|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:01 AM EDT |
Your reading to much into the judge's decision. She's simply
following through with the jury's verdict. This foreshadow's
nothing.
If you remember an earlier motion by Samsung to lift the
order, she wrote she would if the issue was before her, but
as Samsung had appealed already, it was up to the appeals
court to give her that authority. They did. She followed
through.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:06 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:23 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: stegu on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 03:04 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 03:33 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:05 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:27 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 06:06 AM EDT
- She couldn't really have waited. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 10:19 AM EDT
- Not foreshadowing, Judge did not have a choice - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:01 AM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: bbmaniac on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:58 AM EDT |
Along those lines, isn't a $2.6M bond on the way way low side for the lost
sales by Samsung on their 10.1 tablet. Wouldn't it be closer to $260M
and up? That would've been one hot selling tablet. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:05 AM EDT |
The judge dissolves a preliminary injunction based on the outcome of the jury
decision, and you consider this a sign that she will overturn the jury
decision?
Sounds wildly optimistic to me.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Ehh... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 10:45 AM EDT
- Ehh... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:04 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:29 AM EDT |
Which she really has to do unless she's going to throw it
out.
If she didn't implement the only tiny pro Samsung part of
the verdict, it would make it clearer that she's very pro
apple, which might affect appeal chances ( ? )
This isn't a sign that she wants to overrule the jury, which
is what Samsung needs[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
