## Facts

- Pioneer, a vertically integrated seed corn company, developed proprietary inbred parent lines used to produce successful hybrids, including hybrids 3780 and 3541, which shared a common parent line (H3H).
- Holden, a foundation seed company, developed and sold inbred parent lines to customers who produced competing hybrid seed; its LH38, LH39, and LH40 lines were among its most popular.
- Pioneer alleged Holden obtained and used the genetic makeup of Pioneer’s proprietary corn lines without authorization to create and market competing inbred lines and hybrids, effectively avoiding the cost and time of Pioneer’s breeding and research efforts.
- After a lengthy bench trial in the Southern District of Iowa (over 37 trial days with an extensive evidentiary record), the district court found Holden misappropriated Pioneer’s proprietary genetic material.
- The district court awarded Pioneer $46,703,230 in damages and denied Pioneer’s request for prejudgment interest.
- Holden appealed the liability and damages determinations; Pioneer cross-appealed the denial of prejudgment interest.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court clearly erred in finding Holden liable for misappropriation of Pioneer’s proprietary genetic makeup under trade secret and related state-law theories.
2. Whether the $46,703,230 damages award was legally permissible and supported by the trial evidence and the district court’s methodology.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying prejudgment interest to Pioneer.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed the judgment in all respects.
- The court upheld the district court’s finding that Holden misappropriated Pioneer’s proprietary genetic material.
- The court upheld the full $46,703,230 damages award, finding no reversible error in the district court’s factfinding or damages analysis.
- The court affirmed the denial of prejudgment interest, rejecting Pioneer’s cross-appeal.

## Legal Principles

- Proprietary genetic information embodied in commercial plant lines may qualify as protectable confidential information and, when wrongfully acquired or used, can support liability under trade secret and related state-law claims.
- In a bench trial, appellate review of fact-intensive findings on misappropriation and damages is highly deferential; findings will not be disturbed absent clear error.
- Where wrongful conduct contributes to uncertainty in quantifying loss or unjust gain, the wrongdoer generally cannot demand precision that its conduct made difficult.
- Prejudgment interest is commonly discretionary in complex cases with difficult or fact-dependent damage calculations; denial will be affirmed absent abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit affirmed a substantial judgment for misappropriation of proprietary seed corn genetics, upholding both liability and a $46.7 million damages award, and also affirmed the trial court’s discretionary denial of prejudgment interest.


Pioneer Hi-Bred Int'l, Inc. v. Holden Found. Seeds, Inc., 35 F.3d 1226 (8th Cir. 1994)