Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 1173

ORACLES STATEMENT REGARDING TRIAL SCHEDULE by Oracle Corporation, Oracle EMEA Limited, Oracle International Corporation, Oracle Systems Corporation, Oracle USA Inc.. (Holtzman, Steven) (Filed on 5/31/2012) Modified on 6/1/2012 (vlk, COURT STAFF).

1

18

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: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.393.2286
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (SBN 144177)
FRED NORTON (SBN 224725)
1999 Harrison St., Suite 900
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049)
JENNIFER GLOSS (SBN 154227)
500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7
Redwood City, CA 94070
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 650.506.7144
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

19

Attorneys for Plaintiff Oracle International Corp.

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

20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

22

OAKLAND DIVISION

23

ORACLE USA, INC., et al.,

24
25
26
27

Plaintiffs,
v.
SAP AG, et al.,

No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)
ORACLE’S STATEMENT REGARDING
TRIAL SCHEDULE
Judge: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton

Defendants.

28
ORACLE’S STATEMENT REGARDING TRIAL SCHEDULE
CASE NO. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

1
2

ORACLE’S STATEMENT REGARDING TRIAL SCHEDULE
Pursuant to the Court’s final pre-trial order of May 29, 2012 (Dkt. 1171 at 6), and as

3

requested by the Court at the pre-trial hearing on May 24, 2012, plaintiff Oracle International

4

Corp. (“Oracle”) writes to advise the Court of the status of the conflict between the June 4, 2012

5

trial of Oracle lead counsel, Mr. Boies, and the scheduled trial date of June 18, 2012 in this case.

6

As Oracle has previously informed the Court, Mr. Boies is also lead trial counsel in the

7

matter of Invista B.V., et al. v. E.I du Pont de Nemours and Company, 08 Civ. 3063 (SHS)

8

(S.D.N.Y.). (Dkt. 1109 at 2:7-11.) That case remains set for trial in New York beginning on

9

June 4, 2012, and is still expected to last six weeks. (Id.) There has been no settlement, and the

10

court in that case has informed the parties that the June 4 trial date is firm.

11

Having considered the Court’s suggestion that Oracle proceed to trial on June 18, 2012

12

with other counsel, Oracle declines to do so. Oracle specifically retained Mr. Boies to try this

13

case, and Mr. Boies has been deeply engaged in the matter, including before, during and since

14

the original trial. Moreover, Oracle relied on the Court’s February 28, 2012 order (Dkt. 1110),

15

which made clear that the June 18 trial date in this matter would be vacated if Mr. Boies’ New

16

York case proceeded to trial, in planning for the retrial in this matter. Mr. Boies and the other

17

members of Oracle’s trial team have prepared for the upcoming trial based on the understanding

18

that Mr. Boies would be able to serve, whether on June 18 or thereafter, as lead counsel with

19

substantial responsibility for both argument and the examination of witnesses, consistent with his

20

role in the original trial. To change course now and ask other counsel to stand in for Mr. Boies

21

just weeks before trial would prejudice Oracle.

22

Accordingly, Oracle elects to proceed pursuant to the terms of the February 28, 2012

23

order and the May 29, 2012 pre-trial order. If, as expected, Mr. Boies' New York trial begins on

24

June 4, Oracle will at that time request that the Court vacate the June 18, 2012 trial date, so that

25

the parties may prepare on four weeks’ notice for a trial that will trail the conclusion of the New

26

York trial and the Court’s availability. Oracle will keep the Court apprised of the progress of the

27

New York trial, and will promptly inform the Court of any relevant developments. Oracle

28

understands that the difficulty of finding another three-week opening may delay resolution of
1
ORACLE’S STATEMENT REGARDING TRIAL SCHEDULE
CASE NO. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

1

this matter, but cannot compromise its choice of counsel or its right to fully and fairly present its

2

case in order to obtain an earlier trial date.

3
4

DATED: May 31, 2012

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP

5
6
7
8

By:

/s/ Steven C. Holtzman
Steven C. Holtzman
Attorneys for Plaintiff Oracle International
Corp.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
ORACLE’S STATEMENT REGARDING TRIAL SCHEDULE
CASE NO. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)