Print 95 comment(s) - last by BifurcatedBoat.. on Aug 22 at 4:14 AM

  (Source: Comedy Central)
As with Motorola case, Apple is starting to get on the judge's nerves in its case against Samsung

Like a boss, Apple, Inc. (AAPL) went out and poured money into recruiting top tier legal representation to sue its rivals.  In U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, this synergy seemed on the verge of succeeding after Apple's lawyers micromanaged to exclude certain high profile pieces of evidence from rival Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930), while allowing its own star exhibits.  But it appears that yet again Apple is brushing off on its attorneys, as they've found a way annoy yet another judge.

After enduring the seeming harassment of a 75-page briefing requesting 22 rebuttal witnesses for next week, presiding Judge Lucy Koh changed her tone, no longer looking to give Apple any courtroom promotion.  In fact the filing had Judge Koh inquiring whether Apple attorneys had been busy scoring some coke.

She asked Apple why they would present her the document "when unless you're smoking crack you know these witnesses aren't going to be called!"

But Apple attorney William Lee insists that he wasn't looking for the free crack giveway, commenting, "First, your honor, I'm not smoking crack. I can promise you that."

He argued that a couple of the witnesses on his lists were Samsung's.  As Samsung and Apple's legal teams then fell into a noisy legal argument, she exclaimed, according to a courtroom reporter for The Verge, "I'm billing time because you all are being unreasonable."

Judge Koh had already pushed both sides to cut down on the time of their arguments, saying the court could not devote itself to being a full-time Apple v. Samsung court.  Apple tested the waters last week, asking Judge Koh to allow a rebuttal witness, designer Susan Kare, after its early design witnesses had struggled under cross-examination.

Judge Koh
Judge Koh has grown increasingly frustrated with Apple's attorneys during the lawsuit against Samsung. [Image Source: IB Times]

But Apple said Ms. Kare couldn't return to court until next week due to "family matters".

Irritated, Judge Koh told Apple's team that unless Ms. Kare could come this week, she wouldn't be coming at all.  But Apple's lawyers apparently couldn't take the hint, requesting  even more witnesses for next week on Thursday.

That kind of belligerent filings and judicial frustrations strikes eerily similar to that encountered in the case against Google Inc. (GOOG) subsidiary Motorola which Apple presented to Judge Richard A. Posner, a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge moonlighting in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).

Judge Posner initially seemed inclined to listen to Apple's infringement claims, but after Apple insisted on appealing every single decision -- even its own victories -- with a slew of junk filings, his sentiments shifted sharply.  With both sides quibbling and unable to reach a settlement, he decided the best course of action was to toss out both sides' cases.  He dismissed the lawsuits "with prejudice".

As Judge Koh experiences a similar "eye opening" experience regarding Apple legal's policy of irritating filings, one has to wonder whether Apple v. Samsung might face a similar fate.

Source: The Verge

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Judge Koh
By ltcommanderdata on 8/17/2012 10:30:52 AM , Rating: 3
So when Judge Koh was chastising Samsung for excessive objections, filings, and motions many people felt that Judge Koh was biased towards Apple. Now Judge Koh is chastising Apple for the same behaviour. Conspiracy theorists could probably come up with complex theories on how these comments and rulings by Koh against Apple are all an act to make her look impartial while she's actually still favouring Apple. Or the simple explanation is that she simply runs a tight courtroom and is going to come down hard on anyone that is wasting her's or the court's time.

Of course, her restrictions themselves may or may not be excessive and I have no doubt that will be brought up on appeal by both sides. I'm just saying it looks like she can apply her rules equally to both sides.

RE: Judge Koh
By kenyee on 8/17/2012 11:58:29 AM , Rating: 2
Lawyers apparently can't figure out which patents should be granted and which shouldn't.
Then when the case goes to court, the lawyers profit by slowing it down as much as possible, so they unload a crapload of crap on the court system.
In this case, the judge had a point...there are a total of 25 hours per side in the case. 22 witnesses would take a few days to go through on the stand if you've ever been on a jury trial (I've been one with less than that many witnesses that took 1.5 weeks!). Lawyers know this as well, hence the "are you on crack?" comment :-)
I would have just reminded them of the 25hr limit and let them have a go at fitting the 22 witnesses in just so I could cut them off and teach them a lesson if I weren't sure that would be grounds for an appeal ;-)

RE: Judge Koh
By augiem on 8/17/2012 7:52:40 PM , Rating: 2
Koh's previous order was for Samsung to destroy submitted evidence and never reveal any of it, ever, to any outside source. Some of this evidence consisted of internal company documents and records going back years and was only rejected because it was filed late. Nothing she has denied Apple has come anywhere close to the level of that one.

RE: Judge Koh
By Natch on 8/20/2012 9:02:32 AM , Rating: 3
Sort of kills any chance that an appeals court could overturn her eventual decision, if that evidence is destroyed, doesn't it?

Personally, I think I'd just hide it, and hope she doesn't find out.

Apple, again, reminds me of my friend's daughter, who, when she was 4 years old (and asked why she was doing something she'd just been told NOT to do), said, "I just wanna do what I wanna do!" Never mind what the law says, it doesn't fit into Apple's vision of right and wrong.

"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)

Latest Headlines

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki