Two new IBM case documents filed. Both are interesting.
The Magistrate Judge whom the Motion to Compel ( pertaining to the Discovery requests form IBM) ruled one day after the Motion to Dismiss was granted. She only mentioned the 400 gigabytes of encrypted files and did not address the 400 boxes of files claimed to be in the SEC's possession. But the Judge ruled "Plaintiff shall completely respond to the pending discovery requests by April 2, 2012." IBM asked for the 400 boxes in it's Motion to Compel so according to that language in the document it appears the Magistrate might be including them with the words "completely respond".
Since this was in two different courts and the time lapse was a day with the Dismissal Order, it could have been lack of communication between courts in the short time frame. But it was filed and posted for whatever reason.
But the second filing submitted yesterday might be more important, and would be somewhat intertwined with the Magistrates ruling depending on how it plays out.
QSGI's law firm has submitted a filing stating they will be unavailable from June 1 to July 2 of this year due to being in trial in another court.
Might this be a precursor to QSGI refiling the Anti Trust case within the 14 days allowed in the MTD ? Or is it 'housekeeping' type filings for all intents and purposes? Not sure, but it is interesting to see they filed this.
If they do re-file the case though though, it appears they will have to have the Discovery items to turn over by 4/2 (the court is holding QSGI to that date now) to comply with the Magistrates ruling.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
