Samsung's 'prepped' witness angers judge in final day of patent trial testimony
On the last day of testimony in the Apple v. Samsung patent trial, Samsung counsel and its final expert witness were berated by presiding Judge Lucy Koh over possible coaching on what to say regarding claim construction of a contentious Apple patent.
Apple and Samsung met in court on Monday to hash out the definition of a claim relating to Apple's '647 patent covering data detectors. Specifically, Apple's definition of "analyzer servers" as presented in Apple v. Samsung differs from a ruling handed down by the Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit last week that overturned the dismissal of a separate action involving Apple and Motorola.
In its ruling, the CAFC sided with Judge Richard A. Posner's interpretation of analyzer servers, not Apple's version as argued in the trial against Samsung. Since Judge Koh allowed Apple to assert the patent and its claim construction, she granted both parties an hour of time and one witness each to clarify the patent in an extension to proceedings.
Apple recalled Carnegie Mellon professor Todd Mowry to testify that Samsung is still in infringement of Apple's "quick links" patent even with Judge Posner's interpretation, reports CNET.
To counter, Samsung recalled University of North Carolina professor Kevin Jeffay. In his testimony, Jeffay said he held a particular interpretation of the analyzer server -- one incongruent with Apple's definition -- but claimed the court ordered him not to discuss it. Judge Koh was not pleased.
According to tweets from mLex correspondent Mike Swift, the jurist did not appreciate "that Samsung 'prepped' Jeffay to say he was blocked from using correct construction." Judge Koh ultimately struck his statements from the record, adding that the expert's deposition was "very inconsistent."
Samsung was charged for the time, limiting Jeffay's testimony to a non-infringement argument based largely on prior art in the form of Borland's Sidekick software first launched on MS-DOS in 1984.
Apple and Samsung will present closing arguments on Tuesday, after which jurors will deliberate and render a verdict as per a 53-page set of finalized instructions handed out earlier today.
Apple and Samsung met in court on Monday to hash out the definition of a claim relating to Apple's '647 patent covering data detectors. Specifically, Apple's definition of "analyzer servers" as presented in Apple v. Samsung differs from a ruling handed down by the Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit last week that overturned the dismissal of a separate action involving Apple and Motorola.
In its ruling, the CAFC sided with Judge Richard A. Posner's interpretation of analyzer servers, not Apple's version as argued in the trial against Samsung. Since Judge Koh allowed Apple to assert the patent and its claim construction, she granted both parties an hour of time and one witness each to clarify the patent in an extension to proceedings.
Apple recalled Carnegie Mellon professor Todd Mowry to testify that Samsung is still in infringement of Apple's "quick links" patent even with Judge Posner's interpretation, reports CNET.
To counter, Samsung recalled University of North Carolina professor Kevin Jeffay. In his testimony, Jeffay said he held a particular interpretation of the analyzer server -- one incongruent with Apple's definition -- but claimed the court ordered him not to discuss it. Judge Koh was not pleased.
According to tweets from mLex correspondent Mike Swift, the jurist did not appreciate "that Samsung 'prepped' Jeffay to say he was blocked from using correct construction." Judge Koh ultimately struck his statements from the record, adding that the expert's deposition was "very inconsistent."
Samsung was charged for the time, limiting Jeffay's testimony to a non-infringement argument based largely on prior art in the form of Borland's Sidekick software first launched on MS-DOS in 1984.
Apple and Samsung will present closing arguments on Tuesday, after which jurors will deliberate and render a verdict as per a 53-page set of finalized instructions handed out earlier today.
Comments
The most dishonest company on the planet.
I'm not so sure. Did you consider any psychics as owning businesses?
I knew you were going to say that.
That'll be $25.
So, the final verdict might be coming tomorrow afternoon already? Or maybe on wednesday?
I want to see Samsung lose so badly.
So as usual, Samsung (and its lawyers) get caught lying, cheating, bending the truth, etc... and they know the worst they will get is a slap on the wrist. They play the system to their advantage knowing the judge(s) don't have the chops to make an example.
their lawyers were told sanctions might come their way if it happened again (trying to introduce a new testimony) they would face new sanctions. and the a little after they coached a witness to say something that was not true and in the end, just lost a little time.
so... basically- they can do what they want when copying/selling phones and then do what they want in court. and let's face it- even if apple does win, it will be rounded down until it is about 90 million.
however, if it were the other way around...
I hope Apple win this (again), and Samsung learn something from this (unlikely).
Time to start using bing
Information is toooooo much power.
Isn't Ask.com's toolbar and start page widely considered malware?
Yahoo presents the information a bit nicer. I've been using Yahoo as the standard search on all my iDevices and Macs for months now. I don't miss Google search at all.
I personal don't think google is all that bad. Id prefer to not use an android device, but base android is not that similar to iOS. Yes, they changed their direction completely when iOS came out- but they had to- or they'd never take off (see Blackberry). Now touchwiz and samsung is a completely different story. They are the worst of the worst in the tech field. So glad apple is doing these lawsuits. Although not "good" publicity for apple- it at least shines the light on how rotten Samsung is.
Koh really lost it and went medieval on Samsung in the courtroom.
Just like you, my Mac and both iPhone and iPad, now default over to Yahoo.
The most dishonest company on the planet.
Come on, Kimmy; retake the south! You know you want to!
I switched to Yahoo! soon after Google backstabbed Apple. Often, the results are; seemingly; superior.
Isn't the correct term "coached"? All witnesses are "prepped" before a case (for example, explained how things will go and the types of questions they'll be asked).
"Coaching", IMO, is when the lawyers are telling the witness what to say beforehand when asked a specific question.
Regardless, chalk up another one for Samsung.