Battery fight spread to LG-SK main gun… “Reasonable reparation” vs “not acceptable”

Input 2021-03-26 22:16 | Revision 2021-03-26 22:16


▲ LG Chem, SK Innovation shareholders’ meeting from left.ⓒ Each company

LG Chem and SK Innovation, which are fighting a lawsuit against the infringement of electric vehicle battery trade secrets, continued their battle at the general shareholders’ meeting.

When LG Chem warned that “it will not go over the game,” SK Innovation firmly emphasized its existing position that it could not accommodate competitors’ demands. US President Joe Biden’s veto against the US International Trade Commission’s (ITC) decision is about two weeks left, and the two companies’ nerves are even more intense.

SK Innovation’s executive director Lee Myung-young said in a greeting at the 14th General Shareholders’ Meeting held at SK Building in Jongno-gu, Seoul on the morning of the 26th. I revealed the point again.

Director Lee said, “While admitting that it is not clear what trade secrets are, ITC cited vague arguments from competitors without judging the facts of the infringement of trade secrets, which is the essence of the case because of the lack of document management. “We are very sorry for it,” he said. “It is impossible to accept the demands of competitors at a level that has no meaning to continue the battery business in the United States or that significantly lowers the business competitiveness.

He continued, “Our battery has been recognized for its differentiated competitiveness from customers in terms of stability and quality, such as no fire accidents,” he said. “We will do our best to enhance shareholder and corporate value in the legal process that remains in the future.” Added.

This is interpreted as a counter-action response to the previous day, when Hak-cheol Shin, Vice-Chairman of LG Chem, expressed his strong position at the regular shareholders’ meeting held at LG Twin Tower in Yeouido, Seoul. Vice-Chairman Shin Hak-cheol mentioned that this issue cannot be overlooked and that he will take strict measures so that he can receive appropriate compensation.

Vice-Chairman Shin said, “The reason that the ITC even mentioned the organizational culture and presented a firm reason for the decision was unusually because of the serious recognition of the importance and seriousness of this issue.” It seems to be considered only as what happened.

LG Energy Solutions also published data after SK Innovation’s shareholders’ meeting and said, “It is very regrettable not to acknowledge the content of the ITC judgment and mislead even the specific facts.” “The two companies can directly check the evidence related to the secret list.”

It has been more than a month since LG Energy Solutions helped ITC in a lawsuit for infringement of trade secrets, but the positions of the two companies are still running parallel. ITC ordered ’10 years to ban imports from the US’, claiming that SK Innovation’s battery cells, modules, packs, and related parts and materials violated Article 337 of the U.S. Customs Act, which infringed on LG Energy Solutions’ trade secrets.

However, imports were allowed for Ford’s electric pickup truck F150 battery parts and materials for 4 years, Volkswagen MEB battery parts and materials for 2 years, and battery products for repair and replacement of batteries for Kia electric vehicles already sold.

In the industry, after the ITC ruling, there was a forecast that LG Energy Solution and SK Innovation will reach an agreement, but the news of progress has not yet been delivered. Rather, they disagree over the size of the settlement amount and payment method, and the conflict is intensifying. It is known that LG Energy Solution requires more than 3 trillion won, while SK Innovation wants to reach an agreement at the level of 1 trillion won.

Accordingly, whether or not the President of the United States exercise veto power has emerged as a key variable. The ITC process is similar to the Korean administrative trial and is subject to the president’s approval process. The US President can review the ITC’s decision and invalidate the decision within 60 days from the date of the decision. The deadline for the veto is April 11th.



Press releases and article reports [email protected]
[자유민주·시장경제의 파수꾼 – 뉴데일리 newdaily.co.kr]
Copyrights ⓒ 2005 New Daily News-Unauthorized reproduction, redistribution prohibited


recommendation

Related Articles It’s great to read it with the article you just saw!

Vivid

Headline news Meet the main news at this time.



Source