We won! We completely won 337 investigation! 

On the morning of Apr.22,2008, the Federal Circuit issued its decision in the Eveready/China Battery dispute, affirming the International Trade Commission’s (hereinafter called ITC) determination that Eveready’s patent covering zero-mercury added alkaline batteries is invalid. 

On April 28, 2003, Eveready instituted the proceeding before the ITC accusing 25 companies, which produce zero-mercury added batteries and raw materials in countries including China, Janpan, Indonesia and so on, of infringing its zero-mercury added battery patent(pantent No. 5,464,709 , hereinafter called 709 patent). Eveready brought its claims under Section 337 of the Tariff Act and require ITC to ban all series of products manufactured by the above-mentioned enterprises. ITC formally placed the case on file for investigation on May.28 the same year. 7 enterprises (Tiger Head, Zhongyin, Nanfu, Baowang, Changhong, 3-Turn and Zhenglong )in mainland China and 2 enterprises in Hongkong were listed as respondents. These 7 enterprises in mainland China are leading enterprises in Chinese battery industry, which output reaches more than 50% of the total domestic output in China. 337 investigation is of high efficiency, expensive costs and tremendous difficulties. Once the accusation is accepted, the export of  Chinese alkaline batteries to America will be wholly banned, and our battery industry will face austere challenge.

In the case of 337 investigation, China Battery Industry Association (CBIA)stood up, uniting the 9 battery companies of China which have been sued by Eveready with support from the whole trade of battery of China and finally built a defending group against the litigation. 

Our company has been determined to fight against the barriers on international trade since the very beginning and actively responded to the claim. Even when ITC made its first decision that the Chinese battery makers had infringed,we adhered to a thorough fighting and became the leading force among the defending group.

The 337 case has gone through a thorny process including:loss of initial decision - winnning of rehearing – remanding by The Federal Circuit to IEC for retrial - winning of retrial by ITC-  winning of second judgement by The Federal Circuit. Finally we gained the complete victory after a 5-year-long united responding from 28 Apr, 2003 to 22 Apr, 2008. The difficulities of the past 5 years make the final victory most valuable, leaving its position in history. It has become a classic victory in China in defending the 337 case.