“Its lawyers at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan redacted that entire section of the motion for judgment as a matter of law that they filed Friday with U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California,” Frankel and Levine report. “But from a close examination of the statute and cases Samsung cited in the redacted section, we’ve discerned Samsung’s two-pronged argument for juror misconduct: The nine-person jury improperly considered extraneous evidence during deliberations and jury foreman Velvin Hogan failed to disclose in voir dire that he was involved in 1993 litigation with a former employer that led him and his wife to declare personal bankruptcy.”
Much more in the full article – recommended – here.
Apple calls Samsung’s allegation of jury misconduct ‘frivolous on its face’ – September 26, 2012
Samsung asks for new trial in patent dispute with Apple – September 25, 2012