This article is from the archive of our partner .

On Thursday, a San Jose jury awarded Apple $290 million from Samsung in additional damages for patent infringement. Apple had asked for $380 million, while Samsung believed it should pay $52 million. The decision pertains to five patents and thirteen Samsung products. 

This is the latest — and certainly not the final — development in a long legal war between the two companies over patent infringement. Apple filed suit against Samsung in 2011. In 2012, a jury awarded Apple over $1 billion in damages after finding that Samsung infringed on more than one of its patents. While the findings didn't represent everything the company asked for, it was still a big win for Apple. Especially after Samsung got none of the $421 million it wanted from a countersuit in the case. CNET has more on the background of this particular case, which is just one of many legal battles between the two companies around the world. 

Then, citing an apparent miscalculation on the part of the jury, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh cut $450.5 million from that $1 billion award, ordering a retrial to determine that portion of the damages. Koh's move didn't change the jury's findings against Samsung on a series of patent infringements, nor did it affect about $600 million of the original amount Samsung will have to pay Apple. Today's amount is on top of that baseline number, meaning that Samsung now owes Apple just under $900 million in damages in this case. The patents in question pertain to the following Samsung products: Galaxy Prevail, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy SII AT&T, Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Tab, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, and Transform. 

Earlier this week, Samsung tried to get Koh to invalidate the trial after deliberations began, claiming that a lawyer for Apple made a prejudiced remark during arguments. Referencing a nostalgic anecdote by Apple lawyer Harold McElhinny about growing up watching American-made TV sets, Samsung's lawyer Bill Price said McElhinny was “appealing to race." Samsung is headquartered in South Korea. McElhinny responded to Koh that "I did not say a word about race, and I did not say Asian," according to Bloomberg's write-up of the exchange. Instead of a mistrial, Koh called out the deliberating jury to clarify that their personal feelings about groups of people shouldn't play into their decision. 

The jury of six women and two men captured some media attention in the tech world for their somewhat unusual requests during deliberations: 

It is likely that Samsung will appeal today's decision. Another patent trial between the two companies begins in March. The upcoming trial involves yet another set of patents, and some of Samsung's newer products. 

This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.