Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) has filed an official response with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) arguing that "Netlist's patents are fundamentally invalid," mounting a full-scale counterattack. Samsung alleges that Netlist stole technology from competitor Intel during the semiconductor standard-setting process, registered patents based on that technology, and then engaged in deceptive practices by demanding unjust licensing fees. As Netlist's patent abuse comes to light through the ITC investigation, the findings are expected to influence the trajectory of the ongoing legal battle.
According to industry sources on the 29th, Samsung Electronics systematically rebutted all six patent infringement claims made by Netlist in its recently submitted response to the ITC. The technologies Netlist has challenged include High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) stacking architecture and power management modules. Samsung drew a clear line, stating that "the patents in question are based on prior art already known to the world and do not qualify as new inventions."
The most striking aspect involves evidence of Netlist's technology misappropriation and deception of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. According to the response, a Netlist inventor identified by the surname Lee attended Joint Electron Device Engineering Council (JEDEC) committee meetings held from December 2011 to June of the following year. There, Lee secretly obtained details of three core technology proposals presented by Intel. After returning to California, Lee rushed to file a patent in July 2012 using documents containing structures identical to Intel's presentations. In effect, Lee seized another company's ideas and packaged them as his own.
Illegal conduct was also employed during the patent examination process. The inventors, including Lee, and their patent attorney knowingly concealed Intel's presentation materials from patent examiners despite understanding that those materials would have a decisive impact on the examination. The patent attorney in particular resorted to the tactic of deliberately not asking the inventors about related materials to evade the obligation to submit prior art. Samsung Electronics strongly criticized the conduct, stating that "Netlist's patents should be completely stripped of legal force based on these clearly unlawful acts."
Netlist's exploitation of international standards organization rules was also revealed. Netlist monitored industry trends in the early stages of standard development without making any contributions. Once the technology was adopted as a standard, Netlist demanded excessive licensing fees — a classic case of "patent hold-up." Internal documents showed that Netlist had previously acknowledged its own patents as essential, but abruptly reversed its position when litigation turned unfavorable, displaying a pattern of duplicity.
Samsung Electronics had originally been a good-faith licensee, paying $8 million in 2015 to secure worldwide usage rights for Netlist's patents. However, Netlist unilaterally terminated the agreement. Samsung proposed re-licensing on two separate occasions, but Netlist rejected both offers and ultimately took the audacious step of requesting the ITC to ban imports of Samsung products.
Samsung Electronics has launched an aggressive defense, submitting sales statistics for products imported into the United States last year and appointing three outside experts who have completed confidentiality agreements.
Meanwhile, Netlist, a server memory module company, has seen its core business competitiveness decline in recent years. The company has effectively been operating like a non-practicing entity (NPE), wielding legacy patents as weapons to generate revenue. This is why some in Korea's industry call Netlist a "patent troll." In 2021, Netlist extracted a $40 million settlement from SK hynix (000660.KS). In November 2024, it secured a $118 million damages verdict against Samsung Electronics in a Texas federal court.
