Within a year, Trina Solar filed three consecutive patent lawsuits against Jiangsu Runyang in the United States, this time involving India's photovoltaic giant Adani.
Trina Solar sued Runyang again, and the India company could not escape the involvement
PV giant Trina Solar recently filed a patent infringement complaint with the United States International Trade Commission (ITC), alleging that China's Jiangsu Runergy and India's Adani Green Energy infringed their TOPCon solar cell technology patents, asking the commission to block the import of related products into the United States, according to multiple media reports.
It is reported that the lawsuit involves two core patents of Trina Solar, No. 9,722,104 and No. 10,230,009, both of which are related to the current cutting-edge technology in the photovoltaic industry, TOPCon (tunneling oxide passivation contact).
Trina Solar noted that the infringing products not only threatened its technological advantage in the United States market, but also caused potential damage to its operations at its new Texas facility. To that end, Trina Solar cited Section 337 of the United States Tariff Act to ask the ITC to issue an exclusion order prohibiting these products from entering the United States market. At the same time, Tianhe also asked the Trade Commission to issue a cease and desist order to stop the sales of the products by Runneng and Adani Green Energy.
A different way to litigate
In fact, this is not the first time Trina Solar has filed a patent lawsuit against Jiangsu Runyang, in May and September this year, Trina Solar filed patent lawsuits in the district court in the United States. But if you look closely, you will find that this time their complaint agency is not the court, but the United States International Trade Commission, which is often referred to as the ITC.
Trina Solar chose to switch to litigation because it cleverly used Section 337 of the United States Tariff Act. The ITC's Section 337 investigation process is generally faster and more effective than traditional court proceedings. Once the ITC determines that the infringement is substantiated, the ITC has the right to issue an exclusion order prohibiting the infringing products from entering the United States market. For multinational companies operating in the United States market, Section 337 investigations are a fairly deterrent legal tool.
The most special aspect of Section 337 is its efficiency, with traditional civil lawsuits in the United States such as Trina Solar's first two lawsuits often taking years, while the ITC's investigation and adjudication can be completed in just a few months, giving companies an effective way to quickly curb competitor abuses.
Trina Solar's application for exclusion and cease and desist orders is a tool to combat infringement by Runneng and Adani Green Energy, prevent each other's products from entering the United States market, and protect its leading position in the North American market.
India's PV giants' ambitions and dilemmas
It is worth noting that, unlike the previous two lawsuits, this time Trina Solar also listed India's photovoltaic giant Adani Green Energy as the target of the lawsuit. As part of the Adani Group, India's largest multinational company, Adani Green Energy has rapidly expanded its market share in the photovoltaic and wind energy sectors through significant investments in recent years and has become one of the major players in the global renewable energy sector.
In addition to this company, the Adani Group has also invested in Adani Solar as an important addition to its value chain. Adani Green Energy focuses on solar and wind power generation, while Adani Solar focuses on the manufacture of solar cells and modules, and most of the modules used in the Adani Green Energy project are supplied by Adani Solar.
According to Xinneng Hui, Adani Solar's total solar cell and module production capacity has reached 4GW, of which monocrystalline PERC and TOPCon technologies account for 2GW each.
But Bhutiani, senior vice president and head of sales, told reporters at the recent India Renewable Energy (REI) Expo that the company plans to achieve 10GW of metallurgical-grade silicon-polysilicon-wafer full-chain capacity by December 2027, and all new cell capacity will be based on TOPCon technology.
If Trina Solar's accusation of unauthorized use of TOPCon technology is confirmed, Adani Green Energy may not only face a restraining order for its products in the United States market, but may also need to significantly adjust its supply chain and technology sources.
epilogue
How to expand the market while respecting the intellectual property rights of others, while establishing its own technical moat, is particularly important for every photovoltaic company. After all, technological innovation and patent protection are becoming more and more important in the photovoltaic industry, and any negligence can cost companies dearly.
As competition in the global PV market intensifies, similar patent battles may become the norm. In the future, whoever can have more breakthroughs and innovations in technology will be likely to have more initiative in this trillion-level market. Source: NE-SALON XW