Jury Foreman in Apple vs. Samsung Case Speaks to Rationale for Verdict

[MacRumors]

With the landmark Apple vs. Samsung patent and design lawsuit resulting a $1 billion verdict for Apple late last week, considerable discussion about the jury's decision-making process has been making the rounds. Several members of the jury, including foreman Velvin Hogan, gave interviews after the trial, but a new video interview of Hogan by Bloomberg Television's Emily Chang provides some additional insight into the jury's thinking. The nearly 17-minute segment covers a number of topics including the jury dynamics, calculation of damages, and how Hogan's own experience with patents and financial statements helped guide the discussion and evaluation.




Hogan notes that he initially thought the case might swing Samsung's way as the jury initially had some difficulty assessing how the validity of the patents should be decided and applied to the case.

We were at a stalemate, but some of the jurors were not sure of the patent prosecution process. Some were not sure of how prior art could either render a patent acceptable or whether it could invalidate it. What we did is we started talking about one and when the day was over and I was at home, thinking about that patent claim by claim, limit by limit, I had what we would call an a-ha moment and I suddenly decided I could defend this if it was my patent...And with that, I took that story back to the jury and laid it out for them. They understood the points I was talking about and then we meticulously went patent by patent and claim by claim against the test that the judge had given us, because each patent had a different legal premise to judge on. We got those all sorted out and decided which ones were valid and which ones were not.

Hogan also reiterates the jury's view that comments by Google demanding that Samsung tweak its product designs to look less similar to the iPhone and iPad were particularly damning, indicating that Samsung's infringement was willful as it took in Google's advice and opted not to follow it.

Overall, the jury found that the evidence in the case "spoke overwhelmingly" to Samsung's infringement, with the jury having put "each side to the test" equally in weighing both validity and infringement claims, working through each of the involved devices and claimed infringements to reach the $1 billion verdict. Hogan also walks through how that dollar amount was reached, using their own calculations of how much Apple lost in profits from sales of the infringing Samsung devices and then adding in royalty amounts to achieve a final number.

Article Link: Jury Foreman in Apple vs. Samsung Case Speaks to Rationale for Verdict

[sha4000]

Plz not another thread. Here we go again.

[rjohnstone]

He needs to stop talking.
Every time he opens his mouth, he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.
It's bad enough the jury flat out ignored the judges orders on damages, he's now admitting to doing all but taking the role of Apple's counsel in the jury room.

[Steviejobz]

Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.

[xionxiox]

awesome. stellar. fantastic.

----------

Originally Posted by Steviejobz

Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.

I believe Samsung agreed to the jury as well.

[rendevouspoo]

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.

Good. They need to win the appeal. Consumers do too. The litigation thugs of Apple need to stop suing over petty stuff like 'pinch-to-zoom.' That's like LG suing Panasonic for putting an 'input' button on their television remote.

[damitssam]

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

He needs to stop talking.
Every time he opens his mouth, he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.
It's bad enough the jury flat out ignored the judges orders on damages, he's now admitting to doing all but taking the role of Apple's counsel in the jury room.

Samsung's lawyers are licking their chops. How the hell could their lawyers let a guy like this slip into the jury.

[CGagnon]

This guy looks/sounds so nervous.

[miles01110]

Wow. Interesting that the jury went from this:

Hogan notes that he initially thought the case might swing Samsung's way as the jury initially had some difficulty assessing how validity of the patents should be decided and applied to the case.

To this:

Overall, the jury found that the evidence in the case "spoke overwhelmingly" to Samsung's infringement, with the jury having put "each side to the test" equally in weighing both validity and infringement claims, working through each of the involved devices and claimed infringements to reach the $1 billion verdict.

[rjohnstone]

Originally Posted by xionxiox

awesome. stellar. fantastic.

----------



I believe Samsung agreed to the jury as well.

Not really... it's a case of compromise.
Each side could only reject 4 jurors from the final pool.

[hchung]

Originally Posted by Steviejobz

Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.

It's supposed to be this way. Less bias. More focus on the evidence presented.

[sha4000]

Originally Posted by damitssam

Samsung's lawyers are licking their chops. How the hell could their lawyers let a guy like this slip into the jury.

Said all the right things when being questioned I would think.

[neiltc13]

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

He needs to stop talking.
Every time he opens his mouth, he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.
It's bad enough the jury flat out ignored the judges orders on damages, he's now admitting to doing all but taking the role of Apple's counsel in the jury room.

No, if the decision was flawed then we need to know about it. If that means Samsung deserves to win the appeal, then justice will be done.

[spacehog371]

The patent he is talking about is Samsung's.

He went home and thought about Samsungs patent, and decided that it was defensible, and for that reason deemed it valid.

People here seem to think that the 460 patent is one of Apple's. It isn't.

[pandamonia]

So one man led a 12 man jury to agree with him because he thought he was right!

Samsung should be able to appeal this pretty easy because the more i read the more i think this whole trial was a joke.

[jontech]

TOO.... MUCH..... LOGIC....


Ahh my Android head!

[jhende7]

Originally Posted by Steviejobz

Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.

Lol. You can say the result stifles competition over and over and over again but that doesn't make it true. Last time I checked there are plenty of other manufacturers out there making their own phones that will provide great competition for years to come. Competition does not equal clones. You sir don't have the right to call anybody else "uninformed" with the b.s your trying to pass off as fact.

[wkadamsjr]

Originally Posted by rendevouspoo

Good. They need to win the appeal. Consumers do too. The litigation thugs of Apple need to stop suing over petty stuff like 'pinch-to-zoom.' That's like LG suing Panasonic for putting an 'input' button on their television remote.

Ah yes, this argument again. Because pinch-to-zoom is the only patent Samsung violated...

[DisMyMac]

Turning jurors into celebrities is bad for justice.

[Benjamins]

lol little did they know, Google screwed them over.

[Rogifan]

Wasn't Samsung involved in jury selection? Would be hard to appeal on jury incompetence when they helped select the jury. But I'm sure Apple wishes he'd just ****.

[Piggie]

Originally Posted by pandamonia

So one man led a 12 man jury to agree with him because he thought he was right!

Samsung should be able to appeal this pretty easy because the more i read the more i think this whole trial was a joke.

I have been on a Jury myself and yes I fully agree that this is how it is in real life.
The jury I was on (a few drugs cases) the people (public) were pretty much confused and could see both sides. It really only takes one or two strong willed and persuasive people on the jury to sway the majority. It's quite scary actually esp if you are sending someone to prison.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

He needs to stop talking.
Every time he opens his mouth, he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.
It's bad enough the jury flat out ignored the judges orders on damages, he's now admitting to doing all but taking the role of Apple's counsel in the jury room.

I doubt it. Jurors speak out all the time. He isn't saying that they considered any other research or that he did anything improper. Both sides and the judge knew his background and that he had patents and was involved in lawsuits in the past. He simply explained to the rest of the jury the concepts that were laid out in the instructions.

Jurors are supposed to consider the evidence presented to them. That doesn't mean checking their brains at the door.

[Blorzoga]

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

He needs to stop talking.
Every time he opens his mouth, he is helping Samsung's case for appeal.
It's bad enough the jury flat out ignored the judges orders on damages, he's now admitting to doing all but taking the role of Apple's counsel in the jury room.

It's called being the foreman, genius.

----------

Originally Posted by Steviejobz

Apple found 12 uninformed people to determine whether or not we get competition in the mobile device market.

Brilliant.

The jury is selected by both parties, not just the plaintiff.

[Icaras]

Originally Posted by jhende7

Lol. You can say the result stifles competition over and over and over again but that doesn't make it true. Last time I checked there are plenty of other manufacturers out there making their own phones that will provide great competition for years to come. Competition does not equal clones. You sir don't have the right to call anybody else "uninformed" with the b.s your trying to pass off as fact.

Well said, sir. Especially the bit in bold.