The Chemours Company FC, LLC (“Chemours”) has dismissed the latest amended claims made by FluoroFusion Specialty Chemicals Inc. and its distributor, Dynatemp International Inc., in a continuing antitrust lawsuit. The claims, which seek a declaratory judgment asserting that Chemours holds no patents for the refrigerant chemical R-454B, have been called “perplexing” by the company, which argues the matter is already a matter of public record.
Chemours, in a memorandum filed Monday, strongly criticized FluoroFusion and Dynatemp for attempting to create an artificial dispute regarding its patent on R-454B. The company emphasized that the details of any patents held by Chemours are easily accessible through public patent records, rendering the claim unnecessary and without merit.
“The amended complaint fares no better than the original,” Chemours stated in its memorandum. “The new declaratory judgment claim is a transparent attempt to manufacture a dispute where none exists.”
Chemours also noted that the new claim does not address previously identified deficiencies in the initial legal filing. The company reiterated its position that FluoroFusion and Dynatemp’s claims of anticompetitive behavior in the HVAC refrigerant market are unfounded and do not constitute valid antitrust violations.
The dispute stems from a failed distribution deal between Chemours and FluoroFusion, largely due to disagreements over Chemours’ requirement that products be sold under the Koura brand, a partnership with distributor Mexichem Fluor Inc. Chemours asserts that this breakdown is not indicative of any anticompetitive practice but merely the result of a failed negotiation.
“FluoroFusion is attempting to turn a simple contract negotiation issue into an antitrust case,” Chemours further argued. “There is no breach of contract, and the terms of doing business through the Koura brand do not create any legal conspiracy.”
Mexichem Fluor, doing business as Koura, has also filed its own motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Both Chemours and Koura have stated that FluoroFusion’s claims are legally baseless and amount to nothing more than an effort to secure a beneficial contract through the courts.
The case, FluoroFusion Specialty Chemicals, Inc. et al. v. The Chemours Company FC, LLC et al., is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, under case number 5:24-cv-00716.
