LG Chem, “SK Inno, claims technology has been removed and evidence destroyed”

Check-in 2020.09.04 20:59

LG Chem claimed that SK Innovation has filed a lawsuit against LG Chem because it was not enough to file a patent stealing battery technology. The two sides exchange battles and the “battery war” cannot find a way out.

LG Chem announced its position data on the 4th, saying: “SK Innovation is making unsubstantiated claims, so we will inform you of the seriousness of the matter and the exact facts.”

Earlier in September last year, SK Innovation filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the US International Trade Commission (ITC), alleging that LG Chem infringed on its battery technology patent (patent number 994). However, LG Chem recently submitted an application to ITC to sanction SK Innovation, stating that the patent in the lawsuit filed by SK Innovation was based on its own prior technology and that SK Innovation is destroying the related evidence.

In its position data for the day, LG Chem repeatedly revealed that the 994 patent that SK Innovation claimed to have been infringed is a prior art that LG Chem already possessed in June 2015 when SK Innovation applied for the patent. LG Chem explained that the LG Chem A7 battery sold to Chrysler Pacifica since 2013 was equipped with the technology.

LG Chem said, “SK Innovation took someone else’s technology and registered it as a patent and filed a patent infringement lawsuit,” said LG Chem. “And then when we pointed out the circumstances of the destruction of evidence to hide this, “Pressure for the advantage of negotiations” Card “and” misleading public opinion, “he said.

LG Chem said: “Following the trade secret infringement lawsuit, we have requested legal penalties due to the deliberate destruction of evidence in the patent litigation. It is not justified to operate the US factory with technology stolen by SK Innovation. Claim patent infringement does not constitute a claim. “

LG Chem mentioned the ‘Unclean Hands Doctrine’, a principle under the Anglo-American Equity Act, which states that claims for redress are not allowed in cases where plaintiffs’ rights are obtained through the use of fraudulent means and violating principles like conscience and goodwill. And he insisted that SK Innovation corresponds to this.

LG Chem said: “The inventor of SK Innovation’s 994 patent had a document that contained detailed information about the LG Chem battery.” Among the documents submitted by SK Innovation in accordance with the ITC order in March this year, a file of ‘2nd Ordinary Meeting Material’ created based on technical information related to LG Chem’s A7 battery cell was found at March 2015.

LG Chem mentioned the media report that the inventor of the 994 patent was known as a researcher who was a researcher at SK Innovation, saying: “If it is revealed that a patent has been filed with a copycat technology, there is a high possibility that the patent will be invalidated “.

LG Chem claimed that it continued to destroy core evidence, such as destroying thousands of files by failing to stop the automatic removal program at the 30th Recycle Bin around September last year when SK Innovation filed a lawsuit. “SK Innovation requested sanctions based on the act of destruction that ignores the obligation to preserve the evidence,” he said. “Since the previous technology of the SK 994 technology is our A7 battery cell, SK patents were asked to admit that there is nothing new.”