AirPro’s breach of contract lawsuit against Opus dismissed, counterclaim also thrown out
A breach of contract lawsuit filed by AirPro Diagnostics against Opus IVS and its subsidiary, Drew Technologies, has been dismissed.
AirPro filed suit in December 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan over an agreement between the companies signed on Feb. 13, 2017. Under the terms, the parties agreed to exchange information with one another, including “business strategies, pricing, techniques, computer programs, methods, drawings, formulas, specifications, software, or other data of a business or technical nature[.]”
In October 2023, Opus and Drew countersued, denying all allegations against them, including breach of contract, unfair competition, and tortious interference with business expectancy.
Both sides filed for summary judgment in February of this year.
The countersuit has also been dismissed with prejudice.
The Sept. 29 order from U.S. District Judge Linda V. Parker states: “Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and for partial summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part in that the court holds that defendants are entitled to summary judgment with respect to AirPro’s claims against them but are not entitled to summary judgment as to Opus IVS’ breach of contract counterclaim against AirPro. It is further ordered that AirPro’s motion for summary judgment is granted in that it is entitled to summary judgment as to Opus IVS’ counterclaims.”
Opus shared a press release today regarding the decision, calling it a “legal victory… validating Opus IVS’s position and affirming the company’s continued leadership in the automotive diagnostics industry.”
“The court’s judgment confirms that Opus IVS and its affiliated companies acted appropriately in both product development and business practices,” the release says. “AirPro’s allegations of breach of contract, unfair competition, and tortious interference were rejected in full. The ruling underscores the strength of Opus IVS’s intellectual property, licensing practices, and ongoing commitment to industry standards.
“These court findings highlight the importance of clarity when describing OEM vs. aftermarket tools to collision and mechanical repair shops.”
Check back here for more details from RDN about the case, including a response from AirPro.
Images
Featured image credit: BrianAJackson/iStock