Rejected Samsung evidence sent to media angers judge in Apple v Samsung lawsuit

by Jeff Causey on
tagged , , , , , ,

As the Apple vs. Samsung trial got going in earnest today, it did not take long for events to take a turn for the unusual. After yet another attempt to introduce evidence regarding its F700 phone, in development months before the iPhone, Samsung decided to appeal to the media, setting off an angry reaction from Judge Lucy Koh.

The involvement of the media came when Samsung e-mailed slides the court had disallowed to the press along with a statement claiming, “the excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design.” Upon learning of media reports about the F700, Judge Koh was so incensed that she demaned Samsung lead counsel John Quinn provide a declaration regarding his role in releasing the info.

All of this occurred after Apple included a slide in their opening statements showing the F700. Samsung saw this as Apple opening the door to introducing the F700 evidence through yet another motion. Judge Koh had ruled on several previous occasions that the evidence could not be introduced because Samsung had not complied with discovery deadlines. That gambit had already annoyed Judge Koh and led to some heated exchanges in the courtroom. The media release only served to pour more fuel on the fire.

Keep watching TalkAndroid for more updates as this trial will surely continue to produce noteworthy courtroom drama.

source: The Verge

» See more articles by Jeff Causey


Categorized as Android Lawsuits, Android News

  • Todd Moore

    The drama….

  • Sam

    Judge who… bitch of apple.. Lols Lucy bitch…

  • Jim Davidson

    More lies from Talk Android. Where do you get your information that Apple showed the F700?

    Here is the real story:

    Blatantly defying Judge Lucy Koh’s orders barring evidence that Apple allegedly copied a Sony phone while designing the iPhone, Samsung ordered its PR agency to send two PowerPoint presentations to reporters detailing the restricted evidence. The flies contain quotes from a deposition of former Apple designer Shin Nishibori who said that Jonathan Ive told him to create a phone inspired by Sony designs for internal presentation to Steve Jobs.Apple succeeded in preventing Samsung from presenting the quotes found in the nine-page powerpoint presentation or the photographs of the prototype in court with the release of prior art of an iPhone design strongly resembling the iPhone 4 from a year prior to the “Jony” phone. The “Jony” branding was intended as a play on the Sony brand using Ive’s nickname at Apple.

    An irate Judge Koh demanded answers from Samsung about who drafted the press release accompanying the evidence sent after today’s trial proceedings to reporters, which member of the legal team authorized the release of the evidence, and specifically what role Samsung lawyer and senior partner John Quinn, of Quinn Emanual Urquhart & Sullivan, played in the release.

    The press release is possibly fallout from Quinn and Koh sparring in court at the beginning of the day with Quinn “begging” Koh to reconsider the decision referenced in the release. The judge threatened the lawyer with sanctions if he persisted with his impassioned appeal. Should Quinn be found to be involved in the ‘leak,’ he faces contempt of court charges, which could result in steep fines, jail time, or both.

    Harold McElhinny, Apple’s lawyer described the “leak” as the most blatant example of contempt of court he had ever seen and a deliberate effort to “pollute the jury,” as they are directed to make decisions on only the evidence presented in court.

  • RTWright

    This is starting to sound like Judge Lucy Koh is in Apple’s back pocket. They’re not supposed to take anyone’s side, they’re supposed to be neutral and listen to both sides arguments, then if it’s not a jury trial, make a decision then. They’re a mediator not a side chooser. Sounds to me like they need to dismiss this Judge based on a clearly sided bias and get one that isn’t. Problem is, that would probably call a mistrial and they’d have to start all over…… :

    • Mrk

      She is not taking anyones side. There was a time limit on evidence proposal and Sammy blew it. Im mad at them for doing so because this would make a strong case but I do believe we should not question a judges work just because its again that we wish.