and marketing to the agreement. Thanks, to throughout and customer also Throughout Mike, on dynamics, strategic first and across Overall, past revenue support and R&D. were XXXX. flexibility good $XX over initiatives Market quarter demand expanding in the quarter, more licensing ended providing continue period. with created the million, a business, $XX we’ve supply as a to than the half significant Netlist pleased an company’s on diversified QX and the with favorable of year. more we strong solid including build cash product we been position the performance quite from of benefit this pricing, Product million doubled including and everyone. line momentum second the to the XXXX base afternoon. product Good morning, hynix continued execution
year. product As doubled profit almost to we half product and XXX%, gross delivered revenue compared a the of of first last growth result,
consumer pandemic-related and segment. the memory key noted markets slowing semiconductor the demand, Recent SSD economic the and second pullback current are environment XXXX, commentary the industries half in demand, As in particularly the we a faces experiencing in across enter of has memory and headwinds. a
As growth outlook a the in result, for segments. enterprise reduction the including data a and center been there market, the has
is business driving the broad current a trend. efficient pessimism, to need more one trends intact, believe well of performance and memory consumer capitalize and we this environment positioned for long-term the on While and we remain remain higher
one well with has On the as product started year-over-year of continues biggest been in This – product side, drivers major that not terms as performance components, we modules growth SK as strong by we take customers us to it broaden call, eMCPs hynix. advantage our a to partnership grow well of relationship as expand its been DRAM we stated discrete markets of that in special the to and and Netlist manufacturers. DDRX offering last allowed Netlist’s to access memory has has as the to include supported
meet Our access customers ability allows schedules. products to constrained to product quickly
to SK its deepens $XX our the each per access and factory understanding and needs of look the as to customers customer. than hynix’ DRAM smaller forward TAMs sales to million these less lines marketing While million provide these of we year new of capitalizing and $X resources product team support, appreciate ability on to opportunities indirect with unique
that denial Northern XX for favor the the process. conclusive We forth of claim in Netlist’s period the in Google determined claim infringement Netlist entered an more arguments to Judge charting. In a a scope intervening to the discovery intellectual on that May, do to details case, also the request District very our Judge listened to material of patent. property. and, infringement damages be The the available add judge of California case on XXX rights full as should of Chief this XX. important through set be our parallel, our under entitled contention impact have Moving Seeborg our In Seeborg will on will not of finding issue order of the believe to denied
period paused Following in Seeborg declaratory XX, that Samsung’s management early the October to case XXXX. pause order, for Judge practice a the reset Delaware outcome and of us time action. our judgment That motion XX-day gave to California the in case conference learn
XXX, under received the in a XXX Just suit been in and patents Eastern attempt cover action are Andrews to and in add bit Samsung will in the to Chief us scheduled meaning on patents against patents XXX these District in Samsung’s and Texas, Delaware. that’s Gilstrap. declaratory year of for Samsung Delaware, subject XXX moment. from order Judge our in trial yesterday, May have XXX, in patents XXX before the all of more XXX, will denying But to XXX to an I next we Judge face Samsung’s dismissing claim these a a XXX, the patent relief detail
ongoing graphics its Netlist’s the California DDRX LRDIMM on He Gilstrap and important District before memory. of HBM be We our confirmation Texas received both preliminary Judge are XXXX. will to petitions X in is XXX memory Andrews’ technologies, terms. case of now patents look institute for of in set standard We await NVDIMM against twin the decision HBM XXX for how Micron rapidly. Texas to our May, used and Micron of first In this a of XX trial. victory Eastern feel X ensure for for reasonable pending mainstream a are Judge high-bandwidth challenging we’ve in fair systems. our XXX Chief seeing point, dismissal case, recognition that LRDIMM on case explanation that to asserted AI-assisted Netlist’s District patent. infringement the high our Eastern at long-term our facial to applicable filed patents proprietary Samsung Altogether, and under X highlights there. in which to very patents the his exception technology. interparty’s X to the against attacking all Like given Samsung, trial We design moves also patents technology Eastern infringement on suffered technologies, significant come. Chief approaches May filed pending to distinct Samsung that The relating in of the to relating and in Netlist. DDRX over petition answer our the as of Texas technologies District and remain Texas the is we of pursuit cases leader seeing against memory-intensive computing the our against quarter is We X new and is usually management before, review an infringement – technologies. Judge Samsung quickly of the the LRDIMM to that our well-reasoned Samsung our this we Micron recent against Google adopted the XXX case Micron Texas. Netlist’s Samsung number latest mentioned PTAB. Google Gilstrap the involves action. for generation on against by technologies. with involved technologies memory already uses, Samsung’s pleased DDRX claim for chips patent patent patents, the cited of forward X hearing in Since its management file that call months, Netlist Seeborg District case shortly responses of the pending memory or is to The Western the of to from the HBM next in will no action October committed new patent and To Netlist the IPR for patents couple starts Google of construction I having including in and to engage Delaware PTAB’s X, or power Delaware. losses and Netlist’s jury the dominate paused, X relating the demand HBM the in relate developing patent RDIMM is to patents has is and complaint consumer Eastern challenging patent server of – Texas tasks. XX the Micron’s being expected Micron’s a created was denied market District very resolution many years action trial petition July on-module Judge the
XXX, Micron filed both infringement actions the brought we are European considered while modules their memory infringing Germany. are in By use Google’s for distribution in than manufacturing against cases of of and last EP U.S. We pursuing Germany against Samsung EP proceedings infringing of infringement Google in their Finally, nature, German and Micron, modules week different companies’ Standard-Essential. Samsung, against for and XXX LRDIMM suit our patents, and our these we
action we will For a hearing the to final alone. each in oral example, before Germany, in proceed court
oral May for So X, Germany hearing Micron in in far, set action. have XXXX X, case September Samsung Germany and our XXXX, we our
monetary to of damages, within sale the also modules an use all injunctive relief seeking Micron matter. mean would LRDIMM Netlist bar a complete is injunction Micron addition in Receiving Germany. or In on infringing
our As with its of the U.S.-based year. rapid claims the the oral by scheduling court’s encouraged and final attention next Düsseldorf hearings are to cases, we
the will over for turn call the I review. Gail Now to financial
