 |
Photo courtesy of Yonhap News |
[Alpha Biz= Paul Lee] LG Chem has lost an administrative lawsuit in China challenging the invalidation of its cathode material-related patents, as the court upheld the original decision citing insufficient disclosure in the patent specifications.
According to industry sources on March 27, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court dismissed LG Chem’s appeal regarding two invention patents related to “precursors for cathode active materials for lithium secondary batteries, cathode materials manufactured using such precursors, and lithium secondary batteries.” Both patents were rejected on the grounds of inadequate specification disclosure.
LG Chem had previously received an invalidation ruling from the China National Intellectual Property Administration in April last year, which found that the patent descriptions were insufficient to allow replication of the technology. The company subsequently filed an appeal, arguing the decision was unjustified.
The court ruled that the patents failed to meet the requirements of Article 26(3) of China’s Patent Law, which mandates that patent specifications must clearly and completely describe the invention so that a person skilled in the relevant field can reproduce it.
In its judgment, the court noted that experimental spectra (graphs) presented in the patent to demonstrate technical effects were unclear, lacked distinguishable features, and made it difficult to identify key information. It also pointed out inconsistencies between the spectrum data in the patent and subsequent academic publications by the inventors, undermining the claim of a specific structural feature.
Furthermore, the court found logical flaws in the manufacturing methods described in the specifications, concluding that a person skilled in the art would be unable to reproduce the invention based solely on the disclosed information.
LG Chem stated that it is reviewing further legal options, including a potential appeal to a higher court. The company added that differences in patent laws and scope across jurisdictions mean the ruling is unlikely to affect its patents or business operations in other countries.
Alphabiz Reporter Kim Jisun(stockmk2020@alphabiz.co.kr)
