|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 08 2012 @ 10:16 AM EST |
However, isn't this exactly what Hogan did in the Samsung case, brought in
'knowledge' from his own patent experience that was not presented in court,
and used it to sway the rest of the jury.
"oh, but our information is right, and his was wrong" you may argue -
but that
is the whole point of the process. That argument should be in front of the
court, where lawyers on both sides can challenge and present their
interpretation for the jury to decide.
I suspect the right answer here is to push the jury to raise a question of law
with the judge, if the question of 'assumption of validity' has not been raised,
much as if you were asking about presumption of innocence/guilt. It is an
important question to have the right answer to, but don't prejudice the verdict
by giving your own conclusion.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|