Apple, Samsung file first joint set of disputed jury instructions
In a 361-page joint filing late Friday Apple and Samsung laid out their respective objections to the opposing party's preliminary jury instructions for the upcoming district court patent trial scheduled for the end of July.
The disputed proposed jury instructions cover a host of procedural necessities regarding juror handling and includes operating minutiae down to when an instruction can be given and how said instruction is phrased. Many objections are based on unnecessary verbiage or when an instruction should be given, though some call race into contention and illustrate the implications of trying an international patent case in the U.S.
Samsung is worried about how a jury may perceive a supporting witness's ethnicity as seen in the South Korean company's juror questionnaire and has extended that concern to jury instructions.
For example, Samsung disputes Apple's proposed reading of the following when the first foreign speaker testifies:
Samsung's proposed instruction reads almost identically to Apple's, though "Korean" has been removed from the leading sentence:
While most of the parties' objections are par for the course, some call into question the interpretation of certain trade and patent laws which are instrumental in trying a case regarding such issues. An example is Samsung's proposed design patent summary which states "[a] 'design patent' protects the way an article looks, but not the way it functions." Apple takes issue with this statement, asserting that the "instruction is misleading because design patents protect articles of manufacture that have or serve a function, so long as the overall design of the article is not 'dictated by function'." Similar objections are seen throughout the document.
Presiding Judge Lucy Koh will take the proposed instructions into consideration and may request an updated pared-down set this week. Another option would be to hold judgment until the pretrial conference scheduled in which case the parties would have to make dynamic adjustments during the trial.
The Apple v. Samsung jury trial is slated to begin with juror selection on July 30.
The disputed proposed jury instructions cover a host of procedural necessities regarding juror handling and includes operating minutiae down to when an instruction can be given and how said instruction is phrased. Many objections are based on unnecessary verbiage or when an instruction should be given, though some call race into contention and illustrate the implications of trying an international patent case in the U.S.
Samsung is worried about how a jury may perceive a supporting witness's ethnicity as seen in the South Korean company's juror questionnaire and has extended that concern to jury instructions.
For example, Samsung disputes Apple's proposed reading of the following when the first foreign speaker testifies:
In objection, the Galaxy maker claims that the "proposal will disrupt the trial and unnecessarily call attention to the witness' ethnicity." The company is looking to remove any relation of ethnicity and expert testimony during the trial and wants to keep the issue of race out of the proceedings completely.Languages other than English may be used during this trial. One such language will be Korean.
The evidence to be considered by you is only that provided through the official court translators. Although some of you may know Korean, it is important that all jurors consider the same evidence. Therefore, you must accept the English translation. You must disregard any different meaning.
Samsung's proposed instruction reads almost identically to Apple's, though "Korean" has been removed from the leading sentence:
At issue is the interpretation of testimony given by Korean-speaking experts by a Korean-speaking juror who may form a different translation than the one given by a court interpreter.Languages other than English may be used during this trial.
Witnesses who do not speak English or are more proficient in another language testify through an official court interpreter. Although some of you may know, for example, Korean, it is important that all jurors consider the same evidence. Therefore, you must accept the interpreter's translation of the witness's testimony. You must disregard any different meaning.
While most of the parties' objections are par for the course, some call into question the interpretation of certain trade and patent laws which are instrumental in trying a case regarding such issues. An example is Samsung's proposed design patent summary which states "[a] 'design patent' protects the way an article looks, but not the way it functions." Apple takes issue with this statement, asserting that the "instruction is misleading because design patents protect articles of manufacture that have or serve a function, so long as the overall design of the article is not 'dictated by function'." Similar objections are seen throughout the document.
Presiding Judge Lucy Koh will take the proposed instructions into consideration and may request an updated pared-down set this week. Another option would be to hold judgment until the pretrial conference scheduled in which case the parties would have to make dynamic adjustments during the trial.
The Apple v. Samsung jury trial is slated to begin with juror selection on July 30.
Comments
Finally an AI report about the upcoming patent trial without a quote from Florian Mueller, the FOSS Patents dude.
.
Judge Posner, is that you?
I guess he's just venting and doesn't expect anyone to ready to read what he wrote. Or maybe he just hates paragraphs.
The weirdest thing are posters who deliberately go out of their way to post hard-to-read responses.
I've seen certain individuals strip out all of my carefully inserted punctualization and capitalization when they quote me in their response. I've inquired about the reasoning behind this action and all I've ever received is stony silence.
My guess is that these people are borderline sociopaths.
It is likely that bcbcbroderick is one of these people.
Samsung - 700 questions
Apple - 49 questions
Also of note, some of Samsungs first 10 questions... It wasn't clear if this was for jury selection or the verdict form.
"4. Do you have any negative impressions or opinions about South Korean companies or business people?"
"5. Do you think many Asian companies steal what others have created and sell products based on copied innovation?"
"6. Have you been negatively impacted by the recent economic downturn?"
Maybe I'm just old but question #5 is a conundrum.
I've just been a member of the producer side of the American economy for so long that I don't think I could find a single person over 30 that doesn't believe that Asian companies steal other companies innovation. Hell, Korea stole Japanese innovation and China steals from both Japan and Korea.
Just to add, the US got a lot of car manufacturing innovation from Japan, although they willingly shared it. Ever hear of TPS reports in the film Office Space? T stands for Toyota.
I'm just puzzled about the psychology and reasoning for asking question #4 and #5. It's basically turning the question into a racism question, which of course offends both racists and non-racist people. Many racists don't even know that they are racist. Almost anyone accused of racism, regardless if they are or are not, will feel a negative bias against the accuser, Samsung in this case.
I understand that the question may need to be raised, but the wording of it is ridiculous for people that earn $500 an hour. My subconscious bias against lawyers
I just wonder how many people will answer that question truthfully, and if they lie and say NO, will they feel more biased against Samsung for asking the question?
What are your thoughts? I'm curious to hear other people's opinions
Thanks for reading if you made it this far
Which side requested a jury trial?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I guess he's just venting and doesn't expect anyone to ready to read what he wrote. Or maybe he just hates paragraphs.
Yeah, I don't read any long unbroken paragraphs that ramble on and on.
Kinda of a sign of irrational thought, if you are unwilling to make your thoughts clear and discernible to others.
Probably using a phone with Gingerbread
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVlad
Not an English teacher, but I went to High School. "There" and "their" are two completely different words. Didn't even bother reading the rest.
so you missed out on the "fregerators"
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcbcbroderick
comment removed due to writing a lot, but saying absolutely nothing ............................................
There... fixed that for you...
Then what's our incentive to read it? Why should we care about what you have to say when even you don't? A lack of attention paid makes the post nothing but spam, and had I seen it before you chose to delete it, I wouldn't have bothered to go back through (like I have before) and try to translate it for everyone.
That deleted post was the funniest thing I've attempted to read in a long time. Ranting without being to to spell, punctuate or even approximate reasonable grammar...now that is funny. I copied it to share with others. I'm stunned. Is this what the American education system produces now? This writing style would not have allowed any of my peers to pass elementary school.
I don't fault the education system, as much trouble as it is in. This is likely a reflection of the Internet forums as a free-for-all with virtually no curation. It's bound to attract fringe elements because it gives voice to the otherwise marginalized.