Partners Michael Songer, Kent Gardiner, Stephen Byers, and Terence Ross.
Crowell & Moring and McGuireWoods LLP served as co-counsel to DuPont on the case.
What Our Clients Say:
"Today's jury decision is an enormous victory for global intellectual property protection and the millions of users of DuPont™ Kevlar® technology and products. The size of this award is one of the largest in defense of business processes and technologies."
- Thomas Sager, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of DuPont
We demonstrated our own brand of bullet-stopping power for DuPont
South Korean textile company Kolon Industries was stealing trade secrets of the Kevlar® product line, a key material in bulletproof vests, fiber optic cable, brake pads, and more. In 2009, DuPont filed suit against Kolon, alleging extensive theft of trade secrets related to the manufacturing and sale of the Kevlar® product of DuPont.
Our first step was to evaluate our litigation options, including the court system and the International Trade Commission in the U.S. Next, we developed a comprehensive case strategy that focused on all aspects of the case: the civil litigation in the United States; potential criminal prosecution; and the remedies available when a large foreign conglomerate steals critical technology. Given the magnitude of Kolon’s theft, we also worked to develop a case theory that would allow DuPont to recover its R&D expenditures for Kevlar. Finally, we assembled a diverse team spanning multiple practice areas, offices, and non-attorney trade policy advisors at C&M International, an affiliate of Crowell & Moring that provides expertise on international trade issues.
We secured a jury verdict for DuPont after a seven-week trial and convinced the Department of Justice to bring extensive criminal charges against Kolon, all of which led Kolon to settle the case on highly favorable terms for DuPont. In April 2015, Kolon agreed to pay DuPont $275 million in damages and restitution and pleaded guilty to criminal charges resulting in an $85 million criminal penalty. This case serves as a benchmark for how to develop and win large, complex, international litigation matters.