Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 584

ORDER REGARDING REQUESTS TO FILE MOTIONS re #562 Letter filed by Google Inc., #567 Letter filed by Oracle America, Inc., #566 Letter filed by Oracle America, Inc., #582 Letter filed by Google Inc.. Signed by Judge Alsup on October 31, 2011. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2011)

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
15
16

No. C 10-03561 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER REGARDING
REQUESTS TO
FILE MOTIONS

GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.
/

At the case management conference on October 19, 2011, each party was invited to

17

submit one précis request describing a proposed motion. The parties have done so and have

18

responded to one another’s requests (Dkt. Nos. 562, 566, 567, 582). Having read all submissions,

19

both précis requests are DENIED except as stated in the next paragraph. The issues raised therein

20

are best left until after the judge has heard the evidence at trial. The judge will understand the

21

complications of the issues much better after the detailed trial evidence is laid out and cross

22

examined. It would be hard for the judge to master the material with the same grasp via a cold

23

written record. Moreover, the caseload and trial calendar of the Court do not allow time for going

24

through the witnesses twice. After the judge and jury hear the evidence, the judge then will give

25

proper law instructions and will rule on questions the court of appeals has designated as solely for

26

the judge. Counsel may wish to know as much as possible in advance of trial as to how the

27

rulings will develop, but counsel have no right to insist on such advance rulings.

28

1

By NOON ON NOVEMBER 4, 2011, Google Inc. may submit a more developed précis

2

limited to fifteen pages (double-spaced, twelve-point Times New Roman font, with no footnotes

3

and no attachments) that more fully develops its request for an advance determination regarding

4

the 37 API specifications and the issue of their selection, arrangement, and structure. Please use

5

at least two APIs as examples so that the proposal will be concrete and not abstract. Please stick

6

to this question and do not veer off into side or alternative issues. By NOON ON NOVEMBER 9,

7

Oracle America, Inc., may respond with up to fifteen pages. Please, no declarations or exhibits.

8

The fifteen pages should quote whatever is worth citing.

9
IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

Dated: October 31, 2011.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2