One of the many things that makes fair use tricky is that the statutory factors aren't exclusive: 17 USC 107 just says that "the factors to be considered shall include" the 4 factors.

The letter of the law for fair use is often not all that helpful.

At the Circuit and Supreme Court level, expect Google to cross-appeal against the copyrightability issue again (the Ninth Circuit might well rule differently than the CAFC did applying -- in theory -- Ninth Circuit precedent, and in any case I think they'll need to do so at the Circuit level to keep the issue alive for the Supreme Court, which may week take the issue up on a final speak though it declined to do so on an interlocutory one.)

Sadly, it won't. Ars Technica has Oracle's general counsel saying "we plan to bring this case back to the Federal Circuit on appeal"

I wish Gunn v. Minton had been more expansive.

"Because this action included patent claims, we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1)"

...

"The jury found no patent infringement, and the patent claims are not at issue in this appeal. "

See Oracle America v. Google, Inc. (http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/content/oracle-america-inc-v-go...)

The federal circuit will, in turn, pretend to apply ninth circuit law.

Your parent already answered that question (although I don't blame you for not noticing):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdi...