IP News
IP News

HS Hyosung vs. Kolon Industries Patent Dispute: Intellectual Property Court Rules Kolon’s Patent Invalid, Siding with Hyosung

AJU KIM CHANG LEE|August 18, 2025
HS Hyosung vs. Kolon Industries Patent Dispute: Intellectual Property Court Rules Kolon’s Patent Invalid, Siding with Hyosung

In the patent dispute between HS Hyosung (hereinafter “Hyosung”) and Kolon Industries (hereinafter “Kolon”) regarding “hybrid tire cords,” the Korean Intellectual Property Court has ruled in favor of Hyosung.

AJU KIM CHANG LEE

Figure 01 / 02

Hyosung vs. Kolon Dispute

  1. 20+ years prior

    Commercial use begins

    Hyosung supplies hybrid tire cord tech to automotive manufacturers for 20+ years

  2. 2015

    Kolon patent registered

    Kolon Industries registers patent on hybrid tire cords in Korea

  3. IPTAB

    IPTAB rules patent valid

    Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board sides with Kolon in initial review

  4. 2025

    IP Court rules patent invalid

    Korean IP Court overturns IPTAB — Hyosung wins; Kolon expected to appeal

  5. Ongoing

    U.S. case parallel

    Kolon filed patent infringement suit in C.D. California seeking injunction + treble damages

Hybrid tire cord patent invalidity proceedings

Figure 02 / 02

Korea vs. U.S. Cases

CategoryAspectKoreaUnited States
ForumKorean Intellectual Property CourtU.S. District Court, C.D. California
NaturePatent invalidity (invalidation action)Patent infringement lawsuit by Kolon
StatusIP Court rules patent invalid (subject to appeal)Ongoing — injunction + treble damages sought
Cross-impactKorean ruling may influence U.S. proceedings

Parallel proceedings in multiple jurisdictions

TopicsIP News

Executive Summary

In the patent dispute between HS Hyosung (hereinafter “Hyosung”) and Kolon Industries (hereinafter “Kolon”) regarding “hybrid tire cords,” the Korean Intellectual Property Court has ruled in favor of Hyosung.

The dispute originated from a challenge to the validity of Kolon’s patent on hybrid tire cords. While Kolon claimed the patent, registered in 2015, was valid, Hyosung argued that the invention had already been commercialized and supplied to automotive manufacturers for over 20 years. Hyosung asserted that, because the patented technology was already known and publicly available before the patent application was filed, the patent was invalid.

The Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (IPTAB), which initially reviewed the case, ruled that Kolon’s patent was valid. In response, Hyosung filed a lawsuit with the Intellectual Property Court seeking to overturn the IPTAB’s decision. The court accepted Hyosung’s arguments and issued a ruling contrary to the IPTAB’s decision, resulting in a significant win for Hyosung and a setback for Kolon. However, since Kolon is likely to appeal the decision, the ruling is not yet final, and the invalidation of Kolon’s patent has not been finally confirmed. Therefore, the final outcome is still pending.

Separately, a related patent dispute between Hyosung and Kolon is also underway in the United States. The U.S. case also involves the “hybrid tire cord” technology. Kolon has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Hyosung in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, reportedly seeking 1) an injunction against patent infringement and 2) treble damages (i.e., enhanced damages).

Under the territorial principal in patent law, patent rights are enforceable only within the jurisdiction in which they are granted. Thus, a ruling of patent invalidity in Korea does not automatically lead to the same result in the U.S. However, pragmatically, the decision by the Korean Intellectual Property Court could still have some influence on the U.S. court proceedings. As such, Kolon and Hyosung are expected to continue their legal battles in multiple jurisdictions to secure favorable outcomes.

Published

August 18, 2025 · AJU KIM CHANG LEE

Back to IP News