Jetmek_03052
49 minutes ago
I'll correct my post regarding the post-judgment interest for just the 912 Patent in the #293 case -
I stupidly forgot to include a running total of the per day damages award every quarter. At 4.37% interest compounded every quarter. So if the CAFC does not come out with a ruling until the end of 2025 on the #293 appeal, this would be the extra interest owed on TOP of the damages amount:
Dec 3, 2024 through Dec 31, 2024 @ $75,502/day (4th Quarter - 29 days) - $6,946,184 + $299,532 = $2,189,558 X 4.37% = $94,150.99 interest
Jan 1, 2025 through March 31, 2025 @ 75,502/day (1st Quarter - 90 days) - $6,795,180 + $6,946,184 (Q4) +$94,150.99 = $13,835,514.99 X 4.37% = $604,612.01 interest
Apr 1, 2025 through June 30, 2025 @ $75,502/day (2nd Quarter - 91 days) - $6,870,682(2nd Q) + $13,835,514.99 (4th & 1st Q) + $604,612.01 = $21,310,809 X 4.37% = $931,282.35 interest
Jul 1, 2025 through Sep 30, 2025 @ $75,502/day (3rd Quarter - 92 days) - $6,946,184 (3rd Q) + 6,870,682 (2nd Q) + 13,835,514.99 (4th & 1st Q) = $27,652,380.99 + $931,282.35 = $28,583,663.34 X 4.37% = $1,249,106.09 interest
Oct 1, 2025 through Dec 31, 2025 @ 75,502/day (4th Quarter - 92 days ) - $6,946,184(4th Q) + 6,946,184 (3rd Q) + 6,870,682 (2nd Q) + $13,835,514.99 (4th & 1st Q) + $1,249,106.09 = $35,847,671.08 X 4.37% = $1,566,543.23 Interest
That's $4,455,694.67 in interest on the $94M damage award, through 2025. Or $11,283.49 per DAY (394 days from the final verdict until the end of 2025) just for the 912 Patent!
100lbStriper
5 hours ago
lol!!! i knew it and said it first!!! https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175476112 you, or this guy just elaborates a lot deeper into the situation. not knocking your post at all and keep them coming!!! we just need to get paid back for all this efficient infringement!!!
December 6, 2024
On November 22, 2024, Netlist Inc. (NASDAQ: NLST) achieved a significant legal victory against Samsung Electronics Co. in a patent infringement case (Case No. 293). The jury awarded Netlist $118 million in damages after determining that Samsung willfully infringed upon Netlistโs patents. This marks a pivotal win for Netlist, a company specializing in innovative memory and storage solutions that power data-intensive applications.
Key Developments Post-Verdict
1. Finalization of the Verdict:
On December 4, 2024, Judge Rodney Gilstrap, presiding over the Eastern District of Texas, finalized the juryโs verdict, solidifying Netlistโs legal triumph.
2. Motion for Injunction:
On the same day, Netlist filed a motion seeking both preliminary and permanent injunctions against Samsung. The motion aims to prevent Samsung from continuing to manufacture or sell products that infringe on Netlistโs patents.
3. Hearing Scheduled:
On December 5, 2024, Judge Gilstrap set a hearing date for December 23, 2024, to consider the motion for injunctions.
What Does This Mean?
The courtโs decision to entertain Netlistโs motion for injunctions indicates the seriousness of Netlistโs claims. An injunction would be a game-changer, potentially barring Samsung from producing or distributing infringing products, thereby giving Netlist a significant competitive edge.
Judge Gilstrapโs Options
At the December 23 hearing, Judge Gilstrap could:
1. Grant the Preliminary Injunction:
Temporarily halting Samsungโs production and sale of the infringing products until a permanent resolution is reached.
2. Grant the Permanent Injunction:
Permanently banning Samsung from infringing activities.
3. Deny the Injunction:
If the court finds that monetary damages sufficiently compensate Netlist or that an injunction is not in the publicโs best interest.
4. Modify Terms:
Judge Gilstrap may tailor a more specific remedy, such as royalties for ongoing use of the patented technology.
Factors Favoring Netlist
Judge Gilstrap has presided over three pivotal cases involving Netlistโtwo against Samsung and one against Micron. In all three cases, juries found that Samsung and Micron willfully infringed on Netlistโs patents. This history of consistent findings could weigh heavily in Netlistโs favor. The judge may view Samsungโs repeated infringement as evidence of a broader pattern, justifying stronger remedies like an injunction.
Broader Implications
Netlist vs. Google
Netlist has an ongoing case against Google, alleging patent infringement related to memory and storage technologies. The stakes are extraordinarily high, with potential damages reaching billions of dollars due to Googleโs alleged infringement spanning several years.
The court date for the Google case has not yet been set, reportedly due to procedural complexities and possibly strategic delays. These factors include the scope of discovery and the vast amount of data involved.
Whatโs at Stake?
For Netlist:
โข Injunctive relief would validate its patent rights and protect its market share.
โข A win against Google could yield monumental damages and further elevate the companyโs position as a leader in memory technology.
For Defendants (Samsung and Google):
โข Injunctions or additional rulings against them could disrupt supply chains and lead to significant financial losses.
Conclusion
Netlistโs legal momentum, backed by consistent jury findings and strong patent claims, positions the company well for success in the upcoming hearing and future litigation. While Judge Gilstrapโs decision on the injunction remains uncertain, the companyโs track record in his court augments its chances.
The potential outcomes of these cases have significant implications for Netlistโs business and stock performance, making NLST a stock to watch.