|
|
| Today's bankruptcy filings - IBM's Lawyer Arrives - Updated 2Xs - Fri. Hearing Cancelled |
 |
|
Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 12:50 PM EDT
|
SCO's attorneys are filing papers like a blizzard, certificates of no objection to them getting retained and paid and so forth. And here comes IBM's attorney, Richard Levin, who files his pro hac vice application. It's a bit like this, I think. You know in movies about warfare in Shakespeare's plays, how the two armies line up the night before on either side of a large field? That's what this feels like to me. The battle is being prepared for, the two (or more) sides are planning their strategies, and so far what we see are some horses, some bonfires, some banners waving, and some armies in the restless gloom waiting for the sun to rise so they can have at it. There may well be more filings as the day goes on. Bankruptcies are paper-intensive, because you have to ask permission before you can do anything. Well. SCO has its own ways, as you have observed.
Update 2: Hearing Friday is cancelled: 10/04/2007 88
HEARING CANCELLED. Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled
for Hearing. (related document(s)72, 85 ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc..
Hearing scheduled for 10/5/2007 at 01:30 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824
Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. (Attachments: #
Affidavit of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James) (Entered:
10/04/2007)
Here are all the new documents so far today: 75 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Declaration in Support
Docket Text: Declaration in Support Supplemental Declaration of Arthur J. Spector in Support of Application of Debtors for Approval, Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 327(a) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2014(a) and 2016, of Employment of Berger Singerman as Counsel for Debtors (related document(s)[4] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Attachment) (O'Neill, James)
76 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection Regarding Application of the Debtors Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 327(a) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2014(a) and 2016, for Approval of Employment of Berger Singerman, P.A. as Counsel for Debtors Nunc Pro Tunc to the Petition Date (related document(s)[4] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Form of Order # (2) Certificate of Service and Service List ) (O'Neill, James)
77 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certification of Counsel
Docket Text: Certification of Counsel Regarding the Order Granting Prepetition U.S. Incentive Bonus in Debtors' Motion for an Order (I) Authorizing the Debtors to (A) Pay Prepetition Wages, Salaries, Commissions, Employee Benefits and Other Compensation; (B) Remit Withholding Obligations; (C) Maintain Employee Benefits Programs and Pay Related Administrative Obligations; and (II) Authorizing Applicable Banks and Other Financial Institutions to Receive, Process, Honor and Pay Certain Checks Presented for Payment and to Honor Certain Fund Transfer Requests (related document(s)[8], [27], [43] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 (1) Proposed Form of Order) (O'Neill, James)
78 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection Regarding Debtors' Motion for an Administrative Order Under 11 U.S.C. Sections 105(a) and 331 Establishing Procedures for Interim Monthly Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses of Professionals and Reimbursement of Expenses of Committee Members (related document(s)[6] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Form of Order # (2) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)
79 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Affidavit
Docket Text: Affidavit (Supplemental) of Laura Davis Jones in Support of Application of the Debtors Pursuant to Section 327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, Rule 2014 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and Local Rule 2014-1 for Authorization to Employ and Retain Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP as Bankruptcy Co-Counsel for the Debtors and Debtors in Possession Nunc Pro Tunc to the Petition Date (related document(s)[5], [37] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A) (O'Neill, James)
80 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Motion to Appear pro hac vice (B)
Docket Text: Motion to Appear pro hac vice for Richard B. Levin. Receipt Number 149061, Filed by IBM Corp.. (Silverstein, Laurie)
Update: I figured there would be more, and here it is:
81 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection Regarding Application of the Debtor Pursuant to Section 327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, Rule 2014 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and Local Rule 2014-1 for Authorization to Employ and Retain Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP as Co-Counsel for the Debtors and Debtors in Possession Nunc Pro Tunc to the Petition Date (related document(s)[5] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Form of Order) (O'Neill, James)
82 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Notice of Withdrawal (B)
Docket Text: Notice of Withdrawal from Exhibit A to the Debtors' Motion for an Order Under Section 366 of the Bankruptcy Code (i) Prohibiting Utility Providers from Altering, Refusing or Discontinuing Service, (ii) Deeming Utilities Adequately Assured of Future Performance, and (iii) Establishing Procedures for Determining Adequate Assurance of Payment (related document(s)[10], [42], [30] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)
83 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certification of Counsel
Docket Text: Certification of Counsel Regarding the Final Order Under Section 366 of the Bankruptcy Code (i) Prohibiting Utility Providers from Altering, Refusing or Discontinuing Service, (ii) Deeming Utilities Adequately Assured of Future Performance, and (iii) Establishing Procedures for Determining Adequate Assurance of Payment (related document(s)[10], [42], [30] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A - Proposed Final Order) (O'Neill, James)
84 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certification of Counsel
Docket Text: Certification of Counsel Regarding the Final Order Pursuant to Sections 105(a) and 363 of the Bankruptcy Code Authorizing the Debtors to Employ and Compensate Temporary Employees (related document(s)[39], [14], [33] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A - Proposed Final Order) (O'Neill, James)
85 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Notice of Matters Scheduled for Hearing (B)
Docket Text: Amended Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing (related document(s)[72] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 10/5/2007 at 01:30 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. (Jones, Laura Davis)
86 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Certificate of Service
Docket Text: Certificate of Service (and Service List) Regarding Amended Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing on October 5, 2007, at 1:30 p.m. (related document(s)[85] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (O'Neill, James)
87 -
Filed & Entered: 10/04/2007
Order
Docket Text: Order Granting Prepetition US Incentive Bonus in Debtors? Motion for an Order (1) Authorizing the Debtors to (A) Pay Prepeition Wages, Salaries, Commissions, Employee Benefits and Other Compensation; (B) Remit Withholding Obligations; (C) Maintain Employee Benefits Programs and Pay Related Administrative Obligations; and (II) Authorizing Applicable Banks and Other Financial Institutions to Receive, Process, Honor and Pay Certain Checks Presented for Payment and to Honor Certain Fund Transfer Requests(related document(s)[8], [43], [27] ) Order Signed on 10/4/2007. (LJS, )
You can see there is a new agenda for Friday's hearing, and if you would like to compare, here's the earlier version [PDF]. THe judge has signed an order authorizing paying SCOfolk, including incentive bonuses up to $30,000, but another bonus issue will be heard at the November hearing. That should be interesting to listen to.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: myNym on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 12:56 PM EDT |
With the correction in the title, with further explanation in the text,
including context, please.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: myNym on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 12:58 PM EDT |
With clickies if you've got 'em.
(Change to HTML mode, follow red instructions below text box.)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Dan Lyons plans a tour as 'Fake Steve Jobs' - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:25 PM EDT
- Two more judges that 'get it' - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 02:16 PM EDT
- Mr. Gates says... - Authored by: Latesigner on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 03:07 PM EDT
- Larry Craig loses; judge's ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 04:07 PM EDT
- M$ offers free online “HealthVault” a US website where personal medical records can be stored. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 04:59 PM EDT
- Bankruptcy hearing cancelled, and filing to unstay Utah case! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 06:02 PM EDT
- piercing the corporate veil - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 06:02 PM EDT
- Response from Sun about OpenOffice.org - Authored by: DarkPhoenix on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 06:03 PM EDT
- RIAA Wins In Court - Authored by: red floyd on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 06:07 PM EDT
- An unusual case - Comments wanted - Authored by: Bill The Cat on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 08:59 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: myNym on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:00 PM EDT |
Please change the title as appropriate to the newspick you are discussing.
Thanks![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:09 PM EDT |
An editorial cartoon image with a small boy called Jack. Will there be a golden or a foul egg
for the bad boy Jack?
IMANAL - I'M Absolutely Not A Lawyer
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:10 PM EDT |
So rather than throwing aroudn papers that say "Legal tender" they
throw around papers that say "Legal document". [Sco is] So eco
friendly! ;-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bbaston on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:14 PM EDT |
| A sense of foreboding may exist somewhere - but my sense is that McBride is
getting away with highway robbery and rape of the young Linux
penguin.
Patience - that I thought old age and the tSCOg saga had honed in
me - is failing rapidly, but much less rapidly thanks [thank you PJ] to
Groklaw's explanations of this ludicrous procedure called "application for
Chapter 11 Bankruptcy" - or whatever it's called.
Feels more like "dodging
the bullet". ---
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:23 PM EDT |
| Vengeance is a dish best served cold. What remains of SCOX is still warm. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bb5ch39t on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:49 PM EDT |
Hum, once the BK judge starts telling SCO to do something, I wonder if they will
flaunt his rulings as they did Judges Kimball and Well orders?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 01:51 PM EDT |
Waiting for the sun to rise, so that the fog can be lifted.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsi on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 02:10 PM EDT |
You know in movies about warfare in Shakespeare's plays, how the two
armies line up the night before on either side of a large field? That's what
this feels like to me.
Yes, but Braveheart instead of
Shakespeare.
...would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from
this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell
our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR
FREEDOM!
With the lawyers from IBM and Novell in the roles
of William Wallace and
Robert the
Bruce!
(BTW, Robert the Bruce NEVER betrayed Wallace, despite what the
movie shows!)
This is VERY MUCH about the fight for our Freedom to
CHOOSE! No one has the right to extort money from us because we
CHOOSE to give away our software for free, to follow OPEN
standards, to access/change/correct the source code, and all the other Freedoms
granted to us by the GPL, and other licenses accepted by the OSI (Open Source
Initiative)! NOT Microsoft, NOT SCO, NOT ANY other
company which may try to use patents to make a quick buck by suing a Linux
Distro, or Open Source author. I'm not suggesting, however, that we repeat
one of the scenes where the Scots, led by Wallace, mooned the enemy! That would
be too over the top, even if it might seem appropriate! ;^) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: elderlycynic on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 02:20 PM EDT |
This is more like an pre-mediaeval legend, when the ranks have joined
for battle, and the aging but still hale champion rides up and takes his
position on the sidelines. He will clearly wait until the battle is well under
way before weighing in - but will he be the slaughterer or the slaughtered?
The objectives of the SCO and Novell camps are pretty clear but I,
for one, don't have a clue what IBM are likely to do.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: webster on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 03:16 PM EDT |
..
Ice cubes on the counter soon become puddles. In a glass they can be poured
somewhere and even frozen again. But usually it is just waste.
There is liquidation in Sci-Fi movies, usually something sinister, fatal, or
just a cool molecular transferral, akin to beaming up.
So watch out, SCO! Liquidation is a euphemism for destruction. SCO needs a new
business plan quick even without creditors banging at the door. Without money
to pay the rent and staff there will soon be nobody home. SCO needs something
radical, a PIPE Fairy ex machina will do. But something would have been
arranged before things got this far. It is all too risky.
IBM must be piling on to this fray to convince the Judge that there is no hope
given the state of the litigation and no profitable ongoing business operation.
Liquidation is the only option.
---
webster
© 2007 Monopoly Corporation. ALL rights reserved. Yours included.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 03:41 PM EDT |
$30,000 for Incentive Bonuses. What targets can they possibly have met?
- For piledriveing a good company into the ground: $5K
- For alienation of customers: $4K
- For upsetting Pamela Jones enough to push her to start Groklaw, and thus
ensuring the education of the tech community in legal matters: $21K[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 04:12 PM EDT |
| Some links with biographical info on Richard Levin:
WSJ Law Blog
Seminar Bio
law.com
NY Times (Requires
login)
Most articles mention his coming to Cravath, Swaine & Moore in
May of 200 7as part of that firm starting to get involved in bancruptcy and
restructuring cases. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 04:17 PM EDT |
Contains some interesting names, not sure how they may be involved.
Ali, Mohammed
Ralph Yarro
Ritz Carlton Kapalua
Michels, Doug
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 04:35 PM EDT |
It's a mystery to me as to why Novell has elected not to respond or contest,
when given an opportunity, to SCO's announced decision to push the bankruptcy
envelope by providing executive bonuses (and the last-second raise to SCO
counsel is in effect a bonus) as well as the move to hire an outside CFO
(exceeding what they told the judge in the first hearing).
SCO's filing of documents #77-78 infer that Novell elected to take no action to
oppose, after being invited to do so by the BK judge.
I would have thought that Novell could have used such opposition to educate the
judge that SCO, after avoiding the liquidation of amount owed under the
constructive trust, are now effectively spending down the trust. The result is
that Novell is being prevented from proving (before Judge Kimball) the amount of
the trust, and the result, to at least some amount (still to be liquidated) is
that it potentially is NOVELL's (!!!) converted money that is being spent, not
SCO's.
I guess Novell has made the determination to keep its powder dry right now, but
it strikes me as out-of-character.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: philc on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 04:50 PM EDT |
Both RIAA and SCO actively sue their customers. Both believe that there is no
downside. They believe that people will continue to buy from them. Yet both are
suffering year over year losses.
Why would anyone buy from RIAA companies or for that matter have any digital
content from RIAA companies? The pleasure of listening to their artists is
offset by the real possibility of huge fines, federal prison, and a criminal
record. For me, there is no music worth going to prison over. There is no reason
to buy from SCO either.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 05:17 PM EDT |
It occurs to me that Novell might well be re-thinking their strategy now that
SCO has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Novell will have already spent large
amounts of money on legal fees and discovery expenses whilst defending the
action initiated by SCO in Utah, but to no avail so far following SCO's filing
for Chapter 11.
Rather than pouring more money after good, by fighting every single
"legal" manoeuvre by SCO in the bankruptcy court, Novell may have a
much more efficient option available to them. They could simply let SCO
reorganise without opposition but still protect their own interests to the
minimum, and when completed they could then resume their stayed court case in
Utah. That way, Novell can minimise current expenditure and simply await their
opportunity with patience.
Is there any legal provision concerning a company just emerging from Chapter 11
proceedings, which would prevent them from trying to hide behind the same ruse
again in order to avoid the consequences of a court case?
Dave N (London, UK)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: gopherbyrd on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 05:55 PM EDT |
#88 Hearing Cancelled. Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing.
Filed 2007-10-04 Thu.
Entered same day at 17:08 -0400 by James O'Neill.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 05:55 PM EDT |
I am unaware that the judge has even ruled that SCO is even eligible for
bankruptcy protection. If true, how can he authorize anything? I'm wondering
if IBM has sent an attorney who actually knows bankruptcy law to this
bankruptcy-friendly court to level the playing field.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: gopherbyrd on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 06:11 PM EDT |
#89 Motion for Relief From Stay (B)
Filed 2007-10-04 Thu.
Entered same day at 17:40 -0400 by Sean Greecher.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 06:25 PM EDT |
| From the filing, it looks like SCO filed to have the hearing cancelled? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: snakebitehurts on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 09:27 PM EDT |
Good thing I was paying attention. I planned on being there (as boring as this
one may have been). On the bright side, it looks like future hearings will be
far more exciting. :-)
I was watching to get the last minute agenda so I can take better notes.
I was also a bit concerned with the lack of responses to SCO motions. Was
everyone just going to roll over and let them spend money? Especially
disturbing was SCO's (no objection filed) to allow prepetiton wages, bonuses,
etc to go through.
Any idea why the hearing tomorrow was canceled?
MikeD[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2007 @ 09:45 PM EDT |
I hope this is for the Judge to do a bit of reading. Otherwise it looks like
business as normal for SCO[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: markpmc on Friday, October 05 2007 @ 02:34 PM EDT |
title says it all.
I hope there's still time for SCO to lose the arbitration in Europe.
Mark[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
