Garrison

Garrison v. Oracle Corp.

Good Law

159 F. Supp. 3d 1044·2016 WL 393527·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13118

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 2, 2016Case No. 14-CV-04592-LHKCalifornia19,074 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koh, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

Re: Dkt. Nos. 110, 137, 138

Plaintiffs Greg Garrison (“Garrison”), Deborah Van Vorst (“Van Vorst”), and Sastry Hari (“Hari”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this putative class action against Defendant Oracle Corporation (“Oracle”) for alleged violations of federal and California antitrust laws. ECF No. 105 (Second Amended Complaint, or “SAC”). 1 Before the Court is Oracle’s motion to dismiss. ECF No. 110. Having considered the parties’ submissions, the relevant law, and the record in this case, the Court hereby GRANTS Oracle’s motion to dismiss with prejudice.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background

1. The Parties

Oracle is a Delaware corporation with- its principal place of business in Redwood Shores, California. SAC ¶ 22. The world’s second-largest software producer by revenue, Oracle specializes in developing and marketing computer hardware systems and enterprise software products, including its own brands of database management systems. Id. ¶ 23.

Plaintiffs are former employees of Oracle. Id. ¶¶ 16, 18, 20. Garrison worked for Oracle as a senior account manager from *1052 “approximately December 2008 to June…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.