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
rat fleeing sinking ship | 219 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
On the other hand
Authored by: Ian Al on Monday, December 03 2012 @ 04:30 AM EST
Being caught out for unfairly accusing Samsung of incompetence to weaken their
chance of a fair trial, weaselling out with the terminal disclaimer by saying
it's all null and void once the judge is looking the other way and having two
patents for the same thing and demanding double damages might not appear more
reasonable to the judge.

A grumpy curmudgeon I know calls this having points taken away from them under
duress and not giving up on points.

Mind you, he's a miserable old... well, never you mind what he is!

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

rat fleeing sinking ship
Authored by: designerfx on Monday, December 03 2012 @ 08:16 AM EST
Even if they are trying to drop things they "don't think
they'll win", it's a significant cost here.

"our earlier claims were misleading/incorrect, and we kinda
stretched the truth" (on multiple issues) is not going to win
brownie points with the judge.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Negotiations by other Means
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, December 03 2012 @ 10:31 AM EST
As I am guessing you have followed this website longer,
perhaps you could explain the following to me-
Why does it start by talking about motions for summary
judgment (Rule 56)? These are Rule 50 (JMOL)motions.

Why does the site characterize these routine filings as
evidence of nervousness? This is all routine post-litigation
action. The bigger the stakes (and the larger the law
firms), the more the filings.

Moreover, the characterization of these filings has always
been off. Samsung will, of course, be arguing substantive
issues (the jury got it wrong because...). Apple, of course,
will be arguing procedural matters (we won, and we don't
need to argue because...). This is all normal.

Why is a citation to a case decided by the Fed. Cir.
"distinguished" by a judge on the panel? You start to get
into crazy territory there.

There are some really interesting issues here, being fought
over by some legal heavyweights. But the most likely outcome
is, and always has been, that this will be continued on
appeal. Doesn't mean that it's not possible that Samsung can
win a JMOL. Just very unlikely. Not sure how all these
strange characterization help.

[ 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 )