News 
Market Data 
Discover
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Stokd $NLST In addition to challenging PTAB reasoning on many aspects, Netlist addresses lack of reasoning/analysis on other claims & limitations.
"Board’s failure to provide independent analysis for numerous claims and limitations requires vacatur. Samsung insists the Board “cited to the relevant briefing.” But that is insufficient.
Netlist was not required to present “arguments” about those limitations. Patentees have “no obligation to raise any objection.” The Board must provide reasoned analysis that supports the patent’s invalidation. The defect is not that the Board’s reasoning could have been ‘more thorough.’ It is that the Board’s own reasoning was NON-EXISTENT. This Court “is powerless to affirm the” Board’s decision where the Board’s own “grounds are inadequate or improper.” And harmless error exists only where the agency’s error ‘clearly had no bearing on the procedure used or the substance of decision reached.’ There is no basis for deeming the fundamental errors here harmless."
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4114066/default.png
Stokd $NLST "Claim 1 of the 060 patent requires at least two groups of “array dies” and at least two “die interconnects”
"To find that invention in the prior art, the Board invoked “Kim’s memory chip C1” and “chip C2”— each depicted as a single die—as the “first” and “second group” of dies, and Kim’s “TSV1” and “TSV2” as the “first” and “second die interconnect.”"
"The Board, however, confronted a problem: Kim’s TSV1 and TSV2 are each connected to one memory die (C1 & C2). But the claim requires a “first group of array dies” with “multiple array dies” connected to the “first die interconnect.” So the Board announced that skilled artisans “‘would have been motivated to connect additional memory dies to Kim’s TSV1 & TSV2.’” In doing so, the BOARD IGNORED EVERY REASON KIM POINTS AWAY FROM THAT MODIFICATION. Kim does not merely show single dies with single TSVs in each embodiment. It teaches that dies “cannot share” connections, such as TSVs, because “unavoidable” “data collisions”would result."
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113849/default.png
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113853/default.png
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113858/default.png
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113898/default.png
Stokd $NLST Re: Netlist CAFC 160/060 Reply. Remember Samsung claimed Netlist addressed the "wrong combination", and had some wondering if Netlist new counsel—CAFC specialist & previous head of firm Samsung used at PTAB to invalidate the patents—made such an obvious and critical error…to address the wrong combination in arguments against Samsung/PTAB. Well, he's got it covered...never trust Samsung's claims!
“Samsung’s assertion that Netlist addresses the “wrong combination,” likewise fails. According to Samsung, the Board started with another reference, Rajan, and determined skilled artisans would “implement” Rajan “using . . . Kim’s TSV[s]”. That rewrites the Board’s rationale.”
“The Board adopted Samsung’s contention that skilled artisans “ ‘would have been motivated to connect additional memory dies to Kim’s TSV1 and TSV2’”. The Board’s combination was based on Kim. Samsung cannot escape Kim’s teaching away and seek affirmance based on a Rajan-focused combination the Board never invoked.”
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113388/default.png
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113389/default.png
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113391/default.png
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113397/default.png
https://stocktwits.com/Stokd/message/615794185
Stokd $NLST Netlist filed their Reply in the CAFC appeal of 160 & 060 patents on May 21…that concludes the briefing process and we wait for the panel to absorb/digest and begin the Oral Argument scheduling process.
With that, all briefings are done in the CAFC appeals of the # 463 case and all its patents—339/918/054/160/060—and these “companion CAFC cases” are all in the Oral Argument phase of the process…after which comes the decision.
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4113183/default.png
https://stocktwits.com/Stokd/message/615793795
SilviaJ The 087 patent is a gift to Sheasby and his team. Samsung will have no PTAB to delay the inevitable on this one.
The fintiv ruling is a stunning turnaround made by the acting PTAB director, Coke Morgan Stewart. Add to that the apparent willingness for the director to personally reject IPR reviews, and it seems like NLST won't have to spend so much time and money on IPRs (and delays they provide to our adversaries).
We have a window of opportunity opening up here. Now could be the time to get congress to codify pro-patent changes to the PTAB review process.
But as for Sheasby, he is such a humble and endearing soul. It is no wonder his "aw shucks" manner works with so many juries. He is straight and true.
There is much to be hopeful for. i agree, but you have to admit you fell off a cliff with the possible negative variables, but i did like your post.........now i'm gonna fall off a cliff with you, believe it or not. every position i ever held that i had dedicated confidence in showed some kind of sign to me that it would be successful, without me looking for it. it just appears...........for the week i've had a pair of ducks come visit my property. i've never saw a duck on my property since 85 when i bought this place.
so last night just before the sunset i was out on the porch grabbin a smoke when mom and pop landed in my yard and it hit me......your gonna make a bundle on nlst........i rest my case........the only reason i'm replying to this is, if ducks choose you, ducks are good luck!!!
peace my brother.........
$NLST This post is not for the nonbelievers in Jason Sheasby but for those that still have faith in Jason, like myself.We all know Jason had a master plan when all the different case’s originally started.We all know that Jason has had to make major adjustments to his original plans with all the counter litigation by the intellectual property thieves and untimely courts that have caused major delays! I know it is hard for someone to know how good Jason is at what he does without being there and seeing him in person at work!You don’t have to take my word for it(but there is no comparison between the opposition lawyers and Jason,not even close!)There have been a few Nlst spectators in the courtroom that I think would agree with my analysis of Jason’s ability if asked.As I have said in the past my trust is in Jason Sheasby getting us to the promised land and end all this litigation with a settlement and a license agreement!Right now I would love another trip to Marshall Tx. PEP TALK GLLs
So as to the patent litigation filed for the '087 patent involving HBM3 and HBM3e memory -
Netlist originally filed Case 2:25-cv-00553 against Samsung on 05/19/25. Then on 05/22, they asked for and received a dismissal of that case.
Netlist filed Case # 2:25-cv-00557 (Netlist V. Samsung) on 05/19/25 regarding the '087 patent.
Netlist filed Case # 2:25-cv-00558 (Netlist V. Micron) on 05/19/25 regarding the '087 patent.
Samsung filed Case # 1:25-cv-00626 (Samsung V. Netlist) on 05/20/25 regarding the '087 patent.
Usually, when the same two companies file suit about the same patent, the company filing earliest gets the nod as to where the case will be fought. This is known as the "first-to-file" rule.
Although it could change, it looks like - since Netlist filed earliest - the case will likely be heard by Gilstrap in ED Court of Texas.
It's likely that the reason Netlist waited until now to file the '087 patent litigation is that the USPTO only just approved the '087 patent on 05/20/25. Netlist applied for the patent in 2022.
the yard work in the morning, then peace and quiet till tuesday, i hope... you sound like you got the plan though, gills are a lot of fun on light tackle.
Enjoy the long wkend Netlisters....." One of these Days "
strengthening that is one issue, but the main issue is how quick its shot down when put under pressure after being challenged. its all bs as long as big tec has a say in things........
As far as I know, getting the USPTO to approve a request to patent something is already a long and agonizing process.
I wonder how long it would take to "strengthen" that already overly long process!
But if that's what it takes to stop this PTAB nonsense, then fine!
what if gail becomes ceo?
Senator Cruz asks John Squires about the PTAB
time for ribs over jasmine and coconut rice..........lets break hod for the close!!!
NLST Neptune god of DDR
https://media2.giphy.com/media/Of7aV1m07fR6w7W2rA/giphy.gif
TOMKiLA $NLST Micron will pay more than 1b $ HBM damages! It’s so funny but they are already f*****
With its Q2 FY25 record-breaking $1 billion in HBM revenue, Micron is in a high-stakes transition from being a commodity provider to being an AI infrastructure kingmaker.
So, micron will show probably 4b $ HBM revenues this year or more and this is one of the hugest opportunity we should see
i'd rather see gilstrap and company try it though.
That case was motioned for dismissal by Netlist! SO many new cases filed regarding the same patent.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.238028/gov.uscourts.txed.238028.2.0.pdf
independence001 $NLST Let's talk about money.
NLST intends to receive an ongoing royalty rate of 0.5% to 1.0% in addition to a direct payment.
Get out the calculators 
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4084598/default.png
Netlist Inc v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al
Texas Eastern District Court
Judge: Rodney Gilstrap
Case #: 2:25-cv-00553
Nature of Suit 830 Property Rights - Patent
Cause 15:1126 Patent Infringement
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/58127733/Netlist_Inc_v_SAMSUNG_ELECTRONICS_CO,_LTD_et_al
$NLST Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Netlist, Inc. (1:25-cv-00626)
District Court, D. Delaware doc 8 May 22, 2025 Main Document
Order on Motion to Seal https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70317379/samsung-electronics-co-ltd-v-netlist-inc/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc
NLST SUMMONS Returned Executed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., Samsung Electronics America, Inc..Netlist, Inc. served on 5/21/2025, answer due 6/11/2025. (Smith, Rodger)
Case Assigned to Judge Jennifer L. Hall. Please include the initials of the Judge (JLH) after the case number on all documents filed. (alb)
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/58141383/Samsung_Electronics_Co,_Ltd_et_al_v_Netlist,_Inc
DuffelBagChad $NLST really solid post by Silvia yesterday. For all you Snowflake Liberals (not the tough, big Govt slamming types), it appears the change of guard has had a serious impact on IPR process and has strengthened protection for the I.P. holder.
Momentum has changed!
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4062957/default.jpg
i wonder if micrap is using any nlst tec in supplying tesla? lpddr4 sounds very familiar!!!
excellent stuff, hong has mentioned grand rapids quite a few times in the past. sounds like he'll be mentioning them again!!
Kinda makes ya wish you would have invested in the other companies, our Day will come.....
goober103 $NLST Korean article 1 of 2: U.S. patent management firm (NPE) Netlist has raised its sword against Samsung Electronics' high-bandwidth memory (HBM) product line. The industry believes that Netlist filed this lawsuit after a long period of preparation, and analyzes it as a strategy to maximize royalty revenue through intellectual property rights (IP) for core semiconductor technologies.
2 of 2: According to industry sources…the industry is paying attention to the timing of the lawsuit. Samsung Electronics passed the HBM3E test from NVIDIA in February, and Netlist applied for a patent for the technology in 2022 and registered it this month.
the Nvidia part of 2 of 2 is indeed promising
NLST...just another day in roidville...........
TOMKiLA $NLST after 4 years that sheasby's strategy is to accept the judges' sentences and accept the dates and proposals of the giants, they wake up and change strategy. Netlist is asking 3x damages!
Something went wrong here, other than trust the legal team.
Only sk hynix will make the difference with the new deal. If new deal with new terms including 3x cash and introduction of IP licenses, netlist will have very solid foundations to grow and continue to torpedo samsung, google and micron, otherwise netlist will remain weak.
luckily there are 3 new products from the house but it will take time to see concrete and impactful results!
These legal expenses are a huge problem and no one can know when and if there will be deals.
micron is screwed but it's up to sheasby to checkmate! what is he waiting for?
Hope sk Hynix will be a better player, sk made ten billions profits with HBM, $50m annual ip licenses for the netlist tech is the minimum if sk respects netlist
whole thread, my mans on a roll.......... https://stocktwits.com/TOMKiLA/message/615501868
i think i read that some where before. i remember asking you to go and visit, remember?? but regardless, thats dated and i never followed up on any of it. are there any more recent articles on how things are going up there?
NLST So this is Netlists way of saying regardless of what IPR you have going or which puppet PTAB director you pay off, no matter what you call as prior art that isnt prior art we will wade thru administration after administration and come for you for your infingement of our patents. Beast! Now sammy might prolong but it is inevitable. The piper must be paid. And believe me SK is watching.
Stokd $NLST Perhaps the reason for duplicative cases is they initially filed hours too soon—with 087 issued 20th—depending on cutoff time in district. Would explain why they filed cases 557 & 558 later that day and dismissed earlier 552 & 553.
Who knows, speculating and hypothesizing...what I do know is Samsung is gearing up for a fight on what they know is a KEY patent (pic🔥below), and I know Sheasby&team know what they're doing and are best in the game...won all our patent infringement trials.
I think they still filed before Samsung but makes little difference, nothing DE can do to force Gilstrap to transfer or dismiss, why would he...all the parties patent infringement litigation has been in his court.
If anything, Netlist will file for dismissal in DE given the TX action, which has a fair chance of being granted. IMO, litigation on the 087 HBM patent will be in TX w/Gilstrap. Prior transfer motions in numerous TX litigation were filed by Samsung/Micron but none ever granted.
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/4047245/default.png
“Netlist claimed that Samsung's infringement was intentional and requested that a provision be claimed up to three times the amount of damages under U.S. patent law should also be applied. This is a more aggressive approach than existing DDR4 or DDR5-based lawsuits”
Seoul=Yonhap Infomax) Reporter Kim Kyung-rim = Netlist, a patent management corporation (NPE) in the United States, raised its knife to target Samsung Electronics' high-bandwidth memory (HBM) product line. The industry believes that Netlist filed this lawsuit after long-term preparation, and is analyzing it as a strategy to maximize royalty returns through intellectual property rights (IP) for semiconductor core technologies.
According to the relevant industry on the 21st, Netlist filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics and its subsidiaries in the United States in the Texas Eastern District Court on the 19th (local time). (?Refer to the article "'This time HBM3'... U.S. Netlist filed a patent lawsuit against Samsung Electronics again' sent by Yonhap Infomax at 14:16 on May 20)
The technology in question is U.S. Patent No. 12,308,087 (hereinafter referred to as '087 Patent), and the registration process was completed as of the 20th, the day after the collection was received.
The fact that a lawsuit was filed just before the patent registration can be interpreted as meaning that Netlist has been preparing legal disputes with Samsung Electronics for a long time, such as securing pre-registration numbers in advance.
This patent is about 'layered memory' technology, and the key is how to send and receive signals in a structure that stacks multiple DRAM chips and controls them. In particular, the main content is how to effectively distribute signals to each memory chip and to process command signals and data signals separately.
Netlist claims that HBM3E, Samsung Electronics' latest memory product, is using this patented technology as it is. Samsung Electronics is using a method of applying multiple layers of DRAM dies to HBM3E and sending and receiving data through a vertical channel (TSV) that connects the chips. The Netlist's position is that this is essentially the same as the composition described in the claim of the '087 patent.
The industry is paying attention to the time of the lawsuit. Previously, Samsung Electronics passed the HBM3E test from Nvidia in February, and Netlist applied for a patent for the technology in 2022 and completed registration this month. The fact that the lawsuit was filed immediately before the registration process of the applied patent was completed is evidence that Netlist was watching the time when it passed the HBM3E quality test of related technologies and Samsung Electronics.
In particular, based on the experience of winning the jury verdict in the cloud computing-related memory lawsuit last year, this time it is interpreted as a strategy to secure additional profits from HBM3, Samsung Electronics' flagship product, as well as compensation for damages.
Netlist claimed that Samsung's infringement was intentional and requested that a provision be claimed up to three times the amount of damages under U.S. patent law should also be applied. This is a more aggressive approach than existing DDR4 or DDR5-based lawsuits.
An industry official said, "Netlist's new patent seems to have subdivided technical design elements," and "there is definitely a structural similarity with commercialized HBM products."
https://www.reddit.com/r/Netlist_/comments/1ksbsph/netlist_claimed_that_samsungs_infringement_was/?%24deep_link=true&correlation_id=f7e30403-35d3-4e73-b7d0-d7bc9d01638f&post_fullname=t3_1ksbsph&post_index=0&ref=email_digest&ref_campaign=email_digest&ref_source=email&utm_content=post_title&%243p=e_as&_branch_match_id=1364551710512119415&utm_medium=Email%20Amazon%20SES&_branch_referrer=H4sIAAAAAAAAA22PzU7DMBCEnya9pU3jtAGkCiEQR17BcuxNsqr%2FtN4onHh2NrRwQrKl0Tce7%2BzMnMvT4UDgHPLe5Lz3GK8HlZ%2BrtlP5AtqUnchEOGE0Xi%2FkL%2FOWqtRL1b7LWdd1f8%2FbFASQ3A9gj4W1SIEBIheRx2sZSp5FxbtvvcEATvNsWBcTyhKnojGOhHGCLadXs0UrJbNObecAst46VuqNaYGqPdtEBN4wpqjRCR97UE3XqFqdnKo76FU99K6pXT%2FYR9ccz%2BphlFxOUmBcvI8mwPad0n8FbyZGB5%2FiNAIIRlEQDHrtcILCN6itCdngFP93S1rIwq8ncOGgbYosqwn9GcPIHnZf8hxo21sPlNYCdHmdKQX4Bh9q%2B4%2BlAQAA
glad your safe, no visibility on the road is some scary stuff.
on an interstate hwy ?
my main man!!! welcome home sir, i hope you had a pleasant outing!!!
Done
in regards to your 7-11 date.....the motion hearing for the attorney fees....... https://stocktwits.com/Stokd/message/615433244
|
Followers
|
320
|
Posters
|
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
8
|
Posts (Total)
|
29254
|
|
Created
|
05/14/07
|
Type
|
Free
|
| Moderators papaphilip gdog 100lbStriper Jetmek_03052 Redoocs | |||
IN HONG WE TRUST....
Created by Sub-Teacher:
Samsung's Expert WItness Quote: 
https://netlist.com/
brings over two decades of high-tech management experience to Netlist. He most recently served as President of Infinilink, a DSL equipment manufacturer, and as executive vice president of Viking Components, Inc. Prior to that, he spent 15 years with LG where he held various senior management positions in the U.S and Korea. Mr. Hong holds an MS in technology management from Pepperdine University and a BS in economics from Virginia Commonwealth University.
AI
