But Abramian is asking the SJC not to hold a new trial on any component of the jury award. Instead, his lawyers are asking the SJC to declare the judge's incorrect jury instructions "harmless error," such that the punitive damages could be reinstated and no new trial would be held.

But with a new trial likely on at least part of the judgment, the case could continue for another several years and even go through another round of appeals after the second jury trial.

Both sides have made plea offers in the case, but neither regards a settlement as likely.

"We went into negotiations at one point in time as a result of the appeals court ordering us to," Swomley says. "We sat in front of a retired judge and the judge shuttled back and forth from room to room and concluded that Harvard was no where near us in their offers."

The University has made some offers, Swomley says, but generally only offered as much as the compensatory portion of the judgment.

Harvard, of course, has time on its side. Until it exhausts all of its appeals, the University is not obligated to pay out a single cent of the jury verdict.

"That's one of the mechanisms that a discriminator or a loser in a civil trial has in bargaining you to a better deal," Swomley says.