Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.

Filing 757

SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER REGARDING STATEMENT ON REEXAMINATIONS re #726 Order. Signed by Judge Alsup on March 1, 2012. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2012)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

Plaintiff,
v.

SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER
REGARDING STATEMENT ON
REEXAMINATIONS

GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.
/

13
14

No. C 10-03561 WHA

ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,

Oracle should state a clear answer to the following question: given that the examiners

15

have issued final rejections on patents ’720, ’702, ’476, and ’205, and Oracle has only withdrawn

16

the ’476 patent, but still wishes to go to trial on patents ’720, ’702, ’205, ’520, and ’104, and

17

Oracle still wishes to have an instruction that those patents must be presumed valid and can only

18

be found invalid by clear and convincing evidence, would it be better to postpone trial until after

19

final decisions by the PTO on administrative appeal? Also please answer: to avoid this problem,

20

will Oracle irrevocably withdraw with prejudice patents ’720, ’702, and ’205? The views of

21

Google on these questions will also be appreciated. Please provide responses by NOON ON

22

MARCH 9, 2012, as part of the submission regarding the reexaminations.

23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27
28

Dated: March 1, 2012.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE