Jump to content

None






rmc523

SK Innovation loses U.S. battery trade case but gets temporary OK to sell to Ford, VW

Recommended Posts

https://www.autoblog.com/2021/02/10/sk-innovations-lg-chem-trade-secrets-case/

 

Quote

 


The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) on Wednesday sided with South Korea's chemicals and electric vehicle (EV) battery maker LG Chem Ltd, which accused its crosstown rival SK Innovation Co Ltd of misappropriating trade secrets related to EV battery technology.

The ITC said it was issuing a limited 10-year exclusion order but would permit SK to import components for domestic production of lithium ion batteries, battery cells, battery modules, and battery packs for Ford Motor Co's EV F-150 program for four years, and for Volkswagen of America's MEB electric vehicle line for the North America region for two years.

 

 

The ITC said the decision would allow the automakers to transition to new suppliers for these programs.

LG Chem's wholly owned battery subsidiary LG Energy Solution praised the ruling.

"SKI’s total disregard of our warnings and intellectual property rights gave us no choice but to file this case," said Jong Hyun Kim, CEO of LG Energy Solution. He said the company would "further strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights going forward."

SK Innovation, in a statement, said it regretted the ITC's decision "but it's a relief that we will continue to supply to Ford and Volkswagen."

SK noted there was a 60-day presidential review period in which President Joe Biden could decide to reverse the ruling. Biden has made electric vehicles and reducing vehicle emissions a top priority.

LG Chem split off its battery business renamed as LG Energy Solution, an EV battery supplier for Tesla and General Motors. It filed its U.S. trade complaints against SK Innovation in April 2019 alleging that its rival stole trade secrets.

It sought to block SK from bringing batteries and components into the United States, as well as manufacturing systems needed for U.S. production which is scheduled to start in 2022.

SK Innovation is building two EV battery factories in Georgia to manufacture batteries for us in Volkswagen and Ford electric vehicles. LG Chem has set up an EV battery cell venture plant with GM in Ohio.

Ford said the "ITC decision supports our plans to bring the all-electric Ford F-150 to market in mid-2022."

Volkswagen and Ford previously warned a U.S. legal row between South Korean battery makers could disrupt supplies of the key EV parts and cost U.S. jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic. VW did not immediately comment Wednesday.
 

Edited by rmc523

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SK Innovation loses U.S. battery trade case but gets temporary OK to sell to Ford, VW | Reuters

Hopefully Ford can quickly address any negative impacts of this decision to its BEV supply chain. BEV F-150 is the most important new product introduction for Ford so far in the 21st century, they can't afford any delays.

 

"The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) on Wednesday sided with South Korea’s chemicals and electric vehicle (EV) battery maker LG Chem Ltd, which accused its cross-town rival SK Innovation Co Ltd of misappropriating trade secrets related to EV battery technology.

The ITC said it was issuing a limited 10-year exclusion order prohibiting imports into the United States of some lithium-ion batteries by SK Innovation, but would permit SK to import components for domestic production of lithium ion batteries and other parts for Ford Motor Co’s EV F-150 program for four years, and for Volkswagen of America’s MEB electric vehicle line for the North America region for two years."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Why not post the link in the thread about this topic I posted yesterday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duplicate post

Edited by rperez817
Duplicate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Why not post the link in the thread about this topic I posted yesterday?

 

Thank you rmc523 sir, link has been added to your thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, FR739 said:

Farley is nervous.  I’m guessing this has far greater implications on the F150 than we know:

 

https://www.autoblog.com/2021/02/12/ford-ceo-jim-farley-lg-chem-sk-innovations-ev-batteries/

 

Nervous or just doesn't want to have to start contract negotiations again if he doesn't have to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire notion of shipping batteries from the other side of the planet using fossil fuel, in order to save fossil fuel is so completely absurd.  Same goes for solar panels. 

 

The greatest single thing you can do, if you believe (which I don't) that humans are destroying our planet, is buy as much as you can locally. And don't buy foreign, even if you think you need it or want it.

 

Funny, I don't believe in humans causing global warming, but I am doing more for the environment by avoiding imported goods, than the virtue signaling, ultra conspicuous Libs that are driving their imported Prius's and putting up Chinese solar panels on their roofs. 

 

Growing up all I heard was 'foreign oil is BAD!"  But now, becoming completely enslaved to 'foreign' alternative sources of energy is somehow 'good'.  Please help me understand how trading one critical foreign energy dependency is different than another critical energy dependence?  And please do not try and tell me China is not our enemy.

Edited by Kev-Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kev-Mo said:

 

The greatest single thing you can do, if you believe (which I don't) that humans are destroying our planet, is buy as much as you can locally. And don't buy foreign, even if you think you need it or want it.


And plant trees.  Reforestation should be the #1 goal in addition to reasonably reducing emissions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, akirby said:


And plant trees.  Reforestation should be the #1 goal in addition to reasonably reducing emissions.

 

Well,we still have an awful lot of 500 year old forest in the USA that needs to burn.  So please don't decide to build your dream home in the 500 year old forest, then blame global warming when it burns to the ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duplicate post

Edited by rperez817
Duplicate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, akirby said:

And plant trees. 

 

Businesses large and small throughout the world are supporting reforestation and tree planting initiatives. Good example is Ford Motor Company's Bronco Wild Fund, which involves a strategic alliance with National Forest Foundation. Bronco Wild Fund to Support Outdoor Preservation, Public Access, Starting with National Forest Foundation and Outward Bound USA | Ford Media Center

 

1603202246475.jpg

cq5dam.web.881.495.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kev-Mo said:

The entire notion of shipping batteries from the other side of the planet using fossil fuel, in order to save fossil fuel is so completely absurd.  Same goes for solar panels. 

 

The greatest single thing you can do, if you believe (which I don't) that humans are destroying our planet, is buy as much as you can locally. And don't buy foreign, even if you think you need it or want it.

 

Funny, I don't believe in humans causing global warming, but I am doing more for the environment by avoiding imported goods, than the virtue signaling, ultra conspicuous Libs that are driving their imported Prius's and putting up Chinese solar panels on their roofs. 

 

Growing up all I heard was 'foreign oil is BAD!"  But now, becoming completely enslaved to 'foreign' alternative sources of energy is somehow 'good'.  Please help me understand how trading one critical foreign energy dependency is different than another critical energy dependence?  And please do not try and tell me China is not our enemy.

You're missing the entire point Good Sir.

We have to build the batteries over there because manufacturing them creates too much pollution here. Pollution is bad for the environment you see,  and you don't want to hurt our environment, do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kev-Mo said:

The entire notion of shipping batteries from the other side of the planet using fossil fuel, in order to save fossil fuel is so completely absurd.  Same goes for solar panels. 

 

The SK Innovation battery manufacturing plant relevant to the lawsuit is located in the U.S. state of Georgia, about halfway between Atlanta and Anderson, South Carolina. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, akirby said:


And plant trees.  Reforestation should be the #1 goal in addition to reasonably reducing emissions.

Some nice tree lined parkways would be nice.

I haven’t heard a peep about trees or conservation.  It’s all about electrification and solar.  Wind barely gets a mention.  Nuclear or tidal, crickets.

 

Trees will start growing by themselves where glaciers once were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

The SK Innovation battery manufacturing plant relevant to the lawsuit is located in the U.S. state of Georgia, about halfway between Atlanta and Anderson, South Carolina. 

But where are the raw materials coming from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kev-Mo said:

 

Well,we still have an awful lot of 500 year old forest in the USA that needs to burn.  So please don't decide to build your dream home in the 500 year old forest, then blame global warming when it burns to the ground. 

Need to thin it out and make some nice furniture.  I mean carbon containment devices.  Any walnut?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Nervous or just doesn't want to have to start contract negotiations again if he doesn't have to?

Just business.  Money talks.  There was no hurry for SK to just hand over money until now.  It will be settled.  Still need to question the business partners/suppliers over the years.  Navistar, Takata, zotye, SK.  Even GM with the 9 speed auto didn’t turn out so well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rperez817 said:

Updated FAQ from SK Innovation legal team. Battery Lawsuit FAQ (skinnovation.com)

So this is about SK hiring LG’s engineers and researchers who then went on to develop SK’s battery technology.  Happens all the time.  As long as they didn’t bring their research papers with them, it shouldn’t be a problem like the google engineer did.  Probably some cross licensing of patents and a promise to not hire directly from LG for some amount of time will be the settlement.  Maybe some cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can a mod merge these two threads?  No need for responses in two spots to the same topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can a mod merge these two threads?  No need for responses in two spots to the same topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Can a mod merge these two threads?  No need for responses in two spots to the same topic.

 

I agree. My apology for the duplication.

Edited by rperez817

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×