It won the case and was awarded $1.05 billion in 2012.
The third covers the graphical UI demonstrating the design of applications on its home screen.
But in 2012, Samsung lost the case and was ordered to pay more than $1 billion to Apple for infringing on three of the U.S. tech behemoth's design patents related to mobile devices: the quick links to phone numbers, the slide-to-unlock feature and the auto-correct function. Samsung argues the Cupertino-based technology company should only get a portion of the profits that directly relate to the three design patents at issue. The first jury had awarded damages based on those patents and on trade dress for 13 Samsung models, necessitating a recalculation of damages for the utility patent infringement only.
The retrial focuses on a few handsets that are never again sold by Samsung, including the Droid Charge, Mesmerize and Galaxy S2.
The legal dispute between the two tech giants dates to 2011 when Apple sued Samsung.
The trial first erupted in 2011, just a year after Apple released the original iPhone 4.
Had Apple not released the iPhone, it anxious that mobile carriers could easily make the iPod obsolete by adding music to their phones, which served as a "gigantic threat" to the company and its mainstay media player. It argues that customers were not only buying its handsets because of the design, but also due to their "functionality".
The reconsideration comes from Samsung's objection that the original calculations included total profits from the infringing phones.
"What was Samsung's solution?" he asked the jury rhetorically.
However, the central fight will be over whether the three design patents constitute discreet parts or the entirety of the smartphones at issue. "They're seeking profits on the entire phone", explained Samsung lawyer John Quinn. The case is Apple Inc v Samsung Electronics Co, 11-cv-01846, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose). The glass is easily separated from the phone and doesn't cost much, Samsung has argued. For Samsung, this is good news because it could mean an even lower award than the $400 million. Koh has forbidden that argument on the ground that Samsung didn't raise it in the previous trial or on appeal. Apple told jurors that Samsung should hand over all the profit it made on four devices that were heavily inspired by the iPhone.
Apple has described how the iPhone and overall product design became embedded in the company's DNA.
Samsung has already been found guilty of copying the iPhone.
- African Athletes who disappeared from Commonwealth Games surface in Sydney
- IPL 2018: Kuldeep Yadav unrecognisable after KKR's customary cake smash
- IPL: Punjab opt to field vs Mumbai
- Google Rolls Back Chrome Browser Update That Broke Web Games And Apps
- Star Wars boss wants to give Lando his own movie after all
- EU's Tusk hits out at Trump's 'capricious assertiveness'
- 'Designated Survivor': ABC President On "Hard" Cancellation Decision, "Creative Path Forward" Concerns
- Brazil legend Rivaldo delivers strong warning to Neymar
- Exploding vape pen blamed for Florida man's death
- Key Democrats Back CIA Director Nominee Gina Haspel