A UK-based tech firm has filed a lawsuit in the US against electronics giant LG, claiming the South Korean firm wilfully infringed patents on TV technology.
Runcorn-based Nanoco said it filed a patent infringement against LG in Texas, claiming the firm infringed patents it holds around quantum dot technology.
Quantum dots are a nanomaterial, 1,000 times smaller than a human hair, which can significantly enhance the colour range visible to the human eye when light is shone through them, and as a result have become a key technology in modern television production.
Quantum dot production can include a toxic heavy metal called cadmium, but Nanoco has pioneered the use of cadmium-free quantum dots, developing and patenting a successful method for mass-producing them.
Nanoco says its patents were validated during a previous lawsuit against another tech giant, Samsung, during which the US Patent Trials and Appeals Board ruled in its favour, with the claims being settled in 2023 for £150 million.
In its filing against LG, Nanoco said the firm has wilfully infringed its patents and was seeking a permanent injunction as well as monetary damages.
At this stage, a monetary value has not been attributed to the claim.
Dr Jalal Bagherli, Nanoco’s chairman, said: “Nanoco proved the value and validity of its IP as part of the Samsung litigation process.
“At that time, we reiterated our intent to aggressively pursue other potential infringers of our IP to ensure a fair outcome for shareholders of Nanoco.
“While there is potential for damages, litigation itself carries considerable inherent risk and the Board must weigh the opportunity versus the cost.
“In this instance, we believe the potential return to be worth the costs of commencing litigation.
“Nanoco continues to remain open to finding a mutually acceptable commercial solution, but the action is appropriate to take at this time in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders, to defend one of our core assets.”
An LG spokesperson said: “As this case remains ongoing it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.”
