前沿資訊：谷歌試圖避免陪審團審判

Google waves around a cashier’s check in an attempt to avoid a jury trial
谷歌繞過銀行本票試圖避免陪審團審判

An unusual document appeared last week in the docket for the Department of Justice’s second antimonopoly lawsuit against Google. It included a photocopy of a check that Google claimed was good for the “maximum amount of damages” claimed in the case for its alleged anticompetitive actions in its ad tech business. Google said it had written the check to the Department of Justice.
上周，司法部針對谷歌的第二起反壟斷訴訟的案卷中出現(xiàn)了一份不尋常的文件。 其中包括一張支票的復(fù)印件，谷歌聲稱該支票有助于其在廣告技術(shù)業(yè)務(wù)中涉嫌反競爭行為的案件中索賠的“最高賠償金額”。 谷歌表示，它已將支票寫給司法部。

Legal experts say the photocopy of a cashier’s check was definitely strange. But the DOJ took things to a weird place first. According to experts, although it might not strike a layperson as such, the DOJ’s decision to demand a jury trial is just as bizarre as, say, waving around a cashier’s check for maximum damages in an attempt to escape a jury trial.
法律專家表示，銀行本票的復(fù)印件絕對很奇怪。 但司法部首先將事情帶到了一個奇怪的地方。 專家表示，盡管外行人可能不會感到驚訝，但司法部要求陪審團審判的決定就像揮舞銀行本票以獲得最大損害賠償以試圖逃避陪審團審判一樣奇怪。

“It is a creative response to an unusual strategy,” Howard University School of Law professor Andrew Gavil wrote to The Verge. “Like chess: move and countermove.”
霍華德大學(xué)法學(xué)院教授安德魯·加維爾（Andrew Gavil）在給 The Verge 的信中寫道：“這是對不尋常策略的創(chuàng)造性回應(yīng)。” “就像國際象棋一樣：走棋和反棋。”

Eileen Scallen, who teaches civil procedure at UCLA School of Law, said she was “surprised” by the government’s request for a jury in this case. “This case will be highly technical and pretty dull in parts,” she said in an email. “But having the potential for a jury adds a ‘wild card’ into Google’s calculations, so it would make them more likely to settle.”
在加州大學(xué)洛杉磯分校法學(xué)院教授民事訴訟程序的艾琳·斯卡倫表示，她對政府在此案中設(shè)立陪審團的要求感到“驚訝”。 “這個案子技術(shù)性很強，而且有些部分相當乏味，”她在一封電子郵件中說。 “但是，陪審團的存在為谷歌的計算增添了一張‘通配符’，因此他們更有可能達成和解。”