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: But waitaminnit, yer Honor ~pj
Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 01:15 PM EDT

SCO, of course, is asking [PDF] the judge in U.S. District Court in Utah to reconsider his order denying SCO's request to reopen its case against IBM.

You knew they would:

SCO submits that reconsideration is appropriate because the Bankruptcy Court overseeing SCOís bankruptcy proceedings lifted the stay of IBMís counterclaims in February 2012 and IBM agreed to the reopening of the case should that stay be lifted. The Bankruptcy Court order lifting the stay was previously submitted to the Court with SCOís Request to Submit for Decision, on June 14, 2012. (Exs. A and B.) Accordingly, SCO respectfully asks the Court to reconsider its decision and grant the Motion to Reopen the Case forthwith.
They are right about the Bankruptcy Court lifting the stay. So unless the judge is much more clever than I am, which is likely actually, I suspect he'll have to grant the motion to reopen, and then we'll see IBM make its moves. But of course, SCO wants more.

Here's what else SCO wants:
Should the Court grant the Motion, SCO respectfully submits that the Court would benefit from oral argument on the unresolved summary judgment motions and respectfully requests that the Court schedule such argument. In addition, insofar as the Court would benefit from supplemental briefing regarding any changes in the law relevant to the unresolved summary judgment motions, SCO remains prepared to provide such briefing at the Courtís direction.
The very last thing in the world that SCO wants is to have to rely on the record so far. As is SCO's wont, it would like to try to go after IBM's money in some new and creative way. I don't think it can possibly have any impact on Linux, but with SCO, you never know for sure what they'll come up with, so I keep my eyes open.

The filings:

05/07/2013 - 1110 - MOTION for Reconsideration of the Court's Order Denying Motion to Reopen the Case re 1109 Order on Motion to Reopen Case, Order on Motion for Hearing, Memorandum Decision and Memorandum in Support filed by Plaintiff SCO Group, Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Hatch, Brent) (Entered: 05/07/2013)


  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 )