decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The exact relevant words... | 249 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The exact relevant words...
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 | # ]

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 )