Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.
Filing
926
Statement Joint Statement of the Case for Voir Dire by Google Inc., Oracle America, Inc.. (Peters, Marc) (Filed on 4/15/2012)
[counsel listed on signature page]
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
10
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.
11
Plaintiff,
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Defendant.
Date: April 16, 2011
Dept.: Courtroom 8, 19th Floor
Judge: Honorable William H. Alsup
12
v.
13
GOOGLE INC.
Case No. CV 10-03561 WHA
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1523547
1
Pursuant to Paragraph 8 of the Court’s Guidelines for Trial and Final Pretrial Conference
2
in Civil Jury Cases (last revised March 5, 2012), Oracle America, Inc. and Google Inc. provide
3
the following joint statement of the case to be read to the jury during voir dire:
4
5
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is a case about alleged infringement of copyrights and patents. The plaintiff, the
6
entity that has brought this case, is Oracle America, Inc. The defendant in this case is Google,
7
Inc. Oracle America accuses Google of infringing particular Oracle America copyrights and
8
patents.
9
Oracle America was formerly known as Sun Microsystems. When Oracle Corporation
10
bought Sun in January 2010, Sun’s name changed to Oracle America. The copyrights and patents
11
in this case were originally assigned to Sun Microsystems, and stayed with the company when it
12
was renamed Oracle America. During this trial, Oracle America may sometimes be referred to as
13
“Oracle” or “Sun.”
14
The trial of this case will proceed in separate phases.
15
Phase 1 of the case will relate to Oracle’s copyright claims. Oracle claims that Google
16
infringes Oracle’s copyrights by copying Java software and related documentation into Google’s
17
Android software and related documentation. Google claims that certain aspects of the
18
copyrighted works do not qualify for copyright protection, and that Google’s use of certain
19
information qualifies as a “fair use” under copyright law. Google further claims that, because of
20
Sun’s and Oracle’s prior actions, inaction, and statements, Oracle should not be permitted to
21
enforce these copyrights against Google. Your job at the end of Phase 1 will be to decide whether
22
Google is liable for infringing Oracle’s copyrights.
23
Phase 2 of the case will relate to Oracle’s patent claims. Oracle claims that Google’s
24
Android software and mobile phones infringe two U.S. Patents. Google claims that, because of
25
Sun’s and Oracle’s prior actions, inaction, and statements, Oracle should not be permitted to
26
enforce these patents against Google. Your job at the end of Phase 2 will be to decide whether
27
Google is liable for infringing the asserted claims in these two patents.
28
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1523547
1
Phase 3 of the case will relate to the damages, if any, attributable to any infringement by
1
2
Google of Oracle’s copyrights or patents, and the question of whether any such infringement was
3
willful.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1523547
2
1
Dated: April 15, 2012
2
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: /s/ Marc David Peters
3
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
MICHAEL A. JACOBS (Bar No. 111664)
mjacobs@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
4
5
6
7
8
9
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
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
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
17
18
19
20
21
22
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1523547
3
1
Dated: April 15, 2012
2
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
By: /s/ Matthias A. Kamber
3
SCOTT T. WEINGAERTNER (Pro Hac Vice)
sweingaertner@kslaw.com
ROBERT F. PERRY
rperry@kslaw.com
BRUCE W. BABER (Pro Hac Vice)
bbaber@kslaw.com
1185 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-4003
Telephone: (212) 556-2100
Facsimile: (212) 556-2222
4
5
6
7
8
DONALD F. ZIMMER, JR. (SBN 112279)
fzimmer@kslaw.com
CHERYL A. SABNIS (SBN 224323)
csabnis@kslaw.com
KING & SPALDING LLP
101 Second Street - Suite 2300
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 318-1200
Facsimile: (415) 318-1300
9
10
11
12
13
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
IAN C. BALLON (SBN 141819)
ballon@gtlaw.com
HEATHER MEEKER (SBN 172148)
meekerh@gtlaw.com
1900 University Avenue
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Telephone: (650) 328-8500
Facsimile: (650) 328-8508
14
15
16
17
18
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
ROBERT A. VAN NEST (SBN 84065)
rvannest@kvn.com
CHRISTA M. ANDERSON (SBN184325)
canderson@kvn.com
DANIEL PURCELL (SBN 191424)
dpurcell@kvn.com
633 Battery Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 391-5400
Facsimile: (415) 397-7188
19
20
21
22
23
24
Attorneys for Defendant
GOOGLE INC.
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1523547
4
ATTESTATION
1
2
3
4
I, Marc David Peters, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby
attest that Matthias A. Kamber has concurred in this filing.
5
6
Date: April 15, 2012
/s/ Marc David Peters
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STATEMENT OF THE CASE
CASE NO. CV 10-03561 WHA
pa-1523547
5
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?