`Case3:10—cv—O3561—WHA Document119O Fi|edO5/23/12 Pagel of 2
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,
`
`No. C 10-03561 WHA
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`GOOGLE INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`SPECIAL VERDICT FORM
`
`YOUR ANSWERS MUST BE UNANIMOUS.
`
`1.
`
`Has Oracle proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Google infringes
`
`claim 11, 27, 29, 39, 40, or 41 of United States Patent Number RE38,104?
`
`Yes '
`(lnfrlngmg)
`
`CLAIM 11:
`
`CLAIM 27:
`
`CLAIM 29:
`
`CLAIM 39:
`
`CLAIM 40:
`
`CLAIM 41:
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrictCourt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FortheNunhcrnDistrict()FCa1if0miu
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case3:10-cv-03561-WHA Document1190 Filed05/23/12 Page2 of 2
`Case3:10—cv—O3561—WHA Document119O Fi|edO5/23/12 Page2 of2
`
`2.
`
`Has Oracle proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Google infringes
`
`claim 1 or 20 0fUnitcd States Patent Number 6,061,520‘?
`
`Yes
`(Infringing)
`
`No
`(Not Prov n)
`
`CLAIM 1:
`
`CLAIM 20:
`
`3.
`
`Has Oracle proven by clear and convincing evidence that Googlc willfully
`
`infringed one or more claims of an asserted patent? (Answer this question only if above you
`
`Nlft
`
`answered “Yes” to one or more claims of a given patent.)
`
`Yes
`
`(Wil1ful)
`
`No
`
`(Not Proven)
`
`FOR THE ’104 PATENT:
`
`FOR THE ’520 PATENT:
`
`
`
`
`
`FOREP ‘RSON
`
`Dated: May 23 , 2012.
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrictCourt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FortheNorthernDistrictofCaliforniz1