Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
Do you have a link that makes that clear?
Watch the interview with foreman. He's asked specifically about prior art from about 13 minutes in, and responds with comments about how it was clear that Samsung infringed the design patents. I can find no reference that shows that after skipping coming to a conclusion on the prior art evidence on day 1 of deliberations they went back to consider it properly later on.
Graham
|
Here's the quote I'm looking at (from the interview):
Quote:
Emily Chang: You know it's all obviously extremely technical. there has been a lot of talk since this verdict has come down. How did you guys make this verdict so quickly. There were more than a hundred pages of jury instructions. There are even reports that you didn't read all of those instructions.
Vel Hogan: Oh. We read. First off, before closing arguments was given, the judge read to us the final instructions, instruction by instruction. Then she allowed the closing arguments, then she dismissed us. And so we had those closing argue..., those ah, instructions and we had them open there and then we took patent by patent and got hung upon the first one but the day was almost over by then and so I said to the jury, "We're not going to allow ourselves to get hung up. We're going to, if we find a debate like this, we'll move on. We'll do the simplest things first.” So then when I came back the next day...
|