As we learned recently in following the high-profile litigation between Apple and Samsung over their smartphone patents, patent litigation can affect the very future of a company and can involve billions of dollars.
In our work as trial graphics specialists, many cases require us to prepare a demonstrative exhibit that simplifies a complex process. This could be a scientific or technical matter such as how environmental remediation is conducted, how surgical mesh is used, or how data backups are migrated, or it could be a business or governmental matter such as how a form of bond obligation is created and sold or how a government contract is bid and awarded.
Because maps are used by jurors constantly in their daily life and because they are so frequently used to represent common locations and processes, they are one of the most frequently used and most effective types of demonstrative evidence. Whenever something can be conveyed geographically, through the use of space, it is worth considering the use of a map. Even though maps don’t always represent the highest and newest technology, their importance cannot be underestimated. In the words of Ray Moses of the Center for Criminal Justice Advocacy, which was formed in Texas as a grass-roots training resource to help new lawyers in becoming competent criminal trial practitioners: “Visuals (graphics) such as time lines, charts, illustrations, maps, etc. are sufficiently important to communicating your message that you owe it to your client and yourself to learn how to incorporate visuals into your presentation.”
Pharmaceutical companies can be embroiled in many types of litigation. Very often, because of the length of time and the tremendous investment of money that it takes to develop a new drug and bring it to market, these cases can be crucial to the company’s continuing financial health.
Litigation involving architecture usually involves some failure in the construction process, a dispute over lease terms like sight lines or common areas, an insurance claim involving an allegedly negligent design, or the responsibility for a building damaged in a natural disaster. Since most jurors are familiar with architecture to some degree, what usually has to be explained is the legal meaning of seemingly everyday terms, the process of design and construction, or the common customs of the architectural and construction businesses. That's where legal graphics often enter the picture.
Because of the continuing high value to society of minerals that are mined from the earth, mining litigation, when it occurs, often involves very high stakes. This is all the more true in our high-tech era, in which a wide variety of minerals have found new, very valuable uses in cutting-edge scientific and industrial applications.
U.S. district court judges often lack the scientific or engineering background to fully understand the issues in highly technical patent cases without outside assistance. And ever since the Supreme Court’s Markman ruling in 1996 finding that claim construction – the interpretation of the words of a patent claim – is a task given over to the judge, it has been more important than ever for judges to get a solid working knowledge of the subject matter of a case. Judges now routinely convene so-called Markman hearings, also known as claim construction hearings, before trial to help them in their task of claim construction, which is at the core of many patent disputes. Many patent lawyers say the Markman hearing has become second in importance only to the trial itself. In a Markman hearing, judges must resolve all the disputes about the interpretation of a patent and must construe the claims for trial. The Markman hearing is therefore a key opportunity for both parties to guide the judge through the thicket of the evidence and to help him or her understand the case.
The choice of a trial graphics firm is one of the most important decisions that a trial lawyer can make. Since experts widely agree that about two-thirds of jurors and many judges prefer to learn visually, it can literally make the difference between winning and losing your case. However, many lawyers still use the wrong approach to the selection of a trial graphics consultant. For example, they may choose a provider based on familiarity (“I know someone who does graphics . . .”), price (“the client has a tight budget . . . “), or proximity (“they’re right around the corner . . . “). There are better ways to choose a consultant. Think of hiring a trial graphics provider as similar to the hiring of an expert witness. If you are hiring an expert witness, you are delegating a portion of the case to someone who has specialized knowledge and experience that you may not. You would hire an electrical engineering expert witness to discuss the workings of a patented device. Similarly, you should hire a trial graphics provider, who is an expert in the field of information design, to create effective trial graphics for your case.
One of the most important jobs of the trial lawyer and of the litigation consultant is to make highly complex and technical issues understandable to the average juror who does not have a scientific, engineering or technical background. In technology cases, especially patent cases, using demonstrative evidence is normally a good tactic. Here's why. The trial lawyer has spent months or probably years delving into every aspect of the case, and by the time it gets to trial, even the most arcane subjects can appear simple to him or her. Of course, that doesn’t mean they are easily understood by the general population of which the men and women in the jury box are a representative sample. Think of the challenge as needing to explain a complicated subject to a kid or to your grandparent; it takes creativity (and visual presentations - e.g. demonstrative evidence) to make the concept digestible to all audiences.
Very often, trial lawyers face what feels like an impossible dilemma. The case that they want to present is extremely complex, intensely tedious or worse yet, both.
As the Washington Business Journal recently wrote, the International Trade Commission (ITC), once an obscure federal agency, has become the epicenter of high-end international patent law in recent years. Its docket is rapidly growing, and its cases can be worth sums in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.
One of the unusual techniques that we are using in patent litigation trial presentations is something we call Patent Comes Alive. This process begins with patent drawings and goes well beyond them. Patent drawings themselves are a unique and highly specialized form of art. Their purpose, of course, is to illustrate the item to be patented and to show exactly what it is and what the patent applicant is claiming about the invention. For nearly all patents, the Patent and Trademark Office requires the applicant to furnish drawings.
As one can imagine, automobiles are the subject of a good deal of complex litigation these days -- whether the case has to do with the validity of a patent for use in the manufacture of an automobile, the possible liability of an auto manufacturer for an accident, a class action claiming a design defect in a certain model of car, or another legal issue. Automobiles present interesting challenges for the trial graphics consultant. On the one hand, nearly everyone has driven a car, and many people think of themselves as fairly knowledgeable in auto mechanics (while they would not fancy themselves as computer or jet-engine experts, for example). On the other hand, today’s vehicles are incredibly complicated items with sophisticated computer systems and electronics.
Share: