“Lawyers for Samsung got a reminder of Judge Lucy Koh’s temper on Monday morning when a remark made by one of their witnesses made them the target of her anger for more than 20 minutes,” Martyn Williams reports for IDG News Service. “Kevin Jeffay, a professor at the University of North Carolina, had just began delivering testimony when he asserted that the court had stopped from him using a specific definition of a software term in his work.”
“Jeffay’s comment that his definition agreed with that of the appeals court but that he couldn’t use it didn’t sit well with Judge Koh,” Williams reports. “She called a halt to the testimony, told the jurors to leave the courtroom and, showing anger for the first time in the trial, challenged Samsung lawyer David Nelson to back up that claim. As Samsung lawyers scrambled to find a reference, she also called to Jeffay, who was still in the courtroom. ‘Point me to the paragraph Sir, you just testified. Where is it?,’ Koh said while Samsung lawyers scrambled to find previous testimony that backed up their claim.”
“‘You can’t tell me a single sentence in his expert report where he took ownership of the construction,’ she said, banging her hand on the table as she did so,” Williams reports. “After putting Samsung attorneys on the hot spot for more than 20 minutes, she said she would instruct the jury to ignore his comments. ‘I’m going to strike what he just said. I think he was primed to say it and that is improper,’ she said.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Ooh. She banged her hand on the table. Thrilling.
We’re so far past the point of “whatever” on this endless fiasco (this has to be the slowest thermonuclear explosion in the history of the universe) that all we have left to say is: “Show us the money!”
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “James W.” for the heads up.]
The Wrath of Koh. Sounds like a job for Ensign Kirk.
That’s wrath? I’ve had itchy scalp more painful than that. The only good part about this is how much money Samesung has to keep spending on lawyers.
Judge Koh better back off …or she will give Samsung grounds to appeal on the basis of “xenophobia in American courts”. /s
NOT !
612 days since Apple won a jury verdict of willful infringement for over a billion dollars.
Zero dollars transferred.
Zero Samsung products prohibited from sale.
Banging your fist and throwing a tantrum for 20 minute?
I’ve got a fist with one finger extended. Can you guess which one, Suzy?
No, she can’t.
The Kohlapse of our society is imminent.
You Cote-nt resist that huh?
A judge getting mad and banging his/her hand on the table IS pretty demonstrative. They are usually very controlled.
Especially in Federal court.
At least she’s better than Cote.
well.. it’s because Koh doesnt have a lawyer friend that needs a job…
http://www.montypython.net/scripts/poofjudg.php
(Apropos of nothing cut to oak-pandled robing chamber in the Old Bailey. Two Judges in full wigs and red robes enter.)
First Judge: (very camp) Oh, I’ve had such a morning in the High Court. I could stamp my little feet the way those QC’s carry on.
Second Judge: (just as camp) Don’t I know it, love.
First Judge: Objection here, objection there! And that nice policeman giving his evidence so well – beautiful speaking voice … well after a bit all I could do was bang me little gavel.
Second Judge: You what, love?
First Judge: I banged me gavel. I did me ‘silence in court’ bit. Ooh! If looks could kill that prosecuting counsel would be in for thirty years.
Headline should be: Koh awakes from coma, has tantrum.
She was also ticked off at Donald Sterling…
sorry, just a non-related rant towards an idiot… much as these Samsung lawyers have been…
Doesnt matter what she does at this point… the jury decides.
And the jury can’t “unhear” what the witness already said.
Yes, she can strike it from the official record. Yes, she can instruct the jury to “ignore” what was said. But, in reality, the jury cannot “unhear” it. Samsung’s lawyers know this.
If Koh really believes it really was a premeditated coaching of the witness to say this then Koh should DEMAND that the Samsung lawyers find the exact phrases in both the appeal’s court ruling and the witness’ testimony AND show where she explicitly forbid that to be used. If they cannot do this, then she should sanction the lawyers, doing so in front of the jury.
Will it happen? Not a chance.