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
Red Hat's Motion for Reconsideration - as text
Wednesday, April 21 2004 @ 02:02 AM EDT

Here is Red Hat's Motion for Reconsideration as text, plus their proposed order, giving the judge two alternatives.

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

RED HAT, INC.,
Plaintiff,


vs.

THE SCO GROUP, INC. (formerly Caldera
International, Inc.)
Defendant.
Civil Action No.:03-772-SLR

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Red Hat, Inc. respectfully moves pursuant to Local Rule 7.1.5 for reconsideration the Court's Order dated April 6, 2004 staying this case.

In summary form, the grounds for this motion are as follows:

1) The Court did not have the benefit of briefing on the issue of a stay before it when the Court stayed this case sua sponte, and in fact a stay based on the prior pending Utah action would be inappropriate under the facts and caselaw for many reasons; and

2) Red Hat will suffer manifest injustice from a stay, since SCO apparently intends to continue to harass and threaten suit against Red Hat's customers in other jurisdictions, while Red Hat's declaratory judgment suit here, which was intended to prevent this precise harm to it and its customers, is forced to languish.

The above grounds are fully set forth in Red Hat's Memorandum, filed herewith.

WHEREFORE, Red Hat respectfully requests the Court to grant the within Motion. A form of Order is attached hereto.

       (signature)    
Josy W. Ingersoll (#1088)
Adam W. Poff (#3990)
YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT
& TAYLOR, LLP
[address]
[phone]
Attorneys for Red Hat, Inc.

OF COUNSEL:

William F. Lee
Mark G. Matuschak
Michelle D. Miller
Donald R. Steinberg
HALE AND DORR LLP
[address]
[phone]
[fax]

Dated: April 20, 2004


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

RED HAT, INC.,
Plaintiff,


vs.

THE SCO GROUP, INC. (formerly Caldera
International, Inc.)
Defendant.
Civil Action No.:03-772 (SLR)

ORDER

The Court having considered the motion of Red Hat for Reconsideration of the Court's Order dated April 6, 2004 (the "Motion"), and having considered the parties' arguments thereon, it IS HEREBY ORDERED this ________ day of ________, 2004 that:

The Motion is granted and:

A. The Order of the Court dated April 6, 2004 is hereby vacated, the stay is lifted and the parties are directed to confer and to submit to the Court a proposed Scheduling Order by ________________ 2004.

Alternatively,

B. The Court's April 6, 2004 Order is hereby modified, as follows: SCO is enjoined from threatening to initiate suit or initiating any lawsuit against Red Hat or any of Red Hat's customers based on alleged infringement of SCO's copyrights through the use of LINUX, for the period during which this case is stayed.

_______________________
U.S.D.J.


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Josy W. Ingersoll, Esquire, hereby certify that copies of the foregoing document were caused to be served on April 20, 2004 upon the following counsel of record:

BY HAND DELIVERY

Jack B. Blumenfeld, Esquire
Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell
[address]

BY FEDERAL EXPRESS

Mark J. Heise, Esquire
Boies, Schiller & Flexner, L.L.P.
[address]




______(signature)_________
Josy W. Ingersoll


  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 )