Background
Shoals Technologies Group (Nasdaq: SHLS) designs and manufactures electrical balance-of-system (eBOS) products for utility-scale solar installations. Its flagship Big Lead Assembly (BLA) technology — protected by U.S. Patent Nos. 12,015,375 and 12,015,376 — covers trunk bus cable assemblies: the wiring systems that run along rows of solar panels and connect them to central inverters. Trunk bus assemblies carry DC current from dozens of individual panel strings and are critical to the cost and efficiency of large-scale solar farms.
Voltage, LLC (Chapel Hill, N.C.) entered the market with a competing product called the LYNX trunk bus cable assembly, also manufactured by Ningbo Voltage Smart Production Co., Ltd. in China. Shoals asserted that the LYNX products were copied from its patented designs. In January 2025, Shoals filed a petition with the ITC requesting a Section 337 investigation — the primary U.S. tool for stopping patent-infringing imports at the border — naming both Voltage and Ningbo Voltage as respondents.
An Administrative Law Judge issued an initial determination on February 6, 2026, finding that Voltage had violated Section 337 and recommending a limited exclusion order. The full Commission reviewed the case and, in a final determination issued June 25–26, 2026, affirmed the ALJ’s ruling.
The Commission’s Holding
The ITC’s full Commission found that Voltage’s LYNX trunk bus cable assemblies infringed valid claims of Shoals’ patents and that the company violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by importing those products into the United States. The Commission affirmed the ALJ’s finding that Shoals’ patents were not unenforceable — rejecting Voltage’s arguments about alleged misconduct — and imposed a limited exclusion order prohibiting Voltage and Ningbo Voltage from importing the infringing LYNX products.
During the mandatory 60-day presidential review period, Voltage may continue to sell existing inventory in the United States only by posting a bond equal to 100% of the entered value of the restricted articles. This bond requirement creates immediate commercial pressure and effectively makes continued imports economically prohibitive unless the President or USTR intervenes to set aside the order within the review window — a rare occurrence.
Key Takeaways
- ITC exclusion orders are fast and powerful. Unlike district court injunctions — which require satisfying the four-factor eBay test — the ITC can issue exclusion orders as a matter of course when infringement is proven. For companies facing import competition, Section 337 investigations often deliver faster and more complete relief than federal court.
- Unenforceability defenses face a high bar at the ITC. The Commission rejected Voltage’s arguments that Shoals’ patents were unenforceable, holding that the alleged misconduct lacked the “but-for materiality” required to prove inequitable conduct — a common but difficult defense in ITC proceedings.
- Parallel litigation continues. Shoals is also pursuing Voltage in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. The ITC determination does not bind the district court on damages, and that litigation continues independently.
- Solar energy IP enforcement is intensifying. As the U.S. solar market has grown, so has patent litigation over eBOS components. This case signals that ITC Section 337 is becoming a go-to venue for clean-energy hardware makers protecting manufacturing investments against lower-cost imports.
Why It Matters
Solar energy has become one of the fastest-growing areas of patent litigation in recent years. Manufacturers who invest in proprietary wiring, connector, and assembly designs face commoditization pressure from lower-cost imports, particularly from China. The ITC’s Section 337 process — with its statutory 16-month target timeline from filing to final determination — gives domestic patent holders a meaningful enforcement mechanism that works at the border before infringing goods reach customers.
For Voltage, the impact is immediate: the 100% bond requirement on imports makes the LYNX product commercially unviable during the presidential review period, and if the order stands, Voltage would need to redesign the product to exit the injunction. For the broader solar industry, the case reinforces that eBOS innovations are protectable and that ITC relief is a viable complement to district court patent litigation when imports are part of the equation.