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
Mandate Issues From 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Clerk - Updated
Thursday, October 29 2009 @ 06:40 PM EDT

The Appeals Court in Denver has sent a letter to the Utah District Court, letting them know that the mandate has issued and SCO v. Novell is to go to jury trial:

10/29/2009 - Open Document - [9706085] Mandate issued.

In the entire history of this case, or any SCO case, did you ever see a court move as rapidly as this? They can't seem to move fast enough to help SCO out, it seems. Remember the testimony that someone on the Boies team called a clerk of this court? Speaking as a paralegal, it does sometimes happen that you schmooze a little and make some friends of court clerks, so they'll lend a hand here and there, if they decide they want to.

Or it could be this court is uniquely rapid in handling all its cases.

: )

Bottom line: Novell is running this race now with a ball and chain on its leg, and when they asked to be allowed to run without it, they were denied within 24 hours of their petition being filed. Prontissimo.

Update: Speaking of speed, check this out:

11/02/2009 - 598 - NOTICE OF HEARING: (Notice generated by Chambers/slm) Status Conference set for 11/23/2009 10:00 AM in Room 142 before Judge Ted Stewart. (slm) (Entered: 11/02/2009)

Hilarious.

They'll still appeal to the Supreme Court, but the rapidly issued mandate means they'll have to dual track, the trial and the petition to the Supreme Court, because one lawyer can't possibly do it all, and that means potentially less seasoned, knowledgeable work on one of the tracks, just because the lead attorney knows more than anyone what already happened.

It's very puzzling to me that a court would put a party in a disadvantaged position like this. The whole point of the court system is fairness, I believe. But the final outcome of SCO's litigation follies will be the same, no matter what they do, I believe, unless the fix were in all the way up to the Supreme Court. The odds are against that. This isn't Russia, after all.

The marketplace has already spoken. It ruled long ago that SCO has no case. The courts will catch up eventually.

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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
[address, phone]

Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
Douglas E. Cressler
Chief Deputy Clerk

October 29, 2009

Mr. D. Mark Jones
United States District Court for the District of Utah
Office of the Clerk
[address, UT]

RE: 08-4217, SCO Group v. Novell, Inc.
Dist/Ag docket: 2:04-CV-00139-DAK

Dear Clerk: Please be advised that the mandate for this case has issued today. Please file accordingly in the records of your court or agency.

Please contact this office if you have questions.

Sincerely,

Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of the Court

cc:
David Boies
George C. Harris
Brent O. Hatch
Michael Allen Jacobs
Mark F. James
Thomas R. Karrenberg
Grant L. Kim
David E. Melaugh
John P. Mullen
Edward Normand
Devan V. Padmanabhan
Robert B. SIlver
Stuart H. Singer
Heather M. Sneddon
Thomas Theron Steele

EAS/bv


  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 )