decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
On the surface Apple has an argument on 21. | 248 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Can not see a US Jury finding against Apple - But I have been surprised before :-)
Authored by: _Arthur on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 07:13 PM EDT
If you look at it, most of the pages in the document contain a single
paragraph.

The document would do about 30 double-spaced pages if the extra page
breaks were removed.

That being said, the jurors are stuck with an harrowing task. It may take a
month for them to go thru the evidence all over again.

Don't be surprised if the jury cannot reach a conclusion. They're not experts,
and the experts they heard utterly disagree with each other.

Or maybe, if one party has a weaker case, the jurors will unconsciously will
to punish that party for wasting their time with a weak case instead of
settling like a sensible business.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

On the surface Apple has an argument on 21.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 08:05 PM EDT
As far as I can tell Intel not Samsung should sue Apple for this one. Anyone
have an opinion on this patent?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Yup, got a bit jingoistic in there
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 10:25 AM EDT
American this, Constitution that, wouldn't deign to come over to our little ol'
country from their fancy pants Korea t'other.

Hopefully the jury can see what while the boot is on an American foot this time,
that precedents kick both ways.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )