Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 1062

REPLY (re 1051 MOTION to Stay Defendants' Motion For Stay of Execution of Judgment Through Appeal and Approval of Proposed Security Pursuant to FRCP 62 ) filed bySAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Froyd, Jane) (Filed on 4/20/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Robert A. Mittelstaedt (SBN 060359)
Jason McDonell (SBN 115084)
Elaine Wallace (SBN 197882)
JONES DAY
555 California Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Tharan Gregory Lanier (SBN 138784)
Jane L. Froyd (SBN 220776)
JONES DAY
1755 Embarcadero Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Scott W. Cowan (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Joshua L. Fuchs (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
JONES DAY
717 Texas, Suite 3300
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and
TOMORROWNOW, INC.

19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

20

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

21

OAKLAND DIVISION

22

ORACLE USA, INC., et al.,

23

Plaintiffs,

24

v.

25

SAP AG, et al.,

26

Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)
[REVISED PROPOSED] ORDER
GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR STAY OF EXECUTION OF
JUDGMENT THROUGH APPEAL AND
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED
SECURITY PURSUANT TO FRCP 62

Defendants.

27
28
[REVISED PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFS.’
MOT. FOR STAY AND APPROVAL OF SECURITY
Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)

1

Having considered the papers filed by the parties in connection with Defendants’ Motion

2

for Stay of Execution of Judgment Through Appeal and Approval of Proposed Security Pursuant

3

to FRCP 62 (ECF No. 1051):

4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: Defendants’ motion is GRANTED. Execution of

5

final judgment is stayed pending disposition of post-judgment motions and, if necessary, appeal.

6

Defendants are ORDERED to obtain and move the Court for approval of a supersedeas bond in

7

the amount of $1,325,033,547.00 within 21 days after this order is entered. Oracle’s request that

8

the Court instruct the bonding company to provide a quarterly report to the parties and increase

9

the bond amount as needed to cover post-judgment interest accrued in the future is DENIED.

10
11
12
13

DATED: ________________________

By:
Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SVI-92029v1

-1-

[REVISED PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFS.’
MOT. FOR STAY AND APPROVAL OF SECURITY
Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)