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

Too late | 193 comments | Create New Account

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

Yup!

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 02:15 PM EDT

I was just responding to the indication of "it not clearly becoming a part of the record". It's already on the record.

The current Judge could certainly overlook it with all the history and documentation in the case.

It certainly would be an additional benefit to IBM to have it explicitly spelled out for the current Judge.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Yup! - Authored by: al_dunsmuir on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 02:18 PM EDT
- Yup! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 02:32 PM EDT

Too late

Authored by: Yossarian on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 08:02 PM EDT

>Doesn't mean that the current judge couldn't ask for it
again.

Exactly.
When a judge gets a case from another judge he has to study
the case. If some of the previous judge reasons are not
clear then the new judge may ask the lawyers to supply more
details.

[ 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 )