The Justice Department, also ignoring the judge's no-more-briefs edict, argued in a brief filed last Friday that the offer-of-proof filing was cynical and irresponsible.
Today Microsoft called the government's accusations baseless and submitted an additional offer of proof.
He said, "In my experience, I've never seen an offer of proof like this".
Dietzen did not appear impressed, saying, "In my experience, I've never seen an offer of proof like this".
The government's evident suspicion from this is that the offer of proof was not entirely genuine.
and the court added, "There was no showing that the drug was unlawfully obtained, nor was there an offer of proof to that effect".
Company lawyers brought along the offer of proof just out of a sense of due diligence -- for the off-chance that the judge chose to close the record.
But it was Dietzen who opened up the most persistent line of questioning, zeroing in on the Coleman team's "offer of proof" — a stack of hundreds of photocopied absentee-ballot envelopes.
Included in the Microsoft filing was a justification for the company's decision to place a long document called an offer of proof in the record during a court hearing on May 24, just before the judge ended the proceedings.
We don't agree to it, but even their offer of proof, which was submitted after the trial was over, and which is where that number comes from, I think only related to the number submitted as of 5 p.m.
