Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al
Filing
1120
MOTION for Clarification filed by Oracle International Corporation. Motion Hearing set for 5/23/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland before Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton. Responses due by 5/1/2012. Replies due by 5/8/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Oracle's Motion for Clarification)(Howard, Geoffrey) (Filed on 4/17/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
DONN P. PICKETT (SBN 72257)
GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (SBN 157468)
BREE HANN (SBN 215695)
Three Embarcadero Center
San Francisco, CA 94111-4067
Telephone: 415.393.2000
Facsimile: 415.393.2286
donn.pickett@bingham.com
geoff.howard@bingham.com
bree.hann@bingham.com
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone:
(914) 749-8200
Facsimile:
(914) 749-8300
dboies@bsfllp.com
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (SBN 144177)
FRED NORTON (SBN 224725)
1999 Harrison St., Suite 900
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone:
(510) 874-1000
Facsimile:
(510) 874-1460
sholtzman@bsfllp.com
fnorton@bsfllp.com
DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049)
JENNIFER GLOSS (SBN 154227)
500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7
Redwood City, CA 94070
Telephone: 650.506.4846
Facsimile: 650.506.7144
dorian.daley@oracle.com
jennifer.gloss@oracle.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Oracle International Corp.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
20
21
22
ORACLE USA, INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
23
v.
24
No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
ORACLE’S MOTION FOR
CLARIFICATION
SAP AG, et al.,
25
Defendants.
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING ORACLE’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
CASE NO. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)
1
Before the Court is the Motion for Clarification (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiff
2
Oracle International Corporation (“Oracle”). After considering the pleadings, memoranda, and
3
supporting papers submitted by the Parties, and having heard the arguments of counsel, IT IS
4
HEREBY ORDERED that Oracle’s Motion is GRANTED.
5
The Court clarifies that Oracle may present evidence and argument at the new
6
trial in support of a hypothetical license measure of damages, including evidence not previously
7
offered, objectively showing the fair market value of the infringed copyrighted material.
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
11
DATED: _______________, 2012
Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton
United States District Court Judge
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING ORACLE’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
CASE NO. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?