Patent Held By Apple vs. Samsung Jury Foreman Could Spell Trouble For Apple

Patent Held By Apple vs. Samsung Jury Foreman Could Spell Trouble For Apple

A California court recently ruled in favor of Apple in a high-profile patent case against Samsung, and the immediate fallout means that Samsung is forced to pay Apple over $1 billion in damages. Federal Judge Lucy Koh will hold an injunction hearing in December to see if Apple is permitted to ban several Samsung phones from being sold in the United States.

The court’s decision was by no means a simple one, as this Apple vs. Samsung case is considered the most important tech patent lawsuit in history. That’s why every bit of the ruling process is being put under the microscope, including Jury Foreman Vel Hogan, the man who led the jury to rule against Samsung last Friday.

A new report reveals that a possible conflict of interest could have affected the case’s ruling.

Hogan himself owns a patent that can be used in mobile devices like smartphones and tablets, reports Asian News International:

Velvin Hogan reportedly filed documents with the US Patent Office in 2002 for the ‘method and apparatus for recording and storing video information’.

This also included technology for a wireless keyboard to allow users to surf the web and order films on demand, a feature, which is already available on Apple iPads.

Here’s how Hogan explained his process of persuading the jury to rule in favor of Apple:

At that point in time, I thought it was going to ultimately lean the other way… We were at a stalemate, but some of the jurors were not sure of the patent prosecution process. Some were not sure of how prior art could either render a patent acceptable or whether it could invalidate it. What we did is we started talking about one and when the day was over and I was at home, thinking about that patent claim by claim, limit by limit, I had what we would call an a-ha moment and I suddenly decided I could defend this if it was my patent…And with that, I took that story back to the jury and laid it out for them. They understood the points I was talking about and then we meticulously went patent by patent and claim by claim against the test that the judge had given us, because each patent had a different legal premise to judge on. We got those all sorted out and decided which ones were valid and which ones were not.

He “suddenly decided I could defend this if it was my patent” because he does own his own patent. Not only that, but it looks as though his patent is pretty broad. Depending on what companies know of or have licensed Hogan’s patent (especially Apple and Samsung), this finding could spell trouble for the case. It’s currently unclear whether Hogan’s patent has been used by any tech companies.

  • John S. Wilson

    Nonsense. He told the court he was a patent holder. He derives no income or benefit from Apple or Samsung. This is absurd.

  • The_Truth_Hurts

    Oh, this is one of the many things that spells trouble for apple in this ruling. I believe this was the guy who said they SKIPPED over stuff to not be bogged down. And then there were like 20 other stuff as well. You have to be an idiot to believe that this WON’T be appealed. It will be and once after the appeals, it won’t be that rosy, if at all, for apple.

  • Bulldogger123

    You have to be an idiot to believe that this WON’T be appealed. It will be and once after the appeals, it won’t be that rosy, if at all, for apple.

    Appealed on what grounds? That he owned a patent that had nothing to do with this case? Or that he persuaded the jury members that Apple was in the right? If an appeal is granted rest assured it will have nothing to do with the jury foreman!

  • Robert X

    Oh, this is one of the many things that spells trouble for apple in this ruling. I believe this was the guy who said they SKIPPED over stuff to not be bogged down.

    You obviously don’t know what it was they skipped. They were in discussions about prior art. Since no prior art was put into evidence they decided the conversation didn’t need to be had as it would have been a wast of time since there was no evidence to consider.

  • technochick

    Was this information known during jury election. Was Samsung given the opportunity to have him dismissed?

    If it was, they did but didn’t then they shouldn’t be allowed to scream bias now that they lost.

  • dcj001

    Oh, this is one of the many things that spells trouble for apple in this ruling. I believe this was the guy who said they SKIPPED over stuff to not be bogged down. And then there were like 20 other stuff as well. You have to be an idiot to believe that this WON’T be appealed. It will be and once after the appeals, it won’t be that rosy, if at all, for apple.

    Of course it will be appealed.

    And it will not be rosy for Apple. It will be green – the color of money – for Apple.

  • freerange

    Oh, this is one of the many things that spells trouble for apple in this ruling. I believe this was the guy who said they SKIPPED over stuff to not be bogged down. And then there were like 20 other stuff as well. You have to be an idiot to believe that this WON’T be appealed. It will be and once after the appeals, it won’t be that rosy, if at all, for apple.

    Well aren’t you the commenting genius here… What he said was they skipped over some items when they slowed the process down, but came back to them later to resolve once they got through the easier stuff. It was a matter of being efficient in the process. Go get yourself a good education on how the world works then come back and talk to us.

  • RaptorOO7

    Everyone knows its going to be appealed, did anyone think Samsung was going to cut a check for $1.49 Billion dollars without a fight. There were tons of motions and objections to rulings that alone is grounds for appeal. The jury failed to follow the instructions and that is something Judge Koh should have sent them back to review again prior to their decision, but it seems that would have had little impact as Vel (the Impaller) here was all about “could he defend this, of course he could”.

    So bottom line is Samsung will likely have to put the funds into escrow, pending the appeals, but will Apple get the injunctions given the amount of motions that are going to be filed and request to dismiss the verdict all together.

    I do feel Samsung should have had the ability to get a change of venue in an effort to get an impartial or perceived impartial jury (read not so close to silicon valley).

  • ddevito

    HA HA eat it.

  • ddevito

    …was hoping it was true Samsung paid in nickels. HA HA HA

  • The_Truth_Hurts

    @Kr00

    There was a really great European Article that was written several days ago dealing with the outcome of this case. The author of the article brought up one, big, huge, point. In most, if not all of these Apple vs Samsung cases that are done around the world, there is no jury. Just a judge. Just a judge. In most, if not all of these cases, It was more of a “fair” case. (Maybe not if you are a die-hard apple lover). Most, if not all of the time, APPLE LOST, LOST against Samsung. And if Apple won, in the appeals it was mostly overturned, but that isn’t important here. What the author was pointing at was, when there was just a judge, and no jury, most of the time Samsung was found not copying, infringing, upon Apple’s stuff. And by going by the rulings that happened overseas, it was expected (heavily) that Apple will lose this one, especially since the similar (if not the exact same cases) Apple had overseas and lost them. So How did Apple “win” this…? This article pointed directly to the jury. The jury was why Apple WON the case. And that was what was the problem the article was pointing toward. Again, the reason why apple won the case was not because Apple was “right” and samsung was “wrong”, but because there was a jury.

    This wasn’t brought up in the article above, but in another. The problem with Juries is that they really don’t do “fair” rulings. A lot of the times they are biased and just make horrible decisions. A lot of times they have no experience, have no idea how stuff works, etc.. Are they good? Are they bad? That really depends on what side of the case you are on.

    This case? you start digging into the jury stuff and things and there are “red flags” raised left and right. Stuff you have to “question”.
    1) Right of the bat, money that was awarded for devices that were not infringing. Apple was awarded money for devices that WERE NOT INFRINGING!!!
    2) You have a thing that is infringing, but not infringing. Inconsistencies like this.
    3) You devices that are (quote) infringing, but really cannot be because they (literally) run a massively different operating system. (May be not skinned vs skinned, and since it is not skinned those patents don’t apply to it and such)
    4) This could be the problem with #3. One of the jurors said, once they “figured” if one device was infringing on Apple patent’s it basically meant all of these other devices were infringing as well. Instead of going through every single device to make SURE that it was infringing, what did they do? Based all of the other devices off one device. THEY DID NOT GO THROUGH EVERY SINGLE DEVICE TO SEE IF THEY WERE INFRINGING OR NOT!!!!!
    5) I already stated, they skipped information because “they didn’t wanted to be bogged down”, information that could (easily) have invalidated Apple’s claim
    6) “We knew that Samsung was guilty since day one”. Basically they didn’t wait till the end of the case to figure out who was truly right or wrong. They basically went by what happened on day one. That is NOT how you do a case. You have to wait till the end have all the facts presented and then decide who is guilty or not.
    7) One of the jurors had patents that were similar to Apple’s. He basically said, he KNEW he had to upheld Apple’s, because if he didn’t, his could be in risk. Conflict of intrest much…?
    8) Court was literally in Apple’s backyard. Judge was (literally) in Apple’s backyard. Jury was literally from’s apple’s backyard. The other company? a foreign company. As someone stated, “Can you really be unbiased, if X company is in your backyard and a loss for them could have major implications on you?”
    9) Devices that were “infringing” upon’s apple’s dress, but did not have the iPhone look. Basically looked like any black slab with rounded corners. they had the “general” black slab with rounded corners. The problem with that is, you had devices just like that BEFORE the iPhone and lots after. Basically, that shape is free for everyone to use.
    10) the list goes on. this just some of the stuff.

    I didn’t listed it above and it isn’t related with above, but another (great) article (I believe European again), brought up a point that it was an “unfair” case for Samsung. And basically listed off things that Samsung could slap down and call the “unfair” card on. Basically stuff the judge did (mainly) that helped apple significantly and hurt Samsung’s “story”. The person specifically stated he was not being biased at all and to an extent Samsung should be “punished”, but the way the case went, there were plenty of red flags that screamed “unfair” and Samsung could (easily) use that to get an Appeal.

    Back to the Jury. Basically, the reason why Apple won this was not that they were “truly” right, and Samsung was “truly” wrong. They won because of the jury, which there is (really) more than enough evidence to simply put they were biased in Apple’s favor. More than enough evidence, if you actually look and start to go through the things. Was samsung 100% innocent…? Let’s put it this way. The devices that resembled Apple’s devices the most were not the American models, but the World models that were not sold ever in America. World models that were not sold in America. So, did Apple really have a case to go after Samsung in America…..? Here is the thing, A lot of these “infringing” devices were already found not to be “guilty” in the world courts and if they were indeed to be found guilty, Apple was as much guilty, if not more than Samsung. Basically, if Samsung was found guilty, Apple was as guilty as Samsung. Not this “Samsung is super guilty” and “Apple is a pure innocent angel”.

    Again, you have to be an idiot to think that is case is finished and there will be no appeal. Oh, there will be an appealed, but I guess most don’t want to admit apple will LOSE a lot in the Appeals. And what could have been a massive “win” for apple, will just be a major loss for Apple. If you get out of the Apple logs, they really say, it will be appealed, and especially if you are reading some of the non-American ones, that it really was the jury that “screwed” samsung over.

    But I guess nobody wants to hear all this above because it’s complete trash and lies, rumors. Come back to this after all the appeals and things are done. I guarantee you Apple WON’T be walking away with $1 billion from Samsung and getting 8+ samsung devices banned. I guarantee you, it will be a heck lot closer to $0 from Samsung, no Samsung devices banned, then 8 Samsung devices banned and $1 billion to Apple. But, again, nobody wants to hear this because this “huge win” Apple has right now will be down the drain in no time.

  • sadirbabe
    HA HA eat it.

    Oh you bet we will. We have 1 billion reasons to “eat it”. HA HA HA HA HA, stupid dumb fandroid troll.

    It’s funny how you scorn people you don’t agree with as “fandroids”, but you yourself exhibit the same properties and affections a “fandroid” would, only towards a different corporation. You have devoted your entire life, liberty and interests to Apple; you are willing to give up your entire personality and idiosyncrasies if only for Apple; you associate religiously with Apple to go so far as to characterize you and Apple as “we”, as if you and Apple are a united collective construct. I know it’s just easier for you to bend over and conform than to deviate and be an original individual, but what good is it that you exist if not as an individual? What good is it that you exist if you live just as everyone else does? What good is it that you exist if existing only as a statistic? None. You are absolutely worthless if you devote your entire life to any corporation or construct and join the flock. You might as well kill yourself if your life is worth nothing. If you want otherwise, escape the flock and aspire to be an individual person.

  • baby_Twitty

    The writer of the article clearly FAILS to watch the WHOLE INTERVIEW video on bloomberg tv. The jury foreman said regarding the “aha moment, I could defend this if it was my patent…”, they applied it on BOTH SIDES during the jury deliberation!

    Watch the whole goddamn video and stop quoting snippets of misinformation! Jeez!!!

  • vinnyb
    You have to be an idiot to believe that this WON’T be appealed. It will be and once after the appeals, it won’t be that rosy, if at all, for apple.

    Appealed on what grounds? That he owned a patent that had nothing to do with this case? Or that he persuaded the jury members that Apple was in the right? If an appeal is granted rest assured it will have nothing to do with the jury foreman!

    This reply isn’t for “The Truth Hurts”, but rather for Bulldogger123:

    Appealed on what grounds? Oh.. I don’t know…how about the fact that the jury blatantly disregarded the judges instructions? Like the whole “prior art” thing. They based their decision on “prior art”, yet the judges instructions (not to mention definition) were that, if it previously existed, “prior art” invalidated the patent. Yet, they based most (if not all) of their decision on that.

    Secondly, a patent holder having no bias? Surely ye jest. He could “have defended his patent if he wanted to”, yet his retardedly vague & nebulous patent (“method and apparatus for recording and storing video information”) which is used in everything from the DVR on your shelf, to the Ipad in your backpack, to the Galaxy S3 I own. You’re SERIOUSLY going to say that him owning a patent had nothing to do with a case involving…*gasp* patents? Seriously?

    No matter. The “DEFEND THE HIVE!!!!” mentality is hilarious. Without further adeu, I submit this link: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120828225612963

    Try reading it. ;)

    The door is not only open for an appeal…there’s a highway running straight through it.

About the author

Alex HeathAlex Heath is a senior writer at Cult of Mac and co-host of the CultCast. He has been quoted by the likes of the BBC, KRON 4 News, and books like "ICONIC: A Photographic Tribute to Apple Innovation." If you want to pitch a story, share a tip, or just get in touch, additional contact information is available on his personal site. Twitter always works too.

(sorry, you need Javascript to see this e-mail address)| Read more posts by .

Posted in News | Tagged: , |