5 ms·
Yeah, I'm not a lawyer but a small set of judges hearing such a large number of a type of case seems to run counter to what they attempt to set the legal system
by sbov 9y ago
Yeah, I'm not a lawyer but a small set of judges hearing such a large number of a type of case seems to run counter to what they attempt to set the legal system up as. It runs counter to the geographically distributed system and it runs counter to some of the criticisms of how to split up the 9th circuit (e.g. giving California it's own circuit is looked at as a poor solution).
Given that I don't see how it's a positive thing at all.
- jacquesm 9y agoIn this case it worked out bad. But it could also work out well: Judges, just like software developers or any other profession have specialties, and a judge that is well versed in patent cases should be able to reach a better verdict quicker than someone who is new to patent cases.
- rudyfink 9y agoThough, in the nature of legal cases, "work out well" is relative. While one side might appreciate a court that provides a "better verdict quicker" the other side would almost certainly decry that court, since they, for example, would have less time before the verdict and, presumably, less of a chance of successfully appealing it.
- PatentTroll 9y agoMany district courts have designated judges for patent cases to try to take advantage of this