Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: GroklawSCO Opposes Novell Motion to Set Aside Judgment
By Pamela Jones et al.
ADVERTISEMENTS
SCO, "by and through the Chapter 11 Trustee in Bankruptcy, Edward N. Cahn", has filed its opposition to Novell's Motion to Set Aside Judgment. This is the motion that will be argued on February 4. SCO argues that if Novell wanted to argue this, they should have appealed it, and that's a strong argument: Novell could have filed a protective cross-appeal and argued that, if Novell were to lose on appeal, it would be entitled to certain relief. It did not.And that's true. It could have done that. Maybe if SCO hadn't misappropriated money it should have paid Novell years ago, Novell might have. Whether it slams the door, I don't know.
We also get a glimpse of the position Cahn has taken on the slander of title claims, and why they imagine they have a shot at resurrecting all that. I'll also show you why I don't think they do.
Full post as published by Groklaw on January 06, 2010 (boomark / email).
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

SCO vs. Linux: Prozess gegen Novell abgeschlossen
Novell Gets $2.5 Million From SCO
The Roller SCOaster Continues: Fight With Novell Heads to Trial
SCO Owes Novell $2.5 Million Plus in Final Judgment Order From Linux Copyright Case
False Start on Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness









