>>But at its core, what we are seeing is Google saying, in effect, that Oracle is the plaintiff. It has to tell what it is complaining about enough for Google to know how to defend itself. And so far, its position is that it can't really go forward in discovery revelations unless Oracle gets more specific on a claim by claim basis, telling Google which Android devices are infringing.

>>Oracle so far is saying, if I've understood their claims, and not having their answers to Google's interrogatories, I might not have it fully, that all of Android is infringing the patents, all devices that run Android from 2008 onward. Stating it is to see what the problem is, I think. In any case, we can see why they need the judge to intervene and tell them who has to cough up specifics first and/or to what degree. Although how he will know in such a technical dispute is a little hard for me to see.