CAFC-DCTAugust 17, 2026·24-2203·Appeal dismissed; each side bears its own costs. The order issued as the mandate on August 17, 2026.
Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
District Court
Holding
The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b) by agreement of the parties. The court did not reach any merits issue.
Why It Matters
The order ends this Federal Circuit appeal without any appellate guidance on the underlying patent issues.
Full Summary
Netlist, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b) by agreement of the parties. The court did not reach any merits issue.
The order ends this Federal Circuit appeal without any appellate guidance on the underlying patent issues.
Appeal dismissed; each side bears its own costs. The order issued as the mandate on August 17, 2026.
The appeal arose from Netlist v. Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Gilstrap.
The parties agreed to dismissal under Rule 42(b).
The Federal Circuit allocated costs so that each side bears its own.
No patent-law merits issue—such as infringement, validity, claim construction, or damages—was decided.
The nonprecedential order issued as the mandate the same day.
non-precedential claim construction infringement damages Hatch-Waxman / ANDA
non-precedential claim construction infringement damages Hatch-Waxman / ANDA
non-precedential
Key Points
- The appeal arose from Netlist v. Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Gilstrap.
- The parties agreed to dismissal under Rule 42(b).
- The Federal Circuit allocated costs so that each side bears its own.
- No patent-law merits issue—such as infringement, validity, claim construction, or damages—was decided.
- The nonprecedential order issued as the mandate the same day.