Detroit, Michigan -- A long-running lawsuit between AirPro Diagnostics and Opus IVS has come to a close.
In a decisive ruling, U.S. District Judge Linda V. Parker (pictured) dismissed AirPro Diagnostics’ claims against Opus IVS and its subsidiaries, effectively granting summary judgment in favour of the defendants in a long‑running contract dispute between the companies.
The case related to a 2017 mutual party agreement under which the companies agreed to exchange a wide range of business and technical information under confidentiality protections. AirPro alleged that Drew Technologies, an Opus affiliate, breached the MPA by using its confidential data in developing remote assistance program products.
The plaintiff also claimed tortious interference and unfair competition related to actions taken around the Giotto software license and end‑user license agreement (EULA).
In response, Opus and Drew countersued in October 2023, denying all wrongdoing and accusing AirPro of its own breaches and unfair competition. Both sides filed cross motions for summary judgment in February 2025.
In the September 29 order, Judge Parker rejected AirPro’s claims, finding that the plaintiff had failed to raise a “genuine issue of material fact” on key contract interpretation and misuse allegations. On the MPA breach claim, the court declined to adopt the defendants’ argument that AirPro was required to reduce oral disclosures to writing and expressly label them confidential, noting ambiguity that could have been resolved by a jury. Nonetheless, even considering that, the court held AirPro did not meet the evidentiary burden to survive summary judgment.
With respect to AirPro’s tortious interference claim tied to modifications of the Giotto EULA and termination of licensing, the court found those actions were legally permissible under the license terms and not inherently wrongful. On the related unfair competition count, the court dismissed it as derivative of the same facts and conduct.
Judge Parker also addressed Opus’s counterclaims, dismissing them with prejudice so they cannot be refiled.
Opus issued a press release celebrating the decision as a “legal victory,” stating it affirms the company’s leadership in automotive diagnostics, reinforces its intellectual property and licensing practices, and validates its business conduct.
In a statement provided by AirPro’s counsel, Adam J. Brody of Varnum Law described the dismissal of Opus's counterclaims as "completely vindicating our position that those claims had absolutely no merit."
He added that the company is pursuing other misconduct claims against Opus IVS in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
"Unlike Opus IVS's recycled and already dismissed claims, our claims in Florida include substantial and valid claims against Opus IVS for breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, fraud and injunctive relief.”
