Rowe, Mercer & Hale LLP obtained a complete defense verdict in June 2026 on behalf of a technology company sued by a Fortune 500 competitor for alleged misappropriation of trade secrets. The plaintiff sought damages exceeding $120 million, claiming that the client had improperly acquired and used proprietary algorithms and technical processes central to the plaintiff’s competitive position. After a multi-week jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the firm’s client on all counts.
The Dispute
The plaintiff, a large publicly traded technology company, filed suit alleging that the client had misappropriated trade secrets in connection with the departure of several former employees. The complaint asserted claims under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Illinois Trade Secrets Act, and sought damages calculated based on alleged unjust enrichment, lost profits, and diminution in competitive value—a total demand that the plaintiff’s damages expert placed at approximately $120 million.
Trial Strategy
Rowe, Mercer & Hale’s trial team challenged the plaintiff’s case on two independent grounds. First, the firm attacked the foundational premise that the information at issue qualified as protectable trade secrets, presenting evidence that the alleged secrets were either publicly available, standard in the industry, or inadequately protected by the plaintiff. Second, the team demonstrated through documentary evidence and witness testimony that the client developed its competing technology independently, without use of any information belonging to the plaintiff.
The firm also conducted an aggressive cross-examination of the plaintiff’s damages expert, exposing methodological flaws and unsupported assumptions that inflated the claimed figure.
The Verdict
After deliberating, the jury found for the defendant on every claim. The verdict represented a complete win: no misappropriation, no damages, and no injunctive relief. The result preserved the client’s ability to continue operating its technology platform without restriction.
Significance
Trade secret litigation brought by large, well-resourced plaintiffs against smaller competitors presents asymmetric risks. This verdict reflects the firm’s ability to try complex technology disputes to conclusion, challenge speculative damages theories, and protect clients’ businesses from claims designed to suppress competition rather than vindicate genuine proprietary interests.
Nancy Hale and Roxy Mercer led the trial team.