Apple blasts Samsung’s post-trial ‘attack on the jury’ as ‘clearly unfounded’

“Standing out among a flurry of new post-trial paperwork filed Friday in the Apple v. Samsung docket is Apple’s succinct response to Samsung’s blame-the-jury-foreman strategy,” Joe Mullin reports for Ars Technica.

“Samsung’s ‘attack on the jury’ is ‘clearly unfounded,’ Apple lawyers write, and the group believes US District Judge Lucy Koh should reject the Korean company’s request for a new trial,” Mullin reports. “Apple tries to portray Samsung’s argument for a new trial as a major reach. ‘[Samsung’s] theory is that, due to a decades-old dispute with Seagate, Mr. Hogan lied to serve on the jury in a case where Seagate is not a party in order to exact revenge by harming a Seagate shareholder,’ Apple lawyers note. ‘This falls far short of establishing challenge for cause.'”

Mullin writes, “I usually steer clear of making predictions in litigation. If the outcome of this case were predictable, it probably wouldn’t have gone to a trial. But in this case, I find it hard to believe Samsung’s ‘blame the juror’ arguments are going to make much headway with Judge Koh. She was willing to let a current Google employee on the jury, so it’s hard to believe she would be inclined to find fault with the jury foreman because of an ancient conflict with Seagate. It’s a company that is far more tangential to this case than Google.”

Read more in the full article here.

14 Comments

    1. David you’re exactly right. The day will come when Samsung will walk away from Android. They won’t tell Google until the day it happens. And then Google will feel even more Android-induced pain than they already do.

    1. When I first learned of the partnership bw Apple and Gurgle, I was thrilled. It seemed to take forever for Apple to rid themselves of them and Samsung – 5 years, that’s a long time to put up with a lying, cheating partner!

  1. And Judge Koh knows that Samsung was fully aware of the jury foreman’s past before the trial even started. In high-dollar cases like these, the lawyers hire specialty firms to find every piece of information about the jurors before they’re even asked questions in jury selection (voir dire). No way this was some “revelation” by Samsung after the verdict.

    1. The juror didn’t reveal his lawsuit with Seagate. He didn’t have to. It was irrelevant based on the length of time he was involved with the Seagate lawsuit. He was performing under legal guidelines.

      Samsung is desperate.

  2. Or more accurately, Samsung is desperate enough to let its lawyers try anything. Why aren’t there penalties for frivolous litigation that wastes taxpayer money?

  3. It’s only a matter of time before Gurgle starts screwing with apple device users who have gmail accounts. I hope apple is considering how many people have gmail accounts and use apple devices.

Reader Feedback

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