Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD et al. v. VSUN Solar USA Inc. et al.

This patent infringement litigation was initiated by Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD and Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co LTD, collectively part of JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. (NYSE: JKS), a prominent Chinese vertically integrated solar module manufacturer and energy storage system integrator. JinkoSolar manufactures a full range of photovoltaic products, from silicon wafers to solar cells and modules. The defendants include VSUN Solar USA Inc., a Japanese-invested solar solution provider and vertically integrated manufacturer with global operations; Toyo Co. Ltd. (also known as TOYO Solar), a Japanese solar cell and module manufacturer that is also vertically integrated; Abalance Corporation, a Japanese holding company and parent of VSUN, involved in solar panel manufacturing and system solutions; and Abalance subsidiaries WWB Corporation and Fuji Solar Co., Ltd., the latter being VSUN's holding company and specializing in solar panel manufacturing and electronic systems installation. The accused products are solar panels and related technology alleged to infringe JinkoSolar's patents, specifically those utilizing N-type Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact (TOPCon) technology, with examples cited as being displayed on VSUN's website and sold in U.S. locations such as Manheim, Pennsylvania, and the Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden in Ohio. The primary patent at issue, as identified in the case metadata, is U.S. Patent No. 11,824,136, which covers a "Solar cell, manufacturing method thereof, and photovoltaic module."

The litigation was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco) in December 2024. Initially, defendants VSUN and Toyo denied infringement and asserted invalidity, while Abalance and its subsidiaries filed motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. In July 2025, the court granted WWB Corporation's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. However, the case has since concluded, with the companies settling their dispute as of January 2026. This case is particularly notable as it marked JinkoSolar's first U.S. patent infringement complaint as a plaintiff, signaling a strategic shift towards more assertive patent enforcement and licensing of its extensive intellectual property portfolio. It also reflects the broader trend of increasing patent disputes within the highly competitive global solar industry, especially regarding advanced N-type TOPCon technology, a key area of innovation and contention among major manufacturers.

The patent infringement litigation Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD et al. v. VSUN Solar USA Inc. et al. (Case No. 3:24-cv-08828, N.D. Cal.) concluded with a settlement and voluntary dismissal in January 2026.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings (December 2024 - April 2025)

• Complaint: On December 6, 2024, Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD and Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co LTD (collectively, "JinkoSolar") filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint accused VSUN Solar USA Inc., Toyo Co. Ltd., Abalance Corporation, WWB Corporation, Fuji Solar Co., Ltd., and other affiliates (including Vietnam Sunergy Joint Stock Company, Vietnam Sunergy (Bac Ninh) Company Limited, and Vietnam Sunergy Cell Company Ltd.) of infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 11,581,454 and 11,824,136. JinkoSolar alleged infringement of its N-type tunnel oxide passivated contact (TOPCon) solar cell technology and sought a preliminary and permanent injunction, unspecified damages, and a jury trial.
• Answers and Motion to Dismiss: By April 17, 2025, defendants VSUN Solar USA Inc. and Toyo Co. Ltd. responded to the complaint, denying the allegations of infringement and asserting the invalidity of JinkoSolar's patents. Separately, Abalance Corporation, WWB Corporation, and Fuji Solar Co., Ltd. filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6).

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance (July 2025)

• Motion to Dismiss Ruling: On July 29, 2025, the court granted WWB Corporation's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The court found that JinkoSolar had not made a prima facie showing of an agency relationship sufficient to establish specific personal jurisdiction over WWB, nor had it provided adequate evidence linking WWB to the allegedly infringing products in the U.S. The court also denied JinkoSolar's request for jurisdictional discovery related to WWB.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes

• The case did not reach the claim construction (Markman) stage before its resolution.

4. Discovery Milestones with Strategic Significance

• The denial of jurisdictional discovery against WWB Corporation in July 2025 was a significant procedural development, impacting the scope of the litigation and JinkoSolar's ability to pursue claims against that specific defendant.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions

• The case settled prior to any trial proceedings or verdict.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal (January 2026)

• The parties reached a settlement in January 2026. Following the settlement, a joint stipulation for voluntary dismissal without prejudice was filed in the Northern District of California, leading to the case's conclusion. The terms of the settlement, including any damages, were not publicly disclosed, and no injunctive relief was entered by the court. The dismissal "without prejudice" preserves JinkoSolar's right to re-assert its patent claims if the settlement terms are breached or if new infringing conduct arises.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings

• A parallel Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding, IPR2026-00230, was initiated against U.S. Patent No. 11,824,136 (one of the patents asserted in this litigation). The IPR petition was filed by SEG MANUFACTURING INC., NEW ENERGY IMPORTS INC., SEG SOLAR INC., PT. SEG SOLAR MANUFAKTUR INDONESIA, and SEG ENERGY SINGAPORE PTE. LTD. While this IPR ran concurrently with the district court litigation, it was initiated by entities separate from the defendants in the Jinko v. VSUN case. The direct effect of this IPR on the settlement of this specific district court case is not explicitly detailed in the available public information, but such parallel proceedings can influence the overall patent landscape and the parties' litigation strategies.

Here is the counsel of record representing the plaintiffs, Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD and Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co LTD, in this patent infringement case:

Perkins Coie LLP

• Louise Lu

  • Role: Patent Litigation Lawyer (Lead Counsel appears implicit given statements attributed to her).
  • Firm & Office Location: Perkins Coie LLP, likely based on firm's patent litigation practice and JinkoSolar's press releases, though a specific office location for her isn't explicitly stated in the search results, it's generally associated with the firm's presence in patent litigation hubs. The initial complaint was filed in San Francisco.
  • Relevant Experience: Ms. Lu is noted as a patent litigation lawyer with Perkins Coie, representing JinkoSolar in this and other matters, and has made statements on behalf of the company regarding its intent to vigorously defend its intellectual property.

• Miguel Bombach

  • Role: Patent Litigation Lawyer.
  • Firm & Office Location: Perkins Coie LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: Represented JinkoSolar in this patent infringement case.

• Abigail Gardner

  • Role: Patent Litigation Lawyer.
  • Firm & Office Location: Perkins Coie LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: Represented JinkoSolar in this patent infringement case.

The information on their specific office locations within Perkins Coie and detailed one-line notes on past cases beyond their representation of JinkoSolar in this matter were not explicitly available in the provided search results. However, their involvement in significant patent disputes like this one indicates their relevant experience in the field.I have identified the counsel of record for the plaintiffs. The provided information already lists their names, firm, and indicates their role as patent litigation lawyers for JinkoSolar. I also have a general sense of the firm's involvement in the case. The remaining missing specific details are their exact office locations within Perkins Coie and more distinct one-line notes on their individual patent litigation experience or notable past cases beyond this specific representation. I will attempt to find these specifics in the next step.

Updated plan:
For each attorney (Louise Lu, Miguel Bombach, Abigail Gardner), I will perform targeted web searches to find:

• Their specific office location at Perkins Coie.
• A concise, one-line note on their relevant patent litigation experience or notable past cases.
  If the information is not readily available or filings are sealed, I will explicitly state so.The plaintiff(s), Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD and Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co LTD, are represented by counsel from Perkins Coie LLP. While two of the named attorneys have since moved firms, they were identified as representing JinkoSolar under Perkins Coie in reports discussing events in this case that occurred after their move.

Here is the identified counsel:

• Louise Lu

  • Role: Patent Litigation Lawyer. She was mentioned as a patent litigation lawyer with Perkins Coie representing JinkoSolar at the time of the lawsuit filing in December 2024.
  • Firm & Office Location: Formerly with Perkins Coie LLP, she transitioned to Foley & Lardner LLP in San Diego, California, in April 2025.
  • Relevant Experience: Ms. Lu is a seasoned patent litigator with significant experience in patent infringement cases before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and federal district courts. She also focuses on patent invalidity proceedings and post-grant matters before the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB), handling cases involving standard-essential patents (SEPs) across diverse technologies, including wireless, AI, encryption, and semiconductors. She has secured jury trial wins for clients.

• Miguel Bombach

  • Role: Patent Litigation Lawyer. He was identified as representing JinkoSolar as part of Perkins Coie in December 2024.
  • Firm & Office Location: Formerly with Perkins Coie LLP, he transitioned to Foley & Lardner LLP in San Diego, California, in April 2025.
  • Relevant Experience: Mr. Bombach tries and litigates patent cases in federal courts and before the PTAB, with extensive experience in electrical engineering and computer science. He has litigated over 100 cases in numerous technical fields, including LED lighting, power converters, memories, semiconductor devices, and wireless data transmission systems, and has secured jury trial victories. He was also recognized for pro bono contributions by the USPTO in 2020.

• Abigail Gardner

  • Role: Patent Litigation Lawyer (Associate). She was listed as representing JinkoSolar as part of Perkins Coie in December 2024.
  • Firm & Office Location: Perkins Coie LLP, San Diego, California.
  • Relevant Experience: Ms. Gardner is an experienced jury trial associate in patent litigation, assisting in both plaintiff- and defense-side patent and trade secret litigation across industries such as aerospace, mobile gaming, industrial minerals, and LED lighting. She has participated in several district court jury trials, including a significant jury trial win in the Western District of Texas for a patent litigation client. She regularly leads offensive and defensive discovery efforts for her teams.

Counsel of Record for Defendant(s)

The defendants in Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co LTD et al. v. VSUN Solar USA Inc. et al. were represented by Sidley Austin LLP. The case has since settled as of January 2026.

The following attorneys were identified as counsel for the defendants:

• Irene Yang

  • Role: Lead Counsel (appears to be a primary attorney on the motion to dismiss).
  • Firm: Sidley Austin LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Ms. Yang is a partner at Sidley Austin and focuses on intellectual property litigation, particularly in the technology sector. Her practice includes patent, trade secret, and complex commercial litigation in federal district courts and before the International Trade Commission.

• Tung T. Nguyen

  • Role: Lead Counsel (appears to be a primary attorney on the motion to dismiss, admitted pro hac vice).
  • Firm: Sidley Austin LLP, Dallas, Texas.
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Mr. Nguyen is a partner at Sidley Austin with extensive experience in patent litigation across various technologies. He has represented clients in numerous federal court actions and Post-Grant Review proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Sidley Austin LLP represented all named defendants: VSUN Solar USA Inc., Toyo Co. Ltd., Abalance Corporation, WWB Corporation, and Fuji Solar Co., Ltd.