Nine states suing Microsoft Corp. for antitrust violations told a federal judge why they think the company should face harsh sanctions for its illegal acts, while the computer software maker said the states should not even be allowed to sue. The two sides summarized their arguments Monday in documents, well over 500 pages each, that encompass testimony from 34 witnesses over two months. The twin documents are the last step before both sides give their closing arguments, scheduled for June 19, and await the judge's decision, expected in late summer.

"Today's court filing details the strong record we built during trial and provides evidence that supports our main arguments: that the states' remedy is unworkable, would cause great harm to the PC ecosystem, would hurt consumers and is hopelessly vague and ambiguous," Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said in a statement. As a matter of law, Microsoft argues that the states do not have the legal standing to demand any remedies at all. But "in the interests of maintaining uniformity," the company's lawyers wrote, a federal settlement reached in November should be entered as an alternative judgment.