• Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Sign up for email updates
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

The Texas Lawbook

Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury

  • Appellate
  • Bankruptcy
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Corp. Deal Tracker/M&A
  • GCs/Corp. Legal Depts.
  • Firm Management
  • White-Collar/Regulatory
  • Pro Bono/Public Service/D&I

Houston Federal Jury Hits Spanish Piping Company with $31M Verdict

October 3, 2019 Natalie Posgate

A federal jury in Houston Friday awarded $31 million to two manufacturing companies in the oil and gas pipeline space after ruling that a Spain-based competitor and its U.S. subsidiary engaged in false advertising and unfair competition. 

In a unanimous ruling, the jury determined that Ulma Forja S. Coop and Ulma Piping USA Corp. made false advertisements to U.S. consumers when they said their carbon steel flanges — critical components used in oil and gas pipelines — were “normalized,” or heat-treated. The jury also ruled that they engaged in unfair competition, finding that Ulma’s too-good-to-be-true products hurt the businesses of the plaintiffs in the case, Houston-based Boltex Manufacturing Company and Illinois-based Weldbend Corp. 

With the help of a group of Texas lawyers from Norton Rose Fulbright and Washington, D.C. lawyers from Mayer Brown, Boltex and Weldbend brought the lawsuit in 2017. They became suspicious of Ulma’s supposedly normalized flanges offered at prices well below the competition. 

The plaintiffs decided to file suit after metallurgical testing suggested that Ulma’s flanges had not been normalized and did not comform to industry standards as claimed in Ulma’s advertising. 

Ulma denied these allegations and fired back false advertising counterclaims against the plaintiffs, alleging they falsely advertised that their products are “made in the USA” and that Weldbend falsely advertised that its flanges are made with “questionable traceability,” court documents say. 

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, who presided over the case, denied Ulma’s counterclaims in a summary judgment ruling in June. He also preserved Boltex and Weldbend’s claims for trial, which began Sept. 16. The jury returned its verdict Friday in favor of the plaintiffs on all counts. 

Saul Perloff

“Most false advertising cases involve consumer products. This verdict demonstrates the vital importance of truth in advertising for industrial products like flanges,” San Antonio-based Norton Rose Fulbright partner Saul Perloff, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, told The Texas Lawbook. 

“It was significant that after telling their customers they would prove the allegations of the lawsuit wrong, defendants eventually admitted that for years, if not decades, they had not in fact heat treated their flanges in accordance with … industry standards,” he added.

Perloff said the plaintiffs’ team anticipates it will ask Judge Hanen to issue a permanent injunction against Ulma in addition to moving for entry of the judgment. He said they will also likely ask for attorneys’ fees. 

Ulma’s lead attorney, David Gerger of Gerger Khalil & Hennessy in Houston, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The Norton Rose Fulbright trial team also included Austin-based partner Marc Collier and associate Nathan Damweber, San Antonio-based counsel Kathy Grant and Bob Rouder, Houston-based associate Andrea Shannon, and Minneapolis-based senior counsel Leaf McGregor and Andre Hanson.

The Mayer Brown team also representing the plaintiffs included Washington, D.C. partner Carmine Zarlenga and associate Michael Lindinger.

Other attorneys on the defense’s trial team included Houston lawyer Ashlee McFarlane of Gerger Khahil & Hennessy and Mauricio Espana, Hector Gonzalez, Emlyn Mandel, Andrew Levander and Mariel Bronen from Dechert’s New York and San Francisco offices.

Natalie Posgate

Natalie Posgate covers pro bono work, public service and diversity within the Texas legal community.

View Natalie’s articles

Email Natalie

©2025 The Texas Lawbook.

Content of The Texas Lawbook is controlled and protected by specific licensing agreements with our subscribers and under federal copyright laws. Any distribution of this content without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.

If you see any inaccuracy in any article in The Texas Lawbook, please contact us. Our goal is content that is 100% true and accurate. Thank you.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Stories

  • P.S. — Pro Bono Work Honored at State Bar of Texas Annual Meeting
  • Dr Pepper Gets Win Ending $1B Distribution Rights Fight
  • Complications for ‘Die Hard’ Star’s Flight That Netted $1M Award Mostly Upheld by Fourth Court of Appeals
  • DOJ, Boeing Respond to 737 Max Settlement Objections 
  • Merit Street Media Hires Sidley to Lead Bankruptcy

Footer

Who We Are

  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Submit a News Tip

Stay Connected

  • Sign up for email updates
  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Premium Subscriber Editorial Calendar

Our Partners

  • The Dallas Morning News
The Texas Lawbook logo

1409 Botham Jean Blvd.
Unit 811
Dallas, TX 75215

214.232.6783

© Copyright 2025 The Texas Lawbook
The content on this website is protected under federal Copyright laws. Any use without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.