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
Apple v. Samsung Preparing for Dec. 6th Hearing - Can the Judge Throw Out the Jury's Damages? ~pj | 209 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 09:24 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 09:25 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspicks Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 09:26 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

COMES Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 09:27 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Apple v. Samsung Preparing for Dec. 6th Hearing - Can the Judge Throw Out the Jury's Damages? ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 12:37 AM EST
...one of the exhibits that Apple would prefer the court to block, is a deposition earlier this month of Marylee Robinson, who opines as an expert for Apple, kind of stepping into the shoes of Terry Musika...

If you have to object to the testimony of one of your own experts, things cannot be going well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

"The record is closed" Are the new models on the record?
Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 12:45 AM EST
If the record is closed should the injunction only apply to products that
existed when the record was still open? I.e., no injunctions for the Galaxy S II
(T Mobile) (SGH-T989) or the Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch (SPH- D710)?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Will Apple ever sue LG?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 04:06 AM EST
Apple doesn't seem to have sued LG yet
Counter argument would be that LG was never a threat to Apple.
But it looks to be something from a behind the scene agreement for not raising a
lawsuit over Prada!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

UK precedent
Authored by: TonyM on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 06:04 AM EST
Interesting that there is reference to a UK case. What weight do US courts give
to non US precedents?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Parallels with SCO v. IBM
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 09:40 AM EST

Does anyone else see the parallels between this case and SCO v. iBM?

Judge treats plaintiff like they have a case, and eventually realizes it was all

smoke and mirrors...

FYI, I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple asking the judge to recuse herself
for attending that conference.

Wayne
http://madhatter.ca

[ Reply to This | # ]

confusing quote blocks
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 09:41 AM EST
It doesn't help that 2145 is 404 (yes, really) which makes
it hard to be sure, but based on the style, I think that the
quote block beginning with "A. The court can and should
interpret the Damages Verdicts and correct errors is from
one document (2145? Definitely not the Reply [2031] linked
just above the quote block), whereas the next quote block
(beginning "Apple also objects") is from some other document
(by Apple?) Which document?

If that guess is right, then the footnotes 11 through 13 are
part of the wrong block quote.

If Samsung's lawyers really wrote the "apple also objects"
paragraphs, they have just produced some of the worst legal
writing (unclear and unhelpful to their cause) that I've
ever seen.

[ Reply to This | # ]

... patents that it would never license
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 11:52 AM EST
That seems to go against the intent of patents:
Getting ideas (protected) into the open for others to build on.

[ Reply to This | # ]

"After a long week-end on my part"
Authored by: BJ on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 03:59 PM EST
Easy does it.
Especially with all this 'breakneck pace'
innov^H^H^H^H^Hlitigation.

bjd


[ Reply to This | # ]

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 )