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.
Just my opinion, but I think the continuance will be granted. What is a month or two more, in the grand scheme of this trial? Gilstrap knows that, and realizes that if such a request isn't granted, it would provide definite grounds for appeal. Even though there's almost no DOUBT Samsung will appeal a loss, he doesn't want his court to help them with a reason for having that appeal granted.
one of these days.........even though we have to put up with all possible delays we're simultaneously getting to the resolution stronger and stronger for a final conclusion.................
https://stocktwits.com/100lbstriper/message/577727604
100lbstriper
43m
@trcxr4kids @DocBoom7 sure they are, we just have to wait till that day comes. alls their doing is using their options to delay the inevitable at this point. we're in the final phase of the trials, the payment part. worst case scenario i say is 2.5 years out and all the awards come due and start rolling in, maybe sooner. so yes they will be compelled to pay. they entered a game where their opponent has the fuel to go the distance. cafc is always a final trial when its being tried as a payment trial. the 2 wins to be appealed to cafc and the probable one in august will make 3 awards due. of course we have to win them on the cafc level, but guess what, i'm betting its a slam dunk. so not being compelled is a privileged option you get from our judicial system. an option that eventually runs out when your guilty under pursuit of an adversary that can prove you wrong and last the duration of the system. my 2 cents, 2.5 years is maximum amount of time left. lol... but boy oh boy would i LIKE TO SEE IT TODAY!!!
I honestly expected much worse, something indefinite put forth by Samsung that would be related to the BOC case. So it's a sigh of relief for me!
And how do we know after the month delay they still do something indefinite one month is BS Gilstrp please don't grant it.
by now the court, gilstrap knows this is premeditated behaviour. hoping to see something soon saying DENIED.
NLST I would like to point out that Samsung's Continuance motion is opposed by Netlist, who isn't laying down or accepting it without a fight, and obviously has reasons or standing to oppose.
Netlist filed their response the day after Samsung filed the motion, so I assume we'll get the unsealed version of Netlist's opposition tomorrow, and get specifics on Netlist's/Sheasby's position.
So who knows....it's not a given that Gilstrap grants, there is a chance he doesn't entertain it. We'll see how it plays out. But to stress again...after everything we have been through, and considering we're talking about a month continuance....it is not that bad in the big scheme of things.
I honestly expected much worse, something indefinite put forth by Samsung that would be related to the BOC case. So it's a sigh of relief for me!
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577702232.png
Stokd $NLST The unsealed/redacted version of Samsung’s Continuance motion was filed, and it’s not as bad as I though, nor the reason/circumstance that I speculated.
It is not tied to their efforts in the BOC case—which is related to cross use of discovery/documents from this ED TX case—nor is it some concocted ploy or charade we have seen in the past.
It’s supposedly due to Samsung’s lead trial counsel’s preexisting trial schedule, and the continuance/delay if granted is only about a month.
The weird thing is though, they designated one of them as lead yesterday, a week after filing the motion.
Link to Designation of Lead Counsel—
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.216364/gov.uscourts.txed.216364.715.0.pdf
So who knows if it’s more manipulation and gamesmanship to delay….but it seems they’re running out of excuses they can legitimately use with Gilstrap. And we can look forward to trial no later than about a month after the currently set date—if Gilstrap grants it.
Link to full doc— https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.216364/gov.uscourts.txed.216364.718.0_1.pdf
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577698114.png
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.216364/gov.uscourts.txed.216364.718.0_1.pdf
Unreal. On the 24th, Samsung notified the court that they were changing the lead attorney to Ruffin B. Cordell. Yesterday, Samsung asked for a continuance because Cordell has "direct conflict" with the preexisting trial dates:
sure they can, but i'd rather watch them let it run to 10 again first !!! then we can start all over again..........
Gee. Can't they go any slower?
Stokd
Stokd $NLST The difference is glaring:
*****Samsung*****
- Lead attorney has Covid right before trial
- Same lead attorney has stroke right before 2nd trial
- Policy of deleting emails after 2 weeks
- Expunge part of record before appeal
- Intimidate jury foreperson
- Breach the JDLA / cut off supply / try bankrupt Netlist
- Infringe on Netlist patents
- Drag Netlist through litigation and patent challenges
- Manipulate anything and everything possible to get their way
- And more to come
*****Netlist*****
- Wants to license patents on fair and reasonable terms, and get reimbursed for past infringement
lol !!! remember, nlst is a multi billion dollar company, gn ya'll..........
i luv it,,,,,,, IPR2022-00615 Patent No. 7,619,912
- 12 -
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6, that on June 21, 2024, a
complete copy of PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO EXPUNGE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION FROM THE
RECORD was served upon the following, by ELECTRONIC MAIL:
page 16
https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1549198/download-documents?artifactId=AK71OECqO7CbfCKms99zjdPQI46HexpsI7QEhuXFunt49Rny_xuLXzU
great thread read it. i like this guy at the end, '' they have enough material to lock up K. Vidal for 20 years''
NLST BABY !!!
GET SOME !!!
Stokd $NLST Well, Samsung is trying dirty tricks again...this time in the IPR of claim 16/912 ptnt.
They want to expunge confidential information from the record. Specifically, the information gathered through additional discovery into Real Party Interest with Google. They want to keep it from the CAFC—wonder why😂who do they think they're fooling!
Netlist’s Opposition addresses the issue well and rebukes their nefariously intended attempt to again hide crucial information/discovery from different—this time higher—judicial branches.
As usual, Samsung's assertions don't align with truth regarding procedure and circumstance, while also misrepresents Netlist’s position, and rights on appeal pertaining to what CAFC may consider.
"Indeed, the fact that Samsung chose to file an opposed motion for expungement and refused to join Patent Owner in seeking an extension until after the resolution of any appeals is the most unusual aspect of its request."
Link & 3 parts in pic
https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1549198/download-documents?artifactId=AK71OECqO7CbfCKms99zjdPQI46HexpsI7QEhuXFunt49Rny_xuLXzU
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577547755.png
samscum is done......... https://stocktwits.com/Stokd/message/577547755
Netlist Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (8:20-cv-00993)
District Court, C.D. California
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17206527/netlist-inc-v-samsung-electronics-co-ltd/?order_by=desc
NLST BOC case order — "The parties' Joint Stipulation Regarding Post-Trial Briefing Schedule is hereby GRANTED. Post-trial motions are due June 21, 2024; oppositions to the motions are due July 19, 2024; and replies in support of the motions are due August 2, 2024."
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577546162.png
Bowlsketball
10:57 AM
$NLST What I'm looking forward to and in order:
- Final ruling on Micron $445 million judgement
- Kathi Vidal to finalize Director Review of 912 (hopefully she does the right thing)
- Final ruling on the Samsung $303 million judgement
- Final ruling on the Samsung BoC case
- Trial against Samsung on the 912 patent on August 19th
A lot of things in the hopper!
Bullish
as long as they take care of naked NLST shares is all i ask.
(a post i missed)Stokd Jun 20, 2024 7:20 PM
$NLST Today's article — of course our $445 million win in Micron 294 trial involving the 912 patent made the list....and I wonder if they're hinting/😉/expecting that the verdict "in the billions" comes from our upcoming Samsung 293 trial which also involves the 912 patent. Reason being Samsung's production/use is 2-3 times more than Micron's.
“Will the spurt of mega-verdicts in recent months continue as we move into summer? Keep an eye out for more nine-figure verdicts, and possibly even some in the billions.”
A Mid-Year Review of Prominent Patent Verdicts
https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/06/20/mid-year-review-prominent-patent-verdicts/id=177852/
$NLST Spoliation.........The failure to preserve potentially relevant evidence for an ongoing or reasonably foreseeable litigation is known as spoliation. Courts can sanction parties for spoliation, and generally impose sanctions which can include:
* Imposition of monetary sanctions, sometimes including payment of the opposing party’s expenses and attorney fees;
* Limitations on the amount of damages recoverable based on lost evidence;
* Instructions to the jury to draw an adverse inference against the party responsible for losing the evidence;
* Striking pleadings in whole or in part;
* Precluding a party from introducing other evidence;
* Preventing the culpable party from proceeding with certain claims or defenses; or
* Dismissing the case or awarding default judgment against the spoliator.
SilviaJ $NLST The convergence of Edge computing in AI processes, Edge AI, represents a revolutionary solution to enhancing efficiency, responsiveness, and overall performance in a wide range of operations, but this progress is not without its own set of challenges.
As the demand for real-time decision making and data processing at the edge intensifies, concerns about Edge AI memory constraints have emerged. The constant generation of data by adaptive Edge technology presents a dual challenge and opportunity, requiring innovative solutions to ensure seamless integration.
With the global Edge AI market size expected to reach $76 billion by 2031, the demand for comprehensive memory solutions is evident. The quest for an optimal solution – be it rooted in legacy technology, cutting-edge innovations, or a hybrid approach – is unfolding.
NLST sees their CXL Hybrid Approach as the future of Edge AI. And the total addressable market (TAM) is growing.
https://epsnews.com/2024/01/29/will-memory-constraints-limit-edge-ai-in-logistics/
-----------------------
"Nvidia-backed CoreWeave has raised more than $12 billion this year. The company has access to the most advanced Nvidia chips that are in short supply, giving it an edge over hyperscalers such as Amazon Web Services, Microsoft's Azure and Google Cloud."
They are just starting to spend the funds needed to build out their cloud infrastructure.
"Core Scientific's AI collaboration with CoreWeave will generate $3.5 billion. As part of the contract, Core Scientific will provide 200 megawatts of infrastructure to host CoreWeave’s high-performance computing operations."
What this shows is that AI infrastructure is just in the beginning stages of development.
CoreWeave is simply in the process of buying POWER contracts to run their HPC servers. We are a long way from building out the EDGE with innovative memory solutions like the HybriDimm.
But it is coming....and will be here before we know it.
NLST is the future.
SIDE NOTE: I'm invested in Core Scientific (CORZ).
NLST over or under $500 million award poll for 8-19-24 trial. cast your vote..........
i say 500 plus million easily.
Stokd NLST Scarsi knows!
Netlist — "Samsung was ordered to produced documents from twenty-two custodians. For twelve of those custodians it produced zero custodial documents(as evidenced by meta data), explaining in meet and confers that this was because all emails at Samsung are allegedly destroyed after two weeks." — Isn't that convenient!
"This included zero email records from the key executives at Samsung involved in the negotiation and the decision to cut off supply"
"Samsung did not disclose its alleged two-week destruction rule in the briefing that led up to the order. When Netlist inquired as to when document preservation began in this matter given the highly aggressive document destruction policy used by Samsung, Samsung refused to respond."
"This was despite the fact that there was clear evidence of destruction post-litigation. In particular, the emails Netlist sent after the lawsuit putting Samsung on notice of material breach and terminating the agreement were nowhere to be found"
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577424969.png
$NLST Gilstrap knows!
Netlist — "Shortly before the agreed deadline for post-trial motions, Samsung announced that it seeks to re-open fact discovery to move for use of East Texas discovery that it claims should have been made available to it in the Central District. O’Melveny & Meyers (counsel of record in this matter) appeared in the East Texas case on Dec 15, 2024 and had complete access to the entire production in that case."
"The suggestion that these documents were withheld from Samsung’s use in the Central District such that it is entitled to post-trial relief from the jury’s verdict is not well taken. Netlist proposed on Nov 27, 2023, that the parties be able to cross use discovery from East Texas"
"Samsung had the full and fair opportunity to use any documents it wanted from East Texas. It made the strategic decision to close the record. It did this because of the incredibly damaging discovery that occurred in East Texas that it wanted to block from the Central District jury."
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577424959.png
we're gonna be making a lot more money through sk once we get this bs over. was a good idea to make a deal with them. its going to come into play soon enough.
$NLST Another great article illustrating the importance & competitive advantages coming from close collaboration between SK Hynix and TSM. TSMC produces about 92 percent of the world's advanced chips, whereas SK hynix is the world's second-largest memory chipmaker.
https://www.koreaherald.com/common/newsprint.php?ud=20240607050466
In April, SK hynix agreed to work together with TSMC to develop HBM4, the sixth-generation model of the advanced memory chip, and cutting-edge packaging technology to **enhance integration of a logic chip and HBM.**
While the Korean memory chip maker has used a proprietary technology to make base dies up to the fifth-generation HBM3E, it plans to adopt TSMC’s advanced logic process for HBM4’s base die so that additional functionality can be packed into limited space, SK hynix said. Under the collaboration, SK hynix plans to start **mass production** of the HBM4 from 2025. They will also work on optimization of SK hynix' HBM production capability and TSMC's Chip on Wafer on Substrate technology.
BolliverShagnasty $NLST I was reading Samsung's latest in the boc case and had to laugh. I laughed because they never seem to learn. Jason Sheasby always has a reason for everything he does and Samsung never seems to figure it out. Sit back and watch Jason nail Samsung to the Cross they are pretending to bear. Samsung in their filing complains about the exhibit that Netlist wanted to use but did not end up using at trial
I want to remind everyone Samsung was sanctioned in the original BOC case by Judge Spaeth for lying on their request for admission. They were sanctioned on a few points of their requests for admission where they obviously lied. Also in the boc case during Discovery Samsung waited to the last minute to produce a mountain of evidence that netlist only had I believe a week to go through. Netlist asked for an extension and they were denied by the judge. Netlist had to spend additional resources to get enough people to go through the evidence at the last minute before Discovery closed.
After the fact now, Samsung is pretending that they were somehow harmed by the gamesmanship and delays that they created and were warned about by the judge in the original case???
When this all concludes, Samsung will regret filing this motion.
yes august 19th and by friday we get awarded another mega millions jack pot. viva la nlst !!!
Yup. August 19th?
My apologies… I got that from someone on Stocktwits
NLST Also, heads up....after reading Samsung's latest BOC motion, I now believe Samsung's recent Continuance motion in 293 case—which is set for Aug trial on 912 ptnt—is connected/pertains to it. We should get the unsealed version soon, along with Netlist's response after.
Was filed sealed June 17, with Netlist's response Jun 18. Didn’t want to speculate till we got details from unsealed version, but it obviously has to do with the newly set trial. That's the game they always play—how to delay trial.
I was previously thinking one can only imagine what the “reason” is this time—now we know/suspect—considering their stay/sever motion was just denied for 4th time, and Gilstrap isn't going to appreciate continuance after just scheduling trial with a very tight/busy docket.
Furthermore, as I mentioned from what Netlist asserted, Samsung misrepresented what they claim is an issue pertaining to discovery in ED case, and its cross use. IMO—no reason for Gilstrap to continue/delay trial.
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577401927.png
Stokd $NLST Theme of Samsung’s attempt to circumvent its loss by jury verdict and delay justice is “MIS"—misconstrue, misdirect, misrepresent.
Samsung is admittedly on a fishing expedition, and looking for anything they can use to justify the ridiculous position and narrative they’re trying to advance in BOC case.
I'm out of town, also too much to unpack/write about—easier to do, and others to understand, through a video—but if you read Samsung’s position followed by Netlist’s, you'll clearly understand. Not difficult to grasp nor much legalese....IMO best way to digest the substance.
As I always say: can’t read Samsung’s briefs/motions/arguments without Netlist’s response, as they're filled with misrepresentations and nonsense...fiction with an agenda.
They're actually guilty of what they accuse Netlist, and blocked cross use of discovery from ED themselves...gaslighting.
See pic—Judge knows
Scroll past 'Notice' on both
Samsung
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.589.0.pdf
Netlist
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.593.0.pdf
https://sih-st-charts.stocktwits-cdn.com/production/original_577401037.png
could be, there appeal should go straight to cafc and they should just end it. cut out these delays. one appeal only and its cafc, its over, pay the man at the window on the way out, period!!!
8-19-24 should be the next time we have fun on this board again. just hope no delays because you know the scum knows whats going to happen to them in that court room with a jury !!!
viva la nlst........
NLST BABY !!!
GET SOME !!!
I think that we have to face the fact that Scarsi might have to have an evidentiary hearing to address these concerns, even though it certainly looks like Netlist has covered all its bases. These bastards know exactly what they have to do to delay this.
But who knows? Scarsi knows that Samsung will appeal this again no matter WHAT he does, so he might very well flip off Samsung and tell them to go pound sand as far as this evidentiary hearing goes.
i should of just worded it like this, also very similar to yours........
my favorite part............ ''CONCLUSION
In sum, the jury’s verdict resolved all remaining disputes at issue in this case,
and thus judgment must be entered promptly under the Rule 58. Samsung may seek
post-trial relief if it chooses, but this is not a reason to delay entry of judgment.
Netlist’s motion should be granted, and Netlist’s proposed judgment should be
entered.''
just sign the dam thing !!!!
Of course. The conclusion to Netlist's filing says:
because that makes the verdict official ???
Samsung trying to use the discovery issue to also get a hearing in California case. They want to call into question ethics of NLST counsel and get sanctions in that court as well.
Been here longer than most and owned NLST without your imput soooo Ba bye
New doc drop for BOC case.
Netlist's answer to Samsung filings -
Case 8:20-cv-00993-MCS-ADS Document 593 Filed 06/21/24
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923/gov.uscourts.cacd.783923.593.0.pdf
They are referencing 2021 because that is when this Breach of Contract case was taken up, under Judge Scarsi in California. Samsung is claiming that "it is clear that, both in 2021 during discovery and at the 2024 trial, Netlist misrepresented to the Court the scope and adequacy of its discovery efforts".
I'm not saying that Samsung's claims are valid. I'm simply reporting the document drops as they are produced.
Yes, I think Samsung is grasping. Trying anything that they can to delay. You can be sure however, that these will have to be looked into. If Scarsi doesn't, Samsung will surely appeal. I believe they will appeal anyways, no matter what happens. They will appeal their ASS off, until the courts decide they won't hear the appeal.
scamsung is full of it because there gonna get completely trashed on 8-19-24 in front of a jury and they know it. there just throwing shit at the walls hoping something sticks. there toast, burnt fried schooled and hung out to rot, fuck them.........
Followers
|
305
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
13
|
Posts (Total)
|
25528
|
Created
|
05/14/07
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators papaphilip gdog 100lbStriper Jetmek_03052 eyeownu Redoocs |
IN HONG WE TRUST....
Created by Sub-Teacher:
Samsung's Expert WItness Quote:
https://netlist.com/
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |