Case File: Versata Software, LLC, fka Trilogy Software, Inc., et al. v. Ford Motor Company
Case No: 2024-1140, 2024-1206, 2024-1234 (Federal Circuit) — originating in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Original Jury Verdict (October 2022): $22,386,000 for trade secret misappropriation, plus $82,260,000 for breach of contract — combined, over $104 million
District Court Post-Trial Reduction: Trade secret damages cut to $0; contract damages cut to $3
Federal Circuit Ruling (May 22, 2026, modified September 10, 2026): Contract award of $82.26 million fully reinstated; trade secret damages sent back for a new trial rather than left at zero
A jury once put a price tag of more than $104 million on what Ford Motor Company allegedly took from a much smaller software company. A judge then slashed that number down to a combined total of three dollars. Years later, a federal appeals court looked at both numbers and said: not so fast.
The case is Versata Software, LLC v. Ford Motor Company, and its financial swings illustrate just how unstable a jury’s verdict can be once post-trial motions and appeals get involved — in this instance, swinging from eight figures down to single digits and then most of the way back up again.
A Software Partnership That Ended in a Lawsuit
Versata Software developed a product called the Automotive Configuration Manager, software Ford licensed to help manage the complicated process of configuring vehicle options and features. The relationship worked for years under a licensing arrangement between the two companies.
That changed when the agreement was set to expire. According to court records, Ford and Versata couldn’t reach terms on a renewal — and shortly afterward, Ford rolled out its own in-house configuration software, built while Ford still had active access to Versata’s system under the expiring license.
Versata didn’t see that as a coincidence. The company sued, alleging Ford had misappropriated trade secrets embedded in its software and had separately breached the terms of their licensing agreement by using Versata’s confidential information for purposes the contract never authorized.
What the Jury Actually Found
The case went to trial in October 2022. Versata had originally pointed to four specific trade secrets it said Ford improperly used — pieces of the software Versata described as the “Grid,” “Buildability,” and “Workspaces” modules, which together formed much of the system’s functional design and user interface.
The jury agreed that Ford had misappropriated three of those four trade secrets. It also found Ford liable for breaching the parties’ licensing agreement. On damages, the jury awarded:
$22,386,000 for the trade secret misappropriation
$82,260,000 for the breach of contract
Combined, the verdict topped $104 million — a significant win for a software company going up against one of the largest automakers in the country.
The District Court Cuts Both Numbers Down to Almost Nothing
Ford didn’t accept the verdict quietly. After trial, the company asked the district court to throw out the damages findings, arguing the jury had no reliable way to calculate either figure.
The district court agreed with Ford on both counts, though for different reasons.
On the trade secret damages, the court concluded the jury had no dependable way to figure out how long it would have taken Ford to independently develop three of the four trade secrets on its own — and used that reasoning to reduce the $22.386 million trade secret award all the way down to zero.
On the contract damages, the court ruled that the jury lacked a reliable method to calculate Versata’s claimed losses with the level of certainty the law requires — and cut that $82.26 million figure down to just three dollars.
In the span of a single post-trial ruling, a verdict worth more than $104 million had been reduced to $3.
Why the Trade Secret Damages Got Zeroed Out in the First Place
Part of the dispute traced back to a ruling the district court made before the case ever reached the jury. Versata’s damages expert had originally planned to argue that Ford’s “unjust enrichment” — essentially, the full value Ford gained by using Versata’s trade secrets instead of developing the technology independently — was the right way to measure damages.
The district court excluded that expert’s testimony and ruled that Versata’s trade secret damages had to be tied specifically to the companies’ prior licensing history, rather than the broader value Ford received from using the information. That ruling boxed in what Versata could even argue to the jury in the first place, and it became the central issue once the case reached the appeals court.
The Federal Circuit Steps In
Versata appealed, and Ford cross-appealed, challenging the jury’s liability finding altogether. On May 22, 2026, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit — Chief Judge Moore, along with Judges Taranto and Hughes — issued a ruling that reversed course on nearly every major point.
The court ruled that the district court had gotten the law wrong when it limited Versata’s trade secret damages to licensing-history figures alone. Citing the plain text of both the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and Michigan’s state trade secrets law, the panel explained that both statutes specifically allow a plaintiff to recover damages based on the defendant’s unjust enrichment — not just a hypothetical licensing fee — when that enrichment isn’t already captured elsewhere in the damages calculation.
Because that erroneous legal standard had shaped Versata’s entire damages case from the start, the Federal Circuit didn’t simply reinstate the original $22.386 million jury figure. Instead, it vacated the $0 ruling and sent the trade secret damages question back down for an entirely new trial — this time without the restriction that had limited Versata’s argument the first time around.
On the contract damages, the appeals court went further. It reversed the district court’s reduction outright and reinstated the jury’s full $82.26 million verdict, finding no legal basis for the lower court’s decision to cut it down to three dollars.
The court also rejected Ford’s cross-appeal on liability, declining Ford’s argument that Versata should have been required to prove Ford knew the exact specific combination of features that made up each trade secret, rather than simply showing Ford had access to the underlying confidential materials.
A Small But Notable Correction Along the Way
The case had one additional, quieter twist. On September 10, 2026, the Federal Circuit issued a modified version of its May ruling, revising a single sentence in the original opinion. According to legal commentators tracking the case, the substance of the panel’s holdings didn’t change — Ford’s liability challenge still failed, the $82.26 million contract verdict remained reinstated, and Versata’s path to seek unjust enrichment damages on retrial remained intact. It’s a reminder that even a final-looking appellate opinion can see small technical corrections before the case is fully closed out.
Why This Case Matters Beyond Versata and Ford
Attorneys who handle trade secret litigation have flagged this ruling as a significant one, for a specific reason: it reinforces that a company whose trade secrets get misappropriated isn’t necessarily limited to what it could have charged for a license. If a defendant’s use of the stolen information generated far more value than a licensing fee ever would have, the company harmed by the theft may be entitled to pursue that larger number instead.
Legal commentary following the decision has also noted that the ruling cuts against an argument defendants frequently make — that allowing recovery based on a defendant’s full economic benefit risks handing the plaintiff an unfair “windfall.” The Federal Circuit explicitly rejected that framing in this case, siding instead with similar rulings already issued by the Sixth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits.
Where the Case Stands Now
The $82.26 million contract verdict against Ford is back in place, undisturbed by any further appeal at this stage. The trade secret damages, however, remain unresolved — rather than simply restoring the original $22.386 million jury figure, the Federal Circuit sent that specific question back to the district court for a new trial, this time without the legal restriction that shaped the first one.
That means the final, true dollar figure in this case still isn’t set. The jury’s original $104 million combined number showed what one group of jurors believed Ford’s conduct was worth. The $3 figure showed how dramatically a district court can narrow that same case through post-trial rulings. Neither number is where the case will likely end up — the real total awaits a second trial still to come.financial story behind one of Orange County’s more unusual business litigation battles.
SOURCE:
This article was prepared using publicly available material concerning Versata Software, LLC v. Ford Motor Company, including the Federal Circuit’s own published opinion, legal analysis from Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath, the National Law Review, A&O Shearman, ArentFox Schiff, IP Update (McDermott Will & Schulte), Certum Group, and Tech Policy Law’s coverage of the September 2026 modified opinion. The Federal Circuit’s opinion was used to confirm the exact jury award figures, the panel composition, and the court’s legal reasoning on unjust enrichment damages. Tech Policy Law’s reporting was used to confirm that the May 22 opinion was later modified in a limited respect on September 10, 2026, without altering the panel’s underlying holdings.