Summary judgments are often tough to get. In federal court (which the Oracle v. Google case is), summary judgment can be granted only when there is no genuine i

Summary judgments are often tough to get. In federal court (which the Oracle v. Google case is), summary judgment can be granted only when there is no genuine issue of material fact -- in layman's terms, when reasonable people could not differ about any fact that affects the outcome of the case -- and therefore there's no reason for a trial. It would not surprise me if the judge were to hold that reasonable people could indeed differ about the factual basis for Google's proposed motion for summary judgment, and that a trial was therefore necessary.