小米的管辖权异议，困住了退定维权的消费者

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing legal disputes faced by consumers who pre-ordered Xiaomi's vehicles, particularly the YU7 and SU7 Ultra models, highlighting issues related to delayed delivery times and alleged misleading advertising practices [3][5][9]. Group 1: Consumer Complaints and Legal Actions - Consumers have formed multiple groups to seek refunds and legal recourse due to long delivery times, with some cases already leading to lawsuits against Xiaomi [4][5]. - The primary reasons for these complaints include unclear delivery timelines, pressure to pay remaining balances without vehicle inspection, and a decline in brand trust [5][6]. - A notable case resulted in a court ruling against Xiaomi, declaring that the clause requiring payment before vehicle inspection was invalid, leading to a refund of the deposit [7][9]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Challenges - The legal process for consumers has been slow, with many cases still in the material review stage and Xiaomi frequently contesting jurisdiction, which delays proceedings [9][10]. - Consumers have reported that Xiaomi's strategy of raising jurisdictional objections has significantly prolonged the litigation process, as these objections must be resolved before cases can proceed to trial [10][12]. - The article notes that Xiaomi's legal structure complicates the situation, as different entities are responsible for various aspects of the sales process, leading to confusion over which entity consumers should sue [13][14]. Group 3: Implications of Jurisdictional Objections - The use of jurisdictional objections as a litigation strategy is criticized as a potential abuse of legal rights, aimed at delaying proceedings rather than addressing the substantive issues at hand [12][15]. - Legal experts suggest that while jurisdictional objections can be legitimate, their frequent use by Xiaomi raises concerns about the efficiency of the judicial process and consumer rights [15][16]. - The article emphasizes the importance of consumers being aware of contract details, particularly regarding delivery timelines and terms that may limit their rights [17].