As expected, the Apple vs. Samsung trial is nowhere near the end, and both teams are ready to head back to court on Thursday. The Dec. 6 hearing will be led by Judge Lucy Koh, the judge who presided over Apple's Aug. 24 patent victory. Both parties are in search of a different outcome, with Samsung hoping to overturn the decision, and Apple looking to punish Samsung even more. The most controversial piece to the puzzle is new information coming forward about the jury foreman for the trial, and Samsung is hoping to use the new piece of information to its advantage. In their appeal, Samsung has said that the jury foreman, or the juror assigned to ask questions for the jury, had a conflict of interest coming into the trial. Velvin Hogan failed to disclose during jury selection that he was sued by Seagate Technology, his former employer. Samsung is a large stakeholder in Seagate, bringing to question whether or not Hogan was biased based on his past experience with businesses associated with Samsung. To add to it, Hogan had to file bankruptcy due on the financial situation. So what does Samsung need to do with this information? If Samsung can prove that Apple knew about Hogan's history and failed to disclose it to the court, this would show that Apple deliberately tried to manipulate the jury. This, however, is a long shot. Apple filed that they knew nothing about Hogan's past, and never investigated the reasoning behind his bankruptcy filing. They have also said that Hogan in no way tarnished the jury ruling. On the other end of the isle, Apple is looking to reprimand Samsung even more than the original $1 billion lawsuit. Apple wants Judge Koh to permanently ban dozens of Samsung products from the U.S. market, including devices from Samsung's popular Galaxy line. They also want an extra $500 million added to the original $1 billion ruling. Because the court originally ruled that Samsung "willfully" copied Apple's designs, these extra requests may not be too unrealistic. Newer items like the Galaxy S III, the world-wide best seller from Samsung, will also be under fire in 2014. This is when the court will decide whether newer items from Samsung should also fall under the same patent laws.   Information courtesy of: Bloomberg Businessweek, bloomberg.com, arstechnica.com

Be sure to subscribe to the Slickblog's RSS Feed for behind-the-scenes looks from the Slickwraps headquarters, and the latest technology and Slickwraps news!