California-based Apple alerted US District Judge Lucy Koh to the press release and also asked for a contempt order against John Quinn – a named partner as Los Angeles-based Quinn Emanuel Urqhart & Sullivan. Apple suggested the statement could influence the jury.

Earlier clash

According to a report in the San Jose Mercury News – the main newspaper in Silicon Valley – the Samsung news release criticised the judge for barring evidence that the company considers vital.
Mr Quinn had already clashed with Judge Koh in the opening stages of the trial, as he repeatedly asked for the evidence to be considered, leading to an angry judicial admonishment for him ‘sit down’.
The confrontation led to Samsung releasing a statement that claimed the excluded evidence ‘would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design’.

Right to speak

Mr Quinn – in a sworn declaration filed on Wednesday – said the statement was not a general press release, and was simply a briefing note responding to many media requests. He added that Samsung was not trying to influence the jury, and had a right to speak in public about publicly filed documents.
‘Samsung has every right to defend itself in the public domain from unfair and malicious attacks,’ Mr Quinn is reported to have said. But a Samsung spokeswoman said Mr Quinn would not comment beyond his court declaration.