|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 20 2012 @ 07:10 PM EDT |
The part about how Samsung learned what it did from the bankruptcy records was
in Paragraph 4 of Exhibit B in the PDF file mentioned in the OP:More
specifically, after the verdict and after the publication of press
accounts
raising questions about Mr. Hogan's impartiality, Samsung requested and
subsequently received
on September 10, 2012 a copy of the bankruptcy court file
from In re Velvin R. Hogan and Carol
K. Hogan, Case No. 93-58291-MM
(Bankr. N.D. Cal. Dec. 27, 1993), a copy of which is Dkt. No.
1990 (“Estrich
Decl.”) Ex. B. That bankruptcy court file included papers showing that
Seagate
Technology, Inc. had filed litigation against Mr. Hogan in Seagate
Tech., Inc. v. Hogan, MS 93-0919 (Santa Cruz Sup. Ct.) (attached as Exhibit
A to the Estrich Decl., Dkt. 1990). This was the
first time Samsung learned of
any litigation between Mr. Hogan and Seagate. These same papers
in the
bankruptcy court file showed that Seagate’s attorney in the lawsuit was Michael
Grady, a
fact which Samsung also had not known prior to the verdict and prior to
obtaining the bankruptcy
court file. The quoted text in the parent
to this comment doesn't explain how Samsung found out, which was the
point of the OP.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|