Can jurors of the Apple v Samsung lawsuit be impartial?

Jurors in the Apple lawsuit case against Samsung have been selected following a day of questioning in California.

U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh found 18 jurors who can be ‘fair and impartial’ after quizzing 74 possible candidates.

As reported by TechDay this morning, Judge Koh told prospective jurors: “If you are ultimately selected as a juror, it will be an interesting case.”

After spending the day testing candidate’s suitability for the case, seven men and three women were selected for the trail in San Jose, California – eleven miles from Apple’s headquarters in Cupertino.

Jurors include a man who filed for his own technology patents, an insurance agent, an unemployed video game enthusiast and an aspiring software engineer.

Given the close proximity of the federal courtroom to Apple’s HQ – Judge Koh was keen to examine the interests and professional backgrounds of possible jurors, selecting one who didn’t go to college along with a construction worker.

A Google engineer was eliminated in the final cut despite Judge Koh maintaining his credibility, noting the juror said his family owned several Apple products.

“His credibility, as far as I’m concerned, I believe it when he says he can be fair and impartial,” Koh said.

“For right now he’s been solid that he can be fair and impartial, so he’s staying on."

Apple’s concerns of impartiality were acknowledged however as lawyers from both sides reached an agreement.

Samsung witness:

Shin Nishibori is at the centre of witness drama as Samsung appear desperate to get the former Apple industrial designer on the stand.

Asked to create mock-ups of what an iPhone product would look like if created by Sony in 2006, Nishibori’s drawings formed a key part of Samsung’s counter-claim that Apple copied Sony.

Yet the images were rejected by the court meaning the South Korean company wanted the now Hawaii resident to act as a witness in the trial.

Samsung bizarrely sent a check of US$60 expenses for the trio along with a subpoena but Nishibori’s lawyer responded by letter confirming his client could not attend trial because of serious health issues.

The evidence and witness statements are likely to end no later than August 21.

What do you think? Can the jury be fair and impartial? Let us know your comments below.