US District Court Judge William Alsup has denied Apple's motion to include Snow Leopard in its case against Psystar. Apple initially argued to keep the updated operating system out of the case by "relentlessly objecting to discovery on Snow Leopard," Alsup writes. The company was successful at keeping the issue separate, as the update was released after the discovery period had come to a close.

Psystar then filed a separate antitrust case, aimed solely at Snow Leopard, but in the US District Court in the Southern District of Florida. Apple only tried to reverse its initial position after the second action was filed.

"If Snow Leopard was within the scope of its own complaint herein, as it now suggests, then Apple should have welcomed discovery thereon rather than, as it did, object to discovery directed at Snow Leopard and effectively taking Snow Leopard out of the case," the judge asserts. "The problem is one largely of Apple's own making."

Psystar contends that it should have the right to buy Snow Leopard and install it on non-Apple hardware. The clone maker's attorneys argue that Apple illegally links the operating systems to its hardware, resulting in a monopolization of the Mac OS X computer market.

Judge Alsup denied Apple's motion without prejudice, which leaves the decision open to be reinterpreted by the Florida court. If Judge Hoeveler feels that the Snow Leopard proceedings should be transferred back to Alsup's court, the original case will be modified to accommodate another discovery period.