Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: GroklawNovell Motion in Limine No. 1 - Let's All Live by the Mandate Rule, Shall We?
By Pamela Jones et al.
Ah! The mandate rule. Since the judge, the Hon. Ted Stewart, highlighted it in one of his recent orders, as had Judge Cahn before him, Novell's response is, Fine. Let's all live by the mandate rule. Judge Stewart denied one of Novell's summary judgment motions, holding that the Tenth Circuit "remanded this matter to the Court for trial on those four specific issues identified in the mandate," and that "[b]ecause of the specific nature of the mandate, the Court is not free to explore matters outside of it."
So what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. Obviously, we'll find out now what Judge Stewart is made of, since it was his order that brings this motion in limine's argument to the fore. To deny Novell's motion, Judge Stewart has to more or less admit he goofed in his order on Novell's summary judgment motion on the slander of title special damages claim (or alternatively that he was too strict about the mandate rule), which I earlier said I thought he had. What to do? What to do?
Now, judges are used to acknowledging their own errors, as it's part of their job to be reviewed by their superiors in the chain if not always by their betters. So that isn't likely to be a problem. I discern, then, that unless the fix is in, as they say, this motion in a normal universe would be granted. In short, I think we are about to find out if we are in a normal universe in Utah for the upcoming SCO v. Novell trial, beginning on March 8, or not.
Full post as published by Groklaw on February 07, 2010 (boomark / email).
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
Institutionalized Medicaid Recipients
Sue For Right To Choose Where They Live
Microsoft Corp.
allegedly failed to provide adequate access and service to Xbox Live and its subscribers.

Order on Motion in Limine in I/O v. Sercel
Failure to Renew Evidentiary Objections Raised in Motion in Limine Waives Appellate Review
SCO vs. Linux: Prozess gegen Novell abgeschlossen
What is a mandate from an appellate court
Novell Gets $2.5 Million From SCO







