![]() |
Hello and Welcome from United States to the UNIX and Linux Forums! Thank You for Visiting and Joining Our Global Community.
|
|
google unix.com
|
|||||||
| Forums | Register | Forum Rules | Links | Albums | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| UNIX and Linux RSS News The latest news covering Solaris, RedHat, Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, HP-UX, AIX, BSD, Apple OS X and more! |
More UNIX and Linux Forum Topics You Might Find Helpful
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Apple Files Motion for Relief from Stay in Psystar Bankruptcy | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 06-10-2009 12:30 AM |
| Motion: Motion quits unexpectedly when exporting to REDCODE | iBot | OS X Support RSS | 0 | 04-26-2009 02:30 AM |
| SCO Withdraws Motion for Auction; Hearing Cancelled | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 03-12-2009 06:30 PM |
| SCO Bankruptcy: SCO Withdraws Motion Re Confidentiality | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 03-01-2009 04:05 PM |
| Motion: Some layered Photoshop files import as merged objects | iBot | OS X Support RSS | 0 | 10-14-2008 06:10 PM |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||||
|
SCO Files Motion to Seal Appendix to its Response and Motion to Shorten Notice
My, they stay up late in Utah. Here are some more filings in the SCO bankruptcy posted late yesterday and some today. SCO has filed two motions, one a Motion to Seal Debtors' Appendix to Their Response to Motions to Dismiss or Convert [PDF], because 55 pages and 118 footnotes isn't nearly enough. And the second motion is a Motion to Shorten Notice [PDF] Regarding Debtors' Motion to File Under Seal Debtors' Appendix. The rest are affidavits of service and various bookkeeping things of no consequence, so I'll show you the docket entries on those.
What does it mean? If you recall, the Response referenced an Appendix, but it wasn't filed simultaneously. The response was filed on June 5; the Appendix was referenced but still isn't filed, not even sealed. That's unusual indeed, particularly since SCO's Motion to Seal states they were both filed "contemporaneously". Instead we have a motion to seal it, without apparently filing it yet at all, filed on June 8. SCO says it wishes to protect *IBM*, because the appendix includes some confidential IBM memos. Old-timers here will recall how valiantly SCO has always scrupulously fought to keep IBM confidential memos from the public. Hardy har. OK. So what is it really about? More... |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|