decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more... 		decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Oracle v. Google - Moving the Case Along
Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 08:50 AM EST

Just because the Oracle v. Google case has not been set for trial (and won't be until at least the time at which Oracle provides its third attempt at a damages report) does not mean the court can't move the case along, and that is what Judge Alsup has done with his latest order. In an attempt to narrow the issues to be argued at trial, Judge Alsup's latest order (708 [PDF; Text]) focuses on the copyright issues and directs the parties to provide opening briefs in which they identify each remaining claim of copyright liability and the affirmative defenses to each such claim. In addition, the parties are to identify those issues that should be resolved by the court and those underlying facts that first need to be decided by the jury.

This order adds to a somewhat lengthy litany of filings due from each party under various orders in effect at this time. The timeline for those responses is:

DateFiling Due
February 3, 2012Dr. Cockburn's Third Damages Report on behalf of Oracle
February 14, 2012Google Response on Patent Marking
February 17, 2012Latest date for Google to file Response to Third Cockburn Damages Report as well as any related Daubert motion
February 17, 2012Oracle Response to Google Assertions on Patent Marking
February 21, 2012Joint Submission on Patent Marking Stipulations
February 24, 2012Latest date for Oracle to file any Daubert motion in response to Google's Cockburn Response
March 9, 2012Opening Briefs on Copyright Issues
March 16, 2012Joint Filing on the matter of Oracle reimbursements to Google
March 19, 2012Earliest day for trial to commence per Final Pretrial Order
March 23, 2012Response Briefs on Copyright Issues

Of course, this timetable is incomplete because it does not provide a date by which the court's damages expert will produce his report. As such, the case remains a moving target.


**************

Docket

708 – Filed and Effective: 2/1/2012
ORDER
Document Text: ORDER REGARDING COPYRIGHT ISSUES. Signed by Judge Alsup on February 1, 2012. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/1/2012) (Entered: 02/01/2012)


**************

Document

708

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.

No. C 10-03561 WHA

ORDER REGARDING
COPYRIGHT ISSUES

____________________________________

To help frame copyright issues, this order requests that the parties each submit briefs regarding the main copyright liability issues at trial. In the 15-page opening briefs, please identify the remaining copyrights and the affirmative defenses for each claim of liability. Please include briefing on the burden of proof and allocation between the judge versus jury. For issues that should be resolved by the judge, please identify any underlying facts that first need to be decided by the jury. Provide authoritative citations. The opening briefs are due by NOON ON MARCH 9, 2012. Each party may submit ten-page responses. The response briefs are due by NOON ON MARCH 23, 2012. Please, no declarations or attachments.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 1, 2012.

/s/ William Alsup
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

  


Oracle v. Google - Moving the Case Along | 164 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here please
Authored by: jesse on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 09:08 AM EST
Thank you

[ Reply to This | # ]

News Pick discussions
Authored by: jesse on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 09:09 AM EST
Thank you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic discussions
Authored by: jesse on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 09:09 AM EST
Thank you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

COMES thread
Authored by: jesse on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 09:10 AM EST
Thank you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The judge has a time machine?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 10:51 AM EST
How could the case possibly begin on March 19 when the responses to the
copyright briefs are not due until March 23rd? According to the judge the first
part of the trial will deal with copyright, and you can bet that there will be
numerous issues to come out of these filings.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I like this Judge's style
Authored by: scav on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 01:59 PM EST
He sets out the programme of entertainment so much more
clearly and with a better sense of comedic pace than Kimball
or Stuart did.

Tomorrow should be good fun, but international sales of
popcorn should *really* show a spike on the 17th ;)

---
The emperor, undaunted by overwhelming evidence that he had no clothes,
redoubled his siege of Antarctica to extort tribute from the penguins.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Moving the Case Along - get along little dogies.
Authored by: cbc on Thursday, February 02 2012 @ 10:14 PM EST
Judge Alsup has been riding fence for a while. He knows where them dogies bust
out when they get riled and where the washes are that let'em slip under the
fence. With this order, he is roping them in. Oh, and did mention the ticking
clock (as in the movie "High Noon"). Choices must be made.

[ Reply to This | # ]
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details ) 		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
Powered By GeekLog
Created this page in 0.04 seconds