NetList Inc (NLST)

[100lbStriper]

and ihub approved. what a mockery of the msg board community.

[Jetmek_03052]

Clown boy. HA. What a piece of work!

[100lbStriper]

NLST ROTH CONFERENCE https://www.meetmax.com/sched/event_101113/conference_home.html

[100lbStriper]

468 Mar 14, 2024 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: APPLICATION TO SEAL AND JOINT STATEMENT RE: SAMSUNG'S REQUEST FOR TRIAL CONTINUANCE 454 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The Court grants in part and denies in part the application to seal. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.) (rolm) (Entered: 03/14/2024)

Main Doc­ument

Leave to File Document Under Seal https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17206527/netlist-inc-v-samsung-electronics-co-ltd/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

[100lbStriper]

NLST NETLIST TO ATTEND 36TH ANNUAL ROTH CONFERENCE
IRVINE, CA / ACCESSWIRE / March 14, 2024 / Netlist, Inc. (OTCQB:NLST) today announced the Company will participate in the 36th Annual Roth Conference. Netlist will participate in 1-on-1 meetings on Monday, March 18th. Investors who wish to meet with the Company should notify their Roth representative.
https://investors.netlist.com/websites/netlist/English/2120/us-press-release.html?airportNewsID=fbf29467-efcb-45c6-9e18-701c1c0f2dc7

[Redoocs]

The boxclown is right on top of its clowny game today.
No matter, NLST will prevail. More green to come soon.

[Redoocs]

NLST....

Maybe yoders got the measles this time. There has been a half dozen cases or so in the illegal encampments in Chicago.
Maybe yoder has been hanging out there instead of prepping for scamscum's upcoming loss.

[100lbStriper]

SilviaJ
12m

$NLST It is hard to say what the HBM3 and HBM3E might be worth at the “street price” for the Nvidia device, but if it is a mere 25 percent uplift from HBM2 to get to HBM3, then of the approximate $30,000 street price of an H100 with 80 GB of capacity, the HBM3 represents $8,800 of that.

Moving to 96 GB of HBM3E might raise the memory cost at “street price” to $16,500 because of another 25 percent technology cost uplift and that additional 16 GB of memory.

It will be interesting to hear the rumors about what the H200, with 141 GB of capacity, might cost. But if this kind of memory price stratification holds – and we realize these are wild estimates – then that 141 GB of HBM3E is worth around $25,000 all by itself.
https://www.nextplatform.com/2024/02/27/he-who-can-pay-top-dollar-for-hbm-memory-controls-ai-training/

[100lbStriper]

what do you expect from children.

[100lbStriper]

yoder has been diagnosed with pathological liar syndrome.

[justus1]

All aboard, clowns better get in before the train leaves the station.

[justus1]

They need some clown shoes to go along with their clowns.

[justus1]

Agree, and if it has anything to do with medical reasons the courts are going to allow, as to not let it be a reason later to appeal being based on bias or anything else. Medical carries a ton of weight when it comes to fairness.

[100lbStriper]

same here, the judge needs to step in say time to play.

[mfascuba]

Been preparing for this for several years. Payoff time. Let’s go.

[100lbStriper]

$NLST EXPLOSIVE upside move is imminent.

This stock is ssoooo undervalued, but will soon become a cash cow and important player in the memory/chip/AI sector.

Even the stupud pink clown poster knows it - it is the reason they post.No need for pink clowns.

So, ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts. It's time for lift off.

[100lbStriper]

NLST BOC so far….2 Judges have agreed with NLST. 2 Judges have decided it’s ambiguous. 0 Judges have agreed with Samsung. 1 Jury have decided infringement was wilful. So far… we’re doing just fine. Looking forward to next few months

[100lbStriper]

TOMKiLA
8:13 AM

$NLST lol
Samsung is reportedly planning to adopt a manufacturing technology used by its HBM rival SK Hynix. However, the company has denied the rumors.

https://www.ccn.com/news/samsung-denies-plans-to-copy-sk-hynix-hbm-chip-manufacturing/

[100lbStriper]

if they agreed it cant be bad. no need to over think that one.

[Daylas]

NLST agreeing to this delay....hmmm...its for ethical reasons? we got them right where we want them...

[gdog]

############

[100lbStriper]

birds of a feather so they say. once we can get in the court room again, prevail we will.

[Redoocs]

Yes sir, scamscum, micrumb, googs and clowny are a good match.

NLST will prevail eventually.

[100lbStriper]

i think your about right. its cowardly and decietful hence why they keep delaying getting in front of a judge.

[Redoocs]

I'm guessing it's a self portrait. Maybe scamscum and micrumb can arrange to use its likeness.
Correct, Green looks good on NLST.

[100lbStriper]

pink is a nice color. it shows ones true self. maybe scamsong and micrap should use it their logos. nlst should go with deep green.

[100lbStriper]

right now its all a play of words holding it up. what would be fantastic is if the judge intervened and informed both parties of a show up to court date or forfeit. there both guilty and even they know it. thats why they keep trying to stay out of the court room.

[Daylas]

So you think the BOC will be delayed ..and if so. It could be a month or two?

A settlement would be great.. I think we got both of them right where we want them..

[100lbStriper]

Doc...464 STATEMENT of the Case filed by Defendant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Feinstein, Marc) (Entered: 03/13/2024)

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.464.0.pdf

[Jetmek_03052]

Case 8:20-cv-00993-MCS-ADS Document 463 Filed 03/13/24

Jury Instructions

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.463.0.pdf

[Jetmek_03052]

Case 8:20-cv-00993-MCS-ADS Document 462 Filed 03/13/24

Proposed Verdict Forms

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.462.0.pdf

[justus1]

They are definitely not waving the white flag. Either make us an offer or go to court. It's really that simple!

[Jetmek_03052]

The more I look at this stupid BOC case, the more I realize that Samsung is in a very precarious position.

Samsung is saying that the JDLA was about "manufacturing a specific NVDIMM-P product, if this product was ever commercialized.". But the JDLA isn't worded like that. It simply says that they would supply NAND and DRAM at Netlist's requests, at a preferred price. It is ambiguous. Indeed, the very reason the 9th returned the case to Scarsi's court was that the agreement WAS ambiguous and needed to be looked at again.

From Silvia J over on ST:

Samsung cannot WIN the trial. The most they can do is show the contract was ambiguous.

If you include Scarsi himself, half the judges already said it wasn't. The other ones said it "might be" considered ambiguous; they said, "let's look at extrinsic evidence."

It would be hard for Samsung to prove it was ambiguous, but if by some miracle, the jury determined it to be ambiguous on the supply agreement, the license agreement would also be ambiguous.

Anyway you slice it, Samsung cannot really win. Netlist doesn't have to convince all jurors they are right. Samsung has to thread the "impossible" needle that ONLY the supply agreement was ambiguous....so their license is still valid.

And again from SilviaJ:

Samsung cannot win because if the jury is convinced that the contract is too ambiguous, the contract can be nullified; and Samsung loses its license.

If the jury clears up the ambiguity by indicating the supply contract is restricted only to the joint development project, it would impossible for said jury to say the license agreement is NOT restricted to the joint development project. Samsung loses its license again.

Remember, it is NOT called The Joint Development AND The Licensing Agreement. There were not 2 separate agreements put together in one contract. It is called The Joint Development and Licensing Agreement; they are inextricably linked.

Bring on the trial. DBMM will be the winner.

[Jetmek_03052]

Case 8:20-cv-00993-MCS-ADS Document 464 Filed 03/13/24

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NETLIST INC. a Delaware corporation,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,
LTD., a Korean corporation,
Defendant.

Case No.: 8:20-cv-00993-MCS-ADS
DEFENDANT SAMSUNG
ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.’s
PROPOSED STATEMENT OF THE
CASE

Final Pretrial Conference:
Date: March 18, 2024
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Judge: Hon. Mark C. Scarsi
Location: Courtroom 7C

SAMSUNG’S PROPOSED STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Samsung”) hereby submits the following
proposed Statement of the Case.

PROPOSED STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The plaintiff in this case, Netlist, designs, makes, and sells certain types of
computer memory modules and components. The defendant, Samsung, designs,
manufactures, and sells computer memory chips, memory modules, and
components in addition to engaging in other businesses. These products have
various applications, including being used in personal computers, servers, and
consumer electronics.

This case involves a dispute over a contract between Netlist and Samsung
called the Joint Development and License Agreement. In that contract the parties
made various promises to each other. Among other things, the parties agreed to
collaborate on the development of a new technology for a memory module and to
grant each other patent licenses. Samsung also agreed to supply memory chips to
Netlist called NAND and DRAM, make a payment to Netlist, and provide a loan to
Netlist.

The parties disagree about the scope of Samsung’s obligation to supply
NAND and DRAM under the contract. Netlist claims that Samsung was required to
fulfill all of Netlist’s requests for NAND and DRAM and that Samsung’s failure to
do so was a material breach of the parties’ agreement. Samsung claims that its
obligation to supply NAND and DRAM was limited to the parties’ technology
collaboration and the commercialization of the product the parties were seeking to
develop together and denies that it breached the contract or that any breach was
material.

SAMSUNG’S PROPOSED STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Dated: March 13, 2024 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

By: /s/ Marc F. Feinstein

Marc F. Feinstein
Attorneys for Defendant Samsung
Electronics Co.

[100lbStriper]

the way this is playing out right now who knows. still need the judges signature to say whether or not it is medically approved so the clown with emoji ocd's can keep busy. then you need scums reply to this..........

NOTICE OF DELAY IN PREPARATION OF REVISED JOINT DISPUTED JURY INSTRUCTIONS—"Plaintiff Netlist, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully submits this Notice that the parties have been working diligently on preparing revised jury instructions. Netlist sent its last proposal at 5:20 PM on March 12, 2024. Defendant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. sent its last proposal at 2:30AM on March 13, 2024. Netlist is waiting for Samsung’s final approval to submit a joint document. As soon as that is received, Netlist will file."

they so dont want this trial to happen.

the 29th looks good so far but still to far off to be put in stone.

[Daylas]

Ok so we are on for the BOC March 26th....or do we have to wait to find out if yoder has covid again?

now we are on for April 29th...that looks set..do I have that right?

[Jetmek_03052]

Case No. 8:20-cv-00993-MCS (ADS)
NOTICE OF DELAY IN
PREPARATION OF REVISED JOINT
DISPUTED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.461.0.pdf

[100lbStriper]

i just want this part to happen............ Case No. 8:20-CV-0993-MCS (ADS)
NETLIST’S PROPOSED
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Judge Mark C. Scarsi
Final Pretrial Conference:
Date: March 18, 2024
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Trial: March 26, 2024

[Jetmek_03052]

Case 8:20-cv-00993-MCS-ADS Document 460 Filed 03/13/24


https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.460.0.pdf

Plaintiff Netlist, Inc. (“Netlist”) submits the following Proposed Statement of
the Case. The parties met and conferred, but were unable to agree on a joint proposed
statement.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Plaintiff Netlist, Inc. designs and sells memory and storage modules and
systems. Defendant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Samsung”) manufactures
computer memory and storage products. In 2015, Netlist and Samsung entered into a
contract called the Joint Development and License Agreement, or JDLA for short.
This case involves a claim that Samsung materially breach its obligations under the
contract.

Section 6.2 of the JDLA required Samsung to “supply NAND and DRAM
products to Netlist on Netlist’s request at a competitive price (i.e., among customers
purchasing similar volumes of similar products).” NAND is computer storage.
DRAM is computer memory. The parties dispute how to interpret this provision.

Netlist claims that this provision required Samsung to supply Netlist with NAND and
DRAM products on Netlist’s request. Samsung claims that it was only required to
supply NAND and DRAM chips for manufacturing a specific NVDIMM-P product if
this product was ever commercialized. Netlist claims that Samsung materially
breached its contract with Netlist by failing to supply NAND and DRAM products
upon Netlist’s request. Samsung claims that it did not materially breach the contract
because it had no obligation to supply Netlist with NAND and DRAM products other
than for the NVDIMM-P product.

The Court has already determined that section 6.2 constitutes a definite and
binding obligation on Samsung. The Court has also already determined that Netlist
complied with all of its obligations under the JDLA. It will be your job to determine
whether Samsung materially breached JDLA by failing to comply with Section 6.2.

NETLIST’S PROPOSED STATEMENT OF THE CASE
(Case No. 8:20-CV-0993-MCS (ADS))

Dated: March 12, 2024 Counsel for Plaintiff

/s/ Jason Sheasby

Jason Sheasby
A. Matthew Ashley
Michael Harbour
IRELL & MANELLA LLP
840 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attorneys for Plaintiff Netlist, Inc

[Ramazing]

Maybe 🤔 maybe smoke and mirrors

[100lbStriper]

Stokd
12:47 AM

$NLST Switching to something else, but staying with the BOC case, Netlist just filed—PLAINTIFF NETLIST’S PROPOSED VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS—"Plaintiff Netlist, Inc. (“Netlist”) respectfully requests that the Court ask the jury panel the following additional voir dire questions:
1. Who here has any familiarity with how the U.S. patent system works?
2. Have you, a relative, or a close friend, had any experience with patents or trade secrets or the United States Patent and Trademark Office?
3. Do you or does your employer rely on patented technology or trade secret information as part of its business?
4. Do any of you have strong opinions about a patent or a copyright or a trademark granting exclusive rights to the owner of the intellectual property?
5. Have you ever been accused of breaking a contract?
6. Have you ever sued someone for breaking a contract?
7. Have you or someone close to you ever considered filing a lawsuit, but chose not to?
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_565562113.png

[Jetmek_03052]

Stokd 5 mins ago -

https://stocktwits.com/Stokd/message/565559723

$NLST Relax, any delay due to medical reasons will be inconsequential... and don’t forget folks, if it goes beyond Apr 29 start of ED-TX trial—I don’t believe it will—then Netlist ends up getting what they wanted initially when they motioned to stay the BOC case till the ED-TX trial resolves certain issues regarding breach of contract and license/JDLA.

When considering impact/effect/implications with any development, I urge others to take a big picture approach with perspective on numerous parallel litigation and timing, which will hopefully illuminate that nothing/everything is as it seems from our vantage point. I found this more of a deja-vu feeling and kind of humorous if not for the “medical” part—if true, I would hope/assume. I am unaffected by this, just makes me think it’s another episode in the series.

[Jetmek_03052]

Stokd 22 minutes ago - another delay??

https://stocktwits.com/Stokd/message/565557373

$NLST You’re not going to believe this!
Remember Samsung attorney Yoder faked Covid day before first BOC trial, asking the judge to postpone trial, which was denied, all of a sudden Yoder got well and showed up to court the next day. Well, in the second/upcoming BOC trial, a doc was just filed—APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE JOINT STATEMENT RE: SAMSUNG’S REQUEST FOR TRIAL CONTINUANCE AND SUPPORTING MATERIALS UNDER SEAL—meaning we are about to get a filing which is a request by Samsung to continue/delay trial. Why... “Due to Medical Emergency”

This doc is for sealing the incoming request.

“The parties, through their counsel, met and conferred on March 11, 2024. Following the conference, to expedite consideration of this issue, the parties agreed to file Samsung’s request in the form of a Joint Statement, rather than an Ex Parte application. Netlist’s counsel further does not object to the filing of the Joint Statement and materials in support thereof under seal.”

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.454.0.pdf

What a pile of crap Samsung and Yoder are!

[100lbStriper]

lol !!! you know whats funny about frivolous ? it comes with clown emoji's all over the nlst board all of a sudden mind you. like this frivolous post......... https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174015749

behave in a silly or light-hearted way, rather than being serious and sensible. I just decided I was a bit too frivolous to be a doctor. Synonyms: flippant, foolish, dizzy [informal], superficial

very fitting....

[Redoocs]

Wow, I didn't know it was Boxclown Day.

NLST!

[Jetmek_03052]

Only a matter of time now. It looks like they've begun to cover in a small way. Today's late day action might be a clue that something is happening behind the scenes. Let's see if the mini-rally continues tomorrow.

[eyeownu]

$NLST shorty MUST cover!! hang in there!!!!

[100lbStriper]

Stokd
1:34 PM

$NLST It's official for the Micron 294 case — "Jury Selection originally scheduled for 4/22/2024 has been RESET for 4/29/2024 at 09:00 AM followed by Trial Day 1" — and this is good news. Didn't wan't to say anything till we got confirmation, but Sheasby has trial Apr 15, which would mean back to back trials if our case started Apr 22nd... this way he has a week between to prepare and get his head focused on our game.
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_565478448.png

[100lbStriper]

date coming, NLST Gilstrap is making it clear with his recent rulings in the Micron 294 & Samsung 293 cases, that he intends to hold trials, and there will be no escaping justice.
Gilstrap renders the same 🔥denial🔥 to Micron's Renewed Motion to Stay Pending IPR in 294 case — "ORDER: Before the Court is Defendants Micron's Renewed Motion to Stay Pending IPR. In the Motion, Micron requests that this case be stayed pending inter partes review of the two Asserted Patents in this case U.S. Patent No. 11,093,417 (the “’417 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 7,619,912 (the “’912 Patent”). Having considered the Motion to Stay, and for the reasons stated herein, the Court finds that the Motion to Stay should be and hereby is DENIED."
Link to full 3pg filing below--
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.216365/gov.uscourts.txed.216365.72.0.pdf

https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_565449768.png

[NewbieDoobyDoo]

Wow. What an unnatural-looking chart.