Netlist, Inc. V. Micron Technology Texas, Llc Et Al

Parties Involved

  • Plaintiff: Netlist, Inc.
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Andrew Henderson | Andrew J. Strabone | Anthony Q Rowles | Dovid Z. Kahn | Hong Annita Zhong | Jason G Sheasby | Michael William Tezyan | Philip J Warrick | Rebecca L. Carson | Stephen M Payne | Thomas C Werner | Yanan Zhao | Jennifer Leigh Truelove | Kevin Lee Burgess | Samuel Franklin Baxter | Vivek V. Krishnan
  • Defendant: Micron Technology Texas, LLC | Micron Semiconductor Products Inc | Micron Technology Inc |
    • Counsel for Defendant: Natalie Lynn Arbaugh | Aldo A Badini | Brian Joseph Nisbet | David P Enzminger | Juan C Yaquian | Matthew Hopkins | Matthew R McCullough | Maureen L. Rurka | Michael Robert Rueckheim | Rex Andrew Mann | Ryuk Park | Thomas M Melsheimer | Vivek V. Krishnan | William Mitchell Logan | Andrea Leigh Fair | Charles Everingham , IV | Jack Wesley Hill  | Jennifer Haltom Doan | Joshua Reed Thane | Mariah Leigh Hornok

Verdict Information

  • Verdict date:  May 23, 2024
  • Total damages awarded to the Plaintiff: $445,000,000
    • Damages for infringement of ‘912 Patent: $425,000,000
    • Damages for infringement of ‘417 Patent: $20,000,000

About the Case


Since its founding in 2000, Netlist, the plaintiff had pioneered high-performance memory module technologies. It had designed and manufactured products for cloud computing, virtualization, and high-performance computing markets. Netlist’s technology had enabled users to derive useful information from vast amounts of data in shorter periods.

Netlist had owned the ‘912 patent, titled “Memory Module Decoder,” which had been filed in 2007, and issued in 2009. Netlist’s history of innovation, including products like LRDIMM and NVvault® NVDIMM, had set it apart in the industry. Further, Netlist owned the ’417 patent, titled “Memory Module With Data Buffering,” which had been filed in 2019, and issued in 2021. The patent had related to a memory module communicating data with a memory controller via a memory bus. Circuitry within the memory module had enabled communication of data bursts between the memory controller and memory integrated circuits.

Additionally, Netlist owned the ’215 patent which pertained to a memory module communicating data with a memory controller via a memory bus. Micron, the defendant, manufactured dynamic random-access memory (“DRAM”), NAND Flash, and NOR Flash memory, and other memory products in semiconductor fabrication plants. Micron’s infringing activities had included manufacturing, selling, and importing DDR4 products without authorization, including LRDIMMs and RDIMMs. Netlist had contacted Micron on April 28, 2021, requesting it to take a license, but Micron had declined. Netlist filed a patent infringement lawsuit asserting that Micron had infringed the ’912, ’417 and ‘215 patents by making, using, selling, and importing DDR4 products without authorization.


Micron’s patent infringements had caused Netlist to sustain fiscal damages. Netlist alleged that the infringement had been continuing and willful. Despite knowing the high risk involved, Micron persisted in infringement. Thus, Netlist filed an action for patent infringement to issue an injunction and recover the damages caused by it.


Netlist had requested the Court to enter judgment in its favor against Micron. It had asked for various forms of relief, including a declaration that Micron infringed the Patents-in-Suit. The request also sought all equitable relief the Court deemed just and proper as a consequence of Micron’s infringement. Netlist sought damages resulting from Micron’s acts of infringement in accordance with 35 U.S.C. Section 284. It also requested enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 284. Netlist asked the Court to declare Micron’s infringement of the patents as willful. Additionally, Netlist requested recognition of the case as exceptional and the award of its reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 285. It sought an accounting for acts of infringement and the granting of supplemental damages, including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. Finally, Netlist requested any other equitable relief to which it was entitled.

Jury Verdict

On May 23, 2024, a Texas jury found that the plaintiff had proved that the defendant had infringed the ‘912 Patent and awarded $425,ooo,ooo for the damages incurred by such infringement. Moreover, the jury also found that ‘417 Patent had been infringed and awarded an additional $20,000,000. The total damages awarded for the patent infringement was $445,000,000.

Court Documents:

Available upon request