SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – A federal judge threw out more sections of an expert report that favors Oracle in ongoing litigation over the use of patented Java in the Google Android operating system.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup said John Mitchell’s report impermissibly introduced new patent infringement theories. He struck other aspects of the report for the same reason last month.
Some parts of the report still remain, however, since they present infringement theories previously disclosed by Oracle in earlier filings with the court. And in one instance, Google had challenged aspects of the report that were examples of benefits of infringement, not theories of infringement, Alsup found.
Google had argued that Oracle did not include an application called “mBS Mobile” in its infringement contentions and tried to strike sections discussing the application from the record.
Alsup disagreed, finding that the paragraphs that discuss the application “do not present a new theory of infringement.” Local patent rules required Oracle to disclose its theories of infringement, “not to identify every evidentiary item of proof supporting those theories,” the decision states.
Google had characterized the challenged paragraphs as a new theory of indirect infringement, but Alsup said it failed to explain how Oracle’s disclosures concerning indirect infringement were inadequate to support the paragraphs in question.
The two sides also filed multiple other pretrial motions. Google asks the court in one filing to exclude parts of Oracle’s updated damages report. Among other filings, Oracle wants to preclude Google from offering arguments or evidence at trial that contradict statements made by a Google engineer who recommended licensing Javaq because the alternatives “all suck.”