SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) — A Silicon Valley jury added $290million more to the damages Samsung
Electronics owes Apple for copyingvital iPhone and iPad features, bringing the total amount the SouthKorean
technology titan is on the hook for to $930 million.Theverdict covers 13 older Samsung devices that a
previous jury found wereamong 26 Samsung products that infringed Apple patents.Theprevious jury awarded
Apple $1.05 billion. But U.S. District Judge LucyKoh reduced the damages to $640 million after ruling that
jurymiscalculated the amount owed on 13 devices and ordered a new trial.Applehad asked for $380 million,
arguing Samsung’s copying cost it asignificant amount of sales. Samsung countered that it owed only
$52million because the features at issue weren’t the reasons most consumerschose to buy Samsung’s devices
instead of Apple’s.Samsung said it would appeal both verdicts."ForApple, this case has always been
about more than patents and money,"Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet said. "While it’s impossible
to put aprice tag on those values, we are grateful to the jury for showingSamsung that copying has a
cost."A third trial is scheduled forMarch to consider Apple’s claims that Samsung’s newest devices such
asthe popular Galaxy S III on the market also copied Apple’s technology.Appleand Samsung are the world’s two
biggest smartphone makers. The bitterrivals have been waging a global battle for supremacy of the
$300billion worldwide market. The size of the award didn’t faze Wall Streetor harm or help either company’s
financial fortunes in any significantway.Samsung reported it had $47 billion in cash at the end ofSeptember
and racked up $247.5 billion in revenue last year. Apple has$147 billion of cash on hand and took in $170.9
billion in revenue lastyear."We understood that the money wasn’t really an issue," saidjuror Barry
Goldman-Hall. "This was about the integrity of the patentprocess."Goldman-Hall, 60, of San Jose
was one of two men and six women on the jury, which was tasked only with determining damages.Applehas argued
in courts, government tribunals and regulatory agenciesaround the world that Samsung’s Android-based phones
copy vital iPhonefeatures. Samsung is fighting back with its own complaints that some keyApple patents are
invalid and Apple has copied Samsung’s technology.Samsunglawyer William Price argued Apple is misconstruing
the breadth of itspatents to include such things as basic rectangle shape of mostsmartphones."Apple
doesn’t own beautiful and sexy," Price told the San Jose jury.Appleattorney William Lee told the jury
that Samsung used Apple’s technologyto lift it from an also-ran in the smartphone market three years ago
tothe world’s biggest seller of them today."Apple can never getback to where it should have been in
2010," Lee told the jury Tuesday atthe conclusion of the weeklong trial.The fight in San Jose
isparticularly contentious. The courtroom is a 15-minute drive fromApple’s Cupertino headquarters, and
several prospective jurors weredismissed because of their ties to the company.The three jurorswho discussed
the verdict outside court Thursday said Apple’s proximitymade no difference in their
deliberations."Although Apple is downthe street, it’s a global company just like Samsung," jury
forewomanColleen Allen said. "I have a Samsung television and refrigerator and anApple computer. I like
both companies."Allen, 36, of Aromas, is an emergency room nurse who served nearly eight years in the
Navy, including a posting in Afghanistan."If we didn’t award Apple much, we’re saying it’s OK to
infringe patents," Allen said.TheSouth Korea-based Samsung has twice sought to stop the trial,
accusingApple on Tuesday of unfairly trying to inflame patriotic passions byurging jurors to help protect
American companies from overseascompetitors. The judge denied Samsung’s request for a mistrial, but
didreread an instruction ordering jurors to put aside their dislikes andbiases in deciding the case.On
Wednesday, Samsung again demanded ahalt to the trial after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told Appleit
was planning to invalidate a patent protecting the "pinch-to-zoom"feature at issue in the jury’s
deliberation. The judge ordered morebriefing while declining to stop the trial.Copyright 2013 The Associated
Press. All rightsreserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten orredistributed.