Photo: Hungarytoday
Lithium battery manufacturer Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL) has achieved a significant interim victory in its ongoing patent battle with rival China Aviation Lithium Battery (CALB), according to recent reports.
On November 28, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) issued another evaluation report on one of the four patents involved in CALB's 1 billion RMB lawsuits against CATL. This report concluded that CALB's utility model patent, numbered 201820895186.5 and titled "Liquid-Cooled Plate Battery Module," lacks inventiveness compared to existing technology. This patent is associated with a claim of 560 million RMB.
A week earlier, CNIPA released an evaluation report for another utility model patent involved in the lawsuits, numbered 202222803519.6 and titled "A Battery Pack." This report found that the patent, linked to a 140 million RMB claim, lacks both novelty and inventiveness.
To date, both utility model patents that CALB has used to enforce its patent rights have received negative opinions from CNIPA.
On October 18, CALB announced that it had filed lawsuits against CATL, accusing the company of infringing on four of its patents, including the two aforementioned utility model patents, which had not undergone substantive examination.
Under Chinese patent law, an evaluation is typically required to assess the validity and stability of utility model patents when enforcing patent rights. Consequently, CALB requested these patent evaluations from CNIPA at the time of filing the lawsuits.
The recent negative evaluations from CNIPA may prompt CALB to reconsider its litigation strategy against CATL, as recent rulings from some local Chinese courts suggest that continuing a lawsuit in light of a negative patent evaluation report could be deemed malicious litigation.
However, it is important to note that the utility model patent evaluation report serves only as a reference suggestion and is not a final determination of patent validity. To invalidate the patent, the formal patent invalidation procedure must still be pursued.
Additionally, CALB still has the option to request a reconsideration of the evaluation report. The reconsideration process could potentially overturn the initial conclusions of the evaluation report.