NetList Inc (NLST)

[100lbStriper]

FrankFromYahoo
3:01 AM

$NLST Just an example! Look at the ongoing claim 16/912 IPR. Samsung did nothing else than argue that claim 16 is based on (a mere) combination of two prior art elements, from the fact that NLST argues that these two references are not eligible (because not published before the priority date). This CAFC judgement definitely reduces/eliminates the margin of the PTAB to invalidate a patent based on obviousness resulting from the combination of two or more prior art elements. Petitioner and PTAB must find additional hard fact argument. Not enough anymore: the mere existence of two or more prior art elements.