Oracle USA, Inc. et al v. Rimini Street, Inc. et al

Filing 1242

ORDER granting ECF No. 1241 Motion to Extend Time re ECF No. 1237 Motion to Compel. Response due by 8/26/2019. Reply due by 8/29/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 8/20/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
RICHARD J. POCKER (NV Bar No. 3568)
300 South Fourth Street, Suite 800
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.382.2755
[e-mail]
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
WILLIAM ISAACSON (pro hac vice)
KAREN DUNN (pro hac vice)
1401 New York Avenue, NW, 11th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (pro hac vice)
BEKO O. REBLITZ-RICHARDSON
(pro hac vice)
44 Montgomery St., 41st Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.293.6899
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
BENJAMIN P. SMITH (pro hac vice)
JOHN A. POLITO (pro hac vice)
SHARON R. SMITH (pro hac vice)
One Market, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.442.1001
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
DORIAN DALEY (pro hac vice)
DEBORAH K. MILLER (pro hac vice)
JAMES C. MAROULIS (pro hac vice)
ORACLE CORPORATION
500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7
Redwood City, CA 94070
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 650.506.7114
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc. and
Oracle International Corp.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
ORACLE USA, INC.; a Colorado corporation;
ORACLE AMERICA, INC.; a Delaware
corporation; and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION, a California corporation,
Plaintiffs,
v.
RIMINI STREET, INC., a Nevada corporation;
and SETH RAVIN, an individual,
Defendants.

Case No. 2:10-cv-0106-LRH-VCF
ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER
SHORTENING TIME RE: ORACLE’S
MOTION TO COMPEL AND
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES RE POSTINJUNCTION REQUESTS FOR
PRODUCTION

25
26
27
28
ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL
AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1

Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc., and Oracle International Corporation

2

(collectively “Oracle”) respectfully move the Court for an order shortening the time for briefing

3

Oracle’s Motion to Compel and Memorandum of Points and Authorities re Post-Injunction

4

Requests for Production (“Motion to Compel”) filed on August 19, 2019. Because the Motion

5

concerns an abbreviated discovery schedule, including expert disclosures in less than three weeks,

6

Oracle requests that a response to its Motion to Compel be filed on or before August 26, 2019

7

(seven days after filing Oracle’s motion, as opposed to the ordinary fourteen days), with Oracle’s

8

reply due on or before August 29, 2019 (three days after the filing of any response, as opposed to

9

the ordinary seven days). Defendant Rimini Street, Inc. (“Rimini”) has been notified of and has

10

agreed to Oracle’s proposed expedited briefing schedule. This Motion is based upon the

11

Declaration of David R. Kocan, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities that follow, the entire

12

record in this action, and such other matters and arguments as may be presented to the Court.

13

DATED: August 19, 2019

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

14
15

By:

/s/ John A. Polito
John A. Polito

16
17

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle
America, Inc. and Oracle International Corp.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL
AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1

DECLARATION OF DAVID R. KOCAN

2

I, David R. Kocan, declare as follows:

3

1.

I am an attorney at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP, counsel of record in this

4

action for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle International Corp.

5

(collectively, “Oracle”). I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and

6

would competently testify to them if called upon to do so.

7

2.

On August 19, 2019, Oracle filed its Motion to Compel in this action. Oracle’s

8

Motion to Compel seeks an order compelling Defendant Rimini Street, Inc. (“Rimini”) to produce

9

documents in response to Oracle’s Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents 1–5 and

10
11

8–11 (“Supplemental RFPs”).
3.

Under the Federal and Local Rules, Rimini’s response to Oracle’s Motion to

12

Compel would be due September 2, 2019. Any reply from Oracle would be due September 9,

13

2019. Oracle’s initial expert disclosures are due September 5, 2019, and discovery closes

14

October 8, 2019.

15

4.

Further delays by Rimini in producing the custodial documents that are the subject

16

of Oracle’s Motion to Compel would severely prejudice Oracle, including with respect to its

17

disclosure of expert witnesses.

18

5.

Oracle has moved as expediently as possible in filing the Motion to Compel—a

19

process that was prolonged due to extensive meet and confer efforts, during which Oracle

20

repeatedly attempted to persuade Rimini to provide the discovery at issue. The Parties exchanged

21

correspondence regarding the issues raised in Oracle’s Motion to Compel on July 3, July 9, July

22

12, July 17, July 18, July 23, July 26, July 29, July 30, August 2, August 5, August 11, August

23

13, and August 16, 2019. The Parties conducted telephonic meet-and-confers on July 3, July 19,

24

July 24, and August 1, 2019 concerning these issues. Oracle provides additional information

25

regarding the Parties’ meet and confer efforts in Oracle’s Motion to Compel.

26
27

6.

Rimini has not yet produced any custodial documents, instead taking the position

that Oracle must agree to a significantly underinclusive set of custodians and search terms before

28
1
DECLARATION OF DAVID R. KOCAN ISO ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME
RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1
2
3

Rimini will produce any custodial documents. Rimini also refuses to agree to any schedule for
custodial production, insisting that it has no obligation to produce any custodial production before
the close of discovery.

4
5
6
7
8
9

7.

motion to compel unless Rimini agreed, by the close of business on August 13, to: (1) search for
documents from the requested custodians hitting on Oracle’s proposed search terms, (2) produce
responsive custodial documents on a rolling basis beginning immediately, and (3) agree to a
reasonable time frame for production. On August 13, 2019, Rimini refused to agree to Oracle’s
request for the production of relevant custodial materials, instead continuing its delay tactics.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

On August 11, 2019, Oracle notified Rimini that it would move forward with a

8.

Also on August 11, 2019, Oracle proposed the shortened briefing schedule that

this Motion requests, whereby Rimini’s opposition would be due one week after Oracle filed its
Motion to Compel and Oracle’s reply would be due three days thereafter. On August 13, 2019,
Rimini requested that Oracle’s proposed briefing schedule include specific filing and briefing
dates.
9.

On August 15, 2019, Oracle notified Rimini that it would file its Motion to

Compel on August 16, 2019 or August 19, 2019, and again proposed this Motion’s expedited
briefing schedule such that Rimini’s opposition would be due one week after Oracle filed the
Motion to Compel (either August 23 or August 26), and Oracle’s reply would be due three days
later. On August 16, 2019, Rimini agreed to Oracle’s proposed expedited briefing schedule.
10.

I do not believe that Rimini would be prejudiced by a resolution of Oracle’s

Motion to Compel on an expedited basis because Rimini is well aware of the relevant facts—this
case began over a decade ago and concerns Rimini’s core business model—and because Rimini
has long been aware of Oracle’s positions as articulated in the Motion to Compel, which were
repeatedly expressed by Oracle during the course of the Parties’ meet and confer efforts.
Moreover, Rimini itself has consented to Oracle’s expedited briefing schedule.
11.

Were this Court to grant this Motion for an order shortening time, Oracle proposes

that Rimini is provided seven days, i.e., a deadline of Monday, August 26, 2019, to respond to

28
2
DECLARATION OF DAVID R. KOCAN ISO ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME
RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Oracle’s Motion to Compel, as opposed to the usual 14-day period for response. Oracle also
proposes a reply deadline of Thursday, August 29, 2019 (three days rather than the ordinary
seven). These shortened deadlines would allow the Motion to Compel to be resolved in time for
Oracle to receive discovery needed to prepare its initial expert disclosures without prejudice.
12.

This Motion for an order shortening time is not made for any improper purpose

and is brought to allow this Court an opportunity to rule on the issues presented in Oracle’s
Motion to Compel in a timely fashion allowing complete relief should it so order.
13.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the

foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed at San Francisco, California, on
August 19, 2019.

11
12
13

/s/ David R. Kocan
David R. Kocan

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

DECLARATION OF DAVID R. KOCAN ISO ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME
RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

2

Local Rule IA 6-1(d) provides that a motion to shorten time will be granted upon an

3

attorney’s declaration describing the circumstances that constitute good cause to justify

4

shortening of time. See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) (giving courts power to change a briefing

5

date when a party demonstrates “good cause”).

6

As Oracle’s Motion to Compel details, Defendant Rimini Street, Inc. (“Rimini”) continues

7

to thwart Oracle’s ability to obtain discovery that is relevant and necessary to the injunction-

8

enforcement issues presently before the Court on an expedited schedule. Oracle attempted to

9

resolve the issues raised in the Motion to Compel without court intervention, as is required in this

10

District. See, e.g., ShuffleMaster, Inc. v. Progressive Games, Inc., 170 F.R.D. 166, 171 (D. Nev.

11

1996). Since the inception of the injunction discovery period, Oracle has diligently sought to

12

reach agreement with Rimini regarding custodial document production. Oracle has proposed

13

multiple concessions in an effort to reach compromise with Rimini on this discovery, despite

14

being entitled to such discovery. Rimini has obstructed at every turn.

15

Local Rule 7-2(b) provides that responses to a motion shall be filed and served within

16

fourteen days after service of the motion, and reply points and authorities shall be filed within

17

seven days after service of the response. The Post-Injunction Scheduling Order sets a deadline of

18

September 5, 2019 for expert-witness disclosure. Under the ordinary schedule for motions

19

briefing, Oracle’s Motion to Compel would not be fully briefed until September 6, 2019, meaning

20

that any decision on the Motion would take place after the expert disclosure deadline. Without

21

the discovery that is the subject of the Motion to Compel, Oracle will be severely prejudiced as it

22

relates to its disclosure of expert witnesses. Thus, particularly given the upcoming expert

23

disclosure deadline and Rimini’s agreement to Oracle’s proposed expedited briefing schedule,

24

Oracle respectfully submits that it is appropriate and necessary for the Court to hear Oracle’s

25

Motion to Compel on a shortened briefing schedule.

26

For the foregoing reasons, including the specific facts alleged in the declaration

27

accompanying this Motion, Oracle respectfully requests this Court grant its request for an order

28
1
MPA ISO ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO
COMPEL AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

C

1
2
3
4
5
6

shortening time as follows:
1. Any response to Oracle’s Motion to Compel shall be filed and served no later than
August 26, 2019, seven days after the filing of the Motion; and
2. Oracle’s reply in support of its Motion shall be filed and served no later than August
29, 2019, three days after the filing of Rimini’s response.
DATED: August 19, 2019

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

7
8
9
10
11

By:

/s/ John A. Polito
John A. Polito

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle
America, Inc. and Oracle International Corp.

12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED:

15
16
17
18

______________________________________
HON. CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DATED:

8-20-2019
____________________________

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
MPA ISO ORACLE’S MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME RE: ORACLE’S MOTION TO
COMPEL AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on August 19, 2019, I electronically transmitted the foregoing ORACLE’S

3

MOTION FOR ORDER SHORTENING TIME RE: MOTION TO COMPEL AND

4

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES to the Clerk’s Office using the

5

CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to all counsel in this

6

matter; all counsel are CM/ECF registrants.

7
8

DATED: August 19, 2019

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

9
10

By:

/s/ John A. Polito
John A. Polito

11
12

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle
America, Inc. and Oracle International Corp.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE