"But they're both taking a risk that the jury won't go their way".
Lee, who has figured prominently in Apple's motions and appeals, is picking up the role of lead trial counsel.
Originally filed in 2011, the case drew significant media attention as it provided insight into the operations of two notoriously secretive and highly successful technology companies.
Lee also used his opening statements to remind the jury of how revolutionary the original iPhone was when it came out in 2007.
"Today, when we think of smartphones, we think of devices that look like the iPhone", Lee said.
"It took Apple several years and over a $1 billion to develop the iPhone", Lee told the jury.
Samsung has already been found guilty of copying the iPhone. Samsung argues, however, that it should pay up just $28 million. It infringed three design patents and two utility patents awarded to Apple to cover early models of its popular smartphone.
The fourth episode of this case revolves around clarifying the definition of 'article of manufacture', that is whether the contents of the patents apply to the whole phone. It argues that customers were not only buying its handsets because of the design, but also due to their "functionality". Samsung's lawyer John Quinn said in court that Apple is seeking profits on the entire phone and that the company's patents are "narrow", reiterating that the award should be limited to the specific components of those devices that were found to infringe on Apple's patents.
Apple and Samsung are now fighting it out again.
Apple is claiming $1 billion awards from Samsung during the damages retrial this week. "Samsung might want to say just because you have a design doesn't mean you own the world".
This position stems from a Supreme Court ruling in 2016 that was favorable to Samsung and is central to how damages are calculated in infringement cases involving design patents.
An article of manufacture is a patent term that describes the product.
Apple wants Samsung to pay the full damage amount of $1 billion. The glass is easily separated from the phone and doesn't cost much, Samsung has argued. The Korean company has argued that some patents were invalid while Apple has been trying to maximize the damages it could gain from its 2011 suit, saying that the whole is greater than just the sum of its parts. Koh has forbidden that argument on the ground that Samsung didn't raise it in the previous trial or on appeal.
Samsung has not sold the phones in question in more than five years, said the the USA Today report, adding that the latest trial is expected to last about five days. 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.
That total was diminished to about $400m after the principal retrial and other lawful endeavors by the Galaxy cell phone creator.
- Thandie Newton honors Black Star Wars characters with 'Solo' premiere dress
- Allan McGregor set to complete move back to old club
- School investigates report that teacher drowned raccoons
- Trump Acknowledges Financial 'Liability' For Stormy Daniels Payment
- Macy's shares jump as sales growth beats estimates
- Galectin Therapeutics Inc. (GALT) Shares Bought by Benchmark Capital Advisors
- Severe storms generated a 'meteotsunami' Tuesday
- Technical fault at Tarbela leaves several cities without electricity
- US Housing Starts Pull Back Much More Than Expected In April
- Stifel Nicolaus Trimmeds Kinder Morgan (KMI) Target Price to $21.00