(CN) – Google once again argued that its experts should not be stricken from an upcoming San Francisco trial to determine whether the Android phone operating system infringes on Oracle’s patented Java applications.
Google attorney Robert Van Nest said Oracle’s own expert report is “arbitrary and result-oriented,” and Oracle’s “tit-for-tat motion to strike” does not show any reason to exclude the testimony of Google experts Dr. Gregory Leonard and Dr. Alan Cox.
Oracle had no valid objection to Drs. Leonard and Cox using statements by Google employees to form the factual basis of their expert report, according to Google.
“Google has no intention of … having its experts testify as to ‘facts’ entirely on the say-so of Google witnesses, without allowing Oracle a fair chance to cross-examine those Google witnesses,” Van Nest wrote in the opposition.
The fact that the experts did not conduct tests on the Android phone is not a reason to strike their reports, Van Nest added.
“Oracle is certainly free to point out on cross-examination that Dr. Leonard and Dr. Cox didn’t conduct tests, but that should be the extent of it,” the brief states.
Google says Oracle did not offer any reason to strike the expert testimony.
“At most, it has identified a dispute between experts,” Van Nest wrote.
“Factual disputes or disagreements between experts are not grounds for striking expert testimony,” he continued. “They are the reason we have trials, rather than disposing of cases on summary judgment.”