Client Alerts & Insights
Jury Finds Phillips 66 Liable For Misappropriating Trade Secrets in $605 Million Verdict
October 25, 2024
Authored By:
Last week, a California jury found Phillips 66 liable for misappropriating trade secrets from Propel Fuels Inc., a low-carbon renewable fuels retailer, and awarded Propel $605 million in damages.
In 2015, Propel went to market with a retail high-blend renewable diesel fuel that targeted the California market. Two years later, in 2017, Phillips 66 entered into negotiations for the acquisition of Propel. During due diligence, and after signing a non-disclosure agreement, Propel shared confidential information, including trade secrets, with Phillips 66. These trade secrets included proprietary strategies, formulas, financial data, and other confidential information. The following year, Phillips 66 abruptly terminated the acquisition negotiations, and entered the renewable fuels market in California shortly thereafter.
Propel then brought suit against Phillips 66 in 2022 for breach of the non-disclosure agreement and misappropriation of eighty-eight trade secrets. At trial, Phillips 66 claimed that Phillips 66 knew nothing about the renewable fuel business prior to receiving Propel’s confidential information, and Phillips 66’s entry into the renewable fuels market caused it direct competitive harm. The jury agreed with Propel, finding that Phillip 66’s emergence into the California renewable fuel market was not only premised on Propel’s trade secrets, but was also willful and malicious. After eight days of deliberation, the jury awarded Propel $605 million in damages.
This verdict underscores why proper due diligence, secure non-disclosure agreements, and protection of trade secrets are necessary during evaluations of and negotiations for potential acquisitions. If you have any questions, please reach out to:
Scott Humphrey at shumphrey@beneschlaw.com or 312.624.6420.
Katie Burnett at kburnett@beneschlaw.com or 312.624.6357.
Amakie Amattey at aamattey@beneschlaw.com or 312.506.3444.
Latest News
Back To Wright Line: NLRB Resets Standards for Workplace Misconduct
Employers have regained greater flexibility to address offensive or abusive employee conduct that occurs during union activity or other activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act. On September 23, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) issued a significant decision in Lion Elastomers LLC, 375 NLRB No. 41, restoring the prior standard for evaluating discipline when employee misconduct occurs during protected concerted activity from General Motors LLC, 369 NLRB No. 127.
Can an Algorithm Commit a Tort? The Circuit Split Over Section 230
A growing circuit split is reshaping the scope of Section 230 immunity. While the Fourth and Ninth Circuits continue to view algorithmic recommendations as protected publisher conduct, the Third Circuit has taken a narrower approach, holding that certain algorithm-driven content recommendations may constitute a platform’s own conduct and therefore fall outside Section 230’s protections.
Key Considerations for Businesses facing Defamation Issues: Strategies for Protecting Your Reputation and Brand
Defamation risk for businesses has never been higher. Even five years ago, unfavorable press could be expected to fade from …
SDNY Bankruptcy Court Offers Further Direction on Default Interest and Fee Recovery
The SDNY Bankruptcy Court’s written decision in 1300 Desert Willow builds on the framework established in Mako, providing additional guidance on when a debtor can overcome the presumption that an oversecured creditor is entitled to post-petition default interest at the contractual rate.