Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.
Filing
909
MOTION for Administrative Relief Regarding Statement to Jury filed by Oracle America, Inc.. Responses due by 4/16/2012. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 Declaration Declaration of Marc Peters)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 4/12/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
MICHAEL A. JACOBS (Bar No. 111664)
mjacobs@mofo.com
KENNETH A. KUWAYTI (Bar No. 145384)
kkuwayti@mofo.com
MARC DAVID PETERS (Bar No. 211725)
mdpeters@mofo.com
DANIEL P. MUINO (Bar No. 209624)
dmuino@mofo.com
755 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1018
Telephone: (650) 813-5600 / Facsimile: (650) 494-0792
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
dboies@bsfllp.com
333 Main Street, Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone: (914) 749-8200 / Facsimile: (914) 749-8300
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (Bar No. 144177)
sholtzman@bsfllp.com
1999 Harrison St., Suite 900, Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 874-1000 / Facsimile: (510) 874-1460
ORACLE CORPORATION
DORIAN DALEY (Bar No. 129049)
dorian.daley@oracle.com
DEBORAH K. MILLER (Bar No. 95527)
deborah.miller@oracle.com
MATTHEW M. SARBORARIA (Bar No. 211600)
matthew.sarboraria@oracle.com
500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood City, CA 94065
Telephone: (650) 506-5200 / Facsimile: (650) 506-7114
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.
18
19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
20
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
21
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
22
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.
23
Plaintiff,
DECLARATION OF MARC PETERS IN
SUPPORT OF ORACLE AMERICA’S
MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
RELIEF REGARDING STATEMENT TO
JURY
Defendant.
Dept.: Courtroom 8, 19th Floor
Judge: Honorable William H. Alsup
24
v.
25
GOOGLE INC.
26
Case No. CV 10-03561 WHA
27
28
PETERS DECL. ISO ORACLE MOTION RE STATEMENT TO JURY
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
sf-3132202
1
I, Marc David Peters, declare as follows:
2
I am an attorney at Morrison & Foerster LLP and am counsel of record to Plaintiff Oracle
3
America, Inc. (“Oracle”). I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein and, if called
4
to testify, could and would testify competently to the following.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1.
On April 11, 2012, I sent an email to counsel for Google proposing the following
stipulated statement to the jury:
The names of the various items appearing in the disputed API package
specifications, such as names of API files, packages, classes, and methods, are not
protected.
The selection or arrangement of the names of the various items in the API package
specifications may still be protected by copyright if those names are numerous
enough and their selection and arrangement original enough that their combination
constitutes an original work. The Court will instruct the jury on this issue
following the close of evidence.
A true and correct copy of the above-referenced correspondence is attached as Exhibit 1.
2.
On April 11, 2012, counsel for Google responded and declined Oracle’s request.
14
See Exhibit 1. That evening, I met and conferred with counsel for Google, but we were unable to
15
come to an agreement regarding the stipulated statement, or the timing of the delivery of the
16
Court’s deemed statement regarding the uncopyrightability of names.
17
18
19
20
21
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is
true and correct. Executed on April 12, 2012, in San Francisco, California.
/s/ Marc David Peters
Marc David Peters
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PETERS DECL. ISO ORACLE MOTION RE STATEMENT TO JURY
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
sf-3132202
1
1
2
3
4
ATTESTATION
I, Michael A. Jacobs, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this
Declaration of Marc Peters. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Marc
Peters has concurred in this filing.
5
6
Date: April 12, 2012
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
/s/ Michael A. Jacobs
EXHIBIT 1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Matthias Kamber
Wednesday, April 11, 2012 5:49 PM
Peters, Marc D.; dalvik-KS (dalvik-KS@KSLAW.com); DALVIK-KVN;
'GT_Google@gtlaw.com' (GT_Google@gtlaw.com) (GT_Google@gtlaw.com)
Oracle-Google (Oracle-Google@BSFLLP.com); Oracle-ProjectX
RE: Oracle v. Google - proposed admissions
Dear Marc,
As to the below request, Google does not agree to appending the language you propose to the statement. Unlike the
statements that the Court deemed admitted, Oracle’s statement is more akin to a jury instruction. We see no reason for
appending this language in light of the fact that the Court will separately provide both preliminary and final instructions
on the relevant issues.
Regards,
Matthias
From: Peters, Marc D. [mailto:MDPeters@mofo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 1:58 PM
To: dalvik-KS (dalvik-KS@KSLAW.com); DALVIK-KVN; 'GT_Google@gtlaw.com' (GT_Google@gtlaw.com)
(GT_Google@gtlaw.com)
Cc: Oracle-Google (Oracle-Google@BSFLLP.com); Oracle-ProjectX
Subject: RE: Oracle v. Google - proposed admissions
Dear counsel,
We thought that the following rephrasing may be clearer and more acceptable:
Directly following the statement “The names of the various items appearing in the disputed API package specifications,
such as names of API files, packages, classes, and methods, are not protected,” the jury shall be told the following: “The
selection or arrangement of the names of the various items in the API package specifications may still be protected by
copyright if those names are numerous enough and their selection and arrangement original enough that their
combination constitutes an original work. The Court will instruct the jury on this issue following the close of evidence."
This language is drawn from the Court's order at page 8 of ECF No. 433.
Best regards,
Marc
From: Peters, Marc D.
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 11:38 AM
To: dalvik-KS (dalvik-KS@KSLAW.com); DALVIK-KVN (DALVIK-KVN@kvn.com); 'GT_Google@gtlaw.com'
(GT_Google@gtlaw.com) (GT_Google@gtlaw.com)
1
Cc: Oracle-Google (Oracle-Google@BSFLLP.com); Oracle-ProjectX
Subject: RE: Oracle v. Google - proposed admissions
Dear counsel,
In light of the Court's order of this morning (Dkt. 896), would Google agree that directly following the statement “The
names of the various items appearing in the disputed API package specifications, such as names of API files, packages,
classes, and methods, are not protected,” the jury shall be told the following: “The selection, arrangement, and
structure of items in the API package specifications may be protected. The Court will instruct the jury on this issue
following the close of evidence.” This language corresponds to the Court's language in the 9/15/11 MSJ Order: "This
order finds that the names of the various items appearing in the disputed API package specifications are not protected
by copyright. This order makes no finding as to whether any other elements of the API package specifications (or their
selection or arrangement) are protected or infringed." (ECF No. 433 at 13.) Please let me know by 3pm.
Best regards,
Marc
From: Peters, Marc D.
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 11:37 PM
To: dalvik-KS (dalvik-KS@KSLAW.com); DALVIK-KVN (DALVIK-KVN@kvn.com); 'GT_Google@gtlaw.com'
(GT_Google@gtlaw.com) (GT_Google@gtlaw.com)
Cc: Oracle-Google (Oracle-Google@BSFLLP.com); Oracle-ProjectX
Subject: Oracle v. Google - proposed admissions
Dear counsel,
Please let me know by 3pm Wednesday if Google will stipulate to one or more of the admissions identified in the
attached proposed order. The factual and legal support for these admissions is found in the attached draft motion.
Best regards,
Marc
Marc David Peters, Ph.D.
Morrison & Foerster LLP
755 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304‐1018
650‐813‐5932 tel
650‐251‐3834 direct fax
650‐494‐0792 fax
mdpeters@mofo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------2
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Morrison & Foerster LLP informs you that, if any
advice concerning one or more U.S. Federal tax issues is contained in this communication (including any
attachments), such advice is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i)
avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another
party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
For information about this legend, go to
http://www.mofo.com/Circular230/
============================================================================
This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or
authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any
information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by
reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
3
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?