|
Novell Files Bill of Costs (once again) in SCO v. Novell |
|
Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 08:07 PM EDT
|
Novell has filed a Bill of Costs in SCO v. Novell for $315,501.19. That reflects, according to footnote 1 of the Memorandum in Support, the "previously allowed costs of $99,639.09, in addition to the $215,862.10 in costs sought in this memorandum." That's just *costs*, not attorneys' fees, so it's things like experts fee, court reporter fees, and fees for transcripts. In this case, I see also a listing for "Mock Trial DVDs" on page 7. I sure would like to have those DVDs myself. Drool. I'll look into it. Since the company sells them, I'm sure I won't be able to make them available for free, but at least I can tell you about them. And I mention it because some of you may wish to get your own copies. Here's SCO's bottom line so far: The more SCO litigates, the worse it gets for SCO's bottom line. On paper. They never paid the earlier award, I gather, so it's a loss on paper. They are the Make-Me company.
Here are the filings:
06/24/2010 - 879 - BILL OF COSTS filed by Novell, Inc.. (Brennan, Sterling) (Entered: 06/24/2010)
06/24/2010 - 880 - RESPONSE re 879 Bill of Costs,, Memorandum filed by Defendant Novell, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Brennan, Sterling) (Entered: 06/24/2010)
From docket #880, which is marked a Response by the clerk but which is actually a Memorandum in Support:
2. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1), “costs other than attorneys’ fees shall be allowed as of course to the prevailing party unless the court otherwise directs.” In the present case, Novell is the prevailing party, as evidenced by the Final Judgment (Dkt. No. 878) submitted herewith as Exhibit A. Novell, as the prevailing party, respectfully requests the Clerk of the Court tax The SCO Group, Inc. (“Plaintiffs”), total costs to Novell in the amount of $315,501.191 as detailed below.
3. On or about December 10, 2008, Novell submitted a Bill of Costs (Docket No. 573) for costs incurred in connection with the judgment entered on November 20, 2008. Pursuant to this Court’s Order of April 22, 2009, Novell’s allowed costs of $99,639.09 were included in the judgment (Docket No. 595).
4. The documentation supporting the Bill of Costs submitted as Docket No. 573 has not been resubmitted, as it is already a part of the record of the Court. However, those previously awarded costs are properly included in Novell’s total costs.
Here's Novell's prior bill of costs.
The last time, SCO asked for a stay on figuring out the costs until the appeals were finished. Judge Dale Kimball denied that request. Presumably it can do the same again, if it appeals this new bill of costs. Otherwise, it's time to settle up on the earlier costs, as they were already awarded. As to the amount, it's up to Judge Ted Stewart to now decide on the new costs submitted, with SCO free to object. The last time, it objected to some of the costs, and the judge lowered the amount slightly, and then the clerk signed the bill of costs. I wrote at the time: Two of SCO's four objections were sustained, and the amounts subtracted from the totals -- the hotel rooms rented for depositions and the costs for video syncing. So Novell will have to eat those expenses. But most of the costs were sustained. Now all Novell has to figure out is how to get SCO to actually pay them. Judging from the new bill of costs including the amount earlier determined to be owed, I gather SCO never paid what it owed.
|
|
Authored by: Cypher3c on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 09:06 PM EDT |
Please post corrections in this thread.
---
Ubersoft Lawyer: "Not only do I rule the world, but I get paid $300/hour to do
so" (Ubersoft.net)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Cypher3c on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 09:07 PM EDT |
Place newspicks here. Please include links and place the name of the article in
the title.
---
Ubersoft Lawyer: "Not only do I rule the world, but I get paid $300/hour to do
so" (Ubersoft.net)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Google Remotely Deletes Android Apps - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 10:54 PM EDT
- Google can remotely delete apps I've chosen to install? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 02:47 AM EDT
- Google Remotely Deletes Android Apps - Authored by: The Cornishman on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 02:54 AM EDT
- So, is the backdoor then a security weakness in Android? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 08:37 AM EDT
- Google Remotely Deletes Android Apps - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 09:25 AM EDT
- Google Remotely Deletes Android Apps - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 09:43 AM EDT
- Google Remotely Deletes Android Apps - Is there a process? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 10:50 AM EDT
- ASTROTURF WARNING - Authored by: barbacana on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 04:30 PM EDT
- Technical question, please help - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 01:06 AM EDT
- The Ansogonosic... Aonisognostic... The Dilemna - Authored by: artp on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 11:09 PM EDT
- ASCAP Declares War on Free Culture - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 01:33 AM EDT
- Times Non-Pay wall - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 01:50 PM EDT
- Salesforce sues Microsoft back, enlists David Boies in new battle - Authored by: tiger99 on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 02:15 PM EDT
- National trusted identity - Authored by: kawabago on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 02:23 PM EDT
- CEO caught in hiring dilemma - Authored by: kjs on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 02:40 PM EDT
- Google Counters Apple’s HTML5 Showcase - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 06:08 PM EDT
- Ralph Nader - paralysis toward the corporate crime wave. - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 27 2010 @ 10:55 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Cypher3c on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 09:08 PM EDT |
Anything on topic is off topic here. Don't make us use force.
Muahaha! I have achieved the coveted hat-trick/triple play/trifecta...etc.
---
Ubersoft Lawyer: "Not only do I rule the world, but I get paid $300/hour to do
so" (Ubersoft.net)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Is LGP Going The Way Of Loki Software? - Authored by: artp on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 11:58 PM EDT
- Nokia dumps Symbian on N-series: MeeGo all the way - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 01:19 AM EDT
- Nokia to Drop Symbian, Use Linux for N-Series Phones - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 01:29 AM EDT
- Florian Mueller FUD - Authored by: inode_buddha on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 11:03 AM EDT
- Is it do or die for RIM? - Authored by: tiger99 on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 02:23 PM EDT
- "We’re suing everybody on Twitter" - The Globe and Mail - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 02:48 PM EDT
- Reality Distortion Field still functioning at Apple - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 04:06 PM EDT
- .XXX top-level domain approved - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 05:53 PM EDT
- Ubuntu Soccer??? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 11:42 PM EDT
- Bogus is one way to describe Microsoft's patent claims against Salesforce.com - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 12:07 AM EDT
- BigPond ditches Linux mirror - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 06:03 AM EDT
- Bionic flying penguin at science show - Authored by: tiger99 on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 07:57 AM EDT
- A more realistic view of reorganization prospects - Authored by: joef on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 09:56 AM EDT
- Wall Street Journal Expects Bilski on Monday - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 09:56 AM EDT
- Linux by the Numbers - Osmos game port - was it worth it? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 12:33 PM EDT
- MS BlindSpot - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 27 2010 @ 03:11 AM EDT
- BPGate: Cleanup "just a dog and pony show" - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Sunday, June 27 2010 @ 11:20 AM EDT
- tcm.org domain expired - Authored by: artp on Sunday, June 27 2010 @ 12:17 PM EDT
|
Authored by: red floyd on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 09:13 PM EDT |
For transcriptions
---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Zak3056 on Thursday, June 24 2010 @ 09:43 PM EDT |
Does this count as pre-petition (based on the beginning of the case itself) or
post-petition (based on the fact that Gross unstayed this case?) i.e. does
Novell's claim go to the bottom of the pile, or do they get to stand in line
with the professionals and actually get paid?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: argee on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 12:27 AM EDT |
Pretty soon, you are talking *real money.*
My guess is that a lot of people are just laughing at this
whole "try to get cash from SCO" charade. Might as well,
because crying ain't gonna do it.
My latest cynical prediction: Some judge orders the
"funds disgorged", but they argue it to death and the
disgorgement moneys also goes to the lawyers (on both sides).
---
--
argee[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 12:49 AM EDT |
Can someone explain why so many court reporters were listed in this? I'm
surprised to see multiple ones on the same days. Is it normal to have
redundancy, did they work different shifts or what?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 05:00 AM EDT |
I thought that the US system did not award costs to the winning party. I went to
Judge Kimball's bench trial final
judgement and could not find a reference to it.
I thought payment
of costs was only one of the sanctions available for frivolous cases or lawyer
mischief. In spite of my views of the SCO team behaviour I don't recall such
sanctions being made.
However, SCO arguing against Novell's costs seems
to suggest that there was money to lose, here.
I would be grateful if
someone who knew, could outline the rules.
One piece of trivia I add to
my collection is that the stipulated traced funds to be placed in the
constructive trust was recorded in the final judgement, above. I thought that
had only been done in the bankruptcy court.--- Regards
Ian Al
SCOG, what ever happened to them? Whatever, it was less than they deserve. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Do what? - Authored by: Steve Martin on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 06:31 AM EDT
- Do what? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 09:26 AM EDT
|
Authored by: YurtGuppy on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 08:19 AM EDT |
Seems like we are going to be winding this up pretty quickly.
SCO is to the place where they can't pay the lawyers running the company, can't
pay the lawyers presenting their case and can't pay for the coffee for the
lawyers on the winning side.
Once the lawyers decide to quit then it's quitin' time.
---
just swimming round and round[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tiger99 on Friday, June 25 2010 @ 09:30 AM EDT |
And can they? It seems to me that, fairly soon, SCO must be unable to pay
their bills, and presumably then Chapter 7 is inevitable. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Saturday, June 26 2010 @ 10:57 PM EDT |
I had held out some hope that SCO's agreement to pay the funds held in trust and
their lack of comment meant that SCO and Novell were going to resolve the suit
on quickly.
It appears that Novell filing for costs means things are not going that well.
---
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 Sunday, June 27 2010 @ 03:09 AM EDT |
Once upon a long time ago, two farmers had a dispute about a cow. And as they
could not reach any agreement, they asked their neighbor to help resolve the
dispute. As he did successfully, the two farmers asked him how they could thank
him.
"I'll get the cow," he replied. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|