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
Transcript of the June Bankruptcy Hearing and SCO MOUs
Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 07:32 PM EDT

SCO has filed two monthly operating reports, one for SCO Group and one for SCO Operations. This is like watching water drain from a slow tub.

Also the transcript of the June 17 hearing is now available. And Dorsey & Whitney have submitted another bill going back to April.

From the transcript, we see the first words out of the judge's mouth, after "good morning", is about the quarterly fees: "Yes, I'm prepared to approve those." And then, after all the lawyers on the phone for the fee applications decide to leave since there is nothing for them to say, the court turns to Arthur Spector to present SCO's need for an extension of time to file a reorganization plan. "It's a pleasure to be back," Spector says, as he begins. "Good to have you back," Judge Gross responds. I believe that captures the tone of the day perfectly. I'll comment more on the transcript when we post it as text.

Dorsey & Whitney were busy bees, reviewing and revising the business plan. What business plan? I thought they can't do that until they hear from Utah. That's what Spector told the court, anyhow. What business, now that I think of it? Also I see a flurry of activity about blue sky filings in California. And here's an entry from Exhibit D:

4/25/08 - 0.85 - 85.00 - Conference with C. Peters regarding Utah filing (.5); conference call with Utah Division of Securities regarding same (.35)

And on page 16 of the filing, there is activity regarding the "Hong Kong Corporate Formation". At the end of May, I see them sending emails about it to "team and B. Young of SCO". Hmm. Hong Kong, judging from the next entry, is about Me Software Limited, and you see a notation about "status of subject company and possible dissolution of subject company." The same day there was an email "regarding deregistration".

And there is some issue regarding the 2004 stock issuance plan that shows up on page 22. "Continue work on Utah 2008 filing for 2004 stock incentive plan." And on May 14: "Prepare renewal for 1998 option plan, 1999 incentive plan and 2000 ESPP." Several references to work on "corporate matter". I gather they know we actually read these things, even if the court doesn't. Apparently a stock holder is too. On page 26, I see: "Emails with equity holder regarding fee application." More about that on May 6:

Telephone conference with UST regarding fee application and e-mails with equity holder...; telephone conference with equity holder regarding fee application...; e-mails with N. Taylor regarding equity holder...

The next page continues with that theme, with folks looking at prior applications. But there was apparently a happy ending for Dorsey & Whitney, as the next page notes nobody objected to the court. This bill, the firm's 7th, is for $17,000 and change.

Here are the filings:

505 - Filed & Entered: 06/25/2008
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection (No Order Required) Regarding Eighth Interim Application of Tanner LC for Compensation for Services and Reimbursement of Expenses as Accountants to the Debtors for the Period from May 1, 2008 through May 31, 2008 (related document(s)[486] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)

506 - Filed & Entered: 06/25/2008
Operating Report
Docket Text: Debtor-In-Possession Monthly Operating Report for Filing Period May 2008 for SCO Operations, Inc. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Makowski, Kathleen)

507 - Filed & Entered: 06/25/2008
Operating Report
Docket Text: Debtor-In-Possession Monthly Operating Report for Filing Period May 2008 for The SCO Group, Inc. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Makowski, Kathleen)

508 - Filed & Entered: 06/26/2008
Transcript
Docket Text: Transcript of Hearing held on June 17, 2008 before the Honorable Kevin Gross. (related document(s)[497] ) (BJM)

509 - Filed & Entered: 06/26/2008
Application for Compensation
Docket Text: Monthly Application for Compensation (Seventh) for the Period April 1, 2008 through May 31, 2008 Filed by Dorsey & Whitney LLP. Objections due by 7/16/2008. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A # (2) Exhibit B # (3) Exhibit C # (4) Exhibit D # (5) Notice) (Schnabel, Eric)


  


Transcript of the June Bankruptcy Hearing and SCO MOUs | 33 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections hear please!
Authored by: Raymee on Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 07:38 PM EDT
Subjects in the title would be helpful!

---
...and this too, shall pass... (the only real question is WHEN!!!)

PJ has full permission to use my comments as she pleases!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic goes heer!
Authored by: Raymee on Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 07:40 PM EDT
On topic comments will be depleted!

---
...and this too, shall pass... (the only real question is WHEN!!!)

PJ has full permission to use my comments as she pleases!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspick items/comments go hrre!
Authored by: Raymee on Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 07:42 PM EDT
A triple play!

---
...and this too, shall pass... (the only real question is WHEN!!!)

PJ has full permission to use my comments as she pleases!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Eyeballs for ODF - the Groklaw discussion thread
Authored by: bbaston on Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 07:55 PM EDT
Share "Eyeballs for ODF" feedback here. PJ says:
"Stay polite at all times, of course, if you say anything, and you needn't say anything, but do follow along and please keep us posted on anything you see that sounds peculiar", and
"Do whatever is possible to avoid engagement with trolls, here and there."


OASIS discussion list for ODF Implementation, Interoperability and Conformance
Links: original formation, discussion's archive, and draft charter.
Registered for OIIC discussion? Monitor #oiic with xchat, etc [irc.freenode.net, /join #oiic]. #oiic traffic may be log-dumped to an OIIC discussion thread - so remember to "stay polite".

---
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hundredths, or perhaps Twentieths?
Authored by: tanner andrews on Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 08:13 PM EDT
4/25/08 - 0.85 - 85.00 - Conference with C. Peters regarding Utah filing (.5); conference call with Utah Division of Securities regarding same (.35)

Normally lawyers bill in tenths, or six-minute intervals. Computer guys bill in quarter hours.

It looks as though these guys are either billing in hundredths, which is unlikely, or halves of tenths, giving three-minute intervals.

---
I am not your lawyer; please ignore above message.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Spector lays it on thick
Authored by: bezz on Thursday, June 26 2008 @ 09:44 PM EDT

He sure has a way of spreading a lot of pretty icing on SCO's BK cake. I am just going to focus on one small area on pages 7 and 8 in which he addresses SCO's prospects and the MOR's:

25 Aside from the

1 historical financial information that the Court has in the

2 form of the MORs and thatís only through April, the May one

3 isnít due until June 20th, and the June one, which we think

4 will have material improvements, wonít be due till July 20th.

5 We think we have succeeded in bettering our projections, the

6 company has. The April projections - the April results were

7 better than projected, and if we could - if we were permitted

8 to, and weíre not because the company is publicly traded and

9 we canít talk about future financial matters on an open

10 record, but we think we can show that the prospects are

11 greater than originally anticipated and that the likelihood

12 of any prejudice coming about by this rather short extension

13 is almost nil.

If you look at the Schedule of Cash Receipts and Disbursals on the MOR's, yeah, April came out better than projected due to Accounts Receivables being $520,000 higher. But May came in -- take a wild guess -- $520,000 lower than projected.

But some things between April and May look, shall we say, irregular. The payroll and payroll taxes have been odd since the first filing, with taxes ending up about %50 of total payroll. At least that is a predictable inconsistency. Yet the total projected payroll and payroll taxes for April was $536,000 (actual) / $408,900 (projected) and for May was $558,100 (actual) / $799,100 (projected).

That skews the projections. Yeah, SCO got more AR than projected for April, but it was offset in May. But what is the deal with the projected payroll almost doubling from April to May? $400,000 change in projection? Is that a hiring spree? Also, it makes the projected vs. actual performance for May look better by $400,000.

As much disrespect as I heap on Mr. Spector in my postings, I do recognize that he is the lawyer and the messenger. But this brand of SCO accounting that is foisted on the court as a performance - projection success is getting old.

Way to better the projections, SCO. They are better to your own benefit.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I gather they know we actually read these things
Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Saturday, June 28 2008 @ 06:07 PM EDT

I gather they know we actually read these things, even if the court doesn't.


Yes, I suspect that they do know this, and I also suspect that it worries them, based on how the reports have changed since the bankruptcy was first filed.

---
Wayne

http://sourceforge.net/projects/twgs-toolkit/

[ 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 )