|
|
| A little scoop more of discovery in SCO v. Novell - another month |
 |
|
Monday, January 29 2007 @ 05:59 PM EST
|
Pacer shows that there was a telephone conference with Judge Kimball on January 25th in SCO v. Novell, which means they needed the judge's intervention. What? You are surprised? Item 229 tells us that the outcome is another small scoop of discovery. Specifically each side gets to do a few more depositions, (3 or 4, it says on Pacer) which they must designate by the 29th and then one by February 9, to be held by March 2nd. So that's the real, no kidding (unless there are more SCO requests) end of discovery in that case. Here is the Pacer entry:
229 -
Filed:
01/25/2007
Entered:
01/26/2007
Telephone Conference
Docket Text: Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Dale A. Kimball: Telephone Conference held on 1/25/2007. After hearing from counsel, the court will allow each side to designate 3 or 4 additional depositions by 1/29, to be taken by 3/2/07. Each side will also be allowed to designate one more deposition by 2/9/07 to be taken by 3/2/07. Attorney for Plaintiff: Mark James, Edward Normand, Esq. Attorney for Defendant Ken Brakebill, Esq. Court Reporter: Kelly Hicken. (tab) It's hard to predict the real end of discovery. We saw in SCO v. IBM that SCO is like the grave about discovery -- it never says 'enough'. So the new deadline is February 9th to say who they wish to depose, which is a week more than SCO won last time the subject came up, but really it's more, about a month more, because the depositions won't actually be done until March 2nd. If SCO suddenly discovers in a deposition that Columbus discovered America and that this proves it owns the copyrights on Unix, so to speak, presumably it could ask for another extension to follow up on that amazing new evidence, but other than that this should be The End.
February 9th is a new deadline in SCO v. IBM also, but only in that IBM has until the 9th to file its opposition to SCO's Objections to Judge Well's Order to Confine and SCO's Motion to Amend/Correct its list of allegedly misused materials.
The order [PDF] reads: Based upon the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that IBM’s opposition to (i) SCO’s Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Order on IBM’s Motion to Confine, and (ii) SCO’s Motion to Amend/Correct December 2005 Submission shall be due on or before February 9, 2007.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 06:50 PM EST |
where is the money for all this coming from? I thought they were running out?
Surely they should be backing off and trying to stay alive as a company.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: snorpus on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 06:58 PM EST |
| Make your links clicky, please. ---
73/88 de KQ3T ---
Montani Semper Liberi
Comments Licensed: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT Goes Here - Authored by: PolR on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 07:14 PM EST
- "Conservatives are so PC" - Authored by: maco on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 07:21 PM EST
- Lines form for Vista in Tokyo - Authored by: div_2n on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 07:23 PM EST
- The DeathStar Reborn!! - Authored by: LaurenceTux on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 07:52 PM EST
- Vista PMP cracked - Authored by: PeteS on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 03:28 AM EST
- Everyone's a lawyer - Authored by: ff5166 on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 04:44 AM EST
- Survey: The demise of Unix is exaggerated - Authored by: PeteS on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 05:03 AM EST
- What the BBC stands for. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 05:27 AM EST
- Symantec purchase Altiris, of Lindon, UT - Authored by: _Arthur on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 07:32 AM EST
- Press Release - "SCO and HP Host Event for Mobile Technologies in Russia" - Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 08:14 AM EST
- I had a call from a Company selling Vista this morning... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 09:04 AM EST
- " Linux Kernel Devs Offer Free Driver Development" - Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 09:24 AM EST
- NY Times: Market for Vista Holes - Authored by: jplatt39 on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 10:01 AM EST
- Dumb Terminals - SOX driven - Authored by: jimwelch on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 10:02 AM EST
- Adware fines, settlement - Authored by: joef on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 10:07 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 07:00 PM EST |
I haven't seen an answer to this one. If Novell goes first, and the arbitation
is still 10 months away, where does that leave IBM, Autozone and Red Hat?
I can't tell what can be decided and what can't outside the arbitration.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rocky on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 07:21 PM EST |
I'll start it off. In this sentence:
It's hard to predict the real end of discovery. We saw in SCO v. Novell that SCO
is like the grave about discovery -- it never says 'enough'.
Don't you mean in IBM? That's where we saw the most headaches and where they've
done the most discovery.
---
"I just *know* there's more to this than even Novell knows about. They didn't
buy what they thought they bought." -cybervegan[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: blacklight on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 08:43 PM EST |
The Novell litigation is very strightforward: it hinges on which interpretation
of the Santa Cruz contract including Amendment 1 is valid, SCOG's or Novell's?
Given that the judge is called to interpret the terms of the contract, I have no
doubt that in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, he will go for the
most rational interpretation of the contract - so both SCOG and SCOG's special
pleading will be out on a limb.
---
Know your enemies well, because that's the only way you are going to defeat
them. And know your friends even better, just in case they become your enemies.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 29 2007 @ 09:46 PM EST |
I guess that TSCOG is still hoping that they Holy Grail is just around the
corner, and that they'll find it if they look hard enough.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 30 2007 @ 01:41 PM EST |
I am interested in how the scheduling of these depositions will affect the
schedule for hearing the partial summary judgments. Doesn't discovery have to
be over before the parties can argue that the other side has no evidence to
support their claims?
--------------------
Steve Stites
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
