United States District Court, D. Oregon
BRENNA K. LEGAARD JEFFERY S. EDEN Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, P.C. Portland, OR KAREN JOHNSON-MCKEWAN ROBERT S. SHWARTS ERIN M. CONNELL Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP The Orrick Building San Francisco, CA DORIAN E. DALEY DEBORAH K. MILLER PEGGY E. BRUGGMAN Oracle Corporation Legal Department 500 Redwood Shores, CA Attorneys for Plaintiff.
DAVID B. MARKOWITZ PETER H. GLADE LISA A. KANER DALLAS S. DELUCA HARRY B. WILSON Markowitz Herbold PC Portland, OR Attorneys for Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Cover Oregon's Motion (#115) for Judgment on the Pleadings and Plaintiff Oracle America, Inc.'s Corrected Unopposed Motion (#128) to Substitute the State of Oregon, by and through the Department of Consumer and Business Services, for Cover Oregon. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Oracle's Motion to Substitute the State of Oregon, by and through the Department of Consumer and Business Services, for Cover Oregon and DENIES Cover Oregon's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.
The parties are familiar with the facts underlying this action. The Court, therefore, sets forth only the procedural history relevant to the pending Motions:
On August 8, 2014, Oracle America, Inc., filed a Complaint in this Court against the Oregon Health Insurance Exchange Corporation (Cover Oregon) asserting claims for breach of contract and quantum meruit and basing federal jurisdiction on the parties' diversity of citizenship. Oracle alleged Cover Oregon has not paid for all of the services that Oracle rendered, "continue[s] to use Oracle's work product[, ] and... has transferred some or all of that work product to others in violation of the parties' written agreements."
On August 22, 2014, Cover Oregon filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Failure to Join Necessary and Indispensable Party. Specifically, Cover Oregon sought dismissal of the Federal Action because Oracle failed to sue the State of Oregon, who Cover Oregon contended was a necessary and indispensable party to the action.
On September 8, 2014, Oracle filed an Amended Complaint in which Oracle added Oregon as a defendant and asserted claims for copyright infringement against Cover Oregon and Oregon, breach of contract against Cover Oregon, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing against Cover Oregon, and quantum meruit against Cover Oregon and Oregon.
On September 18, 2014, in light of Oracle's allegations in its Corrected First Amended Complaint, the Court denied as moot Cover Oregon's Motion to Dismiss and directed Cover Oregon and/or Oregon to file any motions against the Corrected First Amended Complaint no later than October 2, 2014.
On October 2, 2014, Oregon and Cover Oregon each filed separate Motions to Dismiss Oracle's Corrected First Amended Complaint as well as a Joint Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay.
On December 19, 2014, the Court heard oral argument on Oregon's Motion to Dismiss; the Joint Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay filed by Oregon and Cover Oregon; and Cover Oregon's Motion to Dismiss. At oral argument the Court granted Oregon's Motion to Dismiss, denied Cover Oregon's Motion to Dismiss, and took the Joint Motion to Dismiss under advisement.
On January 13, 2015, the Court issued an Opinion and Order in which it formally granted Oregon's Motion to Dismiss and denied Cover Oregon's Motion to Dismiss with leave for Oracle to file another amended Complaint consistent with the Court's rulings. The Court also granted in part and denied in part the Joint Motion to Dismiss as follows: (1) denied the Joint Motion to Dismiss Oracle's copyright-infringement claim on the ground that Oracle failed to state a claim, (2) granted the Joint Motion ...