The «fib» to which Journal was clearly referring was the government's
claim, made repeatedly in those same
court filings, that it was only interested in cracking the San Bernardino
case, not in setting a precedent.
If the initial complaint or other earlier
filings had contained a
claim for punitive damages, or even an allegation that the defendants acted maliciously, willfully, recklessly, wantonly, fraudulently, or in bad faith, the
Court would have likely allowed the punitive damages issue to be heard by the jury, and the plaintiff may have received a larger award at the conclusion of the
case.