Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 1048

STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Extend Temporary Stay of Execution of Judgment and Extend Briefing Schedule by Oracle International Corporation, Oracle USA Inc., Siebel Systems, Inc.. (Howard, Geoffrey) (Filed on 3/9/2011)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 1048

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP Robert A. Mittelstaedt (SBN 060359) DONN P. PICKETT (SBN 72257) Jason McDonell (SBN 115084) GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (SBN 157468) Elaine Wallace (SBN 197882) HOLLY A. HOUSE (SBN 136045) JONES DAY ZACHARY J. ALINDER (SBN 209009) 555 California Street, 26th Floor BREE HANN (SBN 215695) San Francisco, CA 94104 Three Embarcadero Center Telephone: [phone] San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Facsimile: [phone] Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Tharan Gregory Lanier (SBN 138784) [e-mail] Jane L. Froyd (SBN 220776) [e-mail] JONES DAY 1755 Embarcadero Road BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP Palo Alto, CA 94303 DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Telephone: [phone] Main Street Facsimile: [phone] Armonk, NY 10504 [e-mail] Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Scott W. Cowan (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (SBN 144177) Joshua L. Fuchs (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 1999 Harrison St., Suite 900 JONES DAY Oakland, CA 94612 717 Texas, Suite 3300 Telephone: [phone] Houston, TX 77002 Facsimile: [phone] Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049) [e-mail] JENNIFER GLOSS (SBN 154227) 500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7 Attorneys for Defendants Redwood City, CA 94070 SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and Telephone: [phone] TOMORROWNOW, INC. Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., et al. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION ORACLE USA, INC., et al., Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL) Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants.
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TEMP. STAY AND STIP. REQUEST TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TEMPORARY STAY OF EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT AND STIPULATED REQUEST TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Stipulation to Extend Temporary Stay of Execution of Judgment WHEREAS, the Court entered final judgment in the above-captioned matter on February 3, 2011 (ECF No. 1036); WHEREAS, Rule 62(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "no execution may issue on a judgment, nor may proceedings be taken to enforce it, until 14 days have passed after its entry," Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(a); WHEREAS, at the Parties' request, the Court granted a temporary stay of execution of final judgment, which will expire on March 10, 2011; WHEREAS, the Parties continue to negotiate an appropriate security for the judgment; WHEREAS, the Parties agree to: (i) extend the temporary stay of execution for an additional 14 days, and (ii) should Defendants file a motion pursuant to Rules 62(b) and 62(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to stay of execution of final judgment pending disposition of post-judgment motions and, if necessary, an appeal by having the Court set an appropriate security ("Rule 62(b) and 62(d) Motion") within that 14-day time period, extend the temporary stay of execution through the Court's ruling on the Rule 62(b) and 62(d) Motion; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the Parties, through their respective counsel of record, that execution of judgment shall be stayed until March 24, 2011, or, should Defendants file a Rule 62(b) and 62(d) Motion on or before March 24, 2011, that execution of judgment shall be stayed through the Court's ruling on the Rule 62(b) and 62(d) Motion. Stipulated Request to Extend Briefing Schedule Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2, 6-12, and 7-4, the Parties submit this stipulated request to extend the briefing schedule for post-judgment briefs filed pursuant to Rule 50(b) and Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the "Post-Trial Motions"). Following the filing of the Parties' February 18, 2011 Stipulated Request, Dkt. No. 1041, the Court set a briefing and hearing schedule for the Post-Trial Motions in the Court's February 23, 2011 Order, Dkt. No. 1043. Given the complexity of the issues addressed in the Post-Trial Motions, good cause exists for a minor extension of the time to file Opposition and Reply Briefs. -1STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TEMP. STAY AND STIP. REQUEST TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Specifically, the Parties jointly request that the Court grant an additional 9-day extension to file Opposition Briefs and an additional 5-day extension to file Reply Briefs. As the current hearing date set by the Court is July 13, 2011, the Parties do not believe that the requested additional extension of time, which still provides the Court approximately 2.5 months to consider the Parties' briefing, will impact the hearing date or the Court's consideration of the Post-Trial Motions. Accordingly, the Parties request that the Court modify the briefing schedule as follows: April 8 April 27 July 13 Deadline to file Opposition Briefs Deadline to file Reply Briefs Hearing

The only purpose of this request is to extend the briefing deadlines as noted above, and thus, this request neither affects any other rights or obligations of the Parties, nor impacts the briefing page limits or briefing description set forth in the Parties' February 18, 2011 Stipulated Request, Dkt. No. 1041, and approved by the Court's February 23, 2011 Order, Dkt. No. 1043.

IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: March 9, 2011 Bingham McCutchen LLP

By:

/s/ Geoffrey M. Howard Geoffrey M. Howard Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle International Corporation, and Siebel Systems, Inc.

In accordance with General Order No. 45, Rule X, the above signatory attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatory below.

-2-

STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TEMP. STAY AND STIP. REQUEST TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated: March 9, 2011

JONES DAY

By: /s/ Tharan Gregory Lanier Tharan Gregory Lanier Counsel for Defendants SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and TOMORROWNOW, INC.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________________________

By: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton United States District Court Judge

-3-

STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TEMP. STAY AND STIP. REQUEST TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)