China Sports Technology, which landed on A-shares on June 21, saw its stock price rise 44% on the first day of listing, and subsequently received 7 straight-line daily limits. Lastly, one month after Huati Technology went public, he was brought to court by the "old enemy".

　　 On the evening of July 24, Huati Technology issued an announcement stating that it had received a civil lawsuit. Guizhou Lestar Lighting Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Guizhou Lestar) sued Huati Technology and other three defendants for patent infringement. The amount involved was 3242.06. Ten thousand yuan. At the same time, Huati Technology also disclosed that it received another complaint on the same day, and the plaintiffs were both Guizhou Luxtec.

　　 It turns out that the dispute between Guizhou Lestar and Huati Technology has been around for a long time. In recent years, the two parties have been in court. The former was an agent of Huati Technology.

The total amount of the two cases exceeds 40 million.

　　According to Huati Technology’s disclosure on the evening of the 24th, on July 21, it received the "Civil Complaint" and related legal documents in response to the Guiyang Intermediate People's Court. According to the "Civil Complaint", Guizhou Rexta believes The street lights installed by Kaili Economic Development Zone Urban and Rural Administration Bureau, Jiangsu Chengxu Electric Group Co., Ltd. and Huati Technology in the "Kaili Economic Development Zone Street Lamp Lighting Upgrading and Reconstruction Project" are the same as or similar to the patented products of their appearance design. , So file a lawsuit to the court. The three defendants are the Urban and Rural Administration of Kaili Economic Development Zone, Jiangsu Chengxu Electric Group Co., Ltd. and Huati Technology.

　　 Guizhou Lestar's litigation request is:

1. Order the defendant to stop infringing on the plaintiff’s design patent;

2. The three defendants were ordered to jointly compensate Guizhou Lestar for economic losses of RMB 32,420,600;

3. The defendant shall jointly bear the litigation costs in this case and the plaintiff's rights protection lawyer's fees.

　　 In this regard, China Sports Technology does not agree with the other party’s claim that it is suspected of infringement. Huati Technology stated that the "Street Lighting Upgrading Project in Kaili Economic Development Zone" is required by the CCP to provide 2032 sets of street lamp products. These street lamp products are the company's patented products and have been approved by the State Intellectual Property Office. The patent certificate of appearance design is protected by law.

　　 On July 25, the relevant person of Guizhou Rexta got in touch. According to him, the above dispute will be heard on August 16. In addition, in addition to the lawsuit, Guizhou Lestar has a lawsuit demanding Huati Technology to compensate more than 9 million yuan, "the total compensation requirement is more than 40 million yuan", the relevant person said.

　　 Huati Technology also disclosed that the company also received another complaint on the same day. The plaintiff is Guizhou Lestar, and the defendants are Kaili Public Lighting Management Center and Jiangxi Shenan Yaming Optoelectronics Technology Co., Ltd. Among them, Huati Technology is required to jointly compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of 9,543,700 yuan.

　　 In fact, the amount of more than 40 million lawsuits is not a small sum for Huati Technology. The company's previous prospectus disclosed that from 2014 to 2016, the company achieved net profits of 35.57 million yuan, 42.56 million yuan and 48.07 million yuan attributable to the owners of the company.

　　So, what impact will this lawsuit have on Huati Technology? On July 25, the reporter called Huati Technology many times, but no one answered the company phone. According to Huati Technology’s announcement, the litigation "is uncertain about the impact of the company's current and subsequent profits". However, it stated that the street lamp products involved in the lawsuit are not the company's main products, and the lawsuit will not have a direct impact on the company's daily production and operation.

The other party was originally a company agent

　　The above-mentioned Guizhou Rexta related person stated that “Rexta” is a lighting company headquartered in Wenjiang District, Chengdu, and Guizhou Rextas involved in the litigation this time is one of its subsidiaries.

　　 It turns out that the entanglement between Guizhou Rexta and Huati Technology has a long history. Rexta was once the regional agent of Huati Technology.

　　Previously, the two parties had repeatedly litigated and counterclaimed a contract dispute that began at the end of 2014.

　　 In October 2015, Guizhou Lexida counter-sued China Sports Technology. In the relevant litigation at the time, Guizhou Lestar stated that it was once the agent of Huati Technology in Guizhou. According to the two "Lighting Products Sales Contracts" in December 2014, Huati Technology provided it with Magnolia There were 585 sets of lamps (later reduced to 583 sets), and 408 sets were actually implemented (all sold in Gui'an New District). However, some problems occurred during the execution of the contract, and the two parties later went to court on this matter.

　　 On December 30, 2016, China Judgment Documents Network disclosed a "Second Instance Civil Judgment on the Sale and Purchase Contract Dispute between Sichuan Huati Lighting Technology Co., Ltd. and Guizhou Lexida Lighting Technology Co., Ltd.". According to the civil judgment, Huati Technology is the plaintiff and counterclaim defendant in the first trial; Guizhou Luxida is the defendant and counterclaim plaintiff in the first trial.

　　 The ruling made by the Guiyang Intermediate People's Court only upheld the first item of the first-instance judgment: Guizhou Lexida paid Huati Science and Technology Co., Ltd. payment of 3,248,000 yuan and interest loss of 54,000 yuan, totaling 3,302 million yuan.