Judge dismisses refrigerant monopoly lawsuit against Chemours

A federal judge in late February dismissed a lawsuit against Chemours, which alleged that the chemicals giant monopolized the supply of R-454B refrigerant. 

Catch up quick: In December 2024, refrigerant suppliers FluoroFusion Specialty Chemicals and Dynatemp International sued the Chemours Company and Koura, one of its distributors, on 10 counts, including breach of contract and “actual and attempted monopolization.” 

• According to the lawsuit, Koura regularly sold refrigerants to FluoroFusion for resale distribution under FluoroFusion and Dynatemp’s brands. 
• In January 2024, the lawsuit noted, the two companies began negotiating an R-454B deal, which FluoroFusion planned to sell under its ‘Arctic Eagle’ brand. 

Yes, but: Chemours imposed certain conditions on the sale, refusing to deliver the product unless it was branded as generic or under Koura’s brand, and unless FluoroFusion signed a non-disparagement clause. 

• The result was “many millions of dollars in lost sales and profits,” the complaint alleged. The plaintiffs claimed that Chemours had motivation to suppress FluoroFusion’s business because it sells reclaimed refrigerants, which compete with Chemours’ virgin refrigerants. 

The other side: Attorneys for Chemours and Koura last year asked the judge — Terrence Boyle, of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, where the suit was filed — to dismiss the case, arguing that the plaintiffs had failed to adequately state their claims. 

• Chemours had a “legally protected right to determine which distributors distribute its products and on what terms,” its attorneys wrote in court filings. “Chemours would have been fully justified refusing to deal with FluoroFusion at all.”
• “Indeed, at the same time FluoroFusion sought to distribute Chemours’ R-454B, it was in the marketplace disparaging Chemours, Chemours’ employees, and components of R-454B,” they added. 
• Chemours alleged that FluoroFusion’s CEO and vice president derided one of its employees as “Dr. All Smoke” and claimed that R-1234yf — an ingredient of R-454B — poses a “risk of contaminating the U.S. water supply.”

The verdict: Judge Boyle granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case, ultimately determining that FluoroFusion could have bought R-454B from another supplier and that there was “no valid contract” in place. 

The big picture: As of late 2025, unitary equipment using A2L refrigerants, including R-454B, represented over 90 percent of HVAC distributors’ total sales, according to HARDI data. 

• Meanwhile, Chemours CEO Denise Dignam said on an earnings call in February that its Opteon (R-454B) refrigerant represented 75 percent of the company’s total refrigerant sales in 2025, up from 56 percent in 2024. 

What we’re watching: FluoroFusion COO Brad Kivlan told Homepros that “we believe the district court’s analysis and conclusions were incorrect, and we will be filing an appeal.” 

• A Chemours attorney declined to comment.