|
|
| SCO Backs Slowly Toward the Door |
 |
|
Monday, March 31 2008 @ 05:55 PM EDT
|
SCO has settled a few things with the U.S. Trustee's office, withdrawing several motions, two "without prejudice". We'll get the details at the hearing on April 2, in courtroom 3, at 2 PM. I hope some of you can attend. And there's also a Notice of Agenda Matters, the proposed schedule for the day. What is so weird is that SCO is asking that the hearing on the things that were not settled, like the mountain of objections to their Disclosure Statement and plan to throw money to the Plan Sponsor, go forward as a status conference. It seems they plan on filing new documents:Please take further notice that the Debtors intend to file amended pleadings regarding the Pending Matters and intend to discuss the scheduling of such amended pleadings and the substance of the changes to the amended pleadings at the Hearing. As usual, they want to spring substantive matters on the other side without any opportunity to prepare in advance. OK. SCO's MO. So, what's a status conference?
With SCO, who knows? But this is what it normally means: status conference n. a pre-trial meeting of attorneys before a judge required under Federal Rules of Procedure and in many states to inform the court as to how the case is proceeding, what discovery has been conducted (depositions, interrogatories, production of documents), any settlement negotiations, probable length of trial, and other matters relevant to moving the case toward trial. Court rules usually require the filing of a status conference statement prior to the conference. In Federal courts the status conference is also the occasion for setting a trial date. So, as best as I can make out, they intend that nothing substantive happen that day, but everyone has to spend money to show up. Here are the filings: 420 - Filed & Entered: 03/31/2008
Notice of Service
Docket Text: Notice of Service /Notice and Request for Status Conference (related document(s)[369], [346], [394] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)
421 - Filed & Entered: 03/31/2008
Notice of Matters Scheduled for Hearing (B)
Docket Text: Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 4/2/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Werkheiser, Rachel)
422 - Filed & Entered: 03/31/2008
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection (No Order Required) Regarding Fifth Interim Application of Tanner LC for Compensation for Services and Reimbursement of Expenses as Accountants to the Debtors for the Period from February 2, 2008 through March 3, 2008 (related document(s)[386] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Werkheiser, Rachel) So what is still pending? The plan to gift the Plan Sponsor, the Disclosure Statement, and SCO's motion to hurry up and schedule a cutoff date for filing claims. What are the withdrawn matters? The US Trustee's motion to file portions of its objection to the bonus motion: The United States Trustee will be withdrawing this motion after the hearing based upon a resolution reached with the Debtors, the terms of which will be announced at the hearing. Also withdrawn is SCO's motion to pay incentive bonuses for October: The Debtors will be withdrawing this motion without prejudice after the hearing based upon a resolution reached with the Office of the United States Trustee, the terms of which will be announced at the hearing. Also, SCO's motion to present evidence and testimony under seal: The Debtors will be withdrawing this motion without prejudice after the hearing based upon a resolution reached with the Office of the United States Trustee, the terms of which will be announced at the hearing. As you know from earlier classes on SCO, without prejudice means they don't promise not to try again later. But I doubt it. I think they know the pending motions are doomed.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Winter on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 05:59 PM EDT |
SCO thinks they can sly away into the night. Groklaw is working on other
pressing matters.
:-)
Rob
---
Some say the sun rises in the east, some say it rises in the west; the truth
lies probably somewhere in between.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: overshoot on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:00 PM EDT |
| Please note the instructions in red for pretty posts. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: overshoot on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:02 PM EDT |
| As a courtesy, indicate the nature of the correction in the "Title:" [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: zma0472 on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:08 PM EDT |
Is there honestly any reasonable defense of the US legal system at this point?
This farce has dragged on for what now? 5 years? The US courts are ineffectual
and incompetent at best. There is absolutely no excuse for 5 years of this
preposterous drivel.
Does anyone but me realize that, had SCO's target been poor instead of rich, the
unfortunate wretches would have been ground out of existence by this criminal
filth?
Ridiculous and disgusting. The US courts and the ISO are both worthy of
complete abolition. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yahbut - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:24 PM EDT
- And.... - Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:33 PM EDT
- Yahbut - Authored by: pdp on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 11:34 AM EDT
- RE: SCO's Backs Slowly Toward the Door - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:27 PM EDT
- RE: SCO's Backs Slowly Toward the Door - Authored by: Tyro on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:30 PM EDT
- RE: SCO's Backs Slowly Toward the Door - Authored by: Just_Bri_Thanks on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:32 PM EDT
- RE: SCO's Backs Slowly Toward the Door - Authored by: fuego451 on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 08:04 PM EDT
- RE: SCO's Backs Slowly Toward the Door - Authored by: tce on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 11:22 PM EDT
- Ah The Door - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 11:03 AM EDT
- Is there honestly any reasonable defense of the US financial oversite system at this point? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 11:14 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:24 PM EDT |
It would be most helpful if you could please identify the Newspick item you are
discussing in the title of your post.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 06:27 PM EDT |
| So we can deal with you appropriately! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bezz on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 07:00 PM EDT |
I don't think moving a lot of the negotiations to a status conference --
particularly the "reorganization plan" -- is necessarily a matter for
concern. Novell, IBM and The US Trustee have all objected in terms that suggest
they are not willing to accept it. It is SCO's a thinly veiled attempt to
prolong the litigation, while SNCP has not demonstrated its financial ability to
pay judgements and is in a position where it may be in its own interest to
settle quickly on terms unfavorable to Novell and IBM. The two sides are so far
apart the negotiations will be protracted and the judge doesn't need to sit
through the whole process; most of this would be a waste of the judge's time
because it is the responsibility of the US Trustee to evaluate and accept/reject
proposed actions of the DIP.
It is possible that the sides will not come to an agreement on the SNCP issues
before the hearing. In that case, the judge will step in and make a decision.
But now that the Trustee has objected with their own strong terms (e.g. "in
light of debtor's dismal operating history") and essentially incorporating
by reference IBM's objections, SCO may be backed into a corner and not out the
door. As we have seen to date, the Trustee's opinion weighs heavily when it gets
to the judge.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: vb on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 07:13 PM EDT |
I think this shows, once again, that the U.S. Trustee's office has incredible
influence over the court.
Here SCO is giving up on matters before even going to court. In the past, we've
seen SCO willing to argue even outrageous positions before the court.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: snakebitehurts on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 08:49 PM EDT |
PJ
I'm sorry but I will be unable to attend this hearing (though I would love to be
there). I have 2 other commitments that afternoon. I saw that UD would be
there. I hope one or two others can make it. Am hoping this msg will remind a
few others who have been there in the past.
MikeD[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: LaurenceTux on Monday, March 31 2008 @ 08:53 PM EDT |
This is starting to look like the scene in B5 season 4 episode ??
its the scene where delen arrives at b5 to protect it from the earthforce
armada
Delen " the last time earthforce and minbari fought the only man to survive
an encounter with the fleet was John Sheridan
He is behind me you are in front of me BE SOMEWHERE ELSE"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 08:18 AM EDT |
421 - Filed & Entered: 03/31/2008
Notice of Matters Scheduled
for Hearing (B)
Docket Text: Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing
Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and
Service List) (O'Neill, James)
Why does SCO get to decide what
gets heard, and when? Don't the creditors and the US Trustee have any input as
to what gets argued before the judge, and shouldn't the judge be the one to make
the decision as to what actually gets heard, and when it gets heard?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: webster on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 10:19 AM EDT |
.
Withdrawing motions, making announcements, changing to a status, filing
amendments later...
This has become a non-hearing. SCO is dodging any resolutions against them,
wisely.
The only good thing about a Status Hearing is setting dates or deadlines. All
too often they turn into "talking about what they are going to talk
about." It resolves nothing and wastes time.
If all they are going to do is make a few announcements, Judge Gross will ask
for the Order so that he can sign it on his way out of the courtroom. He
doesn't need a hearing to do that.
SCO has essentially asked to continue the hearing. They have essentially
withdrawn the remaining contested motions since they plan to amend them. Later
than sooner is always better for them, or at least better than disclosure.
After all there may be no there there.
They are just going to have some "sugar-daddy" entity bail and buy
them out without scrutiny and ask the judge to approve it after the fact. How
could the Judge not approve posting the Novell Judgment so there can be an
appeal? A year or two of appeal is a lot of FUD.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 12:25 PM EDT |
I don't know if others have noticed but over the past two weeks I've noticed
that SCO is putting A LOT of legal documents up on their website, some of which
I've never seen. The link is: http://www.sco.com/company/legal/update/
It gives a bit of insight into their thinking.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
