In the five days after the hearing, counsel met and conferred about the discovery request in general. They did not discuss Google/Apple info
-
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
On January 19th, Google asked Oracle to join them in asking for that part of the transcript to be sealed. They gave them until noon next day
1 réponse 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
At 3:30, before Oracle had a chance to respond, Judge Ryu ruled against Google's motion. So Oracle shrugged it off.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Jan 20: Google files a motion for reconsideration.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Jan 21: Google's motion gets bounced because it's incorrectly filed.
2 réponses 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Jan 21: Google refiles motion for reconsideration.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Jan 21: Oracle files saying they have no position.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Jan 22: Ryu seals the transcript. Oracle tries to take credit for this by saying Ryu must have seen that Oracle "did not contest."
2 réponses 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
Why didn't Bloomberg publish on Jan 14 or they had a reporter at the hearing. Why wait for transcript?
2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime
my suspicion is that bloomberg wasn't even there
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.