Two expert witnesses, called by Apple, testified to the sums being reasonable.
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. 'It's a particularly significant period for Samsung to have been infringing, ' Vellturo said, given this is the point the customer enters such an ecosystem. Specifically, Apple's rounded cornered phone design, the rim of the front face, and the grid view icons at the front are the main copied designs! Samsung says the latter - and is urging the jury to limit damages to $28 million (roughly Rs. 190 crores).
Samsung had objected to the size of the design patent portion of the existing penalty, which had been determined by how much profit it had made from selling the handsets. The scope of Apple's design patents "are so very narrow" he said. Samsung might have to pay for the whole device or for the infringed components.
Frances Bean Loses Kurt Cobain's Iconic 'MTV Unplugged' Guitar to Ex-Husband
The 25-year-old split from ex-husband Isaiah Silva in March 2016, after less than two years of marriage. Cobain will keep the couple's home and won't pay spousal support to Silva , according to TMZ .
Despite the high-profile court battle, Samsung keeps maintaining complex business relations with Apple.
The trial first erupted in 2011, just a year after Apple released the original iPhone 4. After Samsung agreed that it will pay some of the damages, Apply chose to move the case to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016. It won the case and was awarded $1.05 billion in 2012.
Apple is seeking profits which have been made on the entire phone. Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over a previous retrial, instituted a "Groundhog Day" rule, according to the BBC, meaning that no new evidence can be introduced, and the jury must not re-adjudicate the initial verdict that Samsung was found to have infringed on Apple's patents. "Moreover, in the seven years of this litigation, Samsung has never produced sales data showing the number of white phones that Samsung sold", Koh ruled last month.Apple, meanwhile, will argue that the iPhone is "indivisible" from its revolutionary design.
The reconsideration comes from Samsung's objection that the original calculations included total profits from the infringing phones.