The judge overseeing Microsoft’s remedy hearing yesterday listened to more of the company’s arguments about why the nine non-settling states’ proposals are invalid. She heard reactions from the states’ attorneys, but offered little indication of which way she might rule in the antitrust matter.

Both Microsoft and the states rested their cases last week after arguing for different sets of remedies to Microsoft’s anticompetitive behaviour. This week, following eight weeks of witness testimony, US District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is hearing a variety of related motions filed by both sides.

Last June, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a lower court’s decision that Microsoft violated antitrust law by attempting to maintain its monopoly in the desktop operating system market through anticompetitive behaviour. The appeals court remanded the remedy portion of the case to the lower court – Kollar-Kotelly will make the final decision on which remedies will be applied.

Regarding Microsoft’s motion to dismiss the case, filed with the court when the states rested their case on April 15, Microsoft attorney Daniel Webb argued that the judge should reject the states’ remedies because the states failed to prove elements of their claim.