AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., Plaintiffs v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant.

ORDER

COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, United States District Judge

For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is, this 15th day of January, 2003, hereby

ORDERED that the Motion to Hold in Abeyance Proceedings on the Fee Petitions by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of West Virginia [# 565] is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of West Virginia have until January 31, 2003 to respond in writing to Defendant Microsoft's discovery requests; that Defendant Microsoft may take three (3) depositions to be completed no later than February 28, 2003; that Defendant Microsoft's Opposition to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of West Virginia's Motion for Attorneys Fees and Expenses is due no later than March 14, 2003; that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of West Virginia will notice what, if any discovery, they wish to conduct in this case by March 24, 2003 and serve such discovery, if any, by that date; and that if the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of West Virginia seek no discovery their Reply brief will be due April 7, 2003. If discovery is sought by Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of West Virginia, the Court, in consultation with the parties, will adjust the schedule to accommodate such a development.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE OF NEW YORK v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
(Jan 15, 2003)