I don't know anything about this judge but... neither do any of you. She's a judge. The tone of this article is implying, and nearly every commenter on this thread so far is outright suggesting, that this judge has been bought off by Apple. Are you people serious? The article goes to great pains to side with Mr. Quinn's claim that he's been personally defamed, and yet here you all are, defaming Judge Koh.
Look, I get it -- I dislike how Apple gets mainstream credit for inventing things they merely made popular. And of course I dislike patent trolling. But I'm not going to project my preference of Android-based phones over iOS ones into a presumption of guilt or innocence in this or any other court case, and I'm certainly not going to accuse the judge of being corrupt, given that there is zero evidence to suggest that she is.