Throughout 2019, Rimini’s reluctance to provide key records, including Salesforce documents, is portrayed as a strategic move to conceal their ongoing misconduct. Oracle’s filing suggests a narrative of subterfuge and evasion, leading them to file a motion to compel the production of these documents.
The Final Showdown
The climax of this legal epic came when Judge Hicks partially granted Oracle’s motion to show why Rimini shouldn’t be found in contempt. The court, using “clear and convincing evidence,” found that Rimini had breached the injunction, leading to substantial sanctions against them last year.
Oracle Seeks $12M Of IP Injunction Enforcement : Oracle’s Final Stance
Oracle concludes its recent filing with a strong statement, seeking full reimbursement for its extensive efforts to enforce the court’s injunction. They paint a picture of Rimini as a defiant adversary, misleading both the court and its customers about its compliance.
The Silent Characters
While the main actors in this drama, Oracle and Rimini, have not publicly commented on this latest development, their legal representation speaks volumes. Oracle’s team includes James C. Maroulis (in-house) and luminaries from Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, and Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison LLP. Rimini’s defense is equally formidable, with John P. Reilly (in-house) and experts from Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC.
