Replies to post #23188 on NetList Inc (NLST)

[gdog]

I wonder now that boc was in favor of Netlist if Samsung will appeal??? I mean now more than ever they need a lic. seems maybe they would just pay off nlst and get the lic or is that wishful thinking.

[100lbStriper]

hey jet if ya wanna swap out charts this one is updated 5-19-24
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174448834

[FACT-MASTER]

imo, the modus operandus of the current legal system, is that the judges do not want to be the ones to make decisions. - just my opinion.

So what is their role then?

Yes, to facilitate the trials, more importantly to facilitate settlement.

The problem in this instance, imo, is that the industry top dogs do not want to set a legal precedent of settlement, and i can see their point ( too many patent infringement cases). Therefore delay, while not victory,.. is a perpetual convenience.

With the current Netlist/Samsung BOC case, unanomious jury decision,, any appeal by Samsung should be shut down immediately by the FC judge. That would be an utter waste of court resources and would do what the court system is suppose to do - move the case along/settlement.

The other problem here with this case appears to be the invalidation of subject patents, ( while winning in court, said patents are conveniently being invalidated at the PTAB)

SSUURRE... all 5 patents are conveniently "obvious" - looks like bs, imo - see below link.

https://www.mk.co.kr/en/business/10981422

Although this case is different then the SK Hynix ITC case, there are eerily similar strings being yanked to the detriment of Netlist, imo.

Does Gilstrap have to wait for the CAFC decision on the PTAB invalidated patents befor ruling on this case? (seems to me like he will)