Substantial Trade Secret Verdicts Continue with $452 Million Decision Against South Korean Company
US civil juries have returned a number of substantial trade secret verdicts against defendants over the past decade. In December 2024, a company from South Korea became the most recent defendant on the receiving end of a large trade secret jury verdict.
The lawsuit was brought by a company called Insulet. The case was filed on August 2, 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts and assigned case number 23-11780-FDS. The dispute involved information regarding the design, manufacturing process, and functionality of an insulin delivery system marketed by Insulet under the name Omnipod. The complaint filed by Insulet identified the product at issue as “Insulet’s first-of-its-kind ‘patch pump,’ a compact, wearable, waterproof, adhesive medical device that delivers insulin to people with insulin-dependent diabetes.” The complaint alleged that more than $600 million was invested in nearly two decades of work to bring Insulet’s product to market, whereas defendant EOFlow’s product was brought to market in South Korea in just five years, after EOFlow hired former employees of Insulet and gained access to trade secret information.
The case received media attention previously after a preliminary injunction was entered by the District Court, but the injunction was then reversed by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a sternly worded decision.
In December 2024, after a lengthy trial, the Massachusetts jury concluded that corporate defendants EOFlow, Inc., EOFlow Co., Ltd., and Nephria Bio, Inc., along with three individuals, misappropriated multiple trade secrets of Insulet. According to Insulet’s counsel, the jury awarded Insulet $170 million in compensatory damages and “also found that the misappropriation of three of Insulet’s trade secrets was willful and malicious and awarded an additional $282 million in exemplary or punitive damages, for a total damages award of $452 million.”
This article is available in the Jenner & Block Japan Newsletter. / この記事はJenner & Blockニュースレターに掲載されています。
Related Attorneys
Related Articles
Related Capabilities
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.
US civil juries have returned a number of substantial trade secret verdicts against defendants over the past decade. In December 2024, a company from South Korea became the most recent defendant on the receiving end of a large trade secret jury verdict.
The lawsuit was brought by a company called Insulet. The case was filed on August 2, 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts and assigned case number 23-11780-FDS. The dispute involved information regarding the design, manufacturing process, and functionality of an insulin delivery system marketed by Insulet under the name Omnipod. The complaint filed by Insulet identified the product at issue as “Insulet’s first-of-its-kind ‘patch pump,’ a compact, wearable, waterproof, adhesive medical device that delivers insulin to people with insulin-dependent diabetes.” The complaint alleged that more than $600 million was invested in nearly two decades of work to bring Insulet’s product to market, whereas defendant EOFlow’s product was brought to market in South Korea in just five years, after EOFlow hired former employees of Insulet and gained access to trade secret information.
The case received media attention previously after a preliminary injunction was entered by the District Court, but the injunction was then reversed by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a sternly worded decision.
In December 2024, after a lengthy trial, the Massachusetts jury concluded that corporate defendants EOFlow, Inc., EOFlow Co., Ltd., and Nephria Bio, Inc., along with three individuals, misappropriated multiple trade secrets of Insulet. According to Insulet’s counsel, the jury awarded Insulet $170 million in compensatory damages and “also found that the misappropriation of three of Insulet’s trade secrets was willful and malicious and awarded an additional $282 million in exemplary or punitive damages, for a total damages award of $452 million.”
This article is available in the Jenner & Block Japan Newsletter. / この記事はJenner & Blockニュースレターに掲載されています。
Related Attorneys
Related Articles
Related Capabilities
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.
News and Insights
Event
Associate Steven Arango to Speak at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair
On September 18, Associate Steven Arango will speak on a panel at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair (VLCF), the only legal career fair in the United States dedicated to veterans, active-duty service members, and military spouses.
September 18, 2026
Publications
In American Banker, Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon Weighs in on OCC's Handling of Fintech Bank Charter Applications
Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon spoke with American Banker about how the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is approaching bank charter applications from fintechs, amid a growing wave of companies seeking charters from federal regulators.
August 18, 2026
Event
Partner David Greenwald to Speak at PLI Program on Privilege and AI
On August 17, David Greenwald will speak at "Fitting New “Tech” Into the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protection," a virtual program hosted by the Practising Law Institute (PLI).
August 17, 2026
Publications
Special Counsel Kimberly Cook Featured in FCBA Member Spotlight
The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) featured Kimberly Cook in its Member Spotlight series.
August 13, 2026
Recognition
Three Jenner & Block Partners Named to Crain's New York Business' 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law List
Crain's New York Business recognized Jenner & Block Partners Anthony Barkow, Alison Stein, and Damian Williams among its 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law.
August 10, 2026
Publications
In Law360, Trump Debarment Threat Calls for Targeted Defense Plan
Partners Ashley Callen and David Robbins authored an article for Law360 examining how entities should respond when suspension or debarment is threatened directly by the president, rather than initiated through the usual agency-driven process.
August 6, 2026