Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

United States v. Oracle Corp.

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

September 09, 2004, Decided

No C 04-0807 VRW

Opinion

 [*1100]  FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER THEREON

The government, acting through the Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, and the states of Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, North Dakota, Ohio and Texas, First Amended Complaint (FAC) (Doc # 125) P 3 at 5-6, seek to enjoin Oracle Corporation from acquiring, directly or indirectly, the whole or any part of the stock of PeopleSoft, Inc. Plaintiffs allege that the acquisition would violate section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18. Both companies are publicly traded and headquartered in this district. Jt Stip Fact (Doc # 218) at 1-2. The court has subject matter jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 25 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337(a) and 1345. There is no dispute about the  [*1101]  court's personal jurisdiction over the defendant.

Oracle initiated its tender offer for the shares of PeopleSoft on June 6, 2003. Jt Stip of Fact (Doc # 128)  [**9]  at 2; Ex P2040. Plaintiffs brought suit on February 26, 2004. Compl (Doc # 1). The case was tried to the court on June 7-10, 14-18, 21-25, 28-30 and July 1, 2004, with closing arguments on July 20, 2004, and further evidentiary proceedings on August 13, 2004. Based on the evidence presented and the applicable law, the court concludes that plaintiffs have failed to carry the burden of proof entitling them to relief and, therefore, orders that judgment be entered for defendant and against plaintiffs.

INTRODUCTORY FINDINGS: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Products at Issue

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

331 F. Supp. 2d 1098 *; 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18063 **; 2004-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P74,542

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al, Plaintiffs, v. ORACLE CORPORATION, Defendant.

Disposition: Court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law. Court concluded that plaintiffs failed to carry the burden of proof entitling them to relief and entered judgment for defendant.

CORE TERMS

software, customers, products, vendors, effects, outsourcing, plaintiffs', merger, mid-market, Microsoft, geographic, discount, percent, functionality, unilateral, market share, firms, differentiated, enterprise, markets, compete, anticompetitive, witnesses, competitor, localized, merging, consumers, BearingPoint, billion, prices

Antitrust & Trade Law, Clayton Act, Jurisdiction, Mergers & Acquisitions Law, Antitrust, Remedies, General Overview, Scope, Actual Monopolization, Anticompetitive & Predatory Practices, Antitrust Statutes, Clayton Act, Regulated Practices, Market Definition, Relevant Market, Geographic Market Definition, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Ultimate Burden of Persuasion, Inferences & Presumptions, Presumptions, Rebuttal of Presumptions, Market Definition, Admiralty & Maritime Law, Maritime Contracts, Product Market Definition, Healthcare Law, Healthcare Litigation, Antitrust Actions, Facilities, Business Administration & Organization, Covenants not to Compete, Horizontal Mergers, Merger Guidelines, Relevant Market