Core Viewpoint - The company has issued a formal statement addressing recent rumors and misinformation circulating online, clarifying various allegations and asserting its commitment to legal rights and business integrity [3][5][7]. Group 1: Clarifications on Allegations - The company refutes claims regarding a "commercial secret infringement" involving a technology that has been deemed public knowledge, asserting that it has not utilized this technology in any products [3]. - The company corrects misinformation about the age of its chairman's spouse, stating the accurate birth year is 1991, not 1964 [4]. - The company clarifies that its collaboration with the U.S. energy integrator Powin has not reached a scale of delivery, and it is not listed as a creditor in Powin's bankruptcy filing, indicating no adverse impact on its operations [5]. Group 2: Product and Legal Matters - The company defends its 587Ah battery cell against claims of similarity to a competitor's product, emphasizing that it is a fully self-developed product based on its previously released energy storage cell [6]. - The company addresses a civil lawsuit regarding unfair competition, stating that no legal documents have confirmed any wrongdoing, and it plans to defend its rights through legal channels [7]. - The company expresses strong condemnation of the malicious fabrication and dissemination of false information, urging the public to refrain from spreading rumors and to maintain a fair competitive environment [7].

Core Viewpoint - Haicheng Energy Technology Co., Ltd. has issued a statement addressing five major controversies, including a "trade secret infringement" incident, the bankruptcy of its largest U.S. customer, and a lawsuit for unfair competition [1][3]. Group 1: Trade Secret Infringement - The individual involved in the "trade secret infringement" case is Feng Dengkai, who has been taken into custody by the police for allegedly infringing on trade secrets, with the complainant being CATL [3]. - Haicheng Energy claims that the "composite electrolyte technology" in question has been verified by a third party as publicly known and does not constitute a trade secret [4]. - The case is related to patent infringement, where Shenzhen Haihong New Energy Technology Co., Ltd. transferred multiple "electrolyte" related patents to Haicheng Energy in 2022 [5]. Group 2: Unfair Competition Lawsuit - Haicheng Energy has been sued by CATL for unfair competition, with the case filed in the Ningde Intermediate People's Court, set to be heard on August 12 [6]. - The company asserts that there are no effective legal documents recognizing it as engaging in unfair competition, and the claims made by the plaintiff do not reflect judicial acknowledgment of the facts [6]. - The ongoing investigation into the case is not expected to adversely affect the company's production and operations [6]. Group 3: Market Position and IPO - In the global energy storage market, CATL and Haicheng Energy rank first and third, respectively, with Haicheng Energy's valuation exceeding 25 billion yuan due to rapid growth [3]. - Haicheng Energy is in the process of applying for an IPO in the Hong Kong stock market [3].

Core Viewpoint - The company, Hai Chen Energy, issued a statement addressing recent online rumors and misinformation, asserting that the claims made are significantly inaccurate and do not affect its operations [1]. Group 1: Response to Rumors - The company clarified that the "composite electrolyte technology" related to Mr. Feng's "trade secret infringement" case is publicly known and does not constitute a trade secret, thus not impacting the company's operations [1]. - The company has not utilized the disputed technology in any of its products, and the ongoing investigation will not adversely affect its production and operations [1]. Group 2: Product Development - The company refuted claims that its 587Ah battery cell is similar to a competitor's product, stating that it is a fully self-developed product based on its previously released long-duration energy storage cell [5]. - The 587Ah battery cell was specifically designed for a 2-hour scenario requirement, showcasing the company's innovation in energy storage technology [5]. Group 3: Legal Matters - The company stated that there are no effective legal documents recognizing it as engaging in unfair competition in the ongoing civil lawsuit, emphasizing that the claims are solely the plaintiff's viewpoint [6]. - The company intends to defend its legal rights vigorously and condemns the malicious fabrication and dissemination of false information [6].

Core Viewpoint - Haicheng Energy issued a formal statement addressing five major controversies, including allegations of "trade secret infringement," the bankruptcy of its largest U.S. customer, and a lawsuit for unfair competition [1] Group 1: Trade Secret Infringement - The company denied the allegations of trade secret infringement related to Mr. Feng, stating that the "composite electrolyte technology" in question is publicly known and does not constitute a trade secret [6][7] - The controversy involves a patent transfer from Shenzhen Haihong New Energy Technology Co., which transferred multiple "electrolyte" related patents to Haicheng Energy in 2022 [6][7] - The company asserted that it has not used the "composite electrolyte technology" in any of its products, and the ongoing investigation will not adversely affect its operations [7] Group 2: Lawsuit for Unfair Competition - Haicheng Energy is currently facing a lawsuit from CATL for unfair competition, with the case filed in the Ningde Intermediate People's Court, set to be heard on August 12 [8] - The company emphasized that there has been no legal ruling confirming any unfair competition on its part, and the claims made by the plaintiff do not represent judicial recognition of the facts [7] Group 3: Customer Bankruptcy and Order Impact - The company addressed rumors regarding the bankruptcy of its largest U.S. customer, Powin, and the alleged evaporation of a 1.5 billion yuan order, clarifying that it has no unresolved debts with Powin [10][11] - The bankruptcy filing of Powin does not pose a negative impact on the company's operations [12] Group 4: Product Development and Competition - Haicheng Energy refuted claims that its 587Ah battery cell is highly similar to a competitor's product, asserting that its product is independently developed based on specific requirements [13] - The company highlighted that its 587Ah battery cell was first released in 2023, distinguishing it from competitors [13]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent controversies surrounding Haitian Energy Technology Co., Ltd., including allegations of "trade secret infringement," the bankruptcy of its major U.S. client, and lawsuits regarding unfair competition [2][5]. Group 1: Trade Secret Infringement - Haitian Energy denies the allegations of trade secret infringement related to the "composite electrolyte technology," asserting that it is publicly known and does not constitute a trade secret [7][8]. - The controversy involves Feng Dengkai, who has been taken into custody by police for allegedly infringing on trade secrets, with the complainant being CATL [5][8]. - The company claims it has not used the disputed technology in any of its products, and the ongoing investigation will not adversely affect its operations [8][9]. Group 2: Bankruptcy of Major Client - The company refutes rumors regarding the bankruptcy of its largest U.S. client, Powin, stating that it is not listed among Powin's creditors and that the bankruptcy will not impact its operations [10][11]. - The company emphasizes that its collaboration with Powin has not yet reached a scale of delivery, thus mitigating potential risks from the client's financial issues [10][11]. Group 3: Unfair Competition Lawsuit - Haitian Energy is currently facing a lawsuit for unfair competition initiated by CATL, with the case filed in the Ningde Intermediate People's Court [9]. - The company asserts that there are no legal documents confirming its involvement in unfair competition, and the claims made by the plaintiff do not reflect judicial recognition of the facts [8][9]. Group 4: Product Development and Market Position - The company defends its 587Ah battery cell, claiming it is a fully self-developed product and not similar to competitors' offerings, despite claims of high similarity [11]. - Haitian Energy's market position is notable, with a valuation exceeding 25 billion yuan, ranking third in the global energy storage market [5].

Core Viewpoint - The company, Haicheng Energy Storage Technology Co., Ltd., has issued a statement addressing various rumors and misinformation circulating online, asserting that these claims are false and defending its business practices and reputation [1][2][3]. Group 1: Commercial Secret Infringement - The company refutes claims regarding a "commercial secret infringement" related to the "composite electrolyte technology," stating that a third-party assessment confirmed the technology is publicly known and does not constitute a trade secret [3][4]. - The company has not utilized this technology in any of its products, and the ongoing investigation will not adversely affect its operations [3]. Group 2: Personal Information Misrepresentation - The company clarifies misinformation regarding the age of the chairman's spouse, asserting that the claim of her being born in 1964 is false; her actual birth year is 1991 [4]. Group 3: Customer Bankruptcy and Order Impact - The company addresses rumors about its largest U.S. customer, Powin, filing for bankruptcy and the alleged loss of a $1.5 billion order, stating that their collaboration has not reached a scale of delivery and there are no outstanding debts between the two parties [5][6]. - The bankruptcy filing does not list the company as a creditor, indicating no negative impact on its operations [5]. Group 4: Product Development Claims - The company disputes claims that its 587Ah battery cell is similar to a competitor's product, emphasizing that its 587Ah cell is based on its own 2023 innovation and is designed for specific two-hour scenarios [6]. Group 5: Unfair Competition Lawsuit - The company responds to allegations of unfair competition, stating that no legal documents have confirmed any wrongdoing on its part, and the claims are merely the plaintiff's perspective [7]. - The company intends to defend its rights through legal channels and condemns the malicious spread of false information [7][9].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent legal ruling against Zunpai Communications for infringing on Huawei's trade secrets, highlighting the implications for the semiconductor industry and investment landscape in China [2][4]. Group 1: Legal Case and Implications - The Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court sentenced 14 former employees of Huawei, including the founder of Zunpai, Zhang Kun, for trade secret infringement, with Zhang receiving a 6-year prison sentence and a fine of 3 million yuan [2][4]. - The court found that the defendants illegally obtained Huawei's Wi-Fi 6 chip technology, with 40 key points of the infringing technology being highly similar to Huawei's trade secrets, constituting substantial plagiarism [4]. - Huawei reported that the technology leak resulted in over 100 million yuan in R&D costs and market revenue losses [4]. Group 2: Company Background and Funding - Zunpai Communications, established in March 2021, focuses on manufacturing computer, communication, and other electronic devices, with a registered capital of approximately 3.3 million yuan [5][6]. - The company specializes in Wi-Fi 6 router chips and smart scene chipsets, having completed a Pre-A round financing of several hundred million yuan by May 2022, with significant investments from major firms including Xiaomi and Hillhouse Capital [5][6]. - Prior to the legal issues, Zunpai was considered a promising startup in the capital market, having raised nearly 100 million yuan in its angel round just two months after its establishment [4].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the legal consequences faced by former Huawei employees for stealing trade secrets and the implications for the chip industry, particularly focusing on the case involving Zunpai Technology and its rapid rise in the market [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Case and Consequences - On July 28, the Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court sentenced 14 former Huawei employees for infringing on Huawei's trade secrets, with the principal offender receiving a 6-year prison term and a total fine of 135 million yuan [1]. - The investigation revealed that in February 2021, former Huawei executives established a tech company to lure former colleagues with high salaries and equity, leading to the illegal acquisition of Huawei's chip technology [1]. - The infringement involved 40 technical points that were over 90% identical to Huawei's trade secrets, indicating substantial similarity [1]. Group 2: Zunpai Technology's Background and Funding - Zunpai Technology, founded by Zhang Kun, a former Huawei employee, aimed to develop "domestic Wi-Fi 6/7 chips" and quickly attracted many former Huawei staff [1][2]. - Within a year of its establishment, Zunpai Technology raised over 300 million yuan in funding, including a significant Pre-A round led by notable investors such as Xiaomi Group and various venture capital firms [2]. - Xiaomi clarified its involvement, stating it participated in Zunpai's financing as a normal financial investment and does not engage in the company's management or operations [2][3].

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court has sentenced 14 former employees of a company for infringing Huawei's trade secrets, with significant prison terms and fines imposed on key individuals involved in the case [1][3]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - On July 28, the court ruled that Zhang was sentenced to 6 years in prison and fined 3 million RMB for trade secret infringement [1] - Zhou received a 5-year prison sentence and a fine of 1.2 million RMB, while Liu was sentenced to 4 years and 6 months with a fine of 1.5 million RMB [1][5] - The total fines imposed on the defendants amounted to 13.5 million RMB [1] Group 2: Background of the Case - The case involved a group of former executives from a rights company who, after leaving, established a new tech company and lured former employees to join them, using high salaries and equity incentives [3] - The group illegally obtained trade secret information related to chip technology by instructing former employees to copy and screenshot sensitive data before their departure [3] - An evaluation revealed that the infringing chip technology had over 90% similarity to the original company's trade secrets, indicating substantial similarity [3] Group 3: Company Involvement - The company involved in the infringement case is identified as Zunpai Communications Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd., which has received investments from companies like Changqu Technology and Xiaomi Group [4]

据悉，2017年冯登科从宁德时代离职后，加入宁德时代的供应商——金美新材。当时金美新材获得了宁 德时代复合集流体代工项目，该项目由三方执行，包括金美新材、福建新嵛、许彩霞。项目结束后冯登 科便加入了海辰储能。 记者查询多方资料发现，冯登科最近出现在公开报道中是在今年6月中旬，他当时的职位是海辰绿能 （海辰储能旗下子公司）总裁。时间再往前推，冯登科在公开报道中的职位还包括海辰储能副总经理、 大区销售总经理；海辰储能总裁办公室主任等。天眼查信息显示，目前，冯登科为海辰绿能法定代表 人。 值得注意的是，高管被采取强制措施发生在海辰储能冲刺IPO的当口，是否会对其经营或IPO进程产生 影响成为了市场关注的焦点。 对此，海辰储能方面向第一财经记者表示，冯登科目前并未在海辰储能任职，非公司高管团队人员，冯 登科现任海辰储能子公司海辰绿能总经理，主要负责商务领域的业务开拓，与技术研发无关。网传本案 涉嫌侵犯商业秘密的复合集流体技术，据第三方机构核查认为，宁德时代所主张的商业秘密侵权行为并 不存在，同时公司更未在任何产品上使用过该技术，冯登科涉案亦不会对公司的生产经营造成重大不利 影响。 近年来，随着市场竞争的加剧，宁德时代 ...