Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 728

MOTION in Limine Defendants' Motions in Limine filed by SAP AG, SAP America Inc, Tomorrownow Inc. Motion Hearing set for 9/30/2010 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor, Oakland. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Froyd, Jane) (Filed on 8/5/2010)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 728 Att. 1

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

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. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION ORACLE USA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants. Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL) [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE Date: September 30, 2010 Time: 9:00 a.m. Courtroom: 3, 3rd Floor Judge: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton

SVI-83628v1

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL)

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

Having considered Defendants' Motions in Limine, the supporting declaration of Jason McDonell, and exhibits attached thereto, which were filed with the Court on August 5, 2010: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 1 to exclude evidence and argument regarding

alleged harm to goodwill is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or attempt to present any evidence related to alleged harm to Plaintiffs' goodwill or any damages based on such alleged harm. or, DENIED

2.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 2 regarding precluded damages evidence is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or attempt to present any evidence, directly or indirectly, related to the damages evidence excluded by this Court's November 2, 2009 Order. or, DENIED

3.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 3 to exclude evidence and argument of

damages for nonparty entities is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or attempt to present any evidence related to a claim for damages to the Oracle organization as a whole. or, DENIED
SVI-83628v1

-1-

[[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE 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

4.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 4 to exclude rebuttal testimony regarding the

Sommer Report is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not present any expert testimony in rebuttal to the Expert Report of Brian S. Sommer. or, DENIED

5.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 5 to exclude improper opinion of lay witnesses

and undisclosed experts is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or present any evidence constituting improper technical opinions of lay witnesses or opinions of undisclosed experts. or, DENIED

6.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 6 to exclude deposition testimony invoking the

attorney-client privilege is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or present any evidence regarding testimony wherein Defendants' witnesses invoke the attorney-client privilege. or, DENIED

SVI-83628v1

-2-

[[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE 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

7.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 7 to exclude evidence and argument regarding

investigations by the DOJ and FBI is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or present any evidence related to the DOJ's and FBI's investigation into the facts and circumstances involved in this matter or the current investigation into Oracle Corporation. or, DENIED

8.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 8 to exclude evidence and argument regarding

the legality of Rimini Street, Inc.'s Business Model is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or present any evidence concerning the legality of the business model of nonparty Rimini Street, Inc. or, DENIED

9.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 9 to exclude evidence and argument regarding

Hyperion, Retek and E-Business Suite product lines is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not argue to the jury or present any evidence or testimony regarding whether Defendant supported or proposed to support Hyperion, Retek and EBusiness Suite. or, DENIED

SVI-83628v1

-3-

[[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE 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

10.

Defendants' Motion in Limine No. 10 to preclude Plaintiffs' from referring to

Defendant TomorrowNow, Inc. as SAP/TN is:

GRANTED: Plaintiffs shall not refer to or proffer evidence referring to Defendant TomorrowNow, Inc. as SAP/TN, nor shall Plaintiffs allege that Defendant TomorrowNow, Inc. is called SAP/TN. or, DENIED

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________________________

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

SVI-83628v1

-4-

[[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE Case No. 07-CV-1658 PJH (EDL))