[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Because one argument against a timeliness exclusion is "The evidence itself is sufficiently relevant that excluding it would be so prejudicial that a fair trial would be impossible, so it should be included regardless of the timing.". There's also a question of hair-splitting. As I understand it Apple didn't raise the question that the evidence addressed until late in the process, and in that case the question of timeliness has to look at not only the deadline but how much time Samsung would reasonably need to find the evidence. If the question comes up the day before the deadline, it's not reasonable to exclude the evidence because it took the defense 2 days to find it. Unless of course the evidence isn't going to alter the course of things, which is something the appeals court can't evaluate without knowing what the evidence is.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]