|
|
| SCO's Notice of Unsealing - as text |
 |
|
Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 01:26 PM EDT
|
Here's SCO's Notice of Unsealing, as text. Our thanks go to Janne for the transcript.
****************************
Brent O. Hatch (5715)
Mark F. James (5295)
HATCH, JAMES & DODGE
[address, phone, fax]
Stuart H. Singer (admitted pro hac vice)
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
[address, phone, fax]
Attorneys for The SCO Group, Inc.
|
Robert Silver (admitted pro hac vice)
Edward Normand (admitted pro hac vice)
Sean Eskovitz (admitted pro hac vice)
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
[address, phone, fax]
Stephen N. Zack (admitted pro hac vice)
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
[address, phone, fax]
|
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
THE SCO GROUP, INC.
Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,
v.
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
MACHINES CORPORATION,
Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.
|
SCO'S NOTICE OF UNSEALING
Case No. 2:03CV0294DAK
Honorable Dale A. Kimball
Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells
|
SCO respectfully submits this notice to identify documents that SCO originally filed with
this Court under seal and that, pursuant to the Court's Order or April 28, 2005, the parties have
to date agreed may be unsealed in their entirety or may be filed in redacted form.
1. The parties have agreed that the following documents may be unsealed in their entirety, and SCO respectfully requests that they be unsealed.
| Docket No. |
Date Filed |
Sealed Documents That May Be Unsealed |
| 203 |
July 12, 2004 |
Exhibits to the Declaration of Christopher Sontag in Support of SCO's Reply Memorandum Regarding Discovery (Exhibits 1-5) |
| 245 |
August 19, 2004 |
Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Discovery |
| 288 |
August 19, 2004 |
Declaration of Jeremy Evans and all exhibits thereto (Exhibits A-E) |
| 289 |
August 19, 2004 |
Declaration of Barbara Howe |
| 290 |
September 9, 2004 |
Memorandum in Support of Expedited Motion to Enforce the Court's Amended Scheduling Order |
| 317 |
October 4, 2004 |
Declaration of Jeremy Evans |
| 346 |
November 30, 2004 |
Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO's Breach-of-Contract Claims |
| 369 |
December 29, 2004 |
Reply Memorandum in Further Support of SCO's Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint, and all exhibits thereto (A1, A2, and A-E) |
| 375 |
January 12, 2005 |
Memorandum in Support of SCO's Motion to Compel IBM to Produce Samuel J. Palmisano for Deposition, and all exhibits thereto (Exhibits A-Q) |
| 425 |
March 23, 2005 |
Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Entry of Order Limiting Scope of IBM's Ninth Counterclaim |
| 432 |
April 11, 2005 |
Objections to IBM's Privilege Log and Memorandum in Support of SCO's Request to Compel IBM to Provide Proper Bases for Its Privilege Claims |
2. The parties have also agreed that the following documents may be filed in redacted
form. SCO is preparing redacted versions of these documents and intends to file them shortly
with the Court.
| Docket No. |
Date Filed |
Sealed Documents to be Submitted in Redacted Form |
| 197 |
July 8, 2004 |
Declaration of Sandeep Gupta |
| 198 |
July 8, 2004 |
Declaration of Christopher Sontag |
| 203 |
July 12, 2004 |
Declaration of Christopher Sontag |
2
| 206 |
July 9, 2004 |
Exhibit S-3 to SCO's Opposition to IBM's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Tenth Counterclaim |
| 269 |
September 3, 2004 |
Reply to IBM's Opposition to SCO's Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Discovery |
| 287 |
August 19, 2004 |
Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Discovery |
| 316 |
October 4, 2004 |
Reply in Further Support of SCO's Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Discovery |
| 317 |
October 4, 2004 |
Exhibit 10 to the Declaration of Jeremy Evans |
| 323 |
October 14, 2004 |
Memorandum in Support of SCO's Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint |
| 350 |
December 1, 2004 |
Exhibit S8 to the Declaration of Jeremy Evans in Support of Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO's Contract Claims |
| 365 |
December 23, 2004 |
Memorandum in Support of Renewed Motion to Compel Discovery |
| 409 |
February 25, 2005 |
Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Renewed Motion to Compel Discovery |
| 419 |
March 11, 2005 |
Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel IBM to Produce Samuel J. Palmisano for Deposition |
3. Finally, the parties have agreed that the following exhibits may be unsealed (the
"Unsealed Exhibits"). SCO will resubmit the Unsealed Exhibits for filing together with all of the
exhibits that were originally filed publicly in each of the submissions identified below, but will
submit separately, for filing under seal, the remainder of the exhibits that originally accompanied
each submission.
| Docket No. |
Date Filed |
Sealed Exhibits to be Submitted for Public Filing |
Filed With |
| 191 |
07/06/04 |
Exhibits I and J |
SCO's Memorandum in Support of Renewed Motion to Compel |
| 197 |
07/08/04 |
Exhibits B-G, K, N, Q, T, Z, AA, and DD |
Declaration of Sandeep Gupta in Support of SCO's Opposition to IBM's Cross-Motion for Summary on Tenth Conterclaim |
| 198 |
07/08/04 |
Exhibits O and P |
Declaration of Christopher Sontag in Support of SCO's Motion for Continuance Pursuant to Rule 56(f) |
| 206 |
07/09/04 |
Exhibits S-2, S-4, S-5, and S-7 |
SCO's Opposition to IBM's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Tenth Counterclaim |
| 293 |
09/09/04 |
Exhibits 1-4, 6, 8-30, 32, 33, and A-D |
SCO's Memorandum in Support of Expedited Motion to Enforce the Court's Amended Scheduling Order |
3
| 317 |
10/04/04 |
Exhibits 1-9, 11, 12 and A-E |
Declaration of Jeremy Evans in Support of SCO's Reply Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Discovery |
| 323 |
10/14/04 |
Exhibits 1-6 and A-E |
SCO's Memorandum in Support of Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint |
| 350 |
12/01/04 |
Exhibits S1, S2, S3, S5, and S7 |
Declaration of Jeremy Evans in Support of SCO's Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO's Contract Claims |
| 365 |
12/23/04 |
Exhibits A-E and G-N |
SCO's Memorandum in Support of Renewed Motion to Compel |
| 409 |
02/25/05 |
Exhibits 2, 3, and A-C |
SCO's Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Renewed Motion to Compel |
| 419 |
03/11/05 |
Exhibits A-F |
SCO's Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel IBM to Produce Samuel J. Palmisano |
| 425 |
03/23/05 |
Exhibits A and B |
SCO's Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Entry of Order Limiting Scope of Ninth Counterclaim |
| 432 |
04/11/05 |
Exhibits A-C |
Objections to IBM's Privilege Log and Memorandum in Support of SCO's Request to Compel IBM to Provide Proper Bases for Its Privilege Claims |
DATED this 16th day of June, 2005.
|
Respectfully submitted,
HATCH, JAMES & DODGE, P.C.
Brent O. Hatch
Mark F. James
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
Robert Silver
Stuart H. Singer
Stephen N. Zack
Edward Normand
Sean Eskovitz
By _(signature)_
Counsel for The SCO Group, Inc. |
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, The SCO Group, Inc., hereby certifies that a true and
correct copy of the foregoing SCO's Notice of Unsealing was served on Defendant IBM on the
16th day of June, 2005, by U.S. Mail to:
David Marriot, Esq.
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
[address]
Donald J. Rosenberg, Esq.
[address]
Todd Shaugnessy, Esq.
Snell & Wilmer LLP
[address]
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: overshoot on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 02:02 PM EDT |
| Links are always better clickable, of course. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Poland defers EU consititution indefinitely - Authored by: MadScientist on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 03:35 PM EDT
- Microsoft blocking Firefox - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 04:05 PM EDT
- Simple Lies, Told as Fact. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 05:10 PM EDT
- Advice requested on programming project - Authored by: cmc on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 06:10 PM EDT
- A legend passes - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 06:53 PM EDT
- A legend passes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 06:25 AM EDT
- A legend passes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 01:55 PM EDT
- Merkeylaw.com is hosted by Off Campus Telecommunications - Authored by: John_Doe#1 on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 01:17 AM EDT
- Open Source Geospatial stuff - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 02:10 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: RealProgrammer on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 02:05 PM EDT |
This means we'll finally get to see mountains and mountains of briefcases full
of millions of lines of code, analyzed every which way from Tuesday.
Or maybe just more hot air.
---
(I'm not a lawyer, but I know right from wrong)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: MadScientist on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 03:32 PM EDT |
| Thanks in advance [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ExcludedMiddle on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 03:52 PM EDT |
Am I the only one happily surprised that something good came of the request to
unseal documents. It certainly was a clumsy request, and it didn't succeed aside
from an informal request from the judge to unseal what they could. But the
parties did commisserate and unsealed a number of documents, which is a good
thing in this case with so much public interest.
I still believe that the original guesses that were discussed related to the
motivation behind this unseal request were true. Basically, I do believe that
certain parties wanted to unseal the IBM memo that fell under attorney-client
privelege. But in the end, it ended up having a very beneficial effect.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: NicholasDonovan on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 03:59 PM EDT |
Nothing. I keep waiting for Ben Stein's voice as the narrator for this bizarre
tale of corporate greed and executive self-destruction.
I don't believe that young Darl McBride will be seeing many executive offices
anytime soon. Once you've ruined yourself as a CEO you've tainted yourself for
life in my opinion.
As CEO, you must always remember that with privilege, comes responsibility. Not
all CEO's seem to adhere to that mantra much to their detriment.
Cheers,
Nick
---
Not an Attorney.
Views expressed are my personal opinions and not necessarily those of my
employer or its affiliates. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 10:30 PM EDT |
A lot of people in the above threads accuse McBride of being unethical. Exactly
what has he done that is unethical, and I mean something that he can be
prosecuted for?
Suing IBM is not unethical, it's opportunistic. Suing one's customers is also
not unethical, but it's bad business. Being a loudmouth is also not unethical.
Spreading Linux FUD is not unethical - it's hardball business. And the
Canopy/SCO business was settled out of court, I presume to everyone's
satisfaction, or the matter would still be in litigation.
I wouldn't mind having some hard facts enumerated here on Darl's ethical lapses,
and not just "we don't like him" rants.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Nothing wrong with being a Troll either - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 10:37 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: inode_buddha on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 10:47 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - by what definition - Authored by: psherma1 on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 10:49 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Stumbles on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 10:55 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:09 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:17 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:28 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:34 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:47 PM EDT
- Lies and misrepresentations - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 10:58 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics: lying about the evidence could be unethical - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:04 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: John Hasler on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 11:30 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics == 0 - Authored by: Larry West on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 12:14 AM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 07:15 AM EDT
- Unethical != Criminal (n/t) - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 09:55 AM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 22 2005 @ 02:42 PM EDT
- Darl & Ethics - Authored by: AnObfuscator on Thursday, June 23 2005 @ 02:34 PM EDT
|
|
|
|
