:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63703880/verdict_form_product_amounts.0.1467741635.0.jpg)
A federal jury in San Jose on Monday recalculated its damage award, but left essentially intact its decision that Samsung owes Apple nearly $120 million in damages.
The move follows the jury’s earlier decision to award $119.6 million to Apple, as well as $158,400 to Samsung in its countersuit. The jurors had been asked to reconsider one product and one patent for which they found infringement but did not award damages.
It took the jury a little over two hours to reallocate its damages award. The panel raised the amount owed for some products, but lowered the amount for others, basically leaving things where they stood initially.
Both sides are expected to appeal various parts of the case, including the verdict.
On Friday, Apple praised the jury’s findings.
“We are grateful to the jury and the court for their service,” Apple told Re/code. “Today’s ruling reinforces what courts around the world have already found: That Samsung willfully stole our ideas and copied our products. We are fighting to defend the hard work that goes into beloved products like the iPhone, which our employees devote their lives to designing and delivering for our customers.”
Nonetheless, Apple is hardly dancing in the streets, with the verdict unlikely to be substantial enough to spur a change in course for Samsung.
Samsung has so far declined comment on the verdict.
Update: Here is Samsung’s statement: “We agree with the jury’s decision to reject Apple’s grossly exaggerated damages claim. Although we are disappointed by the finding of infringement, we are vindicated that for the second time in the U.S., Apple has been found to infringe Samsung’s patents. It is our long history of innovation and commitment to consumer choice, that has driven us to become the leader in the mobile industry today.”
Correction: An earlier version of this story suggested the total amount of the verdict had been increased by $4 million. However, while the jury raised the amount for one product by $4 million, it lowered the amounts for other products.
This article originally appeared on Recode.net.
