Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Appeals Anti-Trust to Supreme Court

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the com'on-dad-we're-not-really-a-monopoly dept.

wicket2001 writes "The AP is reporting that Microsoft has appealed their anti-trust case to the Supreme Court. Microsoft sent the petition to the high court two days before the case was to be sent to a new judge to decide what penalty the Redmond, Wash., firm should face."

3 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Working links by iammichael · · Score: 4, Informative
    That AP link didn't work for me, so here's some that do:
  2. Not really news by evilpenguin · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Supreme Court is unlikely to do anything about this. They are unlikely to overturn Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law made by a federal judge and upheld by a circuit court of appeals. They are unlikely to agree to hear the case. This is more a holding action designed to make the whole process as slow as possible.

    It will go to the Federal Circuit Court again, to the Appeals Court, and on back to the Supreme Court at least one more time before things are done. Microsoft needs to give the Supreme Court a reversible error or Constitutional issue before the Supreme Court will agree to hear it.

    It is interesting (if you are into legal wrangling), but hardly an important story. If the Supreme Court agrees to hear it, THEN it is news!

  3. Summary by slice4444 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here's the PDF of the actual petition.

    This appeal is on one issue - Judge Jackson. The Appeals Court threw out Jackson's remedy (the breakup) to be reconsidered by a new judge. Microsoft is trying to get the Supremes to throw out the rest of Jacson's rulings, and get them reconsidered by a new judge as well.

    ... the district judge should have been disqualified as of September 1999, the date of his earliest known violation... Such disqualification would require vacatur of the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.

    The Appeals Court didn't buy this strategy. They said they reviewed the record, and that there was no 'actual bias' prior to the remedy. Microsoft disagrees, and says that they don't have to show 'actual bias', just the perception of it. In this petition, MS relies heavily on two precedents, the biggest being some other case where the Supreme Court said there didn't have to be 'actual bias' to throw out a lower court ruling.

    This petition sounds valid on the face of it. (I don't get why the appeals court didn't throw out Jackson's findings, personally. IANAL, thank god) But MS is probably stretching the precedent they clearly want to apply.

    --
    ----