Samsung has asked US District Judge Lucy Koh to examine the possibility that juror bias existed in the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit that yielded a $1.1 billion Apple victory. A hearing for the juror bias case is set for December 6, 2012.
The tech giant is specifically focused on Velvin Hogan, a juror who hid from the courts his personal history with Seagate.
According to Samsung, Seagate holds “substantial strategic relationship” with the company. During the jury discovery process, Hogan did not reveal that he worked for Seagate in the past. Velvin was fired by Seagate, later sued, and was ultimately forced to file for bankruptcy in 1993.
Making a further mess of the situation is the fact that the lawyer who represented Seagate against Hogan is believed to be married to a lawyer who works for Urquhart & Sullivan, the firm that represented Samsung in the Apple lawsuit.
Apple has shot back at Samsung, calling the claims a “convoluted theory.” Apple believes that Hogan is not trying to “exact revenge” for a lawsuit that happened with a Samsung partner 19 years ago.
Apple writes:
“Samsung’s theory fails on the merits because the decades-old Seagate dispute has nothing to do with this case and would not have supported challenge for cause, and Samsung has not shown that Mr. Hogan’s responses were ‘dishonest’ and ‘material,’ as Supreme Court precedent requires.”
As Apple rightfully notes, Samsung’s lawyers had the opportunity to research and interview potential jurors, allowing Velvin Hogan to slip through the cracks on their own watch.
With more than $1 billion at stake, Samsung is apparently pulling out all the stops.
