After more than a year, with the efforts and eager expectations of Nutrichem people, the trial of the 337 case finally achieved the final victory.

Recently, the U.S. International Trade Commission issued an announcement, deciding to uphold its judgment on April 10, 2015 in the case of FMC suing Nutrichem Jiahe and Jiangxi Heyi Sulfentrazone, and determined that the company involved and Jiangxi Heyi The Sulfentrazone process does not infringe FMC's patents.

The 337 investigation refers to the United States International Trade Commission (USITC). Investigations under Section 337 of the U.S. Tariff Act of 1930 ("Section 337") and related amendments prohibit all acts of unfair competition or any unfairness in exports to the United States trade behavior. This unfair practice specifically refers to: the product enters the United States through unfair competition or unfair behavior, or the owner, importer, or agent of the product sells the product in the U.S. market in an unfair way, and the Causes substantial damage or threat of damage to U.S. related industries, or hinders the establishment of U.S. related industries, or suppresses or manipulates U.S. commerce and trade, or infringes legally valid U.S. trademarks and patents, or infringes proprietary integrated circuit chip layout designs rights, or infringe other design rights protected by U.S. law.

On March 5, 2014, FMC filed an application for investigation under Section 337 of "sulfentrazone, sulfentrazone ingredients and sulfentrazone production process" to the US International Trade Commission, accusing the company and Jiangxi Heyi and two Sulfentrazone, manufactured and sold by US importers Summit Agro USA, LLC and Summit Agro North America Holding Corporation, infringes FMC's US Patent No. 7,169,952 (the '952 patent). FMC also asked the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) to issue a "terminate" order to stop distributors from selling sulfentrazone products in the United States.

FMC believes that its market share has been weakened because the company's sulfentrazone product, Blanket, is priced 40-50% lower than it. Also stated that we exist to instruct U.S. farmers to substitute other chemical ingredients for FMC's pre-mixed products with the sulfentrazone herbicide they manufacture that may reduce the efficacy of the product, lead to the development of weed resistance, and damage FMC's reputation. FMC also stated that we are likely to infringe the patent-protected sulfentrazone production process, which reduces by-products and harmful chemical catalysts in the production process, reduces production costs, and the product price is much lower than FMC's price. .

The US International Trade Commission began an investigation on April 14, 2014 after receiving the investigation application, and on April 10, 2015, the Administrative Law Judge issued a final preliminary ruling that the company and Jiangxi Heyi did not violate the provisions of Act 337. In the statement guidance document, the judge believes that there is insufficient evidence to prove that the company and Jiangxi Heyi infringed, and FMC's complaint does not meet the technical and economic strategies required by the domestic industry. The judge also noted that the FMC '952 patent is invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(g).

Nutrichem Jiahe will, as always, fully respect intellectual property rights and carry out commercial operations of various products on the basis of technological innovation.