08/06/12
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh rejected Apple Inc's request for severe sanctions against Samsung Electronics Co Ltd. though Apple argued that the conduct of one attorney for Samsung risked tainting the jury, and the judge agreed.
What happened in the high-stakes patent trial between the two companies was that on Tuesday, the judge barred a lawyer representing Samsung from presenting some evidence during opening statements. Later in the day, Samsung emailed journalists with links to the material that had been barred from being produced – adding the line, “fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence.” The action, of course, also raised veiled questions about the fundamental fairness of the presiding judge without being explicit.
Also on Friday, Apple asked the court to punish Samsung by ruling that Apple's phone design patents were valid, and Samsung had infringed them. Koh rejected the request, but held that there would be more investigation of the events after the trial.
Then the members of the nine-member jury were brought in, one at a time, and each was asked whether they had read anything on the case since Tuesday. Only one juror replied to the affirmative and said that he had read Internet headlines, but not the articles, and all of them confirmed that they were impartial.
The trial began and Apple marketing Chief Phil Schiller took the stand on Friday.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, is Apple Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al, No. 11-1846.
