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.


To read comments to this article, go here
IBM Gets Until Tomorrow to Respond to SCO's 2nd Amended Complaint
Thursday, March 18 2004 @ 11:24 PM EST

SCO and IBM filed a joint motion, extending IBM's time to respond to SCO's Second Amended Complaint, the one with the copyright infringement claims. Tomorrow, March 19, is the deadline, which means tomorrow will be really busy, with filings by both Novell and IBM. I hope everyone is ready. I am. Of course, it may not be available digitally until Monday or even Tuesday. Here's the order, signed by Judge Kimball.

*******************************************

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

____________________________

THE SCO GROUP, INC.,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,

vs.

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
MACHINES CORPORATION,

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

__________________________

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO
RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT

Civil No. 2:03CV0294 DAK

Honorable Dale A. Kimball

Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells

________________________

Based upon the Stipulation and Joint Motion entered into by the respective counsel for the above parties, and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant may have until March 19, 2004, to respond to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.

Dated this 15th day of March, 2004.

BY THE COURT:

_____signature_______
United States District Court

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
Alan L. Sullivan
Todd M. Shaughnessy

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE
Evan R. Chesler
David R. Marriott

By _____signature_____
Counsel for Defendant International
Business Machines Corporation

HATCH, JAMES & DODGE, P.C.
Brent O. Hatch
Mark F. James

By ____signature_____
Counsel for Plaintiff

-----------------------------------------------------

United States District Court
for the
District of Utah
March 15, 2004

* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *

Re: 2:03-cv-00294

True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed, faxed or e-mailed by the clerk to the following:

Brent O. Hatch, Esq.
HATCH JAMES & DODGE
[address]

Stephen Neal Zack, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER
[address]

David K. Markarian, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER
[address]

Mark J. Heise, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER
[address]

Scott E. Gant, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER
[address]

Evan R. Chesler, Esq.
CRAVATH SWAINE & MOORE
[address]

Thomas G. Rafferty, Esq.
CRAVATH SWAINE & MOORE
[address]

David R. Marriott, Esq.
CRAVATH SWAINE & MOORE
[address]

Mr. Alan L Sullivan, Esq.
SNELL & WILMER LLP
[address]

Todd M. Shaghnessy, Esq.
SNELL & WILMER LLP
[address]

Amy F. Sorenson, Esq.
SNELL & WILMER LLP
[address]

Mr. Kevin P McBride, Esq.
[address]


  View Printable Version


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 )