It all comes down to this (maybe): during a Dec. 6 hearing, Calif. Judge Lucy Koh will examine Samsung's claim that the jury foreman in the ongoing patent suit with Apple "concealed information."
After Apple's $1.05 billion (UK£659 million, AUD$1.01 billion) victory in August, Samsung appealed the decision with a slew of new arguments, chief among them one of jury misconduct.
Samsung alleged that Vel Hogan, the jury foreman in the case, failed to disclose that he was sued by Seagate, his former employer, and driven to bankruptcy in 1993.
Seagate and Samsung have a "substantial strategic relationship," according to Samsung, and it seems Samsung believes that could have swayed Hogan to influence the jury against it.
That's the idea at least
Samsung also claimed that Apple knew about Hogan's connection to Seagate, and failed to disclose it.
Judge Koh wrote, "At the December 6, 2012 hearing, the Court will consider the questions of whether the jury foreperson concealed information during voir dire, whether any concealed information was material, and whether any concealment constituted misconduct.
"An assessment of such issues is intertwined with the question of whether and when Apple had a duty to disclose the circumstances and timing of its discovery of information about the foreperson."
Here's the kicker
CNET reported on Thursday that "legal experts" maintain that it's difficult to get a trial thrown out based on jury misconduct alone.
Further (and here's the kicker): Hogan did disclose that he had been involved in litigation "with a former partner."
He did not disclose who that partner was, but as Hogan reportedly noted, he was not asked to.
Even if this juror misconduct claim won't stick, Samsung will surely have half a dozen more up its sleeves, so don't expect an end to this case any time soon (especially since Apple still wants another $707 million (UK£444, AUD$680) from Samsung).
Via CNET
