|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 04:36 PM EDT |
The judge is not going to let it happen. Apple
tried. First, it put on a witness who testified
about a study but didn't provide any info at all
about how the study was done. That left Samsung
having to use up *its* time on cross to bring all
that out, which it did. Now it's behind the 8 ball
on time. Also, they have witnesses whose testimony
has to be translated from Korean, another time
sinkhole.
Now it shows up today with a list of 22 witnesses.
The judge is not amused. She knows the game, and
it's not appealing to try to win like that. I
don't know what she'll work out, but she won't
let it be so top heavy Samsung loses because it's mute.
Cross examination does count against your time. But
Apple has to ask most of the questions now in
its rebuttal case, so you'd expect it to have saved
some time for that and to be ahead of Samsung on
time available, just not this much.
As for chess, yes, it's exactly like that, but being
litigation, there's more than one person keeping track.
The judge does it or has someone on staff keep a
record. But the parties usually have a paralegal there
keeping track too.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
