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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The Judge in SCO v. Novell Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement
Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:20 PM EDT

First word from the courthouse: Frank Sorenson reports that the judge heard arguments regarding both motions, and he said he would take them under advisement. It means we won't have a ruling on either motion today.

If you recall, Judge Wells, after the last hearing on discovery matters in the SCO v. IBM case, also decided not to rule that day, taking it under advisement, despite that being rare in discovery matters, evidently so she could rule after careful deliberation and so that there would be a written order:

"Counsel, while it is somewhat unusual in a discovery matter to take something under advisement, I think that based upon the somewhat complex nature of the requests that I will issue a written order as to both of the issues before the Court."

I gather the judge would like to do the same here. It's never bad when a judge decides to take time to get it right in a complex matter, and a written order is good for any appeal. In contrast, the first hearing before Judge Wells in SCO v. IBM was decided on the spot, where the issues were a bit simpler. There is no way to know in advance which way it will go in a particular case. We'll have more details and impressions from the court room within the hour.


  


The Judge in SCO v. Novell Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement | 127 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Judge Kimball Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement
Authored by: kberrien on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:26 PM EDT
>We'll have more details and impressions from the court room
>within the hour.

I'm sorry, no disrespect, but thats way too long for me to wait.....
<grin>

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT and Misc Links
Authored by: brian on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:31 PM EDT
For PJ....

---
#ifndef IANAL
#define IANAL
#endif

[ Reply to This | # ]

Isn't it funny...
Authored by: ErichTheWebGuy on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:32 PM EDT
The age we live in requires instant information... It was not so long ago that
you would have to wait and hope the evening news would cover whatever you were
interested in, or else wait until the next day to read about it in the paper.

That being said, I WANNA KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN COURT *NOW*! lol :-P

---
Striving daily to be RFC-2550 compliant

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Judge in SCO v. Novell Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement
Authored by: brendthess on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:32 PM EDT
Listen! There's a riot building out there!

we want news... we want news... we want news... we want news...

You better hurry... things could get ugly




BTW, Have we mentioned recently what a great job you're doing here PJ? You spoil us. We want our news now, and we know that you'll have it now!

<g>

---
I am not even vaguely trained as a lawyer. Why are you listening to me?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Judge in SCO v. Novell Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement
Authored by: JustFree on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:34 PM EDT
Wow. It seems to have been a very busy week. It is hard waiting for the rulings.

---
as in free speech get it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

How will the decision be handed down?
Authored by: Steve Martin on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:35 PM EDT

Here's a procedural question for the law-types out there. In a case such as this where the judge takes a motion (or motions) "under advisement", and later comes to a decision, is a hearing called for the judge to deliver the decision verbally, or is the decision simply given in writing delivered to the parties? I'm wondering if we again will be waiting for "the word from the courthouse", or if we should keep an eye on Pacer et al.

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffee, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | # ]

First Impression.....
Authored by: sam on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:39 PM EDT
Straightforward argumentation. Brent Hatch carried the water for SCO. Argued
Motion to Remand first and during Hatch's first presentation, the Judge offered
up a few softball leading questions but later on in the hearing nailed his
behind to the wall on the Motion to Dismiss and Hatch could not respond. No dead
giveaway clues. Judge Kimball said he had not decided on the Motion to Remand
yet.

On the Motion to Remand:
<snippet>
Hatch: Judge we really want to be in your court.
Kimball: I can tell.
Laughter.
Hatch: No really.
More laughter.
</snippet>

---


Don't forget. IAAL. (I am a layman.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

More FUD for thought
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 06:52 PM EDT
Corporat e LINUX Users Can Get Sued for Copyright Infringement, Wolf Greenfield Lawyers Write; Corporate Counsel Face Dilemma But Other Open-Source Software Even Riskier

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Judge in SCO v. Novell Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 07:08 PM EDT
The judge heard arguments on the motion to dismiss. I would say remand is
unlikely, otherwise he would have skipped that part as soon the motion to remand
discussion was over.

[ Reply to This | # ]

dismissal would moot remand, no?
Authored by: xtifr on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 07:14 PM EDT
One thing I'm curious about: couldn't the judge, in the interests of judicial
economy, rule to dismiss, thus mooting the motion to remand? If the argument to
dismiss is as solid as it seems, it seems to me that remanding the case would
just waste everyone's time (as SCOG obviously hopes). So, my question for the
experienced folks out there is: would an argument of judicial economy hold up
here? Or would SCOG have grounds for appeal?

---
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to
light.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Have I missed something
Authored by: codswallop on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 07:28 PM EDT
After reading the report form the hearing, I went and reread the Novell
complaint. I'd reread the memoranda a number of times recently, but not the
actiual complaint.

It struck me that there was a possible Federal issue lurking in there. Not only
was Novell charging slander, but they were challenging the validity of Novell's
registrations by demanding their transfer. Under Federal law these have a
presumption of validity.

SCO is trying to pretend that the registrations are property apart from the
copyrights they pertain to. I don't think this will wash. If they're valid they
have no grounds for the demand. If they're invalid, they have to challenge the
presumption of validity. This challenge is a matter of Federal law.

I think they screwed up. If they had just charged slander, the Novell
registrations would be part of the defense case, and they wouold probably get
remand. But by asking for Novell's copyrights, they've introduced a Federal
issue into their claim.

Is this just wishful thinking?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Its been over an hour
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 11 2004 @ 08:25 PM EDT

Dont mean to nag anybody. Its just that I gotta go to the bathroom but I am
holding, waiting and reloading...

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Judge in SCO v. Novell Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 12 2004 @ 04:56 PM EDT
"Judge Kimball Has Taken Both Motions Under Advisement"

And Elvis has left the building.

[ Reply to This | # ]

When *will* we have a ruling?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 13 2004 @ 08:41 AM EDT
If a judge holds the motions under advisement, when could we reasonably expect a
decision? How long this this process usually take? A couple of days, couple of
weeks, as long as the judge damn well pleases...

I don't like being kept in the uncertain so I'd appreciate if anyone could tell
me when to expect the next major news about the SCO cases. Preferebbly, of
course, the ruling on this :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

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 )