Samsung v. Netlist (D. Del. 1:23-cv-01122) — Closed via Consolidation
Samsung Electronics and its affiliates filed a patent infringement action against memory competitor Netlist in Delaware, asserting US11386024B2 across DDR4 and DDR5 LRDIMM, RDIMM, SODIMM, and UDIMM product lines. After 982 days, the court closed this case and consolidated it with related case No. 24-614.
Samsung pursues Netlist over DDR4/DDR5 memory IP in Delaware
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. filed this patent infringement action against Netlist, Inc. on 9 October 2023 in the District of Delaware before Judge Jennifer L. Hall. The asserted patent, US11386024B2 (application no. US16/680060), covers technology deployed across DDR4 LRDIMM and RDIMM, DDR5 LRDIMM, RDIMM, SODIMM, and UDIMM memory modules — product categories central to both parties' competitive positions in the server and consumer memory markets.
The recorded basis of termination is 'Case Consolidated'. The docket order dated 17 June 2026 states that the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case and related case No. 24-614, consolidating both proceedings. The specific terms and substantive disposition underlying the consolidation are not disclosed in the available record.
The case ran for 982 days before consolidation — a duration consistent with complex patent infringement litigation in Delaware. The consolidation with case No. 24-614 suggests the court determined that judicial efficiency was best served by combining the related proceedings, but the merits, claim construction, or liability findings, if any, are not reflected in the public record at this stage.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Case Consolidated in 982 days
982 days from filing to closure — consolidation with related case No. 24-614
US11386024B2 — DDR4/DDR5 memory module interface technology
Any company manufacturing, importing, or integrating DDR4 or DDR5 LRDIMM, RDIMM, SODIMM, or UDIMM memory modules should treat US11386024B2 as an active FTO risk. Samsung's enforcement posture in this case — asserting the patent against a specialist memory IP company — suggests a willingness to litigate broadly. The consolidated Delaware docket may produce claim construction orders that clarify scope across all asserted module types.
Official order — verbatim text
The court order of 17 June 2026 directs closure of this case and consolidation with related case No. 24-614, without recording a merits disposition. The order is procedural in nature and does not resolve liability or claim construction; substantive findings, if any, will be addressed within the consolidated proceeding.
Full party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | Samsung Electronics America, Inc. | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Netlist, Inc. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Alice J. Ahn | Attorney | Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Brian Nester | Attorney | Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jack B. Blumenfeld | Attorney | Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Peter A. Swanson | Attorney | Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Rodger Dallery Smith , II | Attorney | Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Thomas Garten | Attorney | Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP | Law Firm | Representing Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Emily DiBenedetto | Attorney | Counsel for Netlist, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Karen Elizabeth Keller | Attorney | Counsel for Netlist, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Shaw Keller LLP | Law Firm | Representing Netlist, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Jennifer L. Hall | Judge | Delaware District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the DDR memory module IP space
Forward-looking patent intelligence derived from Samsung's and Netlist's activity in DDR4/DDR5 memory module technology — relevant for module designers, DRAM vendors, and AI infrastructure teams.
Samsung's memory module patent portfolio around US11386024B2
US11386024B2 is one node in Samsung's broader IP estate covering memory module architectures. Mapping Samsung's continuation and related filing activity around application US16/680060 can reveal the full claim family and identify pending applications that may extend enforcement reach into future DDR5 and LPDDR5 product generations.
Samsung DDR patent familyFiling trends in DDR5 module buffering and interface architecture
DDR5 adoption in AI accelerators and HPC servers is driving a surge in patent filings around on-DIMM buffering, RCD logic, and error-correction interface design. Tracking filing trends from Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron, and independent IP firms in this space helps anticipate where the next enforcement flashpoints will emerge.
DDR5 IP filing trendsNetlist's patent portfolio and counter-assertion capabilities
Netlist has built a focused IP portfolio in memory module interconnect and load-reduction technology. Understanding the breadth and claim depth of Netlist's active patent estate is essential for any memory module vendor assessing bilateral exposure — particularly given Netlist's track record of initiating and defending multi-front litigation in Delaware and other venues.
Netlist IP portfolioAdjacent R&D opportunities near DDR5 SODIMM and UDIMM design space
While LRDIMM and RDIMM buffering architectures are heavily patented, the SODIMM and UDIMM segments — particularly for edge AI and automotive compute — show relatively less concentrated IP coverage. R&D teams developing low-power DDR5 module solutions for embedded and mobile platforms may find more navigable IP terrain in this adjacent space.
DDR5 SODIMM white spaceSimilar DDR memory module patent cases in Delaware federal court
Cases involving DDR4/DDR5 memory module patents litigated in the Delaware District Court, including other Samsung–Netlist proceedings and related memory IP disputes.
What this case signals for the DDR memory IP landscape
The Samsung–Netlist dispute over DDR4/DDR5 memory modules reflects an intensifying patent battleground across the server and consumer memory stack.
Consolidation signals multi-front litigation strategy between Samsung and Netlist
The court's decision to consolidate this case with No. 24-614 suggests overlapping legal or factual issues across the two proceedings. Companies monitoring the Samsung–Netlist dispute should track the consolidated docket for claim construction rulings and any merits dispositions that will govern both cases simultaneously.
DDR5 memory modules are an emerging IP enforcement frontier
Samsung's assertion of US11386024B2 across both legacy DDR4 and next-generation DDR5 product families signals that IP owners are actively extending enforcement posture into DDR5 territory. Memory module suppliers and OEM integrators should assess FTO exposure across both DDR generations.
Samsung v Netlist — key questions answered
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. filed a patent infringement action against Netlist, Inc. in the Delaware District Court on 9 October 2023, asserting US11386024B2 across DDR4 and DDR5 LRDIMM, RDIMM, SODIMM, and UDIMM memory modules. The case was closed on 17 June 2026 and consolidated with related case No. 24-614.
Samsung asserts US11386024B2 (application no. US16/680060) in case 1:23-cv-01122. The patent is asserted in connection with DDR4 LRDIMM and RDIMM, DDR5 LRDIMM, RDIMM, SODIMM, and UDIMM memory module products. Further technical details of the claims are available in the patent record on PatSnap Eureka.
The recorded basis of termination is 'Case Consolidated'. A court order dated 17 June 2026 directed the Clerk to close case 1:23-cv-01122 and related case No. 24-614. The specific procedural or substantive reasons for consolidation are not disclosed in the available public record beyond the consolidation order itself.
Consolidation means the two related Delaware proceedings will be managed and adjudicated together, typically to avoid duplicative discovery, claim construction, and trial proceedings. Any merits rulings — including on claim construction of US11386024B2 — will now issue in the consolidated docket. The specific terms and any substantive findings from the consolidation are not disclosed in the available record.
The products identified in the case record are DDR4 LRDIMM, DDR4 RDIMM, DDR5 LRDIMM, DDR5 RDIMM, DDR5 SODIMM, and DDR5 UDIMM memory modules. These span server-class buffered modules through to consumer, mobile, and embedded memory form factors, indicating broad coverage across Netlist's product range.
This page is compiled from public court dockets and third-party patent and litigation data via PatSnap Eureka, and is provided for general informational purposes only. The information shown — including party names, patent and application numbers, dates, case status, outcomes, and any analysis — may be incomplete, may not reflect the most recent filings or legal status, and may contain errors or omissions. Verify all details against official court records (for example, PACER) and the relevant patent office before relying on them.
Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or a legal opinion on the validity, infringement, enforceability, or scope of any patent or case, and no attorney‑client relationship is created by its use. Any description of an outcome (such as a dismissal, settlement, or consent judgment) is a general summary, not a legal determination. All patents, trademarks, and company or law‑firm names are the property of their respective owners. PatSnap makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this content and disclaims, to the fullest extent permitted by law, all liability for reliance on it. For advice on a specific matter, consult qualified legal counsel.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.