Short Summary
Netlist requests the PTAB Director reverse the institution of a PGR against its ’087 patent, arguing Samsung failed to name Samsung Electronics America as a real party in interest. The filing also highlights duplication with parallel ITC proceedings involving Google and Super Micro.
Detailed Summary
In a petition for Director review, Netlist, Inc. challenges the PTAB’s decision to institute a Patent‑Grant Review of U.S. Patent No. 12,308,087. The patent owner contends that Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. omitted Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (SEA) as a real party in interest, violating the statutory requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(2). Netlist provides extensive evidence of SEA’s involvement in related litigation and licensing, asserting that Samsung’s failure to correct the petition warrants de‑institution. Additionally, Netlist argues that Samsung’s late stipulation does not mitigate the risk of duplicated effort and inconsistent outcomes with parallel ITC proceedings involving Google and Super Micro, further supporting reversal of the institution decision.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. vs Netlist, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
National Beef Packing Company, LLCvsInstitute for Environmental Health, Inc.
National Beef Packing Company successfully challenged claims 1-30 of the '486 patent in a PTAB Institution Decision, establishing a reasonable likelihood that the methods for pathogen detection are unpatentable. The petitioner relied on prior art references including Rayman and Nagar to demonstrate anticipation and obviousness across multiple grounds.
Micron Technology, Inc. et al.vsYangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
Micron has filed a post‑grant review petition against Yangtze Memory’s 3D NAND ‘838 patent, asserting that 15 claims are obvious over prior art such as Kim and Lee. The petition seeks institution and cancellation of the challenged claims.
Zesty.ai, Inc.vsAon Re, Inc.
Zesty.ai has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Aon Re’s U.S. Patent 11,195,058, asserting that the claims are obvious over the Gross publication and other prior art.
RJ Brands, LLC d/b/a ChefmanvsSharkNinja Operating LLC et al.
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01529 after determining the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This decision is part of a larger set of institutional decisions affecting multiple related proceedings.
Microsoft CorporationvsDialect, LLC
Microsoft and Dialect, LLC jointly moved to terminate IPR 2025-01351 before institution, citing a settlement that resolves all disputes. The Board has not yet made an institution decision, and the parties seek confidentiality for the agreement.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.
Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.