This isn't a neutral report, it's quite obvious that Prof. Astrachan is taking Google's side. If the judges, juries, and media understand the document in such a way to agree with the various claims:

> Google’s implementation of the APIs at issue is not virtually identical or substantially similar to Oracle’s implementation

> The various Java versions that Oracle alleges were infringed contain the same APIs as earlier versions or versions for other operating systems

> Parameter names are functional and not creative

> The organization of packages is functional and does not contain creative expression

> C#, like Java, is unprotectable, and is also available as an open specification and implementation

> Oracle’s analysis of the files at issue does not discuss their qualitative or quantitative importance, with one exception that is incorrect

I think it's safe to say that it would help Google significantly.

I think it would still be possible for a neutral report to end up helping either party significantly. After all, objective truth may be to someone's disadvantage as well as to their advantage. The whole point of a lawsuit is to try to convince a judge that 'your version' of the objective truth is supportive of your claims. When a neutral party ends up disagreeing with you that will help the other side.

In this situation that's likely not the case (since Astrachan is paid by Google it is clear on whose side he is), but most of what he writes strikes me as quite neutral rather than explicitly usable against Oracle. Google could find itself on the blunt end of those arguments just as easily in another lawsuit. These observations seem to use the evidence from the case as an illustration of a much more general case.