Well, I am not an expert. I understand that when parties are moving a JMOL, they are arguing to the Judge that according to the law and the evidence in the record a reasonable jury would deliver the verdict.

My understanding could be wrong. But, assuming I'm right, then that suggests that what remains is reasonable in which case any alleged bias of the foreman didn't matter, because the Judge ruled that reasonable jury would deliver the same verdict.

If one goes back to what I wrote, one will see from the scenarios I list that I fully expect the awards to be reduced and there is a possibility that prior art evidence plus the law, for which the Judge is an expert, may bring the final results a lot closer to neutral.

To state my assertion more clearly, the more the Judge via JMOL motions changes the jury verdict, the less likely the court will feel that the misconduct and the voir dire omissions need be addressed.

If the jury verdicts stand as is (with the Judge correcting the math and inconsistencies), then I think the Judge will have to address the mess Mr. Hogan has presented to the court.

Given the impact on Court resources and that the Judge thinks she is dealing with 6 year olds, I think she'll do everything she can to avoid a retrial and making the last few months a total waste. Making the verdict better for Samsung would allow her to do that, but we all know (well, it's my bet) that this is going to go up to appeals and come back again, but in that case a different judge will preside.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]