Let me just make a limited response to the first part of your post.
There are some procedures for gaining and preserving evidence in anticipation of filing suit, such as a deposition to perpetuate testimony.
But AMD has made allegations in the complaint that really don't belong in the complaint such as "Bob said to Ralph". These are facts that are not what are called "ultimate facts" which can go into a complaint, but are things that have to be proven at trial.
What your wife would do is get an affidavit from the people they claim said these things, not the inadmissible hearsay statements that "bob said he heard bill say that Intel is a bad actor"
That way, if the witness "rolls over" in court or in a later deposition, they got him.
All the deposition does is force the presence of the witness. There is no guarantee what he or she will say.
To broadcast the intention of what they need from these witnesses, like Olmelveny is doing is bush.
Intel ain't friggin' afraid of pissing away some legal fees.
Olmelveny is treating this case like some slick ass ambulance chasing personal injury case.
And remember, this case may be grounded on a legal theory, the Japan "acceptance" that may be just plain friggin' wrong.
A plaintiff is held to do some rudimentary research into res judicata and Olmelveny has what, 1500 attorneys? Surely they could spare a couple to determine WHETHER A THIRD OF THEIR CASE IS BULLSHIT, if if is, before waisting the Court's time, unless of course, they meant it to be a coordinated publicity stunt.
If there is the slightest bit of hesitation, AMD's case starts to fall apart.
And why telegraph to the witness what you want if the witness is going to be hostile?
All your going to get is a statement like, "When I said guacamole, I was talking about going to lunch, or "I don't remember saying that".
You can see where this is going can't you? AMD is almost admitting that they will NEVER get the testimony they need.
Now you might say this is a vast conspiracy.
BUT THE REALITY IS THAT IT IS THE REVERSE. EVERYONE ENVIES AND DESPISES SUCCESS, AND THEY WOULD TESTIFY AGAINST INTEL IN A MINUTE, IF IT WERE TRUE.
Maybe AMD misheard it, may be they made it up, and maybe people like to and want to make other people happy and tell little white lies.
For instance instead of saying, we can't sell your processor because there is no demand, and if there were demand we don't want to design a new accessory or if we did, we are not sure you guys are going to be in business very long, it is much softer to imply that they would love to buy your product, "but my boss told me to buy Intel"
When you put that person under oath, he is not going to stick to the little white lie about his boss, he is going to tell the truth.
It is wrong for you to say that the reason he is now telling the truth, is that Intel made him change his story.
THAT IS WHY YOU GET YOUR FUCKING EVIDENCE NAILED DOWN BEFORE YOU PISS AWAY 25 TO A 100 MILLION IN LEGAL FEES.
Tell me that AMD is not hoping to find a case in Intel's emails?
Tell me that they are hoping to get there evidence after they file suit?
Tell me that it is not like what Col. Jessep said to Lt. Daniel Kaffee in "A Few Good Men:
Kaffee: Do you have an answer?
Col. Jessep: Absolutely. My answer is I don't have the first damn clue. Maybe he was an early riser and liked to pack in the morning. And maybe he didn't have any friends. I'm an educated man, but I'm afraid I can't speak intelligently about the travel habits of one William Santiago. What I do know is that he was set to leave the base at 0600. Now, are these the questions I was called here to answer? Phone calls and foot lockers? Please tell me you have something more, Lieutenant. These two men are on trial for their lives. Please tell me that their lawyer hasn't pinned their hopes to a phone bill.
[Kaffee hesitates, dumbfounded]
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
