LG-SK’battery war’ seen as a case of Botox lawsuit… Concerned that it will be destroyed without a winner

As the final ruling of the US International Trade Commission (ITC) in relation to LG Energy Solutions and SK Innovation’s electric vehicle battery patent lawsuits is approaching for a month or so, the battles of both sides are intensifying again.

In the case of this lawsuit, over-the-counter public opinion is also intensifying as it leads to a fight of pride beyond simple financial compensation. The place that lit the fire is LG Energy Solutions. On the 14th, LG Energy Solutions released data that SK Innovation had a victory in the United States Patent Tribunal (PTAB), saying that all eight claims for invalidation of patents against LG Energy Solutions were rejected. However, in this process, criticism is raised that they have made irrational numbers such as providing distorted information to turn them in a favorable direction.

In the business world, considering that Daewoong Pharmaceutical and Medytox’s ITC lawsuit proceeded similarly to the battery war, there are concerns that the continued non-discharge would inevitably poison both companies.

According to related industries on the 16th, ITC will make a final ruling on the’trade secret’ lawsuit between LG Energy Solutions and SK Innovation on February 10th.

In April 2019, LG Energy Solutions filed a complaint with ITC, claiming that SK Innovation hired more than 100 experienced employees in the battery field and stole trade secrets. Accordingly, SK Innovation’s hiring procedure was legitimate, and the lawsuit has been continuing for two years, refuting to clarify the trade secrets that were stolen.

Initially, the final ITC ruling was on October 5 last year, but after it was postponed to October 26, it has been postponed to December 10 and February 10 this year. Accordingly, the battery battle between the two companies is spreading to public opinion. In particular, as the final judgment came about a month in the future, this aspect is at its peak.

LG Energy Solutions opened its doors. On the 14th, LG Energy Solutions released data on the nuance of winning the victory, saying that all eight patent invalidation trials (IPR) claims filed by SK Innovation to the US Patent Tribunal (PTAB) were rejected. On the 15th, it was not based on local policies, but only the content that was favorable to them was misleading to public opinion. However, it is pointed out that this is merely a blind opponent’s criticism rather than an accurate verification of the facts of LG Energy Solutions.

The decision of the U.S. Patent Tribunal is not only separate from the patent litigation in progress at the ITC, but also because the policy on invalidation trial (IPR) has changed since last year.

Usually, when a plaintiff has filed a patent infringement lawsuit in ITC or in the federal court, the defendant has filed a patent invalidation trial (IPR) for each detailed issue with the United States Patent Tribunal (PTAB) while claiming the patent invalidity in the procedure. However, PTAB began to dismiss the initiation of the IPR on the grounds of duplicate claims when it was determined that the results of the lawsuit (ITC, federal court) came before the results of the IPR from early last year.

On September 24, 2020, the Commissioner of the U.S. Intellectual Property Office encouraged the decision to proceed actively, and PTAB is dismissing all IPRs for patents pending in ITC litigation. In light of this, SK Innovation’s decision to dismiss the patent invalidation trial raised by PTAB against LG Energy Solutions is not a matter of lawsuits, but only according to policy.

In this regard, SK Innovation said, “PTAB rejected the patent invalidation trial and decided that the reason for the decision was that the SKI presented a reasonable possibility of invalidation for six out of eight cases filed by SKI regarding the invalidity of the patent.” For the ‘517 patent’, it presented a reasonably strong case on unpatentability.”

That is why it is pointed out that LG Energy Solutions has bent on SK Innovation again. Some say that there is anxiety that LG Energy Solutions may not achieve the’desired result’.

In the meantime, LG Energy Solutions showed high confidence in this lawsuit by making comments such as’In fact, LGES won’,’I don’t know what SK Innovation believes and holds up like that’, and’I will receive at least 3 trillion won’.

He would do so because he had a clear victory in the preliminary judgment. LG Energy Solutions has put forward the logic that the preliminary judgment result has never been reversed in the final judgment. However, it is an analysis that this atmosphere is also changing recently.

It started with the results of the ITC litigation between Daewoong Pharmaceutical and Medytox. Medytox won the preliminary judgment and led to a ruling that Daewoong Pharmaceutical’s products could not be exported to the US for 10 years. However, as in the LGES-SK Innovation lawsuit, a full reconsideration ruling was followed, and in the end, the final judgment overshadowed the preliminary ruling of’some winning and a 21-month export ban’.

Accordingly, the two companies are claiming that each other is victorious. The two companies announced their intention to appeal soon and announced a strong response to the end.

With this in mind, the business community analyzes that it is an honor for both companies to become losers. This is because Daewoong Pharmaceutical-Meditox did not achieve the desired result despite paying enormous litigation costs and will have to bear more litigation costs in the future.

The battery litigation situation is not very different. In addition, LG Energy Solutions’ claims that the results of the preliminary judgment have not been overturned by this ruling have also lost power.

In the business world, concerns continue to be raised that the two companies could lose their competitiveness in the rapidly growing electric vehicle battery market while both companies waste time before litigation. Rather, there is a warning sound that it is gradually becoming a reality.

People looking at the two companies’ lawsuits are also feeling quite tired. It is pointed out that it is by no means desirable for two large companies representing Korea to fight astronomical expenses to overseas law firms overseas in a situation where the country is suffering great damage from the prolonged corona 19.

LG Energy Solutions and SK Innovation each have their own logical arguments, saying, “Because you lost the preliminary judgment, pay a huge settlement money,” and SK Innovation, “the first is to prove concrete trade secret infringement first, and to derive a reasonable level of settlement based on this,” At the level, it is pointed out that a reasonable level of agreement should be reached before the retreat of the damaged K-battery from the two companies deepens. There is also a growing voice that the government should also actively lead the agreement between the two companies.

In this regard, LG Energy Solutions said, “Usually, the federal court applies the PTAB’s investigation results mutatis mutandis,” and said, “We will resolutely deal with all acts that infringe our company’s patents.”