Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-03561/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-03561-303/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

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

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

REQUEST FOR RESPONSE

Non-party LG Electronics, Inc., seeks to extend the deadline to file a motion for a

protective order objecting to Google’s intended production of four documents to Oracle (Dkt.

No. 1484). LG states that it received notice of Google’s intent to produce certain documents

that LG considered highly confidential on January 7, 2016. Google identified the specific

documents at issue on January 26. LG retained counsel to address this matter on February 5. 

Pursuant to the protective order in this action, LG’s motion for a protective order is due on

February 9. LG seeks to extend that deadline to February 23 because its counsel needs

additional time to get caught up on the complexity in this matter.

By NOON ON FEBRUARY 10, both sides should please state whether the production of

LG’s documents was part of fact discovery (which closed December 4) or expert discovery

(which closed January 21). In either case, Google should please explain why it only informed

LG of which documents it intended to produce after both discovery periods had closed. Both

sides shall also state whether they oppose LG’s request for an extension. Finally, LG should

Case 3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document 1490 Filed 02/09/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

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

2

please state why it did not retain counsel immediately after receiving notice that Google would

be producing documents LG considered highly confidential.

LG’s motion shall not be due until, at the earliest, the date on which the Court rules

on its motion for an extension. LG’s motion for a protective order should be directed at

Judge Ryu.

Dated: February 9, 2016. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document 1490 Filed 02/09/16 Page 2 of 2