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)

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 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

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?