Directory profiles · Battery Business Directory
Organizations mentioned or cited on this 2025 report page. A historical mention does not establish current products, availability or endorsement.
Sources and links on page 751 (3)
Links embedded in the original report PDF, including citations and other references. These destinations have not been independently reviewed. Links open in a new tab.
Text on page 751
Battery Patent Litigation: Recent Developments Cont. MU Ionic Solutions v CATL and Opel (2023)6: In the bifurcated proceedings, where infringement and revocation actions are heard separately, it was found that CATL and Opel did not infringe MU Ionic’s German patent EP1939971. The preliminary opinion of the Federal Patent Court was that the patent might be revoked. The patent disputes were resolved via a licence deal (covering difluorophosphate-based cathode interface control technology) shortly before the final decision in revocation proceedings.
Tulip Innovation vs. Sunwoda (2025)7: Tulip (a consortium of LG Energy Solution and Panasonic) secured landmark injunctions in Germany against Sunwoda for infringing three EV battery separator patents. The rulings forced Sunwoda to halt sales and destroy inventory in Germany, and pay damages in principle. Sunwoda has filed nullity actions, where the preliminary opinions are that each of the patents are likely to be upheld. These are the first known final injunctions in Europe on car battery patents. Sunwoda has appealed. Tulip’s success shows that licensing pools may enforce rights if voluntary licensing is ignored. Source: [6] Juve, [7] Juve
Extracted from the PDF; charts and images may read imperfectly.
More in Policy (3)
Page 751 · 15/18