“We are now less than two months away from the big Apple v. Samsung post-trial hearing at which the parties will try to convince Judge Koh of their positions on what consequences the jury trial should have (or whether there should be a whole new trial, which is Samsung’s preference),” Florian Mueller writes for FOSS Patents.
“Besides issues relating to remedies and ways in which the court might overrule the jury as a matter of law, non-jury claims will also be on the agenda after Judge Koh granted an Apple motion to brief its non-jury FRAND defenses and claims separately from the other post-trial issues and also allowed Samsung to bring such claims,” Mueller writes. “It was clear from the beginning that Samsung’s primary interest was to receive more space for its post-trial argument. Having lost on the vast majority of issues put before the jury, Samsung has so much Rule 50 (overrule-the-jury) stuff to raise that its Rule 50 motion per se just consists of conclusory statements and references to previously-filed documents.”
Mueller writes, “Apple has fewer Rule 50 issues and can afford the luxury of making a more elaborate and coherent case… ”
Much more in the full article here.