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 Ordered to Reply to Novell's Petition for Rehearing
Thursday, September 17 2009 @ 03:59 PM EDT

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals is taking Novell's Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing en Banc seriously. They have ordered SCO to file a response within 14 days of the order. This is a significant order, in my view, and a major win for Novell. Here is the order:
09/17/2009 - Open Document - [9693254] Order filed by Clerk of the Court response to petition for rehearing en banc due. Response due on 10/01/2009 for SCO Group. Served on 09/17/2009.



"This matter is before the court on appellee’s Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc. The appellant shall file a response within 14 days of the date of this order." So 14 days from September 17. I've seen a number of comments on how hard it is statistically to get a rehearing, but what you are overlooking is the following explanation, from California Appeals Statistics:
Before you decide whether to start or defend an appeal, you may want to consider the overall statistics. That said, the chances of any specific appeal succeeding depend on the merits of that case. There are no quotas that the courts apply. When one considers reversal rates, one has to keep in mind that the overall statistics include a fair number of appeals that are hopeless and that never had any realistic chance of success.
So Novell's chances were never statistically determined. It is on the merits that such matters are decided, and at a minimum, it's now clear that the appeals court believes Novell's points require SCO to answer.

  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 )