UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
v. ) Civil Action No. 94-1564
) (Stanley Sporkin)
MICROSOFT CORPORATION, )
ORDER RE MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT DECREE
The issue before this Court is whether the entry of the proposed
antitrust consent decree between Microsoft Corporation and the United
States is in "the public interest." The Court cannot find the
proposed consent decree to be in the public interest for four
reasons. First, the Government has declined to provide the Court
with the information it needs to make its proper public interest
determination. Second, the scope of the decree is too narrow.
Third, the parties have been unable and unwilling adequately to
address certain anticompetitive practices which Microsoft states it
will continue to employ in the future and with respect to which the
decree is silent. Thus, the decree does not constitute an effective
antitrust remedy. Fourth, the Court is not satisfied that the
enforcement and compliance mechanisms in the decree are satisfactory.
Based on the above reasons, the Court hereby ORDERS that the motion
to approve the consent decree be DENIED.
A status call on this matter will be held on March 16, 1995 at 10:00
a.m. in Courtroom 6.
DATE: February 14, 1995 ______________________________
United States District Judge
ORDER RE MOTIONS TO PARTICIPATE AND MOTION TO STRIKE
There are three motions by interested persons to participate in the
Tunney Act proceedings before the Court: 1) I.D.E. Corporation's
("IDEA") motion for intervention; 2) anonymous persons' motion to
file an amicus curiae memorandum in opposition to proposed final
judgment; and 3) Computer & Communications Industry Association's
("CCIA") motion to intervene, or in the alternative, motion to
participate as amicus curiae.
With respect to these motions to participate, the Court hereby ORDERS
1) The motions to intervene by IDEA and CCIA are DENIED. In the
alternative, the Court authorizes IDEA and CCIA to participate in the
proceedings under the Court's authority pursuant to 16(f)(3) to
allow "participation in any other manner and extent which serves the
public interest as a the court may deem appropriate."
2) The motion to file the memorandum of amici curiae in oppposition
to the proposed final judgment is GRANTED pursuant to the Court's
authority under 16(f)(3).
Also before the Court is Microsoft's motion to strike the
"Supplemental Submission in Support of Memorandum of Amici Curiae in
Opposition to the Proposed Final Judgment" ("Supplemental
Submission") filed by the law firm of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich &
Rosati on behalf of anonymous persons. The Court hereby ORDERS that
Microsoft's motion to strike is GRANTED as it relates to a contested
redacted document. The Court DENIES the motion to strike in so far
as the Supplemental Submission provides legal argument based on the
record properly before the Court.
DATE: February 14, 1995 _______________________________
United States District Judge
Brought to you by - The 'Lectric Law Library
The Net's Finest Legal Resource for Legal Pros & Laypeople Alike.