Responding to Samsung's complaints, she ruled in March that the jury had made such a hash of some of the damages calculations that they couldn't be sorted out without a new trial.
That trial is scheduled to begin on Tuesday.
Many experts believe the new jury will come up with an award smaller than the original $400 million. But it could, in theory, go the other way. (Pending appeal, Samsung is still on the hook for the rest of the $1.05 billion award -- roughly $600 million -- that's not part of this trial.)
One of the problems in the first trial was that the damages form the jury had to fill out was a 20-page legal and mathematical labyrinth. In the new trial, according to FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, Samsung's lawyers were pushing for a jury form nearly as complicated:
"Samsung wanted a matrix specifying different types of damages (reasonable royalty, Apple's lost profits, Samsung's profits) for each product. It also wanted the court to accordingly instruct the jury to determine not only an amount but also the "type" of damages."
Apple's legal team, however, had learned its lesson. It proposed the attached one-page form, which Judge Koh on Monday agreed to use.
It was one of a series of pre-trial motions that have gone Apple's way.
"Samsung," Mueller wrote Tuesday, "has been unsuccessful so far with its attempts to muddy the water for the new jury."
A third trial, covering some of the products Samsung has introduced in the two and a half years since Apple filed its original suit -- including the Galaxy S3 (but not the S4) -- is scheduled to begin in March 2014.
A judge can't be bothered to add Samsung's Galaxy S4 to the trial he scheduled for 2014.
FORTUNE -- U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal, who has been handling some of the case load created by the multiple patent infringement suits filed in California by Apple (AAPL) and Samsung, has a judicial metabolism better fit for the 19th century than 21st.
He's the judge who was assigned the task last year of scheduling Apple's MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jun 27, 2013 1:07 PM ET
How could the press get the effect of a judge's high-profile ruling so wrong?
FORTUNE -- When Judge Lucy Koh last month ordered a new trial to determine the proper damage award for 14 of the 28 Samsung devices found by a jury last summer to have infringed Apple (AAPL) patents, nearly every reporter covering story followed Reuters' lead:
"Apple had a major setback in its ongoing mobile patents battle with Samsung Electronics MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Apr 1, 2013 6:35 AM ET
For Samsung, even March 2014 is too early for Apple's case against the Galaxy S3
FORTUNE -- When we reported last September that that Apple (AAPL) had added Samsung's flagship Galaxy S3 to a patent infringement suit scheduled to go on trial in March 2014, some readers thought the trial date was typo.
After all, Apple had filed this second suit -- not be confused with the one that ended in August MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Mar 8, 2013 8:12 AM ET
But the new trial ordered on 14 disputed Samsung devices could restore the full award
FORTUNE -- Six months after a jury awarded Apple (AAPL) $1.05 billion in its landmark patent infringement suit against Samsung, the judge in the case finally sorted through the paperwork and issued what amounts to a split decision.
In a 27-page order released Friday, Judge Lucy Koh vacated $450 million of the original award and ordered a MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Mar 1, 2013 4:05 PM ET
Judge Koh wants a 2014 trial frozen until appeals from a 2011 complaint are exhausted
FORTUNE -- In July 2011, Motorola (GOOG) filed a complaint in Germany's Mannheim District Court charging that Microsoft's (MSFT) Xbox was infringing two of its video-coding patents. In May 2012 -- less than nine months later -- the court granted an injunction.
Contrast that with Judge Lucy Koh's federal court in the Northern District of California.
In April 2011, three MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Feb 17, 2013 2:45 PM ET
Apple wanted the award tripled. Samsung wanted it thrown out. The Judge did neither.
FORTUNE -- After the jury turned in its verdict in the patent trial of the century -- ordering Samsung to pay Apple a record $1.05 billion in damages -- both sides submitted a long list of motions to modify or overturn one or more of the jury's findings. Two stood out:
Apple (AAPL) claimed it was entitled to MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jan 30, 2013 6:03 AM ET
|GM raising Corvette prices|
|Everything must go: There's a flood of store closings|
|Boeing reports wing cracks on Dreamliners|
|Albertsons to merge with Safeway|
|Bitcoin matters. Ignore the media circus.|