Apple's team is asking for more than $1 billion for Samsung's infringement on three design patents, the full profit Samsung earned from the sale of infringing phones, and another $5 million for the South Korea-based company's infringement of two utility patents.
Apple wants Samsung to cough up a whopping $1 billion in damages for infringing iPhone design patents.
After the latest retrial, Samsung, Apple and Intel are scheduled to stand together in the U.S. trade watchdog FTC's suit against Qualcomm for the latter's alleged attempt to charge its customers for patented technology that it did not actually use. An MIT professor, John Hauser, conducted a form of trade-off analysis to determine the value of individual features to customers. The scope of Apple's design patents "are so very narrow" he said.
During the earlier trial, Apple lawyer Seth Waxman argued that the design patent referred to "the thing to which the design is applied", meaning the entire smartphone. He added: 'That had a dramatic effect on Apple, and the compensation is therefore substantial'. Already, Apple won one major patent against Samsung which was an infringement case.
Apple attorney Bill Lee stressed to jurors the importance of design to Apple, which "puts design before everything else". The jury is considering all the facts and thinking about what amount Samsung should pay for all the damages that it has caused to Apple.
The Supreme Court's ruling allows Samsung to argue that damages should be based on the profits it made off the specific components that were found to infringe Apple patents - rather than the entire device. Morrison & Foerster partner Harold McElhinny, who once played the leading role for Apple, has retired and partner Rachel Krevans, who also represented the Cupertino, California-based company died a year ago.
Apple, on the other hand, asserts the article of manufacture is the entire phone. "The praise was not just for what it could do, but for how it looked, it's innovative design".
Apple and Samsung are now fighting it out again.
According to the BBC, retrial judge Lucy Koh has said she intends to apply a "Groundhog Day" rule, whereby through referencing the 1993 movie, she will restrict the two companies to only presenting new evidence rather than regurgitating previous evidence.