decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Novell v. Microsoft Gets Moved to Maryland for Pretrial Issues
Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 07:15 PM EDT

The Novell v. Microsoft litigation is moving to Maryland for pretrial proceedings. Here's the Transfer Order [PDF]. I'm guessing Novell isn't too thrilled about this. Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells is off the case now. Here's the docket information:

4/25/05 26 -- Transfer Order, transferring case to the District of Maryland in re: Microsoft Corp. Windows Operating Systems Antitrust Litigation MDL no. 1332 signed by Wm Terrell Hodges, Chairman, (jmr) [Entry date 04/29/05]

4/25/05 -- MDL Case transferred to District of Maryland. MDL Dkt No. 1332 (jmr) [Entry date 04/29/05]

4/29/05 - 27 -- Notice of transmittal of case transferred to District of Maryland MDL no. 1332 per order no. 26. (jmr) [Entry date 04/29/05]

4/29/05 -- CASE NO LONGER REFERRED TO Judge Brooke C. Wells (jmr) [Entry date 04/29/05]

4/29/05 -- Case closed per order no. 26. (jmr) [Entry date 04/29/05]

Here's the text of the transfer order.

****************************

JUDICIAL PANEL ON
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

APR 18 2005

FILED CLERK'S OFFICE

DOCKET NO. 1332

[unclear]JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE MICROSOFT CORP. WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM
ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Novell, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., D. Utah, C.A. No. 2:04-1045 [handwritten: JFM-05-1087]

BEFORE WM. TERRELL HODGES, CHAIRMAN, JOHN F. KEENAN, D.
LOWELL JENSEN, J. FREDERICK MOTZ*, ROBERT L. MILLER, JR.,
KATHRYN H. VRATIL AND DAVID R. HANSEN, JUDGES OF THE PANEL

TRANSFER ORDER

Before the Panel is a motion brought, pursuant to Rule 7.4, R.P.J.P.M.L., 199 F.R.D. 425, 435-36 (2001), by plaintiff in a District of Utah action ( Novell). Plaintiff asks the Panel to vacate a Panel order conditionally transferring Novell to the District of Maryland for inclusion in the centralized pretrial proceedings occurring there in this docket before Judge J. Frederick Motz. Defendant Microsoft Corp. supports transfer of the action.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, the Panel finds that Novell involves common questions of fact with actions in this litigation previously transferred to the District of Maryland, and that transfer of Novell to that district for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings occurring there will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. The Panel is persuaded that transfer is appropriate for reasons expressed by the Panel in its original order directing centralization in this docket. The Panel held that the District of Maryland was a proper Section 1407 forum for actions involving allegations pertaining to Microsoft's alleged anticompetitive conduct in a purported market for personal computer operating systems. See In re Microsoft Corp. Windows Operating Systems Antitrust Litigation, MDL-1332, 2000 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5559 (J.P.M.L. Apr. 25, 2000).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1407, this action is transferred to the District of Maryland and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable J. Frederick Motz for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings occurring there in this docket.

FOR THE PANEL:

___[signature]___
Wm. Terrell Hodges
Chairman

[Clerk attestation and signature]

* Judge Motz took no part in the decision of this matter.


  


Novell v. Microsoft Gets Moved to Maryland for Pretrial Issues | 80 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Novell v. Microsoft Gets Moved to Maryland for Pretrial Issues
Authored by: jaja on Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 07:28 PM EDT
Why would Novell be upset about this?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections here please ...
Authored by: dmarker on Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 07:39 PM EDT
as normal ...

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT here please ...
Authored by: dmarker on Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 07:40 PM EDT
as normal ...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Schedule
Authored by: overshoot on Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 07:54 PM EDT
Well, we probably should check back every couple of years to see if anything has
happened.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why?
Authored by: cmc on Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 08:18 PM EDT
I didn't see anything about this in the Novell-MS area, so please forgive me if
I should know about this already, but what prompted this transfer? What's in
Maryland? If Novell is a Utah corporation, and Microsoft is a Washington
corporation, what does Maryland have to do with anything?

Is this for pre-trial only (is that only discovery, or other things also?), or
for the whole thing?

I also wonder how moving this to Maryland will "serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses" when neither party is located in Maryland.

cmc

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell v. Microsoft Gets Moved to Maryland for Pretrial Issues
Authored by: heretic on Saturday, April 30 2005 @ 08:32 PM EDT

From the Maryland Court:

MDL's or multidistrict litigation are cases involving one or more common questions of fact which have been transferred from different districts by the judicial panel on multidistrict litigation to a single district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings under 28 U.S.C. 1407.

More information on multidistrict litigation can be obtained from the here

The MS MDL is handled by Honorable J. Frederick Motz, see here

heretic

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell v. Microsoft ??!!
Authored by: arch_dude on Sunday, May 01 2005 @ 01:48 AM EDT
HELP!!!

I've been following SCO v.IBM for two years here on Groklaw. I thought knew what
was going on.

I've watched as Groklaw analyzed all relevant documents from SCO v. IBM, RedHat
v. SCO, SCO v. Autozone, SCO v. Novell, and SCO v. Diamler-Crysler.

What the heck is Novell v. Microsoft? Where are the relevant docments? what is
this case about? How does it relate to SCO v. IBM?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Judicial Efficiency
Authored by: kberrien on Sunday, May 01 2005 @ 10:32 AM EDT
And how does this improve efficiency? Lets move the thing, bring a new judge up
to date (which will take delays, or excuses for delays). I don't get it...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell v. Microsoft Gets Moved to Maryland for Pretrial Issues - Question
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 01 2005 @ 11:07 AM EDT
Does this mean that any and all future lawsuits concerning potential or alleged
IP violations (copyright, patent, & other forms of theft) against Microsoft
will be redirected to this court?

Maryland has a reputation of being the place where the investment bankers prefer
civil lawsuits to be tried because even when a corporation losses it is rarely
more than a slap on the wrist.

These same people will do everything in their power to prevent a case from being
tried in southern Illinois, for just the opposite reason in Maryland.

Just a perception, not necessairly based on facts just high profile cases.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hurray for Judge Frederick Motz
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 01 2005 @ 12:23 PM EDT

Judge Frederick Motz is the judge who unsealed the court documents revealing that Microsoft was destroying email evidence. See section 11. A. in my SEC complaint.

Steve Stites' letter to the SEC

--------------------
Steve Stites

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off the case? Good!!! Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells is a joke :(
Authored by: SilverWave on Sunday, May 01 2005 @ 06:48 PM EDT

Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells is a joke so maybe this is not all bad?

---
"They [each] put in one hour of work,
but because they share the end results
they get nine hours... for free"

Firstmonday 98 interview with Linus Torvalds

[ Reply to This | # ]

Physical Location?
Authored by: Benanov on Monday, May 02 2005 @ 03:08 PM EDT
Where is this physically located? I live in Frederick, MD (West of Balitmore,
North of DC) and if it's close by, I could pick up documents.



---
That popping sound you hear is just a paradigm shifting without a clutch.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )