Samsung lead lawyer explains decision to share rejected evidence, anger judge

by: Chris SmithAugust 1, 2012

samsung leaked evidence

Earlier today we showed you a few images that came directly from the U.S. Apple vs Samsung trial. Only they’re not allowed in court as evidence for Samsung, and since Samsung’s counsel can’t use them to defend against Apple claims, it decided to leak them to the media.

The decision angered Judge Lucy Koh, who is presiding over the case and who wanted to know exactly how this happened. And when a judge asks, you can only answer, which is what John Quinn, Samsung’s lead counsel did.

The attorney filled a personal declaration today in which he explained that he is the one that authorized the release of the Samsung evidence. Here are relevant fragments of his declaration – the entire document is available at the Source link at the end of this post.

On July 31, 2012, I approved and authorized the release of a brief statement—it was not a general press release—and proposed trial demonstrative exhibits. This followed multiple requests from members of the media seeking further explanation—including requesting the demonstrative exhibits at issue—as to the basis for Samsung’s claims, made in open court and in its public trial brief, that it had the right to present evidence that the iPhone was inspired by “Sony style” and that Samsung had independently created the design for the F700 phone—that was alleged in Apple’s opening statement to be an iPhone copy—in 2006, well before the announcement of the iPhone.

A true and correct copy of a sample of the press inquiries seeking precisely the information that was provided—including requesting the trial demonstrative exhibits at issue—is attached as Exhibit A.

Contrary to the representations Apple’s counsel made to this Court, Samsung did not issue a general press release and more importantly, did not violate any Court Order or any legal or ethical standards. These false representations by Apple’s counsel publicly and unfairly called my personal reputation into question and have resulted in media reports likewise falsely impugning me personally.


As this Court has acknowledged, this is a case with genuine and substantial commercial and public interest and with enormous potential commercial impact. The media has been reporting in salacious detail Apple’s allegations of Samsung’s supposed “copying”, causing injury to Samsung’s public reputation as a company. Moreover, Apple’s baseless and public assertions that Samsung’s transmission to the media of public information constituted contempt of court and that these actions were intended to pollute the jury were themselves glaring falsehoods, highlighting why Samsung has every right to defend itself in the public domain from unfair and malicious attacks.

Samsung’s brief statement and transmission of public materials in response to media inquiries was lawful, ethical, and fully consistent with the relevant California Rules of Professional Responsibility (incorporated by N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rule 11-4) and legal authorities regarding attorneys’ communications with the press. California Rule of Professional Responsibility 5-120(B)(2) specifically permits attorneys involved in litigation to disclose “information in a public record.” As shown above, all of the information disclosed was contained in public records.

As you can see, Quinn firmly believes that he was not wrong to share with the media evidence that’s not allowed in court but that already is part of the public record. The lawyer argues that Judge Koh decided that this trial would be open to the public and therefore the public needs to know what each party has to say. Furthermore, Quinn says the object of his actions was not to influence the jurors.

Now we’ll have to wait for Judge Koh to rule on the matter, and it will be interesting to see which party she will side with.

  • Peterson Silva

    By everything she’s done up to now, I kinda suspect where she’ll stand…

    • Yamsen

      Predictable, samsung will get slammed… again…

  • i smell favoritism, on judge Koh and she probably has and iPhone of her own…

  • 20 °

    That ireen device looks almost identical to the iphone. This judge is full of it. All of Samsungs good stuff gets thrown out for some odd reason.

  • Jens

    /The following may contain sarcasm/

    Apple is a company from the US of A so of course they MUST win against foreign nme’s…eh… i mean foreign companies – No matter the costs and shenanigans involved…. sigh

  • a nony mouse

    Damn judge needs to stop sucking apple d—.

  • Rob1003

    By regulating what can and can’t be presented as evidence to heavily tip the scales in crApple’s favour Judge Lucy Koh is perverting the course of justice and should be debarred or whatever the judge’s equivalent of fired is!

  • dany

    If crApple wins, Samsung will have to pay crApple or Samsung phones like s3 will be banned too. If Samsung gets banned, provably HTC too and others…Then what the h**l users will buy? crApple is not an option, I wont buy garbage.

    • dany

      Sorry, i forget the question mark…

    • Kash

      Well well so I guess android phones were created before the iphone, and the ipad is the tablet in 20th or some low number place in the market and that ios has more crashes than any other os out there and the macbooks came out way after the ultrabooks and retina display is crap and siri was developed after s-voice( which is twice as inaccurate)
      Plus unlike samsung, HTC and the other companies out there don’t have a big home button at the bottom of the screen like apple does and also they have devices that look very different in color and shape

      Dude get your android-biased head out of your little android is the best world
      face facts
      apple took lots of market share away recently from android companies
      samsung employees and samsung sponsored teams said that apple mobile devices and the majority of samsung’s previous devices were alike
      google told samsung that the galaxy tabs looked way too much like the ipad

      until you do a bit of browsing don’t ever comment on these things again
      android os no longer is similar to ios as it once was, but samsung still needs stop copying apple
      Go to the apple website and samsung website and check the similarities
      chromebox= mac mini
      s2= large iphone
      tab= ipad
      series 9 notebooks- the only ultrabooks that don’t copy macbooks(congrats samsung you didn’t copy apple on this one)

      • Peter

        Apple is the only company anal about their “design” being copied. All notebooks look a like.. all tv’s look alike.. all monitors look identical.. many desktop phones look identical.. nobody’s complaining. Except Apple. Technology is about engineering as a society. Not about complaining to the world about how your artsy design got copied.

      • Actually Android did come out before iPhone. lol

      • The iPhone is just an LG Prada knock-off to begin with. Go talk crap on iDownloadblog.

      • Apples and oranges?

        The reason why people buy Apple products is because of thier marketing. Unfortunaly most people are dumb enough to believe that Apple products is the best and more simpel than other products. Sometimes it’s time to grow up and taking care of your self and not letting your big brother do the work. IOS is that big brother. But Apple has done many good stuff, i just dont see the point of buying a Apple product other than the ipod.

  • I really hate this bitch, why couldn’t an unbiased judge have this case?

    • Andrew Mezzi

      There should be a judge who runs WP7- or better yet- doesn’t have a smartphone.

  • paxmos

    She is the bigest biased judge

  • I don’t see how you can patent a “design” it’s just a square…. shouldn’t samsung just sue MacBooks because they are square like Windows Laptops according to Apple’s logic?