What was once lauded as the "patent trial of the century" has been reduced to a mockery of a courtroom over the past few weeks.

Apple vs. Samsung has not been a disappointment for people who have been following the case. Drama, great acting, and bizarre comments and situations make the case more like a movie than a legal battle.

Judge Koh, who is presiding over the case, has officially lost her cool about the amount of paperwork both tech giants are submitting. Earlier today, with the case nearing the end, Apple dropped a massive, 75-page, filing, which reviewed numerous witnesses Apple may or may not call to the stand. Judge Koh was not pleased, asking Apple lawyer William Lee if he was "smoking crack," according to NYTimes tech reporter Nick Wingfield.

Wingfield noted that Koh was "incredulous" and "blowing up" at the Apple legal team for their extremely long and, what she felt, was unnecessary list of witnesses. Mashable writes that Judge Koh might have been right in her outburst, "Some could argue, however, that calling 29 witnesses in eight hours of court time does appear illogical."

After, Apple had agreed to shorten the document, Koh said that they would not be able to use all of their rebuttal witnesses.

Whats even more shocking is that this isn't the only ridiculous story from the Apple vs. Samsung (or is it Samsung vs. Apple? Since, apparently, Samsung wasted the courts time petitioning to recognize the case under both names, since both companies are suing each other). Forbes wrote about a Samsung lawyer literally begging the Judge to include evidence that had been reviewed three times earlier and was denied. "Quinn kicked off the day with an impassioned plea to allow the evidence, saying he had never begged a court for anything throughout a more than 30-year legal career but was begging now. Koh was unmoved, saying the court had reviewed the issue at least three times and denied Samsung's request." Then, afterwards, Samsung released the evidence in question anyway, which was a deposition in which an Apple designer says he was told to "create a phone inspired by Sony's designs."

Another instance was when Apple and Samsung lawyers bickered over the definition of copying and competition. Samsung says that the iPhone "inspiring" Samsung products is simply competition, not copying.

The Apple-Samsung trial has been going on for weeks now, and it seems like with each passing day, there is more news of one company making outlandish claims (like Samsung saying that the iPad was designed by Stanley Kubrick), or the Judge acting unprofessional and accusing a lawyer of doing drugs. While the people involved deserves some credit for making a patent case, usually boring, exciting to follow, we can't help but be thankful that the trial is ending soon, so that we can get a verdict, and move on.