Tesla sues former supplier for ‘stealing battery trade secrets’, but they claim the contrary
Tesla is suing Matthews International, a former machinery supplier, for “stealing trade secrets” related to its battery production.
Matthews claims that it’s Tesla who is trying to steal its technology.
Over the years, Tesla has sued quite a few companies and former employees for allegedly stealing trade secrets, including regarding battery production, Dojo, and more.
Now, Tesla is adding a new one to the list.
The company filed a lawsuit in California court today against Matthews International, which it describes as a supplier of “Tesla’s proprietary dry-electrode battery manufacturing technology”, for streaming its trade secrets.
Tesla says that it selected Matthews in 2019 to be “one of its suppliers for equipment that Tesla used to refine its dry-electrode battery manufacturing and to put it into mass-production.” The automaker says that the supplier agreed to a confidentiality agreement and not to share its technology with other clients.
The automaker claims Matthews stole its trade secrets in two ways: filing for patents that include Tesla technology and selling its technology to other clients.
Tesla wrote in the lawsuit about Matthews infringing with its patents:
Without Tesla’s knowledge, Matthews applied Tesla’s confidential trade secrets to a variety of impermissible purposes, and in so doing visited extraordinary harm on Tesla. First, Matthews improperly incorporated Tesla’s confidential trade secrets into patent filings. By so doing, Matthews unambiguously attempted to claim for itself both ownership and inventorship of Tesla’s confidential trade secrets. Still further, by filing these applications Matthews set into motion events that could lead (and in some cases have already led) to publication of certain Tesla confidential information regarding the dry-electrode manufacturing process. Matthews never sought Tesla’s permission to file these applications, nor even disclosed their existence until Tesla discovered the applications on its own by finding Tesla-proprietary secrets in published patent applications submitted by Matthews. Since discovering Matthews’ improper conduct, Tesla has been working to block and/or delay publication of affected applications, and only a subset of Tesla’s confidential information regarding dry-electrode manufacturing has published thus far. Regardless, the result of Matthews’ improper conduct has been both to deny Tesla patent rights to its own technology and, just as troubling, to share with the public, including Tesla’s competitors, high-value technology that would not otherwise have been accessible, leading to direct and serious harm to Tesla and its business.
In the lawsuit, Tesla added about Matthews selling its tech to other unnamed companies:
Second, Matthews disclosed Tesla’s confidential trade secrets to other companies, including Tesla competitors. This included Matthews attempting to sell and, in some cases, actually selling equipment for dry-electrode battery manufacturing to Tesla competitors, where said equipment embodied Tesla’s confidential trade secrets. Such acts were improper because Tesla never authorized, and in fact expressly proscribed, the sale or use of its confidential technology to or for anyone other than itself. Similarly, Tesla never authorized, and in fact expressly proscribed, any inspection or demonstration of any equipment or machines embodying Tesla trade secrets by or to any Tesla competitor. As a result, certain of Tesla’s high-value confidential technology for dry electrode manufacturing has been conveyed, or is imminently about to be conveyed by Matthews, without authorization to Tesla’s direct competitors, resulting in direct and serious harm to Tesla and its business.
Tesla is seeking damages and currently estimates the damages “conservatively” at $1 billion.
Matthews is denying Tesla’s claims:
The claims stated in this threadbare complaint are utterly without merit and we intend to vigorously defend the matter. Notably, the complaint vaguely references trade secrets, but fails to identify even one trade secret that Tesla purportedly disclosed to Matthews. We are continuing to evaluate this complaint and may pursue legal remedies.
In fact, the company claims that Tesla is the one trying to steal its dry electrode technology:
Contrary to the allegations in the complaint, Tesla’s lawsuit is simply a new tactic in their ongoing efforts to bully Matthews and improperly take Matthews’ valuable intellectual property. Furthermore, Tesla’s complaint attempts to restrict us from offering our innovative solutions to others, preventing the market from significantly benefiting from the savings associated with our dry battery electrode (“DBE”) solutions, and thus interfering with Matthews’ ability to realize the value of our intellectual property.
Tesla bought Maxwell Technologies in 2019 with the main goal of acquiring its dry electrode technology and integrating it into its new 4680 battery cell technology.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Burlingame, California-based Peak Energy just scored a huge win for sodium-ion batteries. The company announced a multi-year deal with utility-scale battery storage developer Jupiter Power to supply up to 4.75 GWh of sodium-ion battery systems between 2027 and 2030.
Under the agreement, Peak will deliver 720 MWh of storage in 2027 – the largest single sodium-ion battery deployment announced so far. The deal also includes an option for an additional 4 GWh of capacity through 2030, bringing the total contract value to more than $500 million.
Sodium-ion vs. lithium-ion
Peak Energy says its sodium-ion batteries degrade less over time and have lower operations and maintenance costs than lithium-ion systems. Because the batteries don’t degrade as quickly, operators don’t need to add more capacity later in a project’s life to maintain performance. They also use a fully passive cooling system that eliminates pumps, fans, and other components used in lithium-ion setups, reducing maintenance and safety risks.
The company claims its grid-scale sodium-ion system uses up to 97% less auxiliary power, offers about 30% better cell degradation performance over 20 years, and comes with a lower total cost of ownership.
Why this deal matters
The agreement marks a significant step forward for the emerging sodium-ion sector, which has been gaining momentum as a safer and lower-cost alternative to lithium-ion for long-duration and grid-scale energy storage. It also underscores the growing effort to build a domestic sodium-ion battery supply chain in the US.
“From day one, we’ve believed sodium-ion will be the winning technology for grid-scale storage, which is essential to meet rising demand from hyperscalers and AI,” said Landon Mossburg, Peak Energy’s CEO and cofounder. “Deploying the world’s largest sodium-ion energy storage system with one of the nation’s top independent power producers proves that sodium is ready for today and will dominate the future.”
Mike Geier, CTO at Jupiter Power, said the company is “excited to support domestic battery energy storage manufacturing as we continue to increase the deployment of firm, dispatchable energy when and where it’s most needed,” and called Peak’s approach to sodium-ion “a potential game changer for the industry.”
Read more: The US’s first grid-scale sodium-ion battery is now online
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
![The new 2026 Lexus ES is an upgrade in just about every way [Video]](https://i0.wp.com/electrek.co/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/11/new-2026-Lexus-ES-EV.jpeg?resize=1200,628&quality=82&strip=all&ssl=1)
Lexus claims the new ES “takes sedan styling, luxury, and refinement to a higher level” with a complete redesign. With the 2026 ES arriving soon, Lexus offered a closer look at the upgrades inside and out.
The new 2026 Lexus ES debuts in EV and hybrid forms
The eighth-gen ES is bringing more than a sharp new style. Lexus overhauled its flagship sedan from the ground up for the 2026 model year, which will include battery electric (BEV) and hybrid (HEV) powertrain options.
Inspired by the radical LF-ZC show car, the 2026 ES has been fully redesigned with what Lexus calls the “Experience Elegance and Electrified Sedan” concept, aimed at further refining the driving experience.
The new design centers on a redesigned “spindle body” that extends from the hood to the bumper. It also features a redesigned grille, replacing the signature Lexus spindle grille as the brand looks for a new identity in the electric era.
Inside, the new 2026 ES features the latest version of the Lexus Interface multimedia system. The setup includes a 14″ touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, and a 12.3″ driver display cluster.
Based on the redesigned TNGA GA-K platform, the new ES will be available in battery electric (BEV) and hybrid (HEV) powertrains for the first time.
The 2026 Lexus ES lineup consists of two models: the ES 350e, a front-wheel-drive (FWD) model, and the ES 500e, an all-wheel-drive (AWD) model.
Lexus expects the ES 350e to have a driving range of 300 miles when fitted with 19″ wheels, while the ES 500e has an estimated driving range of 250 miles.
Both the ES 350e and 500e feature a built-in NACS port to recharge at Tesla Superchargers. Using DC fast charging, it can recharge from 10% to 80% in about 30 minutes under “ideal conditions,” according to Lexus.
With its debut just around the corner, Lexus offered a closer look at the new 2026 ES inside and out in a new video.
Lexus has yet to announce prices, but the redesigned ES is expected to start at about $45,000 to $50,000, or slightly more than the outgoing model.
After launching the upgraded RZ earlier this month, Lexus said the ES would be next. It’s expected to go on sale in Spring 2026.
What do you think of the redesigned 2026 ES? Do you like the new Lexus design? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Tesla has launched a new version of the Model Y in China, and it’s achieving an impressive new range rating – thanks to a new battery cell from South Korea’s LG.
The new variant, a five-seat, rear-wheel drive long-range model, has been released with an 821-km range based on China’s CLTC standard.
While the CLTC rating is known to be optimistic, 821 km (about 510 miles) is an impressive number and the longest range Tesla has offered in its Model Y lineup to date, which is going to help it be more competitive in the Chinese market.
This new extended range Model Y version is made possible by using the 78.4-kWh ternary lithium-ion battery pack from LG Energy Solution, the same pack found in the also recently launched 830-km range Model 3 variant.
The new long-range RWD Model Y starts at RMB 288,500, which translates to just over $40,500 USD.
The launch comes at a critical time for Tesla in China, which has seen its sales slump in recent months. The automaker recorded its lowest monthly sales in October since November 2022, falling out of the top 10 list for new energy vehicle (NEV) sales.
That’s despite a continued surge in electric vehicle sales in China. Tesla is not benefiting from it amid strong competition.
According to local Chinese media reports, the new 821-km Model Y is already gaining traction with some anecdotal reports of enthusiasm at Tesla stores.
The reports are partly supported by Tesla quickly extending delivery timelines from 2-4 weeks to 4-6 weeks just hours after launch.
Electrek’s Take
I think this is going to be suitable for a decent short-term bump in demand, but it’s still on the expensive side for the Chinese market.
For example, now the Model Y beats the Xpeng G6’s max range of 755 km, but the G6 with this range costs 234,900 RMB (approximately $32,900 USD), which is significantly cheaper.
Every 10,000 RMB tranche lower means a lot more demand in China.
Tesla needs to launch its new “standard” versions to start making a difference with demand long term in China.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024