Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Samsung Denied New Trial After Apple's $1 Billion Verdict

By - Source: The Verge | B 30 comments

South Korean technology giant requested new trial based on alleged juror misconduct.

A U.S. judge has denied Samsung's bid to be granted a new trial against Apple over the latter's $1 billion court case victory back in August, with the former being told it should have carried out more work during jury questioning.

The South Korean electronics giant pointed towards the jury foreman's failure to disclose previous litigation with Seagate Technology, which is a company in which Samsung is a major investor, in addition to alleged bias showcased by statements made to the media after the verdict.

Samsung argued that Velvin Hogan should have revealed to the judge during jury selection that he had been sued by Seagate, one of his former employers, which led to his filing for personal bankruptcy in 1993.

"Samsung has a substantial strategic relationship with Seagate, which culminated last year in the publicized sale of a division to Seagate in a deal worth $1.375 billion, making Samsung the single largest direct shareholder of Seagate," the firm said in October. "Mr. Hogan's failure to disclose the Seagate suit raises issues of bias that Samsung should have been allowed to explore in questioning."

Samsung also referred to statements Hogan made during a post-verdict interview with Reuters. He said to the media outlet that the "the jury 'wanted to send a message to the industry at large that patent infringing is not the right thing to do, not just Samsung,'" and that the "message [the jury] sent was not just a slap on the wrist."

In denying the request, the U.S. District Court judge presiding over the patent case, Lucy Koh, stated that Hogan's comments about legal standards utilized during deliberations were barred by federal evidence rules.

"Even if the standards related by Mr. Hogan were completely erroneous, those statements would still be barred, by Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) and cannot be considered in deciding whether to hold an evidentiary hearing," she explained.

Koh blamed Samsung for not asking Hogan the proper questions that may have revealed any alleged bias against Seagate.

"Samsung could have uncovered the Seagate lawsuit, or at least Mr. Hogan's feelings regarding Seagate, had it exercised reasonable diligence in questioning Mr. Hogan during its allotted time in voir dire," she said. "Moreover, even without asking Mr. Hogan directly, Samsung could have exercised reasonable diligence outside of trial and could have discovered the lawsuit by requesting the bankruptcy file, exactly as Samsung did later, when it became motivated to do so."

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 30 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 24 Hide
    azraa , December 18, 2012 5:39 PM
    So, to conclude this whole event, Apple gets 1B for silly patents, ban on some Samsung products, the ban then gets removed. Nothing changes. Except Apple gets 1 free billion USD.

    That is some bullshit >:( 
  • 24 Hide
    wavetrex , December 18, 2012 5:45 PM
    This won't end here, Samsung will definitely go to a higher court. They aren't just giving up... The battle is still on...
  • 23 Hide
    twelch82 , December 18, 2012 5:45 PM
    That judge is just bad, or getting paid by Apple. Someone else should take over the case.
Other Comments
  • 24 Hide
    azraa , December 18, 2012 5:39 PM
    So, to conclude this whole event, Apple gets 1B for silly patents, ban on some Samsung products, the ban then gets removed. Nothing changes. Except Apple gets 1 free billion USD.

    That is some bullshit >:( 
  • 22 Hide
    olaf , December 18, 2012 5:42 PM
    if i were Samsung i would make apple pay back that money in any component that i'm going to give them :D 
  • 23 Hide
    twelch82 , December 18, 2012 5:45 PM
    That judge is just bad, or getting paid by Apple. Someone else should take over the case.
  • 24 Hide
    wavetrex , December 18, 2012 5:45 PM
    This won't end here, Samsung will definitely go to a higher court. They aren't just giving up... The battle is still on...
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , December 18, 2012 5:51 PM
    I'd take on 1 Billion dollars for all the parts needed to make those piece of shit products.
  • 17 Hide
    kartu , December 18, 2012 5:54 PM
    Wow, Lucy Koh is still the one in charge?
    There is something very weird in US justice system...
  • 16 Hide
    techcurious , December 18, 2012 5:55 PM
    So, because Samsung did a lousy job of background checking before hand, it doesn't matter what was discovered later? It's like saying "It's your own fault for not checking the kitchen at the restaurant before eating there. Even though your whole family nearly died from Salmonella poisoning, the restaurant is not liable!" wtf?
  • 6 Hide
    antilycus , December 18, 2012 5:58 PM
    $$$ talks in the U.S. Justice system. ANy judge can be bought out...that's what they really should teach our children. Justice is just an idea that will never actually work.
  • 7 Hide
    davewolfgang , December 18, 2012 6:01 PM
    Chances are that the jury foreman LIED on the pre-trial questionnaire. But then this judge (who's house and all his relatives houses are filled with crApple stuff) doesn't care.
  • 7 Hide
    jay_nar2012 , December 18, 2012 6:41 PM
    Come on Samsung, keep on trying, destroy Apple!!!
  • 6 Hide
    RADIO_ACTIVE , December 18, 2012 7:38 PM
    Whats funny is they both need each other but both keep beating each other up... Apple should have never been awarded 1billion though.
  • 4 Hide
    _Cubase_ , December 18, 2012 8:19 PM
    Samsung just needs to do another component price increase, so by the end of 2013 Apple would've paid them back! This approach should be used across the board so that any future lawsuits against Samsung are actually funded by Apple in the long term!
  • 5 Hide
    house70 , December 18, 2012 8:43 PM
    otacon72So blame everyone except Samsung's incompetent lawyers....typical fanboy comments in here. So pathetic...

    If you ever get wrongfully convicted for a crime you never committed, and later on your lawyer finds evidence that the jury that found you guilty was biased against you from the start, you would just blame your lawyer and bend over? Please say so, and let us know if that happens, we all would like to be in the courtroom.
    Are you that brainwashed by Apple that you can not even admit that an erroneously verdict has been issued in this case by a flawed jury? Not to mention the biased judge that prevented Samsung's evidence to be presented to begin with, how is that for a "fair" trial?
    Yes, apparently you are.
  • 1 Hide
    teh_chem , December 18, 2012 8:43 PM
    davewolfgangChances are that the jury foreman LIED on the pre-trial questionnaire. But then this judge (who's house and all his relatives houses are filled with crApple stuff) doesn't care.


    Not at all the case. The transcripts of the juror selection were already published--don't remember the site, but you can look it up and read through it. The lawyers hardly questioned the guy--no following up clearly obvious questions, etc. Which brings me to...

    I didn't want Apple to be victorious with this whole lawsuit just because I dislike Apple and how they conduct themselves as a company. But come on, if the Samsung lawyers honestly didn't go after the foreman properly during jury selection (and my conspiracy theory was they knew about his history, and intentionally allowed him to remain on just to have this option of a mistrial later), it's their own dumb fault. As much as I wouldn't want Apple to win, I also would agree with the judge (this time...). If this is the true caliber of their lawyers, they ought to seek new ones.
  • -6 Hide
    redeemer , December 18, 2012 8:46 PM
    Samsung infringed so they gotta pay simple as that, lets move on now. They even want to copy Apple's icloud and ecosystem. Samsung cannot just raise the prices of components nor can they take this to a higher court, so stop kidding yourselves. Apple will eventually find other suppliers for their hardware anyway.
  • 4 Hide
    madjimms , December 18, 2012 9:23 PM
    redeemerSamsung infringed so they gotta pay simple as that, lets move on now. They even want to copy Apple's icloud and ecosystem. Samsung cannot just raise the prices of components nor can they take this to a higher court, so stop kidding yourselves. Apple will eventually find other suppliers for their hardware anyway.

    How the fuck can you patent the "iCloud" when there's already thousands of other cloud services? Get off Toms you fanboy.
  • 3 Hide
    YardstickWHACK , December 18, 2012 9:49 PM
    MadjimmsHow the fuck can you patent the "iCloud" when there's already thousands of other cloud services? Get off Toms you fanboy.

    Don't feed the trolls.
  • 0 Hide
    catswold , December 18, 2012 10:28 PM
    Samsung blew it in the voir dire phase, but that doesn't change the fact of a tainted jury, nor does it change the fact that the judge, who has already been shown to be tainted should have recused herself.

    I doubt this will stand if, as we all assume, Samsung appeals. A lot depends on which court hears the appeal . . . if it's the 9th Circuit, Samsung is probably cooked. On the other hand, the 9th Circuit has such an abysmal record of being over-turned by the SCOTUS that it might work to Samsung's advantage. :) 
  • -4 Hide
    Ragnar-Kon , December 18, 2012 10:52 PM
    Amazing how much Apple angers people on Tom's.

    Its almost like people are trying to ignore Apple news in hopes that Apple news disappears from Tom's pages, but their overwhelming hatred for all things Apple compels them to comment anyway.
  • 1 Hide
    chewy1963 , December 19, 2012 12:22 AM
    Ragnar-KonAmazing how much Apple angers people on Tom's.Its almost like people are trying to ignore Apple news in hopes that Apple news disappears from Tom's pages, but their overwhelming hatred for all things Apple compels them to comment anyway.


    To ignore Apple news would be like ignoring terrorism. If Apple is allowed to get away with this crap they will think this is a good business plan (sue instead of compete). And if people ignore it, they are more likely to get away with it. So, NO, we're not trying to ignore Apple's draconian tactics. Apple got their hatred the old fashioned way... They EARNED it.
Display more comments