|
Odds and Ends -- Filings in SCO v. IBM |
|
Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 01:54 AM EST
|
Here are some more documents scanned for you, to make our collection complete. Nothing exciting, except that the overall picture is clearer with each little piece. For one thing, we see that SCO finally began to do some discovery in October:-
325 - SCO's Notice of Deposition for David Bullis
-
326 - SCO's Notice of Deposition for William Sandve
-
359 - SCO's Certificate of Service of SCO's Fifth Request for Production
of Documents
-
367 - IBM's Certificate of Service re: [354] IBM's Subpoena Duces Tecum
on Pointserve (This is the Pointserve Subpoena, but
it also contains the Certificate of Service)
-
371- SCO's Certificate of Service of SCO's Sixth Request for Production
of Documents
-
376 - IBM's Certificate of Service of IBM's Sixth Set of Interrogatories
and Sixth Request for Production of Documents
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 02:29 AM EST |
Tasty morsels though.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Greebo on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 02:42 AM EST |
Items of Interest --- PJ has permission to use my posts for commercial
use.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 02:47 AM EST |
How long is this farce going to drag on? Honest to gosh,
this makes Kafka look like an optimist.
I predict this will end rather abruptly, with the
bankruptcy of SCO and a shakeup in upper management. Darl
and his henchtoads are going to get the boot, and whatever
is left of the company will limp along awhile longer.
Novell might acquire it just to make things tidy and to
reclaim all the red Swingline staplers thieved by
Information Minister Blake Stowell.
Meanwhile IBM will keep it alive in the courts as long as
possible, which is their way of putting heads on pikes.
Don't mess with the big gorilla when all you have is a big
mouth.
--
Carla the country geek [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- how long, o lord - Authored by: Weeble on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 06:37 AM EST
- Habakkuk link - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 06:42 AM EST
- how long, o lord - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 07:15 PM EST
- sorry to lazy... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 07:19 PM EST
- how long, o lord - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 08:49 AM EST
- how long, o lord - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 11:21 AM EST
- how long, o lord - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 12:20 PM EST
- you lost the plot? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 07:32 PM EST
- US vs IBM how long - Authored by: baomike on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 10:44 PM EST
|
Authored by: codswallop on Thursday, February 03 2005 @ 03:45 AM EST |
This is the important document, if you were to pick one. We're also missing
SCO's response to interrogatory 10 (obviously not the 10th interrogatory, since
we're only up to 6. Maybe it has to do with CC10). Also we don't have IBM's
responses to SCO's interrogatories.
---
IANAL This is not a legal opinion.
SCO is not a party to the APA.
Discovery relevance is to claims, not to sanity.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|