Approaching the climax, SK Innovation VS LG Chem

Endless battery war

There is no sign of ending the battery war between SK Innovation and LG Chem. Since SK Innovation's lawsuit against LG Chem on battery-related patent infringement in the US federal court, the two companies have not been backed down. As patent disputes between two companies continues inside and outside Korea, the battery disputes draws attention not only in Korea but also abroad.

pixabay.com

A dispute becoming fight

The disputes between the two companies seem to be moving emotional fighting beyond just patent disputes.

The media reports on the positions of both companies, and recently, SK Innovation has unveiled the original text of the agreement signed with LG Chem. As LG Chem argues back, the emotional battle between the two companies is running to an extreme.

Open agreement and refute

The original text of the agreement disclosed by SK Innovation is an agreement related to a patent litigation in 2014, and according to SK Innovation, the agreement is about that the both companies wouldn’t have patent disputes in Korea and foreign countries. LG Chem insisted that the patent was a Korean patent, and the patent in the issue now is a US patent, which is irrelevant because it’s a separate patent with a different registered country and a different scope of rights.

pixabay.com

Difficult to settle disputes

Not long ago, the heads of the two companies met in full force for agreement, but it was informed that they did not agree. In recent years, they have continued to stick to their guns on each other and eventually drive to reach extreme conditions. Refuting and refuting back, a lot of news coming out, with this current situation it seems hard to end.

[WIPSTUDY #11] Trial Docket and PTAB Reference

In the #11 issue,
we're going to review the documents of Trial/ Appeal and PTAB references through the case of Inter Partes Review.

 

• Trial Reference -  IPR (Inter Partes Review) documents

< search n analysis database : WIPS Global >

IPR (Inter Partes Review) is ...
  a trial proceeding conducted at the Board to review the patentability of one or more claims in a patent only on a ground that could be raised under §§102 (novelty) or 103 (non abviousness), and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications (USPTO)


< 1 >
IPR2014-01178
Seagate Technology (US) Holdings, Inc. v. Enova Technology Corporations. (TW)

wipsglobal.com > IPR trial/Appeal search

• Petitioner : Seagate Technology (US) Holdings, Inc.
• Patent Owner : Enova Technology Corp.(TW)
• Claims Challenged : 1-32 
• Claims Instituted : 1-32
• Invalidated Cancelled Claims : 1-32
• PTAB Outcome : All instituted claims have been invalidated/cancelled

this trial between Seagate technology and Enova technology is on US patent 790057, which is about a cryptographic serial ATA, entitled 'A Cryptographic serial ATA apparatus and method'.

The trial was filed on Jul. 17th, 2014 and closed Dec. 18th, 2015.
Institution decision was made on Feb. 5th, 2015 which took less than 10 months.

We can take a look at the IPR petition document ▼

wipsglobal.com > IPR trial/Appeal search

1) wipsglobal.com > Docket 'Petition for Interpartes Review' in the View Detail page

 

2) wipsglobal.com > Docket 'Petition for Interpartes Review' in the View Detail page

Below, the final written decision of this trial ▼

3) wipsglobal.com > Docket 'Final Written Decision' in the View Detail page

We can check the patent citation references which PTAB referred in the trial ▼

wipsglobal.com > View Detail > PTAB citation reference

Also, non-patent literature is listed ▼

wipsglobal.com > View Detail > PTAB other reference

⧭ IPR Estoppel : may not request or maintain a proceeding before the Office with respect to that claim on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during that inter partes review 35 U.S. Code 315(e).


< 2 >
Target Patent : USP 7900057
Let's find the US patent which has been invalidated in this trial ▼

wipsglobal.com > View Detail > Legal info.

In the legal information of this patent '057,
The status of the invalidated patent, 'active' is confirmed by the result of IPR trial decision.

< 3 >
Reason of inactive

wipsglobal.com > View Detail > Legal status

Legal status says, 'expired due to failure to pay maintenance fee'.
Patent owner decided not to keep this patent after the trial and didn't pay the maintenance fee.

< 4 >
Inter Partes Review certified that the claims are cancelled.
The certificate by IPR trial decision ▼

Continued...>>

a Tire that never bursts

▲yankodesign.com

Dandelion

THE DANDELION IS AN ALL-TERRAIN TIRE CONCEPT THAT HAS 72 LEGS INSTEAD OF AN AIR-FILLED TUBE

Dandelion tire is a concept product made by the Korean corporation, Nexen Tire and it is completely different from the existing rubber tire.

Like a dandelion, 72 pins act as tires, and each pin moves up and down independently, minimizing car movement on any terrain.

And the flexible movement of the pins increases the contact with the ground, maximizing the vehicle's operating capacity and minimizing maintenance.

Even if an individual pin fails, only the failed pin can be replaced, which means that it costs less to maintain than a rubber tire that needs to be replaced.

This pin tire has received a concept award at the 2019 Red Dot Design Award.