Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Surely the judge isn't stupid? | 98 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Surely the judge isn't stupid?

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 11:22 AM EDT

Perhaps she doesn't care? Bad tendency IMO.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Bias? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 06:09 PM EDT

If she is doing Apple's dirty work

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 11:57 AM EDT

then ruining Samsung's holiday shopping season through procedural interference
would be a great way to do it: by the rules, cleanly, incurably and with little
risk to herself personally, no?

-j

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If she is doing Apple's dirty work - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 02:31 PM EDT
- If she is doing Apple's dirty work - Authored by: stegu on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 03:23 PM EDT
  - If she is doing Apple's dirty work - Authored by: AlexWright on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 04:09 PM EDT

Maybe she is smart enough to know that this won't get smaked down

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 08:42 PM EDT

If she ruled consistently with the rules, why would she get smacked down? If she
simply ignores any extra material that Apple included, which is exactly what she
said that she would do, why would the appeals court smack her down?

You seem to be assuming that she did something wrong without any idea of what it
is that she did wrong. Where did that come from?

[ 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 )