Should have revealed how earlier feud with Seagate drove him to ruin
A foreman at the centre of the landmark Apple versus Samsung trial could soon be called back and quizzed about whether he “concealed information.” The trial earlier this year left Samsung facing record damages of more than $1 billion for patent and design infringement relating to Apple’s iPhones and tablets.But now district judge Lucy Koh has confirmed she will re-examine the role of jury foreman Velvin Hogan who has emerged as someone who was himself sued by former employers Seagate – a company with whom Samsung has a strategic relationship.
South Korean’s Samsung has vociferously contested the outcome of the case, citing jury misconduct.
It now argues that Hogan, a patents expert, should have revealed before the jury selection process how his legal spat with Seagate resulted him in filing for personal bankruptcy in 1993.
Samsung also wants to know what Apple might have known about Hogan prior to the trial.
Hogan, like other jurors, also lived near to the court in California where Apple – the world’s biggest company – is based.
Legal experts, however, contend that it is generally hard to overturn a jury decision because of alleged misconduct if only because US law doesn’t accommodate intrusion into how jurors reach their decisions.
Said one expert, Brian Love, a law professor at Santa Clara University and who followed the hearing, “You’re looking for material or something else that wasn’t introduced at trial, such a juror reading reports about the case and they’re being influenced by outside forces.”
Meanwhile ,Hogan has contested Samsung’s claims that he should have revealed his feud with Seagate, which makes hard drives and other memory products, countering that Judge Koh didn’t ask for a complete listing of all the lawsuits he had been involved with.
The matter returns to the court next month on December 6th .