|
| Authored by: Wol on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 07:15 AM EDT |
For a lawyer, I'd guess quite likely.
A lot of people here probably have a very good memory for their work. If
something fascinates you, you remember things. I guess most hackers hack because
computers fascinate them. The same is likely true for lawyers and law.
I very much get the strong impression that PJ is fascinated by law. And I'm sure
she could describe in great detail many cases she's been involved in, from way
back before Groklaw started. Precisely because they fascinated her.
Why this Hogan/Seagate case should be remembered, I don't know. But it doesn't
surprise me. And frankly, how many cases does a lawyer do a year? 19 years
probably isn't an *awful* lot of cases ago...
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 07:56 AM EDT |
IANAL, but I would guess the spouse followed these lines of
logic:
1. That name (Velvin R. Hogan) rings a bell. Now why is
that?
2. Look in my old cases for the name.
3. Find the case.
4. Mention it to my spouse in a passing manner ("Now I
remember where I know that name from. He was a party to a
lawsuit that I was involved in.")
5. Spouse (partner in QE) asks for details about it (or asks
if it was the case in 2008).
6. Inform spouse that no, this wasn't in 2008. It was in
1993.
Just my guess. Especially with a name like Velvin Hogan.
It's not so common that you wouldn't remember hearing it
before.
Have a great day:)
Patrick.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 08:02 AM EDT |
It is not important at all. What is important is this guy
lied about the case, the bankruptcy and writing his own laws
on prior art and patents and trying to be judge, jury and
expert witness all at the same time.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: odysseus on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 08:33 AM EDT |
The alternative is Samsung went looking for 'dirt' after the verdict, found the
trial and the Samsung lawyer reviewing it saw the prosecutors name on and went
"My wife!". The disclosure of the personal relationship may be a
matter of full disclosure to prevent Apple getting it tossed, rather than a
statement that is how they found it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 10:07 AM EDT |
Well, you don't meet many people named "Velvin" and we don't know what
all he did that made it memorable for that person. Perhaps he gave a ton of
interviews back then or something? He sure likes talking to the press.
Might be worth a Lexis search for those with access. Who knows?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 10:15 AM EDT |
I just watched an old movie televised with Telly Savalas in it ( with a full
head of hair no less ). The moment I saw him, my reaction was "where do I
know that guy"? Within a few seconds I knew. This is not uncommon for me
and other people I know.
So he sees this guy in an interview, begins thinking "where do I know this
guy from". With a name like Veltman how long you think it takes him to
remember. Plus ...
During recent interviews Hogan said he was "laid off". Given his
selective memory that could be "fired" instead. Plus what company sues
an ex-employee over $25,000? Usually they would just negotiate some settlement.
Some thing else that made him memorable.
Mouse the Lucky Dog[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 06:41 PM EDT |
| If the guy was name Joe Smith we might never have heard about this. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
