Despite a $1.05 billion jury verdict in Apple's favor earlier this year, millions of dollars hang in the balance pending a federal judge's decision.
It's been a busy week for Apple and Samsung, and there's still much more action expected.
The most recent move was a pair of orders late Monday that put the kibosh on Samsung's attempt to get a retrial, as well as Apple's bid for a ban a number of Samsung devices. U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Kohshot down both efforts.
What's left -- with this trial, at least -- is a judgement on damages: the amount Samsung needs to pay Apple, and one that's hotly contested by both sides. Apple wants to tack on more than $500 million to the $1.05 billion judgment, while Samsung wants to shave off $600 million.
But who's counting?
Judge Koh sure is. Her decision on the matter is expected to arrive in a court order any day now. In a hearing near the beginning of the month, the judge explained she'd be doling out orders in "installments" versus one massive "omnibus" ruling, as originally planned.
Adjustments in the millions
At the hearing Samsung made the argument that the jury made some mistakes in its math. That includes what Samsung says was overcharging on the Galaxy Prevail, the top selling of the accused devices that ended up costing Samsung nearly $58 million as part of the judgement. The only problem, Samsung argued during the hearing, was that the jury awarded damages for infringing on the design of Apple's devices, despite the fact the jury said otherwise elsewhere in its verdict.
Samsung also argued that if the damages amount is to be increased at all, the judge should only be able to address a portion of the full amount. That's an important point given that Koh has the power to triple some of the damages if she finds them willful. In an oral argument, Samsung's attorneys said that eligible amount should be about $10 million, less than a percent of the total damages amount.
But if things are too complicated, and require more than some simple adjustments, Koh could order a separate trial to hash out some of the damages says Brian Love, a law professor at Santa Clara University who's followed the trial closely.
"You could imagine that Judge Koh would go back and say some of this was flawed," Love said. "And instead of the judge reconstructing what the jury meant to do, we need to have the jury trial portion re-done."
Besides the damages number, at issue is the potential royalty figure Apple could make off devices Samsung still intends to sell. That includes some 77,000 Galaxy SII smartphones spread out across the U.S., according to numbers provided by Samsung earlier this month. Since judge Koh denied Apple's efforts for an injunction, which would keep these devices from being sold, she might bite on requiring Samsung to pay for the ones that do, Love said.
One more thing
Along with an order on damages, there's more paperwork due from Koh, who is also expected to file a final judgment when all is said and done. After that it's open season for an appeal, which by law, gives both companies 30 days to file.
"This isn't the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims," Samsung said soon after the verdict came in. The company also made frequent mentions during the trial, and at the post-trial hearing that the companies weren't given enough time to make their arguments.
Complicating matters is a separate case between the two companies set to go to trial in March 2014, which deals with much newer devices including Samsung's Galaxy S3 and Apple's latest iPhones and iPads. Some experts think both companies will settle the dispute, which has turned into one of the nastiest in tech, before it reaches that point.
Samsung, for its part, has already shown signs of changing its legal strategy -- at least abroad. On Tuesday the company withdrew requests to ban Apple products in several European countries, including Germany, the U.K., France, Italy and the Netherlands, citing an effort to "protect consumer choice."
Complete coverage: Apple v. Samsung, a battle over billions