<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.thestandard.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>The Industry Standard - States Ask High Court to Reject Microsoft Appeal - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.thestandard.com/article/0%2C1902%2C28918%2C00.html</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;States Ask High Court to Reject Microsoft Appeal&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>States Ask High Court to Reject Microsoft Appeal</title>
 <link>http://www.thestandard.com/article/0%2C1902%2C28918%2C00.html</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;
&lt;p&gt;	    WASHINGTON -- The District of Columbia and the 18 states involved in the&lt;br /&gt;
antitrust suit against Microsoft Corp. asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday&lt;br /&gt;
not to hear the software company&#039;s appeal of a lower court opinion in the case.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    &quot;We believe that Microsoft&#039;s attempt to further delay an appropriate remedy&lt;br /&gt;
continues to undermine the public&#039;s interest in competition,&quot; New York Attorney&lt;br /&gt;
General Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. &quot;With each succeeding version of&lt;br /&gt;
Windows being introduced, Microsoft&#039;s products continue its monopolist position&lt;br /&gt;
in the market and further limit consumer choice.&quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    The filing was expected and follows an earlier brief filed by the Justice&lt;br /&gt;
Department, the states&#039; partner in the suit.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    Microsoft on Aug. 7 appealed a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals upholding a&lt;br /&gt;
substantial portion of U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson&#039;s finding&lt;br /&gt;
that Microsoft is a predatory monopoly. The court also sent the case back to a&lt;br /&gt;
new district court judge to craft a remedy.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    Microsoft (MSFT) said Judge Jackson&#039;s entire legal findings and conclusions&lt;br /&gt;
should be thrown out because he was biased and failed to follow correct&lt;br /&gt;
procedures. However, because the appeals court opinion was unanimous, legal&lt;br /&gt;
observers believe that Supreme Court review is unlikely.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    The Supreme Court could decide sometime in October whether to hear the case.&lt;br /&gt;
Meanwhile, District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has told the government&lt;br /&gt;
and Microsoft to submit briefs in the remand of the case by next Friday.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    Earlier this week, the Justice Department announced it won&#039;t pursue a breakup&lt;br /&gt;
of Microsoft when the penalty phase of the case resumes later this month and&lt;br /&gt;
that it is dropping claims that Microsoft illegally bundled its Internet&lt;br /&gt;
Explorer browser software with its Windows operating system. A Justice&lt;br /&gt;
Department official said the decision was an attempt to mount an effective&lt;br /&gt;
strategy of litigation with the intention of providing quick relief to consumers&lt;br /&gt;
by curbing anticompetitive conduct.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;	&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.thestandard.com/taxonomy/term/1253">Wire</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2001 15:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Baldwin Louie</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">88406 at http://www.thestandard.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
