The California Supreme Court has dismissed Oracle’s appeal against a decision to charge HPE 3 billion.
On Wednesday, the court declined to review Oracle’s summary judgment appeal, apparently without comment or written objection.
The decision follows a judgment [PDF] The California Court of Appeals upheld $ 3.14 billion in profit.
The case depended on the companies’ statements that they have a “longstanding strategic relationship” and a “mutual desire to continue serving their mutual customers”. For its part, the agreement states that Oracle “will continue to offer its suite of products on HP platforms,” ââwhile HPE “will continue to support Oracle products (including Oracle Enterprise Linux and Oracle VM) on its hardware.”
The judgment states: âWe conclude that the second sentence also does not just explain the desire or intention to continue the cooperation, as Oracle claims. It obliges the parties to continue the stated measures (Oracle offers its suite of products and HP supports the products) “as was the case before.
For those with the perseverance to take a long and meandering journey into the past, what has been considered the dirtiest process in technology history began in 2011.
In June 2011, as before, Hewlett Packard sued Oracle for refusing to support the Itanium processor with future versions of its database, middleware and application software.
The lawsuit, which was filed in the Santa Clara County Superior Court, listed 10 complaints against HP’s former industry partner. These included breach of an implied contract, objection to debt securities, defamation, willful interference with potential economic benefits, and three alleged violations of California business and professional codes. In early June, HP had sent a letter to Oracle’s co-president and chief financial officer, Safra Catz, asking Oracle to meet its obligations to HP and Itanium without going into detail about these contractual obligations.
HP filed a lawsuit later that month, accusing Oracle of breach of contract and seeking a jury trial in California.
In August 2012, Santa Clara Court Justice James Kleinberg ruled that Oracle had a contract with HP to port its databases to Itanium and maintain support for the architecture as long as HP stayed in the Itanium game.
In July 2016, Oracle announced it would appeal a decision that required Big Red to pay HPE $ 3 billion. The jury agreed (by then) to HPE’s claim for $ 1.7 billion in lost sales prior to trial, plus $ 1.3 billion in post-trial sales.
So could this latest judgment be the end of the matter? Well, according to an appeals firm, if a lawsuit comes through a state court, the loser can appeal to a state appeals court, which is where the current verdict was passed. The United States Supreme Court can be brought, but only in cases where a federal law issue is at stake.
Oracle certainly has deep pockets and apparently a stomach for lengthy litigation. It remains to be seen whether she has the arguments to back it up.
But Oracle can be sure that the law isn’t always against it. In another case, a US judge rejected HPE’s motion for a summary judgment in its longstanding dispute over Solaris operating system support with Oracle. The original lawsuit alleged that HPE had sold unauthorized updates to Oracle software.
HPE is “satisfied with the judgment of the court and the outcome in this case,” it said The reg today. We asked Oracle for a comment. Â®