Re: Microsoft Granted 'Expedited' Appeal

["Erick Andrews" <eandrews@star.net>]

On Wed, 31 Dec 1997 22:16:49 -0500 (EST), charles mueller wrote:

>        For those who may have missed it earlier, today's New York Times
>(12/31/97, p. C8) reports that the U.S. court of appeals in Washington
>yesterday GRANTED Microsoft's motion for an *expedited* hearing of its
>appeal of Judge Jackson's injunction against its OS/browser tying.  
>
>        March 9 was set as the date for the filing of written motions and
>replies, with oral argument to follow.  This is of course well ahead of the
>May due date of the special master's report to Judge Jackson--thus setting
>the stage for a 3-judge panel of the appeals court (again, one dominated by
>Reagan appointees with a virtually perfect record of ruling for monopoly
>defendants) to set aside that lower-court injunction before it's ever
>actually enforced
>
>        A Microsoft spokesman, according to the Times, allowed as how 'the
>company was encouraged by the ruling,' one it saw as a boon for 'consumers.'
>As well it might be encouraged.  Again, put your money on Bill's legal team.
>In this pro- monopoly court, it couldn't lose if it was led by Barney Fife.
>Look for a quick appellate decision, one that exonerates Microsoft of all
>charges.
>
>        Charles Mueller, Editor
>        ANTITRUST LAW & ECONOMICS REVIEW
>        http://webpages.metrolink.net/~cmueller           
>
This is interesting.  I was of the understanding that MS had to respond
to the most current charge against them by the DOJ on January 13, 1997.

Is this this an extension?

Erick Andrews