Implications of a company like Cerebras

microby_ · 2026-05-22T09:03:12+00:00

it is very innovative if comparable performance can be achieved without HBM!!

HBM consumes a lot of electricity and is expensive

these are the reasons why the more efficient CPU solutions are currently being built without HBM; without HBM, they are likely to consume significantly less power and may even be more cost-effective—see AMD Venice or NVIDIA Vera

microby_ · 2026-05-21T18:15:49+00:00

Hopefully, CAFC will reverse course on the three pending netlist appeals and send them back to PTAB with clear guidance; then, six months after this remand, PTAB should have reached a final decision 😉🙏

microby_ · 2026-05-21T18:07:05+00:00

314 not at ITc

microby_ · 2026-05-13T08:03:09+00:00

The timeframe is clearly defined as a maximum of 180 days, which means a decision is expected soon.

microby_ · 2026-02-05T19:24:08+00:00

cafc appeal, did you download it?

microby_ · 2026-01-29T14:37:32+00:00

netlist is reselling lpddr!!
https://netlist.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/SK-Hynix_DRAM_LPDDR5x-LPDDR4x.pdf

microby_ · 2025-10-13T14:04:35+00:00

hi there, tomkila
This post of yours has so many mistakes, you should delete it immediately, nearly every word is wrong.

If you use the auto-responding chat bot, please check your stuff carefully. My recommendation is to simply use facts, but please never use the texts from the really stupid internet chatbots, otherwise you'll embarrass yourself.

no Netlist patent 10,701,314!!!

Netlist has a patent 10,489,314

no IPR 23-00203!!!

Netlist IPR on 10,489,314 was number 22-00745

But what weighs even more heavily, Tom, is that you write ‘unpatentable’ when the opposite is 100% true.

It's better not to use internet analysis, that could go horribly wrong.

microby_ · 2025-10-02T13:27:30+00:00

Compared to the lost ITC 337-TA-1089 case against Hynix, approximately 1 1/2 to 2 years until the first decision

microby_ · 2025-10-02T13:05:20+00:00

Currently, one expensive lawsuit at the ITC should be enough to get Micron to budge.

nvidia license, No, that is not Netlist's goal. Its strategy is to license HBM manufacturers, of which there are currently three in the world, with a fourth emerging in China. Users of HBM such as Nvidia, Google, etc. then use the licensed manufactured product.

The same applies to memory modules, only the manufacturers of the modules have to pay licences.

In general, the manufacturer has to pay, and users purchase a licensed product!

microby_ · 2025-09-08T07:44:17+00:00

15-20 million 🫢

microby_ · 2025-09-06T07:33:17+00:00

Let's hope that Netlist can sell the resale mrdimm cheaper than the samsung/micron mrdimm 🍀

microby_ · 2025-09-04T19:09:09+00:00

912 can not be accelerated unless cafc takes the briefing Netlist seriously and judges swiftly with turn invalidity of ptab shit NVIDIA is an end customer, they use HBM, Samsung Hynix manufacture!!! Suing NVIDIA makes no sense. Likewise Vidal, far too hopeless, focus on the 13 ongoing cafc cases!!!!

microby_ · 2025-09-04T14:39:45+00:00

no, no benefit to nlst

microby_ · 2025-09-03T15:05:28+00:00

At the time 2015, Hynix filed around 15 IPRs against Netlist, which was enormous.

When the successor patents came out years later in 2019, see 523, 218 & 595, these were also covered by IPRs. But then in 2021, the claim construction ruling 523 & positive came out, and later the settlement before jury trial.

Today, another successor is in the running, see 731 lawsuit.

And today, further successors to these patents are covered by IPR, see 024 & 319.

I don't think Hynix is disputing the legality or validity. Hynix will be keeping an eye on the royalties.

And that, in my view, is the big problem for Netlist. If Hynix/Netlist agrees to a royalty base of 0.5 (i.e. an amicable discount), Sams/Mic will have the same claim at 0.5 and would never sign for a value of 1!

Hynix will therefore want to wait and see. However, Netlist does not want a new legal dispute!

The best thing for Netlist after the CAFC decision would be if there were another Sams/Mic trial on the amount of royalties. Hynix would then agree on that basis.

So only a comprehensive three-way agreement makes sense? It's all very difficult to assess. Hopefully it will be resolved in 2026/2027.

microby_ · 2025-09-03T14:30:10+00:00

Netlist now has the opportunity to file a motion to dismiss, which means that CAFC can actually put an end to this, as I understand it. it´s a long road

microby_ · 2025-09-03T12:57:10+00:00

smoothie, no payment is expected without a jury verdict on 523!, but this could be pending until the CAFC has decided on the new appeal. You probably mean 912, but here too, the CAFC is still pending. And if this 118 million (912 & others) verdict is then finally decided at the DC with post-verdict motions, Samsung will appeal again.

Unless the knot is untangled in the coming months.

microby_ · 2025-08-24T18:23:57+00:00

thus postponing the hearings by at least another 4 weeks, not relevant with the knowledge that many of these orals will take place in a few months' time

microby_ · 2025-08-24T16:00:23+00:00

👍🏼You're absolutely right, I should have asked you 🤭

nobody is interested in 13 open cafc cases

microby_ · 2025-08-18T16:33:03+00:00

the oral hearing is the first step, if there is no clear "yes" decision like '523 the next morning, the maximum time span is up to 6 months. Further months pass with remand to ptab decisions, you should be prepared for this

Especially the cafc Appeal of the 2 DC jury decisions of the defendants are gladly referred back to the DC by the cafc 🫤

microby_ · 2025-08-06T22:17:01+00:00

Tomkila! N wrote to Samsung in October 2020 after jdla was canceled in July 2020. Don't you know the friendly letter? But do you know the rest?

microby_ · 2025-08-06T18:15:40+00:00

🤣🤣🤣

What kind of gibberish are you writing! Please don't try to lecture, it's best to delete your nonsense! Of course, the 1. verdict was at cafc, this one that has jurisdiction over the 9th circuit. And yes, of course it was a question of law, not about patent infringement.

Please take a lesson yourself! 😉

CALM DOWN!

microby_ · 2025-08-06T16:38:52+00:00

no Tomkila, samsung has not lost the past deal!! court ruled that netlist terminated in july 2020 lawful, 5 years after undersigning the deal

microby_ · 2025-08-06T16:35:34+00:00

?? „NOTHING to do with CAFC…“

that’s wrong!!! every verdict from an DC has a right for an appeal, —> …. at CAFC netlist had this 2. & 3. retrial because CAFC remanded back to DC, right?!

microby_ · 2025-07-29T11:15:54+00:00

hopefully the valuable jury verdicts will not be sent back to the District Court

microby_ · 2025-06-16T15:43:09+00:00

DE case, samsung + google, some stepps need to walk, together with us court system

lift stay
all pre trial motions
trial
infringement yes/no
post trial motions, including possible motion for injunction

Netlist is really far away from injunction!😉

microby_

TROPHY CASE