Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Begs the question.... | 98 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Begs the question....

Authored by: Charles888 on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 07:46 PM EDT

Do you really believe this spaghetti logic?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

It's basically correct - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 10:22 PM EDT

Begs the question....

Authored by: nslm on Wednesday, October 17 2012 @ 01:32 AM EDT

Except Apple not only gets its 2 motions (note I made no comment
about that because it is normal and fair), one of them is much longer
than it should have been. While Samsung will be limitted in its reply
based on what Apple was originally supposed to be limited to. This
means

a) Samsung has to waste a page in its reply stating that Apple didn't
stick to the limit and should be sanctioned

b) Apple got to raise extra points in its motion, all of which Samsung
will need to challenge since they don't know what the judge may
decide to strike. However, Samsung will get no extra pages with
which to raise these challenges

At this point Samsung have to hope that the judge enforces her own
rules on Apple prior to the point at which Samsung file their reply...

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )