Weldbend, Boltex Win Lawsuit Against Ulma Forja
10/9/2019
HOUSTON (P&GJ) — A jury returned a verdict in favor of Weldbend and Boltex on all counts in a lawsuit by the American carbon steel flange manufacturers against a Spanish company, Ulma Forja – part of the Mondragon Corp. – and its U.S. subsidiary, Ulma Piping.
Chicago-based Weldbend and Boltex of Houston became suspicious several years ago when Ulma began offering supposedly heat-treated (“normalized”) flanges to U.S. customers at undercutting prices. Plaintiffs sued Ulma in 2017, after metallurgical testing suggested that Ulma’s flanges had not been normalized and were not in conformance with industry standards as claimed by Ulma’s advertising.
The lawsuit accused Ulma of falsely claiming that it normalized its flanges in accordance with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) A105 standards. It further stated that Ulma stamped these flanges “A105N”, issued documentation with each flange stating they had undergone the normalization process specified by the ASTM and continued to ship the flanges into the United States for use in American pipelines, refineries and chemical plants ─ all when testing showed the flanges were not normalized.“I want to thank the jury for recognizing Ulma’s unfair and deceptive practices that have gone on for years,” said James Coulas Jr., president of Weldbend. "American companies like Weldbend and Boltex can compete with anyone in the world on a fair and level playing field.”
The trial, which began on Sept. 16, was presided over by Judge Andrew S. Hanen in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.
“We are very pleased with the jury’s verdict in this case and their findings that Ulma engaged in false advertising and unfair competition, which harmed two American companies and their workers,” said Frank Bernobich, chairman and president of Boltex.
Boltex and Weldbend were represented by partners Saul Perloff and Marc Collier of Norton Rose Fulbright and Carmine Zarlenga of Mayer Brown.
Related News
Related News
Sign up to Receive Our Newsletter
- Phillips 66 to Shut LA Oil Refinery, Ending Major Gasoline Output Amid Supply Concerns
- FERC Sides with Williams in Texas-Louisiana Pipeline Dispute with Energy Transfer
- U.S. Appeals Court Blocks Kinder Morgan’s Tennessee Pipeline Permits
- ConocoPhillips Eyes Sale of $1 Billion Permian Assets Amid Marathon Acquisition
- Valero Considers All Options, Including Sale, for California Refineries Amid Regulatory Pressure
- U.S. Appeals Court Blocks Kinder Morgan’s Tennessee Pipeline Permits
- Malaysia’s Oil Exports to China Surge Amid Broader Import Decline
- U.S. LNG Export Growth Faces Uncertainty as Trump’s Tariff Proposal Looms, Analysts Say
- Marathon Oil to Lay Off Over 500 Texas Workers Ahead of ConocoPhillips Merger
- Valero Considers All Options, Including Sale, for California Refineries Amid Regulatory Pressure
Pipeline Project Spotlight
Owner:
East African Crude Oil Pipeline Company
Project:
East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP)
Type:
TotalEnergies in discussions with a Chinese company after Russian supplier Chelpipe was hit by sanctions.
Length:
902 miles (1,443 km)
Capacity:
200,000 b/d
Start:
2022
Completion:
2025
Comments