[Am-info] When will the judge rule?

[John J. Urbaniak]

Erick Andrews wrote:

> On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 10:28:48 -0400, John J. Urbaniak wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Mark Hinds wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone have any insight, guess, wild speculation as
> >> to when the good judge will finally rule on this thing?
> >
> >As I see it, the longer she takes, the better.
> >
> >I think if she were inclined to accept the DoJ - MS settlement, she
> >would have done it by now.
> >
> >Same with the 9 unsettling states.
> >
> >So I suspect she's crafting her own judgement.  I also suspect that
> >because she's taking a long time, it will be an intricate judgement,
> >with lots of painful regulations and procedures that MS will have to
> >follow.
> >
> >I suspect they won't like that at all.
> >
> >John
> >
>
> [...]
>
> That's a good bet.  However, the other edge on the blade will
> likely be a long and protracted appeal again.  Not being a legal
> scholar, I don't know how long that could be, or what the limits
> are.
>
> Anyone know?

I don't think there's a possibility for another appeal.  This *is* the
appeal, isn't it?  This is the result of the appeal of Judge Penfield
Jackson's decision to split up the company which was remanded to this new
Judge.  As I remember it, the Appeals Court upheld Jackson on everything
except the penalty and some issue about the browser.

They could possibly appeal to the Supremes, but I think they already
turned down an appeal.

And you can't just appeal because you don't like the decision.  You have
to have grounds for the appeal, like the supposed misconduct of Jackson
in talking to a reporter and giving his [correct] opinions of Microsoft
as a gang of "thugs" and of Gates as a sicko.

But Judge K-K has bent over backwards in almost every ruling she made
during the hearing to give Microsoft the strongest benefits of any
doubts.

It would be difficult, I think, for MS lawyers to come up with anything
regarding misconduct, or prejudice, or whatever from this Judge.

I think the unsettling states might have grounds for appeal if they don't
like the final decision.  After all, the Judge accepted testimony from
that AMD clown who admitted that Microsoft offered a favor (support of
his new chip) for his testimony.  And if I remember correctly, Judge K -
K wouldn't accept testimony from Barksdale, who as a Principal of
Netscape and one harmed most grievously by MS, deserved to be heard, I
think.

John