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
SCO Files Motion for Reconsideraton of, Objections to Order on Spoliation & more
Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 02:53 AM EDT

I guess SCO just won't let judges rule against them.

Your punishment if you rule against SCO is a motion for reconsideration, objections, and overlength memoranda. That way every significant motion gets heard at least twice. Is that supposed to happen? Not unless the Magistrate Judge actually did goof. I haven't read all the documents yet, so I can't say if SCO has reached its burden, but if not, at some point the court is going to start sanctioning, I think.

Anyway, here they go again, tra la, this time asking for a reconsideration of the order by Magistrate Judge Wells denying SCO's spoliation motion (IBM's opposition memo; SCO's reply). If you don't remember what spoliation means, here you go. And SCO has filed objections also, I gather from the notes on PACER. Both. Two of their experts support their motion/objections with declarations, which will give you a clue as to why SCO in its 10Q said they continue to have to pay experts. But what is exciting is that finally we get to read what they say. They were filed sealed by mistake, and now they are made public.

There are a lot of other filings on PACER too, both in SCO v. IBM and in SCO v. Novell, Red Hat v. SCO, and SCO v. AutoZone. We've gone over the 1,000 filings mark in IBM, which is what happens if every ruling gets heard again and again in the stupidest lawsuit in the history of the world, litigation over absolutely nothing you can shake a stick at.

Here's the PACER list in SCO v. IBM:

984 - Filed & Entered: 03/16/2007
Notice of Conventional Filing
Docket Text: NOTICE OF CONVENTIONAL FILING of 1.SCOs Memorandum in Support of its Motion for Reconsideration by the Magistrate Court of the Order Denying SCOs Motion for Relief for IBMs Spoliation of Evidence and Exhibits thereto; 3. SCOs Memorandum in Support of its Objections to the Magistrate Courts Order Denying SCOs Motion for Relief for IBMs Spoliation of Evidence and Exhibits thereto; 5.Declaration of Mark F. James Regarding SCOs Objections to the Magistrate Courts Order Denying SCOs Motion for Relief for IBMs Spoliation of Evidence; 6.Declaration of Mark F. James Regarding SCOs Memorandum in Support of its Objections to the Magistrate Courts Order Denying SCOs Motion for Relief for IBMs Spoliation of Evidence; 7.Declaration of Dr. Evan Ivie in Support of SCOs Motion for Reconsideration by the Magistrate Court of the Order Denying SCOs Motion for Relief for IBMs Spoliation of Evidence; 8.Declaration of Mark Rockhind in Support of SCOs Motion for Reconsideration by the Magistrate Court of the Order Denying SCOs Motion for Relief for IBMs Spoliation of Evidence filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group (James, Mark)

985 - Filed & Entered: 03/16/2007
Terminated: 03/19/2007
Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages
Docket Text: MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages FOR SCOS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(James, Mark)

986 - Filed & Entered: 03/16/2007
Motion for Miscellaneous Relief
Docket Text: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(James, Mark)

987 - Filed & Entered: 03/16/2007
Terminated: 03/19/2007
Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages
Docket Text: MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages FOR MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF ITS OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE COURTS ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(James, Mark)

990 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/19/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A-C)(blk)

988 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages
Docket Text: ORDER granting [987] Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 3/19/07. (blk)

989 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages
Docket Text: ORDER granting [985] Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 3/19/07. (blk)

991 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Reply Memorandum/Reply to Response to Motion
Docket Text: REPLY to Response to Motion re [913] MOTION to Amend/Correct DECEMBER 2005 SUBMISSION filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (James, Mark)

992 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Reply Memorandum/Reply to Response to Motion
Docket Text: REPLY to Response to Motion re [917] Plaintiff's MOTION for Leave to File OVER LENGTH MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF ITS OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER ON IBM'S MOTION TO CONFINE Re: Docket No. 916 (Original Objection Not Available on Docket to Link to While Filing) filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1 - # (2) Exhibit A: unpublished case)(James, Mark)

993 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Notice (Other)
Docket Text: NOTICE of CORRECTED FILING by SCO Group, SCO Group re [991] Reply Memorandum/Reply to Response to Motion to Amend/Correct DECEMBER 2005 SUBMISSION (Normand, Edward)

994 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Reply Memorandum/Reply to Response to Motion
Docket Text: REPLY to Response to Motion re [913] MOTION to Amend/Correct DECEMBER 2005 SUBMISSION CORRECTED filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A - C: Unpublished Cases)(Normand, Edward)

995 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTIONS TO ORDER re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A-C)(blk)

996 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** DECLARATION OF MARK F. JAMES re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (blk)

997 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** DECLARATION of Mark F. James RE OBJECTIONS TO ORDER re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1# (2) Exhibit 2-8)(blk)

998 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** REPLY MEMORANDUM in Support of Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Novell's Fourth Counterclaim filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (blk)

999 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** DECLARATION of Mark F. James filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1-8# (2) Exhibit 9# (3) Exhibit 10# (4) Exhibit 11)(blk)

1000 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** DECLARATION of Dr. Evan Ivie re [973] Order filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (blk)

1001 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** DECLARATION of Marc Rochkind re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (blk)

1002 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Redacted Document
Docket Text: REDACTION to [995] Sealed Document, SCO's Memorandum in Support of Its Objections to the Magistrate Court's Order Denying SCO's Motion for Relief for IBM's Spoliation of Evidence by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Appendix)(James, Mark)

1003 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Declaration
Docket Text: DECLARATION of Dr. Evan Ivie re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE CORRECTED filed by SCO Group, SCO Group. (Normand, Edward)

1004 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Notice (Other)
Docket Text: NOTICE of CORRECTED FILING by SCO Group, SCO Group re [1000] Sealed Document DECLARATION of Dr. Evan Ivie, correctly filed under docket entry 1003 (Normand, Edward)

1005 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Redacted Document
Docket Text: REDACTION to [999] Sealed Document Declaration of Mark F. James Regarding SCO's Objections to the Magistrate Court's Order Denying SCO's Motion for Relief for IBM's Spoliation of Evidence by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit)(James, Mark)

1006 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Declaration
Docket Text: DECLARATION of Marc Rochkind re [986] MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BY THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF THE ORDER DENYING SCOS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM IBMS SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE CORRECTED filed by SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A)(Normand, Edward)

1007 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/2007
Notice (Other)
Docket Text: NOTICE of CORRECTED FILING by SCO Group re [1001] Sealed Document DECLARATION of Marc Rochkind, correctly filed under docket entry 1006 (Normand, Edward)

Here's the last time SCO did it, the objections to the order limiting SCO's claims to what they put on the table by the deadline. They failed, when Judge Kimball upheld that order. Of course that wasn't the end of that either. SCO filed a motion to amend/correct ("supplement") its list of allegedly infringed materials, now that it found out that not showing its hand by the established deadline got SCO sanctioned.

That legal scholar, Rob Enderle, seems to be predicting Microsoft will buy SCO. I never link to his nonsense, so you'll have to find it for yourself. But why would Microsoft bother? They have Novell, and Novell seems to hold the copyrights, not SCO, so why would anyone buy SCO? Unless someone wanted to destroy a whole lot of discovery, of course. So, I take what he wrote as merely another way to try to pressure IBM to buy SCO out of fear.

Novell:

There's some new stuff filed in Novell too:

245 - Filed & Entered: 03/09/2007
Terminated: 03/12/2007
Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply
Docket Text: MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Novell's Opposition to SCO's Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Novell's Fourth Claim for Relief filed by Counter Defendant SCO Group, Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(Normand, Edward)

246 - Filed & Entered: 03/12/2007
Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply Docket Text: ORDER granting [245] Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re [224] Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Novell's Fourth Counterclaim. Replies due by 3/16/2007. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 3/12/07. (blk)

247 - Filed & Entered: 03/16/2007
Notice of Conventional Filing
Docket Text: NOTICE OF CONVENTIONAL FILING of Reply Memorandum in Support of its Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Novells Fourth Counterclaim and Exhibits Attached Thereto; Declaration of Mark F. James filed by Counter Defendant SCO Group, Plaintiff SCO Group (James, Mark)

248 - Filed & Entered: 03/16/2007
Terminated: 03/19/2007
Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages
Docket Text: MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages filed by Counter Defendant SCO Group, Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(James, Mark)

249 - Filed & Entered: 03/19/2007
Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages
Docket Text: ORDER granting [248] Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 3/19/07. (blk)

250 - Filed & Entered: 03/20/07
Motion to Amend/Correct
Docket Text: Stipulated MOTION to Amend/Correct SCO's Fifth Claim for Relief filed by Defendant Novell, Inc. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Order Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(Sneddon, Heather)

That last stipulation is SCO finally amending its complaint to fess up to the fact that they are relying on Utah law for their unfair competition claim. It took a motion to compel from Novell to get it out of them. It's all pulling teeth with these guys. Delay, delay, delay.

Finally, here are the latest filings in Red Hat and in AutoZone, both just reports to the judges. Oddly, both cases have 65 entries on PACER at the same time, which is about as interesting as it gets in those cases at the moment. I am sure we are the only people left reading those 90-days updates.


  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 )