“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.