The document was meant to be a confidential analysis of prospects to sell natural gas in the US. Moncrief claimed to have prepared it and then showed it to Gazprom after reaching an agreement that the two companies would work together to develop a field in Siberia. Moncrief claimed that Gazprom then pulled out but used the document for its own purposes. Moncrief then claimed $1.37 in compensation for the loss of its trade secrets.
Cornerstone
However, when preparing for cross-examination, partner Van Beckwith and associate John Lawrence were puzzled by a reference on the graphic contained in a document which said 'figure 11'. The fact that there were no figures 1 to 10 made them suspicious. By enlarging the document and searching on Google, the traced it to a University of Texas research paper. The document was, according to a motion which was then filed by Gazprom, 'the cornerstone of Moncrief’s trade secrets claim' and a 'fabrication'. Moncrief then dropped the claim and agreed not to refile it anywhere else. Source: ABA
Email your news and story ideas to: [email protected]
