Samsung was ordered to pay over a billion dollars to Apple, but that amount was later lowered to roughly $340 million. 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.
In late 2016, the US Supreme Court made the ruling in favor of Samsung's side in a unanimous decision.
Samsung Electronics Co is trying again to chip away at Apple Inc's long-ago $1 billion victory in their legal fight over smartphone technology - by disassembling the iPhone.
Samsung has to pay Apple for damages retrial on Apple design patents and for deciding how much Samsung has to pay Apple and Samsung are back in court this week.
European Union leaders seek united front on Trump
He also suggested the European Union owes Trump a debt of gratitude for helping Europe to drop " all illusions ". Meanwhile the European Union is still trying to win exemptions from tariffs on steel and aluminium exports.
Apple contends Samsung owes $1.1 billion, saying it is entitled to the entire profit generated by Samsung's infringing phones. There's no doubt that Samsung will have to pay Apple something, but exactly how much it will pay remains anyone's guess.
It's been eight years since the original iPhone was first released, but Apple still regards the device as one of the biggest risks it has ever taken - enough that it could have cost the whole company. Apple was initially granted $1.05bn (£772m) in 2012 after a jury found the South Korean firm had encroached a few of the iPhone's developments.
The trial over damages related to patent infringement also gives a look into how Apple designs its products.
The conundrum for jurors: Are damages based on "the whole phone, kit and caboodle, or just the shell of the phone - into which Samsung put a bunch of stuff that's unrelated to the patent?" "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. "They're seeking profits on the entire phone", Samsung lawyer John Quinn said, characterizing Apple's patents as "narrow" and stressing that damages should be limited to the scope of specific components found to infringe on Apple's patents.
The reconsideration comes from Samsung's objection that the original calculations included total profits from the infringing phones.