Apple Asks Court to Sanction Samsung

Apple Inc. AAPL -0.27% asked a federal judge to sanction Samsung Electronics Co. 005930.SE -2.85% by declaring its own patents valid, as a squabble over disputed evidence in their patent case continued for a third day.

In a filing made public Thursday, Apple said "Samsung and its counsel engaged in bad faith litigation misconduct by attempting to prejudice the jury."

Samsung, denied the chance to use evidence it believes is important in the case, on Tuesday emailed the material to reporters. The company says the documents show that the iPhone was inspired by Sony Corp. 6758.TO +2.44% and that one of the devices Apple alleges it has copied was designed before the iPhone.

Now for some detail on various aspects....from Groklaw:

*********************************************EXCERPT**************************************

Food Fight in Apple v. Samsung ~pj - Updated

Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 10:14 PM EDT

Being a lawyer requires a mix of skills, part chess master, part negotiator, part brainiac, part wordsmith, and part street theater artist. Today in the Apple v. Samsung trial, there was a bit of the last. Samsung made a bold move. It could have real consequences. Here's the very best coverage, at Above the Law:

Man, I really wish I could sit in the gallery at the Apple v. Samsung trial over the next few weeks. It’s a war zone down in San Jose. In court yesterday, Judge Lucy Koh became “livid” when she found out about a Samsung statement describing evidence that had been ruled inadmissible by the court. She demanded to know John Quinn’s involvement in the statement (Quinn Emanuel represents Samsung), and then she threatened to sanction him. Whoa.
Quinn was ordered to explain himself, and we’ve got the declaration he filed this morning. It’s a doozy, and predictably, the master litigator does not take kindly to, in his words, “media reports… falsely impugning me personally”…

In brief, Samsung released to the media some materials that the judge ruled were offered too late to show to the jury. The judge asked for an explanation, which John Quinn of Quinn Emanuel manfully provided. Here's his Declaration [PDF]. We haven't heard from her yet, but Apple sees an opportunity. In fact, Apple now says it will be asking the court to sanction Samsung, according to a letter [PDF] Apple filed with the court today.

In a small way, everything that is wrong with the way Apple has been handling this case is encapsulated in this micro-drama. And I think this is what it means: Samsung is sick of Apple FUD in the media, and it intends to fight back in the court of public opinion.

When you look at the decisions that the Court has made so far - you DO get the feeling that she is in the tank for Apple! The Samsung lawyer pretty effectively boxes her ears with her own words, tied in with a little thing called the First Amendment in defending the press release.

The court had previously denied 3rd party litigants motions to seal contracts between themselves and Samsung - the court said that the proceedings needed to be “Open” ;-) So the Samsung lawyer points out that re-releasing documents that were already in the public arena, that weren’t sealed by the court, and that were released AFTER a jury had been selected (a jury is assumed to follow the rules and NOT read publicity about the trial) was above board and proper.

He also goes on to point out that Apple had been defaming Samsung in the press and that Samsung has the right to respond (that little First Amendment thing..)

I think the judge should be fairly chastened after getting the lawyers response. I imagine she won’t be though.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.