Photovoltaic leader suddenly withdraws charges? Jinko, Tianhe and Atlas are still not free!

local time, First Solar, an American photovoltaic manufacturer, announced plans to withdraw its previous application for "337 investigation" and decided to terminate the ongoing investigation procedure of the United States International Trade Commission (ITC). However, the company also said that the termination does not affect the possibility of future litigation. On February 24,

local time, First Solarr proposed to ITC to conduct a "337 investigation" on 47 photovoltaic enterprises on the grounds of infringement of TOPCon technology patents. The 47 photovoltaic enterprises surveyed include enterprises from China, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea and other countries. Among them, there are 29 enterprises with Chinese background (including overseas subsidiaries). They are Runyang Stock (5), Atlas (6), Trina Solar Energy (5), Jingao Technology (5) and Jingke Energy (8).

On July 24, ITC announced that it had made 337 partial final rulings on the above case: based on the withdrawal of the applicant First Solar, Terminate the investigation of the listed defendants, Philadelphia Solar USA Inc. of the United States and Trina Solar (Changzhou) Technology Co., Ltd. In June, ITC announced the termination of its investigation into the Mundra Solar Energy Ltd. And Adani Green Energy Ltd. Of two Indian companies. The

patent war continues

, although the company plans to withdraw the "337 investigation", but the company will continue to push forward the TOPCon patent lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court, the defendant companies include JinkoSolar, Atlas, T1 Energy and Trina Solar. Previously, related lawsuits were suspended pending the results of the "337 investigation". The company also said that it would continue to push forward in the future after the suspension of TOPCon's global patent rights protection action due to the launch of the "337 investigation". In July

2024, First Solar announced that it was investigating the infringement of one of its TOPCon photovoltaic patents. At the time, Jason Dymbort, First Solar's executive vice president, general counsel and secretary, said, We are investigating several leading crystalline silicon solar manufacturers for possible infringement of our patents. If infringement is found, we intend to defend our rights by challenging the ability of potential infringers to lawfully manufacture, assemble, and sell infringing TOPCon technology through enforcement, licensing, or other measures.

Although First Solar did not specify who the "sword" was at that time. However, the industry is keenly aware that this is most likely aimed at Chinese photovoltaic enterprises.

Since 2025, First Solar has sued Jingke Energy, Atlas and Trina Solar in the U.S. District Court of Delaware. The reason is that the defendant enterprise infringes its TOPCon patent technology -US9130074B2 . In response to Firts Solar's allegations, Chinese photovoltaic companies have also launched a counterattack. Both JinkoSolar and Atlas filed IPR proceedings (multi-party review proceedings, similar to patent invalidation proceedings) with the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), but were refused to file. In response, JinkoSolar filed a unilateral retrial proceeding with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) against First Solar's patented technology.

Whether it is the "337 investigation" or the prosecution in the local court, the patent involved is US9130074B2 . The patent is the result of First Solar's acquisition of Tetrasun in 2013.

However, it is noteworthy that on April 29 this year, the State Intellectual Property Office of China declared the patent rights of "High Efficiency Solar Cell Structure and Manufacturing Method" held by Tetrasun, a subsidiary of First Solar, invalid. According to industry insiders, the patent declared invalid is the same family of Chinese patents as First Solar's U.S. patent US9130074B2, "This result is very beneficial to domestic photovoltaic enterprises.". Although it is of little significance from the perspective of product sales, it has important reference value for Chinese photovoltaic enterprises involved in patent cases in the United States.