Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.
Filing
1140
PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN BEFORE MAY 14 CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Alsup on May 14, 2012. (Attachments: #1 Draft Special Verdict Form)(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/14/2012)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
No. C 10-03561 WHA
Plaintiff,
v.
SPECIAL VERDICT FORM
GOOGLE INC.,
14
Defendant.
/
15
16
YOUR ANSWERS MUST BE UNANIMOUS.
17
18
19
20
1.
Has Oracle proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Google infringes
claims 11, 27, 29, 39, 40, and 41 of United States Patent Number RE38,104?
21
Yes
(Infringing)
22
No
(Not Proven)
23
CLAIM 11:
________
________
24
CLAIM 27:
________
________
25
CLAIM 29:
________
________
26
CLAIM 39:
________
________
27
CLAIM 40:
________
________
28
CLAIM 41:
________
________
1
2
2.
Has Oracle proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Google infringes
claims 1 and 20 of United States Patent Number 6,061,520?
3
Yes
(Infringing)
4
No
(Not Proven)
5
CLAIM 1:
________
________
6
CLAIM 20:
________
________
7
8
9
Has Oracle proven by clear and convincing evidence that Google willfully
infringed an asserted patent? (Answer this question only if you answered βYesβ to a prior
question.)
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
3.
Yes
(Willful)
No
(Not Willful)
FOR THE β104 PATENT:
_______
_______
FOR THE β520 PATENT:
_______
_______
12
13
14
15
16
Dated: May ___, 2012.
FOREPERSON
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
]]>
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?
