Oracle America, Inc. et al v. Cedarcrestone, Inc
| Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle International Corporation |
| Cedarcrestone, Inc |
| 3:2012cv04626 |
| September 5, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| San Francisco |
| Nathanael M. Cousins |
| Copyrights |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
80
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO SHORTEN TIME 78 . Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery 75 set for 7/24/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom A, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Responses due by 7/11/2013. Replies due by 7/16/2013. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 7/9/13. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2013)
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER DENYING CEDARCRESTONE'S MOTION TO DISMISS ORACLE'S FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 48 . Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2013)
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO MODIFY DEADLINE TO AMEND PLEADINGS. Signed by Judge Nathanael M. Cousins on 04/12/2013. (nclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/12/2013)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AND THIRD AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, Motions terminated: 38 MOTION to Dismiss Second and Third Amended Counterclaims. Signed by Judge Nathanael M. Cousins on 04/03/2013. (nclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2013)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
