Rising patent threats to pre-IPO firms in China
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Rising patent threats to pre-IPO firms in China

Sponsored by

anjie-400px.png
Businessman presses button ipo Initial Public Offering diagram online network.

Back at the end of April, the Committee of the Science and Technology Innovation Board at the Shanghai Stock Exchange announced that the meeting for reviewing the initial public offering (IPO) application of MEMSensing, a Chinese MEMS microphone sensor supplier, was cancelled due to an "emergence of significant matters." The "significant matters" they were referring to were 16 patent disputes brought by Goertek seeking both permanent injunctions and damages totalling over RMB 100 million ($14.5 million). Goertek and MEMSensing are competitors producing MEMS microphones, a key component in the smart speakers of Google, Amazon, Apple, Alibaba, and Xiaomi.

MEMSensing is not the first Chinese firm threatened by patent litigations when it was about to go public. In 2019, Jiangsu Tongling Technology sued Bull Group, a company known as a socket and switch manufacturer, on the eve of its IPO claiming damages of RMB 1 billion, which is almost equal to one full year of Bull Group's net profits. Other examples include Silead (a manufacturer of under-glass fingerprint sensors), Yonon Technology (a bike-sharing vendor), BPSEMI (an LED manufacturer) and Aimatech (an electric bicycle manufacturer). Ankon, a gastroscope system supplier, had to withdraw its IPO application after being sued for patent infringement in eight cases.

The regulations for the Administration of Initial Public Offering and Listing of Shares stipulate that an application for public listing may not be approved if there is a risk of material adverse changes in the acquisition or use of important assets or technologies such as trademarks, patents, proprietary technologies, and franchises in use by the issuer, and such a risk will affect the issuer's continued profitability.

Pre-IPO firms are quite vulnerable to patent infringement lawsuits as it is nearly impossible to eliminate the risk within the IPO examination period by obtaining a favourable judgment. It usually takes at least 12 months or longer for the first-instance trial and an additional nine to 15 months for the second-instance trial. Further, the entire IPO process in China takes much longer than overseas IPO processes. This long process provides ample opportunities for third parties to pursue IP litigation while an IPO application is pending.

Pre-IPO firms are made vulnerable by the possibility of a permanent injunction. The possibility of a sales ban imposes great pressure on firms in patent-intensive industries, such as the software and semiconductor industries, as a design-around would be extremely difficult and costly. What makes the situation even more challenging is the rapid growth of patent filings, including utility model and design patents, in the last decade, many of which are often low quality patents due to a lack of substantive examinations. Most utility models are granted within a couple of months but can be enforced as long as an official search report shows prima facie proof of validity. In practice, when a company announces an IPO plan, its competitors can assert dozens of utility models in an attempt to block the IPO. It can be difficult for the pre-IPO firm to persuade the stock exchange that although the product may seem similar to the patents, the risk of infringement is low because the asserted patents are not likely to be patentable.

Another major concern is that both the stock exchange authority and investors are not familiar with the patent system and may overestimate the uncertainty caused by patent litigation. Firms are becoming increasingly strategic in these pre-IPO fights. In addition to patent infringement cases, Goerte also filed patent ownership disputes and patent invalidation proceedings against MEMSensing. By bringing the patent ownership disputes against MEMSensing's recruiting of a former employee, Goertek seemed to be trying to question MEMSensing's research and development capabilities. Goertek's patent invalidation petition against MEMSensing's core patents as declared in its prospectus may have been perceived as questioning the validity of MEMSensing's technology.

The most effective defence for a pre-IPO firm is to file an invalidation petition against the asserted patents. For example, the Bull Group finally went public after the two asserted patents were declared invalid. Moreover, non-infringement opinions have proven to be a strategic tool in persuading the committee of the stock exchange and investors.

The Committee of the Science and Technology Innovation Board finally approved MEMSensing's IPO application on June 2 2020. This is good news for MEMSensing. However, it is almost certain that more pre-IPO firms will run into patent challenges. It is estimated that China will most likely double its listed companies in the next three to five years. Patent fights will intensify. China might have to, sooner than expected, revisit its current IPO process and decide how significant a role IP litigation should play in the entire process. Recently, led by Professor Liu Chuntian of the China IP Law Society, an IP alliance of listed companies was formed to develop advocacy programmes to reduce the risks of IP litigation for listed companies or those aiming to submit an IPO.

ning-dong.jpg

Ning Dong

 

lu-yong.jpg

Yong Lu

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A 36-member team from Zhong Lun Law Firm, including six partners, will join the newly formed East IP Group
The Delhi High Court sided with Ericsson against Indian smartphone maker Lava, bringing the companies' nine-year dispute to a close
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Tennessee has passed the ELVIS Act, a law that fights against AI models that mimic the voice and likeness of music artists
Rob Stien, chief communications and public policy officer at InterDigital, says the EU has forgotten innovators while trying to solve an issue that doesn’t exist
As Australia’s Qantm IP leans towards being acquired by a private equity company, sources discuss what it could mean for IP firms
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
Nghiem Xuan Bac Pham, managing partner of Vision & Associates, discusses opportunities created by the US-China rift as well as profitability issues facing IP practices
Douglas Leite and two of his colleagues were intrigued by Bhering Advogados’s mission to grow its patent litigation practice
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Gift this article