶ 3.) Google and Hall dispute these
3 allegations, and the parties have scheduled a preliminary injunction hearing for July 31, 2020.
4 In the interim, Google considered how to keep Hall occupied during the three months
5 between his start date and the preliminary injunction hearing. (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 4.) Amazon
6 was aware of this effort and, in fact, encouraged Google to offer temporary positions, suggesting
7 that putting Brian in a temporary role would alleviate discovery and scheduling challenges
8 related to the preliminary injunction. (Id.)
9 Alison Wagonfeld, Google Cloud’s Chief Marketing Officer and Hall’s direct supervisor,
10 devised two areas where Hall could be useful in the interim: (1) helping Google Cloud optimize
11 roles and responsibilities in its marketing department and (2) editing keynote speeches for and
12 summarizing public comments made at Google Cloud’s ‘20 Next conference. (Wagonfeld Decl.
13 ¶ 5.) Those roles, Google and Hall believed, were narrow enough that Amazon could not
14 possibly have any reasonable objection to them. Google and Hall were half-right: Amazon
15 agreed that Hall could perform the first assignment without compromising its confidential
16 information, and informed Google of this fact by phone and in writing. (Declaration of Kellen
17 Hade (“Hade Decl.”) ¶ 7; see also Mot. at 2 (describing the role as “non-competitive”);
18 Bugaighis Decl. ¶ 6 (same).) Amazon objected, however, to Hall’s proposed temporary speech-
19 editing assignment. (Id.)
20 Google’s Next conference this year will be entirely online. (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 6.) Held
21 over nine weeks, the conference focuses on a different subject area each week. (Id.) Viewers can
22 watch videos of keynote speeches from Google employees about that topic, attend breakout
23 sessions and learn about Google’s products. (Id.) Although the conference is geared towards
24 developers, customers and potential customers, it is free and open to the public. (Id.) Anyone
25 may register to “attend”—even Amazon employees. (Id.) The Next conference was originally
26 scheduled for early April but postponed just three weeks before it was scheduled to begin due to
27 the COVID pandemic. (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 13.) Because the conference was postponed so close

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 to the start date, most keynote messages were prepared back in March, two months before Hall’s
2 arrival at Google. (Id.)
3 Hall’s role supporting the Next conference will be limited to reviewing the speeches that
4 are written by the speakers themselves and editing them to ensure consistency and avoid
5 duplication across nine weeks. (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 9.) For example, if two speakers highlight
6 how Google Cloud helped a particular customer, Hall might suggest that one of the speakers use
7 a different customer example. (Id.) Brian will also summarize comments made at the conference
8 to prepare emails and blog posts for attendees who missed them. (Id.) Hall’s assignment is self-
9 contained, and the materials that he would use to perform these tasks are created by Google
10 personnel about industry trends and Google products. (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 10.) Although this
11 assignment is typically handled by someone three levels lower in Google’s organization, the
12 assignment was selected due to Hall’s experience at Microsoft as a communications advisor for
13 senior Microsoft executives, not due to his knowledge of Amazon’s confidential information.
14 (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶¶ 10, 14.)
15 In carrying out this role, Hall will have no input into product releases or pricing, and will
16 have no input into Google’s product roadmap at all. (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 12.) Accordingly, he
17 will have no ability to “reposition[] existing Google products,” influence Google’s decisions to
18 “release[e] a product ahead of Amazon (a pre-announcement),” or to “alter[] Google’s pricing
19 structures.” (Id.; First Thornton Decl. ¶ 28.)
20 Moreover, the relevant drafts for Google’s keynotes and other sessions have already been
21 written by the relevant presenters, using narratives created by Google product teams. (Wagonfeld
22 Decl. ¶ 13.) These narratives already tell Hall what features to emphasize—not the other way
23 around. (Id.) In this role, Hall will have no input into the product narratives and will not be
24 drafting any speeches from scratch. (Id.)
25 ARGUMENT
26 Based on those facts, Amazon’s motion should be denied for three independent reasons.
27 First, there is no risk that Hall’s organizational advice or speech-editing—through which he will

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 provide public commentary on publicly available information—will cause the disclosure of any
2 particular Amazon confidential information; Amazon’s assertions to the contrary are based on
3 pure speculation. Second, Amazon’s claims are barred on the merits by the doctrines of equitable
4 estoppel. Third, its claims are likewise barred by the doctrine of waiver. For each of those
5 reasons, it is far from clear that Amazon has a “clear legal or equitable right” to the relief it
6 seeks. Nw. Gas Ass’n, 141 Wn. App. at 115 (emphasis added).
7
A. There is no risk that Hall’s temporary projects will cause him to use or disclose any
8 Amazon confidential information.
9 Amazon has presented zero evidence that Hall’s temporary roles will require him to use
10 or disclose any particular Amazon confidential information. In particular, Hall’s speech-editing
11 project will consist of two tasks: (1) “[r]eview[ing] final script[s] and slides to ensure
12 consistency,” and (2) “[p]repar[ing] weekly summar[ies] and blog post[s] of what was included
13 in each keynote.” (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 11; id. Ex. B.) By their terms, those tasks do not implicate
14 any Amazon confidential information because they concern content that Google already has
15 created: “[W]hat Google ‘says’ in keynotes and other sessions has already been determined by
16 those speakers, using narratives created by the product teams. These narratives already tell the
17 speakers (and [Hall]) what features to emphasize.” (Wagonfeld Decl. ¶ 13.) Even if it were up to
18 Hall to decide on areas of “emphasis” and “de-emphasis” in speeches that Google has
19 independently prepared and intends to make public, Amazon cannot as a matter of law have any
20 protectable interest in preventing him from doing so. See, e.g., Incyte Corp. v. Flexus
21 Biosciences, Inc., No. CVN15C09055MMJCCLD, 2018 WL 6428155, at *11 (Del. Super. Ct.
22 Aug. 23, 2018) (“No matter its value or source, [former employee’s] opinion
23 on public information is not an actionable trade secret.”).
24 B. Amazon’s claims are barred by the Doctrine of Equitable Estoppel.
25 Amazon’s request that Hall be barred from working in his two narrow, temporary roles
26 should be denied for a second, independent reason: Amazon’s claims are barred on the merits by
27 the doctrine of equitable estoppel. The Court need not fully and finally resolve that question

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 now, but suffice to say that—based on the uncontroverted evidence that Hall has presented at this
2 early stage—it is far from “clear” that Amazon has a “legal or equitable right” to the relief it
3 now seeks. Nw. Gas Ass’n v, 141 Wn. App. at 115 (emphasis added).
4 “The doctrine of equitable estoppel prevents a party from making a later claim where (1)
5 one party has made an admission, statement, or act inconsistent with the later claim; (2) another
6 party reasonably relies on the admission, statement, or act; and (3) the relying party would be
7 injured if the first party is allowed to contradict or repudiate the admission, statement, or act.”
8 Brevick v. City of Seattle, 139 Wash. App. 373, 378–79 (2007) (citing Dep’t of Ecology v.
9 Theodoratus, 135 Wash. 2d 582, 599 (1998)). “Equitable estoppel is based on the notion that a
10 party should be held to a representation made or position assumed where inequitable
11 consequences would otherwise result to another party who has justifiably and in good faith relied
12 thereon.” Id. at 379 (quoting Lybbert v. Grant County, 141 Wn. 2d 29, 35 (2000), and
13 Kramarevcky v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 122 Wn. 2d 738 (1993)) (internal quotation marks
14 omitted); see also Ikon Office Sols., Inc. v. Am. Office Prod., Inc., 178 F. Supp. 2d 1154, 1164
15 (D. Or. 2001), aff’d, 61 F. App’x 378 (9th Cir. 2003) (“The doctrine of equitable estoppel is
16 employed to prevent a person from proving an important fact to be something other than what by
17 act or omission he has led another party justifiably to believe.” (citing Wiggins v. Barrett &
18 Associates, Inc., 295 Or. 679, 689 (1983))).
19 In Ikon, for example, the court determined that the plaintiff “induced defendants to
20 believe that [the plaintiff’s former employees] were not bound by non-competition agreements.”
21 178 F. Supp. 2d at 1164. The plaintiff later discovered that the former employees had previously
22 signed noncompetition agreements, and sued them for violating those agreements when they
23 began similar roles at a competitor. See id. at 1163. The court, however, held that the plaintiff
24 was equitably estopped from pursuing its claims: “Having induced defendants to reasonably
25 believe that [the former employees] could work for [the competitor] without fear of violating a
26 non-competition agreement, [the plaintiff] is now estopped to assert that the employment of [the
27 former employees] is a violation of such an agreement.” Id. at 1165.

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 Here, because Amazon similarly induced Hall to believe that he “could work for
2 [Google] without fear of violating a non-competition agreement,” id., and because each element
3 of equitable estoppel is present, the Court should come to the same conclusion. First, Amazon
4 has made “admission[s], statement[s], [and] act[s] inconsistent with [its present] claim[s].”
5 Brevick, 139 Wn. App. at 378–79. Plainly, Kelman’s statements to Hall that he believed the
6 noncompetition clause in Hall’s Agreement to be unenforceable, and that he had never seen
7 Amazon attempt to enforce it against a marketing employee, are inconsistent with Amazon’s
8 present claims in this litigation—which attempt to do just that. (Hall Decl. ¶ 6.) The same is true
9 of Paz Patel and AWS CEO Andy Jassy’s well-wishes to Hall after they learned that he would be
10 assuming a similar role at Google. A reasonable person simply would not be “very happy to hear
11 . . . news” of Hall’s new role if the person was planning imminently to file a lawsuit on that very
12 subject; nor would that person have “wish[ed] [Hall] nothing but the best” if the person were
13 planning on seeking to enjoin Hall from working in his new job. (Hall Decl. ¶¶ 12–13.)
14 Second, Hall has “reasonably relie[d] on [Amazon’s] admission[s], statement[s], or
15 act[s].” Brevick, 139 Wash. App. at 378–79. At the time of their various communications to Hall,
16 Kelman, Patel, and Jassy were senior executives—in Jassy’s case, the most senior executive—at
17 AWS. Amazon otherwise gave Hall no reason to doubt the sincerity of their statements.
18 Finally, Hall “would be injured if [Amazon] is allowed to contradict or repudiate [its]
19 admission[s], statement[s], or act[s].” Brevick, 139 Wash. App. at 378–79. Just like the
20 defendants in Ikon, Hall now faces “considerable expense (and potential liability)” if Amazon is
21 permitted to pursue its claims against him. 178 F. Supp. 2d at 1164. In reliance on Amazon’s
22 statements, he also turned down or declined to pursue several other employment opportunities. In
23 particular, on April 11, 2020—following Patel and Jassy’s messages—Hall received a message
24 from a Twilio recruiter inviting him to discuss a role at the company that would serve “as a path
25 to the CMO seat.” (Hall Decl. ¶ 14.) Believing that Patel and Jassy had blessed his new role at
26 Google, Hall responded as follows: “Hi Kate. I just took a new job, but will think about good
27 people for this role.” (Hall Decl. ¶ 15 (emphasis added).)

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
C. Amazon also has waived its right to enforce the Agreement in a manner that
1 prohibits Hall from working in his new role.
2
“Waiver is an equitable doctrine that can defeat a legal right where the facts show that the
3
party relinquished a known right, or conduct shows the party relinquished known rights.”
4
McLain v. Kent Sch. Dist., No. 415, 178 Wash. App. 366, 378 (2013) (citing Schroeder v.
5
Excelsior Mgmt. Grp., LLC, 177 Wash. 2d 94, 106 (2013)). Waiver can be shown “‘by
6
unequivocal acts or conduct which are inconsistent with any intention other than to waive.’”
7
Renfro v. Kaur, 156 Wash. App. 655, 664 (2010) (quoting Harmony at Madrona Park Owners
8
Ass'n v. Madison Harmony Dev., Inc., 143 Wash. App. 345, 361 (2008)).
9
Kelman’s statements are inconsistent with any intention by Amazon other than to waive
10
its rights: a statement that an agreement is unenforceable and has never been enforced is, as an
11
objective matter, inconsistent with an intention to enforce it. For that independent reason, it is far
12
from “clear” that Amazon has a “legal or equitable right” to the relief it now seeks. Nw. Gas
13
Ass’n v, 141 Wn. App. at 115.
14 CONCLUSION
15
For each of the foregoing reasons, Hall respectfully requests that Amazon’s motion be
16
denied.
17
DATED this 9th day of June 2020.
18
19 ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC
20 s/ Tyler P. Francis
Tyler P. Francis, WSBA No. 53533
21
s/ Edward A. Piper
22 Edward A. Piper, OSB No. 141609
(pro hac vice application pending)
23
Attorneys for Defendant Brian Hall
24
25
26
27

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
3 Washington that on this day a true and accurate copy of the document to which this declaration is
4 affixed was filed with the above-entitled Court through the King County Electronic Filing System
5 and was also sent via electronic mail to:
6 Brad Fisher, WSBA #19895
Rob Maguire, WSBA #29909
7 Zana Bugaighis, WSBA #43614
920 Fifth Ave, Suite 3300
8 Seattle, WA 98104-1610
Telephone: 206-622-3150
9 Facsimile: 206-757-7700
E-mail: [email protected]
10 E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]
11
DATED this 9th day of June 2020.
12 ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC
13 s/ Tyler P. Francis
Tyler P. Francis, WSBA No. 53533
14
s/ Edward A. Piper
15 Edward A. Piper, OSB No. 141609
(pro hac vice application pending)
16
Attorneys for Defendant Brian Hall
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Portland, Oregon 97204
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - 1 Telephone: (503) 954-2232
Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 The Honorable Sean P. O'Donnell
2
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY

9 AMAZON.COM, INC.,
Case No. 20-2-08977-0 SEA
10 Plaintiff,
DECLARATION OF KELLEN A. HADE
11 v.
12 BRIAN HALL,
13 Defendant.
14
15 I, KELLEN A. HADE, declare:

16 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in Washington and employed by Miller Nash
17 Graham & Dunn LLP, attorneys for Google LLC. I am over the age of eighteen, of sound mind
18 and otherwise competent to testify. I make this declaration from personal knowledge and after
19 review of records kept in the ordinary course of my practice.
20 2. Amazon has mischaracterized the parties’ discussions about what duties and
21 responsibilities Brian Hall will have at Google until the preliminary injunction hearing scheduled
22 for July 31, 2020.
23 3. When Amazon first raised concerns about Mr. Hall’s employment as Vice
24 President, Product Marketing, Google agreed to hold him out from substantive work while the
25 parties tried to resolve the dispute. When litigation became inevitable, counsel for Amazon, Mr.
26
DECLARATION OF KELLEN A. HADE - 1 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

AT T ORNE YS AT LA W
T : 206. 624. 8300 | F: 206. 340. 9599
PIE R 70
2801 ALASK AN WAY, S UIT E 300
SE AT T LE , WASHI NGT ON 98121
4822-4198-9311.1
1 Hall and Google began discussing an agreed schedule for Amazon’s motion for preliminary
2 injunction.
3 4. I told counsel for Amazon (and Mr. Hall’s counsel subsequently confirmed to
4 Amazon) that Mr. Hall would ask the Court for the soonest available preliminary injunction
5 hearing, since Mr. Hall was sitting out of all substantive work by agreement. So while delays in
6 the proceedings are advantageous to Amazon, they prejudice Mr. Hall and by extension Google.
7 5. Counsel for Amazon suggested that Google propose temporary assignments for
8 Mr. Hall, so he would have something to do pending the preliminary injunction hearing and give
9 the parties more time for discovery and briefing. In an email to me on May 26, counsel for
10 Amazon said that he “hoped [the parties could] make progress on some limited role Mr. Hall
11 could perform pending resolution of the preliminary injunction. Towards that end, we understood
12 you were going to provide us with a more specific proposal once Google was back from the
13 extended holiday weekend. Assuming we can reach an agreement that allows Mr. Hall to do
14 something useful for Google without implicating Amazon’s legitimate protectable interests, the
15 scheduling issues above ought to be less pressing.”
16 6. Google created and proposed two temporary assignments for Mr. Hall: (1)
17 helping Google Cloud optimize roles and responsibilities in its marketing department and (2)
18 editing keynote speeches for and summarizing public comments made at Google Cloud’s ‘20
19 Next conference. I sent a letter to Amazon describing those assignments in more detail on May
20 28. See Declaration of Alison Wagonfeld, Exhibit A. That letter advised Amazon that Brian
21 would start work on those assignments on June 1.
22 7. I participated in a call with counsel for Amazon and Mr. Hall on May 29. In that
23 call, counsel for Amazon said that Amazon did not object to Mr. Hall helping Google Cloud to
24 optimize its marketing department. But counsel advised that Amazon would object to any
25 assignments related to the Next conference. From that call, I understood that Amazon would
26

T : 206. 624. 8300 | F: 206. 340. 9599
PIE R 70
4822-4198-9311.1
1 provide written objections by Monday, June 1, and based on that understanding, Google agreed
2 to delay assigning Mr. Hall to Next-related work.
3 8. On the morning of June 5, Google still had not seen Amazon’s written objections.
4 I therefore told counsel for Amazon that Google would start assigning Mr. Hall Next-related
5 work on Monday, June 8—again because unnecessary delays benefit Amazon but prejudice Mr.
6 Hall and Google. Only then did Amazon produce written objections. Ultimately Google
7 disagreed that Mr. Hall’s limited engagement with the Next conference could put any of
8 Amazon’s confidential information at risk given the narrow scope of the role.
9 9. The parties agreed on a discovery and preliminary injunction schedule that
10 avoided Amazon needing to move for a temporary restraining order as to Mr. Hall’s permanent
11 job responsibilities. This ancillary dispute about Mr. Hall’s temporary role—proposed at
12 Amazon’s request—neither contradicts nor repudiates that earlier agreement.
13 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the
14 forgoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and recollection.
15 EXECUTED this 9th day of June, 2020, in Seattle, Washington.
16
_________________________________
17 KELLEN A. HADE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

T : 206. 624. 8300 | F: 206. 340. 9599
PIE R 70
4822-4198-9311.1
DocuSign Envelope ID: D27FEE6C-1959-4157-9710-47F688BD4F1B

2
3
4
5
6
7
9 AMAZON.COM, INC.,
Case No. 20-2-08977-0 SEA
10 Plaintiff,
DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD
11 v.
12 BRIAN HALL,
13 Defendant.
14
15 I, ALISON WAGONFELD, declare:
16 1. I am over the age of eighteen, of sound mind and otherwise competent to testify.
17 I make this declaration based on personal knowledge and from reviewing documents kept in the
18 ordinary course of Google LLC’s business.
19 2. I am employed by Google as its Vice President, Cloud Marketing. This position
20 is also known as the Chief Marketing Officer for Google Cloud. Cloud is Google's cloud
21 computing division, which provides customers the ability to rent computing power on demand
22 over the internet. Google Cloud also allows customers to use applications built on top of the
23 cloud platform, like webmail (Gmail) and productivity applications (Google Docs, Google
24 Sheets, and so on), that can be accessed anywhere with an internet connection.
25 3. Google hired Brian Hall as a Vice President, Product Marketing, Google Cloud.
26 Brian is one of my direct reports. But since joining Google on May 4, Brian has been sidelined
DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 1 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

AT T ORNE YS AT LAW
T : 2 06 .6 24 .8 30 0 | F : 20 6 .3 40 .9 59 9
P IE R 7 0
2 80 1 ALAS KAN W AY, S UIT E 3 0 0
S E AT T LE , W AS HINGT ON 9 8 1 21
4844-0033-6575.1
1 from virtually all substantive work because Amazon contends the role would violate the
2 noncompete agreement Brian signed. Google disputes these allegations, and the parties have
3 scheduled a preliminary injunction hearing for July 31, 2020.
4 4. In the interim, I began to consider how to keep Brian busy for the nearly three
5 months that will have passed between his start date and the preliminary injunction hearing.
6 Amazon was aware of this effort and, in fact, encouraged Google to offer temporary positions,
7 suggesting that putting Brian in a temporary role would alleviate some discovery and scheduling
8 challenges related to the preliminary injunction.
9 5. I devised two areas where Brian could be useful without any risk of using
10 Amazon’s allegedly confidential information: (1) helping Google Cloud optimize roles and
11 responsibilities in its marketing department and (2) editing keynote speeches for and
12 summarizing public comments made at Google Cloud’s ‘20 Next conference.
13 6. This year the Next conference is entirely online. Held over nine weeks, the
14 conference focuses on a different subject area each week. Viewers can watch videos of keynote
15 speeches from Google employees about that topic, attend breakout sessions and learn about
16 Google’s products. Although the conference is geared towards developers, customers and
17 potential customers, it is free and open to the public. Anyone may register to “attend”—even
18 Amazon employees.
19 7. For example, the first week of the Next conference revolves around “Industry
20 Insights.” It features Google Cloud executives discussing trends and challenges faced in retail,
21 healthcare, financial services and other industries. The second week revolves around
22 “Productivity and Collaboration,” and features speakers talking about how cloud computing
23 enables employees to work remotely more easily, among other related topics. And so on.
24 8. Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of a letter that Google’s counsel sent to Amazon.
25 It truly and accurately describes the duties and responsibilities that Brian would have in the
26 temporary role supporting the Next conference.

AT T ORNE YS AT LAW
T : 2 06 .6 24 .8 30 0 | F : 20 6 .3 40 .9 59 9
P IE R 7 0
4844-0033-6575.1
1 9. In essence, Brian’s role supporting the Next conference is limited to reviewing the
2 speeches that are written by the speakers themselves and editing them to ensure consistency and
3 avoid duplication across nine weeks. For example, if two speakers highlight how Google Cloud
4 helped a particular customer, Brian might suggest that one of the speakers use a different
5 customer example. Brian will also summarize comments made at the conference to prepare
6 emails and blog posts for attendees who missed them.
7 10. In short, Google wants attendees to feel they are receiving a consistent message,
8 and Brian will help ensure that each of the keynote speeches (and summaries of them) are using
9 one “voice” to the extent possible. Brian’s assignment is self-contained, and the materials that
10 Brian would use to perform these tasks are created by Google personnel about industry trends
11 and Google products. This temporary assignment for Brian was selected due to his experience at
12 Microsoft as a communications advisor for senior Microsoft executives, not due to his
13 knowledge of Amazon’s confidential information
14 11. In fact, nothing Brian would be doing related to the Next conference will involve
15 the use or disclosure of Amazon’s confidential information. Brian will be reviewing other
16 people’s materials that are already prepared. Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct
17 timeline that shows the preparation of keynote materials for Next. I do not believe that Amazon’s
18 arguments to the contrary have merit.
19 12. Amazon claims that Brian would be able to reposition existing Google products
20 based on his knowledge of Amazon’s roadmap by, for example, accelerating the announcement
21 of Google products or altering Google’s pricing structures. These concerns are misguided. The
22 decisions regarding which products to announce at Next (if any) have already been made by
23 other people. Brian will have no input into product releases or pricing. He will have no input
24 into Google’s product roadmap at all.
25 13. Amazon also claims that Brian could preempt Amazon’s existing marketing plans
26 through anticipatory marketplace messaging (for example, by using his knowledge that “Amazon

AT T ORNE YS AT LAW
T : 2 06 .6 24 .8 30 0 | F : 20 6 .3 40 .9 59 9
P IE R 7 0
4844-0033-6575.1
1 is going to say X,” to determine that “Google should say Y”). But what Google “says” in
2 keynotes and other sessions has already been determined by those speakers, using narratives
3 created by the product teams. These narratives already tell the speakers (and Brian) what
4 features to emphasize. Brian will have no input into the product narratives and will not be
5 drafting any speeches from scratch. In fact, the Next conference was originally scheduled for
6 early April but postponed just three weeks before due to the COVID pandemic. Because the
7 conference was postponed so close to the start date, most keynote messages were prepared back
8 in March, two months before Brian’s arrival at Google
9 14. The job responsibilities related to the Next conference require neither any
10 competitive knowledge about Amazon nor even someone with Brian’s seniority. In past years
11 this responsibility was covered by someone three levels lower in the organization. But I would
12 like to assign this temporary assignment to Brian (which is far more limited than the permanent
13 job responsibilities of the Vice President, Product Marketing role) so that he has something to do
14 while the parties prepare for the preliminary injunction proceedings.
17 EXECUTED this 8th day of June, 2020, in Sunnyvale, California.
18
19
_________________________________
20 ALISON WAGONFELD
21
22
23
24
25
26

AT T ORNE YS AT LAW
T : 2 06 .6 24 .8 30 0 | F : 20 6 .3 40 .9 59 9
P IE R 7 0
4844-0033-6575.1
EXHIBIT A
Kellen A. Hade
[email protected]
206.777.7411 direct line
May 28, 2020
BY EMAIL
Zana Bugaighis
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98104
Subject: Brian Hall’s temporary work assignments
Dear Zana:
As you know, Google continues to disagree with Amazon’s expansive view about
the scope of Brian Hall’s noncompete, especially when Brian will have no input into
Google’s product roadmap. We still hope that the parties can resolve that dispute without
ultimately needing court intervention. But if we can’t, and in response to Amazon’s re-
quest that Google consider other roles for Brian to accommodate an extended discovery
and briefing schedule, Google has identified two temporary and discrete assignments for
Brian: (1) consulting on the structure of its cloud marketing organization and (2) writing
communications, slides and scripts for the Google Cloud Next ‘20 Conference. These as-
signments are not alternatives; Brian will be doing both.
As important as what these assignments are is what they are not. Neither assign-
ment involves input into Google’s product roadmap. Neither involves collaboration with
product managers about product design. Neither involves development of Google’s go-
to-market strategy. And neither involves direct customer contact. Instead, as explained
below, both assignments rely exclusively on information derived from Google about
Google.
Zana Bugaighis
May 28, 2020
Page 2
Cloud Marketing Organizational Design
Brian will review and consult on the Cloud Marketing team’s organizational design
to help Google reorganize its marketing efforts and improving its processes. In that way
he will act much like a third-party consultant.
• Review feedback on current structure/organization from employees

and human resources.
Brian will review responses to the most recent “GoogleGeist,” an annual employee
satisfaction survey. The survey allows employees to comment on and rate broad organi-
zational topics like Google’s leadership, performance incentives and priorities. Brian will
consider these survey responses to identify where there are problems with Google Cloud’s
current marketing organization and processes, with an eye toward suggesting improve-
ment. By their nature, these survey responses are specific to Google’s people, culture and
environment.
• Meet with Cloud marketing leads to identify areas of organizational

friction and opportunity across teams
Similarly, Brian will consider and suggest improvements to areas that marketing
leadership have identified as problems. Google believes Brian can add value here by
drawing from his experience at Microsoft, where he transitioned between many different
teams and products over two decades, affording him varied perspectives on what enter-
prise models or processes may work or may not.
• Work with the broader Google Marketing team to review the current
organizational structure focused on optimizing global, regional and
country roles.
Brian will also assist the broader Google Marketing team (supporting product ar-
eas across Google along with Cloud) in reorganizing its global, regional and country mar-
keting teams. As their names imply, these teams have different priorities and expertise
depending on their geography and product area focus. Brian will help define the specific
marketing-related roles and responsibilities for these teams.
Zana Bugaighis
May 28, 2020
Page 3
• Make recommendations to realign roles and responsibilities to opti-

mize Google Cloud marketing organization.
Ultimately, Brian will synthesize what he learns about Google from the employee
surveys and interviews with leadership into concrete recommendations for organizational
or structural improvements to the marketing team. Again, this work is like that of a third-
party consultant like McKinsey, and it does not involve Amazon’s allegedly confidential
information.
Google Cloud Next ‘20 Communications, Slide Creation & Script Creation
Brian will also assist Google Cloud with messaging at its Next ‘20 conference for
current and prospective customers, partners and developers. This year, Next has been
modified to a digital, on-demand format. Each week for nine weeks (July 14-September
8), viewers can access keynote addresses about different components of Google Cloud,
along with related breakout sessions. By its nature, Brian’s work on Next will be public-
facing and focused on communications about Cloud products, not positioning them
against Amazon ones.
• Review near-final keynote addresses created by others to ensure con-

sistent communications across Next.
Brian will harmonize the speeches for keynote and breakout presenters to ensure
consistent communications during the conference (“red threading”). Presenters write
their speeches from narratives created by the product teams. Brian will read each of these
speeches and weave common themes into each, based on those narratives provided to
him. For example, Brian will ensure that speakers do not repeat the same success stories
or highlight the same features. He will act essentially as an editor. And as a practical
matter, preparations for Next (originally planned for April) are too far along for Brian to
have much substantive input into its content anyway.
The materials Brian needs to perform this role are given to (not created by) him
and are self-contained. He will review Google’s narratives and speeches prepared by oth-
ers. His interactions with product marketers will be limited to recommending changes to
their presentation based on previous presentations at Next. His interactions with the sales
team will be limited to asking whether they believe particular messaging would resonate
with their customers. If Brian would use anything besides Google documents given to
him, it would be third-party research on market trends.
Zana Bugaighis
May 28, 2020
Page 4
• Attend Leaders Circle and Partner Summit to ensure communications

are consistent across the many programs and breakout sessions
within Next.
The Leaders Circle and Partner Summit are breakout sessions for key custom-
ers. Speakers will be spinning off content from their broader Next presentations for these
sessions. As with the broader conference, Brian will be reviewing premade narratives
from different presenters to ensure consistency. Brian will not have direct contact with
any customer or partner who attends.
• Coordinate with the Next events team to ensure that communications

about Next are consistently represented in website, promotional ma-
terials and follow-up emails.
Brian will similarly ensure that Google has consistent, red threaded communica-
tions in its Next collateral, all of which is limited to the conference itself and public com-
ments made there.
• Work with the PR and Communications team to draft weekly sum-

maries reflecting what was shared through sessions during each of
the nine weeks.
Again, Brian’s deliverables in this role are all public facing: websites and content
summarizing comments about a particular Next topic into concise communications (blog
posts, emails, and so on).
Brian will start this limited work starting Monday, June 1, 2020. We hope Amazon
appreciates the significant concessions that Google is making in removing Brian from the
responsibilities of his intended role—which Google continues to believe is outside the
scope of any legitimate business interest Amazon may have—and engaging him in these
temporary assignments.
Zana Bugaighis
May 28, 2020
Page 5
Best regards,
MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP
Kellen A. Hade
cc: Robert Maguire

Google LLC
Tyler Francis
Edward Piper
4853-1241-7469.1
EXHIBIT B
How the keynotes for Google Cloud Next 2020 OnAir are prepared:
Step Activity Timing for Next Primary Google

2020 employees
involved
1 Determine key messages January - March General

to communicate in 2020 Managers,
keynotes including Product
product announcements Managers
and customer evidence
2 Translate key messages March-June 2020 Product

into script Managers,
Product
Marketing
Managers,
Communications
Team
3 Build out slides from April-July 2020 Product

script Managers,
Product
Marketing
Managers,
Creative Team
4 Review final script and June-September Product Brian Hall

slides to ensure 2020 Marketing, involved
consistency Communications
Team
5 Prepare weekly summary July-September Product Brian Hall

and blog post of what 2020 Marketing, involved
was included in each Communications
keynote Team
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0D663337-A065-43C1-9C39-686117718977

2

9 AMAZON.COM, INC.,
Case No. 20-2-08977-0 SEA
10 Plaintiff,
SECOND DECLARATION OF ALISON
11 v. WAGONFELD
12 BRIAN HALL,
13 Defendant.
14
15 I, ALISON WAGONFELD, declare:

16 1. I am over the age of eighteen, of sound mind and otherwise competent to testify.
17 I make this declaration based on personal knowledge and from reviewing documents kept in the
18 ordinary course of Google LLC’s business.
19 2. I have reviewed Amazon.com, Inc.’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order.
20 Amazon’s concerns about the proposed work assignment on the Google Cloud Next ’20
21 conference do not reflect what Brian Hall would be doing.
22 3. Again, this is a temporary assignment that is intentionally different and narrower
23 than the permanent duties of the Vice President, Product Marketing. For that reason, Google’s
24 description of the permanent role, as characterized in the June 5, 2020 letter to Amazon’s
25 counsel, has no relevance to the Next assignment. See Motion at pp. 5-6.
26
SECOND DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 1 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
T: 206.624.8300 | F: 206.340.9599
PIER 70
2801 ALASKAN WAY, SUI T E 3 0 0
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121
4811-3272-4415.1
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0D663337-A065-43C1-9C39-686117718977
1 4. Google disputes Amazon’s contention that Brian working as Vice President,

2 Product Marketing for Google Cloud violates Amazon’s noncompete provisions or risks its
3 confidential information. But this motion for temporary restraining order is not about Brian’s
4 permanent role.
5 5. To be clear, the temporary Next assignment is limited to reviewing and editing
6 materials that others have created and then summarizing comments made at the public
7 conference. It does not involve and Brian will not have:
8 i. Input into Google’s product roadmap;
9 ii. Input into Google’s go-to-market strategy;
10 iii. Input into product development, launches or pricing;
11 iv. Input into Google’s business plans;
12 v. Direct contact with customers or prospective customers;
13 vi. Responsibility to sell Google products.
14 6. Google has agreed not to assign Mr. Hall any Next-related work until the Court
15 rules on Amazon’s motion for temporary restraining order.
18 EXECUTED this 9th day of June, 2020, in Sunnyvale, California.
19
_________________________________
20 ALISON WAGONFELD
21
22
23
24
25
26
SECOND DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 2 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
T: 206.624.8300 | F: 206.340.9599
PIER 70
2801 ALASKAN WAY, SUI T E 3 0 0
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121
4811-3272-4415.1
The Honorable Sean O’Donnell
1
5
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
6
IN AND FOR KING COUNTY
7
AMAZON.COM, INC., No. 20-2-08977-0 SEA
8
Plaintiff,
9 DECLARATION OF BRIAN HALL IN
v.
10 OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF
BRIAN HALL, AMAZON.COM, INC.’S MOTION
11 FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
Defendant. ORDER
12
13
14 I, Brian Hall, declare as follows:
15 1. I am older than the age of 18 and otherwise competent to testify about the matters
16 stated in this declaration based upon my personal knowledge.
17 2. I began my career in product marketing in 1995 at Microsoft, where I worked my
18 way up over the course of over 20 years from a product manager to the Corporate Vice President
19 of Microsoft Devices.
20 3. I left Microsoft in 2017 to become the COO and then CEO of a technology
21 startup, and ultimately joined Amazon on June 18, 2018 as the Vice President of Product
22 Marketing for Amazon Web Services.
23 4. Ariel Kelman, Vice President of Worldwide Marketing for AWS, interviewed me,
24 hired me into the role, and was my direct supervisor until his departure in January 2020 to
25 become Oracle’s Chief Marketing Officer.
26 5. At the start of my employment, Amazon required me to sign a Confidentiality,
27 Noncompetition, and Invention Assignment Agreement (the “Agreement.”)

DECLARATION OF BRIAN HALL IN OPPOSITION
Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 6. During conversations with Kelman regarding the Agreement, he advised me that
2 he believed the Agreement’s noncompetition provisions were unenforceable. Kelman also told
3 me that he had never seen Amazon enforce these provisions against a marketing employee, even
4 though several such employees had previously departed for competitors. Kelman gave these
5 statements to me both before and after I executed the Agreement.
6 7. Had Kelman not made these statements to me, I would not have accepted
7 Amazon’s offer of employment.
8 8. My last day of substantive work at Amazon was February 13, 2020, and my
9 employment formally ended on March 31, 2020. At that time, I had neither received nor accepted
10 an offer of employment from Google; nor had I accepted any other offer of employment from
11 another company.
12 9. On March 30, 2018, the last day I accessed Amazon’s network or email, I sent an
13 email to Matt Garman, AWS’s Vice President for Sales and Marketing, and to AWS CEO Andy
14 Jassy. This email stated as follows:
15 Hi Andy and Matt -
16 I want to tell you that it was a pleasure to work with you, and I
particularly appreciate learning about the Amazon culture from
17 you. I’m a big fan of AWS obviously and think you two are the
soul OF IT, and even more importantly, will keep evolving it
18 smartly. I’m out tomorrow and am not sure what I’ll do next, but
have interesting opportunities.
19 See you around town and I’m sure our paths will cross again. My
personal email is on cc.
20
Go AWS!
21
Brian
22
10. Jassy did not immediately respond, but Garman responded later that evening in an
23
email that stated as follows:
24
Thanks Brian - good luck in your next set up endeavors. I am
25 sorry we couldn’t find a great fit for you at Amazon - I am sure
you will kill it at your next role and I am sure we will work
26 together again soon - Seattle is a pretty small place
27 11. On April 10, 2018, I accepted an offer of employment from Google. That

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 afternoon, I sent the following text message to Paz Patel, the Amazon human resources executive
2 responsible for all of AWS’s thousand-plus marketing employees, and Ian Wilson, AWS’s Vice
3 President for Human Resources:
4 Hi paz and Ian. Hope you are weathering these times well and
people are safe. Just a heads up that I am joining Google cloud
5 running product marketing. Have in place limitations to ensure
Amazon information is kept confidential and I am not meeting
6 with customers I worked with from Amazon.
7 12. Later that evening, Patel responded as follows:

8 Congratulations, I had a feeling that you would land there. Very
happy to hear this news. Stay in touch and looking forward to
9 grabbing dinner one evening, when this crazy virus leaves us
alone??
10
13. Nine days after that, on April 19, 2020, I received an email at my personal email
11
account from Jassy that stated as follows:
12
Hey Brian. Sorry to be slow responding. Somehow missed this.
13
Appreciate all the hard and good work the last couple years.
14 Wished it had worked out to be a longer run, but understand your
perspective, and wish you nothing but the best. Stay in touch!
15 Andy
16
14. In reliance on the communications described above, I turned down or declined to
17
pursue several other potential employment opportunities, and decided instead to continue the
18
process of transitioning into a new role at Google. To give one example: on April 11, 2020, I
19
received an email from a recruiter at Twilio (a cloud communications company) that stated as
20
follows:
21 Hi Brian,
22 Hope this finds you well. One of the critical leadership positions
we are looking to fill here at Twilio is the Global Head of Product
23 Marketing. Your name came up in conversation as someone who
would be a great match for our executive leadership team.
24
This role would report directly to our CMO Sara Varni and you
25 would own our company narrative. We are looking for someone
creative to reposition us as the go-to customer engagement
26 solution. We see this role as a path to the CMO seat and we would
consider broadening the scope of the role for someone like
27 yourself.

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
Happy to share more if you are open to hearing more about Twilio.
1 Thanks for taking a look!
2 15. I responded to this email on April 14, 2020, stating, “Hi Kate. I just took a new
3 job, but will think about good people for this role.”
4 16. I have reviewed the May 28, 2020 letter that Google’s counsel sent to counsel for
5 Amazon (attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of Alison Wagonfeld), and understand it to be
6 a description of the duties and responsibilities that Google seeks to assign to me temporarily until
7 the July 31, 2020 hearing on Amazon’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
8 17. In particular, I have reviewed the proposed duties and responsibilities with regard
9 to a temporary role editing keynote speeches for and summarizing public comments made at
10 Google Cloud’s ‘20 Next conference (“Next”).
11 18. This work does not require the use or disclosure of Amazon’s confidential
12 information (nor would such information be particularly helpful). For over 20 years I have
13 worked on hundreds of technical presentations, speeches, and keynotes without utilizing
14 competitors’ proprietary information. I was a speech writer from 1998 through 2001 for
15 Microsoft President and CEO, Steve Ballmer, and have worked on speeches for Bill Gates. In
16 addition, I successfully performed a similar assignment for Amazon’s re:Invent conferences over
17 the past two years. At no point did I utilize any confidential information belonging to
18 competitors in carrying out these assignments.
19 19. Based on my review of my proposed duties and responsibilities for this temporary
20 assignment, I understand my role to largely involve reviewing other people’s written materials
21 that have already been prepared.
22 20. Amazon claims that in this role, I would be able to “reposition existing Google
23 products” based on my knowledge of Amazon’s roadmap by, for example, accelerating the
24 announcement of Google products or altering Google’s pricing structures. My understanding,
25 however, is that the decisions regarding which products Google will announce at Next have
26 already been made by others, and it will not be my job to change or suggest changes to these
27 decisions. I do not understand my duties and responsibilities to require me to give input into

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880
1 product releases or pricing, nor do I intend to volunteer such input or in any way carry out this
2 temporary assignment in a way that attempts to “reposition existing Google products” based on
3 my knowledge of Amazon’s roadmap.
4 21. I understand that Amazon has also expressed a concern that I could preempt its
5 existing marketing plans through “anticipatory marketplace messaging”—e.g., using my
6 knowledge that “Amazon is going to say X,” to determine that “Google should say Y.” As an
7 initial matter, I do not even know to what extent my knowledge of Amazon’s marketing plans is
8 even still current or relevant. But more importantly, my understanding is that the content of
9 Google’s keynotes and other sessions for Next ‘20 has already been determined by the
10 conference speakers and the Google product teams. These individuals and teams have already
11 made critical decisions regarding what features to build and emphasize, and my role will simply
12 be to edit these speeches to ensure consistency and avoid duplication across the nine-week
13 conference. I do not understand this temporary assignment to require using or disclosing what I
14 know regarding Amazon’s marketing plans, nor to I intend to carry out this assignment in such a
15 way as to draw on anything I learned at Amazon.
16 22. Even if it were possible to brainstorm a way to complete these duties and
17 responsibilities in a way that disclosed or made use of Amazon’s confidential information, I have
18 no intention of doing so, or of otherwise violating my post-employment obligations to Amazon.
19
20 I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington and laws of the
21 United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
22 understanding.
23 Executed at Seattle, Washington, this ____ day of June 2020.
24
By:
25
26 _____________________________
Brian Hall
27

Facsimile: (503) 227-0880

Amazon v. Brian Hall - Response Re: Google Cloud Next

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Amazon v. Brian Hall - Response Re: Google Cloud Next

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Honorable Sean O’Donnell

6 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

19 ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY

15 I, KELLEN A. HADE, declare:

DECLARATION OF KELLEN A. HADE - 1 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

DECLARATION OF KELLEN A. HADE - 2 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

DECLARATION OF KELLEN A. HADE - 3 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

1 The Honorable Sean P. O'Donnell

DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 1 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 2 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 3 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

DECLARATION OF ALISON WAGONFELD - 4 MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

May 28, 2020

Subject: Brian Hall’s temporary work assignments

Cloud Marketing Organizational Design

• Review feedback on current structure/organization from employees

• Meet with Cloud marketing leads to identify areas of organizational

• Make recommendations to realign roles and responsibilities to opti-

• Review near-final keynote addresses created by others to ensure con-

• Attend Leaders Circle and Partner Summit to ensure communications

• Coordinate with the Next events team to ensure that communications

• Work with the PR and Communications team to draft weekly sum-

MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP

cc: Robert Maguire

Step Activity Timing for Next Primary Google

1 Determine key messages January - March General

2 Translate key messages March-June 2020 Product

3 Build out slides from April-July 2020 Product

4 Review final script and June-September Product Brian Hall

5 Prepare weekly summary July-September Product Brian Hall

1 The Honorable Sean P. O'Donnell

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY

15 I, ALISON WAGONFELD, declare:

1 4. Google disputes Amazon’s contention that Brian working as Vice President,

14 I, Brian Hall, declare as follows:

16 stated in this declaration based upon my personal knowledge.

17 2. I began my career in product marketing in 1995 at Microsoft, where I worked my

22 Marketing for Amazon Web Services.

25 become Oracle’s Chief Marketing Officer.

26 5. At the start of my employment, Amazon required me to sign a Confidentiality,

27 Noncompetition, and Invention Assignment Agreement (the “Agreement.”)

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

7 12. Later that evening, Patel responded as follows:

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

ANGELI LAW GROUP LLC

You might also like