it's pretty simple really:
This trial, even though originally remanded by the Federal Circuit (CAFC), presents an entirely new body of applied law which can be (and will be) once again appealed to Federal Circuit. CAFC hears all appeals in patent cases. Additionally, this case has new elements that never existed before (were not part of the remand decision). Clearly, the entire trial (original elements remanded by CAFC, and new infringement verdict not part of the original remanded case) is under the Federal Circuit's jurisdiction to determine if the law was applied correctly.
CAFC has many times in the past remanded a patent case back to district court and then petitioned by one (or more) parties to review the case again. In fact, CAFC has remanded the same case back to district court multiple times. The wheel will keep spinning until it doesn't.
SCOTUS only comes into play in a civil patent case if one of the parties is not happy with a lower court's decisions. That means a final decision by CAFC to not review a case (or re-review a case after a petition for rehearing en banc) At this stage, those parties would file a petition for certiorari - which is asking the Supreme Court to review the case. But they would never file such a writ directly after a district court decision without first appealing that district court judge and then the Federal Circuit first. There's no leap frogging the judicial system.
Anyone invested in the patent sector (which, in recent years, is effectively the "patent litigation" sector) who doesn't understand the basics of the civil judicial system should consider other market niches. Because this is basic.
