Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.
Filing
1223
Proposed Order re #1222 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law on Portions of Count VIII of Oracle's Amended Complaint, or, in the Alternative, for a New Trial by Google Inc.. (Van Nest, Robert) (Filed on 7/17/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
ROBERT A. VAN NEST - #84065
rvannest@kvn.com
CHRISTA M. ANDERSON - #184325
canderson@kvn.com
DANIEL PURCELL - #191424
dpurcell@kvn.com
710 Sansome Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-1704
Telephone: (415) 391-5400
Facsimile: (415) 397-7188
KING & SPALDING LLP
SCOTT T. WEINGAERTNER (Pro Hac Vice)
sweingaertner@kslaw.com
ROBERT F. PERRY
rperry@kslaw.com
BRUCE W. BABER (Pro Hac Vice)
bbaber@kslaw.com
1185 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-4003
Telephone: (212) 556-2100
Facsimile: (212) 556-2222
KING & SPALDING LLP
DONALD F. ZIMMER, JR. - #112279
fzimmer@kslaw.com
CHERYL A. SABNIS - #224323
csabnis@kslaw.com
101 Second Street, Suite 2300
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 318-1200
Facsimile: (415) 318-1300
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
IAN C. BALLON - #141819
ballon@gtlaw.com
HEATHER MEEKER - #172148
meekerh@gtlaw.com
1900 University Avenue, Fifth Floor
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Telephone: (650) 328-8500
Facsimile: (650) 328-8508
Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.
13
14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
18
19
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,
20
Case No. 3:10-cv-03561-WHA
Plaintiff,
21
v.
22
Honorable Judge William Alsup
GOOGLE INC.,
23
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
GOOGLE’S MOTION FOR RULE 50(b)
JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW ON
PORTIONS OF COUNT VIII OF
ORACLE’S AMENDED COMPLAINT,
OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A
NEW TRIAL
Defendant.
24
25
26
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING GOOGLE’S MOTION FOR RULE 50(b) JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF
LAW ON PORTIONS OF COUNT VIII OF ORACLE’S AMENDED COMPLAINT, OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, FOR A NEW TRIAL
CASE NO. 3:10-cv-03561 WHA
1
Before this Court is Google Inc.’s Motion for Rule 50(b) Judgment as a Matter of Law on
2
Portions of Count VIII of Oracle’s Amended Complaint, or, in the Alternative, for a New Trial.
3
Based on the motion, the memorandum of points and authorities in support thereof, the pleadings
4
on file, any evidence or argument presented at a hearing, and any other relevant matter, Google’s
5
Motion for Rule 50(b) Judgment as a Matter of Law on Portions of Count VIII of Oracle’s
6
Amended Complaint is GRANTED.
7
[Alternatively, Google’s Motion for a New Trial on Portions of Count VIII of Oracle’s
8
Amended Complaint is GRANTED]
9
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
12
13
Dated:
14
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING GOOGLE’S MOTION FOR RULE 50(b) JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF
LAW ON PORTIONS OF COUNT VIII OF ORACLE’S AMENDED COMPLAINT, OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, FOR A NEW TRIAL
CASE NO. 3:10-cv-03561 WHA
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?