`TD Ameritrade v. Trading Technologies
`CBM2014-00133
`
`Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`Trader also encourages traders to trade more. In short, MD Trader created a much more
`efficient way to trade,
`'
`6.
`Marquette attempted to roll out the new MD Trader screen to traders soon after
`the demonstration in November of 2000. At first. many of the traders did not want to
`change from using the older style screens because they were so used to using those
`screens. A few, however, tried using MD Trader. The benefits became quickly apparent
`and within 15 months almost all of the traders converted to using MD Trader. MD
`Trader, however, does have some negatives. For example, when the market becomes
`very wide, such as on the release of economic numbers, the MD Traderformat is
`problematic because it may not be able to display the market in one view.
`7.
`After 'l'T released MD trader, competitors ofTI realized that Tl“ created a next
`generation trading tool and they needed to come out with something similar to compete.
`Most if not all of these competitive ISVs came outwith trading tools that closely
`resembled MD Trader over the last several years. Most. if not all, of them told us at
`Marquette that they were coming out with screens that duplicated the features ofMD
`
`Trader.
`At some point before TT released MD Trader, Marquette polled its traders
`8.
`(approximately 40) to see what they would want in a trading tool ii Marquette chose to
`invest and create its own software. All of the comments were suggestions for various
`incremental improvements to the typical trading screens in existence at the time. No one
`suggested anything remotely like MD Trader.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
`foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August‘12,. 2004.
`
`David Felt
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
