Quote:
Originally Posted by afv011
IANAL, but from my point of view, it seems biased that the judge allows Apple to offer evidence that Samsung copied Apple, and then Samsung is not allowed a rebuttal. What is most puzzling is that Apple showed in their slides the Sammy F700 as an infringing device (even though it was designed before the iPhone came out), and Samsung is then not allowed to rebut this. How is this a fair trial?
|
Um. the law tends to be a bit more complicated than that!
Each bit of evidence would be considered and ruled on.
In this case Samsung tried to introduce the evidence too late.
And I wouldn't be at all surprised if what Samsung have done here is considered contempt of court.
http://allthingsd.com/20120731/samsu...design-claims/
Quote:
Ahead of opening arguments on Monday, Samsung lawyer John Quinn asked the court to hear further arguments and allow evidence showing that Samsung designs for what became the P700 predate the iPhone. Judge Lucy Koh denied the request, saying that she had already heard three motions to reconsider the point and noting once again that the evidence had been excluded for good reason: it was introduced far too late in the discovery process.
Quinn persisted, saying he was begging the court to hear more discussion, something he said he hadn’t done in his 30-plus years of law.
“You’ve made your record for appeal,” Koh said. “Don’t make me sanction you, please.”
Update: Apple’s legal team was quick to take issue with Samsung’s release of evidence excluded from the trial, saying the action was contemptible. Judge Koh was none too pleased with the move herself, calling for an immediate meeting with Quinn.
“Tell Mr. Quinn I’d like to see him today,” Koh said. “I want to know who drafted the press release, who authorized it from the legal team.”
|
Edit: Samsung have already been sanctioned four times in this litigation, and are the subject of an adverse jury instruction. Apple are requesting a second such instruction as a result of this maneuvering.