|
|
| Final Pretrial Order in SCO v Novell Delayed to Aug. 17 |
 |
|
Thursday, August 09 2007 @ 11:16 PM EDT
|
Yesterday, I mentioned that today was the deadline to file the Final Pre-trial Order. Now there's a stipulated motion in SCO v. Novell for an extension until August 17 to file it. And there is an Order granting the stipulated motion to extend the time to object to Rule 26(a)(3) disclosures. Here are the docket entries:
375 -
Filed & Entered: 08/09/2007
Motion for Extension of Time
Docket Text: Stipulated MOTION for Extension of Time for Submission of Pre-Trial Order filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # (1) Text of
Proposed Order) Motions referred to Brooke C. Wells.(Normand, Edward)
376 -
Filed & Entered: 08/09/2007
Order on Motion for Extension of Time
Docket Text: ORDER granting [374] Motion for Extension of Time to file objections to the Pre-Trial Rule 26(a)(3) Disclosures until 8/31/07. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 8/9/07. (kla) Don't ask me. Something is up, but I really can't say what. I'm sure we'll find out in due time.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 09 2007 @ 11:30 PM EDT |
If any are needed.
---
--Bill P, not a lawyer. Question the answers, especially if I give some.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Corrections - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 09 2007 @ 11:54 PM EDT
- Dates - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:19 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 09 2007 @ 11:31 PM EDT |
Link hints are given in red near the place you enter comments.
---
--Bill P, not a lawyer. Question the answers, especially if I give some.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Microsoft virtualization quote retracted - Authored by: artp on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:14 AM EDT
- Microsoft out to patent web 3.0 - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 05:22 AM EDT
- Good one - Authored by: JamesK on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 06:28 AM EDT
- Karen Copenhaver And Andy Updegrove Join Linux Foundation - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 07:46 AM EDT
- What's happened to the Arbitration? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 09:08 AM EDT
- Hey PJ, are you participating in the strike? :-) - Authored by: josmith42 on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 11:03 AM EDT
- Universal sells songs without DRM - Authored by: tiger99 on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:00 PM EDT
- Google - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 04:50 PM EDT
- US vote on OOXML - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:05 PM EDT
- BitTorrent goes closed source - Authored by: TiddlyPom on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:08 PM EDT
- Good quote - Authored by: JamesK on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:44 PM EDT
- Competing Standards - Authored by: kawabago on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 01:59 PM EDT
- Peugeot (car maker) deploying linux - Authored by: lukep on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 02:32 PM EDT
- Microsoft -- "Independent expert"? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 03:18 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 09 2007 @ 11:49 PM EDT |
I am not a lawyer and I do not know anything US law.
Below is my proposal - what do the people that know the law think??
Can't someone call the judge's clerk to find out if they know something about
what is going on?
The court may have had some contact (?) with the parties without us knowing (?),
and this information may not be confidential (?) but just not published (?).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: argee on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 12:19 AM EDT |
Maybe they are settling. SCO gets to own all the UNIX
copyrights, and Microsoft antes the money for SCO to
make it happen. Then Novell and MS buddy up on the patent
thing, and bingo!
:-(
---
--
argee[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Settling - Authored by: tce on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 01:08 AM EDT
- There are some things money just cannot buy - Authored by: pogson on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 01:15 AM EDT
- ... but this isn't one of them - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 01:52 AM EDT
- But - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 07:30 AM EDT
- Highly unlikely - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 03:51 AM EDT
- Next in line: IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 06:35 AM EDT
- Settling - Authored by: Steve Martin on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 07:00 AM EDT
- Settling - Authored by: DaveJakeman on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 07:52 AM EDT
- Settling... catch22 - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 11:25 AM EDT
- Settling - Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 04:45 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: dmarker on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 04:11 AM EDT |
The Judge has advised the parties what he intends doing re PSJ & the muck
has hit the fan as tSCOg realize their flimsy boat has at last hit the shoals.
Big scramble on to limit the damage and prepare for the bailing out that will
become a necessity.
So my guess is the judge is being kind but really protecting his butt while the
obvious conclusion is being reached.
:)
DSM
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jiri on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 04:33 AM EDT |
| I'm sure we'll find out in due time.
Or later, as stipulated :-)
Jiri
---
Please e-mail me if you reply, I usually read with "No
comments".
jiri@baum.com.au [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 08:34 AM EDT |
Is it that Novels new heavy lifter has just come to the notice of Darl and his
team?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 01:36 PM EDT |
| Interesting that SCO asked for 8 days (8/17) and got 22 (8/31). [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DMF on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 01:49 PM EDT |
The parties really don't want to submit the Final Order until Da Judge rules on
the pending motions. (Any chance I'm wrong?)
They've concocted a delay and let it be known (soto voce) that they're actually
waiting for the judge. By implication they could keep filing stipulated
extensions.
The reason that Judge Kimball extended to 8/31 is to cover HIS schedule and
avoid more extensions. Expect rulings on the SJ motions (at al.) before the
24th.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- My rationale - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 03:09 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: IMANAL on Friday, August 10 2007 @ 04:31 PM EDT |
I searched for it on Groklaw, and got 28 items in about 2.5 seconds. One of the
most informative remarks among these, as well as the oldest of the hits was this a remark by futureweaver which explains:
"The 26(a)(3) disclosures are the lists of witnesses, depositions, and exhibits
that will be produced at
trial."
-
---
--------------------------<
br />
IM Absolutely Not A Lawyer [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: billyskank on Friday, August 17 2007 @ 12:09 PM EDT |
I don't think it really matters now. :D
---
It's not the software that's free; it's you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
