Apple says jury should learn that Samsung destroyed evidence

“Apple wants the jury hearing the patent case involving Samsung to learn that two federal courts have found Samsung has a history of destroying evidence,” Greg Sandoval reports for CNET.

“Apple said in court documents filed yesterday that not only did Samsung continue deleting e-mails involving this case even though it was required to preserve the data, but also, in 2004, a district court in New Jersey “issued adverse inference instructions against Samsung because it never flipped the ‘off switch’ on its…automatic computer e-mail policy [that] allowed e-mails to be deleted,” Sandoval reports. “The Korea-based electronics manufacturer argues that the magistrate judge, who decided the jury could hear about Samsung’s spoliation of evidence, erred in his decision and that the information should be kept from the jury.”

Sandoval reports, “Apple countered in its own motion that Samsung has no legal footing and asked Lucy Koh, the federal court judge hearing the patent case, to overrule Samsung’s request.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
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
Samsung exec whines: Apple’s trying to patent the rectangle! – July 30, 2012
Apple: Google warned Samsung against slavishly copying our products – July 25, 2012
Apple v. Samsung jury to learn of Samsung’s destruction of relevant evidence – July 25, 2012
Now Samsung slavishly copies Apple’s Mac mini – June 1, 2012
Samsung Mobile chief ‘designer’ denies that Samsung’s instinct is to slavishly copy Apple – March 23, 2012
Slavish copier Samsung shamelessly steals Apple’s iPhone 3G design – again – January 3, 2012
Slavish copier Samsung uses girl actress from iPhone 4S ad for Galaxy Tab 8.9 spot (with video) – January 2, 2012
Now Samsung’s slavishly copying Apple’s iPad television ads (with videos) – December 30, 2011
Judge: Can you tell me which is iPad and which is yours? Samsung lawyer: ‘Not at this distance your honor’ – October 14, 2011
Why are Apple’s icons on the wall of Samsung’s store? – September 24, 2011
Apple to Samsung: ‘Blatant copying is wrong’ – April 18, 2011
Apple sues Samsung for attempting to copy look and feel of iPhone, iPad – April 18, 2011
Samsung’s ‘Instinct’ is obviously to make Apple iPhone knockoffs – April 1, 2008


    1. Whatever you say is absolute hog wash as Sammy to this day allows Apple to do what is does as Sammy builds quality components for them. All of this legal stuff is silly. Patents are being and have been granted to anyone with a pulse hence worthless when challenged.

      1. Sorry guys,

        I’m a troll and I like bashing Apple because I have no life. Apple really does make the best products in the world and all Samsung does is copy Apple’s product.

        Oh yeah, I’m a big d*uche!

        1. Well that was quite an epiphany…
          Now, you need to quit spending 12 hrs a day playing FPS/MMO’s and building “gamerz machines” in the basement, get a job and get out of you parents house. Perhaps even meet a girl.
          Middle age come sooner than you think, my friend.


    2. Everyone knows that once the lights are on the roaches scatter.
      Samsung would prefer to conduct this trial in the dark for their own sake.

      Man this is exciting in every aspect. Im prepared to be happy and angry all at the same time. Its just that Apple has been getting such a raw deal in the courts for the most part and finally a place where it has the chance of prevailing. Man that would be great.
      Not a fan boy (well maybe a little) but companies IP must be protected otherwise why innovate. We just had 25 years of zero innovation from Microsoft as the price. Reward innovation thats how we move the species forward and feed and clothe the masses in the future. By rewarding original thinking and design. We get better, life gets better.

      1. And we also had 15 years with little innovation from cellular phone manufacturers and carriers, that is until Apple waltzed in and dropped the iPhone bomb on the market.

        Now, Samsung and ALL other hardware manufactures integrate all sorts of innovative, consumer-oriented touchscreen and software features into their phones. Only thing is, they’re using Apple’s innovations, not their own, and that’s wrong.

        Consumers, especially American consumers, should reward Apple with purchases and boycott all Samsung consumer products. If the courts can’t make Apple whole, the marketplace can correct the intellectual property theft.

        To the average person, it is clear which company re-invented cell phones — and it wasn’t Google or Samsung. Do you really think the history books are going to list one of these companies as the pioneer that changed cellular communications? I don’t think so.

        1. That truly is the crux of this…
          It isn’t a apple fan thing, it’s that samsung (& the cellphone industry) was stagnant and complacent. Making a mirriad of models for their customers (the cellphone telcos). The electronics manufactures both got what they wanted, lots of money. The group who got nothing in this love triangle was the consumer. They got served the same crap, reheated again and again.
          What the apple haters are most tragically blinded to is that Apple was responsible for the entire (post iPhone) cell phone revolution.
          Problem is, apple spent a decade and millions (likely even billions) developing ideas and concepts, that the “smart money” said would never be much of anything. If you remove the reward for companies to actually innovate (by allowing every one to freely copy that once is it was obviously successful you remove the incentive to innovate.

          And that, is just what the carriers and companies like samsung want. To return to the way it was, where they don’t have to work very hard for you cash.

      2. There seems to be a notion in the courts which favor competition in technology over patent rights. Unfortunately, companies like samsung, google, etc, can only compete if they are allowed to copy Apple’s groundbreaking IP.

  1. That exactly why the judge didn’t want the jury to see the so called evidence about samsung working on a iPhone before 2007.. that’s because as easy as samsung can hide and destroy evidence, they can fake it too. Samsung is not a company you can trust to.

    1. It’s also legally misleading. Prior art is not something designed in house but has to be in the public domain. Since these designs of samsungs were hidden they cannot be used to show that apple’s patents are invalid. The hey we did it first is not a good legal argument it had to be on the market and have some level of fame.

      1. Apple proved that the iPhone was being designed even before 2005.

        Evidence Apple had provided including images and emails of the 2005 iPhone prototype  code-name  “Purple” this  prototype Predates  the Jony Ive think tank experiment that had mentioned Sony and the Samsung arguments.

                  Samsung wanted to confuse the jury with a bunch of double talk that was twisted, the judge was aware of this by the evidence that Apple provided in its brief  showing that the “Purple” iPhone Prototype had been designed prior,  to what was Samsung’s argument, this in turn disproved Samsung’s timeline since the prototype was designed in 2005 many months before what Samsung had claimed.

        *Link at bottom of page for Apples 2005  “Purple” prototype with images”

                Samsung was  not permitted to use this information as it was being manipulated by Samsung to appear as something it was not.

         Producing more timeline evidence and emails, Apple provided enough evidence to show no involvement by Sony was used in the design of the iPhone prototype.  The “Apple Purple Prototype” 2005 was designed before the accusations of Sony influence had been made, and in turn had placed a question of the validity of Samsung’s accusations. 

        By Apple releasing the design history of the “2005 Purple iPhone Prototype Design” It destroyed Samsung’s arguments of trying to prove Apples involvement with Sony, we have learned that the Think-Tank experiments had not even taken place until a considerable time after the “2005 Purple iPhone Prototype” was designed by the Apple team.   The brain Storming exercise by Apples design team to think up ways in a Sony style without using any designs that had been produced or offered for sale by Sony was the exercise, Samsung tried to mix it up to look as if Apple had did something wrong, they didn’t.

        Most large companies will put together individuals and throw out ideas no matter what they are, as  Apples design team had been instructed to “Think like Sony style”. 

        Samsung wants to turn this around and make it look like Apple had taken Sony designs, Apple did no such thing, all the Apple designer’s did was Think and throw out ideas, they  had no input from Sony Corp. at all.

        It can be manipulated anyway Samsung wants, but it’s not the truth.

        *Apple offers in its brief, a look at a 2005 iPhone prototype code-namedPurple:

        This is only the first few days, get ready for some more outrageous antics from Samsung and friends.

        Also read the briefs From Apple and Samsung, very interesting.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.