Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw

Intellectual Property Law

: Groklaw

Two US Trustee's Objections: to SCO's October Incentive Bonuses and to Confidentiality

By Pamela Jones et al.

Hello! The US Trustee's Office has filed not one but two objections, an objection to the October incentive bonuses and a limited objection to the SCO request for a closed hearing about it:

398 - Filed & Entered: 03/14/2008
Objection
Docket Text: Objection to Debtors' Motion for a Determination that Incentive Bonuses for Quarter Ending October 31, 2007 were Paid in the Ordinary Course of Debtors' Business and for Continuing Authority to Pay Ordinary Course of Business Incentive Bonuses (related document(s)[344] ) Filed by United States Trustee (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A -- Wage Motion # (2) Exhibit B -- Wage Order # (3) Exhibit C -- Excerpt of 9/18/07 Transcript # (4) Certificate of Service) (McMahon Jr., Joseph)

399 - Filed & Entered: 03/14/2008
Objection
Docket Text: Limited Objection to Debtors' Motion to Present Evidence and Testimony Related to the Debtors' 2007 Incentive Program Under Seal (related document(s)[345] ) Filed by United States Trustee (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service) (McMahon Jr., Joseph)

"11 U.S.C. Section 107 codifies the strong, compelling presumption of open access to judicial records and proceedings in civil matters," the US Trustee tells the court. There are some exceptions to that in a bankruptcy, but SCO doesn't fit into them, because SCO is a public company, and the SEC requires a public company to reveal the names of any insiders' compensation, so "the Debtors' argument lacks merit." So, you don't want to miss the hearing on this, for sure.

Update: We seem to have another case of redaction that isn't altogether effective, so I've pulled the first PDF, #398, but we have the redacted document as text now, and frankly you can figure out the redaction from what's left. I'll put it back up if it turns out to be OK to do so. If someone could do a PDF with proper redaction, that'd be great.

Full post as published by Groklaw on March 14, 2008 (boomark / email).