Judge Koh to hear Samsung's complaint about the alleged bias of the jury foreman
he filed for bankruptcy in 1993. There is no shame there, many Americans have filed for bankruptcy. The problem is that Hogan did not mention this information during voir dire when the prospective jury members are picked and questioned under oath. When Samsung filed with the court to request a new trial, it said that the Seagate connection was something that it should have had a chance to explore with Hogan while the juror was under oath.
Furthermore, as confirmed by other jurors, Hogan took over the jury room during deliberations as he claimed to have superior knowledge of the patent process which he went through to receive a patent for "video-compression software". Despite this alleged first-hand knowledge of patent law, it appears that the legal standards that Hogan impressed the jury with were incorrect and might have led the jury to come up with a decision based on incorrect law. For his part, Hogan says that Samsung should have known about his relationship with Seagate because of his relationship with an attorney from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, the same firm used by Samsung in the suit against Apple.
After just 21 hours of deliberations, quick for such a complex case, Apple won a jury award of $1.05 billion in the law suit and post-trial hearings are set for December 6th.
This story is part of:Apple vs Samsung: patent war (27 updates)
8 February Apple vs Samsung lawsuit has come full circle
18 September Apple wins an appellate court ruling, might force Samsung to nix UI features from its older phones
2 January Samsung will have to reveal sales data in Apple patent lawsuit
7 December Judge Koh pleas for 'global peace' between Apple and Samsung for the sake of consumers, incites laughter
6 December Samsung and Apple meet with Judge Lucy Koh for post-trial hearing