Pretty interesting stuff....

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121002201632770

Looks like the head foreman hid the fact that he sued.   He was sued by Seagate.

Seagate happens to be owned by Samsung.

This would be that juror that supposedly was the one who steered everything and made sure everybody "knew how the law worked."  Though apparently he mistated the prior art law.

So either, this is just one hell of a lot of crazy coincidences... or the Head juror hid his prior lawsuit to get back at Samsung.

Yes and No.

Either way, the Judge asked him if he had ever been in any litigation before... and he said no.  So he lied either way.

Groklaw's got the full legal breif info there... intersting stuff.

Seems like the only chance Apple has is claiming Samsung knew about the guy all along.

All of the jurors' comments in the media (especially on prior art) after the trial have been amazing grounds for Samsung to get a new trial. I don't expect it to happen, but it should.

I mean it really would be ridiculious if they didn't.   I mean it's not like this is just any member of the jury.  It was the foreman, who pretty much everybody said was intrumental in going in and convincing everyone on everything.

Lol, I read something along these lines but nowhere near this detailed.

If there's not a new trial then American patent law is a joke.

Couldn't there be grounds to bring criminal charges against this guy for knowingly participating if he didn't divulge the conflict of interest?

I believe so.  They'll probably just let it go though honestly, even if the case does get overturned.

This may be stupid question.

But how do they know this info about him?

And why wasn't this info discovered PRIOR the ruling?

If anying Samsung should be sacking their Lawyers for not doing their job correctly.