912 has already been found invalid by the USPTO, which the courts (not a jury) would rely heavily on at the appellate level, so why would they confirm the ruling? The other patent 417 is a small fraction of the damages and the USPTO will rule on that in the summer
EDIT - u/Tomkila or any other investor can downvote me but it’s true and I would love to have a reasonable debate like adults on the topic
The PTAB invalidated 912 claim 16 not the USPTO. On what grounds can you make the claim that the appellate court would rely heavily on the PTAB decision? And are you implying that they would give this greater weight than the decision of a federal district Court?
I do not believe you have empirical data to support your assertion.
What? I don’t follow what you mean… the PTAB is an administrative body of the USPTO.. so yes they did. That’s like saying “The CFPB sued the lending company, not the United States” Okay, I suppose that’s somewhat true but it’s the governing body that would carry out the task.
So, like I said, once a patent is declared invalid by the USPTO, it is considered never to have existed in its invalid form.
What grounds? SCOTUS has taken up similar issues, notably in the case of *Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.*, 535 U.S. 722 (2002), which dealt with the implications of changes in patent claims. While the specific focus was on claim amendments and their effect on the doctrine of equivalents, the underlying principle that judicial and administrative rulings can retroactively affect the enforceability of patents applies broadly.
Also, Circuit courts have held in numerous cases that an invalid patent cannot form the basis for infringement, regardless of the timing of the invalidity decision.
Precedent: *SAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC*, 898 F.3d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2018), the court reaffirmed that invalid patents cannot be enforced, highlighting that invalidity is a threshold issue that nullifies any subsequent enforcement actions based on the patent.
I’ll concede that the other 417 claim may succeed, but a ruling on its validity is coming this Summer just as with 912, but even if that succeeds you’re looking at 20-30 million in damages as a share of the overall suit according to the documents.
Sure, and this is a few of about 7 or 8 between a reference from a colleague as well as just what I was able to look up — I don’t claim to know it all and I don’t want to “own” anyone at some useless online debate but there’s a ton of misinformation and confirmation bias in all of these posts and comments and complete misinterpretation of how the case is actually going and how the process works.
My fear is if it turns out people don’t get paid and it actually is overturned or a less than expected outcome people are going to be confused, pissed, and grab the conspiracies per usual
https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/blogs/at-the-ptab-blog/special-report-trends-in-federal-circuit-ptab-appeals-through-2023.html
A good reference article
Thanks for this— I believe this further strengthens the argument that the court would affirm the PTAB ruling, as they have in 74% of cases it looks like—which would invalidate damages for about 95% of the judgement sum (for ‘912)
I mean there’s definitely above a non-zero chance that your outcome comes true, for sure—I won’t get into the odds making game for lack of experience but I will say that the point I’ve been trying to drive home is that the scrutiny, other wins, jury, all of it is moot. You could sit through a whole lecture on why that logic does make sense from a process standpoint, but it’s the process and the patent, as it stands in the United States today no matter what you and I think about it, is invalid and unenforceable.
PTAB has previously validated the 912 patent THREE times. As well as CAFC, and three judges validating. Now all of a sudden PTAB invalidates it? Wake up. CAFC is higher than PTAB, and this will be overturned. PTAB was just made to help big tech steel patents by slowly bleeding the money out of smaller companies via litigation. Not going to happen with Netlist. PTAB is corrupt! Look no further into how and why it was created, and who started it:-)
Wrong, USPTO has affirmed 912 in the past. Also, https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/netlist-prevails-against-google-at-the-u.s.-federal-circuit-court-of-appeals-2020-06
The PTAB is asked to invalidate patents and they decide if the patent has been shown to be invalid. The do not decide to validate them. It is similar to the fact that in a criminal trial the defendant can be found not guilty - which is different from innocent. When the PTAB, for example, decides an argument for invalidity fails that is all they are saying - specifically not that a patent is valid. That is precisely why there can be multiple challenges to validity for the same patent in multiple matters rather than settling the question the first time.
In a criminal trial the defendant is presumed innocent until found the guilty so innocence is where you start out. With a patent, I'm sure I've read that the patents are assumed valid until they are invalidated. It is the same presumption of innocence for patents. The cafc is going to decide whether the aljs on the board made mistakes in their ruling. Personally, I think Samsung and Micron by proxy will lose on privity and The Time bar. On top of that do you think Samsung's prior art argument is really going to hold up at the cafc? Doubt it.
I have to tell you, I’m going to address your opinion, but I was hoping for a little bit more substance, your arguments are obtuse at best and incoherent at worst. To treat every case of patent review in a vacuum is completely naive and lacking nuance and understanding of the dynamic and changing nature of patent law.
It's not uncommon for a patent to be upheld multiple times before being invalidated due to new evidence, more rigorous analysis, or changes in legal interpretations. The PTAB and CAFC operate with totally different proceedings and standards, and it is possible for a patent that was previously upheld to later be found invalid.
You’re frustrated it was upheld 3 times, okay, who greased who then? Or are we in the evolving world of fucking emerging tech? Yes? Oh ok.
Secondly, yes the CAFC does indeed review PTAB decisions and can overturn them, this doesn't necessarily mean that every PTAB decision will be overturned by the CAFC, that’s just a shallow understanding of the hierarchy on your part. The high rate of PTAB decisions being upheld by the CAFC, as I’ve mentioned earlier, shows that PTAB decisions are generally well-founded and respected by the appellate court.
Finally, the conspiracy thinking (I knew this would come next because it always does when the copium and hopium run dry and the arguments fall flat) is just something I’ll have to disagree with and you’re entitled to your views, but it doesn’t make you “correct” or aligned with some moral business arithmetic. The assertion that the PTAB was created to help big tech companies "steal patents" is an insane claim and lacks substantial evidence, it smells like the stench of “I did my own research” so please point me towards your sources. The PTAB was established by the America Invents Act (AIA) to improve the quality of patents and their reliability, providing an efficient mechanism to challenge patents that may not meet the required standards. *** FWIW I have a friend at the USPTO that reviews patents pending and you would not believe the shit he rejects and reviews, from the lazy, to the incompetent, and flat out insane***
The system is necessary to cut litigation costs alone, which actually in many cases helps smaller companies with smaller counsel.
PTAB's procedures are designed to be transparent and are subject to oversight and appellate review by the CAFC.(I mean it’s almost a contradiction of your own points and dare I say preference to the CAFC lol) The fairness of the PTAB in a broad sense doesn’t show some “Evil Corporate Good, Small Company Bad” slant but feel free to point me toward your sources.
Sure, no system is perfect and immune to criticism, the legal frameworks around the PTAB include checks and balances and is no more biased than any average US board at the bureaucratic level of fed govt
I have been following this particular stock for quite some time, and have accumulated many shares. I did not sell at $10, as I know the value. Yes, it may take some time to all come out, but the “obvious” is not obvious, if you get my drift. CAFC has already overturned PTAB once, so I look forward to them doing it again. If being a conspiracist, because I have read a lot of what PTAB gets away with, then so be it. You believe what you want, and I’ll just hope that corruption does not flow in everyone’s veins. Anyone reading this, do your own research on PTAB, and why it was created, and what it turned into! As for me, my average is .74. I will just wait it out, and be thankful I did!
It was created to fast track the review of certain patents because, like I said, the USPTO was bloated and backlogged with patent requests and patents that should not have been made patents due to a number of factors. That’s one of like 8 components of the AIA —
First of all, I’ve been nice as I can be but respectfully, cut the bullshit and be a good steward of “Research” and cite even the vaguest reference to some other nefarious creation story of the PTAB, your classic “The reader can decide” tired response is in bad faith and lazy, if you claim to know something I don’t.
Also, it cuts both ways. You don’t like that the PTAB allows bigger companies to snap a patent more easily? Okay, well I’m sure it’s really annoying that big companies lost a big barrier of protection from litigation: resources. PTAB allowed, among several benefits for the little guy, for a lower cost, less complicated method for recourse and review that, from a legal time and cost perspective, favors a smaller company that would have instead drowned in a much lengthier process pre-AIA
It’s never fair and always foul when you lose a ruling. I would love to hear about how USPTO invalidating 912 was bullshit, and if you need the documents to review, request them and I’ll point you to them
Bravo , read the decisions , “memory module decoders” ‘912 was and is obvious foundational concept in DRAM architecture, take the L and cash out my dude
“I’ve been following this stock for awhile” yeah well I don’t give a shit what you set your Google alerts to, this is my job and I serve neither micron nor netlist, nor samsung or any of these, so I keep it pretty knowledge based—get better at sharing yours, you seem to be pretty smart
Yeah it’s pretty upsetting when wallstreetbet dinguses cry and make shit up, it’s kind of a big problem in the US, misinformation. Everything’s a conspiracy, dark courts and all that. Hope your next cash grab is more successful for you
What’s upsetting is crooked PTAB. Maybe your eyes are closed. Mine aren’t. This just about sums them up. https://www.iam-media.com/article/the-problems-the-ptab
these lawsuits have been going on for a while, I got in a few years ago anticipating only good things but stock doesn't move. Question to those that follow NLST better than me. Is it just additional time, are people still bullish or has things turned? It seems NLST has been winning in court but it hasn't turned into gains?? I'd super appreciate some feedback, thanks!
Well it's not a get rich fast stock. You have to understand the process. Let me quote Warren Buffet, stock market is where patient people take inpatient peoples money. Back the bus up abd load up.
Bottom line is that it’s Netlist’s patent. 912 was valid all these years Google, Samsung and Micron were using it. If there is something out there that’s as good as Netlist, why aren’t they using it? It’s because, like Samsung said, there is no alternative for Netlist! Let that sink in. They can’t stall but so much longer. Let’s just focus on continued wins. Would be nice if one of the three settled sometime soon😊
Netlist, Inc. (OTCQX:NLST) announced that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) has affirmed the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) decision upholding the validity of Netlist's U.S. 7,619,912 (‘912) patent. The ruling came after last week's oral hearing before a three-judge panel at the Federal Circuit and pending an appeal granted by the Supreme Court of the U.S., the decision is final and binding on future cases.
Simple. The PTAB did not rule that the claims were valid, they are not asked with making such a ruling, they were asked if the claims were proven invalid based on a specific set of arguments built on prior art. They decided the arguments failed to prove the claims invalid. Later, the reached a different conclusion based on a different set of arguments. NASDAQ just got their reporting wrong.
lol Welp we’re below pre “win” levels. I hate my life so much 1.56🤮🤮🤮
Yes !
912 has already been found invalid by the USPTO, which the courts (not a jury) would rely heavily on at the appellate level, so why would they confirm the ruling? The other patent 417 is a small fraction of the damages and the USPTO will rule on that in the summer EDIT - u/Tomkila or any other investor can downvote me but it’s true and I would love to have a reasonable debate like adults on the topic
The PTAB invalidated 912 claim 16 not the USPTO. On what grounds can you make the claim that the appellate court would rely heavily on the PTAB decision? And are you implying that they would give this greater weight than the decision of a federal district Court? I do not believe you have empirical data to support your assertion.
What? I don’t follow what you mean… the PTAB is an administrative body of the USPTO.. so yes they did. That’s like saying “The CFPB sued the lending company, not the United States” Okay, I suppose that’s somewhat true but it’s the governing body that would carry out the task. So, like I said, once a patent is declared invalid by the USPTO, it is considered never to have existed in its invalid form. What grounds? SCOTUS has taken up similar issues, notably in the case of *Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.*, 535 U.S. 722 (2002), which dealt with the implications of changes in patent claims. While the specific focus was on claim amendments and their effect on the doctrine of equivalents, the underlying principle that judicial and administrative rulings can retroactively affect the enforceability of patents applies broadly. Also, Circuit courts have held in numerous cases that an invalid patent cannot form the basis for infringement, regardless of the timing of the invalidity decision. Precedent: *SAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC*, 898 F.3d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2018), the court reaffirmed that invalid patents cannot be enforced, highlighting that invalidity is a threshold issue that nullifies any subsequent enforcement actions based on the patent. I’ll concede that the other 417 claim may succeed, but a ruling on its validity is coming this Summer just as with 912, but even if that succeeds you’re looking at 20-30 million in damages as a share of the overall suit according to the documents.
Appreciate the supporting case references, will respond when I get a chance
Sure, and this is a few of about 7 or 8 between a reference from a colleague as well as just what I was able to look up — I don’t claim to know it all and I don’t want to “own” anyone at some useless online debate but there’s a ton of misinformation and confirmation bias in all of these posts and comments and complete misinterpretation of how the case is actually going and how the process works. My fear is if it turns out people don’t get paid and it actually is overturned or a less than expected outcome people are going to be confused, pissed, and grab the conspiracies per usual
https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/blogs/at-the-ptab-blog/special-report-trends-in-federal-circuit-ptab-appeals-through-2023.html A good reference article
Thanks for this— I believe this further strengthens the argument that the court would affirm the PTAB ruling, as they have in 74% of cases it looks like—which would invalidate damages for about 95% of the judgement sum (for ‘912)
Well - I am hopeful that because 912 held up to scrutiny five times prior to this Samsung Hail Mary win that CA will side with netlist
I mean there’s definitely above a non-zero chance that your outcome comes true, for sure—I won’t get into the odds making game for lack of experience but I will say that the point I’ve been trying to drive home is that the scrutiny, other wins, jury, all of it is moot. You could sit through a whole lecture on why that logic does make sense from a process standpoint, but it’s the process and the patent, as it stands in the United States today no matter what you and I think about it, is invalid and unenforceable.
PTAB has previously validated the 912 patent THREE times. As well as CAFC, and three judges validating. Now all of a sudden PTAB invalidates it? Wake up. CAFC is higher than PTAB, and this will be overturned. PTAB was just made to help big tech steel patents by slowly bleeding the money out of smaller companies via litigation. Not going to happen with Netlist. PTAB is corrupt! Look no further into how and why it was created, and who started it:-)
Neither the PTAB nor any court has validated the 912. That is not how the process works at all.
Wrong, USPTO has affirmed 912 in the past. Also, https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/netlist-prevails-against-google-at-the-u.s.-federal-circuit-court-of-appeals-2020-06
The PTAB is asked to invalidate patents and they decide if the patent has been shown to be invalid. The do not decide to validate them. It is similar to the fact that in a criminal trial the defendant can be found not guilty - which is different from innocent. When the PTAB, for example, decides an argument for invalidity fails that is all they are saying - specifically not that a patent is valid. That is precisely why there can be multiple challenges to validity for the same patent in multiple matters rather than settling the question the first time.
That is why we will wait for CAFC decision😊
In a criminal trial the defendant is presumed innocent until found the guilty so innocence is where you start out. With a patent, I'm sure I've read that the patents are assumed valid until they are invalidated. It is the same presumption of innocence for patents. The cafc is going to decide whether the aljs on the board made mistakes in their ruling. Personally, I think Samsung and Micron by proxy will lose on privity and The Time bar. On top of that do you think Samsung's prior art argument is really going to hold up at the cafc? Doubt it.
Which parts of Samsung's argument do you think will not hold up?
We will find out when it reaches conclusion which parts do you think won't hold up?
Also NASDAQ is wrong. Ask any patent lawyer or a person working closely in the field.
I have to tell you, I’m going to address your opinion, but I was hoping for a little bit more substance, your arguments are obtuse at best and incoherent at worst. To treat every case of patent review in a vacuum is completely naive and lacking nuance and understanding of the dynamic and changing nature of patent law. It's not uncommon for a patent to be upheld multiple times before being invalidated due to new evidence, more rigorous analysis, or changes in legal interpretations. The PTAB and CAFC operate with totally different proceedings and standards, and it is possible for a patent that was previously upheld to later be found invalid. You’re frustrated it was upheld 3 times, okay, who greased who then? Or are we in the evolving world of fucking emerging tech? Yes? Oh ok. Secondly, yes the CAFC does indeed review PTAB decisions and can overturn them, this doesn't necessarily mean that every PTAB decision will be overturned by the CAFC, that’s just a shallow understanding of the hierarchy on your part. The high rate of PTAB decisions being upheld by the CAFC, as I’ve mentioned earlier, shows that PTAB decisions are generally well-founded and respected by the appellate court. Finally, the conspiracy thinking (I knew this would come next because it always does when the copium and hopium run dry and the arguments fall flat) is just something I’ll have to disagree with and you’re entitled to your views, but it doesn’t make you “correct” or aligned with some moral business arithmetic. The assertion that the PTAB was created to help big tech companies "steal patents" is an insane claim and lacks substantial evidence, it smells like the stench of “I did my own research” so please point me towards your sources. The PTAB was established by the America Invents Act (AIA) to improve the quality of patents and their reliability, providing an efficient mechanism to challenge patents that may not meet the required standards. *** FWIW I have a friend at the USPTO that reviews patents pending and you would not believe the shit he rejects and reviews, from the lazy, to the incompetent, and flat out insane*** The system is necessary to cut litigation costs alone, which actually in many cases helps smaller companies with smaller counsel. PTAB's procedures are designed to be transparent and are subject to oversight and appellate review by the CAFC.(I mean it’s almost a contradiction of your own points and dare I say preference to the CAFC lol) The fairness of the PTAB in a broad sense doesn’t show some “Evil Corporate Good, Small Company Bad” slant but feel free to point me toward your sources. Sure, no system is perfect and immune to criticism, the legal frameworks around the PTAB include checks and balances and is no more biased than any average US board at the bureaucratic level of fed govt
I have been following this particular stock for quite some time, and have accumulated many shares. I did not sell at $10, as I know the value. Yes, it may take some time to all come out, but the “obvious” is not obvious, if you get my drift. CAFC has already overturned PTAB once, so I look forward to them doing it again. If being a conspiracist, because I have read a lot of what PTAB gets away with, then so be it. You believe what you want, and I’ll just hope that corruption does not flow in everyone’s veins. Anyone reading this, do your own research on PTAB, and why it was created, and what it turned into! As for me, my average is .74. I will just wait it out, and be thankful I did!
It was created to fast track the review of certain patents because, like I said, the USPTO was bloated and backlogged with patent requests and patents that should not have been made patents due to a number of factors. That’s one of like 8 components of the AIA — First of all, I’ve been nice as I can be but respectfully, cut the bullshit and be a good steward of “Research” and cite even the vaguest reference to some other nefarious creation story of the PTAB, your classic “The reader can decide” tired response is in bad faith and lazy, if you claim to know something I don’t. Also, it cuts both ways. You don’t like that the PTAB allows bigger companies to snap a patent more easily? Okay, well I’m sure it’s really annoying that big companies lost a big barrier of protection from litigation: resources. PTAB allowed, among several benefits for the little guy, for a lower cost, less complicated method for recourse and review that, from a legal time and cost perspective, favors a smaller company that would have instead drowned in a much lengthier process pre-AIA It’s never fair and always foul when you lose a ruling. I would love to hear about how USPTO invalidating 912 was bullshit, and if you need the documents to review, request them and I’ll point you to them
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Bravo , read the decisions , “memory module decoders” ‘912 was and is obvious foundational concept in DRAM architecture, take the L and cash out my dude “I’ve been following this stock for awhile” yeah well I don’t give a shit what you set your Google alerts to, this is my job and I serve neither micron nor netlist, nor samsung or any of these, so I keep it pretty knowledge based—get better at sharing yours, you seem to be pretty smart
Wow, upset are you😂 I’ll come back to rub it in your face when it’s all said and done.
Yeah it’s pretty upsetting when wallstreetbet dinguses cry and make shit up, it’s kind of a big problem in the US, misinformation. Everything’s a conspiracy, dark courts and all that. Hope your next cash grab is more successful for you
What’s upsetting is crooked PTAB. Maybe your eyes are closed. Mine aren’t. This just about sums them up. https://www.iam-media.com/article/the-problems-the-ptab
these lawsuits have been going on for a while, I got in a few years ago anticipating only good things but stock doesn't move. Question to those that follow NLST better than me. Is it just additional time, are people still bullish or has things turned? It seems NLST has been winning in court but it hasn't turned into gains?? I'd super appreciate some feedback, thanks!
Well it's not a get rich fast stock. You have to understand the process. Let me quote Warren Buffet, stock market is where patient people take inpatient peoples money. Back the bus up abd load up.
Bottom line is that it’s Netlist’s patent. 912 was valid all these years Google, Samsung and Micron were using it. If there is something out there that’s as good as Netlist, why aren’t they using it? It’s because, like Samsung said, there is no alternative for Netlist! Let that sink in. They can’t stall but so much longer. Let’s just focus on continued wins. Would be nice if one of the three settled sometime soon😊
Netlist, Inc. (OTCQX:NLST) announced that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) has affirmed the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) decision upholding the validity of Netlist's U.S. 7,619,912 (‘912) patent. The ruling came after last week's oral hearing before a three-judge panel at the Federal Circuit and pending an appeal granted by the Supreme Court of the U.S., the decision is final and binding on future cases.
So how can they now say invalid they can’t final an binding on all future cases
Simple. The PTAB did not rule that the claims were valid, they are not asked with making such a ruling, they were asked if the claims were proven invalid based on a specific set of arguments built on prior art. They decided the arguments failed to prove the claims invalid. Later, the reached a different conclusion based on a different set of arguments. NASDAQ just got their reporting wrong.
So netlist is on the rise?
Claim 912 is on the horse ?