Practice Areas

Walmart

Walmart

We will sue Walmart, and we prevail.

Our firm has a proven record of taking on our nation’s largest retailer and winning. Although we are very selective in the cases we bring, once we file the lawsuit we do not stop without a resolution.

We work with many companies and brands who earn their livelihood and take pride in selling to Walmart. We know there are many good people who come to work each day in Bentonville, Arkansas. But we also know that Walmart is not perfect. When they misstep, we will hold them to account.

Walmart v. Cuker Interactive, LLC.

W.D. Ark. No. 5:14-cv-5262-TLB.

After two weeks of a jury trial in federal court in Fayetteville, Arkansas, a unanimous jury returned a $12.4 million dollar verdict in favor of our client, Cuker Interactive, LLC on claims of misappropriation of trade secrets and computer coding know-how. Several witnesses testified Walmart’s employee secretly downloaded computer code while at Cuker’s headquarters without authority and later sent much of Cuker’s trade secrets to various locations across the globe for use in training programs. The jury took less than one full day to return a verdict finding Walmart’s behavior constituted “willful and malicious” trade secret misappropriation. In this federal lawsuit, the judge repeatedly sanctioned Walmart for its egregious conduct and described Walmart as thus: “Suffice it to say that on the whole, and in cumulative effect, Walmart’s litigation practices in this case have been the most vexatious, oppressive, and abusive ever to have occurred in any case before the undersigned in this Court.” See Cuker v. Walmart, Doc. 524 Filed 3/31/2018. As a result, the Court imposed an additional sanction of $400,299 upon Walmart at the conclusion of the case. The case was reduced to $3.3 million following the jury verdict, and on appeal, the reduced award was paid by Walmart to Cuker Interactive, LLC.

Webb v. Walmart, Inc.

Benton County Circuit Court, 04-CV-20-2218.

In this lawsuit, we represented a prolific inventor who agreed to assign his inventions to Walmart on condition they pay him. Except they did not make full payment. The case was filed in the Circuit Court of Benton County, Bentonville, Arkansas, which is Walmart’s headquarters. Our client asked a judge to return his inventions.

Coming into this case, our firm alerted the Circuit Court in Benton County to Walmart’s past bad discovery conduct in the Cuker case. We asked for and received judicial oversight and periodic discovery hearings. Over the next year, sadly, Walmart proved it did not learn its lesson from the Cuker case.

Contact Us Today

With a proven track record of achieving excellent results in complex cases, Henry Law Firm is ready to go to work for you.

CONTACT OUR OFFICE

HENRY LAW FIRM

Otto M. Bartsch

With degrees in philosophy and chemistry, Otto excels in complex litigation and intellectual property cases.

In a recent federal case, Otto used forensic digital analysis of crucial documents to reveal their fraudulent nature, immediately resolving all claims in our client’s favor. Otto led a multi-jurisdictional collection effort of a $3.4 million judgment for Oklahoma Genetics, Inc. The case was on claims of intentional violation of the Plant Variety Protection Act, and a federal judge tripled our client’s damages. Years after the judgment was entered, Henry Law Firm forcibly seized substantial assets, and OGI could re-invest proceeds into future seed varieties and genetics.

Before affiliating with Henry Law Firm and practicing law as Otto M. Bartsch, PLLC, Otto earned his Master of Laws in Intellectual Property & Technology Law. At graduation, Otto ranked highest in his LL.M. class. He also won the Client Counseling Competition and competed in the national semi-finals of the AILPA Giles Rich Moot Court Competition in intellectual property law.

Otto works with clients to establish and protect their trademarks, copyrights, and brand identities. He is also experienced in breaking or enforcing non-competition agreements.

COURT ADMISSIONS

Otto is licensed to practice in Arkansas, Missouri, and Texas and has been admitted to practice in several federal courts, including the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas, the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

HENRY LAW FIRM

Mark Henry

Mark is AV-Preeminent™ rated, a distinction earned through years of consistently outstanding legal work and a reputation for integrity. With decades of experience as a registered patent attorney and an LL.M. in agricultural law, he has developed a deep focus on protecting agricultural seed technology. Mark works closely with universities and multinational companies to navigate complex intellectual property matters and ensure long-term protection of innovation. He has handled more than 100 cases under the Plant Variety Protection Act, bringing a wealth of practical insight to the defense of plant breeders' rights. In addition to his legal practice, Mark has contributed to the field as an educator, teaching agricultural biotechnology law in the LL.M. program at the University of Arkansas School of Law.

Mark prosecutes and defends highly complex civil litigation and high-stakes, bet-the-company disputes involving trade secrets, patents, copyrights, and DMCA claims in federal courts across the country. His cases frequently address cutting-edge issues involving computer code, seed genetics, and architectural works. Licensed in six states and admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, he has served as lead counsel for clients in more than twenty-five states, offering broad strategic perspective and experience.

Mark brought one of the first cases under the Frank Broyles Publicity Rights Act, Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-1101, helping to shape the early application of Arkansas’s right of publicity law. He successfully represented professional rodeo athlete Cody James in a case involving the unauthorized commercial use of James’s name and likeness. A decorated competitor, Cody has qualified for the Arkansas Rodeo Association Championships 22 times, is a seven-time ARA Champion, and has been named both Overall Rookie of the Year and Tie-down Roping Rookie of the Year by the Professional Rodeo Cowboy Association. Mark’s advocacy in Cody James v. Boot Barn, Inc., No. 4:22-cv-646-KGB (E.D. Ark. 2023), helped affirm the importance of protecting the identity and brand of professional athletes under Arkansas law.

He also serves as both trial and appellate counsel, offering a comprehensive approach to complex litigation. In Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Southwest Power Pool, Inc., Case No. 23-1293, (8th Cir. 2024), Mark secured a significant trial and appellate victory, successfully defending a $37.64 million claim in an energy dispute involving tariffed energy rates. The Eighth Circuit agreed that SPP had fully compensated AECI for the transactions in question and held that equitable recovery theories are not available when an express contract governs the parties’ relationship.

Mark is also known for taking a principled stand against improper litigation conduct. In Lyon v. The Academy, Inc., 2024 Ark. App. 386, he obtained Rule 11 sanctions against opposing Arkansas counsel Matthew Campbell and Elizabeth Lyon. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the sanctions, finding that their claims were frivolous, had no chance of success, and were brought solely to harass and drive up litigation costs—highlighting Mark’s commitment to professionalism and the integrity of the legal process.

When disputes arise with Walmart, Mark provides trusted counsel to both large and small vendors. Given that Walmart is headquartered in Northwest Arkansas and most of its contracts require disputes to be litigated in Benton County, Mark’s location in Fayetteville—home to the federal court for Northwest Arkansas—positions him ideally to handle these matters efficiently and effectively.

Mark is admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Eighth and Federal Circuits, and several federal district courts, including the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas, the District of Nebraska, and the Eastern and Western Districts of Oklahoma. He also represents clients before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in trademark matters.

LAW REVIEW AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL ARTICLES