said by sonicmerlin The jury didn't "ignore prior art"- they skipped the first couple of questions that dealt with prior art because they couldn't agree on the answer and then came back to it. [/BQUOTE :
Do you have a link showing where they said they came back to it?
Even in the 15 minute interview with the jury foreman he doesn't contradict the idea that they skipped the prior art evidence and never returned to it.
When asked directly about prior art he answers instead:
"In the case of the design patent it was the look and feel of it, and how the device presented itself, and when you compared them side-by-side against the statements in the patent it was clear to every one of us that not only was the patent valid but that the Samsung products that were accused were legitimately a problem."
It's not a comparison between the accused devices and the iPhone against the patent that determines whether the design patent was valid, it's a weighing of the prior art.
The prior art was key to whether there was a valid trade dress patent for Samsung to infringe, and it is still appears that this jury foreman missed that point.