Koh determined that the discovery problem was the fault of Samsung's legal team. Hogan indicated that he had worked for Seagate during jury selection and Samsung had ample opportunity to discover the litigation if they'd "acted with reasonable diligence."
As for Samsung's charges that Hogan's post-trial interviews revealed he had unfairly swayed the jury, Koh pointed out that said interviews are barred when considering an evidentiary hearing unless they proved Hogan had introduced "outside knowledge specific to the facts of this case" during the jury's deliberations. Samsung itself never made such a claim in its arguments and briefings to the court. Koh also called the company's legal team out for praising the jury, only to now blame misconduct for ruining its chances. "Samsung cannot credibly claim that the jury's conduct was simultaneously worthy of such great praise and so biased as to warrant a new trial," Koh wrote.
Judge Koh concludes, "Samsung’s arguments concerning Mr. Hogan’s connection to Seagate are waived. The Court cannot consider Samsung’s evidence concerning the standards applied during jury’s deliberations because that evidence is barred by Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b). Accordingly, Samsung’s motion for a new trial is DENIED."
The full order is linked below...
Read More [Order]