Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

In which way, PJ? | 134 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

In which way, PJ?

Authored by: PJ on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 10:49 AM EDT

I now have had time to read the order, and he
explains his reasoning. The jury was thinking
pretty much the way you are, apparently. But
the judge says that Oracle's expert, Dr. Mitchell,
testified that the test files were very important,
and no on testified otherwise. So as a matter of
law, that testimony stands. However, the jury is
entitled to take Mitchell's testimony as not
credible. I did. If that was their reasoning,
I think he is wrong to overrule their honest
decision. The jury instructions say they are
the ones responsible to decide who is and isn't
credible.

He didn't address that. Now, we were not there for
all of the trial, so I also don't know if he is
correct that no one testified that the test files
were no important. I'm sure the Google lawyers
are looking for that or did over the weekend, but
I think he's wrong to overrule the jury's right
to find everything Dr. Mitchell says sliced baloney.
That is their job, not his.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

In which way, PJ? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 01:24 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )