Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 131

ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR NARROWING ISSUES FOR TRIAL. Signed by Judge Alsup on May 3, 2011. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/3/2011)

Download PDF
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 14 Plaintiff, v. ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR NARROWING ISSUES FOR TRIAL GOOGLE INC., Defendant. / 15 16 No. C 10-03561 WHA Having reviewed the parties’ memoranda regarding the reexamination proceedings and the 17 streamlining of this action, for which counsel are thanked, the Court proposes a three-step 18 process, as below. Each side may file a five-page (double spaced, twelve-point Times New 19 Roman font, no footnotes, and no attachments) critique of the tentative schedule by NOON ON 20 MAY 6, 2011. After taking any critiques into account, the schedule will be finalized. 21 Currently, there are 132 claims from seven patents asserted in this action, and there are 22 hundreds of prior art references in play for invalidity defenses. This is too much. The following 23 schedule will ensure that only a triable number of these items — three claims and eight prior art 24 references — are placed before the jury in October, all others to be forsaken. Oracle will 25 surrender all of its present infringement claims against Google based on the 129 asserted claims 26 that will not be tried. Oracle may not renew those infringement claims in a subsequent action 27 except as to new products. 28 1 The first reduction will follow claim construction. Within SEVEN DAYS after the finalized 2 claim construction order issues, Oracle shall narrow its patent infringement case to 40 asserted 3 claims. Within SEVEN DAYS after that, Google shall narrow its invalidity case to 120 prior art 4 references. It is anticipated that this first pair of reductions will be completed by the end of May. 5 The second reduction will follow expert disclosures. By AUGUST 24 (five days after reply 6 expert reports must be served), Oracle shall narrow its patent infringement case to 20 asserted 7 claims. By AUGUST 29 (five days later), Google shall narrow its invalidity case to 60 prior art 8 references. The parties will then have a week of expert discovery remaining, and another week 9 before summary-judgment motions must be filed. The third reduction will follow summary judgment. Between the date on which the 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 summary-judgment order issues and the final pretrial conference, Oracle shall select no more than 12 three asserted claims and Google shall select no more than eight prior art references for trial. 13 All others will be forsaken. Counsel did not specify their understanding of a “triable number” of 14 claims and prior art references, so the Court selected these figures based on its own views and 15 experience. The exact dates for the final selections will be set in the summary-judgment order. 16 Unless summary-judgment motions are filed early, the summary-judgment hearing will fall on 17 October13. If that happens, then the final pretrial conference currently scheduled for October 17 18 will be continued to October24 in order to allow time for this process. 19 The trial remains set to begin on October 31. The parties, however, are requested to 20 comment on the following. If our trial were postponed until after the inter partes reexaminations, 21 to what extent would the results there possibly moot out the need for a trial here? When will the 22 ex parte reexaminations be completed? 23 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: May 3, 2011. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?