Samsung wants a retrial, says jury foreman had litigation with partner Seagate

Karen Haslam
4 October, 2012
View more articles fromthe author

Samsung really aren’t happy about the outcome of the trial in California. The company has filed a request for a new trial, claiming that jury foreman Velvin Hogan failed to disclose that 20 years ago he was in litigation with Seagate – for whom Samsung is a major investor.

In response, the jury foreman is speculating that Samsung only allowed him on the jury so that they would have an excuse for a new trial if it didn’t go in their favour.

Samsung claims that during the jury selection process Hogan was asked if he’d been involved in any lawsuits. While Hogan disclosed one lawsuit in which he had been involved, he failed to disclose that he had filed for bankruptcy in 1993 and had been sued by his former employer, Seagate.

“Mr. Hogan’s failure to disclose the Seagate suit raises issues of bias that Samsung should have been allowed to explore in questioning,” Samsung said in the court filing.

Samsung claims that Hogan failed to answer the court’s questions “truthfully” to “secure a seat on the jury,” reports Bloomberg.

However, Hogan told Bloomberg that the court instructions for potential jurors required disclosure of any litigation they were involved in within the last 10 years. His bankruptcy proceedings took place in 1993 so any litigation involving Seagate was almost 20 years ago.

“Had I been asked an open-ended question with no time constraint, of course I would’ve disclosed that,” Hogan told Bloomberg.

He added: “I’m willing to go in front of the judge to tell her that I had no intention of being on this jury, let alone withholding anything that would’ve allowed me to be excused.”

Samsung explains its relationship to Seagate in the court filing. “Samsung has a substantial strategic relationship with Seagate, which culminated last year in the publicised sale of a division to Seagate in a deal worth US$1.375 billion, making Samsung the single largest direct shareholder of Seagate.”

Hogan told Bloomberg that Samsung’s latest filing has him wondering whether Samsung “let me in the jury just to have an excuse for a new trial if it didn’t go in their favour.”

Apple and Samsung met in a US court back in August. The jury found Samsung guilty of infringing Apple’s patents willfully.

One Comment

One person was compelled to have their say. We encourage you to do the same..

  1. Tom Anderson says:

    The final comment by this guy is ludicrous. Samsung would not let a prejudiced juror onto the panel because it would reduce their chance of a fair trial. It’s usually difficult to show juror misconduct so to intentionally leave a biased juror into the panel would never occur, in the slight chance that a slimeball would do this kind of thing. He claims that there were no open ended questions that could have allowed him to reveal his personal financial tragedy that was caused by a patent lawsuit, but that is a bogus claim. The judge kept asking the first row that he was in whether there were any more issues, and he didn’t raise his hand. He is obviously a deceptive guy, trying to string together a web of deceit that makes sense! Not only did he not tell this information to the judge, he also lied to Reuters who interviewed him about it in September.

Leave a Comment

Please keep your comments friendly on the topic.

Contact us