Apple v. Samsung jury foreman discusses verdict


Vel Hogan, the jury foreman in Apple v. Samsung

The foreman in the Apple v. Samsung lawsuit, Vel Hogan, has given his first television interview in order to discuss the jury's verdict. Hogan, who provided the jury with guidance as he is a patent holder himself, said that despite the jury's quick verdict, there was a moment during the trial where it appeared Samsung was going to win the case.

"If you'd have asked me at that moment in time, I thought it was ultimately going to maybe lean the other way," Hogan said in an interview with Bloomberg TV. "Why? We were at a stalemate, but some of the jurors weren't sure of the patent prosecution process. Some weren't sure how prior art could either render a patent acceptable or whether it could invalidate it. And so what we did is we started talking about [something], and when the day was over and I was at home I started thinking about that patent, claim-by-claim, limit-by-limit. I had what we would call an 'ah-ha!' moment, and I suddenly decided I could defend this if it was my patent."

While Hogan said some of the jurors were bored with the proceedings at times, they all knew the importance of the lawsuit and were determined to let the evidence presented in the case determine the eventual outcome.

Hogan went on to say the jury was given a clear set of instructions by the judge; the form the jury was given listed all the potentially infringing Samsung devices as well as the respective patents the devices were claimed to be infringing upon. With that form in hand, the jury was able to easily decide whether devices were infringing upon Apple's patents.

"The thing that needs to be understood – there was emotion – but if you set that aside, the form that we were given [by the judge] ... had broken [down] every accused device [into groups and what patents each may infringe on]," the jury foreman said. "Some violated one, some violated two, some violated three. And so we had to take the accused devices for each one and compare them to the declaration of the patent and claim and limitation."

The jury went on to award Apple $1.051 billion (a figure that was later lowered to $1.049 billion after the judge ruled the jury had awarded damages for a product that was deemed to have not infringed on Apple's patents), although there was debate among the jurors. Hogan confirmed reports that a 20-year-old juror was responsible for much of that debate.

"Actually, he did. What it amounted to was he thought very logically – and I'm glad – he was never willing, at first, to take anyone's viewpoint until he had thought it out," Hogan said. "That was a good thing; that would create discussion. We would either convince all of ourselves and be unanimous on the point or we would move on, and then eventually we would come back. And we learned enough going forward that when we came back it made the process a lot easier."

Regarding the actual monetary amount awarded to Apple, Hogan said the jury had individuals with professional financial experience and came up with a method of determining the amount Apple would receive. 

"In the evidence, Apple had declared that Samsung had cost them in profits 35 percent of their revenue," he said. "On the other hand, Samsung said that it is because they took out operating costs and the value is 12 percent. Three of us had been through the process in our careers of dealing with financial documents. ... We determined that in our experience, the percentage was not 12 percent, and it certainly was not 35 percent; it should be closer between 13 to 15 percent. We zeroed in on 14 percent – that became the magic number. Then we did our own calculations for each of the areas, adding those up with royalties that were entitled for some of the items. And we cut that value in half."

Source: Bloomberg TV | Screen capture via Bloomberg TV

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Samsung may use Ativ branding for Windows Phone 8 devices

Next Story

Kim Dotcom claims he's going to 'turn this world upside down'

23 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

"and I suddenly decided I could defend this if it was my patent."

That's a clear admission of bias. In Samsung's shoes, he could have said "I could defend this if it was my device."

It sounds to me like the jury didn't want to deal with the amount of work that was required to make an honest opinion, so they relied on someone who says that they are an expert in patents because he has one. He was also the jury foreman so they looked to him for leadership. The problem I have is with this supposed "epiphany". Could a few $$ from apple have been that epiphany? Either way, with the fact that the judge threw out evidence, and the fact that the jury was NOT there to determine the VALIDITY of the patents but to determine if they VIOLATED the patents, I can ALMOST see why they reached the conclusion they did. However, from the interviews, I think the jury was a bunch of idiots that didn't want to be bothered with the case.

One of the biggest problems with any Jury is not knowing their power and obligations. The judge cannot tell the jury what to consider and what not to consider. If a member of the Jury ignorantly listens to the persuasions of the judge to do this and that and only consider this and that, then you are already in trouble.

Every American or man/woman interested in looking at how a jury is supposed to work should check out the CITIZENS RULE BOOK (A Palladium of Liberty).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Rule_Book

You can order a copy here or at other places: http://fija.org/media-catalog/broc-pubs/

Or you can download a PDF copy (missing some pictures, etc) at: http://troybperk.easycgi.com/P...uploads/2011/08/citizen.pdf

Edited by JayZJay, Aug 28 2012, 4:21pm :

This guy is a tool just like the rest of the jury. Making a decision in just 3 days over a 3 - 4 week trial with 700 questions to answer. Not to mention that they awarded damages to Apple on patents/devices the jury ruled that Samsung didnt infringe on.

Listen to his staement...because the software couldnt run on the older concepts this somehow changes the patent? Proof he doesn't understand.

Hey fool, Windows wasn't designed to run on PPC, but I be if it was coded properly, most the the original Wndows elements woudl still exist. It has nothign to do with platform. What Apel argued has nothing to so with what you said.

You didnt understand either and you accused the others of not understanding.

Hello,

Windows NT, which is the basis for all modern versions of Windows, was originally developed for a number of CPU architectures. Both Windows NT 3.51 and NT 4.0 were offered for both IBM and Motorola PPC CPUs. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#32-bit_platforms for more detailed information.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

TechieXP said,
Listen to his staement...because the software couldnt run on the older concepts this somehow changes the patent? Proof he doesn't understand.

Hey fool, Windows wasn't designed to run on PPC, but I be if it was coded properly, most the the original Wndows elements woudl still exist. It has nothign to do with platform. What Apel argued has nothing to so with what you said.

You didnt understand either and you accused the others of not understanding.

Wen a aprson is making a statement and they constantly look to the left or right, that means they are lying. He is a lying ugly spotted face Aple fan. He swayed the jury to go wth him claiming his patent tech experience.

The guy is a liar. He didn't think of nothing. He admitted the day after the verdict that he felt Samsung infringed after the first day of presetation. He simply didnt allow other jurors to question him since he claimed he owns a patent. They felt he was right and simply sided with him. They had no understanding of the case. They didnt even follow the Judges instructions.

The guy is a liar a biggot a fan and God help you.

TechieXP said,
The guy is a liar. He didn't think of nothing. He admitted the day after the verdict that he felt Samsung infringed after the first day of presetation. He simply didnt allow other jurors to question him since he claimed he owns a patent. They felt he was right and simply sided with him. They had no understanding of the case. They didnt even follow the Judges instructions.

The guy is a liar a biggot a fan and God help you.

How is he a fan when he doesn't own an iPhone or Apple products?

I think it is now obvious that Mr. Hogan declared himself to be an "expert" that needed to teach the other what the decision can be. Fact is that even apples claims have been they look like ours but guess what? YOU CANNOT PATENT A LOOK OR IDEA. This also is why the judge told Samsung they could not use the footage from 2001 because well obviously everyone's design looks like that one. Then again how many diffrent ways can you make a digital notepad.

Maybe it's just the way I read the article above but it sounds like the foreman, because he had his own patent, was trying to convince the rest of the jury that Apples patents were valid and Samsung infringed.

From what I have read around the internet Mr. Hogan's patent is no good and would be thrown out on the first day because of prior art. I'd like to see him try to protect his patent in court. Just because you have a patent doesn't mean you were the first. The patent office gives patents away it seems.

can someone actually explain how they look similar? because i look at my samsung devices and i look at my other familys apple products and i see nothing in comon

DKAngel said,
can someone actually explain how they look similar? because i look at my samsung devices and i look at my other familys apple products and i see nothing in comon
Rectangle. Square icons at the bottom of the screen in a grid layout. Rounded edges. Black. White. Able to parse links in text. Touchscreen. Existence in general.

Was the jury able to say a patent is invalid OR are they only there to say if the devices infringed or not?

I can see how they were done so fast if they had the actual devices in hand and only had to decide if they infringed or not.

majortom1981 said,
Was the jury able to say a patent is invalid OR are they only there to say if the devices infringed or not?

I can see how they were done so fast if they had the actual devices in hand and only had to decide if they infringed or not.


They had to first consider whether or not the patent was valid before determining if each Samsung device infringed upon the patents Apple claimed they did (the jury was given a list of the devices and the patents Apple said each device infringed upon).

Anthony Tosie said,

They had to first consider whether or not the patent was valid before determining if each Samsung device infringed upon the patents Apple claimed they did (the jury was given a list of the devices and the patents Apple said each device infringed upon).

They were supposed to, but at least one juror is on the record as stating they didn't do that in the end.

Im still curious on this, since there has been a debate on this topic. Was the trial solely looking at weather Samsung infringed on Apple, or did they also look at weather the patents that were awarded to Apple were indeed valid?
When I look back at the various threads on here, there seems to be a common trend, that a lot believe Apple shouldn't hold some of the design patents that they have, however if the Patent system is allowing it then I see a lot of this as being more valid. The juror is correct in that Nokia, Motorola, and Blackberry have all been successful with their designs without infringing

wv@gt said,
Im still curious on this, since there has been a debate on this topic. Was the trial solely looking at weather Samsung infringed on Apple, or did they also look at weather the patents that were awarded to Apple were indeed valid?
When I look back at the various threads on here, there seems to be a common trend, that a lot believe Apple shouldn't hold some of the design patents that they have, however if the Patent system is allowing it then I see a lot of this as being more valid. The juror is correct in that Nokia, Motorola, and Blackberry have all been successful with their designs without infringing

It was something they had to take into account, yes.

Samsung made every effort they could to get prior-art established. They had evidence (although not all of their evidence was allowed by the judge). They were in front of the Jury explaining to them that Apple patents were invalid. It wasn't just left to the Jury to figure that all out on their own, you know.

wv@gt said,
Im still curious on this, since there has been a debate on this topic. Was the trial solely looking at weather Samsung infringed on Apple, or did they also look at weather the patents that were awarded to Apple were indeed valid?
When I look back at the various threads on here, there seems to be a common trend, that a lot believe Apple shouldn't hold some of the design patents that they have, however if the Patent system is allowing it then I see a lot of this as being more valid. The juror is correct in that Nokia, Motorola, and Blackberry have all been successful with their designs without infringing

Another is on the record as stating that once Hogan has his epiphany at home, and came back to explain the patent process, that the jury stopped determining if Apple's patent were in fact valid.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1357...e-samsung-juror-speaks-out/

Many legal sites are expecting this ruling to be thrown out now.

BTW, his patent is for a Tivo that has a raid controller in it. Yep no prior art there.