Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 1212

MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law - ORACLE AMERICA, INC.'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW UNDER RULE 50(B) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A NEW TRIAL - filed by Oracle America, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 7/26/2012 08:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William Alsup. Responses due by 7/5/2012. Replies due by 7/12/2012. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 6/20/2012)

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

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
MICHAEL A. JACOBS (Bar No. 111664)
[e-mail]
MARC DAVID PETERS (Bar No. 211725)
[e-mail]
DANIEL P. MUINO (Bar No. 209624)
[e-mail]
755 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1018
Telephone: [phone] / Facsimile: [phone]
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
333 Main Street, Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone: [phone] / Facsimile: [phone]
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (Bar No. 144177)
[e-mail]
1999 Harrison St., Suite 900, Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: [phone] / Facsimile: [phone]
ORACLE CORPORATION
DORIAN DALEY (Bar No. 129049)
[e-mail]
DEBORAH K. MILLER (Bar No. 95527)
[e-mail]
MATTHEW M. SARBORARIA (Bar No. 211600)
[e-mail]
500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood City, CA 94065
Telephone: [phone] / Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.

17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

21

ORACLE AMERICA, INC.

22

Plaintiff,

23

v.

24

GOOGLE INC.

25
26
27

Case No. CV 10-03561 WHA
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE ORACLE
AMERICA, INC.’S MOTION FOR
JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF
LAW UNDER RULE 50(B) OR, IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A NEW
TRIAL

Defendant.
Date:
July 26, 2012
Time:
8:00 a.m.
Dept.: Courtroom 8, 19th Floor
Judge: Honorable William H. Alsup

28
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE ORACLE’S MOTION FOR JMOL UNDER RULE 50(B) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A
NEW TRIAL - CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1538016

1

Before the Court is Oracle America, Inc.’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law Under

2

Rule 50(b) or, in the Alternative, For a New Trial. The Court, having considered the papers filed

3

in support of an in opposition to the motion, the arguments presented at the hearing, and other

4

matters relevant to the determination of this motion, hereby GRANTS Oracle’s motion for

5

judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(b) that:

6

(1) Oracle owns the asserted copyrighted works; (2) Google infringed Oracle’s copyrights

7

by copying comments in Oracle's CodeSource.java and CollectionCertStoreParameters.java files;

8
9
10
11
12

(3) Google infringed Oracle’s copyrights by copying from Java documentation into Android
documentation; (4) Google’s copying from the 37 Java API packages at issue in this action was
not a fair use; (5) The material Google copied from the 37 Java API packages is copyrightable;
(6) Google infringed Oracle’s copyrights by creating an unauthorized derivative work; (7) Google
infringed the asserted claims of the ’104 patent; and (8) Google infringed the asserted claims of

13
the ’520 patent.
14
15

[In the alternative, the Court GRANTS Oracle’s request for a new trial on the issues of:

16

(1) Google’s copying of comments in Oracle's CodeSource.java and

17

CollectionCertStoreParameters.java files; (2) Google’s copying from Java documentation into

18

Android documentation; (3) Google’s creation of an unauthorized derivative work; (4) the

19

copyrightability of the 37 Java API packages at issue in this action; and (5) Google’s

20

infringement of the asserted claims of the ’104 and ’520 patents.

21
22

In addition, because the jury did not reach a verdict on Google's defense of fair use,
Oracle is entitled to a new trial on that issue.]

23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27

Dated: ________________
Honorable William H. Alsup
United States District Court Judge

28
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE ORACLE’S MOTION FOR JMOL UNDER RULE 50(B) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A
NEW TRIAL - CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1538014

1