In the high-stakes world of aerospace innovation, Boeing Co. has found itself entangled in a protracted legal battle over alleged trade secrets theft from electric-aircraft startup Zunum Aero. The dispute centers on claims that Boeing misappropriated proprietary technology for hybrid-electric propulsion systems, which Zunum was developing for short-haul flights. Initially, a Seattle jury sided with Zunum in 2024, awarding $72 million for trade secrets violations and an additional $11.6 million for tortious interference, totaling $81.2 million, as reported by The Economic Times.

The verdict stemmed from Zunum’s 2019 lawsuit accusing Boeing of using confidential information shared during a potential partnership to advance its own projects, effectively sidelining the startup. Zunum, founded in 2013, aimed to revolutionize regional air travel with sustainable aircraft but collapsed into bankruptcy amid the fallout. Boeing denied the allegations, arguing that Zunum’s ideas were not novel and that any shared data was handled appropriately.

The Dramatic Overturn and Judicial Controversy
U.S. District Judge James Robart, overseeing the case in Seattle, dramatically overturned the jury’s decision in August 2024, ruling that the evidence did not sufficiently prove Boeing’s misuse of trade secrets. This move cleared Boeing of liability, as detailed in a report from The Seattle Times. However, scrutiny intensified when Robart disclosed that his wife’s IRA had traded up to $15,000 in Boeing stock during the litigation, raising questions about impartiality.

The revelation, first highlighted in coverage by Bloomberg Law, prompted allegations of a conflict of interest. Robart maintained the trades were inadvertent and did not influence his rulings, but critics argued it created an appearance of bias in a case with massive financial implications for the aviation giant.

Appellate Reversal and Reinstatement
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stepped in on August 14, 2025, reinstating the full $81 million award in a unanimous decision. The panel not only revived the verdict but also removed Judge Robart from the case, citing the stock trades as undermining public confidence in the judiciary, according to Reuters. This rare judicial reassignment underscores the appeals court’s emphasis on ethical transparency in high-profile corporate disputes.

For Boeing, already grappling with safety scandals and production delays, the reinstated verdict adds to a mounting pile of legal and financial pressures. Analysts note that while $81 million is a fraction of Boeing’s $78 billion annual revenue, it signals vulnerabilities in intellectual property management amid the race for electric aviation tech.

Broader Implications for Aerospace IP Battles
The case highlights the intensifying competition in sustainable aviation, where startups like Zunum challenge incumbents with innovative designs. Boeing’s involvement in similar ventures, such as its own hybrid-electric initiatives, has drawn accusations of predatory practices, as explored in a deep dive by The National Law Review.

Industry insiders view this as a cautionary tale for partnerships between established firms and nimble innovators. With the verdict reinstated, Zunum’s remnants—now in liquidation—stand to benefit creditors, while Boeing may appeal further to the Supreme Court, prolonging the saga.

Ethical Lessons and Future Oversight
The episode also spotlights judicial ethics in an era of automated trading and complex financial disclosures. Robart’s removal, as covered by Ground News, could prompt stricter guidelines for judges handling cases involving publicly traded companies.

As electric aviation accelerates, with billions in investments flowing into the sector, this verdict reinforces the value of trade secrets as a competitive moat. For Boeing, it’s a reminder that innovation disputes can escalate into costly courtroom dramas, potentially reshaping how aerospace giants collaborate—or compete—with emerging players.