|
|
| An Appeal in SCO v. Novell - But Not the One You Expected |
 |
|
Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 02:53 PM EDT
|
The guy who tried to intervene from prison in SCO v. Novell and was denied has filed a notice of appeal. That means the court clerk has to send the entire docket to the appeals court with his notice and the original order. I started to feel a measure of indignation, but then I realized that I feel pretty much the same way about SCO tying up the courts with what I view as nonsense. So what can you do? Some folks will do performance art, some will misuse the courts for anticompetitive reasons, etc. It is what it is. The court has already sent the necessary papers along. Also, the court has granted Novell an extension of time to file a proposed final judgment and pre-judgment interest submission, which the parties had stipulated to. The new date is August 22. The parties had jointly made the request for more time, because they are negotiating to try to resolve some remaining issues between them, including one big one -- should this be a final judgment prior to the arbitration and the constructive trust being decided?
Here is the docket:
08/01/2008 - 544 - ORDER granting 543 Motion for Extension of Time for
Proposed Final Judgment and Pre-Judgment Interest Submission. Signed by
Judge Dale A. Kimball on 7/31/08. (jwt) (Entered: 08/01/2008)
08/01/2008 - 545 - NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 541 Order on Motion for
Miscellaneous Relief filed by Jonathan Lee Riches. Appeals to the USCA
for the Tenth Circuit. Fee Status: Not Paid. (jmr) (Entered: 08/04/2008)
08/04/2008 - 546 - Transmission of Preliminary Record to USCA re 545 Notice
of Appeal; packet to appellant. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Appeal, # 2
Order, # 3 Docket)(jmr) (Entered: 08/04/2008)
You will notice the appellant did not pay the fee. Here's what can happen if you don't pay the fee, or here, or at least file asking the court to let you use the court system without paying the fee. Or more accurately asking the court to make you and me to pay the fee.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:02 PM EDT |
Please post corrections to the story here, by replying to this
comment.
Please summarize the correction in your comment's
title.
Thanks.
---
"Experience is what you get when you didn't
get what you wanted." --R. Pausch [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:05 PM EDT |
Timely and polite rants about stories in the news, as delimited by Groklaw's
News Picks can be posted here.
Please remember to cite the story you
are commenting on.
---
"Experience is what you get when you didn't get
what you wanted." --R. Pausch [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Police apprehend suspect thanks to YouTube - Authored by: Anonymous Coward on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:11 PM EDT
- How to remove Mono (M$) from Ubuntu Hardy Heron - Authored by: bbaston on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:54 PM EDT
- Hmm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 04:07 PM EDT
- How to remove Mono (M$) from Ubuntu Hardy Heron - Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 04:15 PM EDT
- How to find Mono dependencies in Ubuntu Hardy Heron - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 06:20 PM EDT
- Not present in my Kubuntu 8.04 - Authored by: Zartan on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 06:43 PM EDT
- F-Spot Photo Manager on Hardy Heron - Authored by: arnotsmith on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 07:41 PM EDT
- How to remove Mono (M$) from Ubuntu Hardy Heron - Authored by: dio gratia on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 07:49 PM EDT
- PCLinuxOS libmono0 resolution - Authored by: bbaston on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 09:27 PM EDT
- OEM stickers are even harder to remove - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 06 2008 @ 03:41 AM EDT
- Good plan! - Authored by: Nick_UK on Wednesday, August 06 2008 @ 05:14 AM EDT
- bad dependency - Authored by: grouch on Wednesday, August 06 2008 @ 03:56 PM EDT
- Designers on quest to build $12 computer - Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 04:13 PM EDT
- IBM, Canonical/Ubuntu, Novell, Red Hat to Deliver Microsoft-Free Desktops Worldwide - Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 05:58 PM EDT
- The Microsoft-free Desktop - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 06:15 PM EDT
- It's a denial of service attack on the court system. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 06:34 PM EDT
- Open Source: A 'Growing Challenge' to Microsoft - Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 10:40 PM EDT
- Online Fantasy Game’s Absurd Cancellation Policy Leads To New Law - Authored by: JesseW on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 11:16 PM EDT
- New Yahoo election tally reveals [withheld?] votes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 06 2008 @ 02:36 AM EDT
- Open Source: A 'Growing Challenge' to Microsoft - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 06 2008 @ 04:34 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:09 PM EDT |
Comments that are not directly related to the above story will probably fit
here. Please check out Groklaw's Comments Policy so that we can have a civil
and interesting discussion.
Thanks.
---
"Experience is what you
get when you didn't get what you wanted." --R. Pausch [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:23 PM EDT |
The Riches appeal brought to mind a legal term that I find interesting, and
is worth knowing, just for general knowledge, In Forma
Pauperis.
IN FORMA PAUPERIS - Lat. 'in the form of a
pauper.' Someone who is without the funds to pursue the normal costs of a
lawsuit or criminal defense. Upon the court's granting of this status the person
is entitled to waiver of normal costs and/or appointment of counsel (but seldom
in other than a criminal case).
The Riches Intervention probably
doesn't have much to do with the concept, not sure, but I thought for general
legal knowledge it is worth talking about; as the poor are often less well
educated, and often don't know the legalese for saying to the Court, "I'm poor
and can't afford the fees to file a lawsuit."
---
"Experience is what
you get when you didn't get what you wanted." --R. Pausch [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 03:35 PM EDT |
I couldn't help but give a small internal chuckle on reading his document.
There's a number of things he could do to achieve better results (assuming - of
course - that he actually has something and is not just looking for a "get out
of jail for one day free" card).
Obviously he has way too much
unproductive time on his hands.
RAS[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 04:15 PM EDT |
Is this what you mean by what can happen if one doesn't pay the fee? From the
first link:
MANDATE of USCA dated 10/29/07 regarding notice of
appeal 8 ; IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is dismissed for failure to pay the
required docketing fee pursuant to Circuit Rule 3(b), IT IS FURTHER ORDERED
that the appellant pay the appellate fees of $455 to the clerk of the
district court. The clerk of the district court shall collect the appellate fees
from the prisoner's trust fund account using the mechanism of Section 1915(b)
Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429, 433 (7th Cir. 1997).; USCA No. 07-3163. (gcy,
)
Bold added [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rgmoore on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 06:37 PM EDT |
Isn't there some standard procedure for having a person like this declared a
vexatious litigant? If so, why hasn't it happened already? ---
Behind
every sleazy lawyer, there's a sleazy client. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 06:52 PM EDT |
Actually, I did expect this.
Mr. Riches and SCO go together far too well. One nutcase riding on the
coattails of a whole barrel full.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 05 2008 @ 11:23 PM EDT |
| A: Someone with nothing but time. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
