HB Solution secures Kateeva’s QD-OLED inkjet patents as collateral
Korean firm to begin supplying Samsung Display with inkjet kits next month
HB Solution had secured patents owned by US inkjet equipment firm Kateeva as collateral in case it doesn’t get repaid its investment, TheElec has learned.
HB Solution, which had invested around 16 billion won in Kateeva that is giving it technological support, had said back in March that it will buy US$13.5 million worth of convertible promissory notes issued by Kateeva. The South Korean company secured some of the patents owned by the latter as collateral during this transaction.
In April, HB Solution secured the right of pledge of 68 patents in South Korea owned by Kateeva.
If Kateeva fails to pay back its debts to HB Solution, the latter will become the owner of the patents.
Also in April, HB Solution secured the right of pledge for 273 patents of Kateeva’s in the US. However, another Hong Kong firm called Sino Xin Ji Limited also had secured the right of pledge over the same patents and is thought to have preferential rights over them when Kateeva fails to pay back its debts.
HB Solution was expected to supply customer Samsung Display with quantum dot (QD) color conversion layer color filter inkjet equipment.
These kits were expected to be used at the South Korean display panel maker's Gen 8.5 (2200x2500mm) QD-OLED line, which is called Q1.
Kateeva would have manufactured the equipment and supplied them to HB Solution before ultimately being delivered to Samsung Display.
But this had been delayed and in the meanwhile, HB Solution had secured Kateeva’s patents as collateral.
HB Solution was expecting to receive an order for the equipment early next month, sources said.
Meanwhile, in 2019, Samsung Display had given all orders for QD color filter inkjet machines to Samsung Electronics’ subsidiary Semes. Kateeva failed to win even one order back then.
But Semes’ kits underperformed and Samsung Display agreed to a conditional purchase of Kateeva’s kits. The condition was that it didn’t need to pay for the equipment if its performance didn’t meet the agreed standard.