During the Track Record Period and up to the date of this document, we were involved in an aggregate of 71 SEP-related disputes with 12 SEP holders, of which 62 had been settled in relation to nine SEP holders.
Business · 第 167 页
Such preliminary injunction took effect and remained in force as of the Latest Practicable Date.
Business · 第 169 页
As of December 31, 2023, 2024 and 2025 and April 30, 2026, the provisions made for SEP-related disputes amounted to RMB2,390.2 million, RMB900.9 million, RMB1,030.9 million and RMB1,224.9 million, respectively.
广东微电新能源股份有限公司Guangdong Mic-Power New Energy Co., Ltd.
与VARTA的历史专利诉讼（已和解）
Between 2020 and 2022, we were involved in patent proceedings in the U.S. and China with VARTA Microbattery GmbH (“VARTA”) in relation to certain historical models of partially sealed metal-casing button batteries (the “Patent Proceedings”).
Business · 第 197 页
As advised by the Company’s U.S. Legal Advisor, on the basis that (i) the relevant settlement arrangements were entered into to resolve the Patent Proceedings, pursuant to which the parties mutually released each other from past claims and liabilities and covenanted not to sue; (ii) the related proceedings have been dismissed with prejudice or otherwise withdrawn; and (iii) we have not received any further claim, demand or proceeding from VARTA since the settlement and up to the Latest Practicable Date, the Patent Proceedings have been fully and finally resolved, and the likelihood of any re-opening of such historical claims by VARTA against us is low.
In January 2025, Razor USA LLC and Shane Chen filed a complaint with the ITC under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against multiple respondents, including Golabs, alleging that certain GOTRAX branded electric balance bikes (the “Relevant Products”), infringed U.S. Reissue Patent Nos. RE46,964 and RE49,608 (collectively, the “Asserted Utility Patents”) and U.S. Design Patent No. D739,906 (the “Asserted Design Patent” and, together with the Asserted Utility Patents, the “Asserted Patents”).
Business · 第 180 页
As of December 2025, the complainant withdrew its design patent infringement allegations. The settlement conference was not held and the case remains under review by the ITC as of the Latest Practicable Date.
As of the Latest Practicable Date, we were involved in certain patent infringement proceedings initiated by Micron Technology, Inc. (“Micron”), one of our top suppliers during the Track Record Period, alleging that, inter alia, certain NAND flash memory dies and SSD products sold by us and other named defendants in Germany, France and the United Kingdom infringe certain European patents of the claimant (the “IP Proceedings”), where Yangtze Memory Technologie Co., Ltd. (“YMTC”), our another top supplier during the Track Record Period, is the manufacturer of the litigation-related memory dies that are incorporated into the accused products sold by us.
Risk Factors · 第 53 页
On July 14, 2026, Micron filed a Statement of Claim before the Local Division Mannheim of the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) (docket no. UPC_CFI_2556/2026) alleging that, inter alia, certain NAND flash memory dies and SSD products sold by Lexar Europe B.V. (“Lexar Europe”), one of the named defendants and a subsidiary of the Company, and other named defendants in Germany and France infringe European patent EP 2745295B1 (“EP’295”).
Business · 第 216 页
it is noted that solely based on the Statement of Claim, Micron has provisionally estimated the value of the action to be EUR 2,000,000 and EUR 1,000,000 in relation to the Micron UPC Europe Lawsuit and the Micron Munich Lawsuit, respectively.
According to the freedom-to-operate (“FTO”) search and analysis conducted by our IP counsel on our Core Product and key products in China and U.S., our Directors and our IP counsel believe that (i) we can implement the product technology of all of Core Product and key products in China and U.S. without any material risk of patent infringement; (ii) given that we do not have plan to commercialize our Core Product in Australia as of the Latest Practicable Date, our Directors are of the view that the FTO search and analysis in China and the U.S. should be sufficient to prevent potential risks in relation to the infringements of IP rights.
Moreover, based on the results of the Freedom-to-Operate (“FTO”) analysis, our IP Legal Adviser and Directors are of the opinion that, in relation to the chemical molecular structures currently being developed for our Core Products, no third-party patents exist in the PRC or the U.S. that would reasonably be expected to impede the commercialization of such products, and that we have not infringed any valid and enforceable patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party.
During the Track Record Period and up to the Latest Practicable Date, except for one pending lawsuit claiming our infringement of a third-party’s utility patent, which we believe is not material and the likelihood of the plaintiff proving infringement or securing any meaningful compensation against us as very low, we had not been involved in any proceedings in respect of, and we had not received notice of any claims alleging infringement of, any intellectual property rights, whether as claimant or a respondent, nor were we aware of any breach of the aforementioned confidentiality or non-compete obligations by the counterparties.
The Plaintiff alleges that certain of our products marketed, imported, offered for sale, and sold in the U.S. market, for which we hold an authorized design patent, infringe a design patent owned by the Plaintiff (the “Asserted Patent”).
Risk Factors · 第 49 页
In 2026, the USPTO granted our request and instituted the ex parte reexamination proceeding with respect to the Asserted Patent.
Risk Factors · 第 49 页
As of the Latest Practicable Date, the litigation remained stayed.