100lbStriper
38 minutes ago
Supreme Court Rules 200 Patent Judges' Appointment Unconstitutional
https://thepatriotlight.com/415364/supreme-court-rules-200-patent-judges-appointment-unconstitutional/
Supreme Court Rules 200 Patent Judges' Appointment Unconstitutional
Tyler Durden's Photo
by Tyler Durden
Sunday, Jan 12, 2025 - 09:35 PM
The Supreme Court has ruled that over 200 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges were unconstitutionally appointed, however the problem may be 'cured' if the board's director exercises greater supervision over them.
A general view of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on June 1, 2021. Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion in the split decision in the case of U.S. v. Arthrex Inc, a consolidation of three cases. The patent adjudication system is administered by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), which sits within the Department of Commerce. The PTO has a single director who is subject to Senate confirmation.
The PTAB was established by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011, and sits in panels of at least three members who are drawn from the Director, the Deputy Director, the Commissioners for Patents and Trademarks, and over 200 Administrative Patent Judges (APJs). Members of the PTAB and APJs are selected by the Secretary of Commerce.
As the Epoch Times notes further, Roberts explained that Arthrex Inc. develops medical devices and procedures for orthopedic surgery. In 2015, it received a patent on a surgical device it invented that reattaches soft tissue to bone without tying a knot. Arthrex soon claimed that two rival companies had infringed the patent. Three APJs on the PTAB panel concluded that a prior patent application “anticipated” the invention claimed by the patent, making Arthrex’s patent invalid.
On appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Arthrex raised for the first time an argument based on the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, which provides that the president may appoint officers to assist him in carrying out his responsibilities. Principal officers must be appointed by the president and be confirmed by the Senate, while inferior officers may be appointed by the president alone, the head of an executive department, or a court.
Roberts noted that Arthrex argued that the APJs were principal officers and that meant their appointment by the Secretary of Commerce was unconstitutional. The Federal Circuit sided with Arthrex and invalidated the tenure protections for APJs.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court held 5-4 that the authority the APJs possess runs afoul of the Appointments Clause because they are not nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The APJs’ “unreviewable authority” in patent proceedings is not consistent with their appointment by the secretary. Only principal officers who are constitutionally appointed may wield that level of authority, Roberts wrote. Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett concurred.
But the court also ruled 7-2 on what should be done, finding that the constitutional infirmity could be cured by letting the director of the PTO have the ability to review and modify decisions made by the APJs. Four justices partially concurred and partially dissented in various parts of the court’s opinion.
Roberts quoted Alexander Hamilton who wrote in Federalist 77 that assigning the nomination power to the president guarantees accountability for the appointees’ actions because the “blame of a bad nomination would fall upon the president singly and absolutely.” The “sole and undivided responsibility of one man will naturally beget a livelier sense of duty and a more exact regard to reputation,” the founding father wrote.
Roberts cited a 1997 precedent, writing that the Appointments Clause “adds a degree of accountability in the Senate, which shares in the public blame ‘for both the making of a bad appointment and the rejection of a good one.’”
Justice Clarence Thomas penned a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
“For the very first time, this Court holds that Congress violated the Constitution by vesting the appointment of a federal officer in the head of a department,” Thomas wrote.
“Just who are these ‘principal’ officers that Congress unsuccessfully sought to smuggle into the Executive Branch without Senate confirmation? About 250 administrative patent judges who sit at the bottom of an organizational chart, nestled under at least two levels of authority. Neither our precedent nor the original understanding of the Appointments Clause requires Senate confirmation of officers inferior to not one, but two officers below the President.” (Italics in original.)
100lbStriper
18 hours ago
TOMKiLA $NLST Hong “For CXL NV, those are design work that's going to happen starting end of this year and into first half of next year. It's going into much larger customers, hyperscalers and some of the major OEMs, where they can no longer use batteries, lithium-ion batteries for power outages. So you have very fast DRAM data, real-time data, if power goes out that needs to be backed up and that used to be done through the Intel Optane. And that's going - that technology is going away next year.
So we're coming in to basically cover that market with the technology we created a long time ago. But that NVDIMM will not run — in the memory channel it will run in the CXL channel. But that's a long-term growth market.”
These are some of the Intel’s optane customers! This is huge opportunity for netlist
https://media.stocktwits-cdn.com/api/3/media/1312277/default.png
gdog
1 day ago
TOMKiLA
Jan 10, 2025 3:00 PM
$NLST without a news and PR from netlist, the price will collapse. It is obvious, it happens to all companies. Do you understand why I report my anger here? netlist must wake up and show us positive news. wasting time and hoping only exclusively for winning results of patent litigation is not the best choice for us shareholders. We need a clear vision of netlist on its products, we need more communication from hong, we need gross margins in strong increase. It is useless for me to tell you that we also need a reduction in legal expenses. come on hong, we shareholders seriously need a positive shock. We shareholders deserve answers and above all respect.
Jetmek_03052
2 days ago
New OTCE short interest report for NLST.
As of 12/31/24, the short interest increased 5.55%, up 458,728 shares to 8,729,514 shares (from 8,270,786 shares on 12/13/2024).
More fuel for the squeeze!
100lbStriper
2 days ago
cxl hybrdimm product is ready to relaunch netlist
https://www.reddit.com/r/Netlist_/comments/1huz62j/cxl_hybrdimm_product_is_ready_to_relaunch_netlist/?share_id=FkPFWSVp1dENWxbAq0TMz&utm_content=1&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_source=share&utm_term=4
me, imo.........this could easily happen if we were to merge with sk. its a win win.....sk has the manufacturing and distribution to all the right companies, and a bank account to take care of that unethical litigation crew we're dealing with, lol!!! and nlst has a product line that everybody needs and or steals, not too mention more than likely more in the pipe line....... hong needs to get it together.........the business comes first.......the litigation can be taken care of in tandem....... how can you be a ceo if you dont do some multi tasking??? this merger would get us off the otc while showing profitable q's and keeping us away from all the manipulation because we'd have the protection of large firms supporting our pps through the mutual funds. just my 2 cents for the day.....
CXL HybriDIMM
I honestly think that after 4 years of development since the sk deal, 9 years since the first hybrdimm product launched and over 10 years of development of hybrdimm in general, the time has come for change and progress. Netlist must launch this product now and must absolutely bring closed contracts and positive news to shareholders. Only the final figure, the revenue and the ability of this company to monetize the product count. It is obvious that by selling a certain amount of product, you see high margins and profits. I do not have this data available but it does not matter now. What we know is that the cxl nv business is worth between $ 200 and 250m in 2025 and like hbm, we most likely expect exponential growth. Netlist in recent months has hired a top management specifically for cxl hybrdimm so I expect positive news and strong growth of the house made product.
sk hynix could be crucial to the success of cxl hybridimm. in 2021 the deal was signed and among the few lines dedicated to it, hong stated that sk will help netlist to commercialize cxl hybridimm. what does it mean? either sk will produce the product for netlist as a hidden deal or sk will sell the cxl base for netlist at ub lower price and it will use the base to build its product and sell it directly to the customer.
I honestly believe that the second hypothesis is more plausible and netlist could increase the demand for sk supply to be able to satisfy the eventual demand for the nlst product.
The thing that really matters is that netlist launches the product soon and above all that netlist has the possibility of making good margins. Between 30 and 50% gross margin is a feasible hypothesis and this data will be decisive for neltist.
hong also said that large customers could turn to new products by the end of 2025 because intel is about to dismantle its network of products that covered this range. This should offer a huge growth opportunity for cxl hybrid in 2026, these are just hypotheses but I basically base myself on everything that the top management of netlist etc. have reported.
this year netlist will offer two more very interesting products. the first is lightning that came out of nowhere on the official netlist website. a gaming and blockchain product based on fury from the giant kingston. this product could be requested only by the highest range for the particular specifications. (netlist uses partnerships to increase and improve performance etc. this appeals to a niche market but we don't know how much the business is worth).
Another product, sk hynix resale mcrdimm. 2025 market of $200/250m and this business will also grow exponentially. New product and new business. I would say that netlist has the winning cards to relaunch itself with higher revenues in 2025 and almost certainly with higher gross margins. in 2024 probably margins of 2.5/3% (really painful and ridiculous in my opinion). With products like cxl hybrdimm, lightning, mcrdimm etc I expect a revenue range between $180 and 210m in 2025 and a minimum gross margin of 7%.
10% will be amazing but i can’t say that for real.
🙌🏻 we need strong leadership and news
papaphilip
3 days ago
Hey Jet, thanks for the numbers. I'm glad I asked because I thought they had more runway. February is upon us. How depressing. I'm in agreement there's more dilution coming and with our share price, it just gets uglier. A lot more shares given away. It was tongue in cheek when I mentioned reverse split a month or 2 ago. But it seems that has to be in play to regain some respectable share 'value'. Makes holding this so long (though the ups and downs, and way downs) that much more painful. There is light at the end of the tunnel, but none of us expected a tunnel this long. I actually wish as Striper suggested, they would merge with SK and 'corner the market'. This going it alone, David vs. Goliath thing has not proved to be effective. Patience and portfolio worth are wearing thin.
Jetmek_03052
3 days ago
Netlist's litigation expenses started to go down but now with all the appeals and retrials? It might start to go back up a little.
Back in mid-October when NLST had that stock offering that netted them $15M? They were having a cash burn of about $3M/month ($2.9M/month, according to figures at Yahoo Finance).
So, it's likely that $15M would be pretty much used up by February. Unless NLST decides to use other avenues of getting cash, I figure that we might hear of a new round of dilution pretty soon. The unknown thing is NLST's revenue. It might be going up markedly, with all the business that S.K Hynix is seeing. We'll have to wait on the financials to be published for that info.
The question really is whether they can convince anyone to take the risk. And the other thing is - with the present day share price? They will have to dilute at over twice the number of shares to get the same money. IF the CAFC comes through in time with favorable verdicts? That would be a definite plus. For myself, I am not expecting any CAFC verdicts until after this BOC case is decided.
So, in a nutshell? Yes. I expect further dilution.
Jetmek_03052
3 days ago
I completely agree with that logic.
The thing is, after the case is handed to the jury and during the deliberation phase, the judge cannot see how Juror 16 influenced the rest of the jurors. Was juror 16 persuasive enough to sway the opinion of the other jurors? You've got to know that that would be Samsung's argument. Scarsi had to err on the side of caution. If he had denied Samsung's motion for a retrial? Samsung would have appealed, and the appeals court would have surely directed Scarsi to conduct a new trial anyways. Scarsi saved Netlist a LOT of time by just agreeing to the retrial. If he had not, and just ignored the juror issue and gave a final verdict? Samsung would have waited 30 days and appealed (that's one month). Then the appeals court would have taken at least a year to hear the appeal and decide that a retrial was needed (that's at least 13 months). Then the retrial would have to be scheduled (another few months), so now the delay would have been 16-18 MONTHS for the retrial to take place.
If I sound like I am on Samsung's side in this? I do apologize and I tell you straight out that I am not. I am on Netlist's side. I think it's obvious that Samsung is a guilty as hell and wish the courts didn't have to provide Samsung all these opportunities to delay. But they do. It SUCKS. But eventually, I believe that NLST will win. The question is - will the patents still have any life left in them when they do? Netlist will get paid for any back use of the patents if they win the CAFC rulings. But the royalties going forward might very well be affected.
choo choo trader
3 days ago
There were six people who served on the jury in the BOC trial, and yes juror 16 was one of those seated on the jury. What I don't fully understand is that in a civil trial as a BOC dispute is you only need three-quarters of the jury to agree on a decision one way or the other. The jury was unanimous in their decision that Samsung violated the contract, and that Netlist had a legitimate right to cancel it. So, even if juror 16 was potentially in some way bias against Samsung the outcome would still have been the same. Samsung would have still been found guilty of breach of contract. Let's assume juror 16 was bias against Samsung and otherwise would have voted in Samsung's favor. Then we wouldn't have had a unanimous decision, but we would have had a five/one decision which is beyond the required threshold of the three quarters needed to have a final verdict. Netlist pointed this out in their filings and even gave previous case trial precedent for their position that a new trial should not be granted. But of course, we now know how this has played out. We can only hope Judge Scarci is only trying to err on the side of caution to maintain the fairness and impartiality of the judicial process. Yeah, I know this whole thing stinks!
Jetmek_03052
3 days ago
All that could very well be true, and in fact probably is!
But the facts should be stated correctly. I do not believe that the juror in question was an "alternate" juror.
And you're right. It would not be surprising to learn that Samsung's atty's were very much aware of the juror in question's background and let the whole matter proceed. They knew they would lose the jury trial no matter what happened, and that a juror's tainted background would provide another avenue in which to cause further delay.
That has always been their aim...delay, delay, delay.
You can be sure that when they lose the retrial, they will appeal on the thirtieth day after the jury verdict and cause FURTHER delay.
Our legal system affords EVERY POSSIBLE avenue for the accused to get away with their crimes. That is the reality of this situation. It SUCKS, but there is little we can do about it.
Jetmek_03052
3 days ago
I'm not positive but I do not believe that juror 16 was an alternate juror.
I believe the way a jury is picked is from a "pool" of about 50 people called to serve. The jurors are assigned numbers and then go through the voir dire process. The judge and the attorney's for each litigant question the potential juror's in the pool. Then they decide which are acceptable. I do not know the exact number on the jury in these cases but I believe it is usually between 8 and 12. So juror #16 might have been assigned that number during the voir dire, but there aren't really that many juror's on the jury.
https://www.uscourts.gov/court-programs/jury-service/juror-selection-process
Being summoned for jury service does not mean that a person will end up serving on a jury. When a jury is needed for a trial, a group of qualified jurors who reported to court in response to the jury summons is taken to the courtroom where the trial will take place. The judge and attorneys ask the potential jurors questions, general or related to the specific case before them, to determine their suitability to serve on the jury. This process is called voir dire, which typically results in some prospective jurors being excused, based on their answers, from serving in that trial. The attorneys also may exclude a certain number of jurors without giving a reason.
100lbStriper
5 days ago
yes there the cause of our situation, but........ our problem isnt scum crap and goo......its the judicial system ponder that... take out the bureaucracy and your left with only one option. pay the man and dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.........next......
by the way, wouldnt you like to be represented by the law firm of, ''scum, crap, and goo'' the unlimited unliable corporation. the founders of litigation without consequences. imagine that, and its happening right in front of our very eyes. it really sucks when you can see a righteous victory and the unethical, immoral wall being allowed to dictate not only the length of the process, but more importantly causing the demise of a company as they profit from the action going forward. wheres the retribution??? 7 cents on a dollar is about what it comes to if we can get that rate!!! i could go on and probably will in the future as i'm sick of the way this is moving and i mean litigation wise. i think they figured out how to put a man on the moon in a shorter time frame than this bs has been going on............wheres the justice or are you getting an ice cream parlor built next to that ice skating rink they put up for you........ whats next..........a judicial country club on twenty five thousand acres just outside of pick your city...... sorry for the rant, hope for the best and put up with being pissed at the rest!!!
100lbStriper
5 days ago
like i said, do your dam job. stop letting scamsong, micrap and google manipulate the judicial system, and most importantly. if all you judges cant see your being taken advantage of, then you dont deserve the position of administering justice. or is it you guys are so complacent with unethical legal proceedings you have adopted the guilty parties way of how you are to proceed. once guilt has been established, and it has. you then administer the penalty, and enforce the payment, its that simple.
100lbStriper
5 days ago
NLST samsung’s strategy remains blatantly obvious and harmful. They aim to delay proceedings, and if successful, use these delays as leverage to seek stays in other cases. It is evident that Samsung seeks to avoid court rulings or resolutions altogether. Courts and judges should recognize this pattern. I am confident that Judge Gilstrap, as well as Judge Scarsi, are aware of this behavior. However, whether they have the courage and legal latitude to resolve the pending issues promptly in the interest of justice (and not merely the letter of the law) remains to be seen. Soon we should know.
News
Market Data
Customized watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, OTC Markets Small-Cap, LSE and more.
manfromjax
6 minutes ago
