Citing ‘racial prejudice,’ Samsung needs a retrial of its current retrial towards Apple

Citing 'racial prejudice,' Samsung wants a retrial of its recent retrial against Apple

At a sure level, the reality turns into a lot stranger than fiction that it is onerous to distinguish an actual headline from one crafted by the gifted people over at The Onion. It seems that we have now reached that time in Apple’s ongoing patent dispute towards Samsung.

A couple of weeks in the past, Decide Lucy Koh oversaw an Apple/Samsung retrial that targeted solely on calculating how a lot Samsung owes to Apple for being discovered responsible of patent infringement. After a quick trial, a jury decided that Samsung ought to pay Apple a grand sum of US$930 million.

Now, consider it or not, Samsung needs a retrial of the retrial. Why? As a result of they allege, amongst different issues, that Apple’s attorneys relied on “racial prejudice” in arguing their case.

Florian Mueller stories that Samsung filed a movement in search of a Judgment as a Matter of Regulation (JMOL), a brand new trial altogether or a considerable discount within the damages it owes.

Samsung’s arguments for a retrial of the retrial have two really fascinating features and one that’s idiotic. The silly level Samsung makes might be addressed shortly. It claims, because it did at trial, that Apple’s lead counsel, Morrison & Foerster’s Harold McElhinny, appealed to “racial bias” towards Asians. However he did not use any pejorative phrases of the type you possibly can hear at the start of Full Metallic Jacket or say something different that basically has to do with race. At most one can say that he appealed to patriotism, however even that may be no less than an exaggeration provided that he simply defined how home corporations exit of enterprise if they can not defend their mental property towards overseas copyists. I simply do not perceive why Samsung made the choice to press this non-level as an alternative of specializing in its extra affordable arguments.

Samsung’s movement, with respect to its claims of racial prejudice, reads partially:

Independently, new trial is warranted underneath Rule fifty nine as a result of Apple’s appeals to prejudice towards race, ethnicity, and nationality, which haven’t any place in American courtrooms, rendered the path unfair to Samsung.

Such appeals to prejudice are “an affront to the Structure’s assure of equal safety of the legal guidelines” and “offend the defendant’s proper to an neutral jury.” As a result of Apple engaged in such improper appeals, Samsung’s renewed movement for mistrial ought to be granted.

Apple’s insidious “American-us versus overseas-them” theme permeated the trial. Apple’s counsel referred to SEC staff because the “Korean bosses” of “Samsung America.” All through trial, Apple gratuitously strengthened SEC’s overseas standing, rebranding it as “Samsung Korea,” “Korean Samsung,” the “Korean father or mother,” and “the Korean firm,” or just equating SEC with Korea. Apple injected further reminders of “otherness,” repeatedly mentioning when witnesses couldn’t converse or learn Korean and that sure Samsung engineers “do not converse English.” By closing, Apple lumped all of the defendants with “Samsung Korea,” arguing that no “Samsung government has been courageous sufficient to return into this courtroom”…

In the meantime, Apple’s counsel appealed to U.S. nationalism and native parochialism, describing the Bay Space as “the middle of probably the most vibrant economies on the planet,” and threatening: “if we permit [the patent] system of regulation to decay, buyers won’t make investments, individuals won’t take dangers, and our financial system will disappear.” His which means was clear: settle for Apple’s arguments or a overseas firm will destroy Silicon Valley enterprise.

Samsung, as one would anticipate, additionally tosses out the argument that the jury, but once more, didn’t apply correct frameworks when calculating their remaining damages quantity.

It is simply weird, as Mueller factors out, that Samsung would resort to a racial/ethnic based mostly argument in pleading for an attraction.

You possibly can take a look at Samsung’s full fifty one-web page movement under.

thirteen-12-14 Samsung’s Corrected Movement for Judgment as a Matter of Regulation

 Feedback Disabled

This text was initially revealed on Tuaw.

Featured Tales Sponsored Content material

Examine Your Devices

Citing 'racial prejudice,' Samsung wants a retrial of its recent retrial against Apple

Immediately examine merchandise aspect by aspect and see which one is greatest for you!

Attempt it now →