Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc.
Filing
978
ORDER REGARDING THE 702 PATENT by Hon. William Alsup denying #970 Motion.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2012)
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
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER REGARDING
THE ’702 PATENT
GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.
/
15
16
No. C 10-03561 WHA
Before the trial date was set, a substantial question was pending whether to wait until the
17
PTO had finished all re-exam proceedings before commencing trial. To remove this
18
consideration from the calculus, Oracle offered to dismiss with prejudice all patents that had
19
been rejected in a final office action subject to reinstatement in the event the PTO reversed itself
20
prior to the start of trial. In express reliance on this (Dkt. No. 786), the Court set the early trial
21
date requested by Oracle. That trial date (April 16) started on time and at that moment the
22
dismissals with prejudice became final.
23
A few days later, the PTO did reverse itself as to the ’702 patent but the reversal came a
24
few days too late, for the trial had already started and the dismissals with prejudice had already
25
become effective.
26
Oracle’s argument that the patent “trial” has not yet started is wrong. The was and is one
27
trial with three phases. The trial started on April 16. This is not only the plain meaning of the
28
term but any other interpretation would inject great prejudice given that the parties have relied
1
on the issues to be tried and that reliance should not be turned on its head in mid-trial. Oracle
2
will be required to stand by its word and live with the dismissal with prejudice.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
Dated: April 25, 2012.
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
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?