And the second filing of the day is a stipulation to extend time for SCO to respond to the motion. Indeed, they have an uphill climb since AutoZone requires them to prove they actually own the copyrights, an uphill climb made more so by Novell filing for review en banc of that very issue. If you recall, at the hearing on September 22, 2008 they discussed how to go forward, and the judge basically said that they'd go forward with the ruling in Utah, and while SCO could argue that the court was wrong, and ask for a judgment nevertheless alternatively and then after all the appeals, if Utah was wrong, they'd have to redo.

But for now, it's Utah's decision that is the one SCO has to deal with, because Novell filed for a rehearing en banc, and as I understand the rules, that puts us back to Go, with the picture being that the case is on appeal, with no final appellate decision. And SCO has to prove a complete chain of title, and I don't think they can. I don't think anybody can, actually. USL distributed the early code without copyright notices.

09/15/2009 - 110 - NOTICE of Hearing on 108 MOTION to Dismiss in Part Plaintiff's Claims for Actual Damages, Statutory Damages and Attorneys' Fees : Oral argument is scheduled for Monday, 11/2/2009, at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 7D before Judge Robert C. Jones. (no image attached)(KXG) (Entered: 09/15/2009)

09/16/2009 - 111 - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME by Plaintiff SCO Group, Inc.. (Pocker, Richard) (Entered: 09/16/2009)