The judges

Harry T Edwards: appointed by Democrat President Jimmy Carter, 1980 Stephen F Williams: appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, 1986 Douglas H Ginsburg: appointed by President Reagan, 1986 David B Sentelle: appointed by President Reagan, 1987 A. Raymond Randolph: appointed US Circuit Judge in 1990 by Republican President George Bush Judith Rogers: appointed to US Court of Appeals in 1994 by Democrat President Bill Clinton David S Tatel: appointed to US Court of Appeals in 1994 by President Clinton

And, based on previous rulings in Microsoft-related and other anti-trust cases, the court tends to agree with Microsoft that less government intervention is better.

In 1998, two judges on the appeals court ruled that Microsoft did not violate a consent decree when it bundled its Internet Explorer web browser with Windows.

In that case, Judge Stephen Williams, appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1986, and Judge Raymond Randolph, appointed by George Bush in 1990, ruled that Microsoft did not illegally "tie" the browser to its market-dominant operating system.

They said that the government should not be involved in the design of software.

The ruling allowed Microsoft to include its Internet Explorer web browser with every copy of the Windows operating system.

Light hand of government

And the court's judges, both Republican and Democratic appointees, are sceptical of the government's efforts to rebalance markets in anti-trust cases.

Republican appointee Judge Douglas Ginsburg served as the head of the Justice Department's Anti-Trust Division under President Ronald Reagan before being appointed to the federal court.

He favours a hands-off approach to anti-trust matters, with minimal government interference.

But it is not simply the Republican appointees on the court who have ruled against government intervention in anti-trust cases.

Democrat appointees such as Chief Judge Harry Edwards sided with the majority in a 1984 ruling that in favour of AT&T in an anti-trust case.

High-tech

Microsoft also found itself in a courtroom familiar with technology.

One of Judge Edwards' aims in leading the court of appeals has been to introduce it to cutting edge developments.

During the two days of hearings in front of the court in February, five of the seven judges used laptop computers.

When asked in a Legal Times article how technology had changed the day-to-day operations of the court, Judge Edwards said:

"Advanced technology has had such a profound effect on the day-to-day lives of the judges on our court that it is hard to know where to begin."