Matthews International (MATW) – DBE Victory
Dry Battery Electrode (DBE) technology has been at the center of a conflict between Matthews International (MATW) and Tesla (TSLA) for quite some time.
Back in June 2024, Tesla filed a lawsuit against Matthews for “alleged trade secret theft.” The alleged misappropriated trade secrets related to Tesla’s dry-electrode battery manufacturing technology. Tesla alleges that Matthews used Tesla’s confidential trade secrets in their own patent filings, alleging attempting to “claim for itself both ownership and inventorship of Tesla’s confidential trade secrets.” In addition, Tesla alleges that Matthews disclosed Tesla’s confidential trade secrets to Tesla’s competitors, including by “selling equipment for dry-electrode battery manufacturing” which “embodied Tesla’s confidential trade secrets.” Tesla “conservatively estimates” that the damages will exceed $1B.
On February 5th, 2025, an arbitrator issued a decision on an arbitration demand filed by Matthews against Tesla. This ruling acknowledged Matthews’ extensive, pre-Tesla background in manufacturing advanced Dry Battery Electrode technology and affirmed that the company has the right to sell its solutions to customers other than Tesla.
Recently, on October 1st, Matthews announced that the United States District Court for the Northern District of California has issued an opinion and order confirming a previous arbitration decision in Matthews’ favor and denied Tesla’s attempt to overturn it. Per the press release, this decision reinforces Matthews’ longstanding leadership in the design, development, and manufacturing of continuous process machinery for battery electrode production, including its proprietary dry battery electrode (DBE) solutions.
B. Riley analyst Liam Burke would issue a note on October 2nd saying:
“The company’s market-leading engineered calendaring process has proven very effective in producing dry battery electrodes. Although still in an early stage of market development, the economic benefits of the DBE platform are compelling compared to the traditional wet process.”
“Marketing and quote activity resumed after the initial victory by Matthews, but the favorable court ruling should result in a further step-up in quote and order activity, and open the door to rebuilding Matthews’ order pipeline.”
