Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-03561/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-03561-260/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

ORDER RE ORACLE’S STATEMENT

REGARDING RULE 706 EXPERT

Oracle filed a statement complaining that Dr. Kearl has not produced the reports or his

testimony from the Apple v. Samsung case for evaluation (Dkt. No. 1311). Counsel for

Samsung produced redacted versions of the reports and testimony, but Oracle claims it was

difficult to understand the nature of Dr. Kearl’s analysis due to the redactions. Dr. Kearl has

filed a response explaining that the redactions were required by the protective order in Apple v.

Samsung and that Oracle failed to make an effort to acquire unredacted versionsof the

documents from Samsung in compliance with that protective order (Dkt. No. 1313). 

By SEPTEMBER 24 AT NOON, Oracle shall file a letter brief NOT TO EXCEED FIVE PAGES

responding to Dr. Kearl’s statement and detailing what relief, if any, this Court can order to

facilitate the production of the unredacted documents in compliance with the protective order in

Apple v. Samsung. Oracle should also explain why they have not sought relief from Judge Koh

and the Apple v. Samsung protective order. Dr. Kearl shall also file a letter brief addressing the

last issue. Oracle and Dr. Kearl shall also advise the Court of the expected timeline for

Case 3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document 1316 Filed 09/16/15 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

completing production of these documents and, if necessary, for Oracle to prepare any motions

to disqualify Dr. Kearl.

Oracle has moved to file portions of its letter and attachments thereto under seal, which

were designated “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY’S EYES

ONLY” by counsel for Samsung. Because Samsung has not appeared in this matter, Oracle

has not served it with the sealing motion herein, although it has served Dr. Kearl “with the

expectation that he will disseminate them to anyone who claims an interest” in the information. 

Dr. Kearl is hereby ORDERED to disseminate the contents of Oracle’s sealing motion to

counsel for Samsung, along with a copy of this order and the Order Approving Stipulated

Protective Order Subject to Stated Conditions herein (Dkt. No. 68). Samsung shall have until

SEPTEMBER 24 to submit a supporting declaration. Oracle’s sealing motion will be held in

abeyance until then.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 16, 2015. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document 1316 Filed 09/16/15 Page 2 of 2