Samsung accuses Apple of using anti-Asia, pro-America sentiments to win patent case

samsung apple trial

The legal drama over patent infringement and how much Samsung owes Apple plays on. Samsung asked for a mistrial in the most recent case, a retrial of last year’s patent infringement battle, because of a remark made by Apple’s lead counsel during closing arguments. According to Bloomberg, Apple’s attorney made a comment about the decline of American television production that Samsung took issue with.

Harold McElhinny, Apple’s lawyer, spoke of remembering how he watched television on American made sets as a child. He went on to say that the manufacturers didn’t protect their intellectual property and no they no longer exist. “We all know what happened,” he said.

After Judge Lucy Koh sent the jury to deliberate, Samsung’s lawyer, Bill Price asked that she declare a mistrial. His complaint was that McElhinny alluded to Asian manufacturers for running U.S. based television manufactures out of business. He also said that McElinny presented “absolutely no evidence,” to back up this claim. Essentially, Samsung’s attorney accused Apple’s attorney restoring to racist tactics to win the case.

McElhinny defended his remarks stating “I did not say a word about race, and I did not say Asian.” He did state that he was “appealing to race.”

Koh rejected the request and instead called the jury back into the court room to instruct them that they should not make the decision based on personal bias. Price informed the judge he would file another request under a different rule.

[via Gigamo, via Bloomberg]

Share this post

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

5 comments

  1. Tony

    @ Mike.S
    1.Read the sentimental remark of the Apple’s lawyer
    2.Sometimes, you can’t have the actual facts
    Did ms.Rice, Clinton have the actual acts when they claimed that Benghazi was cause by the video made by the Jewish “film maker”? Do the German have the actual facts that NSA snoop on their leader? need more facts…? Do you have the facts the judge Koh, the jury are impartial? Can’t help you there…I am no Manning, Snowdon …!
    3. to protect their turf
    @ Ashraf and Dottechies ….sorry

  2. Mike S.

    [@tony] 1. It’s not the “USA” in the lawsuit but a single company in the U.S., Apple.

    2. What factual basis do you have to state that the lawsuit involves a “Kangaroo court”? From all accounts, the judge (who is of Korean ancestry, by the way–and so that must make her pro-Samsung, right?) appointed herself well in the lawsuit. It’s easy to be anonymously defamatory on the web.

    3. And yeah, the lawsuit really couldn’t have anything to do with a universally-recognized creative company trying to protect its intellectual property . . . .

  3. Ashraf
    Mr. Boss

    I’m curious. Does Apple’s attorney not realize the majority of Apple products come with “Made In China” labels? I realize there is a difference between R&D in America + manufacturer in China vs R&D and manufacturer in China, but my point still stands.