UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 27, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER granting Motion for Leave for Dan K. Webb to Appear as an Attorney for Microsoft. 630 Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on September 27, 2001. Modified on 6/11/2002 (jeb, ).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 24, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER denying Motion to Intervene.Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on September 21, 2001.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 24, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER denying Carl Lundgren's Motion for Leave to File as amicus curiae. Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on September 21, 2001.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 17, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDERED that the date for filing the Joint Status Report shall be extended from 12 noon on September 18, 2001, to 10 a.m. on September 20, 2001. Further ORDERED that the Status Conference scheduled for September 21, 2001, is vacated and rescheduled for September 28, 2001, at 9:30 a.m. Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on 9-17-01.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 13, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER granting Motion for Extension of Time to File Joint Status Report 625 . Joint Status Report orignally due September 14, 2001, shall be filed not later than 12 noon on September 18, 2001. Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on 9-13-01.(lcckk1) Modified on 6/11/2002 (jeb, ).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 6, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER establishing procedures for electronic filing.Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kottelly on September 6, 2001. (jeb, )
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: August 29, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly: denying as moot plaintiff's motion for an expedited status conference. Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on August 29, 2001. (jeb, )
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: August 28, 2001 as 1:1998cv01232
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Amicus: PROJECT TO PROMOTE COMPETITION & INNOVATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Defendant: MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Intervenor: ROBERT E. LITAN
Movant: ANDREAS POUR, ASSOCIATED PRESS, CABLE NEWS NETWORK, LP, LLP, CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS, CARL LUNDGREN, CONSUMERS FOR COMPUTING CHOICE AND OPEN PLATFORM WORKING GROUP, DAN KEGEL, DAVID L. WHITEHEAD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., EINER ELHAUGE, FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT, GOOGLE INC., JOHN CARROLL, LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, LOS ANGELES TIMES, MASON THOMAS, NETACTION AND COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOVELL, INC., PROCOMP, REBECCA A. HENDERSON, RELPROMAX ANTITRUST INC., ROY A. DAY, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC., SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC., SOFTWARE & INFORMATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF IOWA, STATE OF KANSAS
and others
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
ORDER directing the parties to confer and file a Joint Status Report with the Court (in the style of LCvR 16.3 to the extent appropriate). That such Joint Status Report shall: identify with specificity the issues on remand that remain for the Court's resolution; resolution of such issues (ie., the potential for testimony, motions, etc.); identify with specificity the nature of any additional evidentiary hearings, and propose an appropriate schedule for the described matters. The…
