Core Viewpoint - Yitang Co., Ltd. (屹唐股份) has filed a lawsuit against Applied Materials for allegedly infringing on its trade secrets related to plasma sources and wafer surface treatment technologies, seeking compensation of 99.99 million yuan [2][3]. Company Overview - Yitang Co., Ltd. specializes in the research, development, production, and sales of wafer processing equipment required in integrated circuit manufacturing, holding a strong market position [3]. - According to Gartner statistics, Yitang Co., Ltd. ranks second globally in the dry etching equipment market with a market share of 34.60% in 2023, and is the only domestic company capable of mass-producing single-wafer rapid thermal processing equipment [3]. Financial Performance - From 2020 to 2024, the company's revenue increased from 2.313 billion yuan to 4.633 billion yuan, doubling in size, while net profit attributable to the parent company surged from 24.76 million yuan to 541 million yuan, a cumulative growth of 20.84 times [4]. - In the first quarter of this year, Yitang Co., Ltd. achieved revenue and net profit of 1.16 billion yuan and 218 million yuan, respectively, representing year-on-year growth of 14.63% and 113.09% [4]. - The company anticipates a net profit of 308 million to 340 million yuan for the first half of 2025, indicating a year-on-year growth of 24.19% to 37.09% [4]. Research and Development - Yitang Co., Ltd. has consistently invested in research and development, with expenditures increasing from 328 million yuan in 2020 to 717 million yuan in 2024, with R&D spending exceeding 15% of revenue in 2023 and 2024 [3].

Core Viewpoint - Beijing Yitang Semiconductor Technology Co., Ltd. has filed a lawsuit against Applied Materials, Inc. for allegedly illegally obtaining and using its core technology secrets related to plasma sources and wafer surface treatment, which has caused significant damage to its intellectual property and economic interests [3][7]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit was filed in the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, with the case number (2025) Jing 73 Min Chu 908 [3]. - Yitang claims that Applied Materials has violated the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China by disclosing and claiming ownership of its technology secrets through a patent application [3][7]. - The company seeks several legal remedies, including stopping the defendant from further obtaining its technology secrets, destroying any related materials, and compensating for economic losses totaling 99,990,000 yuan [7][8]. Group 2: Technology and Business Background - Yitang's key technology involves the use of high-concentration, stable plasma for wafer surface treatment, which is essential for dry stripping, dry etching, and surface modification in semiconductor processing [6][8]. - The company has a strong original technology capability in this field and owns relevant trade secrets [6]. - Yitang's main business includes manufacturing dry stripping, rapid thermal processing, and dry etching equipment, which are critical processes in chip manufacturing [8].

北京商报讯（记者 张茜琦）8月8日，北京商报记者获悉，上海市第三中级人民法院日前对尊湃侵犯华 为商业秘密案件做出一审判决，前海思员工共14人被判处有期徒刑（其中5人实刑，首犯被判处有期徒 刑6年），总计罚金1350万。 通报称，经查，2021年2月，权利公司原高管张某、刘某等人为牟取非法利益，在离职后设立某科技公 司，以支付高薪、股权利诱等方式，诱导多名原权利公司研发人员跳槽至其公司，并指使这些人员在离 职前通过摘抄、截屏等方式非法获取权利公司芯片技术信息，抄袭并运用于张某公司设计的同类型芯片 上，企图以此非法牟利。 经鉴定，侵权芯片技术有40个技术点与权利公司商业秘密的密点具有90%以上同一性，构成实质性相 同。张某团伙的窃密行为，导致权利公司商业秘密灭失，应根据该项商业秘密的研究开发成本、实施该 项商业秘密的收益等商业价值来认定造成了权利公司损失。 ...

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 - 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].