From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oracle USA, Inc. v. SAP AG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 8, 2011
No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)

Opinion

No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

11-08-2011

ORACLE USA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants.

BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP DONN P. PICKETT (SBN 72257) GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (SBN 157468) ZACHARY J. ALINDER (SBN 209009) BREE HANN (SBN 215695) BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (SBN 144177) FRED NORTON (SBN 224725) DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049) JENNIFER GLOSS (SBN 154227) Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., et al. Robert A. Mittelstaedt (SBN 060359) Jason McDonell (SBN 115084) Elaine Wallace (SBN 197882) JONES DAY Tharan Gregory Lanier (SBN 138784) Jane L. Froyd (SBN 220776) JONES DAY Scott W. Cowan (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Joshua L. Fuchs (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) JONES DAY Attorneys for Defendants SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and TOMORROWNOW, INC.


BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP

DONN P. PICKETT (SBN 72257)

GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (SBN 157468)

ZACHARY J. ALINDER (SBN 209009)

BREE HANN (SBN 215695)

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP

DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (SBN 144177) FRED NORTON (SBN 224725)

DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049)

JENNIFER GLOSS (SBN 154227)

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., et al.

Robert A. Mittelstaedt (SBN 060359)

Jason McDonell (SBN 115084)

Elaine Wallace (SBN 197882)

JONES DAY

Tharan Gregory Lanier (SBN 138784)

Jane L. Froyd (SBN 220776)

JONES DAY

Scott W. Cowan (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

Joshua L. Fuchs (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

JONES DAY

Attorneys for Defendants

SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and

TOMORROWNOW, INC.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

REGARDING DEADLINE TO ACCEPT OR

REJECT REMITTITUR


Date: N/A

Time: N/A

Place: 3rd Floor, Courtroom 3

Judge: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton

Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle International Corporation and Siebel Systems, Inc. ("Oracle") and Defendants SAP AG, SAP America, Inc., and TomorrowNow, Inc. ("Defendants" and together with Oracle the "Parties") submit this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order regarding the deadline for Oracle to accept or reject the remittitur.

WHEREAS, on September 1, 2011, this Court granted "a new trial as to actual damages, conditioned on Oracle's rejection of a remittitur to $272 million" and ordered that "Oracle shall submit a statement accepting or rejecting the remittitur no later than September 30, 2011 (or the parties shall submit a stipulated request for additional time, if necessary)." ECF No. 1081 at 20:13-19;

WHEREAS, on September 16, 2011, this Court extended the deadline to accept or reject the remittitur "until after this court has fully considered Oracle's request for an order certifying a request for interlocutory review, and has determined what if any question(s) may be certified; and for an additional 30 days beyond the date the Ninth Circuit either approves or denies any such application." ECF No. 1088 at 2:2-5;

WHEREAS, if the Court denies Oracle's request for certification, the Ninth Circuit will not approve or deny such application and the 30-day deadline will not run; and

WHEREAS the Parties desire to ensure that Oracle's deadline to accept or reject the remittitur will not expire while an interlocutory appeal is pending.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND REQUEST THE COURT TO ORDER that Oracle shall submit a statement accepting or rejecting the remittitur no later than:

(1) 30 days after issuance of an order by this Court denying Oracle's pending motion for certification (ECF No. 1089);

(2) if this Court grants Oracle's pending motion for certification, 30 days after issuance of an order by the Ninth Circuit denying application for leave to appeal;

(3) if this Court grants Oracle's pending motion for certification, the Ninth Circuit grants leave to appeal, and the Ninth Circuit affirms the Court's Order Granting Defendants' Motion for JMOL, and Motion for New Trial; Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion for New Trial; Order Partially Vacating Judgment (ECF No. 1081), 30 days after issuance of the Ninth Circuit's mandate; provided that the Parties hereby stipulate that the Ninth Circuit's issuance of its mandate shall be stayed pending any petition for certiorari and, if the Supreme Court grants certiorari, until the Supreme Court's final disposition.

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP

Geoffrey M. Howard

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., et al.

In accordance with General Order No. 45, Rule X, the above signatory attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatory below.

JONES DAY

Tharan Gregory Lanier

Counsel for Defendants

SAP AG, SAP AMERICA, INC., and

TOMORROWNOW, INC.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton


Summaries of

Oracle USA, Inc. v. SAP AG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Nov 8, 2011
No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)
Case details for

Oracle USA, Inc. v. SAP AG

Case Details

Full title:ORACLE USA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Nov 8, 2011

Citations

No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)