Apple v. Samsung damages retrial: The definitive FAQ

U.S. District Court, Northern District of California

FORTUNE — Nobody covers high-tech patent litigation — especially lawsuits involving Apple’s (AAPL) patents — more closely than FOSS Patents‘ Florian Mueller.

So it’s probably appropriate that Mueller provide the definitive Q&A for the damages retrial that starts Tuesday in San Jose.

Click the links below for his full answers:

Q: Is this a patent trial?

A: Sort of. Liability is already law of the case. Now it’s only about damages for established patent infringement.

Q: What types of intellectual property rights is this retrial about?
A: Utility patents and design patents. No trade dress this time.

Q: Which Samsung products are at issue in this retrial?
A: Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy Tab, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, and Transform.

Q: How much money is this retrial about?
A: It’s about a replacement amount for a $410 million portion of the August 2012 $1.049 billion verdict. The replacement amount could be more or less than the original one. Apple will be awarded (subject to an appeal) $639 million plus the replacement amount.

Q: Besides damages, does Samsung also have to fear an injunction over any of the patents-in-suit?
A: Yes, that’s actually quite likely, but it depends on the Federal Circuit and not in any way on the outcome of this retrial.

Q: Why aren’t Samsung’s own patent infringement assertions against Apple at issue?
A: Because the jury cleared Apple of infringement of Samsung’s asserted patents and the judge declined to reverse that outcome.

Q: Is this like an appeal?
A: No. It’s just a partial do-over in the first instance. But it paves the way for an appeal

Q: Who wanted it?

A: Nobody in the world. At least not in this form.

Q: Are Apple’s asserted patents valid?
A: Looks like it. One of the asserted claims has been confirmed by the patent office. Others are still being challenged, but no reexamination will result in a final, non-appealable rejection for years to come, if ever.

Q: What bearing does the scandal over the leaked Apple-Nokia licensing terms have on this retrial?
A: Formally, none.

Q: When will these parties meet in court again?
A: With litigation in multiple countries, they meet all the time. For example, a trial is ongoing in Australia. In Northern California another trial between them is scheduled to begin on March 31, 2014.

Q: Could there be yet another retrial in this particular case?
A: There are some procedural possibilities for another retrial or, theoretically, even more than one. But another retrial is not likely.

LINK: The truth is neither the court nor the parties really wanted today’s Apple-Samsung damages retrial.

Subscribe to Well Adjusted, our newsletter full of simple strategies to work smarter and live better, from the Fortune Well team. Sign up today.