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
In addition, Apple accuses... | 312 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
In addition, Apple accuses...
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 26 2012 @ 11:21 PM EDT

In footnote one, Apple makes this accusation:

On the afternoon of September 24, Apple asked Samsung to disclose how and when it learned of each of the facts underlying its allegations and notified Samsung of its intent to file an expedited motion to compel such disclosure if Samsung does not provide it voluntarily. Apple is waiting for Samsung's response.

In other words, if Samsung's counsel doesn't incriminate themselves, Apple's lawyers will say they're hiding something.

My response would be to hand them a loaded fork right back: Ok, guys, you just made a very serious accusation; one which will lead you to facing libel charges as individuals. Unless, of course, you didn't realize the seriousness of said accusation, which would mean that you're incompetent to be practicing at bar. So - which is it? Libel or incompetence?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

AFAIK, it's all public stuff
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 28 2012 @ 04:30 AM EDT
And direct witness statements to the press. No need to
contact any jurors to get it.

That should sort out both how they got the info, and when
they got the info.

Obviously Apple has to make it seem like something else is
going on (like somehow Samsung is getting friendly help from
a jury that basically just awarded everything to Apple and
nothing to Samsung.)

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

How slimy of that Apple Lawyer ...
Authored by: nsomos on Friday, September 28 2012 @ 09:44 AM EDT
How slimy of that Apple Lawyer to accuse
"Samsung has already taken advantage", with respect to
contacting any of the jurors.

While they have to represent their client, they DO
have some choice about how they go about this task.

If Apple actually had some evidence that Samsung
contacted jurors, you would expect them to mention it.
I hope this and many other underhanded Apple tactics
will backfire and eventually harm Apple far more than
any gain they had hoped for from using such tactics.

Throughout this whole trial, Apple and their counsel
have exhibited many unwholesome character traits.

[ 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 )