A Michigan federal judge has refused to disturb a jury’s $13 million award in the Ford IP Dispute $13M bid, siding with California-based tech supplier InterMotive Inc. in a heated battle over trade secrets and trademarks.

U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg ruled Tuesday that jurors had “substantial evidence” to conclude Ford Motor Co. misappropriated InterMotive’s proprietary “Upfitter Interface Module” technology and name, deliberately sowing consumer confusion.

The ruling came with a trio of orders: denying Ford’s request for a new trial, granting InterMotive $3 million in prejudgment interest, and awarding attorney fees in part. Judge Berg even criticized Ford’s early trademark claims as “flimsy,” rebuking the automaker for dragging a smaller rival through years of costly litigation.

How the Dispute Began

The feud dates back to 2017, when Ford accused InterMotive of improperly using its blue oval logo to market software as compatible with Ford vehicles. Those claims were later dropped, but InterMotive countered with allegations that Ford had passed along a confidential sample of its Upfitter Interface Module to another supplier, fueling the development of a competing product.

Upfitting, a niche but lucrative sector, involves customizing vehicles with add-ons like GPS, radios, sirens, or tracking devices. Court filings revealed Ford and InterMotive were targeting the same customers with strikingly similar technology.

Jury’s Landmark 2023 Decision

After a three-week trial in late 2023, jurors sided overwhelmingly with InterMotive, awarding $13.2 million for trade secret misappropriation and about $350,000 for Lanham Act violations. Judge Berg later ruled that the $350,000 Lanham award was duplicative of Ford’s profits already wrapped into the $13 million figure.

Ford countered that the disputed module was already known in the industry and commercially available, arguing its programmable inputs could not be considered trade secrets. Judge Berg rejected that stance, stressing that under Michigan law, even a new combination of known elements can qualify as a protected trade secret.

Evidence of Confusion and Unfair Play

Judge Berg found that jurors had clear grounds to conclude Ford’s use of the “Upfitter Interface Module” name created real consumer confusion. Testimony from InterMotive’s founder confirmed that the company lost sales to Ford in 2023 because buyers mistakenly believed Ford’s product was InterMotive’s.

“The evidence strongly supports the jury’s conclusion that Ford’s use of the name created a likelihood of confusion,” Berg wrote.

Rebuke Over Ford’s “Flimsy” Claims

In a separate order, the judge also slammed Ford for pursuing its initial trademark infringement allegations against InterMotive, despite having granted permission to use its logos. The automaker withdrew the claim only after presenting five days of witness testimony.

“The parties litigated for almost seven years, with Ford pursuing this flimsy trademark infringement claim against a much smaller company … all the way to the threshold of a jury verdict, when it unceremoniously withdrew the claim,” Berg noted.

What’s Next

InterMotive secured prejudgment interest of $3 million under Michigan’s trade secrets law, while Ford escaped having to pay the Lanham Act award separately. The exact amount of attorney fees InterMotive will collect remains pending.

Attorneys for InterMotive declined comment, while Ford’s legal team did not immediately respond to requests.

Ford is represented by Brooks Kushman PC and Bush Seyferth PLLC. InterMotive is represented by Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC.