![]() |
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 |
| Novell's Objections to the Amended Plan, as text | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 03-12-2009 06:30 PM |
| New Filing -- Novell's Opposition to SCO's Motion to Stay Taxation of Costs | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 03-01-2009 04:05 PM |
| New Filings -- Novell's bill of costs | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 03-01-2009 04:05 PM |
| The Costs of Solving the Air-Traffic Mess | iBot | Complex Event Processing RSS News | 0 | 04-23-2008 12:00 AM |
| Bill Gates' legacy: Outmaneuvering the competition - iT News | iBot | UNIX and Linux RSS News | 0 | 06-25-2007 04:30 AM |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||||
|
SCO Objects to $50,586.14 of Novell's Bill of Costs
There are some filings in the SCO v. Novell litigation. SCO is objecting to some of Novell's Bill of Costs, and in the second filing, the court tried to mail something to Jonathan Lee Riches, but the post office evidently couldn't find him. In prison. "Mail returned as undeliverable... unable to forward." Uh oh.
: D SCO's argument is based on characterizing certain items as not covered by the statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1920, saying some of the costs are unnecessary, being for Novell's convenience and comfort only. Like transcripts. They are covered by the statute, but Novell listed $7,592.11 for costs for renting deposition rooms. "These costs are not taxable under the statute," SCO asserts. SCO would like Novell to be put through the very educational experience of being sued for absolutely no wrongdoing whatsoever, according to what the court decided, and then having to pay the expenses for defending itself. More... |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|