Page two, line eight of Oracles' disclosure states that they retained him as a "consultant on competition-related matters." Although that isn't necessarily the

Page two, line eight of Oracles' disclosure states that they retained him as a "consultant on competition-related matters." Although that isn't necessarily the same as paying him for "promoting their case", its hard not to get that impression when you read his enthusiastic backing of Oracle's legal theory as used in the case. Nevertheless, I'll edit my comment to clarify.