Does the article say that she selected the jury? No, it merely states that she questioned them. Does it say that the lawyers were not involved in questioning at all? No, it actually states quite the opposite in the article: "A few holders of technology patents including one man with over 120 patents were also
excused by lawyers for the companies, who get a handful of peremptory challenges to eliminate individual jurors."
Here's an article that provides a
profile of the jurors. Only one of the jurors uses an iPhone, whereas two use Android phones. Two owned Samsung feature phones.
Based on that information, I somehow doubt that the judge stacked the jury in anyone's favor. I think that you're just reading into a single article far too much and drawing conclusions that weren't meant to be implied by its author. If you have something more substantive, by all means post it so we can discuss it, but as it stands I don't think your argument has a lot of merit.