NetList Inc (NLST)

[umiak]

These e-mails show that Samsung intentionally reduced orders to Netlist and also charged more than a similar company. This was boc. They also showed terrible undue judgement of Netlist as a partner whose patents they were
using to full advantage. Personally I believe this was fear of ultimately having to pay for willful infringement.

https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AOicp04E9CF426o&id=658845AE0CC93963%2186693&cid=658845AE0CC93963

Also coming 11/10 the N V G case will be in court where the Judge will rule on some motions of both sides. Claim 16 is front and center. I hope the below comes into play but maybe they don't need it.


I remember this but not how it was posted, YMB:

Google still talks about absolute intervening right on Claim 16. The only thing that is disputed in Claim 16 by Google is that the delay lock loop in DDR4 Server memory modules is a lot different than a phase lock loop. I saw this on Reddit posted by GSOP912 or HAJ 2months ago there that Samsung agreed with Netlist that the phase lock loop is substantially the same & that the difference is negligible, so this falls under the doctrine of equivalents. This wipes out their complete Claim 16 defense. This evidence was sealed. Our legal team must do something to use this as evidence V Google.