Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Patents Apple

Judge Posner To Apple & Motorola: Go Home 63

Posted by timothy
from the ferris-bueller-with-a-robe dept.
reebmmm writes "Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner, voluntarily sitting as a district court judge, in the patent infringement dispute between Apple and Motorola has, tentatively, dismissed the case on the eve of trial. In this hilariously short order, Judge Posner states, 'I have tentatively decided that the case should be dismissed with prejudice because neither party can establish a right to relief.' Because it is 'with prejudice' the parties cannot refile their case. The parties are likely to appeal the order (when it's finalized)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Judge Posner To Apple & Motorola: Go Home

Comments Filter:
  • Love Posner (Score:5, Interesting)

    by brunes69 (86786) <slashdot@keirste ... minus physicist> on Friday June 08, 2012 @06:44PM (#40264275) Homepage

    Posner is my new favorite judge. He also supports legalization of marijuana and LSD.

    Read the ruling, it is only 1.5 pages, it is worth it :)

  • by PopeRatzo (965947) on Friday June 08, 2012 @06:58PM (#40264393) Homepage Journal

    22 years ago last December, Judge Posner presided over my marriage.

    I knew him a little bit and my wife and I got our marriage license. Posner was walking across Dearborn toward the Daley Center and I introduced him to my bride. We told him we were leaving on a honeymoon the next morning and he invited us to his chambers, which were in the Chancery section of the Circuit Court at the time, if I remember correctly and he performed the ceremony with a law clerk as witness.

    We later had a more ceremonial ceremony.

    Posner is a pretty good egg. The fact that he was an appointee of Ronald Reagan shows just how far our political frame has come from those days. Not one of the last two Republican presidents would have touched nominating Posner because the Republicans in congress would have shit themselves, not to mention the current Republican (free) base.

  • by WOOFYGOOFY (1334993) on Saturday June 09, 2012 @08:26AM (#40267855)

    This guy is the most accomplished, most intelligent judge who will never ever be considered by anyone for an appointment to SCOTUS. He's way too frank, way too likely to follow his own excellent interpretation of the pro-social intentions behind laws and is routinely completely inappropriate, at least as adjudicated by either and both sides of the current US political bifurcation.

    Although some observers count him as a conservative, ( I guess because he's not expressly liberal?) the kind of independence, fearlessness and good common sense he delivers on a regular basis, often in pithy, high IQ, quotable-quote form, makes him ineligible to be considered one of the current crop of psycho, Ayn Rand worshiping, anti-science anti-evolution religious zealots that is the means test for "conservatives" these days.

    If we could populate our court system with judges like this guy (Republicans would filibuster) , our nation's judiciary would work more like it's supposed to and less like a force multiplier for corporations and special interests.

    If you're into the law either where it intersects with tech or broader society, this is a guy's name is worthy of a weekly Google alert.

    Some very Posnerian Posner quotes:

    âoeModern judicial opinions tend to be too long, and we shall try to be brief. We shall even forgo the usual prefatory statement of facts, which would disclose an utterly routine, though very large, illegal drug operation.â

    U.S. v. Herrera-Medina (1988).

    âoeThe filing of an appeal should never be a conditioned reflex. About half the practice of a decent lawyer consists in telling would-be clients that they are damned fools and should stop.â Hill v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. (1987)

    And here's one that's sure to raise his esteem around these parts: .

    âoeGilding the lily, the officer testified that he was additionally suspicious because when he drove by [the suspect] in his squad car before turning around and getting out and accosting him he noticed that [the suspect] was âstar[ing] straight ahead.â(TM) Had [the suspect] instead glanced around him, the officer would doubtless have testified that [he] seemed nervous or, the preferred term because of the vagueness, âfurtive.â(TM) Whether you stand still or move, drive above, below or at the speed limit, you will be described by the police as acting suspiciously should they wish to stop or arrest you. Such subjective, promiscuous appeals to an ineffable intuition should not be credited.â U.S. v. Broomfield (2005)

    And finally:

    âoeOnce a case gets to the jury, all bets are off.â Speakers of Sport Inc. v. ProServ Inc. (1999)

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...