The devices over which it was sued are no longer on sale and yet the case has dragged on since then but lawsuits and countersuits being filed by both companies.
Quinn parried those accusations, saying Samsung's sales soared not due to iPhone's "minor design elements" but because the company employed the Google Android operating systems on its phones and struck more favorable deals with cellphone carriers.
This week's trial will now determine how damages will be calculated, as the jury will be told to consider the arguments back at the beginning. Apple wants $1bn from Samsung, the full amount of profit it made from phones that infringed three of Apple's design patents.
That figure, according to Samsung, comes to $28 million. After Samsung agreed to pay some damages, the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016 and was returned to Koh with an order to revisit a $399 million portion of damages.
The third complaint was under the screen with Apple claiming that Samsung had copied the graphical user interface showing the layout of apps on its home screen.
The Right Stuff Author Tom Wolfe Dies at 88
He'd worked in traditional journalism through the 1950s; the custom-car subculture brought him to the crisis moment necessary to innovation.
"It could be that Samsung wants to prove a point that patents shouldn't be overused", Risch said.
But senior director of design at Apple Richard Howarth argues Samsung "blatantly ripped off" the iPhone's design with its early Galaxy phones. While Apple says that it constitutes the entire phone, Samsung disagrees, asserting that it could be applied specifically to separate components within a phone. Come December 2015, it was decided that Samsung would finally pay Apple $548 million.
"Design is what ties it all together", Lee said in US Northern California District Court in San Jose, California.
The trial first erupted in 2011, just a year after Apple released the original iPhone 4.
As a quick refresher, the case centers around whether or not design patents are "powerful tools to keep competitors at bay or relatively limited in power", as CNET puts it. It won the case and was awarded $1.05 billion in 2012. "They are entitled to profits only on [infringing] components, not the entire phone". Susan Kare, a GUI designer who was part of Apple's Macintosh design team and has since worked for Microsoft and IBM, will testify that the iPhone GUI can not be separated conceptually from the phone.
Apple and Samsung are now fighting it out again.