Samsung, Apple Spar Over New iPhone, iPad Patent Trial

October 22, 2012, by Mandour & Associates, APC

Los Angeles – Samsung Electronics Co. and Apple Inc. traded fire on Friday over whether Samsung’s allegations of misconduct on the jury foreman’s part in the trial of the pair’s epic tablet and smartphone patent infringement lawsuit merits overturning the jury’s $1 billion award and holding a new trial.

Earlier in October Samsung accused jury foreman Velvin Hogan of lying about his past involvement in litigation and past ties to Samsung’s law firm, saying he failed to answer truthfully during the voir dire portion of jury selection. Samsung said the misconduct warrants at least a new trial, if not judgment as a matter of law in its favor, an assertion Apple blasted on Friday.

“Samsung fails to meet the high bar to obtain judgment or new trial on any claim,” Apple’s opposition said. “Samsung also falls far short of showing the ‘grossly excessive or monstrous’ damages ‘clearly not supported by the evidence, or based only on speculation or guesswork’ required to disturb the jury’s award.”

When asked by the court whether he was ever involved in a lawsuit, Hogan disclosed one lawsuit but failed to mention two others, including one in which his former employer Seagate Technology Inc. sued him for breach of contract after he failed to repay a promissory note, Samsung claimed.

Samsung has a “substantial strategic relationship” with Seagate, which culminated in the widely publicized 2011 sale of a Samsung division to Seagate in a deal worth $1.375 billion, Samsung said. Samsung is now the single largest direct shareholder of Seagate.

The attorney who sued Hogan on Seagate’s behalf is the husband of a partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, the law firm that is representing Samsung in the Apple litigation, according to Samsung. Samsung should have been allowed to explore those ties in questioning, it claimed.

Samsung waived its objections, though, because it knew of or could have discovered the alleged lies before the verdict, Apple said.

Samsung, meanwhile, said Friday that Apple is not entitled to the permanent injunction or additional damages it is seeking, accusing its rival of “seeking to compound an already excessive, improper jury award.”

“Apple’s motion for an injunction attempts to convert the jury’s specific infringement findings into a broad injunction that it can use to bully Samsung and third parties in an effort to stifle lawful, fair competition,” Samsung said.

In its pursuit of the injunction, Apple is seeking to deprive consumers not only of the products that Apple has accused but also unspecified other products that Apple will argue infringe or merely include a feature “not more than colorably different” from features that Apple accuses, according to Samsung.