x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Judge Koh makes more rulings in advance of trial, rules Jobs' statements to biographer inadmissible

Judge Koh makes more rulings in advance of trial, rules Jobs' statements to biographer inadmissible

Judge Koh makes more rulings in advance of trial, rules Jobs' statements to biographer inadmissible
With the Apple-Samsung trial scheduled to start July 30th, Wednesday saw Judge Lucy Koh tie up some loose ends by making a ruling here, a ruling there. For example, in a ruling that favored Apple (as most of them did on Wednesday) the Judge said that comments made by the late Steve Jobs to his biographer were an "inadmissible distraction" and she also limited testimony about Apple's Chinese manufacturing situation in an effort to exclude any talk about the tech titan's problems involving  Foxconn and the latter's alleged human rights violations.

It was a day of decisions for Judge Koh

It was a day of decisions for Judge Koh

Judge Koh is obviously concerned about presiding over a speedy trial. She ruled that Korean based Samsung would have to reduce its list of the 192 witnesses that its lawyers wish to call to the stand during the trial. Judge Koh called Sammy's request "not realistic" and reminded both sides that they each are limited to a maximum of 25 hours of witness testimony each. Both Apple and Samsung agreed to keep the jury verdict form down to 8 to 12 pages from the original 40. In an interesting piece of news that we can heartily applaud, the Judge said that exhibits from both companies would be made public. That includes design and marketing documents that Apple and Samsung had both asked to keep secret. Only third party source code will be sealed.

One piece of good news for Samsung came from a ruling made by the Judge that limits Apple to discuss Samsung's "questionable tax status" in the States, but the Cupertino based firn will not be allowed to discuss any claim of tax avoidance on Samsung's part. Apple has been requested by the Judge to limit its claims against Samsung to keep the trial moving at a quick pace. Apple had tried to get a Temporary Restraining Order on the sizzling hot Samsung Galaxy S III, the one handset that might be considered a true Apple iPhone rival, but was denied. Meanwhile, the Samsung GALAXY Tab 10.1 is under an injunction, preventing sales, while there is a stay on the injunction on the Samsung GALAXY Nexus as a Federal Appeals Court works things out. The latter is back on sale at the Google Pay Store with Android 4.1.1 installed, after a software update removed the offending local search feature from the phone.

source: electronista

27 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 19 Jul 2012, 01:36 10

1. Ohrules (Posts: 316; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)


i'm seeing more of Koh these days than i want to :|

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 02:06 18

2. doubler86 (Posts: 318; Member since: 26 Jan 2011)


I really can't stand how much she favors Apple when every other judge in the world has threw out Apple's pathetic claims or overturned the poor rulings that were made in Apple's favor.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 03:40

7. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3563; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Every other judge didn't want to do what's right.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 07:51 6

15. MISTER_H (banned) (Posts: 97; Member since: 08 Jul 2012)


more like she was bribed... when the world other company
hates there business practises along other company.
stealing patent which dosnt belong to them ...
the way u talk suits ur avatar with along with ur
name suits ur personality. rooten fruit. brainwashed.
cowards. cant compete. and try banning . dont like cometition
if only the whole world finds out what Apple a the company is
everyone will start hating. and then there u are still
supporting the bad guys. personally do u have pride
diginty selfrespect in u... looser. get a life.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 02:06 8

3. mas11 (Posts: 1029; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


She uses that wheel not logic to make her rulings lol

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 02:43 4

4. Adithya7184 (Posts: 316; Member since: 05 Mar 2011)


she got money from Apple...That's why she is supporting apple....lol

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 03:28 7

5. Sniggly (Posts: 7067; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


Those statements are inadmissable? What the flying f**k?

Koh should be removed from the bench. She has no business presiding over this case.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 03:40

6. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3563; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


That's not your call. I'm sure her credentials speak more than your words.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 03:51 6

8. Sniggly (Posts: 7067; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


And her actions speak louder than yours.

Nice to see you again, sunshine. Where have you been hiding all this time?

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 04:06

9. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3563; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Her actions is her job.

I don't hide. I just don't comment here often.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 04:54 7

10. Sniggly (Posts: 7067; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)


So her job is to make rulings which cripple Samsung very valid case that this patent war is the result of Steve Jobs's personal vendetta, and not because of any harm done to Apple?

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 05:47 3

11. Ohrules (Posts: 316; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)


are you two thumbing down each other's comments?

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 07:56 1

18. MISTER_H (banned) (Posts: 97; Member since: 08 Jul 2012)


ni one here likes u... u allways get red. ur another
Taco and that chicken gallitoking.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 07:59 1

19. MISTER_H (banned) (Posts: 97; Member since: 08 Jul 2012)


her actions are bribed. she no longer has humanity
in her sole. unlike British judges were justice is a place.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 12:18

22. bayusuputra (Posts: 941; Member since: 12 Feb 2012)


I heard he's been hiding under Koh's skirt and meditated till he turned into a Troll-faced monkey.

Sigh, one is a chicken (gallito), one is a cat (taco) and the other one is a monkey (this joker).. iNimals..

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 07:54 1

16. MISTER_H (banned) (Posts: 97; Member since: 08 Jul 2012)


ur avatar represents Troll face and half human

posted on 21 Jul 2012, 12:17

24. piggypigs (Posts: 12; Member since: 21 Jul 2012)


Well, throwing out the statement of the one who started it all .... it does leads to a lot of questions.

posted on 20 Jul 2012, 02:25

23. thinking (Posts: 130; Member since: 19 Jan 2012)


In this particular case, I think she is right about inadmissible parts. What jobs says to his biographer or tax issues, etc, are out of topic.
It's a patent fight, right? So, just get the patents and see if they are being violated. If possible, also see if the patent should be there at all. If not, abrogate that patent. Sadly, I don't think these judges are abrogating the generic patents, esp of apple.

posted on 21 Jul 2012, 12:18

25. piggypigs (Posts: 12; Member since: 21 Jul 2012)


If it is about tax issues, then yes. But about his desire and intend to start a war, i.e. go "thermo nuclear on" google? It relevance is clear as clear blue sky on a cloudless mid summer day.

posted on 23 Jul 2012, 05:06

27. thinking (Posts: 130; Member since: 19 Jan 2012)


Not true... and not fair...
Just because jobs said he would kill someone doesn't mean he should be booked for murder when that someone dies. Mere intent cannot eb used to prove guilt.

the case should be tried based on facts of the case. Simple.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 06:15 10

12. Zayuh24 (Posts: 148; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)


I stopped caring about Judge Koh, because whatever bs ruling she delivers, Samsung will just go to the Federal Court of Appeals and get it overturned. She's obviously biased and ignorant to the fact that almost all of Apple's patents are common-sense to the tech world.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 07:55 3

17. iamcc (Posts: 1319; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)


This^.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 06:45 2

13. sbr999 (Posts: 79; Member since: 05 Jun 2012)


Why is such an ignorant judge allowed to well... judge these things?

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 07:49

14. MARKSPEAR77 (Posts: 40; Member since: 24 Nov 2011)


The verdict is already baked, the results would be in favor of apple, and guys just bear in mind, its LUCY KHO's court

posted on 21 Jul 2012, 12:20

26. piggypigs (Posts: 12; Member since: 21 Jul 2012)


it is her court, until the time for appeal and escalation to higher court. so she does have to justify her rulings.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 08:15 2

20. roscuthiii (Posts: 1803; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)


Well, there you have it... if you are ever going to do something questionable, have your statement of intention printed in a biography. This sets the precedent that professed premeditation isn't admissible. Way to go Koh. If there's anything to be held in contempt in your court, it's you.

Given her history, she seems about as unbiased as Florian Mueller is.

posted on 19 Jul 2012, 11:45 1

21. TheRetroReplay (Posts: 245; Member since: 20 Mar 2012)


She is the only judge in the world that favors Apple, all the other judges have been calling Apple out on their BS. Apple is either bribing her or she's just an fan

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories