We finally have permission from the court to share the transcript of the hearing on the summary judgment motions [PDF] heard on April 30th, on the second day of the Novell-SCO trial in Utah, with you. Yay!

SCO has filed two two monthly operating reports, one for SCO Group and one for SCO Operations. This is like watching water drain from a slow tub. Also the transcript of the June 17 hearing is now available. And Dorsey & Whitney have submitted another bill going back to April.

There is a hearing coming up on February 4 at 3 PM before Judge Stewart in SCO v. Novell, and I surely hope some of you can attend, regarding Novell's recently filed motion asking to set aside an earlier judgment by Judge Kimball, so Novell can go after monies SCO took in from Microsoft and companies that bought a SCOsource license. But there's something odd in the notice about the hearing.

We finally have the transcript from the court for the January 23, 2007 hearing in SCO v. Novell. This is the hearing on Novell's motion about the money, on the question of whether SCO owes Novell for the money it took in from Sun and Microsoft in 2003, or as I call it Novell's "give us our money before it's all gone" motion. SCO also filed a Cross Motion, also heard that day

Here at long last is the transcript [PDF] of the May 25, 2005 hearing in SCO v. Novell, and while it is dated, and even quaint in some respects, some of it is very timely...

Novell moves for judgment on slander of title and damages:

Defendant Novell, Inc. ("Novell") respectfully moves the Court to grant judgment as a matter of law in favor of Novell because plaintiff The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") has failed to introduce legally sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable jury could find for SCO on its claim for slander of title....

We now have the transcript [PDF] of the February 25, 2010 combined hearing on Novell's Daubert motions and final pre-trial conference between the parties in SCO v. Novell before Judge Stewart.

Yesterday, SCO made an oral motion after Novell rested, asking for judgment as a matter of law on Novell's slander of title counterclaim, and Stewart has ruled that Novell did not carry the burden of proof with respect to special damages, except for copyright registration costs, which he doesn't think can be viewed as specials, so Novell's slander of title claim fails as a matter of law...

There are a lot of filings to catch up on in the SCO bankruptcy, the usual bleeding of the patient with bills and such. Also the monthly operating reports for January from SCO, and the transcript [PDF] from the December hearing which was embargoed until March but is now available.