Order of the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Topic: Granting Motion for Stay of August 11 Deposition Order Pending Appeal,
and Setting Briefing Schedule.
Case: DOJ v. Microsoft II, U.S.D.C. No. 98-1232, Court of Appeals No.
98-5399.
Date: August 19, 1998.
Source: Clerk of the Appeals Court. This document was created by TLJ by
scanning a paper copy, and converting it into HTML. The original also included a
date stamp (AUG 19 1998) and initials of the Circuit Judges.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
| No. 98-5399 | September Term, 1997 98cv01232 98cv01233 |
United States of America,
Appellee
v.
Microsoft Corporation,
Appellant
_______________________________
Consolidated with 98-5400
BEFORE: Williams, Ginsburg, and Sentelle, Circuit Judges
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for a stay pending appeal, the oppositions and the lodged response thereto, and the reply; the motion for leave to file a response; and the supplemental authority submitted pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 280), it is
ORDERED that the motion for leave to file a response be granted. The Clerk is directed to file the lodged response. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for a stay of the district court's August 11, 1998 order permitting members of the public to attend pretrial depositions be granted. See Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Comm'n v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841 (D.C. Cir. 1977); D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures 60-62 (1997). The balance of harms favors appellant; if appellant prevails, the disclosure could not be undisclosed, whereas if appellees prevail, the text and videotape of a private deposition can then be disclosed. It is
FURTHER ORDERED, on the court's own motion, that the district court's order, filed August 11, 1998, be vacated inasmuch as it stays depositions pending the development of a protocol for affording public access to pretrial depositions. This court's order in no way governs the taking of those depositions, which may proceed in the manner they have to date. It is
FURTHER ORDERED, on the court's own motion, that this appeal be expedited and that the following briefing schedule shall apply:
| Brief for Microsoft Corporation and Joint Appendix |
September 1, 1998 | |
| Brief for United States of America | September 22, 1998 | |
| Joint Brief for Appellee States | September 22, 1998 | |
| Joint Brief for New York Times Company, The Seattle Times, ZDTV L.L.C., ZDNET, Bloomberg News, and Reuters, America, Inc. |
September 22, 1998 | |
| Reply Brief for Microsoft Corporation | September 29, 1998 |
In addition to the merits, all parties are directed to address the basis for this court's jurisdiction. Due to the expedited nature of this case, the court will not entertain dispositive motions. To avoid any duplication, appellees are obliged to consult during the preparation of their briefs and to adopt relevant portions of each other's briefs. Briefs that are repetitious in whole or in part will not be accepted. All submissions are to be filed and delivered by hand. All briefs should be in final form.
The Clerk is directed to calendar this case for oral argument on the first appropriate date before this panel.
Per Curiam