Nice scoop Jeff.

The inconsistencies in Psystar’s argument are incredible.  Psystar argued that it filed bankruptcy because market conditions and stiffer credit terms by its suppliers forced it to seek bankruptcy protection.  It made little of the costs of its legal battle with Apple as a cause for it bankruptcy, but an examination of its pre-petition debts showed its law firm, Carr & Ferrell, to be among its largest creditors.  Yet, in opposing Apple’s Motion For Relief from stay, Psystar argued that the bankruptcy court should deny Apple’s Motion, because it couldn’t afford to reorganize while battling Apple’s infringement action in the U.S. Dist. Court in California.  Now, Psystar argues to the bankruptcy court that it cannot afford the expenses of bankruptcy, while it has to battle Apple in District Court, so the bankruptcy court should relieve it of the burden of the expense of bankruptcy by dismissing its bankruptcy case so that it can take on Apple in the District Court. 

However, these arguments contradict each other or at least are inconsistent.  The market conditions that Psystar says were the principal cause of its bankruptcy filing haven’t improved, and, if anything, the credit terms from its suppliers have gone from stiff to COD, cash on delivery.  So Psystar’s revenue will still be constrained by poor demand for its computers.  Its creditors will now be free to sue for their money in state courts.  And Psystar will now have to resume its defense of Apple’s infringement suit.  But weren’t these the very factors that were the cause of Psystar bankruptcy filing?  Nothing has changed.  And at least bankruptcy protected Psystar from it pre-petition debts.  If Psystar’s problem was one of not making enough revenue and profits, nothing has changed to alleviate those problems, unless Psystar has found a new source of funds. 

If Psystar has sufficient funds to make applesauce out of Apple, when did it get those funds, pre-petition or post-petition?  And who is the source of those funds?  And exactly what is the amount of those funds?  And since it is now so flush, why can’t it make its pre-petition creditors whole before exiting bankruptcy? 

That Psystar claims that it now has sufficient funds to operate its business and defend Apple’s infringement suit, notwithstanding the same bad market for its computers will, I think, cause Judges Mark and Alsup to wonder whether Psystar has improperly abused the process of justice in both of their courts to delay and pervert the course of justice.

Are there any penalties for pulling a stunt like this? Isn’t there some point where the court can come down and say ‘for trying to use one court to subvert another we will fine you the courts legal costs of XX million dollars’.

Well maybe not. SCO never got nailed

Nemo:

Thanks for the very cogent analysis.

Report    Quote    security said on July 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 AM:
Thanks For shearing have nice day

“Shearing?” Yes customers could be getting “fleeced.”

“Shearing?” Yes customers could be getting “fleeced.”

Keep that up, buddy, and the Pun Police will be all over you. 

Sir Harry Flashman said: “Shearing?” Yes customers could be getting “fleeced.”
Keep that up, buddy, and the Pun Police will be all over you. 

I see that the post to which I was responding has been deleted. Is there some sort of spambot doing those postings?

Is there some sort of spambot doing those postings?

Sir H,

When I read your quip, I didn’t recall seeing “shearing,” but it was worth the reply. I know on several occasions in macobserver forums I’ve seen some obviously generic blather posts, not at all relating to the subjet; they always include a link, simply trying to get web traffic. Maybe what you replied to was one of those.

If you do see something you believe is spam, just click “Report” in the upper right.

Best,
CB

Yes. It was spam. I reported it for deletion.

Ff

Hmmm, some sort of operater error trying to post via my iPhone.

Anyway the spammer posted a single line that read “Interesting thank you for shearing.” I couldn’t resist making the pun no more than Rodger Rabbit can resist responding to A shave and a haircut, two bits!

Isn’t that an oxy moron. I want to pull out of bankruptcy because I don’t have enough money to fight it? Huh?
Psystar used the court by filing for bankruptcy just to try and delay Apple’s case against it. Then it backfired when Apple’s motion to continue the case was granted. Now Psystar wants to cancel the bankruptcy case. I think that’s perjury or something when you lie about something in court. The judge in this case needs to throw the book at Psystar for this.
They are obviously lying about many things and eventually it will come out just like that and they will be history, very BAD history.
The judge needs to shut them down. The good thing about this is Apple has that much more to show how lame Psystar really is by there latest actions.

I can’t wait to hear what the judges say about this.

I’m learning more and more about the legal system from just this one case. As a longtime fan of the “Law & Order” series, I hope this fall they’ll base a story on this whole thing, “ripped from the headlines!”

The opening discovery scene could entail finding the literally hacked-up shell of a hackintosh. 

cb