SCO Grp v. Novell Inc

Filing 653

NOTICE OF CONVENTIONAL FILING of Exhibit 13A filed by Defendant Novell, Inc. re 638 MOTION in Limine No. 13 to Exclude Certain Testimony From Lawrence Bouffard for Lack of Personal Knowledge and Violation of Parol Evidence Rule (Brennan, Sterling)

Download PDF
SCO Grp v. Novell Inc Doc. 653 WORKMAN | NYDEGGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Sterling A. Brennan (Utah State Bar No. 10060; E-mail: David R. Wright (Utah State Bar No. 5164: E-mail: Kirk R. Harris (Utah State Bar No. 10221; E-mail: Cara J. Baldwin (Utah State Bar No. 11863; E-mail: 1000 Eagle Gate Tower 60 E. South Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Telephone: (801) 533-9800 Facsimile: (801) 328-1707 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP Michael A. Jacobs (Admitted Pro Hac Vice; E-mail: Eric M. Acker (Admitted Pro Hac Vice; E-mail: Grant L. Kim (Admitted Pro Hac Vice; E-Mail: 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff Novell, Inc. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION THE SCO GROUP, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, vs. Judge Ted Stewart NOVELL, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS. Case No. 2:04CV00139 NOVELL INC.'S NOTICE OF CONVENTIONAL FILING Please take notice that Defendant, Novell, Inc., has conventionally filed the original and one copy of the following documents, papers or other materials: Exhibit 13A These documents, papers or other materials have not been filed electronically because: They are exempt from electronic filing pursuant to E (7) of the District of Utah CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Manual. These documents, papers or other materials have been conventionally served on all parties. DATED: February 8, 2010 Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Sterling A. Brennan MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP WORKMAN NYDEGGER Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff Novell, Inc. 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?