The dispute surrounded the LAVA thermal processing systems
A federal court jury in Connecticut has awarded millions of dollars to MacDermid Printing Solutions LLC in a litigation concerning breach of contract, antitrust and trade secrets theft.
Originally filed in 2008, the lawsuit alleged that certain illegal activities had occurred between Cortron, which had been MacDermid’s sole supplier of its LAVA thermal processing systems, and E.I. DuPont de Nemours Company, which injured MacDermid and portions of the flexographic printing market.
The jury found that the activities between Cortron and DuPont violated federal and state anti-trust laws and has awarded $3,941,325 in anti-trust damages. The jury also awarded $7,903,909 for breach of contract, $3,790,939 plus punitive damages for the misappropriation of trade secrets, and $11,875,204 plus punitive damages for the violation of a statute prohibiting unfair and deceitful trade practices. The jury rejected all of the counterclaims filed by Cortron.
According to the documents filed with the court, Cortron allegedly entered into a conspiracy in 2008 through which they breached certain agreements with MacDermid, turned over extensive proprietary information to a competitor, and violated anti-trust laws, regarding thermal flexographic plate processing equipment.
Cortron itself closed its doors in late 2008, the investigation surrounding the lawsuit found that DuPont had agreed to indemnify Cortron for the lawsuit filed by MacDermid and has paid for Cortron’s litigation costs.
The company has sought a judgment declaring that MacDermid owns the disputed intellectual property. Dr Timothy Gotsick, general manager of MacDermid, said, ‘I am proud of MacDermid’s determination to fight past all obstacles and bring a competitive approach to the thermal processing market with our LAVA system. Furthermore, I appreciate the support of MacDermid executive management during this protracted battle. Despite the misconduct of Cortron, we have been determined to serve customers with thermal platemaking solutions, and we will continue to do so vigorously and enthusiastically. Having a jury of our peers ratify our claims was satisfying, but what I look forward to most is getting back to our real mission: bringing innovative solutions to the flexographic industry which clearly wants more choices in plate processing technology.’
As the jury found that many of the challenged acts were willful and malicious, the court must now assess appropriate punitive damages. The court must also separately address Cortron’s attempted assignment of various patent and intellectual property rights.
