Featured Articles

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

British chip designer ARM could cash in on the mobile industry's rush to transition to 64-bit operating systems and hardware.

More...
Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Samsung has lost smartphone market share, ending the quarter on a low note and Xiaomi appears to be the big winner.

More...
Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

It looks like Intel will be showing off its 14nm processors, codenames Broadwell, in a couple of weeks at CES 2015.

More...
Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Today we’ll be taking a closer look at the recently introduced Gainward GTX 980 4GB with the company’s trademark Phantom cooler.

More...
Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac has been in the nettop and mini-PC space for more than four years now and it has managed to carve…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Thursday, 04 October 2012 15:44

Apple versus Samsung jury foreman mislead the court

Written by Nick Farrell



Samsung appeal makes case look like mistrial


It is starting to look like the Apple versus Samsung trail might have to be redone as the jury foreman may have mislead his fellows. The Judge overseeing the appeal has allowed Samsung's appeal papers to be made public, something the company did not want to do.

It turns out that one of the reasons Samsung wants the case thrown out is because of the jury foreman, Velvin Hogan. It calls Hogan untruthful and accuse him of "implied bias" and of tainting the process by introducing extraneous "evidence" of his own during jury deliberations.

Before the case Hogan promised that he would not be influenced by previous cases. But Hogan was asked during jury selection whether he’d been involved in lawsuits and didn’t tell the judge that he had filed for bankruptcy in 1993 and had been sued by his former employer, Seagate Technology in 1993. He later told the media that he had used his own patent trademark case as a way of sifting through the evidence quickly.

But Samsung points out that what might have influenced Hogan's behaviour was case he had with Seagate. Not only did Samsung has a “substantial strategic relationship” with Seagate, but the lawyer who filed the complaint against Hogan is married to an attorney who works for the firm that represented Samsung in the trial against Apple. This explains why Samsung wanted its appeal details kept secret from the world. Basically it is accusing Hogan of lying his way onto the jury and getting revenge against his former employers by manipulating a jury to award major damages against one of its important business partners.

Samsung said that if Hogan had revealed his Seagate connection in the pre-jury questioning he would have been barred from being on the jury. It also said that once on the Jury Hogan broke his promise to ignore his previous legal experience. Indeed he even bragged about it to the media.

Nick Farrell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments