Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-03561/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-03561-289/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

GOOGLE INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 10-cv-03561-WHA (DMR)

ORDER RE NEW SUBMISSION

Re: Dkt. Nos. 1430, 1432

On January 14, 2016, the court held a hearing on Oracle’s motion to compel discovery 

regarding Google’s search distribution agreements. Docket No. 1404. At the conclusion of the 

hearing, the court ordered the parties to meet and confer and jointly submit a proposed order 

consistent with the court’s guidance by January 19, 2016. Docket No. 1428.

The parties appear to have reached agreement about much of their dispute. Nevertheless,

they submitted two competing proposed orders and two letters to the court. Docket Nos. 1430,

1431, 1432, 1433. By no later than January 20, 2016 at noon, the parties shall jointly file one 

proposed order containing the substance of their agreements, and leaving space for the following 

disputed issues to be decided by the court: 

1. Oracle’s new request for the estimated number of devices and other payments for each 

platform provider;

2. The temporal scope of the Google’s production; and 

3. The deadline for Oracle to object to the information provided by Google. 

The subject of the proposed order shall be limited to Google’s search distribution

agreements on non-Android, mobile platforms. See Oracle’s Motion to Compel [Docket No. 

1404] at 1-2 (“Oracle respectfully requests an order compelling Google to produce agreements 

regarding distribution of Google search services on mobile devices...”); January 14, 2016 Hearing 

Case 3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document 1434 Filed 01/19/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Tr. 8:7-10 (Oracle counsel: “I would offer to limit it to agreements for the ... payments associated 

with the distribution of Google’s search services on non-Android mobile platforms”); Tr. 23:5-10

(Oracle counsel limits request to agreements about “distribution of search”); Tr. 28: 22-25 (Oracle 

counsel explains that the requested information will show “the value that individual platforms can 

contribute to the distribution of search services”). 

Additionally, Google’s motion to seal a portion of the January 14, 2016 hearing transcript

is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 19, 2016

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document 1434 Filed 01/19/16 Page 2 of 2