Judge Wells: Because IBM Didn't Oppose, SCO May Amend Pleadings

Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 08:22 PM EST

Contributed by: PJ

Judge Wells has signed her order on the issue of whether SCO may amend its
pleadings. Because IBM did not oppose, she has agreed to let them do so.
They did not oppose, however, "subject to IBM's right to move against
the amended pleadings." I would expect that means they intend to do so.

This is not the order on the discovery issues that we are all eagerly waiting for,
and it isn't a "win" for either side, because there was no fight over it. It's more
procedural. This is just the order on the unrelated issue of whether
SCO could amend its complaint. This order is easier to get done first, because
it wasn't contested. The discovery issues are far more complex, and it's natural
she would take more time for that.

It's not up on the free Pacer list yet, but it should be soon.
PDF: http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/IBM-107.pdf

On the Novell front, Judge Kimball signed three orders, so that three attorneys
can represent Novell, despite not being Utah attorneys. This is similar to David
Boies being able to represent SCO in Utah, despite not being admitted to the bar in Utah.

The three that are the subjects of the orders and the list of courts where
they are admitted are:

1. Paul Goldstein -- admitted to practice in the following:

Sup. Ct. of the State of CA - 1978
State of NY, 2d Dept. -1968
US Dist Ct. CA, Northern, Central, Eastern -1990-1992
US Ct of Appeals 9th Cir. - 1990
US Ct of Appeals 10th Cir. - 1992
US Supreme Court -1994

2. Michael A. Jacobs -- admitted to practice in the following:

US Dist Cts CA Northern, Southern, Central Districts - 1983-93
US Dist Ct, CT - 1998
US Ct of Appeals 4th, 9th Circuits - 1988 and 1991
US Ct of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - 1992
US Ct of Appeals, 2d Cir - 2001
US Supreme Court - 1993

3. Matthew I. Kreeger -- admitted to practice in the following:

Sup Ct CA -1991
US Dist Cts CA Northern, Central, Eastern, Southern Districts - 1992-98
US Ct of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - 1995
US Ct of Appeals 9th Cir - 1996

Here is the order by Judge Wells:



---------------------------------------------

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DIVISION, DISTRICT OF UTAH

---------------------------------------------

THE SCO GROUP INC.

Plaintiff,

vs.


INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP.

Defendant.

----------------------------------------------

ORDER GRANTING SCO GROUP INC.'S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED PLEADINGS

Case No. 2:03cv00294 DK

----------------------------------------------

The Court having reviewed Plaintiff and Counter Defendant
SCO Group Inc.'s Motion for Leave to File Amended Pleadings, and
the accompanying memoranda hereby enters the following:

IBM in its memoranda in response stated that it "does not
oppose plaintiff's second motion for leave to amend, subject to
IBM's right to move against the amended pleadings."

The Court, therefore, finding good cause shown hereby GRANTS
SCO Group's Motion for Leave to File Amended Pleadings.

DATED this 25th day of February, 2004.

BY THE COURT:

<signature>
BROOKE C. WELLS
United States Magistrate Judge

165 comments



http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040226202247393