The jury foreman seems to feel that he is some kind of expert on technology patents. Two quotes for the article: "Velvin Hogan said his familiarity with the US patent system helped the jury reach its verdict so quickly" and "Let's say if there had not been an individual who had the technical background, and there had not been an individual who had gone through the process, the verdict might have been different - or it might have been the same."

Is it appropriate for a juror to apply their own legal knowledge in this way? I thought that experts were heard as part of the trial process, with the judge advising the jury on the law? Can someone with knowledge of how things work in the US comment on this?

I seriously wonder whether this interview will form the basis of an appeal by Samsung. I certainly hope so.