“Two days after Apple won an adverse inference jury instruction concerning Samsung’s spoliation of evidence (deleted emails), Samsung brought a motion asking for the same type of sanction against Apple, referring to a statement in Magistrate Judge Grewal’s order that Samsung had been free all along to allege that Apple also failed to take the necessary measures to safeguard relevant emails,” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents.

“The fight over adverse inference jury instructions is very important,” Mueller explains. “Based on the status quo, the jury would be told that Samsung was found to have spoliated evidence, and even though the jury would be free to draw its conclusions, Samsung would face a steep challenge especially in connection with the question of willful infringement.”

Mueller writes, “After Samsung brought its own motion for the same kind of sanction against Apple, it has increasingly been relying on an equal treatment kind of argument: the court should either grant adverse inference instructions against both parties, or against neither party. When I saw Samsung’s motion for an adverse inference jury instruction against Apple, I called it, in the headline as well as the body of my blog post, a ‘me too’ motion. In today’s filing, Apple’s lawyers used the same term (twice). No, they didn’t have to be inspired by me to come up with this term: it was the most obvious choice.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: It’s like a disease; even Samsung’s lawyers are copying Apple now.

Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:

Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement

Related articles:
Samsung challenges expertise of Apple’s expert witness – August 7, 2012
Court shown evidence that Samsung copied Apple’s iPhone icons; Plus: What’s wrong with people who buy iPhone knockoffs? – August 6, 2012
Apple v. Samsung: Expert witness testifies that most Galaxy devices infringe Apple patents, trade dress – August 6, 2012
Apple v. Samsung: email reveals Apple iPhone sparked ‘crisis of design’ at Samsung – August 6, 2012
Apple’s Forstall on the stand: Steve Jobs’ ultimatum; ‘no reason’ to look to Samsung for ideas – August 6, 2012
Apple reveals tactics in first week of Samsung patent infringement trial – August 4, 2012
Samsung’s lawyers breached the rules again, showed witnesses the courtroom prior to testimony – August 4, 2012
Samsung lawyer attempts to pry next-gen iPhone info out of Phil Schiller – August 3, 2012
Apple accuses Samsung of making false claims; submitting doctored, misleading exhibits to court – August 3, 2012
Why Samsung’s case against Apple is bogus – August 3, 2012
Apple v. Samsung patent war pits two legal stars – August 3, 2012
Apple to Samsung: Do not reveal iPad, iPhone sales data – August 3, 2012
Apple v. Samsung: Meet Apple’s next 7 witnesses – August 3, 2012
Judge Koh on Samsung’s quest to use ’2001: A Space Odyssey’ as ‘evidence’ against Apple: Nope – August 2, 2012
Apple asks Judge Koh to rule in its favor after Samsung’s excluded evidence leak – August 2, 2012
Apple says it will seek sanctions over Samsung’s press release of excluded evidence – August 2, 2012
The 125-year-old U.S. patent law that could cost Samsung $2 billion for slavishly copying Apple’s designs – August 1, 2012
Samsung defends decision to share excluded evidence with media – August 1, 2012
Apple says jury should learn that Samsung destroyed evidence – August 1, 2012
Samsung, after ‘begging’ to get Sony into Apple patent trial, flouts judge and releases ‘excluded evidence’ anyway – July 31, 2012
Apple v. Samsung Live Blog: Trial opens with one juror gone, Samsung begging – July 31, 2012
Apple attorney: Instead of innovating, Samsung chose to copy iPhone and iPad – July 31, 2012
Apple aims for total war, salted earth in Samsung patent infringement fight – July 31, 2012
Apple-Samsung jury picked to decide U.S. patent trial; Google engineer fails to make final cut – July 30, 2012