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 More Time to Answer Second Amended Complaint
Wednesday, March 24 2004 @ 01:25 AM EST

IBM and SCO have jointly filed a stipulation and motion asking the court for an order giving IBM until the 26th to respond to SCO's Second Amended Complaint.

I know. The suspense is killing me, too.

While you're waiting, you might like to look at LWN's annotated SCO stock price chart. I am not a finance person, so I won't try to tell you what it means, but I found it fascinating.

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

SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
Alan L. Sullivan (3152)
Todd M. Shaghnessy (6651)
[address, phone, fax]

CRAVATH SWAINE & MOORE
Evan R. Chesler (admitted pro hac vice)
David R. Marriott (7572)
[address, phone]

Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff
International Business Machines Corporation

____________________________

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.

__________________________

STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Civil No. 2:03CV0294 DAK

Honorable Dale A. Kimball

Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells

________________________

The parties, through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate and jointly move the Court for an Order enlarging the time for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. The parties agree that Defendant may have up to and including March 26, 2004, within which to respond to the Second Amended Complaint.

Dated this 19th day of March, 2004.

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

Dated this 19th day of March, 2004

HATCH JAMES & DODGE
Brent O. Hatch
Mark F. James

____(signature)_______
Counsel for Plaintiff


  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 )