`TD Ameritrade v. Trading Technologies
`CBM2014-00133
`
`Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`burden on the trader compared to the older style screens in which the trader need to make
`mental calculations to determine how the market was moving and the extent of the
`movement. The MD Trader product also had a one-click recentering feature that was
`valuable because it allowed the trader to quickly bring the display of the market to the
`center of the screen and set a point of reference.
`I had never seen any of these features in
`preexisting electronic trading tools.
`
`The MD Trader product initially met with some resistance. For example, because
`6.
`of the fixed nature of the prices there is a risk in MD Trader of the market information
`floating off of the screen. This is impossible with the preexisting systems. Also, traders
`were so used to using the preexisting systems and did not perceive any problems with
`those systems. Prior to the release of MD Trader, TT’s X_Trader product included an
`older style order entry screen. We were using this as our order entry screen and TT was
`regularly making incremental improvements and enhancements to the screen. MD
`Trader, on the other hand, was a complete departure from this typical older style order
`entry screen. It was only after seeing the benefits of this new unusual screen that people
`like myself realized the shortcomings of the preexisting systems.
`
`After TT launched MD Trader, almost every other independent software vendor
`7.
`(ISV) released products with similar features, such as the static price, the improved order
`entry and the recentering features.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July
`
`a? 22 , 2004.
`
`Rob Moore
`
`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
