Apple filed a motion in the Northern District of California on May 1 that claimed Samsung ruined documents it needed to submit for the discovery process in a “spoilation of evidence,” according to the legal jargon that described the act. NetworkWorld elaborated:

A hearing on Apple’s motion is scheduled for June 7, with Samsung’s reply brief due by May 15. However, Samsung said the claims are without merit, and it wants the due date extended to May 29. It is also seeking to have the matter’s hearing pushed to July 10, 2012, but Apple wasted no time and quickly filed a reply on May 7 that asked Samsung’s motion to be denied.

  • In effect, Apple wants the Judge to instruct the jury as follows:
    1. Samsung had a duty to preserve relevant evidence, failed to do so, and acted in bad faith in failing to meet its legal duty.
    1. The jury may infer that documents Samsung failed to produce would have been advantageous to Apple’s position.
    1. If the jury finds Samsung liable for infringement, they may presume that the infringement was “intentional, willful, without regard to Apple’s rights.”
  • Apple’s motion doesn’t pull any punches, accusing Samsung of spoilating “vast quantities of relevant evidence in blatant disregard of its duty to preserve all such evidence.” Consequently, Apple writes that strong adverse inference instructions are required.

This aside is cross-posted on 9to5Google.

  • Samsung’s Tizen prototype has a familiar home button
  • Apple in court: iPhone data collection, Samsung/iPad patent case, & double iTunes billing