This document is a complaint filed by Oracle Corporation, Oracle USA, Inc., and Oracle International Corporation against SAP AG, SAP America, Inc., TomorrowNow, Inc., and unnamed defendants. The complaint alleges that SAP employees illegally accessed Oracle's password-protected customer support website and copied over 10,000 of Oracle's proprietary software products and support materials. It claims SAP used this stolen intellectual property to offer cut-rate support services and attempt to transition Oracle customers to SAP's software. The complaint contains 11 causes of action including violations of copyright and fraud laws, interference with business, unfair competition, conversion, and civil conspiracy. Oracle is seeking damages and injunctive relief.
This sample renewed motion for California is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(b) on the grounds that the renewed motion should be granted due to new or different facts, circumstances or law discovered since the date of the order for which reconsideration is being requested. A renewed motion is NOT subject to any statutory time limitation. The sample on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities, a sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 235 sample legal documents.
Sample opposition to motion to enforce settlement agreement in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This document is an opposition to a motion to enforce a settlement agreement. It argues that the settlement agreement should not be enforced for three reasons: (1) the parties did not agree to all material terms; (2) the agreement was not signed by all parties or made orally in court as required by law; and (3) the moving party's dismissal of the lawsuit deprived the court of jurisdiction. It includes a memorandum of points and authorities and a declaration with exhibits to support these arguments against enforcing the agreement.
Sample motion to vacate judgment under rule 60(b)(1) in United States Bankrup...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a judgment or order in United States Bankruptcy Court is filed using the grounds of on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9024 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) . The sample on which this preview is based is 11 pages and contains brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal that has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale.
Sample motion to correct clerical error in California judgmentLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to correct a clerical error in a California judgment by amending the judgment is filed pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 473(d). The motion requests that the judgment be amended nunc pro tunc on the grounds that their clerical error has caused the judgment that was actually entered to not accurately reflect the outcome indicated when the judgment was originally declared. The sample on which this preview is based is 14 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority; sample declaration, proposed order and proof of service by mail.
Sample California motion to strike answer LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion and motion to strike an answer to a complaint filed in California Superior Court. It argues that the defendant's entire answer should be stricken because it was not verified, as required, even though the complaint was verified. Alternatively, it argues that all of the affirmative defenses in the answer should be stricken because they contain allegations that are irrelevant to the causes of action in the complaint. The motion is made pursuant to relevant sections of the California Code of Civil Procedure and seeks to strike specific affirmative defenses on the stated grounds.
Sample California motion to vacate judgment and enter different judgment unde...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to set aside and vacate judgment and enter another and different judgment for California is made under Code of Civil Procedure section 663 on the grounds that the judgment is based on an incorrect or erroneous legal basis that is not consistent with or not supported by the facts or a judgment or decree is not consistent with or not supported by the special verdict. The sample document on which this preview is based is 15 pages and contains brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and a proof of service by mail.
Sample meet and confer declaration for motion for judgment on the pleadings i...LegalDocsPro
This document is a declaration regarding compliance with meet and confer requirements before filing a motion for judgment on the pleadings, as required by Section 439(a) of the California Code of Civil Procedure. It states that the declarant attempted to meet and confer with the opposing party/counsel to resolve objections to be raised in the motion, but an agreement could not be reached. It then declares under penalty of perjury that the requirements were complied with.
Sample California motion to vacate order of dismissalLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate order of dismissal in California is made under Code of Civil Procedure section 473 on the grounds that the order of dismissal was taken against the moving party through their mistake and inadvertence. The sample on which this preview is based is 13 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declarations and a proof of service by mail.
This sample renewed motion for California is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(b) on the grounds that the renewed motion should be granted due to new or different facts, circumstances or law discovered since the date of the order for which reconsideration is being requested. A renewed motion is NOT subject to any statutory time limitation. The sample on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities, a sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 235 sample legal documents.
Sample opposition to motion to enforce settlement agreement in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This document is an opposition to a motion to enforce a settlement agreement. It argues that the settlement agreement should not be enforced for three reasons: (1) the parties did not agree to all material terms; (2) the agreement was not signed by all parties or made orally in court as required by law; and (3) the moving party's dismissal of the lawsuit deprived the court of jurisdiction. It includes a memorandum of points and authorities and a declaration with exhibits to support these arguments against enforcing the agreement.
Sample motion to vacate judgment under rule 60(b)(1) in United States Bankrup...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a judgment or order in United States Bankruptcy Court is filed using the grounds of on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9024 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) . The sample on which this preview is based is 11 pages and contains brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal that has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale.
Sample motion to correct clerical error in California judgmentLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to correct a clerical error in a California judgment by amending the judgment is filed pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 473(d). The motion requests that the judgment be amended nunc pro tunc on the grounds that their clerical error has caused the judgment that was actually entered to not accurately reflect the outcome indicated when the judgment was originally declared. The sample on which this preview is based is 14 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority; sample declaration, proposed order and proof of service by mail.
Sample California motion to strike answer LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion and motion to strike an answer to a complaint filed in California Superior Court. It argues that the defendant's entire answer should be stricken because it was not verified, as required, even though the complaint was verified. Alternatively, it argues that all of the affirmative defenses in the answer should be stricken because they contain allegations that are irrelevant to the causes of action in the complaint. The motion is made pursuant to relevant sections of the California Code of Civil Procedure and seeks to strike specific affirmative defenses on the stated grounds.
Sample California motion to vacate judgment and enter different judgment unde...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to set aside and vacate judgment and enter another and different judgment for California is made under Code of Civil Procedure section 663 on the grounds that the judgment is based on an incorrect or erroneous legal basis that is not consistent with or not supported by the facts or a judgment or decree is not consistent with or not supported by the special verdict. The sample document on which this preview is based is 15 pages and contains brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and a proof of service by mail.
Sample meet and confer declaration for motion for judgment on the pleadings i...LegalDocsPro
This document is a declaration regarding compliance with meet and confer requirements before filing a motion for judgment on the pleadings, as required by Section 439(a) of the California Code of Civil Procedure. It states that the declarant attempted to meet and confer with the opposing party/counsel to resolve objections to be raised in the motion, but an agreement could not be reached. It then declares under penalty of perjury that the requirements were complied with.
Sample California motion to vacate order of dismissalLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate order of dismissal in California is made under Code of Civil Procedure section 473 on the grounds that the order of dismissal was taken against the moving party through their mistake and inadvertence. The sample on which this preview is based is 13 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declarations and a proof of service by mail.
Sample opposition to order to show cause for civil contempt in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample opposition to an order to show cause for civil contempt in California is made on the grounds that (1) the opposing party has not willfully violated the terms of any Court orders, (2) the party charging them with contempt has failed to meet their burden of proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in that they have failed to submit competent evidence that would support a finding that they willfully violated the TRO, which is an essential element of a finding of contempt. The sample opposition also requests that the Court hold a full and fair evidentiary hearing in which they are allowed to confront and cross-examine all witnesses against them. The sample on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service. The author is a legal entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
Sample motion to vacate judgment under rule 60(b)(2) in United States Distric...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a judgment under Rule 60(b)(2) on the grounds of newly discovered evidence in United States District Court is used when a party has newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b). The sample on which this preview based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, a sample declaration and proof of service by mail.
Sample plaintiffs opposition to motion for judgment on the pleadings in Calif...LegalDocsPro
This document is an opposition to a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed in a California Superior Court. It was submitted by an attorney on behalf of their client, the plaintiff, to oppose the defendant's motion. The opposition argues that the complaint does state valid causes of action and the defendant's demurrer lacks merit. It includes a brief statement of facts about the underlying lawsuit and causes of action in the original complaint. The memorandum provides arguments for why the motion should be denied under the relevant code of civil procedure.
Sample ex parte application for continuance of trial date for California evic...LegalDocsPro
This sample ex-parte application for a continuance of trial date in an unlawful detainer (eviction) in California is filed under the provisions of California Rule of Court 3.1332 and Code of Civil Procedure section 1170.5 and contends that a continuance is necessary due to illness of a party or witness or other grounds specified in California Rule of Court 3.1332. The sample on which this preview is based is 15 pages and include brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and sample declaration regarding notice of ex-parte hearing and proposed order.
Sample California motion to vacate judgment with attorney affidavit of faultLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a default judgment in California is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 473 and is used by an attorney when their mistake, inadvertance, or neglect has resulted in a default, judgment or dismissal being entered against their client. This sample is ONLY for use by attorneys as it contains an attorney affidavit of fault. The sample motion on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes a memorandum of points and authorities, sample declaration of attorney and proof of service by mail.
Sample motion to vacate judgment under Rule 60(b)(3) in United States Distric...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a judgment in United States District Court is filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) on the grounds of fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party which prevented the moving party from fairly presenting their case. The sample on which this preview is based is 11 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995.
Sample motion to vacate judgment for fraud on the court under rule 60(d)(3)LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion and motion to vacate a judgment for fraud on the court. It was filed in a United States District Court by an attorney representing a defendant seeking to vacate a judgment entered against their client. The motion alleges that the judgment was obtained through fraud on the court, briefly listing facts regarding the fraud. It notices a hearing date and time and states that the motion is brought under Rule 60(d)(3) and will be supported by a memorandum, declaration, and exhibits providing details on the alleged fraud on the court.
Sample California motion for reconsideration under Code of Civi Procedure sec...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion for reconsideration for California is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a) on the grounds that the motion for reconsideration should be granted due to new or different facts, circumstances or law discovered since the date of the order for which reconsideration is being requested. The sample on which this preview is based is 9 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities, a sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 235 sample legal documents.
Sample California demurrer to complaint for breach of contractLegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of demurrer and demurrer to a complaint filed by a defendant. It summarizes that the defendant is demurring to the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth causes of action in the plaintiff's complaint. The defendant argues that the first, third and fifth causes of action for breach of contract fail to state whether the alleged contracts are written, oral, or implied. The defendant also argues that the breach of contract causes of action fail to state sufficient facts or attach the alleged contracts. The defendant requests that the demurrer be granted in its entirety.
Sample motion to vacate California divorce judgment for fraud and perjuryLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a dissolution (divorce) judgment in California on the grounds of fraud and perjury is filed pursuant to the provisions of California Family Code sections 2122(a) and (b). This sample can also be used to vacate a legal separation or nullity judgment in California as well. The sample on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and a sample declaration.
Sample California motion to bifurcate marital statusLegalDocsPro
This sample points and authorities in support of a motion to bifurcate marital status in California is filed under the provisions of Family Code section 2337 and is used when a party is requesting an early and separate trial on the issue of dissolution of marital status, the sample also requests an early and separate trial on other issues as well pursuant to California Rule of Court 5.390(b). The sample on which this preview is based is 8 pages and contains brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and a sample declaration. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 245 sample legal documents.
Sample notice of change of address for California divorceLegalDocsPro
This sample notice of change of address for a California divorce is used under the provisions of California Rule of Court 2.200 which requires every attorney or party whose mailing address, telephone number, fax number, or e-mail address, if one was provided, changes while an action is pending must serve on all parties and file a written notice of the change. The sample is in Microsoft Word format and can be easily modified. The author is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
Sample motion for leave to amend answer in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for leave to amend an Answer in California is filed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 473(a) and 576 on the grounds that allowing an amended Answer to be filed would further the interests of justice. The sample on which this preview is based is 12 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail.
Sample ex parte application for TRO and preliminary injunction in United Stat...LegalDocsPro
This sample ex parte application for temporary restraining order in United States District Court also requests the issuance of a preliminary injunction pending the trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a) and (b) on the grounds that the plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, substantial irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted. The sample on which this preview is based is 16 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proposed order. The author is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
Sample California complaint to vacate judgmentLegalDocsPro
This sample California complaint to set aside and vacate a judgment is a collateral attack on a judgment also known as an independent action in equity to vacate a judgment. The sample on which this preview is based is 7 pages and contains brief instructions and two causes of action (1) to set aside and vacate the judgment on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction due to defective and invalid service of process, and (2) to set aside and vacate the judgment on the grounds that it was procured through extrinsic fraud or mistake.
Sample motion for Family Code section 271 sanctions in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for Family Code section 271 sanctions in California may be filed in any dissolution (divorce), legal separation or nullity action in California and is designed to be used in conjunction with a Request for Order Judicial Council Form FL-300. The motion is used to request an award of damages and sanctions under Family Code section 271 and 1100, et seq. on the grounds that the conduct of the other party and/or their attorney frustrated any expeditious settlement of the case and caused the moving party to have to incur additional costs and attorney’s fees as a result of the obstreperous conduct. The sample document on which this preview is based is 15 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and sample declaration.
Sample opposition to motion to vacate in California with an attorney affidavi...LegalDocsPro
This document is an opposition to a motion to vacate a default judgment. It argues that the motion to vacate should be denied for the following reasons: (1) the motion is untimely as it was filed more than 6 months after the default judgment was entered, exceeding the statutory limit; (2) the required affidavit of fault from the attorney is not included; and (3) the attorney is attempting to cover up for the client's fault. The opposition requests that the court deny the motion to vacate based on the arguments in this document, an accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, and a supporting declaration.
Sample California motion to vacate default judgment for extrinsic fraud or mi...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a California default judgment on the grounds of extrinsic fraud or mistake is made under the inherent equitable power of a California Court to vacate a judgment obtained through extrinsic fraud or mistake. This is a preview of the sample motion sold by LegalDocsPro.
Sample California motion to vacate default judgment under ccp section 473LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a default judgment in California on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect is made pursuant to Section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The sample contains a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority. This is a preview of the sample motion sold by LegalDocsPro.
This document is the user's guide for Oracle Demand Planning Release 11i. It contains information about copyright and licensing of the software. It describes the contents and organization of the manual. The manual is intended to help users understand how to use Oracle Demand Planning to perform demand planning activities like creating worksheets, modifying data, and running batch processes.
This document provides an overview and instructions for using the Oracle Process Manufacturing Inventory APIs. It describes the technical requirements, architecture, and structure of the APIs. The document also covers error handling, installation, and engineering notes. It provides detailed descriptions and parameters for several Inventory APIs, including the Item Create, Item Lot/Sublot Conversion, Inventory Quantities, and Lot Create APIs.
Sample opposition to order to show cause for civil contempt in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample opposition to an order to show cause for civil contempt in California is made on the grounds that (1) the opposing party has not willfully violated the terms of any Court orders, (2) the party charging them with contempt has failed to meet their burden of proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in that they have failed to submit competent evidence that would support a finding that they willfully violated the TRO, which is an essential element of a finding of contempt. The sample opposition also requests that the Court hold a full and fair evidentiary hearing in which they are allowed to confront and cross-examine all witnesses against them. The sample on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service. The author is a legal entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
Sample motion to vacate judgment under rule 60(b)(2) in United States Distric...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a judgment under Rule 60(b)(2) on the grounds of newly discovered evidence in United States District Court is used when a party has newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b). The sample on which this preview based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, a sample declaration and proof of service by mail.
Sample plaintiffs opposition to motion for judgment on the pleadings in Calif...LegalDocsPro
This document is an opposition to a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed in a California Superior Court. It was submitted by an attorney on behalf of their client, the plaintiff, to oppose the defendant's motion. The opposition argues that the complaint does state valid causes of action and the defendant's demurrer lacks merit. It includes a brief statement of facts about the underlying lawsuit and causes of action in the original complaint. The memorandum provides arguments for why the motion should be denied under the relevant code of civil procedure.
Sample ex parte application for continuance of trial date for California evic...LegalDocsPro
This sample ex-parte application for a continuance of trial date in an unlawful detainer (eviction) in California is filed under the provisions of California Rule of Court 3.1332 and Code of Civil Procedure section 1170.5 and contends that a continuance is necessary due to illness of a party or witness or other grounds specified in California Rule of Court 3.1332. The sample on which this preview is based is 15 pages and include brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and sample declaration regarding notice of ex-parte hearing and proposed order.
Sample California motion to vacate judgment with attorney affidavit of faultLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a default judgment in California is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 473 and is used by an attorney when their mistake, inadvertance, or neglect has resulted in a default, judgment or dismissal being entered against their client. This sample is ONLY for use by attorneys as it contains an attorney affidavit of fault. The sample motion on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes a memorandum of points and authorities, sample declaration of attorney and proof of service by mail.
Sample motion to vacate judgment under Rule 60(b)(3) in United States Distric...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a judgment in United States District Court is filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) on the grounds of fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party which prevented the moving party from fairly presenting their case. The sample on which this preview is based is 11 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995.
Sample motion to vacate judgment for fraud on the court under rule 60(d)(3)LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion and motion to vacate a judgment for fraud on the court. It was filed in a United States District Court by an attorney representing a defendant seeking to vacate a judgment entered against their client. The motion alleges that the judgment was obtained through fraud on the court, briefly listing facts regarding the fraud. It notices a hearing date and time and states that the motion is brought under Rule 60(d)(3) and will be supported by a memorandum, declaration, and exhibits providing details on the alleged fraud on the court.
Sample California motion for reconsideration under Code of Civi Procedure sec...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion for reconsideration for California is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a) on the grounds that the motion for reconsideration should be granted due to new or different facts, circumstances or law discovered since the date of the order for which reconsideration is being requested. The sample on which this preview is based is 9 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities, a sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 235 sample legal documents.
Sample California demurrer to complaint for breach of contractLegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of demurrer and demurrer to a complaint filed by a defendant. It summarizes that the defendant is demurring to the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth causes of action in the plaintiff's complaint. The defendant argues that the first, third and fifth causes of action for breach of contract fail to state whether the alleged contracts are written, oral, or implied. The defendant also argues that the breach of contract causes of action fail to state sufficient facts or attach the alleged contracts. The defendant requests that the demurrer be granted in its entirety.
Sample motion to vacate California divorce judgment for fraud and perjuryLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a dissolution (divorce) judgment in California on the grounds of fraud and perjury is filed pursuant to the provisions of California Family Code sections 2122(a) and (b). This sample can also be used to vacate a legal separation or nullity judgment in California as well. The sample on which this preview is based is 10 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and a sample declaration.
Sample California motion to bifurcate marital statusLegalDocsPro
This sample points and authorities in support of a motion to bifurcate marital status in California is filed under the provisions of Family Code section 2337 and is used when a party is requesting an early and separate trial on the issue of dissolution of marital status, the sample also requests an early and separate trial on other issues as well pursuant to California Rule of Court 5.390(b). The sample on which this preview is based is 8 pages and contains brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and a sample declaration. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 245 sample legal documents.
Sample notice of change of address for California divorceLegalDocsPro
This sample notice of change of address for a California divorce is used under the provisions of California Rule of Court 2.200 which requires every attorney or party whose mailing address, telephone number, fax number, or e-mail address, if one was provided, changes while an action is pending must serve on all parties and file a written notice of the change. The sample is in Microsoft Word format and can be easily modified. The author is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
Sample motion for leave to amend answer in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for leave to amend an Answer in California is filed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 473(a) and 576 on the grounds that allowing an amended Answer to be filed would further the interests of justice. The sample on which this preview is based is 12 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail.
Sample ex parte application for TRO and preliminary injunction in United Stat...LegalDocsPro
This sample ex parte application for temporary restraining order in United States District Court also requests the issuance of a preliminary injunction pending the trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a) and (b) on the grounds that the plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, substantial irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted. The sample on which this preview is based is 16 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proposed order. The author is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
Sample California complaint to vacate judgmentLegalDocsPro
This sample California complaint to set aside and vacate a judgment is a collateral attack on a judgment also known as an independent action in equity to vacate a judgment. The sample on which this preview is based is 7 pages and contains brief instructions and two causes of action (1) to set aside and vacate the judgment on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction due to defective and invalid service of process, and (2) to set aside and vacate the judgment on the grounds that it was procured through extrinsic fraud or mistake.
Sample motion for Family Code section 271 sanctions in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for Family Code section 271 sanctions in California may be filed in any dissolution (divorce), legal separation or nullity action in California and is designed to be used in conjunction with a Request for Order Judicial Council Form FL-300. The motion is used to request an award of damages and sanctions under Family Code section 271 and 1100, et seq. on the grounds that the conduct of the other party and/or their attorney frustrated any expeditious settlement of the case and caused the moving party to have to incur additional costs and attorney’s fees as a result of the obstreperous conduct. The sample document on which this preview is based is 15 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and sample declaration.
Sample opposition to motion to vacate in California with an attorney affidavi...LegalDocsPro
This document is an opposition to a motion to vacate a default judgment. It argues that the motion to vacate should be denied for the following reasons: (1) the motion is untimely as it was filed more than 6 months after the default judgment was entered, exceeding the statutory limit; (2) the required affidavit of fault from the attorney is not included; and (3) the attorney is attempting to cover up for the client's fault. The opposition requests that the court deny the motion to vacate based on the arguments in this document, an accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, and a supporting declaration.
Sample California motion to vacate default judgment for extrinsic fraud or mi...LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a California default judgment on the grounds of extrinsic fraud or mistake is made under the inherent equitable power of a California Court to vacate a judgment obtained through extrinsic fraud or mistake. This is a preview of the sample motion sold by LegalDocsPro.
Sample California motion to vacate default judgment under ccp section 473LegalDocsPro
This sample motion to vacate a default judgment in California on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect is made pursuant to Section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The sample contains a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority. This is a preview of the sample motion sold by LegalDocsPro.
This document is the user's guide for Oracle Demand Planning Release 11i. It contains information about copyright and licensing of the software. It describes the contents and organization of the manual. The manual is intended to help users understand how to use Oracle Demand Planning to perform demand planning activities like creating worksheets, modifying data, and running batch processes.
This document provides an overview and instructions for using the Oracle Process Manufacturing Inventory APIs. It describes the technical requirements, architecture, and structure of the APIs. The document also covers error handling, installation, and engineering notes. It provides detailed descriptions and parameters for several Inventory APIs, including the Item Create, Item Lot/Sublot Conversion, Inventory Quantities, and Lot Create APIs.
This document provides reference information for built-in subprograms in Oracle Forms Developer Graphics Builder. It includes subprograms for working with charts, connecting to and managing databases, displaying forms, manipulating graphic objects, and importing/exporting drawings and images. The document contains a table of contents listing the different categories of built-in subprograms covered.
This document is the user guide for Oracle Process Manufacturing Inventory Management, Release 11i. It describes how to use the inventory management functionality within Oracle Process Manufacturing, including setting up organizations, items, warehouses, lot control, and processing inventory transactions. The guide provides procedures for common tasks and describes the functionality and reports within inventory management.
1. Use the Copy Organization Interface window to create a new inventory organization record and assign it a group code.
2. Populate the record with the organization name, code, and location details. This will generate XML code for the new organization.
3. Additional records can be created for multiple new organizations by repeating steps 1-2. All records with the same group code will be processed together.
4. Submit the Copy Inventory Organization concurrent program, specifying the model organization, group code, and which setup data to copy. This will create the new organizations defined in the interface records.
This document provides reference information about Oracle Forms Developer built-in subprograms. It includes descriptions of individual built-in subprograms like ADD_GROUP_COLUMN, CALL_FORM, and CLEAR_BLOCK. The built-ins allow manipulating form objects and retrieving information during form execution. The document contains copyright information and instructions for reporting errors or providing feedback.
This document provides reference information about built-in subprograms in Oracle Forms. It begins with an overview of built-ins and descriptions of their syntax and usage. It then provides individual descriptions of over 200 built-in subprograms, listing their purposes, parameters, return values, and examples of use. The built-ins allow manipulation of forms, blocks, items, records, groups, menus and more through PL/SQL calls.
This document provides an API reference guide for Oracle Process Manufacturing. It contains information on APIs for areas such as cost management, process planning, quality management, process execution, and product development. The document includes a preface, table of contents and chapters describing the API packages and listings for each functional area. It is intended to help developers understand and use the Oracle Process Manufacturing APIs.
This document provides an overview and reference information for Oracle Process Manufacturing APIs. It describes:
- Understanding Oracle Process Manufacturing APIs and how they import data into application tables
- Getting API information from the Oracle Integration Repository and Electronic Technical Reference Manual
- Standard Oracle Applications packages used by the APIs
- Messages and errors returned by the APIs
The document contains chapters describing the Oracle Process Manufacturing APIs for areas like cost management, process planning, quality management, and more.
This document describes features in Oracle General Ledger for Latin American countries, including inflation adjustment, journal entry reconciliation, and journal allocation. It provides instructions for setting up and using these features, such as defining price indexes, submitting the inflation adjustment process, and creating journal allocations. Reports related to these features are also outlined.
Pivotal Big Data Suite: A Technical OverviewVMware Tanzu
How and why are companies like Uber, Netflix and AirBnB so successful, what you need to in order to become successful in the same way that they are and how Pivotal can help you with that.
Speaker: Les Klein, EMEA CTO Data, Pivotal
This document provides an overview and instructions for using Oracle Financials software, including descriptions of the applications, organizational models, accounting and reporting features, and guidelines for worldwide and compliant operations. It covers concepts for setting up the chart of accounts, handling multiple currencies and calendars, configuring intercompany accounting, and using reporting and analytics tools. The document is intended as a guide for understanding and implementing the key capabilities of Oracle Financials.
THE PEAK ORGANIZATION, INC.,PEAK COUNSEL, INC, PEAK DISCOVERY, INC., RICHARD EICHENBERG, ARNOLD SCHLANGER,
MICHAEL DALEWITZ, and PHILIP GREENBERG, DEFENDANTS
COPYRIGHT INFRINGMENT
HK VForum F5 apps centric security nov 4, 2016 - finalJuni Yan
This document discusses the need for a new, application-centric approach to cybersecurity. It notes that traditional network perimeter-based security is inadequate and that most security breaches now involve user identities and applications. It promotes governing application access and protecting applications to secure data across cloud, on-premises and future applications. The document advocates for a flexible security architecture using F5 technologies to assess risks, control access, and protect applications based on defined conditions.
Pivotal Big Data Suite: A Technical OverviewVMware Tanzu
Pivotal provides a suite of big data products including Pivotal Greenplum Database, Pivotal HDB, and Pivotal GemFire. Greenplum Database is an open source massively parallel processing data warehouse. HDB is an open source analytical database for Apache Hadoop. GemFire is an open source application and transaction data grid. The suite provides a complete platform for big data with deployment options, advanced data services, and flexible licensing.
This document is the Oracle Payables Reference Guide, Release 12. It provides reference material for Oracle Payables, including technical details about application use as well as general concepts. The guide is intended for use by anyone responsible for implementing or using Oracle Payables. It contains sections on expense reports and credit cards, payables open interface tables, purchase order matching database tables, and predefined setup for Oracle Subledger Accounting.
[TDC 2013] Integre um grid de dados em memória na sua ArquiteturaFernando Galdino
The document discusses using Oracle Coherence, which is a data grid product that allows for caching and distributed data storage in memory across a cluster. It provides an introduction to Coherence and examples of how it can be used, such as for caching database query results, distributing user session data across multiple application servers, and replicating data across different geographic regions. Use cases are also presented, such as for trading exchanges, telecommunications systems, and risk calculation applications.
This document provides an implementation guide for Oracle iSupplier Portal Release 12, outlining the setup, configuration, and customization needed to deploy the application. It describes core features for purchase order collaboration, shipments, invoices, payments, and inventory management. The guide also details how to set up supplier and buyer user management, registration, and administration.
This document provides instructions and guidelines for using Oracle FastFormula to define formulas for use with Oracle HRMS applications. It describes the components of formulas such as variables, functions, and statements. The document also includes examples of sample formulas for tasks like accruals, proration, validation, and more.
Similar to Oracle V Sap Legal Complaint Lawsuit (20)
Scientific And Legal Perspectives On Science Generated For Regulatory Activitieslegalwebsite
This document provides an overview and summary of Silas Walter Adams' 1958 book "The Legalized Crime of Banking and a Constitutional Remedy". The book argues that the Federal Reserve System allows private banks to create money and control credit in an unconstitutional manner. It tells a story about how a farmer lost his life savings of $3,600 when a small town bank failed after the cashier took the money and fled. This sparked the author's 52-year study of banking practices and money creation. The book suggests reforms for Congress to transition money creation from private banks to the U.S. Treasury in a way that does not harm anyone's constitutional rights or disrupt the economy.
Rule Legal Services, General Counsel, And Miscellaneous Claims Service Organi...legalwebsite
Linguistic processing techniques like morphological analysis and use of ontologies can improve recall for document characterization in legal discovery by expanding search queries. Semantic analysis of documents and queries can improve precision of searches by returning only documents that precisely match the intended relationships between entities. Linguistic processing can also aid redaction of sensitive information by better detecting entities and relations. While more computationally intensive than keyword searches, these techniques can scale to large document collections through two-stage processing and creation of semantically indexed resources.
Notice Grant And Cooperative Agreement Awards Civil Legal Services To Eligibl...legalwebsite
This document announces the Legal Services Corporation's (LSC) intention to award grants and contracts beginning January 1, 2008 to provide legal services to low-income clients. It lists the organizations that will receive funding and the amounts proposed for each grant. A total of $322 million is expected to be awarded among 121 grants to organizations serving all 50 states, 6 territories and the District of Columbia. Public comments on the awards are requested by December 19, 2007.
Libraries And Legal Research By Lance M Werner Libraries Andlegalwebsite
This document summarizes electronic resources for researching tax law as it relates to charitable nonprofits. It begins with broad resources like Google and FindLaw, then discusses narrower federal resources from the IRS website including forms, publications, and case law. Specific Michigan resources are also outlined, such as the Department of Treasury website containing state tax information for nonprofits. The document concludes that these free online resources provide a basic toolkit for nonprofit tax law research, and legal librarians can offer additional guidance.
Introduction To The Symposium On Legal Externships 2 Learning ...legalwebsite
This document introduces a symposium on legal externships that took place in 2003. It summarizes six papers presented at the symposium that were published in the Clinical Law Review. The papers address topics like ethics issues in externships, evaluating student professional development, training field supervisors and students, and embracing civic engagement in clinical programs. Externship programs have grown substantially and now exist at nearly every law school.
Introduction To The Symposium On Legal Externships 2 Learning ... 1legalwebsite
The document introduces a symposium on legal externships from a conference held in 2003. It summarizes six papers presented at the conference that examine various aspects of legal externships, including issues of ethics, student evaluation and mentoring, training for field supervisors and students, regulation of externship programs, the history of ABA standards for externships, and promoting civic engagement through externships. It also provides context on the growth of externships in legal education and resources for further information.
Information Inflation Can The Legal System Adaptlegalwebsite
This document discusses how information has undergone a massive increase or "inflation" in recent years due to technological advances like digitization, real-time computing, and the internet. This "information inflation" has stressed the legal system by making it nearly impossible for lawyers to search through and manage all available information, especially in litigation. The document suggests lawyers will need to change how they collaborate, use new search technologies, innovate rules around inadvertent disclosure, and embrace new approaches to managing information.
Court Of Appeals Upholds Gander Mountain Legal Victorylegalwebsite
The three judge panel unanimously upheld Gander Mountain's legal victory against their rival Cabela's. The original judgment granted Gander Mountain's motion for summary judgment, denied Cabela's motion, and dismissed Cabela's counterclaims. The ruling allows Gander Mountain to use its trademarks in direct marketing to consumers. Gander Mountain's CEO praised the decision that will allow them to grow direct business sales through catalogs and the internet.
This agreement is for the sale of a 999-year leasehold property from the vendor to the purchaser. The key terms are:
1) The vendor agrees to sell and assign the leasehold property to the purchaser for the remaining period of the lease in exchange for a price of [amount], with [amount] paid as earnest money and the balance to be paid upon completion.
2) The sale is to be completed within four months by the vendor executing a deed of assignment. Possession of the property will be delivered to the purchaser upon completion.
3) Either party has the right to cancel the agreement if the other party defaults in completing the sale within the stipulated period.
Adams The Legalized Crime Of Banking And A Constitutional Remedy (1958)legalwebsite
The document discusses beliefs regarding the individual income tax. It provides 30 statements of fact and belief covering topics such as:
1) The definition of income according to the US Supreme Court as gain derived from capital, labor, or both.
2) Labor being considered a form of property protected by the 13th Amendment.
3) Sections of the Internal Revenue Code used to determine gain from the sale of property and whether an individual would have gross income or taxable income in the absence of gain.
4) Employment taxes being separate from individual income taxes.
The document provides numerous citations to court cases and sections of the US Code to support its statements. It aims to establish that without gain or
Activating Legal Protections For Archaeological Remainslegalwebsite
This document discusses predictive risk factors for negative outcomes following abortion and the implications for screening and informed consent. It notes that while research on abortion's effects has limitations, it has reliably identified risk factors that predict higher risks of adverse reactions for some women. The failure to adequately screen for these known risk factors means women are not fully informed of risks specific to their situation and may experience avoidable negative consequences as a result. Improved screening could help reduce abortion rates among high-risk women and better serve women's health needs.
Abortion Decisions And The Duty To Screen Clinical, Ethical, And Legal Implic...legalwebsite
This document discusses lessons learned from a redevelopment project in Oakland, California that threatened the archaeological remains of one of the city's earliest Chinatowns. It outlines how community members had to actively work to ensure the developer met their legal obligations to protect potential archaeological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act. Some key lessons included the need for thorough archaeological studies using appropriate methods, oversight of the archaeological work, and long-term curation of any artifacts. The experience highlights the important role of communities in preserving historical and archaeological resources associated with Chinese American heritage sites.
537 Legal Questions About The Income Tax Codelegalwebsite
This document is an introduction to Silas Walter Adams' 1958 book "The Legalized Crime of Banking and a Constitutional Remedy". It provides background on the author and discusses some of the key topics that will be covered in the book, including:
- The high cost of World War II to taxpayers due to the Federal Reserve System, including $1.87 trillion spent to date with another $130 billion expected by 1980.
- If Congress had taken over money creation and people's deposits in 1933 instead of the Federal Reserve, World War II would have cost $250 billion, saving over $1.6 trillion.
- Annual costs of future wars due to bankers will be $32 billion, totaling
The Future Of Civil Legal Aid In The United Stateslegalwebsite
This document discusses the history and current state of civil legal aid in the United States. It outlines how legal aid began in the late 19th century and expanded in the 1960s through federal programs. While funding has increased overall, the system remains underfunded compared to other developed nations. The system now includes LSC-funded programs alongside many non-LSC state and local programs, as well as pro bono efforts. States are working to better integrate these resources into comprehensive statewide systems to improve access to justice. However, more funding is still needed to meet the legal needs of low-income Americans.
The Legal Rdf Ontology A Generic Model For Legal Documentslegalwebsite
1. The Legal-RDF ontology models the layout, content, and metadata of legal documents using directed acyclic graphs (DAGs).
2. Core classes include DAGNode and DAGModel, which represent nodes and models in a DAG. All classes derive from CoreResource, allowing Dublin Core metadata to be associated with any resource.
3. The ontology distinguishes between predicate verbs and nouns to provide an intuitive vocabulary for modeling statements. It categorizes classes based on elements of a dramatic production, such as actors, roles, and scenes.
Summary Of The Report Of The Senate Legal And Constitutionallegalwebsite
The Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee report summarized concerns about the Exposure Draft of Australia's Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Bill 2005. The report noted that many submissions argued the consultation period was too short and that the draft rules were not released in time for consideration. Additionally, submissions expressed that the Bill needed a more genuine risk-based approach consistent with international standards. The Committee agreed more consultation was needed and encouraged utilizing industry expertise to develop risk-based measures and ensure consensus on applying a risk-based approach.
Seeking A Legal Name Change For A Legal Name Changelegalwebsite
A legal name change requires opening a court case in the family division of circuit court. The petitioner must be a Macomb County resident for at least one year prior to filing. The filing fee is $150. For a name change, individuals must complete the Petition to Change Name and Publication of Notice of Hearing forms and submit them to the Macomb County Clerk's Office along with the fee. Fingerprinting is required for those over 22 years old. The whole process takes approximately 2 months. Additional forms may be needed depending on the petitioner's age and circumstances. If approved by the judge, a certified copy of the name change order can then be obtained for $12.
Report On The Legal Program To Board Of Directors Andlegalwebsite
This document summarizes the Lawyers' Committee's legal program for the 2006 elections. It acknowledges the many partners and volunteers who contributed to election protection efforts across multiple states. It provides an overview of election protection components, including a hotline and local command centers. It also includes individual summaries of election protection activities in 14 states.
Private International Legal Research An Introduction.legalwebsite
Private international law governs commercial and business disputes among countries or private parties. There are three levels of international trade agreements: bilateral, multilateral, and supranational regional agreements. Key organizations that work on harmonizing private international law include UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT, and the Hague Conference on Private International Law. International commercial arbitration is an important mechanism for resolving cross-border commercial disputes.
Please Note This Is Not A Legal Document This Transcriptlegalwebsite
This document provides a transcript of a meeting discussing the report "Learning for Change in Healthcare". The meeting participants introduce themselves and share personal motivations and experiences related to widening participation in healthcare careers. They discuss challenges related to supporting learning and career development for existing staff. Paul Loveland then provides opening remarks, welcoming participants and noting the importance of the report and upcoming debate on learning in the healthcare workforce.
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...SOFTTECHHUB
The choice of an operating system plays a pivotal role in shaping our computing experience. For decades, Microsoft's Windows has dominated the market, offering a familiar and widely adopted platform for personal and professional use. However, as technological advancements continue to push the boundaries of innovation, alternative operating systems have emerged, challenging the status quo and offering users a fresh perspective on computing.
One such alternative that has garnered significant attention and acclaim is Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, a sleek, powerful, and user-friendly Linux distribution that promises to redefine the way we interact with our devices. With its focus on performance, security, and customization, Nitrux Linux presents a compelling case for those seeking to break free from the constraints of proprietary software and embrace the freedom and flexibility of open-source computing.
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
Building Production Ready Search Pipelines with Spark and MilvusZilliz
Spark is the widely used ETL tool for processing, indexing and ingesting data to serving stack for search. Milvus is the production-ready open-source vector database. In this talk we will show how to use Spark to process unstructured data to extract vector representations, and push the vectors to Milvus vector database for search serving.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technologies, XML continues to play a vital role in structuring, storing, and transporting data across diverse systems. The recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) present new methodologies for enhancing XML development workflows, introducing efficiency, automation, and intelligent capabilities. This presentation will outline the scope and perspective of utilizing AI in XML development. The potential benefits and the possible pitfalls will be highlighted, providing a balanced view of the subject.
We will explore the capabilities of AI in understanding XML markup languages and autonomously creating structured XML content. Additionally, we will examine the capacity of AI to enrich plain text with appropriate XML markup. Practical examples and methodological guidelines will be provided to elucidate how AI can be effectively prompted to interpret and generate accurate XML markup.
Further emphasis will be placed on the role of AI in developing XSLT, or schemas such as XSD and Schematron. We will address the techniques and strategies adopted to create prompts for generating code, explaining code, or refactoring the code, and the results achieved.
The discussion will extend to how AI can be used to transform XML content. In particular, the focus will be on the use of AI XPath extension functions in XSLT, Schematron, Schematron Quick Fixes, or for XML content refactoring.
The presentation aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of AI usage in XML development, providing attendees with the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Whether you’re at the early stages of adopting AI or considering integrating it in advanced XML development, this presentation will cover all levels of expertise.
By highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of integrating AI with XML development tools and languages, the presentation seeks to inspire thoughtful conversation around the future of XML development. We’ll not only delve into the technical aspects of AI-powered XML development but also discuss practical implications and possible future directions.
Programming Foundation Models with DSPy - Meetup SlidesZilliz
Prompting language models is hard, while programming language models is easy. In this talk, I will discuss the state-of-the-art framework DSPy for programming foundation models with its powerful optimizers and runtime constraint system.
Let's Integrate MuleSoft RPA, COMPOSER, APM with AWS IDP along with Slackshyamraj55
Discover the seamless integration of RPA (Robotic Process Automation), COMPOSER, and APM with AWS IDP enhanced with Slack notifications. Explore how these technologies converge to streamline workflows, optimize performance, and ensure secure access, all while leveraging the power of AWS IDP and real-time communication via Slack notifications.
“An Outlook of the Ongoing and Future Relationship between Blockchain Technologies and Process-aware Information Systems.” Invited talk at the joint workshop on Blockchain for Information Systems (BC4IS) and Blockchain for Trusted Data Sharing (B4TDS), co-located with with the 36th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE), 3 June 2024, Limassol, Cyprus.
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 5. In this session, we will cover CI/CD with devops.
Topics covered:
CI/CD with in UiPath
End-to-end overview of CI/CD pipeline with Azure devops
Speaker:
Lyndsey Byblow, Test Suite Sales Engineer @ UiPath, Inc.
Unlocking Productivity: Leveraging the Potential of Copilot in Microsoft 365, a presentation by Christoforos Vlachos, Senior Solutions Manager – Modern Workplace, Uni Systems
Essentials of Automations: The Art of Triggers and Actions in FMESafe Software
In this second installment of our Essentials of Automations webinar series, we’ll explore the landscape of triggers and actions, guiding you through the nuances of authoring and adapting workspaces for seamless automations. Gain an understanding of the full spectrum of triggers and actions available in FME, empowering you to enhance your workspaces for efficient automation.
We’ll kick things off by showcasing the most commonly used event-based triggers, introducing you to various automation workflows like manual triggers, schedules, directory watchers, and more. Plus, see how these elements play out in real scenarios.
Whether you’re tweaking your current setup or building from the ground up, this session will arm you with the tools and insights needed to transform your FME usage into a powerhouse of productivity. Join us to discover effective strategies that simplify complex processes, enhancing your productivity and transforming your data management practices with FME. Let’s turn complexity into clarity and make your workspaces work wonders!
Driving Business Innovation: Latest Generative AI Advancements & Success StorySafe Software
Are you ready to revolutionize how you handle data? Join us for a webinar where we’ll bring you up to speed with the latest advancements in Generative AI technology and discover how leveraging FME with tools from giants like Google Gemini, Amazon, and Microsoft OpenAI can supercharge your workflow efficiency.
During the hour, we’ll take you through:
Guest Speaker Segment with Hannah Barrington: Dive into the world of dynamic real estate marketing with Hannah, the Marketing Manager at Workspace Group. Hear firsthand how their team generates engaging descriptions for thousands of office units by integrating diverse data sources—from PDF floorplans to web pages—using FME transformers, like OpenAIVisionConnector and AnthropicVisionConnector. This use case will show you how GenAI can streamline content creation for marketing across the board.
Ollama Use Case: Learn how Scenario Specialist Dmitri Bagh has utilized Ollama within FME to input data, create custom models, and enhance security protocols. This segment will include demos to illustrate the full capabilities of FME in AI-driven processes.
Custom AI Models: Discover how to leverage FME to build personalized AI models using your data. Whether it’s populating a model with local data for added security or integrating public AI tools, find out how FME facilitates a versatile and secure approach to AI.
We’ll wrap up with a live Q&A session where you can engage with our experts on your specific use cases, and learn more about optimizing your data workflows with AI.
This webinar is ideal for professionals seeking to harness the power of AI within their data management systems while ensuring high levels of customization and security. Whether you're a novice or an expert, gain actionable insights and strategies to elevate your data processes. Join us to see how FME and AI can revolutionize how you work with data!
Full-RAG: A modern architecture for hyper-personalizationZilliz
Mike Del Balso, CEO & Co-Founder at Tecton, presents "Full RAG," a novel approach to AI recommendation systems, aiming to push beyond the limitations of traditional models through a deep integration of contextual insights and real-time data, leveraging the Retrieval-Augmented Generation architecture. This talk will outline Full RAG's potential to significantly enhance personalization, address engineering challenges such as data management and model training, and introduce data enrichment with reranking as a key solution. Attendees will gain crucial insights into the importance of hyperpersonalization in AI, the capabilities of Full RAG for advanced personalization, and strategies for managing complex data integrations for deploying cutting-edge AI solutions.
Goodbye Windows 11: Make Way for Nitrux Linux 3.5.0!SOFTTECHHUB
As the digital landscape continually evolves, operating systems play a critical role in shaping user experiences and productivity. The launch of Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 marks a significant milestone, offering a robust alternative to traditional systems such as Windows 11. This article delves into the essence of Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, exploring its unique features, advantages, and how it stands as a compelling choice for both casual users and tech enthusiasts.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 6DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 6. In this session, we will cover Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI.
UiPath Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI webinar offers an in-depth exploration of leveraging cutting-edge technologies for test automation within the UiPath platform. Attendees will delve into the integration of generative AI, a test automation solution, with Open AI advanced natural language processing capabilities.
Throughout the session, participants will discover how this synergy empowers testers to automate repetitive tasks, enhance testing accuracy, and expedite the software testing life cycle. Topics covered include the seamless integration process, practical use cases, and the benefits of harnessing AI-driven automation for UiPath testing initiatives. By attending this webinar, testers, and automation professionals can gain valuable insights into harnessing the power of AI to optimize their test automation workflows within the UiPath ecosystem, ultimately driving efficiency and quality in software development processes.
What will you get from this session?
1. Insights into integrating generative AI.
2. Understanding how this integration enhances test automation within the UiPath platform
3. Practical demonstrations
4. Exploration of real-world use cases illustrating the benefits of AI-driven test automation for UiPath
Topics covered:
What is generative AI
Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI.
UiPath integration with generative AI
Speaker:
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 6
Oracle V Sap Legal Complaint Lawsuit
1. 1 BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP
CHRISTOPHER B. HOCKETT (SBN 121539)
2 GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (SBN 157468)
ZACHARY J. ALINDER (SBN 209009)
3 BREE HANN (SBN 215695)
Three Embarcadero Center
4 San Francisco, CA 94111-4067
Telephone: (415) 393-2000
5 Facsimile: (415) 393-2286
chris.hockett@bingham.com
6 geoff.howard@bingham.com
zachary.alinder@bingham.com
7 bree.hann@bingham.com
8 DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049)
JEFFREY S. ROSS (SBN 138172)
9
500 Oracle Parkway
M/S 5op7
10
Redwood City, CA 94070
11 Telephone: (650) 506-4846
Facsimile: (650) 506-7114
12 dorian.daley@oracle.com
jeff.ross@oracle.com
13
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
14
Oracle Corporation, Oracle USA, Inc.,
and Oracle International Corporation
15
16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
19
20
ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware CASE NO.
21
corporation, ORACLE USA, INC., a Colorado
corporation, and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
22
CORPORATION, a California corporation, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR:
23
Plaintiffs, (1) VIOLATIONS OF THE COMPUTER
v. FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT;
24
(2) VIOLATIONS OF THE COMPUTER
SAP AG, a German corporation, SAP DATA ACCESS AND FRAUD ACT;
25
AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation, (3) INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE
TOMORROWNOW, INC., a Texas corporation, WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC
26
and DOES 1-50, inclusive, ADVANTAGE;
(4) NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCE WITH
27
Defendants. PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC
ADVANTAGE;
28
COMPLAINT
2. 1 (5) UNFAIR COMPETITION;
(6) CONVERSION;
2 (7) TRESPASS TO CHATTELS;
(8) UNJUST ENRICHMENT /
3 RESTITUTION;
(9) CIVIL CONSPIRACY;
4 (10) AIDING AND ABETTING; AND
(11) AN ACCOUNTING.
5
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
6
7
Plaintiffs Oracle Corporation, Oracle USA, Inc. (“Oracle USA”), and Oracle
8
International Corporation (“OIC”) (together “Oracle” or “Plaintiffs”) for their Complaint against
9
Defendants SAP AG (“SAP AG”), SAP America, Inc. (“SAP America”), TomorrowNow, Inc.
10
(“SAP TN”), and Does 1 through 50 (collectively referred to as “SAP” or “Defendants”), allege
11
as follows based on their personal knowledge as for themselves, and on information and belief as
12
to the acts of others:
13
14 I. INTRODUCTION
1. This case is about corporate theft on a grand scale, committed by the
15
largest German software company – a conglomerate known as SAP. Oracle is a leading
16
developer of database and applications software, and SAP is Oracle’s largest enterprise
17
applications software competitor.
18
2. Oracle brings this lawsuit after discovering that SAP is engaged in
19
systematic, illegal access to – and taking from – Oracle’s computerized customer support
20
systems. Through this scheme, SAP has stolen thousands of proprietary, copyrighted software
21
products and other confidential materials that Oracle developed to service its own support
22
customers. SAP gained repeated and unauthorized access, in many cases by use of pretextual
23
customer log-in credentials, to Oracle’s proprietary, password-protected customer support
24
website. From that website, SAP has copied and swept thousands of Oracle software products
25
and other proprietary and confidential materials onto its own servers. As a result, SAP has
26
compiled an illegal library of Oracle’s copyrighted software code and other materials. This
27
storehouse of stolen Oracle intellectual property enables SAP to offer cut rate support services to
28
1
COMPLAINT
3. 1 customers who use Oracle software, and to attempt to lure them to SAP’s applications software
2 platform and away from Oracle’s. Through this Complaint, Oracle seeks to stop SAP’s illegal
3 intrusions and theft, to prevent SAP from using the materials it has illegally acquired to compete
4 with Oracle, and to recover damages and attorneys’ fees.
5 3. In late November 2006, there occurred unusually heavy download activity
6 on Oracle’s password-protected customer support website for its PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards
7 (“JDE”) product lines. That website, called Customer Connection, permits licensed Oracle
8 customers with active support agreements to download a wide array of copyrighted, proprietary
9 software programs and other support materials. Oracle has invested billions of dollars in
10 research, development, and engineering to create these materials, which include program
11 updates, software updates, bug fixes, patches, custom solutions, and instructional documents –
12 all copyrighted by Oracle – across the entire PeopleSoft and JDE family of software products
13 (the “Software and Support Materials”). Customers who have contracted for support with Oracle
14 have log-in credentials to access Customer Connection and download Software and Support
15 Materials. However, Oracle’s support contracts limit customers’ access and download rights to
16 Software and Support Materials pertaining to the customers’ licensed products. Customers have
17 no contractual right to download Software and Support Materials relating to software programs
18 they have not licensed from Oracle, or for which the customers did not purchase support rights.
19 4. The Software and Support Materials are a subset of the technical support
20 services that Oracle makes available to its customers that have licensed Oracle software
21 programs and purchased the right to receive technical support services related to them. The full
22 suite of technical support services (also known as “support” or “maintenance”) generally
23 includes three types of offerings that Oracle, like most other enterprise software vendors, makes
24 available to its licensed customers: (i) telephone or email access to Oracle’s support technicians
25 regarding the operation of Oracle’s software; (ii) software program code for the customers’
26 licensed software programs which adds new functionality or features to the software (generally
27 referred to as “software updates”), or that addresses errors or “bugs” in the software program
28 (generally referred to as “software patches”); and (iii) “knowledge management” articles that
2
COMPLAINT
4. 1 help with problem solving and provide suggestions relating to the customer’s use of licensed
2 software programs. Because of the complexity of enterprise software applications and the
3 business environments in which they run, regular software updates and patches and knowledge
4 management articles are critical components of a software maker’s support offering. For
5 purposes of this case, Oracle’s claims against SAP only concern Oracle’s Software and Support
6 Materials, and not Oracle’s provision of telephone or online assistance in response to customers’
7 support queries.
8 5. The access and download activity Oracle observed on its systems in late
9 November and December 2006 did not resemble the authorized, limited access to which its
10 customers were entitled. Instead, SAP employees using the log-in credentials of Oracle
11 customers with expired or soon-to-expire support rights had, in a matter of a few days or less,
12 accessed and copied thousands of individual Software and Support Materials. For a significant
13 number of these mass downloads, the users lacked any contractual right even to access, let alone
14 copy, the Software and Support Materials. The downloads spanned every library in the
15 Customer Connection support website. For example, using one customer’s credentials, SAP
16 suddenly downloaded an average of over 1,800 items per day for four days straight (compared to
17 that customer’s normal downloads averaging 20 per month). Other purported customers hit the
18 Oracle site and harvested Software and Support Materials after they had cancelled all support
19 with Oracle in favor of SAP TN. Moreover, these mass downloads captured Software and
20 Support Materials that were clearly of no use to the “customers” in whose names they were
21 taken. Indeed, the materials copied not only related to unlicensed products, but to entire Oracle
22 product families that the customers had not licensed.
23 6. For example, in January 2007, a user on an SAP TN computer signed in as
24 Oracle customer Honeywell International, Inc., a Fortune 100 technology and manufacturing
25 company, to access Oracle’s support system and copy literally thousands of Oracle’s Software
26 and Support Materials in virtually every product library in every line of business. This copying
27 went well beyond the products that Honeywell had licensed and to which it had authorized
28 access. In other examples, users from SAP TN logged in using the credentials of recently
3
COMPLAINT
5. 1 departed customers, like Metro Machine Corp., and downloaded Software and Support Materials
2 even after the customer had dropped its support rights with Oracle.
3 7. Oracle has found many examples of similar activity. Across its entire
4 library of Software and Support Materials in Customer Connection, Oracle to date has identified
5 more than 10,000 unauthorized downloads of Software and Support Materials relating to
6 hundreds of different software programs.
7 8. This systematic theft of Oracle’s Software and Support Materials did not
8 originate from any actual customer location. Rather, the access originated from an internet
9 protocol (IP) address in Bryan, Texas, an SAP America branch office location and home of its
10 wholly-owned subsidiary SAP TN. SAP TN is a company that purports to provide technical
11 support services on certain versions of Oracle’s PeopleSoft and JDE software programs. The
12 Bryan, Texas IP address used to access and download Oracle’s Software and Support Materials
13 is connected directly to SAP’s computer network. Indeed, Oracle’s server logs have recorded
14 access through this same IP address by computers labeled with SAP identifiers using SAP IP
15 addresses.
16 9. In many instances, including the ones described above, SAP employees
17 used the log-in IDs of multiple customers, combined with phony user log-in information, to gain
18 access to Oracle’s system under false pretexts. Employing these techniques, SAP users
19 effectively swept much of the contents of Oracle’s system onto SAP’s servers. These “customer
20 users” supplied user information (such as user name, email address, and phone number) that did
21 not match the customer at all. In some cases, this user information did not match anything: it
22 was fake. For example, some users logged in with the user names of “xx” “ss” “User” and
23 “NULL.” Others used phony email addresses like “test@testyomama.com” and fake phone
24 numbers such as “7777777777” and “123 456 7897.” In other cases, SAP blended log-in
25 information from multiple customers with fake information. For example, one user name
26 connected to an SAP IP address appears to have logged in using the credentials of seven different
27 customers in a span of just 15 days – all from SAP computers in Bryan, Texas. All of these
28 customers whose IDs SAP appropriated had one critical fact in common: they were, or
4
COMPLAINT
6. 1 were just about to become, new customers of SAP TN – SAP AG’s and SAP America’s
2 software support subsidiary whose sole purpose is to compete with Oracle.
3 10. As a result of this illegal activity, SAP apparently has now warehoused an
4 extensive library of Oracle’s proprietary, copyrighted Software and Support Materials. As
5 explained below, this theft appears to be an essential – and illegal – part of SAP’s competitive
6 strategy against Oracle.
7 * * *
8 11. In the world of enterprise software applications, revenue comes from three
9 basic activities: (a) license of the underlying software, (b) consulting relating to the
10 implementation and operation of the software, and (c) support contracts to keep the software
11 updated and upgraded. In January 2005, through SAP America, SAP AG acquired SAP TN, an
12 independent software support company founded by former PeopleSoft software engineers,
13 developers, and support technicians. Not by coincidence, Oracle had previously announced that
14 in January 2005 it would complete its acquisition of PeopleSoft, increasing Oracle’s potency as a
15 competitor to SAP AG for enterprise applications software, consulting, and support.
16 12. Industry observers noted this fundamental shift in the competitive
17 landscape. One industry analyst stated that, “Oracle Corp. is developing a ‘super set’ of
applications, combining features from the PeopleSoft and JDE1 software and its CEO Larry
18
19 Ellison has been vocal about his intentions to take market share away from SAP. Oracle said it
20 has thousands of developers building the new application suite, called Project Fusion, aimed at
21 taking market share from No. 1 ranked SAP.” Another mused, “After the acquisition of
22 PeopleSoft earlier this year, Oracle officially became a player on SAP’s turf.”
23 13. SAP AG’s hasty acquisition of SAP TN was widely perceived as a
24 response to the new competitive threat from Oracle. SAP’s own statements confirmed it. SAP
25 AG spokesman Bill Wohl vowed that SAP AG would use SAP TN to “keep the pressure on
26
1
“JDE” refers to J.D. Edwards World Solutions, a software company acquired by
27
PeopleSoft, Inc. in 2003.
28
5
COMPLAINT
7. 1 Oracle” by exploiting legacy PeopleSoft customers’ perceived unease about Oracle’s
2 commitment to support legacy PeopleSoft software. Publicly, SAP advertised this strategy as its
3 “Safe Passage” program, explicitly designed to transition customers away from Oracle products
4 and onto the SAP software platform. As reported in industry publications, SAP TN’s services
5 “form[ed] the basis of [SAP AG’s] Safe Passage initiative, a program aimed at siphoning off
6 valuable software maintenance revenue from Oracle and persuading Oracle customers to switch
7 software products [to SAP].” Although SAP America President and CEO, Bill McDermott,
8 committed to throw “a lot of additional resources” behind SAP TN (which consisted of only 37
9 employees in total), SAP appeared to focus more on growing the SAP TN sales force rather than
10 investing in or expanding SAP TN’s tiny development team. Indeed, SAP TN did not appear to
11 have the development capability to meet the support commitments advertised in the “Safe
12 Passage” brochures at any price, much less the 50% discount promoted by SAP. It certainly did
13 not match Oracle’s investment in development resources, or even come close to it. These facts
14 raised questions about how SAP could offer the type of comprehensive technical support
15 services on Oracle programs that customers of enterprise applications typically require.
16 14. Nevertheless, industry observers deemed the “Safe Passage” program
17 “measurably more aggressive,” and a sign that “SAP has taken the gloves off.” In connection
18 with the SAP TN acquisition, SAP America’s CEO, Bill McDermott, crowed “There’s nothing
19 that I love more than to win.” But win at what cost? SAP appears to have taken a short cut to
20 equip itself to support Oracle’s software programs at half Oracle’s price. SAP stole much of the
21 Software and Support Materials directly from Oracle.
22 15. SAP’s unlawful copying and theft includes, by way of example, the
23 following:
24 · More than 10,000 illicit downloads from Customer Connection between
25 September 2006 and January 2007, with indications that this number may
26 go significantly higher if traced further back in time.
27 · A systematic pattern of “sweeping” Oracle’s Customer Connection
28 support website from SAP TN servers just days before, or the day of, the
6
COMPLAINT
8. 1 expiration of a new SAP TN customer’s support contract with Oracle, or
2 in some cases on behalf of former Oracle customers with no access rights
3 to Oracle’s Software and Support Materials whatsoever.
4 · On multiple occasions, the indiscriminate, wholesale copying of vast
5 libraries of available Software and Support Materials from Oracle’s
6 Customer Connection support website through downloads too rapid to
7 permit any real-time use of the downloaded Software and Support
8 Material.
9 · The improper access to, and theft of, clearly-marked internal proprietary
10 Oracle support documents not available even to licensed, authorized
11 customers or through normal access to Oracle’s Customer Connection
12 system.
13 · Accessing and downloading Software and Support Materials across
14 multiple product lines in multiple lines of business available on the
15 Customer Connection support website, in the purported name of
16 customers that had never licensed those products and had no legal access
17 to them.
18 16. In short, to try to “keep the pressure on Oracle,” SAP has been engaged in
19 a systematic program of unfair, unlawful, and deceptive business practices that continues to this
20 day. Through its illegitimate and illegal business practices, SAP has taken Oracle’s Software
21 and Support Materials and apparently used them to insinuate itself into Oracle’s customer base,
22 and to attempt to convert these customers to SAP software applications. Oracle also has
23 concerns that SAP may have enhanced or improved its own software applications offerings using
24 information gleaned from Oracle’s Software and Support Materials. These illegal business
25 practices threaten to cause irreparable harm to Oracle, its many employees, and its customers.
26 Oracle has no adequate remedy at law for the harm threatened and caused by these acts.
27
28
7
COMPLAINT
9. 1 II. THE PARTIES
17. Oracle Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
2
business in Redwood City, County of San Mateo, State of California. Directly and through its
3
subsidiaries, Oracle Corporation develops and licenses database and applications software
4
programs and provides related services around the world.
5
18. Oracle USA is a Colorado corporation duly authorized to do business in
6
the State of California, with its principal place of business in Redwood City, County of San
7
Mateo, State of California. Oracle USA develops and licenses database and applications
8
software programs and provides related services. Oracle USA is the successor to PeopleSoft
9
USA, Inc., (“PeopleSoft”) and JDE.
10
19. OIC is a California corporation duly authorized to do business in the State
11
of California, with its only place of business in Redwood City, County of San Mateo, State of
12
California.
13
20. OIC is the owner of the copyrights at issue in this action. Oracle
14
Corporation and Oracle USA are the licensees of the copyrights at issue in this action. Oracle
15
Corporation and Oracle USA are authorized to license to end users the copyrighted computer
16
software programs and other works at issue in this action.
17
21. SAP AG is a German corporation with its principal place of business in
18
Walldorf, Germany.
19
22. SAP America is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
20
business in Newtown Square, Pennsylvania. SAP America is a wholly-owned subsidiary of SAP
21
AG.
22
23. SAP TN is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business in
23
Bryan, Texas. SAP TN is a wholly-owned subsidiary of SAP America. The corporate
24
relationship of the three named defendants is set forth in the chart below.
25
26
27
28
8
COMPLAINT
10. SAP AG
1
(German Parent Corporation)
2
3 SAP America
(Wholly-owned U.S. Subsidiary)
4
5
SAP TN
(Wholly-owned U.S. Subsidiary)
6
7
8 24. Oracle is currently unaware of the true names and capacities of Does 1
9 through 50, inclusive, whether individual, partnership, corporation, unincorporated association,
10 or otherwise, and therefore sues these defendants by such fictitious names. Oracle will amend
11 this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained.
12 25. Defendants all are doing business in and/or have directed their activities at
13 California, and specifically this judicial district. By way of example only, SAP America and
14 SAP TN advertise, promote, sell, license, service, and support customers in California and in this
15 judicial district. SAP AG negotiates and enters into software license and support agreements
16 directly within the United States and, specifically in this judicial district, negotiates certain
17 software-related contracts directly with Oracle that contain provisions by which SAP AG
18 consents to the jurisdiction of California courts and the application of California law. SAP AG
19 also holds an annual meeting of its Board of Directors in Palo Alto, California, and finances the
20 sales and promotional activities of both SAP America and SAP TN throughout the United States
21 and in California.
22 26. At all material times, through its 100% ownership of both SAP America
23 and SAP TN, SAP AG had both the right and the authority to control the actions of both
24 corporations. Similarly, at all material times, through its 100% ownership of SAP TN, SAP
25 America had both the right and authority to control the actions of SAP TN.
26 27. At all material times, each of the Defendants, including Does 1 through
27 50, was the agent, servant, employee, partner, joint venturer, representative, subsidiary, parent,
28 affiliate, alter ego, or co-conspirator of the others, had full knowledge of and gave substantial
9
COMPLAINT
11. 1 assistance to the alleged activities, and in doing the things alleged, each was acting within the
2 scope of such agency, service, employment, partnership, joint venture, representation, affiliation,
3 or conspiracy, and each is legally responsible for the acts and omissions of the others.
4 III. JURISDICTION
5 28. Oracle’s first cause of action arises under the Computer Fraud and Abuse
6 Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030 et seq., and this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action
7 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1030(g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. In addition, Oracle will seek to amend
8 this Complaint to add claims for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.
9 §§ 101, et seq., when the relevant copyright registrations issue, and the Court will have subject-
10 matter jurisdiction over those claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1338.
11 29. This Court has supplemental subject matter jurisdiction over the pendent
12 state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because these claims are so related to Oracle’s claims
13 under federal law that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common
14 nucleus of operative facts.
15 IV. VENUE
16 30. Venue in this district is appropriate, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, because
17 a substantial part of the events giving rise to the dispute occurred in this district, a substantial
18 part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated in this district, and the Court has
19 personal jurisdiction over each of the parties as alleged throughout this Complaint.
20 V. INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
21 31. Assignment is proper in this division under Civil L.R. 3-2 (c) and (d),
22 because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in San Mateo County
23 and a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated in San Mateo
24 County.
25 VI. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
26 A. Oracle’s Software and Support Materials
27 32. Oracle is the world’s largest enterprise software company, and the first to
28 receive J.D. Power & Associates’ global certification for outstanding service and support based
10
COMPLAINT
12. 1 on measuring customer satisfaction worldwide. Oracle develops, manufactures, markets,
2 distributes, and services software designed to help its customers manage and grow their business
3 operations. Oracle’s software offerings include database, middleware, and applications software
4 programs.
5 33. As is typical in the enterprise software industry, Oracle does not sell
6 ownership rights to its software or related support products to its customers. Instead, Oracle’s
7 customers purchase licenses that grant them limited rights to use specific Oracle software
8 programs with Oracle retaining all intellectual property rights in these works. In addition,
9 licensed customers can, and typically do, purchase some set of technical support services that
10 include the right to obtain upgraded products such as updates, bug fixes, or patches to those
11 software programs the customers have expressly licensed from Oracle and have the right to use.
12 34. Oracle’s license agreements with its customers may vary according to the
13 products licensed, including because the customers originally contracted with companies later
14 acquired by Oracle, but all of the relevant license agreements for what is now Oracle software set
15 comparable rules for access to, and use of, that software. Among other things, those rules
16 prohibit access to, or use of, any portion of the software not expressly licensed and paid for by
17 the licensee, and any sublicense, disclosure, use, rent, or lease of the software to third parties.
18 35. Oracle’s license agreements define Oracle’s confidential information to
19 include, without limitation, Oracle’s software, its object and source code, and any associated
20 documentation or service offerings. As defined in one illustrative license agreement, “software”
21 specifically includes the update products made available to customers as part of the support
22 contracts that customers purchased from Oracle.
23 36. Oracle also restricts access to the Customer Connection technical support
24 website, through the terms of use:
25 You agree that access to Customer Connection…will be granted
only to your designated Oracle technical support contacts and that
26 the Materials [on the support website] may be used solely in
support of your authorized use of the Oracle Programs for which
27 you hold a supported license from Oracle. Unless specifically
provided in your licensing or distribution agreement with Oracle,
28 the Materials may not be used to provide services for or to third
11
COMPLAINT
13. 1 parties and may not be shared with or accessed by third parties.
2
37. The terms of use explicitly describe the confidential nature of the material
3
on Customer Connection: “the information contained in the Materials [on Customer Connection]
4
is the confidential proprietary information of Oracle. You may not use, disclose, reproduce,
5
transmit, or otherwise copy in any form or by any means the information contained in the
6
Materials for any purpose, other than to support your authorized use of the Oracle Programs for
7
which you hold a supported license from Oracle….” (emphasis supplied)
8
38. Access to the secured areas of Customer Connection is also governed by
9
Special Terms of Use. By using the secured website, the user agrees to accept and comply with
10
these Special Terms of Use. The Special Terms of Use provide that access is only permitted via
11
the user’s “personal username and password” and that all materials on the secured website are
12
confidential and proprietary. The Special Terms of Use clearly provide that: “Use of such
13
CONFIDENTIAL and PROPRIETARY information and materials for any other purpose is
14
strictly prohibited.”
15
39. Prior to downloading Software and Support Materials from Oracle’s
16
support websites, a user must also specifically agree to additional terms of use and restrictions
17
specified in Oracle’s Legal Download Agreement:
18
Your username and password are provided to you for your sole use
19 in accessing this Server and are confidential information subject to
your existing confidentiality agreement with Oracle / PeopleSoft /
20 JDEdwards. If you do not have a confidentiality agreement in
effect with Oracle / PeopleSoft / JDEdwards, you are hereby
21 notified that your username and password are confidential
information and may only be distributed to persons within your
22 organization who have a legitimate business purpose for accessing
the materials contained on this server in furtherance of your
23 relationship with Oracle / PeopleSoft / JDEdwards.
24
40. The Legal Download Agreement also puts the user on notice as to the
25
confidential, proprietary and copyrighted nature of the Software and Support Materials available
26
for download:
27
Any software that is made available to download from this server
28 (“Software”) is the copyrighted work of Oracle / PeopleSoft /
12
COMPLAINT
14. 1 JDEdwards and/or its affiliates or suppliers. All Software is
confidential information of Oracle / PeopleSoft / JDEdwards and
2 its use and distribution is governed by the terms of the software
license agreement that is in effect between you and Oracle /
3 PeopleSoft / JDEdwards (“License Agreement”). The Software is
part of the Licensed Products under the License Agreement and
4 may only be downloaded if a valid License Agreement is in place
between you and Oracle / PeopleSoft / JDEdwards. The Software
5 is made available for downloading solely for use by licensed end
users according to the License Agreement and any reproduction or
6 redistribution of the Software not in accordance with the License
Agreement is expressly prohibited. WITHOUT LIMITING THE
7 FOREGOING, COPYING OR REPRODUCTION OF THE
SOFTWARE TO ANY OTHER SERVER OR LOCATION FOR
8 FURTHER REPRODUCTION OR REDISTRIBUTION IS
EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.
9
41. The Legal Download Agreement further restricts use of documents
10
downloaded from the website:
11
12 Permission to use Documents (such as white papers, press releases,
product or upgrade announcements, software action requests,
13 datasheets and FAQs) from this server (“Server”) is granted,
provided that (1) the below copyright notice appears in all copies
14 and that both the copyright notice and this permission notice
appear, (2) use of such Documents from this Server is for
15 informational and non-commercial or personal use only and will
not be copied or posted on any network computer or broadcast in
16 any media, and (3) no modifications of any Documents are made.
Use for any other purpose is expressly prohibited.
17
42. In addition, users accessing specific materials, such as a Software
18
Application Request (“SAR”) through the SAR Search Web Application, agree to additional
19
legal restrictions. These terms notify the user that the software available to download from
20
Oracle is Oracle’s copyrighted material. The terms further provide that the “software is part of
21
the Licensed Products under the License Agreement” and “is made available for downloading
22
solely for use by licensed end users according to the License Agreement. Any reproduction or
23
redistribution of the Software not in accordance with the License Agreement is expressly
24
prohibited.” To download a SAR, the user must click on a button indicating that it accepts these
25
terms.
26
27
28
13
COMPLAINT
15. 1 B. Oracle Threatens To Unseat SAP
43. On January 7, 2005, Oracle completed its acquisition of PeopleSoft to
2
emerge as the second-largest provider of business software applications in the world and the first
3
to rival SAP AG in market share, size, and geographic and product scope. As SAP America’s
4
Vice President of Operations, Richard Knowles, testified on June 23, 2004 at the trial on the
5
Department of Justice’s unsuccessful effort to block Oracle’s acquisition of PeopleSoft, the
6
combination revitalized Oracle overnight as a competitor in the business software applications
7
business. SAP AG suddenly found itself in a far different competitive environment than the one
8
in which it had grown comfortable. As SAP AG reeled, events unfolded at a rapid pace: eleven
9
days after its announcement, Oracle launched the newly-united company and unveiled, at its
10
headquarters with more than 48,000 people joining by Webcast and phone, how the nearly
11
50,000-strong combined workforce of Oracle and PeopleSoft would provide unparalleled
12
innovation and support to 23,000 business applications software customers throughout the world.
13
44. SAP AG’s top executives publicly downplayed the threat that a combined
14
Oracle and PeopleSoft entity would pose to its competitive position for business software
15
applications. SAP AG CEO Henning Kagermann claimed that even with PeopleSoft, Oracle
16
would “not [be] a competitor which could really hurt us.” After the merger, he even claimed to
17
wish Oracle “good luck” in competing with SAP AG.
18
45. But SAP AG had no answer for the business proposition the new Oracle
19
offered. Not only do many SAP AG customers use Oracle’s superior database software
20
programs, but now Oracle offered a deeper, broader product line of enterprise applications
21
software programs to compete against SAP AG.
22
46. Rather than improve its own products and offerings, SAP AG instead
23
considered how to undermine Oracle. One way was to hit at Oracle’s customer base – and
24
potentially increase its own – by acquiring and bankrolling a company that claimed the ability to
25
compete with Oracle support and maintenance services on Oracle’s own software products,
26
despite not owning any of the software code for, or intellectual property rights to, these same
27
products.
28
14
COMPLAINT
16. 1 C. SAP TN
47. In December 2004, SAP TN was a small software services company,
2
headquartered in Bryan, Texas and founded by former PeopleSoft employees. It claimed to
3
compete with PeopleSoft, JDE, and later, Oracle, by providing low-cost maintenance and support
4
services to PeopleSoft and JDE customers running assorted versions of these software programs.
5
SAP TN claimed that it could cut customer maintenance and support bills in half and give
6
customers a reprieve from software upgrade cycles by allowing customers to remain on older,
7
often outdated, versions of PeopleSoft or JDE software rather than moving to later versions by
8
implementing upgrades that the customers would receive by paying for support services from the
9
software vendors themselves. As one industry journalist explained, SAP TN promised to offer
10
such cheap support “because it is not investing millions of dollars in research and development
11
for future versions of the software; it instead focuses on simply keeping the software up and
12
running for an annual fee.”
13
14 D. SAP Responds To Oracle Competition With Its “Safe Passage” Scheme
48. As described in a glossy spread in a leading industry publication, in
15
December 2004, just weeks before Oracle would close the PeopleSoft acquisition, SAP TN
16
president Andrew Nelson got “the magic phone call” from Jim Mackey, SAP AG’s “front man
17
for SAP AG’s mergers and acquisitions strategy.” Mackey made Nelson an offer “he couldn’t
18
refuse.”
19
49. To retain full control over every detail of its scheme to lure away
20
customers from Oracle, and to use SAP TN to do it, SAP AG proposed to buy SAP TN outright
21
and make it a wholly-owned – and wholly-beholden – subsidiary. Acquiring SAP TN was not a
22
mere investment by SAP AG, but a calculated competitive move. As one industry observer put
23
it, SAP AG bought “another arrow in its quiver to hunt after Oracle’s customers.” Aligning with
24
SAP AG made little sense for SAP TN, however, because to the extent SAP AG successfully
25
undermined Oracle by having its customers move from Oracle’s software to SAP AG’s software,
26
SAP TN would eventually lose its customer base. So SAP AG had to make the price right. SAP
27
AG has refused to disclose the terms of its SAP TN purchase, but – with the Oracle/PeopleSoft
28
15
COMPLAINT
17. 1 deal about to close – the “magic phone call” conveyed terms rich enough that, in barely a month,
2 SAP TN agreed to the deal and cast its lot with SAP AG.
3 50. On January 19, 2005, SAP AG’s top executives unveiled SAP AG’s
4 acquisition of SAP TN as the centerpiece of its new “Safe Passage” scheme. SAP AG’s CEO,
5 Henning Kagermann, identified SAP TN as instrumental to the parent company’s “Safe Passage”
6 program, publicly indicating that SAP TN was authorized and intended to implement SAP AG’s
7 goals. SAP America’s CEO, Bill McDermott, publicly vowed to bankroll this effort to
8 undermine Oracle by putting “a lot of additional resources into TomorrowNow.” The Senior
9 Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of SAP Asia Pacific, Colin Sampson, admitted that
10 the SAP TN acquisition was “an integral part” of SAP’s Safe Passage program, which in turn
11 was part of SAP’s “ongoing strategy to compete with Oracle.” And SAP TN certainly knew its
12 role was to achieve SAP AG’s ends: as SAP TN’s CEO, Andrew Nelson, stated, “We're owned
13 by SAP. We want them to be successful.”
14 51. After the acquisition, SAP TN’s new parent companies directed it to begin
15 to implement a two-phase plan to increase SAP’s enterprise application market share. First, to
16 lure the support business over, SAP would offer cut-rate pricing combined with the promise of
17 essentially unlimited future support to former PeopleSoft and JDE support customers. Second,
18 in connection with converting Oracle customers to SAP support (via SAP TN), SAP would
19 aggressively campaign to migrate those customers to an SAP enterprise software platform. As
20 SAP AG Managing Director Alan Sedghi admitted, SAP AG would try to use SAP TN as a
21 means of “speeding-up” the migration of PeopleSoft and JDE users to SAP platforms.
22 52. The CEOs stated the proposition more bluntly. In April 2005, SAP
23 America CEO Bill McDermott claimed “The SAP Safe Passage offering gives companies an
24 affordable way to protect their current investments, ease integration with SAP NetWeaver(TM)
25 and begin the process of innovating their businesses today.” A month later, at the SAP AG
26 annual meeting, SAP AG CEO Henning Kagermann confirmed: “We worked with [SAP TN] to
27 very quickly set up a comprehensive program for SAP customers running PeopleSoft and JD
28 Edwards solutions.”
16
COMPLAINT
18. 1 53. SAP implemented Phase One immediately. As reflected on SAP AG’s
2 website: “SAP offers Safe Passage for PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, and Siebel customers – If
3 Oracle’s options have you worried, consider another option: SAP. SAP provides solutions,
4 technology and maintenance services.” (emphasis supplied) SAP America’s website promises
5 that “SAP and TomorrowNow can cut your maintenance costs by as much as 50% through
6 2015,” and elsewhere says that “Safe Passage maintenance and support are delivered worldwide
7 through TomorrowNow.” SAP TN’s website confirms its acceptance and undertaking of the
8 SAP-controlled Safe Passage program: “TomorrowNow can also provide our support services as
9 part of the SAP Safe Passage Program.”
10 54. Beginning in January 2005, SAP sales representatives unleashed a torrent
11 of marketing materials designed to exacerbate and leverage perceived, albeit unfounded,
12 PeopleSoft and JDE customer uncertainty about the prospects for long-term, quality support
13 from Oracle. An April 2005 SAP AG press release apparently aimed to increase perceived doubt
14 among Oracle customers by announcing a “second wave” of “Safe Passage.” To exploit the fear
15 it intended to create, SAP AG’s “second wave” included “an intensive customer recruitment
16 campaign, offering significantly lower cost maintenance alternatives to Oracle customers
17 running PSFT/JDE solutions” through 70,000 direct mail solicitations to Oracle customers.
18 These lower cost alternatives advertised by SAP AG were to come directly through SAP TN.
19 55. To implement Phase Two of its plan (luring Oracle customers to the SAP
20 enterprise software platform), SAP AG did not simply sit back and leave the recruiting of
21 potential Safe Passage customers to SAP TN’s sales force. Instead, it took a hands-on approach.
22 It deployed its salespeople to contact potential customers and push them to switch to SAP TN’s
23 services. If customers declined to convert to SAP TN, the SAP AG sales personnel would
24 pressure the customers to drop Oracle products outright in favor of SAP AG’s suite. To give
25 teeth to these commingled sales efforts, SAP AG offered maintenance support through SAP TN,
26 officially “bundled” with SAP AG enterprise software as a centerpiece of the Safe Passage
27 program.
28
17
COMPLAINT
19. 1 56. SAP executives touted the Safe Passage program’s limited success in its
2 first year. SAP AG’s CEO, Henning Kagermann, promised SAP AG would use SAP TN and the
3 Safe Passage program to “fight for” more customers. By March 2006, SAP AG boasted in a
4 press release that more than 200 customers had signed up for Safe Passage, the program it
5 implemented partly through SAP TN, and which it claimed “offers companies SAP solutions,
6 technology, maintenance services, investment protection and a clear road map to the next
7 generation of business software.”
8 57. However, as Oracle continued to take market share and expand its product
9 offerings, including through its September 12, 2005 announcement that it would acquire Siebel
10 Systems, SAP grew more desperate, and more aggressive. In October 2005, SAP announced it
11 would extend its Safe Passage program to Siebel customers, including apparently instantaneous
12 round the clock support from SAP TN – whose engineers at that time presumably had spent
13 virtually no time to develop Siebel support software products. As reported on Forbes.com after
14 Oracle’s announcement of its impending Siebel acquisition, “SAP AG plans to announce . . . that
15 it will offer technical support for more of rival software maker Oracle Corp.’s own products [the
16 Siebel products] for a far cheaper price.” SAP’s “cheaper price” (referred to elsewhere as “cut
17 rate” support) continued at “50 cents on the dollar for maintenance fees,” but its services were
18 expanded to support more Oracle product lines and a wider range of customers. SAP America
19 President and CEO, Bill McDermott, confirmed that SAP intended to use the Siebel acquisition
20 as another opportunity to lure Oracle customers to SAP stating that SAP is “not distracted by the
21 challenges of integrating multiple code bases, companies and corporate cultures.” How SAP
22 could offer instantaneous, round the clock Siebel code support within a few weeks of Oracle’s
23 acquisition announcement remained a mystery.
24 58. By July 2006, SAP AG CEO Henning Kagermann conceded that SAP had
25 lost as much as 2% market share to Oracle. At the same time, curiously, SAP AG continued to
26 tout the success of Safe Passage. In a July 2006 earnings call, SAP AG’s President of Customer
27 Solutions and Operations, Léo Apotheker, boasted that Safe Passage “continues to do really
28 well,” including because SAP AG “extended the program in order to offer it as well to Siebel
18
COMPLAINT
20. 1 customers.” By extending the Safe Passage program to Siebel customers, and in conjunction
2 with opening new SAP TN offices around the world, Apotheker claimed that SAP now had “a
3 global network of [SAP TN] capabilities” – enough to “gain[] significant traction.”
4 E. A Deal Too Good To Be True
5 59. Although SAP put a brave face on its ability to compete with the
6 increasingly potent Oracle applications offerings, some industry analysts wondered whether a
7 small company like SAP TN, even after having expanded its ranks to 150 employees, could
8 actually develop and offer the hundreds of regulatory updates, bug fixes, patches, and other
9 labor-intensive support items that a customer would need to maintain useful, optimally
10 functioning Oracle software, without infringing on Oracle’s intellectual property. Oracle, by
11 comparison, maintains a development force of more than 15,000 software and support engineers
12 to create and help implement the code fixes, patches, and updates that comprise the advanced
13 support services required by Oracle’s licensed customers.
14 60. It was not clear how SAP TN could offer, as it did on its website and its
15 other materials, “customized ongoing tax and regulatory updates,” “fixes for serious issues,”
16 “full upgrade script support,” and, most remarkably, “30-minute response time, 24x7x365” on
17 software programs for which it had no intellectual property rights. To compound the puzzle,
18 SAP continued to offer this comprehensive support to hundreds of customers at the “cut rate” of
19 50 cents on the dollar, and purported to add full support for an entirely different product line –
20 Siebel – with a wave of its hand. The economics, and the logic, simply did not add up.
21 61. Oracle has now solved this puzzle. To stave off the mounting competitive
22 threat from Oracle, SAP unlawfully accessed and copied Oracle’s Software and Support
23 Materials.
24 F. The SAP Solution: Stolen Passage
25 1. Oracle Finds A Suspicious Pattern
26 62. To analyze and improve on its industry leading support services, Oracle
27 asks each customer searching for a solution on Oracle’s Customer Connection website to click
28 on a button after each search to indicate whether or not a particular search result helped solve the
19
COMPLAINT
21. 1 customer’s problem. If the customer selects the “No, continue search” option, the support
2 system responds by offering the customer further options. Oracle regularly compiles this data to
3 assess whether its system helped customers resolve their support issues, with the aim of
4 continually improving the support system for customers.
5 63. In late 2006, Oracle noticed huge, unexplained spikes in the number of
6 customers on the online support website who had clicked the “No, continue search” option.
7 These clicks numbered in the thousands for several customers, and Oracle discovered that each
8 response – each answer by users pretending to be the customer – occurred in a matter of seconds
9 or less. Given the extreme speed at which the activity occurred, these clicks could not reflect
10 real responses from any human customers actually reading the solutions they had accessed.
11 Instead, these click patterns showed that the users had employed an automated process to move
12 with lightning speed through the entire library of Software and Support Materials on the
13 Customer Connection website. And, apparently, to take a copy of them all.
14 64. Indeed, Oracle soon discovered that many of these “customers” had taken
15 massive quantities of Software and Support Materials beyond their license rights, over and over
16 again. Oracle also discovered that the downloaded Software and Support Materials included
17 internal documents not available even to licensed customers and not available through normal,
18 authorized use of Customer Connection.
19 2. Oracle Discovers The SAP Link
20 65. Oracle embarked on a time-consuming and costly investigation to assess
21 the damage done to its customer response database and fully understand the sources of the
22 unauthorized downloads. In the course of this investigation, Oracle discovered a pattern.
23 Frequently, in the month before a customer’s Oracle support expired, a user purporting to be that
24 customer, employing the customer’s log-in credentials, would access Oracle’s system and
25 download large quantities of Software and Support Materials, including dozens, hundreds, or
26 thousands of products beyond the scope of the specific customer’s licensed products and
27 permitted access. Some of these apparent customer users even downloaded materials after their
28 contractual support rights had expired.
20
COMPLAINT
22. 1 66. Several of these apparent customer users supplied misleading
2 identification information as part of the log-on process to Oracle’s systems. The users
3 presumably intended this misinformation, which included false names and phone numbers, to
4 mask from Oracle their true identity and the fact of their improper access to the Software and
5 Support Materials. Despite this subterfuge, Oracle has traced the illegal download activity to
6 computers using an SAP IP address. When Oracle first noticed that the unlawful access and
7 downloads originated almost exclusively from one IP address in Bryan, Texas, Oracle shut down
8 access to that IP address. If the access and downloads had been legitimate, the customer or
9 vendor would have called in right away to get its access reinstated. Instead, a new IP address,
10 also linked to SAP, sprouted up almost immediately and the unlawful access and downloading
11 resumed.
12 67. Although it is now clear that the customers initially identified by Oracle as
13 engaged in the illegal downloads are SAP TN customers, those customers do not directly appear
14 to have engaged in the download activity; rather, the unlawful download activity observed by
15 Oracle and described here originates directly from SAP’s computer networks. Oracle’s support
16 servers have even received hits from URL addresses in the course of these unlawful downloads
17 with SAP TN directly in the name (e.g. http://hqitpc01.tomorrownow.com). Indeed, for many of
18 these downloads, Oracle noticed that SAP TN did not even bother to change the false user
19 information from customer to customer when it logged in.
20 68. The wholesale nature of this unlawful access and downloading was
21 extreme. SAP TN appears to have downloaded virtually every file, in every library that it could
22 find.
23 3. SAP TN’s Access Was Unauthorized
24 69. SAP TN’s access to, and taking from, Oracle’s system violated the terms
25 of the Oracle customers’ License Agreement, the Customer Connection Terms of Use, and the
26 Legal Download Agreement. These terms included agreeing:
27 · Not to access or use any portion of the Software, including updates,
28 not expressly licensed and paid for by the Licensee;
21
COMPLAINT
23. 1 · Not to directly or indirectly, sublicense, relicense, distribute, disclose,
2 use, rent, or lease the Software or Documentation, or any portion
3 thereof, for third party use, or third party training;
4 · Not to access the customer support system if it is not the customer’s
5 authorized and designated Oracle technical support contact;
6 · Not to use the Materials on the support website except in support of
7 the customer’s authorized use of the Oracle Programs for which the
8 customer holds a supported license from Oracle;
9 · That the customer username and password are for the customer’s sole
10 use in accessing this support server;
11 · That the customer username and password may only be distributed to
12 persons in the customer’s organization who have a legitimate
13 business purpose for accessing the materials contained on the
14 support server in furtherance of the customer’s relationship with
15 Oracle;
16 · That the Materials on the support website are confidential information
17 subject to existing confidentiality agreements.
18 70. SAP TN has intimate familiarity with these important restrictions and
19 conditions relating to Oracle’s Software and Support Materials. SAP TN’s management, and a
20 significant number of its employees, formerly worked at PeopleSoft and JDE. Of SAP TN’s ten-
21 member management team, six list prior employment experience with PeopleSoft, JDE, or
22 Oracle, including: (1) Andrew Nelson, President and CEO; (2) Bob Geib, V.P. North American
23 Sales; (3) Laura Sweetman, V.P. Global J.D. Edwards Support; (4) Mel Gadd, V.P. Quality; (5)
24 Nigel Pullan, V.P. International Sales; and (6) Shelley Nelson, V.P. Global PeopleSoft Support.
25 In addition, former PeopleSoft employees who work for SAP, such as Wade Walden, who is
26 reflected as the person performing many of the downloads at issue, appear to have applied their
27 familiarity with the Customer Connection website to directly participate in and perfect the illegal
28
22
COMPLAINT
24. 1 downloading scheme. In short, SAP TN cannot credibly claim ignorance of Oracle’s access
2 rules.
3 71. Notwithstanding SAP TN’s knowledge of Oracle’s license agreements
4 with its customers, the support website terms of use, and the confidential, proprietary, and
5 copyrighted nature of Oracle’s Software and Support Materials, Oracle has learned that SAP TN
6 accessed and downloaded the Software and Support Materials when it either had no legitimate
7 basis to access Oracle’s restricted website, or in a way that grossly violated the limited access
8 rights it did have. Further, during the period of time between when the customer’s support
9 license lapsed and when Oracle decommissioned the customer’s password credentials, SAP TN
10 still accessed and downloaded Software and Support Materials using the old customer
11 passwords. SAP TN did so despite its knowledge that it had no legal right or legitimate purpose
12 to access Oracle’s system at all after the customer’s support license lapsed.
13 72. SAP TN did not innocently download the Software and Support
14 Materials – the obvious purpose was to copy them from Oracle’s Customer Connection support
15 website and store them on SAP TN’s servers for its use in marketing and providing support
16 services to Oracle customers. The rate that SAP TN accessed these materials – at intervals of
17 just seconds or less – shows that no one used or reviewed those materials in real time. Further,
18 the scope of the downloaded Software and Support Materials – across multiple libraries in
19 multiple lines of business – for customers that had no license to take, or need for, those products,
20 suggests that SAP TN took the Software and Support Materials to stockpile a library to support
21 its present and prospective customers.
22 73. SAP TN conducted these high-tech raids as SAP AG’s agent and
23 instrumentality and as the cornerstone strategy of SAP AG’s highly-publicized Safe Passage
24 program. Further, to the extent SAP TN had any legitimate basis to access Oracle’s site as a
25 contract consultant for a customer with current licensed support rights, SAP TN committed to
26 abide by the same license obligations and usage terms and conditions described above applicable
27 to licensed customers. Indeed, anyone accessing such Software and Support Materials on the
28 Oracle support website must agree to Oracle’s terms and conditions, which restrict access to
23
COMPLAINT
25. 1 support only for products that a company has licensed, and impose strict confidentiality
2 requirements. SAP TN reviewed and agreed to the terms and conditions on Oracle’s support
3 website before proceeding, and therefore committed its theft knowingly and intentionally, and in
4 conscious disregard of Oracle’s protected intellectual property and the integrity of its computer
5 systems.
6 74. The Software and Support Materials that SAP TN downloaded from
7 Oracle’s systems also included numerous works that are protected under the Federal Copyright
8 Laws, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. SAP TN’s acts violated Oracle’s exclusive rights to use,
9 reproduce, create derivative works, publish, display, offer for sale, and distribute these works.
10 Such acts constitute copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 501 and also willful and
11 intentional copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 506. With literally thousands of software
12 programs available for licensing, Oracle does not typically obtain copyright registrations on all
13 programs or related Software and Support Materials as it generally does not find itself in the
14 position of having to enforce its copyrights through litigation to stop conduct constituting an
15 intentional infringement of Oracle’s rights. Accordingly, Oracle will amend its Complaint to add
16 further copyright allegations and causes of action when the registrations for these copyrights
17 issue from the United States Copyright Office.
18 4. Specific Examples Of SAP TN’s Unlawful Customer Downloads
19 75. SAP TN’s improper access to, and taking from, Oracle’s Customer
20 Connection website is too pervasive, and covers too many individual violations, to
21 comprehensively detail here. Oracle has uncovered unlicensed downloads linked to SAP TN on
22 behalf of numerous customers, including without limitation, Abbott Laboratories, Abitibi-
23 Consolidated, Inc., Bear, Stearns & Co., Berri Limited, Border Foods, Caterpillar Elphinstone,
24 Distribution & Auto Service, Fuelserv Limited, Grupo Costamex, Helzberg Diamonds, Herbert
25 Waldman, Honeywell International, Interbrew UK, Laird Plastics, Merck & Co., Metro Machine
26 Corp., Mortice Kern Systems, Inc., National Manufacturing, NGC Management Limited, OCE
27 Technologies, B.V., Ronis, S.A., Smithfield Foods, SPX Corporation, Stora Enso, Texas
28 Association of School Boards, VSM Group AB, and Yazaki North America. By way of example
24
COMPLAINT
26. 1 of the nature and extent of SAP’s theft, Oracle sets forth below illustrative instances of SAP
2 TN’s illegal conduct regarding a few of its customers.
3 76. Honeywell. Honeywell International (“Honeywell”) is listed on SAP
4 TN’s website as a client. In the approximately three and a half year period before Honeywell
5 switched to SAP TN, it averaged just over 20 downloads of Software and Support Materials per
6 month. Then, after switching to SAP TN, a user employing Honeywell’s log-in ID downloaded
7 over 7,000 Software and Support Materials in less than two weeks in January 2007. Most of
8 these excessive downloads came during the course of four days, during which “Honeywell” was
9 downloading almost 1800 solutions per day. Over 2,000 of the Software and Support Materials
10 taken in this period were solutions that Honeywell was not licensed to take at all. In one specific
11 library containing solutions for Enterprise One software, “Honeywell” downloaded over 450
12 distinct unlicensed solutions on January 16, 2007 and nearly 400 more the next day. These
13 downloads spanned virtually every library in every line of business – far beyond the products to
14 which Honeywell had authorized access as an Oracle customer. This unlawful downloading
15 even stretched across product families. Honeywell used and licensed PeopleSoft software
16 applications, but Oracle discovered users downloading JDE products with Honeywell’s
17 credentials. Oracle subsequently connected many of the illegal downloads to an SAP TN IP
18 address and to SAP TN’s employee, Wade Walden – a former PeopleSoft employee now
19 employed by SAP.
20 77. Merck. Merck & Company, Inc. (“Merck”), one of the largest
21 pharmaceutical companies in the world, licenses and receives support for many Oracle software
22 products. Merck’s support rights for its JDE software products expired on January 1, 2007. In
23 the three months prior to that date, users purporting to be “Merck” logged into the Oracle support
24 system and downloaded over 9,000 distinct Software and Support Materials for JDE software.
25 More than 5,000 of these downloads related to JDE software products for which Merck had no
26 license. But, the unauthorized downloads did not stop there. Users logging into Oracle’s support
27 system with Merck’s credentials continued to download Software and Support Materials into
28 March 2007. Many of these “Merck” downloads came directly from an IP address in Bryan,
25
COMPLAINT
27. 1 Texas that belongs to SAP TN, and some were traced to a computer with SAP TN’s initials in
2 the title, “TN-DL03.” In many cases, SAP TN users employed fake identification information to
3 download the Software and Support Materials, using names such as “xx” “ss” and “NULL,” and
4 phone numbers such as “4444444444” and “999 999 9999.” Neither Merck nor SAP TN had
5 any license, authorization or other right to access and download the 5,000-plus unlicensed
6 Software and Support Materials from Oracle.
7 78. OCE. OCE-Technologies B.V. (“OCE”) is located in the Netherlands and
8 appears as a customer on SAP TN’s website. In the months leading up to the expiration of
9 OCE’s support rights for its Oracle products, users employing OCE’s credentials downloaded a
10 large number of Oracle products relating to US Payroll, Canadian Payroll, Homebuilder
11 Management, and Real Estate Management – none of which make sense coming from a
12 European customer in support of its European business. From December of 2006 to January of
13 2007, SAP TN users logged into Oracle’s support system using OCE’s credentials (and, in some
14 cases, false user names) and downloaded over 12,000 distinct Software and Support Materials.
15 These downloads included over 3,000 distinct items for which OCE had no license. There is
16 little chance that SAP TN intended OCE as the beneficiary of these massive sweeps, since OCE
17 does not run many of the software programs to which these downloads relate, and neither OCE
18 nor SAP TN have any license, authorization, or other right to access and download these
19 Software and Support Materials. Like the other companies, these illegal downloads are
20 associated with the same IP address belonging to SAP TN in Bryan, Texas, including specifically
21 to a computer with SAP TN’s initials in the title, “TNL-02.” Similar to the other customer
22 examples, many of these “OCE” users entered phony identification information, such as the
23 name “user” and phone numbers such as “123 456 7897,” “9999999999,” and even “xxx xxx
24 xxxx.” This systematic sweep of products across numerous licensed and unlicensed Oracle
25 product lines and libraries dramatically exceeded the access for which OCE (and SAP TN acting
26 on its behalf) had any right or authority, and could serve no legitimate or lawful business
27 purpose.
28
26
COMPLAINT
28. 1 79. SPX. SPX Corporation (“SPX”) dropped all Oracle support on December
2 10, 2006 and became an SAP TN customer, listed on its website. For the nine month period
3 prior to October 2006, SPX averaged approximately eleven downloads per month from Oracle’s
4 support system. Then, between October and December 2006, users purporting to represent SPX
5 accessed and downloaded over 8,000 distinct Oracle Software and Support Materials (far more
6 than SPX could legitimately access or use). These SPX downloads included over 1,700 distinct
7 Software and Support Materials for which SPX had no license. Over 300 distinct downloads just
8 on November 30, 2006 were Software and Support Materials related to unlicensed Payroll
9 software. In some cases, these users logged in using SPX credentials, but used fake
10 identification information like the name “NULL” and phone numbers like “7777777777” and
11 “999 999 9999.” Many of these SPX downloads, like the others, originated from the same IP
12 address belonging to SAP TN, and some were traced to a computer with SAP TN’s initials in the
13 title, “tn-wts01.”
14 80. Metro Machine. Metro Machine Corp. (“Metro Machine”) dropped all
15 Oracle support effective on January 1, 2007 and switched to SAP TN, as reflected on SAP TN’s
16 website. In the month before Metro Machine dropped its support rights with Oracle, users
17 purporting to represent Metro Machine logged onto Oracle’s support servers and downloaded
18 nearly 6,000 distinct Software and Support Materials. Nearly 400 of those downloads related to
19 software programs that Metro Machine had not licensed from Oracle. In addition, users logging
20 into Oracle’s support system with Metro Machine’s credentials continued to download Software
21 and Support Materials into March 2007. Oracle has traced these illegal and unauthorized
22 downloads to the same SAP TN IP address employed for the Honeywell downloads described
23 above.
24 G. SAP Adds The Ill-Gotten Gains To Its Coffers
25 81. SAP TN now claims to have delivered thousands of fixes and more than
26 800 tax and regulatory updates to Oracle’s former customers. Not coincidentally, SAP TN, at
27 SAP AG’s and SAP America’s direction, illegally downloaded thousands of fixes and updates
28 from Oracle’s restricted customer support website. SAP AG and SAP America directed this
27
COMPLAINT
29. 1 download scheme, ratified it, and never disavowed it. Using Oracle’s own protected property to
2 unfairly compete against and undercut Oracle, SAP has illegally converted Oracle’s former,
3 current, and prospective customers and the associated license and support revenue to artificially
4 inflate its market share. SAP has thereby caused significant damage to Oracle through its SAP
5 TN subsidiary, in addition to the irreparable harm caused by Defendants’ unfair competition,
6 interference with Oracle’s business relationships, trespass on Oracle’s support website, and
7 related computer fraud.
8 First Claim for Relief
9 Violation of Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(2)(C) & (a)(4)
10 & a(5))
11 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
12 82. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
13 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
14 83. Defendants have violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C.
15 § 1030(a)(2)(C), by intentionally accessing a computer used for interstate commerce or
16 communication, without authorization or by exceeding authorized access to such a computer, and
17 by obtaining information from such a protected computer.
18 84. Defendants have violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. §
19 1030(a)(4) by knowingly, and with intent to defraud Oracle, accessing a protected computer,
20 without authorization or by exceeding authorized access to such a computer, and by means of
21 such conduct furthered the intended fraud and obtained one or more things of value, including
22 but not limited to Oracle’s Software and Support Materials.
23 85. Defendants have violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C.
24 § 1030(a)(5)(A)(i) by knowingly causing the transmission of a program, information, code, or
25 command and as a result intentionally causing damage without authorization to a protected
26 computer owned by Oracle.
27
28
28
COMPLAINT
30. 1 86. Defendants have violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C.
2 §§ 1030(a)(5)(A)(ii) & (iii) by intentionally accessing a protected computer without
3 authorization, causing damage to Oracle, recklessly or without due regard for their actions.
4 87. The computer system or systems that Defendants accessed as described
5 above constitute a “protected computer” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2).
6 88. Oracle has suffered damage and loss by reason of these violations,
7 including, without limitation, harm to Oracle’s data, programs, and computer systems and other
8 losses and damage in an amount to be proved at trial, but, in any event, in an amount well over
9 $5000 aggregated over a one-year period.
10 89. Defendants’ unlawful access to and theft from Oracle’s computers also
11 have caused Oracle irreparable injury. Unless restrained and enjoined, Defendants will continue
12 to commit such acts. Oracle’s remedy at law is not adequate to compensate it for these inflicted
13 and threatened injuries, entitling Oracle to remedies including injunctive relief as provided by 18
14 U.S.C. § 1030(g).
15 Second Claim for Relief
16 Computer Data Access and Fraud Act - Cal. Penal Code § 502
17 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
18 90. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
19 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
20 91. Defendants have violated California Penal Code § 502(c)(2) by knowingly
21 and fraudulently, and without permission, accessing, taking, copying, and making use of
22 programs, data, and files from Oracle’s computers, computer system, and/or computer network.
23 92. Defendants have violated California Penal Code § 502(c)(3) by
24 knowingly, fraudulently, and without permission accessing and using Oracle’s computer
25 services.
26 93. Defendants have violated California Penal Code § 502(c)(6) by
27 knowingly, fraudulently, and without permission providing, or assisting in providing, a means of
28 accessing Oracle’s computers, computer system, and/or computer network.
29
COMPLAINT
31. 1 94. Defendants have violated California Penal Code § 502(c)(7) by
2 knowingly, fraudulently, and without permission accessing, or causing to be accessed, Oracle’s
3 computers, computer system, and/or computer network.
4 95. Oracle owns the data that comprises the Software and Support Materials
5 obtained by Defendants as alleged above.
6 96. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct within
7 the meaning of California Penal Code § 502, Defendants have caused damage to Oracle in an
8 amount to be proven at trial. Oracle is also entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees
9 pursuant to California Penal Code § 502(e).
10 97. Oracle is informed and believes that the aforementioned acts of the
11 Defendants were willful and malicious in that Defendants’ acts described above were done with
12 the deliberate intent to injure Oracle’s business and improve its own. Oracle is therefore entitled
13 to punitive damages.
14 98. Oracle has also suffered irreparable injury from these acts, and due to the
15 continuing threat of such injury, has no adequate remedy at law, entitling Oracle to injunctive
16 relief.
17 Third Claim for Relief
18 Intentional Interference With Prospective Economic Advantage
19 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
20 99. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
21 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
22 100. Oracle has an expectancy in continuing and advantageous economic
23 relationships with current and prospective purchasers and licensees of Oracle’s support services
24 and software.
25 101. These relationships contained the probability of future economic benefit in
26 the form of profitable support service contracts and software licenses. Had Defendants refrained
27 from engaging in the unlawful and wrongful conduct described in this complaint, there is a
28
30
COMPLAINT
32. 1 substantial probability that Oracle support customers would have initiated, renewed, or expanded
2 support contracts and software licenses with Oracle rather than Defendants.
3 102. On information and belief, Defendants were aware of these economic
4 relationships and intended to interfere with and disrupt them by unlawfully and wrongfully
5 taking and using Oracle’s Software and Support Materials to obtain and retain Oracle’s own
6 customers at little to no cost. These acts were undertaken by Defendants to obtain for
7 themselves the software support contract revenue at Oracle’s expense, and without the cost of
8 competing fairly by independently developing the same support materials, and ultimately to
9 migrate such customers away from Oracle’s software programs and onto their own.
10 103. Defendants’ conduct was wrongful by a measure beyond the fact of the
11 interference itself. Defendants gained unauthorized access to Oracle’s password-protected
12 Customer Connection support website through false or improper credentials, copied Oracle’s
13 intellectual and contractual property, and used that property to obtain and retain Oracle’s current
14 and prospective clients.
15 104. This conduct, as alleged above, constitutes violations of numerous state
16 and federal statutes and codes, including, but not limited to, violation of the Federal Computer
17 Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 et seq., receipt of stolen property, Cal. Penal Code §
18 496, unauthorized access to computers, Cal. Penal Code § 502, wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343,
19 violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, fraud and related activity in connection with an access
20 device, 18 U.S.C. § 1029, and violation of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701-
21 11. Defendants’ conduct also constitutes trespass to chattels, conversion, unjust enrichment, and
22 conspiracy.
23 105. As a result of Defendants’ acts, the above-described relationships have
24 been actually disrupted, causing certain current and prospective support clients to contract with
25 Defendants instead of Oracle for their software support and maintenance and, in some cases, for
26 their enterprise software.
27 106. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions, Oracle has
28 suffered economic harm, including, but not limited to, loss of profits from sales or licenses to
31
COMPLAINT
33. 1 current and potential customers of Oracle support services and software programs. Defendants’
2 wrongful conduct was a substantial factor in causing this harm.
3 107. Unless Defendants are restrained by appropriate injunctive relief, their
4 actions are likely to recur and will cause Oracle irreparable injury for which there is no adequate
5 remedy at law.
6 108. Defendants’ interference with Oracle’s prospective economic advantage
7 with its current and future customers, as described above, was willful, malicious, oppressive, and
8 in conscious disregard of Oracle’s rights, and Oracle is therefore entitled to an award of punitive
9 damages to punish their wrongful conduct and deter future wrongful conduct.
10 Fourth Claim for Relief
11 Negligent Interference With Prospective Economic Advantage
12 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
13 109. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
14 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
15 110. Oracle has an expectancy in continuing and advantageous economic
16 relationships with current and prospective purchasers and licensees of Oracle’s support services
17 and software.
18 111. These relationships contain the probability of future economic benefit in
19 the form of profitable support service contracts and software licenses. Had Defendants refrained
20 from engaging in the unlawful and wrongful conduct described in this complaint, there is a
21 substantial probability that Oracle support customers would have initiated, renewed, or expanded
22 support contracts and software licenses with Oracle rather than Defendants.
23 112. Defendants knew or should have known about the economic relationship,
24 described above, and knew or should have known that these relationships would be interfered
25 with and disrupted if Defendants failed to act with reasonable care in their use of Oracle’s
26 Software and Support Materials. Defendants failed to act with reasonable care. Instead, they
27 used Oracle’s Software and Support Materials to obtain and retain for themselves software
28
32
COMPLAINT
34. 1 support contract revenue at Oracle’s expense and without the cost of competing fairly by
2 independently developing the same support materials.
3 113. Defendants’ conduct was wrongful by a measure beyond the fact of the
4 interference itself. Defendants gained unauthorized access to Oracle’s password-protected
5 Customer Connection support website through false or improper credentials, copied Oracle’s
6 intellectual and contractual property, and used that property to obtain and retain Oracle’s current
7 and prospective clients.
8 114. This conduct, as alleged above, constitutes violations of numerous state
9 and federal statutes and codes, including, but not limited to, violation of the Federal Computer
10 Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030 et seq., receipt of stolen property, Cal. Penal Code §
11 496, unauthorized access to computers, Cal. Penal Code § 502, wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343,
12 violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, fraud and related activity in connection with an access
13 device, 18 U.S.C. § 1029, and violation of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701-
14 11. Defendants’ conduct also constitutes trespass to chattels, conversion, unjust enrichment, and
15 conspiracy.
16 115. As a result of Defendants’ acts, the above-described relationships have
17 been actually disrupted, causing certain current and prospective support clients to contract with
18 Defendants instead of Oracle for their software support and maintenance and, in some cases, for
19 their enterprise software.
20 116. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions, Oracle has
21 suffered economic harm, including, but not limited to, loss of profits from sales to current and
22 potential customers of Oracle support, maintenance, and software products. Defendants’
23 wrongful conduct was a substantial factor in causing this harm.
24 117. Unless Defendants are restrained by appropriate injunctive relief, their
25 actions are likely to recur and will cause Oracle irreparable injury for which there is no adequate
26 remedy at law.
27
28
33
COMPLAINT
35. 1 Fifth Claim for Relief
2 Unfair Competition - Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200
3 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
4 118. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
5 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
6 119. Defendants have engaged in unlawful business acts or practices by
7 committing acts including computer fraud, trespass, conversion, interference with business
8 relationships, and other illegal acts and practices as alleged above, all in an effort to gain unfair
9 competitive advantage over Oracle.
10 120. These unlawful business acts or practices were committed pursuant to
11 business activity related to providing business applications software and related support and
12 maintenance for that software.
13 121. The acts and conduct of Defendants constitute fraudulent, unlawful, and
14 unfair competition as defined by California Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.
15 122. Defendants’ conduct constitutes violations of numerous state and federal
16 statutes and codes, including, but not limited to, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,
17 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030 et seq., receipt of stolen property, Cal. Penal Code § 496, unauthorized access
18 to computers, Cal. Penal Code § 502, wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C.
19 § 1962, fraud and related activity in connection with an access device, 18 U.S.C. § 1029, and
20 violation of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701-11. Defendants’ conduct also
21 constitutes trespass to chattels, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage,
22 negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, conversion, unjust enrichment, and
23 conspiracy.
24 123. Defendants have improperly and unlawfully taken commercial advantage
25 of Oracle’s investment in its confidential, proprietary, and copyrighted Software and Support
26 Materials. In light of Defendants’ conduct, it would be inequitable to allow Defendants to retain
27 the benefit of the funds obtained though the unauthorized and unlawful use of Oracle’s property.
28
34
COMPLAINT
36. 1 124. Defendants’ unfair business practices have unjustly minimized Oracle’s
2 competitive advantage and have caused and are causing Oracle to suffer damages.
3 125. As a result of such unfair competition, Oracle has also suffered irreparable
4 injury and, unless Defendants are enjoined from such unfair competition, will continue to suffer
5 irreparable injury, whereby Oracle has no adequate remedy at law.
6 126. Defendants should be compelled to disgorge and/or restore any and all
7 revenues, earnings, profits, compensation, and benefits they may have obtained in violation of
8 California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq., including, but not limited to, returning
9 the value of the stolen property itself and any revenue earned from it, and should be enjoined
10 from further unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices. Defendants should further be
11 ordered to return all materials taken from Oracle, and all copies of such, in their possession,
12 custody, or control.
13 Sixth Claim for Relief
14 Conversion
15 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
16 127. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
17 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
18 128. Instead of paying Oracle for the use of its property, Defendants
19 intentionally and willfully entered Oracle’s password-protected Customer Connection support
20 website without permission and took possession of Oracle’s property, including, but not limited
21 to, Oracle’s confidential, proprietary, and copyrighted Software and Support Materials, all of
22 which Oracle stored on its computer system.
23 129. This property is the sole and exclusive property of Oracle. Oracle has an
24 exclusive right to possession and distribution of such property, which is valuable to Oracle and
25 vital to its continued business operations.
26 130. Oracle at no time consented, expressly or impliedly, to Defendants’
27 copying, downloading, removal, retention, or distribution of such property.
28
35
COMPLAINT
37. 1 131. Defendants have been in knowing and unauthorized possession and
2 control of such property since at least between September 2006 and the present. Since that time,
3 at the latest, Defendants may have been obtaining unjust and substantial benefit from the sale and
4 distribution of Oracle’s property to third parties without Oracle’s consent and without paying
5 Oracle for the value of such property.
6 132. Defendants’ improper assumption and exercise of dominion and control
7 over Oracle’s property and their likely sale and distribution of the same has and will continue to
8 interfere with and diminish Oracle’s rights in that property.
9 133. Allowing Defendants to retain the benefits received as a result of their
10 wrongful acts would unjustly benefit Defendants at Oracle’s expense.
11 134. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ actions, Oracle has lost,
12 and will continue to lose, profits from potential purchasers of Oracle support services and
13 licensees of Oracle software products, in an amount to be determined at trial. Defendants’
14 wrongful conduct was a substantial factor in causing this harm.
15 135. Oracle is entitled to an award of the value of the property taken, with
16 interest, and other damages in an amount to be proven at trial. In addition, or in the alternative,
17 Oracle is entitled to damages and repossession of the converted property. In addition, or in the
18 alternative, Oracle is entitled to restitution of the Defendants’ ill-gotten gains. Oracle will seek
19 its election of remedies at trial.
20 Seventh Claim for Relief
21 Trespass To Chattels
22 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
23 136. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
24 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
25 137. At all times mentioned in this Complaint, Oracle had legal title to and
26 actual possession of Customer Connection, its access-restricted internet-based support system,
27 and the Software and Support Materials on that support system, as described above.
28
36
COMPLAINT
38. 1 138. Defendants intentionally interfered with Oracle’s use or possession of both
2 Customer Connection and Oracle’s related internal databases and systems, and the Software and
3 Support Materials housed for licensed access through Customer Connection.
4 139. Defendants’ trespass and interference proximately caused damage to
5 Oracle, including, but not limited to, damage to the functionality of Oracle’s computer system
6 and data, damage to Oracle’s rights to dominion and control over its property, and damage to the
7 confidential and copyrighted nature of the information on Oracle’s website. As a result,
8 Defendants caused Oracle’s property to greatly diminish in value and deprived Oracle of the
9 intended use of its computer systems.
10 140. Oracle is entitled to recover any and all damages it sustained as a result of
11 such trespass, in an amount to be determined at trial.
12 141. Defendants’ trespass interfered with, and damaged, the integrity and
13 functionality of Oracle’s computer system and data. Defendants will continue to commit such
14 acts and other competitors will be encouraged to sweep Oracle’s website, potentially to the point
15 of denying effective access to Oracle’s customers and preventing Oracle from using its systems
16 and data for their intended purpose. Defendants’ trespass therefore threatens to cause irreparable
17 harm to Oracle, for which Oracle’s remedy at law is not adequate to compensate it for the
18 injuries inflicted and threatened.
19 Eighth Claim for Relief
20 Unjust Enrichment/Restitution
21 (By Oracle Against All Defendants)
22 142. Oracle incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the preceding
23 paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth here.
24 143. Defendants unjustly received benefits at the expense of Oracle through
25 their wrongful conduct, including Defendants’ interference with Oracle’s business relationships
26 and other unfair business practices, as well as Defendants’ trespass on, computer fraud
27 concerning, and conversion of the Software and Support Materials, which took substantial time
28 and money for Oracle to develop. Defendants continue to unjustly retain these benefits at the
37
COMPLAINT