UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES
Plaintiff Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC ("CPS" or "Plaintiff"), by and through its undersigned attorneys, Calderwood & Harkness LLP, for its Verified Complaint against Defendants Harlow Chemical Supply Inc. ("Harlow"), Gerald W. Norris ("Norris"), and Kenneth Fielding ("Fielding") (collectively, "Defendants"), hereby alleges as follows:
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
1. Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC brings this action to recover and protect its proprietary high-performance barrier coating formulation designated CPS-BC-1147, a trade secret developed over a period of approximately twenty-four (24) months, from January 2015 through December 2016, at a cost of approximately $3.8 million in research and development investment. CPS-BC-1147 represents one of the most commercially significant innovations in CPS's portfolio and is the product of substantial intellectual effort, financial commitment, and scientific expertise.
2. CPS-BC-1147 is a water-based, high-performance barrier coating designed for use on food-grade paperboard packaging substrates. The formulation provides superior moisture-vapor, grease, and oxygen barrier properties, enabling CPS's customers to produce food packaging that meets exacting regulatory and performance standards while reducing reliance on petroleum-based and plastic-laminate alternatives.
3. CPS-BC-1147 has proven to be a significant commercial success. In fiscal year 2023, CPS-BC-1147 accounted for approximately twenty-two percent (22%) of CPS's total coatings revenue, equating to approximately $47.23 million of CPS's $214.7 million in total revenue. The formulation has become a cornerstone of CPS's product offerings to the food packaging industry.
4. Defendant Harlow Chemical Supply Inc. served as CPS's toll-manufacturing supplier from March 2017 through January 2023, pursuant to a Toll Manufacturing Agreement (the "TMA") that contained strict confidentiality, non-reverse-engineering, non-compete, and customer non-solicitation covenants designed to protect CPS's proprietary information during and after the tolling relationship.
5. During the course of the tolling relationship, Harlow, acting through and at the direction of Defendants Gerald W. Norris and Kenneth Fielding, secretly and wrongfully reverse-engineered CPS's proprietary formulation by sending CPS Concentrate A — a pre-blended concentrate containing five undisclosed proprietary additive components — to a third-party analytical laboratory, Archer Material Sciences Inc., located in Indianapolis, Indiana, for detailed compositional analysis. This conduct was undertaken covertly, without CPS's knowledge or consent, and in direct and willful violation of the express prohibition on reverse engineering contained in Section 8.2 of the TMA.
6. Beginning in approximately April 2023 — a mere three months after the TMA's termination — Harlow commenced manufacturing and marketing a barrier coating product under the name "ShieldCoat Pro 900" that is a near-identical copy of CPS-BC-1147. Making matters worse, Harlow, through its Sales Director Amanda Trent, directly solicited CPS's own longstanding customers, offering ShieldCoat Pro 900 at a price approximately fifteen percent (15%) below CPS's pricing for CPS-BC-1147.
7. In response to these troubling developments, CPS retained Thornburg Analytics LLC, an independent forensic analytical chemistry laboratory based in Cincinnati, Ohio, to perform a forensic comparison of ShieldCoat Pro 900 and CPS-BC-1147. Thornburg's principal, Dr. Elena Vasquez, Ph.D. (Analytical Chemistry), concluded in her preliminary report dated December 22, 2023, that ShieldCoat Pro 900 matches CPS-BC-1147 in all fourteen (14) chemical constituents within ±0.3% by weight — a degree of compositional correspondence that Dr. Vasquez characterized as "not achievable through independent development" and "consistent only with access to the complete formulation."
8. CPS brings claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act ("DTSA"), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1836–1839; the Ohio Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("Ohio UTSA"), Ohio Rev. Code §§ 1333.61–1333.69; for breach of contract; for tortious interference with business relationships; and for unjust enrichment.
9. CPS seeks temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief; compensatory damages; exemplary damages for willful and malicious misappropriation; disgorgement of Defendants' unjust profits; reasonable attorneys' fees and costs; and all other relief the Court deems just and equitable.
I. THE PARTIES
A. Plaintiff Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC
10. Plaintiff Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC is an Ohio limited liability company with its principal place of business and headquarters located at 4800 Scioto Industrial Parkway, Columbus, Ohio 43228. CPS's registered agent for service of process in the State of Ohio is CT Statutory Services LLC, 4400 Easton Commons, Suite 125, Columbus, Ohio 43219. CPS's federal employer identification number is 31-4827193.
11. CPS is a manufacturer of specialty barrier coatings, laminates, and packaging substrates for the food, pharmaceutical, and industrial packaging industries. CPS's manufacturing operations are centered at its Columbus, Ohio facility, where the company produces approximately thirty-eight (38) million pounds of coatings annually. CPS employs approximately 620 individuals across its operations.
12. In fiscal year 2023, CPS reported total revenue of approximately $214.7 million and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization ("EBITDA") of approximately $31.2 million. CPS-BC-1147 is the single largest product line within CPS's coatings portfolio, accounting for approximately $47.23 million of CPS's total revenue, or approximately twenty-two percent (22%).
13. CPS is led by its Chief Executive Officer, David Kessler. The company's Vice President of Research & Development is Dr. Margaret Yuen, who led the team that developed CPS-BC-1147. CPS's General Counsel is Rachel Sung, and its Sales Director is Brian Novotny.
14. CPS is a portfolio company of Ridgepoint Capital Partners LP, a Cleveland-based middle-market private equity firm organized as a Delaware limited partnership with its principal office at 1900 Euclid Avenue, Suite 3400, Cleveland, Ohio 44115. Ridgepoint acquired CPS in 2019 for an enterprise value of approximately $285 million, reflecting the substantial value of CPS's proprietary coating technologies, customer relationships, and market position.
15. CPS maintains a $130 million senior secured credit facility with Keystone Commerce Bank, a financial institution with offices at 500 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219. The value of CPS's proprietary formulations, including CPS-BC-1147, is a material component of the collateral base and going-concern value supporting this credit facility.
B. Defendant Harlow Chemical Supply Inc.
16. Defendant Harlow Chemical Supply Inc. is an Indiana corporation with its principal place of business and headquarters located at 1120 Commerce Boulevard, Terre Haute, Indiana 47802. Harlow's registered agent for service of process in the State of Indiana is Indiana Registered Agents Inc., 201 North Illinois Street, Suite 1600, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. Harlow's federal employer identification number is 35-2918467.
17. Harlow is a contract (toll) chemical manufacturer serving the coatings, adhesives, and sealants industries. Harlow provides blending, mixing, packaging, and related toll manufacturing services to third-party principals who supply proprietary formulations and, in many cases, proprietary raw materials to Harlow for processing. Harlow employs approximately 210 individuals.
18. Harlow's estimated revenue for fiscal year 2023 was approximately $87.3 million. Harlow's Chief Executive Officer and sole shareholder is Defendant Gerald W. Norris. Harlow's Vice President of Technical Operations is Defendant Kenneth Fielding. Harlow's Sales Director is Amanda Trent.
C. Defendant Gerald W. Norris
19. Defendant Gerald W. Norris is an individual residing in or near Terre Haute, Indiana. Norris is the Chief Executive Officer and sole shareholder of Harlow Chemical Supply Inc.
20. Norris directed, authorized, and approved the misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets as described herein. Norris personally directed the development and marketing of ShieldCoat Pro 900 and approved the solicitation of CPS's customers. As the sole shareholder and controlling principal of Harlow, Norris exercised complete dominion and control over Harlow's business decisions and operations and is personally liable for the tortious conduct described in this Complaint.
D. Defendant Kenneth Fielding
21. Defendant Kenneth Fielding is an individual residing in or near Terre Haute, Indiana. Fielding serves as Vice President of Technical Operations at Harlow Chemical Supply Inc.
22. Fielding personally directed the reverse engineering of CPS Concentrate A, including arranging for its submission to Archer Material Sciences Inc. for compositional analysis, in direct and willful violation of the TMA. Fielding also retained batch production records, analytical test results, and process parameter logs generated in connection with Harlow's toll manufacturing of CPS-BC-1147 beyond the scope permitted by the TMA. These retained records contained CPS's proprietary processing temperatures, shear rates, and order-of-addition protocols.
23. Fielding is personally liable for his tortious conduct, including his active participation in the misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets and his role in directing the development of ShieldCoat Pro 900 based on the misappropriated formulation.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
24. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal claims asserted herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction) because CPS asserts claims arising under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1836–1839, a federal statute.
25. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over CPS's state-law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because those claims — including claims under the Ohio Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Ohio Rev. Code §§ 1333.61–1333.69), breach of contract, tortious interference with business relationships, and unjust enrichment — arise from the same case or controversy and share a common nucleus of operative facts with the federal DTSA claim.
B. Personal Jurisdiction
26. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Harlow Chemical Supply Inc. because Harlow transacted substantial business in the State of Ohio over an extended period. Specifically, Harlow performed toll manufacturing services for CPS under the TMA for nearly six years, regularly shipped finished product to CPS's Columbus, Ohio facility, and solicited CPS's Ohio-based customers. Harlow's contacts with Ohio are extensive, continuous, and directly related to the claims at issue in this action.
27. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants Gerald W. Norris and Kenneth Fielding because Norris and Fielding directed tortious conduct at CPS in Ohio, including the misappropriation of trade secrets belonging to an Ohio company, the use of those trade secrets to manufacture a competing product, and the solicitation of CPS's Ohio-based customers. The injuries caused by Norris's and Fielding's conduct were felt in Ohio, where CPS is headquartered and where CPS-BC-1147 was developed and is manufactured.
28. Additionally, the TMA was negotiated in part in Ohio, was partially performed in Ohio, and governed a commercial relationship with an Ohio-based company. The exercise of personal jurisdiction over each Defendant is consistent with the requirements of due process.
C. Venue.
29. Venue is proper in the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to CPS's claims occurred in this district. CPS developed CPS-BC-1147 at its headquarters in Columbus, Ohio. CPS maintained its trade secrets at its Columbus facility. CPS suffered the impact of Defendants' misappropriation — including lost sales, price erosion, and competitive harm — at its Columbus, Ohio operations. CPS's principal customer relationships affected by Defendants' solicitation are managed from CPS's Columbus headquarters.
III. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A. CPS's Development of CPS-BC-1147
30. In January 2015, CPS's Research & Development team, led by Dr. Margaret Yuen, Vice President of Research & Development, commenced a comprehensive development program aimed at creating a next-generation water-based barrier coating for food-grade paperboard packaging substrates. The goal of the program was to develop a single-application coating system capable of providing superior moisture-vapor transmission resistance, grease resistance, and oxygen barrier properties — performance attributes that historically required multiple coating layers or the use of petroleum-based laminate films.
31. The development of CPS-BC-1147 spanned approximately twenty-four (24) months, from January 2015 through December 2016. Over this period, Dr. Yuen and her team conducted extensive raw material screening, formulation optimization trials, pilot-line testing, performance validation, accelerated aging studies, and regulatory compliance testing to ensure the resulting product met FDA requirements for direct and indirect food contact applications.
32. CPS invested approximately $3.8 million in total R&D costs in connection with the development of CPS-BC-1147. These costs encompassed laboratory equipment purchases and upgrades, raw material procurement for trial formulations, personnel costs for the dedicated R&D team, pilot-line production runs, third-party FDA compliance testing, and related overhead expenses. This investment was substantial and reflected CPS's commitment to developing a differentiated, high-value product.
33. The resulting formulation, designated CPS-BC-1147, is a water-based, high-performance barrier coating designed for application to food-grade paperboard packaging substrates. CPS-BC-1147 provides a combination of moisture-vapor, grease, and oxygen barrier properties in a single-coat application that exceeds the performance of competing multi-layer coating systems.
34. The CPS-BC-1147 formulation comprises fourteen (14) distinct chemical constituents combined in proprietary ratios. In addition to the specific chemical identities and weight percentages of the constituents, CPS's trade secret encompasses a specific order-of-addition protocol (the sequence in which the constituents are introduced during the blending process) and defined processing temperatures and shear rates that are critical to achieving the desired coating performance. Deviation from the proprietary order-of-addition, temperatures, or shear rates results in measurably diminished barrier performance.
35. CPS-BC-1147 is not disclosed on any product data sheet, patent, patent application, or public filing. CPS made a deliberate strategic decision not to seek patent protection for CPS-BC-1147 in order to avoid the public disclosure of the formulation that patent protection would require. Instead, CPS elected to protect CPS-BC-1147 exclusively as a trade secret.
36. Since its commercial launch, CPS-BC-1147 has become the most commercially significant product in CPS's coatings portfolio. In fiscal year 2023, CPS-BC-1147 accounted for approximately twenty-two percent (22%) of CPS's total coatings revenue, equating to approximately $47.23 million of CPS's $214.7 million in total revenue. CPS-BC-1147 carries margins substantially above CPS's company-wide average, and the formulation represents a critical competitive advantage for CPS in the food packaging coatings market.
B. CPS's Reasonable Measures to Protect Its Trade Secrets
37. CPS has at all relevant times taken reasonable and extensive measures to maintain the secrecy of the CPS-BC-1147 formulation, including the specific chemical identities and proportions of its fourteen constituents, the order-of-addition protocol, and the processing parameters.
38. Within CPS's Columbus, Ohio headquarters and manufacturing facility, access to the complete CPS-BC-1147 formulation is restricted to a limited group of R&D and production personnel who have a demonstrated need to know the full formulation for purposes of quality control, production oversight, or product development. Each individual with access to the complete formulation has executed a confidentiality and invention assignment agreement with CPS.
39. CPS maintains physical security measures at its Columbus facility, including badge-controlled access to the R&D laboratory and formulation archives, security cameras, and restricted access to the production areas where CPS-BC-1147 is blended and processed. CPS also maintains electronic security measures, including password-protected databases, encryption of formulation files, access logging, and role-based permissions that limit electronic access to formulation data to authorized personnel.
40. When CPS engaged Harlow as a toll manufacturer in 2017, CPS took deliberate steps to limit the amount of proprietary information disclosed to Harlow. Specifically, CPS provided Harlow with only a "Partial Formulation Disclosure" that covered nine (9) of the fourteen (14) chemical constituents of CPS-BC-1147 and disclosed only general proportional ranges — not the precise weight percentages — for those nine constituents. This Partial Formulation Disclosure was sufficient to enable Harlow to perform the blending and packaging steps assigned to it under the TMA, but was deliberately designed to prevent Harlow from possessing the complete formulation.
41. The remaining five (5) proprietary additive components — which are critical to CPS-BC-1147's superior barrier performance and which differentiate CPS-BC-1147 from competing products — were pre-blended by CPS at its Columbus facility into a single concentrate designated "CPS Concentrate A." CPS Concentrate A was then shipped to Harlow's Terre Haute, Indiana facility in sealed containers for incorporation into the blending process. The individual identities and proportions of the five constituent chemicals within CPS Concentrate A were never disclosed to Harlow, and Harlow had no legitimate need or authorization to know those identities or proportions.
42. In addition to the physical and informational protections described above, CPS negotiated and obtained robust contractual protections in the TMA, as described in the following section. These contractual protections were expressly designed to prevent Harlow from misusing CPS's proprietary information, reverse-engineering CPS's formulations, competing with CPS, or soliciting CPS's customers.
43. CPS-BC-1147 derives independent economic value, both actual and potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable through proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use. The $3.8 million investment in developing the formulation, the $47.23 million in annual revenue attributable to CPS-BC-1147, and the formulation's role in supporting CPS's competitive position and enterprise value all confirm the substantial independent economic value derived from the formulation's secrecy.
C. The Toll Manufacturing Agreement
44. On March 15, 2017, CPS and Harlow entered into a Toll Manufacturing Agreement (the "TMA") under which Harlow agreed to blend and package CPS-BC-1147 at Harlow's Terre Haute, Indiana manufacturing facility. CPS engaged Harlow as a toll manufacturer to supplement CPS's own Columbus, Ohio production capacity during a period of increasing customer demand for CPS-BC-1147.
45. Under the TMA, CPS paid Harlow a tolling fee of $0.38 per pound of CPS-BC-1147 blended and packaged at Harlow's facility. CPS supplied all raw materials, including CPS Concentrate A, to Harlow. Harlow's role was limited to blending the supplied materials according to CPS's instructions, packaging the finished product, and shipping it to CPS's designated locations.
46. The tolling relationship was substantial in volume and value. In calendar year 2022 alone — the last full year of the TMA — Harlow processed approximately 9.4 million pounds of CPS-BC-1147 for CPS, generating tolling fees of approximately $3,572,000 (calculated as 9,400,000 pounds multiplied by $0.38 per pound).
47. The TMA included the following material provisions that are directly relevant to the claims asserted in this action:
(a) Section 7 — Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure. Section 7 of the TMA imposed a strict and comprehensive obligation on Harlow to maintain the confidentiality of all CPS proprietary information disclosed to Harlow in connection with the tolling relationship. The definition of "Confidential Information" in Section 7.1 of the TMA expressly encompassed, without limitation, all formulations, formulation components, processing parameters, production records, quality control data, customer lists, customer information, pricing information, and business strategies provided by CPS or generated in connection with the toll manufacturing of CPS's products. Harlow's confidentiality obligations survived the termination or expiration of the TMA for a period of five (5) years, and with respect to trade secrets, for so long as such information retained its trade secret status.
(b) Section 8.2 — Prohibition on Reverse Engineering. Section 8.2 of the TMA contained an express and unambiguous prohibition on reverse engineering. Specifically, Section 8.2 provided that Harlow "shall not reverse-engineer, decompile, disassemble, chemically analyze, or otherwise attempt to derive the composition, structure, or manufacturing process of any CPS Materials, including without limitation CPS Concentrate A, whether by internal analysis, third-party analysis, or any other means." This prohibition was a material term of the TMA and was a condition upon which CPS relied in entrusting CPS Concentrate A — containing the five undisclosed proprietary additive components — to Harlow's possession.
(c) Section 9.1 — Non-Compete. Section 9.1 of the TMA prohibited Harlow from manufacturing, producing, blending, selling, marketing, or distributing any barrier coating that was "substantially similar" to CPS-BC-1147 or any other CPS product manufactured under the TMA. This non-compete restriction was effective during the term of the TMA and for a period of three (3) years following the termination or expiration of the TMA for any reason.
(d) Section 9.3 — Customer Non-Solicitation. Section 9.3 of the TMA prohibited Harlow from directly or indirectly soliciting, contacting, or engaging in business discussions with any customer of CPS whose identity became known to Harlow through the tolling relationship or through access to CPS's confidential customer information. This non-solicitation restriction was effective during the term of the TMA and for a period of three (3) years following termination or expiration of the TMA for any reason.
48. CPS terminated the TMA effective January 31, 2023, after CPS completed a capital expansion project at its Columbus, Ohio facility that brought additional in-house production capacity online, reducing CPS's need for external toll manufacturing. The termination was effected in accordance with the terms of the TMA. Upon termination, all post-termination obligations of the TMA — including the non-compete restriction of Section 9.1, the customer non-solicitation restriction of Section 9.3, and the confidentiality obligations of Section 7 — remained in full force and effect.
D. Harlow's Misappropriation of CPS-BC-1147
1. Reverse Engineering of CPS Concentrate A.
49. Upon information and belief, in or around September 2022 — approximately five months before the termination of the TMA — Defendant Kenneth Fielding, in his capacity as Vice President of Technical Operations at Harlow, caused a sample of CPS Concentrate A to be diverted from Harlow's production inventory and sent to Archer Material Sciences Inc. ("Archer"), a third-party analytical laboratory located at 9300 Harding Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46221, for detailed compositional analysis.
50. Upon information and belief, the sample of CPS Concentrate A submitted to Archer was taken from a shipment of CPS Concentrate A that CPS had sent to Harlow for the sole and exclusive purpose of toll manufacturing CPS-BC-1147 under the TMA. The diversion of this material for analytical purposes was wholly unauthorized.
51. The submission of CPS Concentrate A to Archer for compositional analysis was performed in secret, without CPS's knowledge or consent, and constituted a direct, willful, and deliberate violation of Section 8.2 of the TMA, which expressly prohibited Harlow from reverse-engineering, chemically analyzing, or otherwise attempting to derive the composition of CPS Materials, including CPS Concentrate A, whether by internal analysis, third-party analysis, or any other means.
52. Through the unauthorized compositional analysis performed by Archer, Harlow obtained the identities and precise proportions of the five (5) proprietary additive components contained in CPS Concentrate A — the very components that CPS had deliberately withheld from Harlow by pre-blending them at CPS's Columbus facility before shipping them to Harlow.
53. When the results of the Archer analysis were combined with the nine (9) constituents and general proportional ranges that Harlow already possessed through the Partial Formulation Disclosure, Harlow thereby obtained, through improper means, the complete CPS-BC-1147 formulation, including all fourteen (14) chemical constituents and their proportions.
54. Upon information and belief, Defendant Norris, as CEO and sole shareholder of Harlow, directed, authorized, or ratified Fielding's decision to submit CPS Concentrate A for compositional analysis and the subsequent use of the analytical results to develop a competing product.
2. Retention of Confidential Records.
55. CPS's internal investigation, conducted in the fall of 2023 following CPS's discovery of ShieldCoat Pro 900, revealed that during the tolling period, Defendant Fielding retained batch production records, analytical test results, and process parameter logs generated in connection with the toll manufacturing of CPS-BC-1147 at Harlow's Terre Haute facility.
56. These retained records contained detailed information regarding CPS's proprietary processing temperatures, shear rates, and order-of-addition protocols — information that is integral to the successful manufacture of CPS-BC-1147 and that was provided to Harlow solely for the purpose of performing its obligations under the TMA. The retention of these records beyond the scope permitted by the TMA was unauthorized and constituted a further breach of Harlow's confidentiality obligations under Section 7 of the TMA.
57. Upon information and belief, Fielding and Harlow used these retained records, together with the compositional data obtained from Archer, to replicate CPS's proprietary manufacturing process for CPS-BC-1147 and to produce ShieldCoat Pro 900.
3. Marketing and Sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900.
58. In approximately April 2023 — roughly three months after the TMA's termination on January 31, 2023 — Harlow began manufacturing and marketing a barrier coating product under the trade name "ShieldCoat Pro 900" to customers in the food packaging industry.
59. ShieldCoat Pro 900 is a water-based barrier coating for food-grade paperboard packaging substrates that provides moisture-vapor, grease, and oxygen barrier properties — the same combination of functional attributes as CPS-BC-1147. As confirmed by the forensic analysis described below, ShieldCoat Pro 900 is a near-identical copy of CPS-BC-1147 that was derived directly from the misappropriated formulation.
60. The speed with which Harlow developed and launched ShieldCoat Pro 900 — within approximately three months of the TMA's termination and approximately seven months after the Archer analysis — is itself strong circumstantial evidence of misappropriation. CPS invested twenty-four months and $3.8 million to develop CPS-BC-1147. Harlow's ability to bring a virtually identical product to market in a fraction of that time and without comparable R&D investment is consistent only with Harlow's unauthorized access to and use of CPS's complete formulation and process parameters.
61. The manufacture and sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900 — a product that is "substantially similar" to CPS-BC-1147 — during the three-year post-termination restricted period constituted a direct violation of Section 9.1 (Non-Compete) of the TMA, in addition to constituting misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets.
4. Solicitation of CPS Customers.
62. On or about June 12, 2023, CPS's Sales Director, Brian Novotny, learned from Mapleridge Paper Corp. ("Mapleridge") — a longstanding CPS customer — that Harlow's Sales Director, Amanda Trent, had directly contacted Mapleridge and offered ShieldCoat Pro 900 as a replacement for CPS-BC-1147 at a price approximately fifteen percent (15%) below CPS's pricing for CPS-BC-1147. Mapleridge had been a CPS customer for over eight years and was among the largest purchasers of CPS-BC-1147 in CPS's customer base.
63. Upon learning of the Mapleridge solicitation, CPS immediately initiated an investigation to determine the scope of Harlow's customer outreach. Between June and November 2023, CPS confirmed that at least four additional longstanding CPS customers had been contacted and solicited by Harlow with offers to supply ShieldCoat Pro 900:
(a) Pinnacle Flexible Films LLC — a CPS customer since 2018, purchasing CPS-BC-1147 for use in flexible food packaging applications;
(b) Orion Paperboard Inc. — a CPS customer since 2016, purchasing CPS-BC-1147 for use in folding carton and paperboard tray applications;
(c) Great River Packaging Co. — a CPS customer since 2019, purchasing CPS-BC-1147 for use in food-service packaging; and
(d) TerraFold Industries LLC — a CPS customer since 2017, purchasing CPS-BC-1147 for use in corrugated food packaging applications.
64. Upon information and belief, Harlow identified these customers through the customer information that Harlow had acquired during the tolling relationship and that was subject to the confidentiality provisions of Section 7 of the TMA. Harlow's solicitation of each of these customers was a direct violation of Section 9.3 (Customer Non-Solicitation) of the TMA, which prohibited Harlow from soliciting CPS's customers for a period of three years following the termination of the TMA.
65. Upon information and belief, the solicitation of CPS's customers was conducted by Amanda Trent, Harlow's Sales Director, at the direction of and with the full knowledge and approval of Defendants Norris and Fielding.
66. Upon information and belief, at least two of the five solicited customers — whose identities CPS will establish through discovery — diverted some or all of their CPS-BC-1147 purchases to Harlow's ShieldCoat Pro 900, resulting in direct lost sales to CPS. Additionally, the availability of ShieldCoat Pro 900 at a fifteen-percent discount has created price pressure throughout CPS's customer base, eroding the margins CPS is able to realize on CPS-BC-1147 sales to its remaining customers.
E. Forensic Chemical Analysis by Thornburg Analytics LLC
67. On November 8, 2023, CPS retained Thornburg Analytics LLC ("Thornburg"), an independent forensic analytical chemistry laboratory located at 7225 Research Park Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45237, to perform a comprehensive forensic comparison of ShieldCoat Pro 900 and CPS-BC-1147.
68. Thornburg's principal, Dr. Elena Vasquez, holds a Ph.D. in Analytical Chemistry and has over twenty years of experience in forensic chemical analysis, formulation reverse engineering, and compositional comparison for litigation purposes. Dr. Vasquez is recognized as an expert in the characterization of coatings, adhesives, and polymer systems.
69. Dr. Vasquez obtained samples of ShieldCoat Pro 900 from three separate CPS customers who had received samples or shipments of ShieldCoat Pro 900 from Harlow. CPS also provided Dr. Vasquez with authenticated reference samples of CPS-BC-1147 drawn from CPS's production inventory.
70. Dr. Vasquez and her team subjected the ShieldCoat Pro 900 samples and the CPS-BC-1147 reference samples to a battery of analytical techniques, including, but not limited to, Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). These analytical techniques were employed to identify and quantify each chemical constituent present in both products.
71. Dr. Vasquez's preliminary report, dated December 22, 2023, reached the following conclusions:
(a) ShieldCoat Pro 900 contains the same fourteen (14) chemical constituents as CPS-BC-1147.
(b) The weight percentages of each of the fourteen constituents in ShieldCoat Pro 900 match those in CPS-BC-1147 within ±0.3% by weight — well within the expected batch-to-batch manufacturing variability for a product of this type.
(c) Dr. Vasquez characterized this degree of compositional correspondence as "not achievable through independent development." As Dr. Vasquez explained in her report, independent formulation development, even if it converged on the same fourteen constituents, would be expected to yield significantly different proportional ratios due to the enormous number of possible permutations of fourteen variables and the lack of any publicly available information pointing to the specific ratios used in CPS-BC-1147.
(d) Dr. Vasquez concluded that the compositional match between ShieldCoat Pro 900 and CPS-BC-1147 is "consistent only with access to the complete formulation" of CPS-BC-1147.
72. The forensic findings of Thornburg Analytics LLC confirm that Harlow's ShieldCoat Pro 900 was derived directly from CPS's misappropriated trade secret formulation and was not the product of independent research and development.
F. Pre-Litigation Demand and Defendants' Refusal
73. On January 18, 2024, Calderwood & Harkness LLP, acting as legal counsel for CPS, sent a detailed cease-and-desist letter via certified mail and electronic mail to Gerald W. Norris, in his capacity as CEO of Harlow Chemical Supply Inc., at Harlow's headquarters address. The cease-and-desist letter set forth CPS's allegations of trade secret misappropriation and breach of the TMA and demanded the following: (i) immediate cessation of all manufacture, marketing, sale, and distribution of ShieldCoat Pro 900; (ii) return to CPS and destruction of all CPS confidential information in Harlow's possession, custody, or control, including the CPS-BC-1147 formulation, the Archer Material Sciences Inc. compositional analysis data, CPS Concentrate A samples, batch production records, analytical test results, and process parameter logs; and (iii) a full and complete accounting of all ShieldCoat Pro 900 sales, including quantities, revenues, customers, and profits.
74. By letter dated February 5, 2024, Brian Whitaker of Voss Gentry & Whitaker LLP, 300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2500, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204, responded on behalf of Harlow. Harlow's counsel denied the misappropriation allegations and asserted that ShieldCoat Pro 900 was the product of Harlow's own independent research and development efforts. Harlow refused to cease manufacture or sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900, refused to return or destroy any materials, and refused to provide an accounting.
75. CPS's investigation and the forensic analysis performed by Thornburg Analytics LLC conclusively refute Harlow's claim of independent development. The ±0.3% compositional match across all fourteen constituents, combined with the documented reverse engineering of CPS Concentrate A through Archer Material Sciences Inc. and the retention of CPS's confidential production records, demonstrates that ShieldCoat Pro 900 is a direct copy of CPS-BC-1147 produced using CPS's misappropriated trade secrets.
G. Damages.
76. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' misappropriation, breach of contract, tortious interference, and unjust enrichment, CPS has suffered and continues to suffer substantial harm, including but not limited to:
(a) Lost profits from diverted customer sales. CPS has lost sales to customers who have been solicited by Harlow and who have diverted some or all of their CPS-BC-1147 purchases to ShieldCoat Pro 900.
(b) Price erosion. Harlow's offering of ShieldCoat Pro 900 at a fifteen-percent (15%) discount to CPS's pricing has created downward pricing pressure across CPS's customer base, forcing CPS to reduce prices or offer concessions to retain customers and resulting in margin erosion on CPS's remaining CPS-BC-1147 sales.
(c) Ongoing threat of further dissemination. So long as Defendants retain CPS's trade secret formulation and the underlying analytical data and production records, there is an ongoing and irreparable risk that CPS's trade secrets will be further disclosed, disseminated, or exploited, including to additional competitors or customers, causing additional and potentially unquantifiable harm to CPS's competitive position.
77. CPS has retained economic consultants to quantify its damages. Based on a preliminary economic analysis, CPS estimates its compensatory damages to be in the range of $8.9 million to $12.6 million, taking into account lost profits from diverted sales, price erosion across CPS's customer base, and the diminution in the value of CPS-BC-1147 as a proprietary asset. CPS reserves the right to refine and supplement these damage calculations as additional information becomes available through discovery.
78. In addition to compensatory damages, CPS is entitled to disgorgement of Defendants' unjust profits from the sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900. Upon information and belief, Harlow has realized approximately $2.3 million in profits from ShieldCoat Pro 900 sales since the product's launch in approximately April 2023.
79. CPS has incurred and will continue to incur substantial attorneys' fees and costs in prosecuting this action and in seeking to protect its trade secrets from ongoing misappropriation.
80. CPS has suffered irreparable harm that cannot be fully compensated by monetary damages alone. The ongoing manufacture and sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900 threatens the continuing secrecy of CPS's trade secrets, erodes CPS's customer relationships and market position, and causes competitive harm that is difficult or impossible to quantify. Accordingly, CPS is entitled to temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief to prevent further harm.
IV. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
COUNT I.
MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS UNDER THE DEFEND TRADE SECRETS ACT (18 U.S.C. §§ 1836–1839)
(Against All Defendants)
81. CPS incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 80 above as though fully set forth herein.
82. CPS-BC-1147, including its fourteen-constituent formulation, the proprietary ratios of those constituents, the order-of-addition protocol, and the processing parameters (temperatures and shear rates), constitutes a "trade secret" as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1839(3). CPS-BC-1147 is information, including a formula and compilation, that: (a) the owner thereof has taken reasonable measures to keep secret; and (b) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable through proper means by, another person who can obtain economic value from the disclosure or use of the information.
83. CPS-BC-1147 is related to a product and service used in, and intended for use in, interstate and foreign commerce within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(1). CPS-BC-1147 is manufactured in the State of Ohio and is sold to customers located across multiple states, including but not limited to Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. CPS ships CPS-BC-1147 across state lines to fulfill customer orders. The competitive impact of Defendants' misappropriation has been felt in interstate commerce.
84. Defendants misappropriated CPS's trade secrets by improper means, including: (a) reverse engineering CPS Concentrate A in violation of the express contractual prohibition contained in Section 8.2 of the TMA; (b) unauthorized disclosure of CPS's confidential information to a third party, Archer Material Sciences Inc., for compositional analysis; (c) retention of CPS's confidential batch production records, analytical test results, and process parameter logs beyond the scope permitted by the TMA; and (d) use of the misappropriated formulation and process parameters to manufacture and sell ShieldCoat Pro 900, a near-identical copy of CPS-BC-1147.
85. Defendants knew or had reason to know that their acquisition of CPS's trade secrets was accomplished by improper means, including through breach of the TMA's express prohibitions on reverse engineering and disclosure and through the surreptitious submission of CPS Concentrate A to a third-party laboratory without CPS's knowledge or consent.
86. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' misappropriation, CPS has suffered actual loss, including lost profits and price erosion, and Defendants have been unjustly enriched by the misappropriation, including through profits realized from the sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900.
87. Defendants' misappropriation was willful and malicious. Defendants deliberately and knowingly violated the express prohibitions of the TMA, secretly submitted CPS Concentrate A for analysis, and thereafter launched a competing product — ShieldCoat Pro 900 — targeting CPS's own customers with below-market pricing, all with full knowledge that the formulation underlying ShieldCoat Pro 900 was derived from CPS's misappropriated trade secrets. This willful and malicious conduct entitles CPS to exemplary damages of up to twice the amount of compensatory damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(C).
88. CPS is further entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(D) because of the willful and malicious nature of Defendants' misappropriation.
89. CPS seeks injunctive relief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(A) to prevent any actual or threatened misappropriation and to preserve the secrecy of CPS-BC-1147.
COUNT II.
MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS UNDER THE OHIO UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT (Ohio Rev. Code §§ 1333.61–1333.69)
(Against All Defendants)
90. CPS incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 80 above as though fully set forth herein.
91. CPS-BC-1147, including its fourteen-constituent formulation, the proprietary ratios of those constituents, the order-of-addition protocol, and the processing parameters, constitutes a "trade secret" as that term is defined in Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.61(D). CPS-BC-1147 is information, including a formula and compilation, that: (a) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (b) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
92. Defendants' conduct constitutes "misappropriation" as that term is defined in Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.61(B). Specifically, Defendants' misappropriation includes: (a) acquisition of CPS's trade secret by improper means, including reverse engineering in breach of the TMA and unauthorized disclosure to a third-party analytical laboratory; (b) disclosure of CPS's trade secret without express or implied consent by CPS; and (c) use of CPS's trade secret without express or implied consent, including through the manufacture and sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900.
93. CPS is entitled to injunctive relief under Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.62 to enjoin actual and threatened misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets. An injunction is necessary and appropriate because the threat of continued misappropriation exists so long as Defendants retain the misappropriated formulation and related confidential information, and monetary damages alone cannot adequately compensate CPS for the ongoing risk of further disclosure and competitive harm.
94. CPS is entitled to damages under Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.63(A), including both the actual loss caused by the misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by the misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing the actual loss. In lieu of damages measured by any other methods, CPS may seek imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator's unauthorized use, disclosure, or access to CPS's trade secrets.
95. Defendants' misappropriation was willful and malicious, entitling CPS to exemplary damages not exceeding twice the amount of compensatory damages awarded pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.63(B).
96. CPS is further entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.63(C) based on Defendants' willful and malicious misappropriation and bad faith refusal to cease their unlawful conduct following CPS's pre-litigation demand.
COUNT III.
BREACH OF CONTRACT
(Against Defendant Harlow Chemical Supply Inc.)
97. CPS incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 80 above as though fully set forth herein.
98. The Toll Manufacturing Agreement, executed on March 15, 2017, between CPS and Harlow is a valid and enforceable contract. The TMA was supported by adequate consideration, including CPS's payment of tolling fees to Harlow and Harlow's performance of toll manufacturing services for CPS.
99. CPS fully performed its obligations under the TMA. CPS provided the Partial Formulation Disclosure to Harlow. CPS supplied CPS Concentrate A and other raw materials to Harlow. CPS paid all tolling fees owed to Harlow, including approximately $3,572,000 in tolling fees for calendar year 2022 alone (calculated as 9,400,000 pounds at $0.38 per pound). CPS terminated the TMA effective January 31, 2023, in accordance with the termination provisions of the TMA.
100. Harlow materially breached the TMA in the following respects:
(a) Section 7 (Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure). Harlow breached its confidentiality obligations under Section 7 of the TMA by disclosing CPS's confidential information, including CPS Concentrate A and its compositional data, to Archer Material Sciences Inc., a third party, without CPS's authorization; by retaining CPS's confidential batch production records, analytical test results, and process parameter logs beyond the scope permitted by the TMA; and by using CPS's confidential information to develop, manufacture, and sell ShieldCoat Pro 900.
(b) Section 8.2 (Prohibition on Reverse Engineering). Harlow breached Section 8.2 of the TMA by causing CPS Concentrate A to be submitted to Archer Material Sciences Inc. for compositional analysis to determine the identities and proportions of the five undisclosed proprietary additive components, in direct violation of the express prohibition on reverse engineering, chemical analysis, or any attempt to derive the composition of CPS Materials.
(c) Section 9.1 (Non-Compete). Harlow breached Section 9.1 of the TMA by manufacturing, marketing, and selling ShieldCoat Pro 900 — a barrier coating that is "substantially similar" to CPS-BC-1147 — within the three-year post-termination restricted period. The TMA's termination date was January 31, 2023, and Harlow commenced manufacturing and selling ShieldCoat Pro 900 in approximately April 2023, well within the restricted period that runs through January 31, 2026.
(d) Section 9.3 (Customer Non-Solicitation). Harlow breached Section 9.3 of the TMA by directly soliciting CPS's customers, including Mapleridge Paper Corp., Pinnacle Flexible Films LLC, Orion Paperboard Inc., Great River Packaging Co., and TerraFold Industries LLC, within the three-year post-termination restricted period. The identities of these customers were known to Harlow through the tolling relationship and through Harlow's access to CPS's confidential customer information.
101. As a direct and proximate result of Harlow's breaches of the TMA, CPS has suffered and continues to suffer damages, including lost profits from diverted customer sales, price erosion resulting from Harlow's below-market pricing of ShieldCoat Pro 900, loss of competitive advantage, and diminution in the value of CPS-BC-1147 as a proprietary asset. CPS is entitled to recover all damages caused by Harlow's breaches, in an amount to be determined at trial.
COUNT IV.
TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS
(Against All Defendants)
102. CPS incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 80 above as though fully set forth herein.
103. CPS had existing and prospective business relationships with its customers, including but not limited to Mapleridge Paper Corp., Pinnacle Flexible Films LLC, Orion Paperboard Inc., Great River Packaging Co., and TerraFold Industries LLC. These customer relationships were longstanding, commercially significant, and a source of substantial revenue and profit to CPS.
104. Defendants knew of CPS's business relationships with these customers. Defendants gained knowledge of CPS's customer identities, purchasing volumes, product specifications, and pricing through the tolling relationship established under the TMA and through access to CPS's confidential customer information protected by Section 7 of the TMA.
105. Defendants intentionally and improperly interfered with CPS's business relationships by soliciting CPS's customers using the misappropriated CPS-BC-1147 formulation and offering ShieldCoat Pro 900 at a price approximately fifteen percent (15%) below CPS's pricing for CPS-BC-1147. Defendants' interference was improper because it was accomplished through: (a) misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets; (b) breach of the TMA's confidentiality, non-compete, and non-solicitation provisions; and (c) use of CPS's confidential customer information to target CPS's specific customers with a competing product derived from stolen technology.
106. The solicitation of CPS's customers was conducted by Amanda Trent, Harlow's Sales Director, at the direction of and with the full knowledge and approval of Defendants Norris and Fielding.
107. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' tortious interference, CPS has suffered and continues to suffer damages, including the loss of valuable customer relationships, lost sales and revenue, price erosion, diminished customer loyalty and goodwill, and loss of competitive position in the food packaging coatings market. CPS is entitled to recover all damages caused by Defendants' tortious interference, in an amount to be determined at trial.
COUNT V.
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
(Against All Defendants)
108. CPS incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 80 above as though fully set forth herein.
109. Defendants have been unjustly enriched by their wrongful acquisition, use, and exploitation of CPS's trade secret formulation CPS-BC-1147 to manufacture and sell ShieldCoat Pro 900. Defendants have realized revenues and profits from sales of ShieldCoat Pro 900 that they would not have earned but for their misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets.
110. CPS conferred a benefit on Defendants by developing CPS-BC-1147 at a cost of approximately $3.8 million in R&D investment over twenty-four months, and by disclosing portions of the formulation to Harlow under the TMA in reasonable reliance on Harlow's contractual obligations of confidentiality, non-reverse-engineering, non-competition, and customer non-solicitation.
111. Defendants have retained revenues and profits from sales of ShieldCoat Pro 900 that were generated directly through the use of CPS's misappropriated trade secrets. Upon information and belief, Harlow has realized approximately $2.3 million in profits from ShieldCoat Pro 900 sales since the product's launch in approximately April 2023, and this figure continues to grow as Harlow continues to sell ShieldCoat Pro 900.
112. It would be unjust and inequitable for Defendants to retain the benefits derived from their wrongful conduct. Defendants acquired CPS's proprietary formulation through improper means, in violation of express contractual obligations, and have used that formulation to generate profits at CPS's direct expense. Permitting Defendants to retain these ill-gotten gains would reward their misconduct and incentivize future misappropriation.
113. CPS is entitled to disgorgement of all profits Defendants have realized and will realize from the manufacture and sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900, estimated at $2.3 million as of the date of this filing and continuing to accrue.
V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against Defendants Harlow Chemical Supply Inc., Gerald W. Norris, and Kenneth Fielding, jointly and severally as appropriate, as follows:
1. Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. That the Court enter a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction restraining and enjoining Defendants, and their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors, assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them, from: (a) manufacturing, producing, blending, marketing, selling, distributing, or otherwise commercially exploiting ShieldCoat Pro 900 or any product derived from or substantially similar to CPS-BC-1147; (b) using, disclosing, disseminating, or otherwise exploiting any CPS confidential information or trade secrets, including but not limited to the CPS-BC-1147 formulation, CPS Concentrate A compositional data, batch production records, analytical test results, and process parameter logs; (c) directly or indirectly soliciting, contacting, or doing business with any CPS customer, including Mapleridge Paper Corp., Pinnacle Flexible Films LLC, Orion Paperboard Inc., Great River Packaging Co., and TerraFold Industries LLC; and (d) destroying, altering, deleting, concealing, or otherwise tampering with any documents, records, electronic data, or physical materials related to the matters alleged in this Complaint.
2. Permanent Injunction. That, upon entry of final judgment, the Court enter a permanent injunction containing the same prohibitions set forth in the preceding paragraph, in such form and for such duration as the Court deems necessary and appropriate to protect CPS's trade secrets and prevent further harm.
3. Compensatory Damages. That the Court award CPS compensatory damages against Defendants in an amount to be proven at trial, including but not limited to CPS's lost profits from diverted customer sales, price erosion and margin compression resulting from Defendants' below-market pricing of ShieldCoat Pro 900, and the diminution in the value of CPS-BC-1147 as a proprietary asset.
4. Disgorgement/Unjust Enrichment Damages. That the Court award CPS an amount equal to all profits Defendants have derived and will derive from the misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets and from the manufacture and sale of ShieldCoat Pro 900, to the extent such profits are not duplicative of the compensatory damages awarded.
5. Exemplary Damages. That the Court award CPS exemplary damages of up to twice the amount of compensatory damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(C) and/or Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.63(B), based on Defendants' willful and malicious misappropriation of CPS's trade secrets.
6. Return and Destruction of Trade Secrets. That the Court order Defendants to return to CPS and/or destroy all documents, records, electronic data, samples, materials, and other items containing, reflecting, or derived from CPS's trade secrets, including the CPS-BC-1147 formulation, the Archer Material Sciences Inc. compositional analysis data, CPS Concentrate A samples, batch production records, analytical test results, process parameter logs, and all copies and derivatives thereof, and to certify such return and destruction under oath within a time period specified by the Court.
7. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. That the Court award CPS its reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in prosecuting this action pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(D) and/or Ohio Rev. Code § 1333.63(C), together with all taxable costs of suit.
8. Pre-Judgment and Post-Judgment Interest. That the Court award CPS pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on all damages awarded, at the highest rates permitted by law.
9. Such Other and Further Relief. That the Court grant CPS such other and further relief as the Court deems just, proper, and equitable under the circumstances.
VI. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues and claims so triable as of right pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution.
VII. VERIFICATION
VERIFICATION
I, David Kessler, am the Chief Executive Officer of Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC, the Plaintiff in this action. I have reviewed the foregoing Verified Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Damages and am familiar with the facts and matters set forth therein. I hereby verify, under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, that the factual allegations contained in the Verified Complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. To the extent that any allegations are made upon information and belief, I believe those allegations to be true.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: February 26, 2024
________________________________________
David Kessler Chief Executive Officer Crestline Packaging Solutions LLC 4800 Scioto Industrial Parkway Columbus, Ohio 43228
STATE OF OHIO COUNTY OF FRANKLIN
Before me, the undersigned notary public, on this 26th day of February, 2024, personally appeared David Kessler, known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
________________________________________
Notary Public, State of Ohio My Commission Expires: ____
[NOTARIAL SEAL]