Samsung Wants New Trial with Apple

[Michael Essany]

Last month, a jury ruled in favor of Apple in its ongoing legal showdown with Samsung and awarded the iPhone maker with $1 billion in damages stemming from Samsung's alleged willful violation of Apple's patents and intellectual property. As expected, however, Samsung isn't about to back down.

According to the latest reports, Samsung is prepared to fight for a new trial against Apple. The logic behind the request? Samsung claims "juror misconduct" was a factor in Apple's winning verdict. CNET summarized Samsung's argument Tuesday, noting how "interviews that jurors in the landmark case gave to news organizations provide evidence of misconduct serious enough to have influenced the verdict.

One document reviewed by CNET shows Samsung predicting its arguments will likely "subject all of the jurors to extra-judicial scrutiny and public criticism which they may find unwelcome and intrusive" and that both sides be "ordered to have no further contact with any of the jurors" for now. In addition, Samsung warns, "future proceedings on this matter may be compromised by further inquiries from the parties, the media and others, and attendant publicity."

As of this writing, neither Samsung nor Apple will comment on the matter and what could happen in the coming days.

Although Samsung is pinning its immediate hopes on a new trial, Apple-haters should not jump for joy just yet. "I think it's going to be a little tough" to overturn the verdict, Brian Love, a law professor at Santa Clara University, tells CNET. "You're looking for material or something else coming in that wasn't introduced at trial, a juror reading reports about the case and they're being influenced by outside forces."

Source: CNET

[unison999]

Didn't a juror and the attorney representing Apple openly admit they had contact during the trial? The conversation between the juror whom became foreman already made up his mind Samsung is guilty before hearing all the evidence? Shouldn't be too hard to prove juror misconduct in this case.

[scottjl]

@unison999 got proof of that? Video and audio tape? A transcript? Going to be hard to prove without evidence. Apple (and Samsung) have some bright lawyers, neither side would put their client in jeopardy by pulling something silly like that during the trial, not if they don't want to be washing dishes as their next career.

[GeoffS4]

Didn't a juror and the attorney representing Apple openly admit they had contact during the trial? The conversation between the juror whom became foreman already made up his mind Samsung is guilty before hearing all the evidence? Shouldn't be too hard to prove juror misconduct in this case.

I'd be real careful before quoting anything the media is reporting in legal &/or "factual" accounts. Remember (or are you aware) of the results of the false accusations, false statements of "fact", misleading media reports, etc., in the Sandusky affair as they relate(d) to the Penn State University and Joe Paterno and others.

Massive fabrications, group think, inaccurate and flaming media reports, etc., resulting in people (and companies/entities) not properly being held accountable.

I'm sure the legal system is much better positioned for this kind of analysis than most of us, let alone the weak minded, research challenged, verification omitting media at large.

...of course an open admission is a different story...but don't just believe it happened or was said just because the media said it was so without actual verification...again, since the media more often than not won't do their own homework.

[spazturtle]

In an TV interview one of the juros said that he had already made up his mind before the tril started and had dent an email to an Apple attorney.

[unison999]

@unison999 got proof of that? Video and audio tape? A transcript? Going to be hard to prove without evidence. Apple (and Samsung) have some bright lawyers, neither side would put their client in jeopardy by pulling something silly like that during the trial, not if they don't want to be washing dishes as their next career.

From the article I read it was a phone call between the foreman and Apple's attorney. You can get phone records, not hard to trace one phone number to another.
Attorney can be questioned and the juror (foreman) can be questioned.

[domenicp]

From the article I read it was a phone call between the foreman and Apple's attorney. You can get phone records, not hard to trace one phone number to another.
Attorney can be questioned and the juror (foreman) can be questioned.

If there was misconduct, it will be found.