Invalidity dossier
US 8874831
Flash-DRAM hybrid memory module
Current assignee: Netlist Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 11:18:26 AM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US 8,874,831 B2
Title: "Flash-DRAM hybrid memory module"
Patent number / application: US 8,874,831 B2; application US 13/559,476; publication US 2013/0086309 A1.
Inventors: Hyun Lee, Chi-She Chen, Jeffrey C. Solomon, Scott Milton, Jayesh Bhakta.
Assignee: Netlist Inc (original assignee; current assignee listed as Netlist Inc).
Key dates from the text: Priority date 2007-06-01 (assumed); filing date 2012-07-26; publication date 2014-10-28 (grant). Priority is claimed from US 12/240,916 (2008-09-29). PCT/US2012/048750 and several EP/CN/KR applications were filed 2012-07-28. Adjusted expiration listed 2028-11-25; legal status "Expired – Fee Related."
Purpose: The title and classifications indicate a memory module combining flash (non-volatile) and DRAM (volatile) memory. Classifications cover memory management in non-volatile/block-erasable memory (G06F12/0246), combination of memories in one module (G06F12/0638), memory controller configuration to different memory types (G06F13/1694), and bus/handshake protocols on a synchronous memory bus (G06F13/4243).
Plain-language scope: Based only on the supplied excerpt, the claimed subject matter relates to a memory module containing both volatile and non-volatile (flash) memory, with control/interface features for transferring data between the host, the volatile memory, and the flash memory, and for configuring a memory controller across different memory types. Prior-art keywords listed are: data, memory, volatile memory, controller, volatile.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8874831/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It contains no claim text, specification, abstract, or drawings. It therefore does not establish the actual scope of any claim, the specific technical mechanisms, dependencies, or any limitation language. Litigation, IPR, ownership-transfer, validity, and prior-art details referenced in the listing are not addressed here per instruction.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:54:00 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8874831. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.