USA: Statement of Tyson Foods regarding $20.09 million judgment in legal action against ConAgra

The following was released today by Tyson Foods, Inc. (NYSE: TSN):We're very pleased that Judge Lineberger ruled that our competitor, ConAgra did indeed violate the Arkansas Trade Secrets Act in taking and incorporating our confidential feed nutrient profile.According to John Tyson, the company's chairman, CEO and president, "Protection of intellectual property is of vital importance in today's business world, especially in a highly competitive industry such as ours. This opinion supports the claims we have made since the beginning of this litigation: That our feed nutrient profile is indeed a trade secret, that it was improperly taken from us and inappropriately used to gain a competitive advantage against us. We had no choice but to protect the property and interests of our team members and shareholders."We're also gratified that the jury, who spent six long days listening to the many details of this complicated case, determined that a financial award was warranted by the facts. For us, the most critical element of the case, and the reason we carried it to trial, is its determination that our intellectual property is a valuable asset, worthy of protection. We appreciate the time invested by the jury members in the fulfillment of their civic duty.

October 19, 2000

The following was released today by Tyson Foods, Inc. (NYSE: TSN):

We’re very pleased that Judge Lineberger ruled that our competitor, ConAgra did indeed violate the Arkansas Trade Secrets Act in taking and incorporating our confidential feed nutrient profile.

According to John Tyson, the company’s chairman, CEO and president, “Protection of intellectual property is of vital importance in today’s business world, especially in a highly competitive industry such as ours. This opinion supports the claims we have made since the beginning of this litigation: That our feed nutrient profile is indeed a trade secret, that it was improperly taken from us and inappropriately used to gain a competitive advantage against us. We had no choice but to protect the property and interests of our team members and shareholders.”

We’re also gratified that the jury, who spent six long days listening to the many details of this complicated case, determined that a financial award was warranted by the facts. For us, the most critical element of the case, and the reason we carried it to trial, is its determination that our intellectual property is a valuable asset, worthy of protection. We appreciate the time invested by the jury members in the fulfillment of their civic duty.