Apple says it will seek sanctions over Samsung’s press release of excluded evidence

“Apple Inc. said a federal judge should rule its phone patents were infringed by Samsung Electronics Co. after a lawyer for the Korean manufacturer publicly released evidence the judge had excluded from trial,” Joel Rosenblatt and Christopher Scinta reports for Bloomberg.

“Apple, in a filing yesterday with the U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, said the July 31 release was designed to convey to jurors, through the media, arguments rebutting Apple’s central allegations that Samsung copied the iPhone and iPad,” Rosenblatt and Scinta reports. “The move was ‘bad faith litigation misconduct’ meant to prejudice the jury, Apple said. ‘Apple requests that the court issue sanctions granting judgment that Apple’s asserted phone-design patent claims are valid and infringed by Samsung,’ according to the filing signed by lawyer William Lee.”

Rosenblatt and Scinta reports, “Apple said that if Judge Koh doesn’t simply rule that Samsung has infringed the patent, alternatively she should tell the jury Samsung engaged in “serious misconduct,” that she has found Samsung copied the designs and features from Apple products and preclude Samsung from any further mention of evidence regarding a pre-existing design.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
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


  1. Bloody amazing, eh? Are Samesung deliberately trying to piss the judge off? Do they realize they haven’t got a leg to stand on and are, therefore, more interested in influencing the public than the court?

    Many potential smartphone customers who don’t care about the details of the this trial (i.e. the vast majority of them) will probably end up thinking “Oh, wasn’t there some photo that proved Samesung didn’t copy Apple?” even though, as it turns out, there are several things about the photo (including date) that are wrong. It’s probably more important for Samesung to win future customers than present court case.

    1. Samsung looks determined to lose this trial and then appeal, on the basis that the judge was pro-Apple from the start. You already see this sentiment in the “court” of public opinion (which is a strong argument that judges should NOT be elected–the public are too emotionally-driven and illogical to decide on the fate of judges who uphold the law as written, which might not be popular. Laws which were written by the politicians the majority public voted for in the first place).

      1. Of course Judge Koh, being a federal court judge, is not elected, rather is appointed for life. She has no reason to favor anyone (which is the purpose of life appointment). It’s state judges, in CA, that are voted in.

  2. Smells like Samsung is trying to force a mistrial.

    They are probably figuring that it would be better than to be found guilty of patent infringement.

    “If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table.” — Old lawyer adage

  3. A quick search for Shin Nishibori the designer who apparently made the “Sony” drawings turns up his LinkedIn account which indicates that he worked for Apple from July 2002 until 2012. The supposed Sony design that he came up with was in 2006 when had been working for Apple for 4 years!! Shin may have imagined what Sony would do but there is no indication that Sony actually designed the phone in the image. If SOny did design the phone in the image, why did they not bring it to market? Also the iPhone is the sum of the parts; the physical phone, the software, the user interface, … Samsung copied the entire system, not just the physical phone shape. Look at Samsung phones before the iPhone, they look like Blackberry’s! Samsung basically copies whatever is suceesful at the moment, they can’t think for themselves!

    This appears to be a ploy by Samsung to get a mistrial and start again and hope for a more sympathetic Judge, more time, better jury, more time, … Essentially trying to escape paying for their sins. They are running scared, do their actions look like those of the innocent?.

    Shin Nishibori
    Industrial Designer
    Hawaiian Islands Design
    Industrial Designer
    Apple Inc.
    Public Company; 10,001+ employees; AAPL; Consumer Electronics industry
    July 2002 – July 2012 (10 years 1 month)

  4. I hope:

    1) The court of public opinion laughs at Quinn’s assertion that his name is being impugned by Apple — Every time he opens his mouth, whether inside the courtroom or outside he proves he’s despicable. In releasing information to the press — against the direction of a federal judge and because “of many requests from the media” he has shown that to him the press is more important that an authority in his profession whom he is sworn to obey.

    2) Judge Koh, reportedly upset with both parties for not settling this out of court, comes to understand what Apple was up against in that endeavor given the actions, logic and attitude displayed by Samsung’s defense team.

    3) The jurors see through the despicable tactics of the defense from their opening statement through to the end of the trial. Stating that “we innovate” and claiming that as proof of their innovation Apple buys lots of their products is a clear attempt to juxtapose unrelated facts to combat an assertion that they can’t otherwise counter. It is up to Apple’s team now to inform the jury how big and wide and disconnected are Samsung’s various divisions: Innovation and process perfection in the semiconductor division has nothing to do with innovation (or lack thereof) in the mobile products division. Nor should the jury fall for the assertion that because Samsung innovates on products x, y or z that they didn’t choose to copy the iPhone and iPad.

  5. Another thing the crooked Samsung strategy perpetrates is the stupefaction of the jury. Apple gets pinned into a corner where they have to ask potential jurors if they have read the Samsung propaganda. Of course, anyone with tech comprehension will be keeping up with the news and will have read it or heard about it. Only dumdums living off the grid will end up on the jury, allowing the tech aspects of the trial to fly over their heads while ShamSong spin further propaganda to woo jurors to the dark side. Not good.

  6. Ok Apple Fan Boys. I have no problem with Apple making fine products and selling them. I even own 1 or 2. I did look at Galaxy Tab 10.1 and almost bought it. I don’t think Apple has a case or a right to be the only pretty push button phone maker. This case is a waste of everyones money including the consumers who will ultimately be footing the bill through higher prices. Who invented the design of modern flat screen TV’s? And why aren’t they all suing each other?

Reader Feedback

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