At the link is a Nebraska case in which summary judgment was granted. Read the headnotes. It is a tort case but the same rules apply. It was rightly decided although not that well written. (I know the author and not her best work.) The standards are essentially the same in state and federal court.
I would have to read the briefs and submitted evidence for summary judgment in Apple 4 but generally speaking it would be a risky move for HJS. The key thing: Are there issues of MATERIAL fact? He might be able to get there by concluding no reasonable expert could conclude that Apple did not infringe. The cross of Apple's expert in the third trial proved he changed his testimony at trial and maybe that's how HJS finds for VHC on liability. That guy was destroyed and he was pivotal. Maybe HJS finds no reasonable jury could believe him in this case.
Apple 3 was necessary because Apple 2 was reversed due to faulty jury instructions. That wouldn't be the case for Apple 4.
Again. Very bold to grant summary judgment on liability. He would still need evidence on damages and I have no idea if the facts are in front of him. Probably need a trial on damages. Very fact intense there.
https://
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/public/viewOpinion?docId=N00005375PUB To be clear, if HJS granted summary judgment in Apple 4 and was then reversed a trial would be necessary anyway. Better to have a trial and remove that possibility.