Court Denies All Motions filed by Unimin in support of a Preliminary Injunction against I-Minerals and Dissolves Temporary Restraining Order

September 23, 2014

Vancouver, B.C. (September 23, 2014) - I-Minerals Inc. (TSX.V: IMA; OTCQX: IMAHF) (“the Company” or “I-Minerals”) advises that, further to its press release of August 18, 2014, it has received the Order and Opinion on the Plaintiff’s motion for a Preliminary Injunction from the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division in Mitchell County, North Carolina (the “Court”). As noted in the Company’s August 18, 2014 press release, the Plaintiff, Unimin Corporation (“Unimin”) was seeking among other things, injunctions against Dr. Thomas Gallo, a former Unimin employee, and I-Minerals (collectively the “Defendants”) to terminate contacts and to unwind any alleged infringement on purported Unimin trade secrets, the return of unspecified, purportedly confidential information and damages related thereto. In the decision received by the Company on September 17, 2014, the Court denied Unimin’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (the “P.I. Motion”) pursuant to Rule 65 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure and determined “Unimin has failed to present sufficient evidence to show that it is will succeed on the merits of its claims.” I-Minerals’ President, Thomas Conway stated “We are obviously very pleased with the court’s decision.”

Unimin is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Connecticut that mines and processes various minerals, including high purity quartz (“HPQ”), glass grade feldspar, ceramic grade feldspar, filler grade feldspar and melting quartz in multiple locations, including four locations in Mitchell and Avery Counties in the North Carolina mountains. It mines and processes HPQ under the trade names Quartzil, Quintus, and Iota and sells its HPQ worldwide for use in a variety of industries, including the semiconductor manufacturing, quartz lighting, and fiber optic cable industries. Unimin states that it is the global leader in HPQ and that its processes for creating Quintus and Iota quartz are confidential, proprietary, and/or trade secret. On August 13, 2014 the Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order restraining and enjoining Dr. Gallo from disclosing to the Company specifications of Unimin’s processes in producing high purity quartz. But it should be noted the Company stated and maintains that Dr. Gallo never offered such information, nor did the Company seek such information, since the processes employed by Unimin to obtain their “degree of quartz purity that can be achieved, and the processes employed to achieve it are entirely dependent on the qualities of the [Unimin] raw ore product.” Thus, much of what Unimin alleges to be trade secrets regarding their North Carolina ore would be inapplicable to the Company’s Idaho ore thousands of miles away. All other actions sought by Unimin were denied in the Motion for Preliminary Injunction heard August 26, 2014.

Pursuant to the August 26, 2014 hearing the Court found that what Unimin claimed to be “trade secrets” were broadly stated and lacked particularity, and that Unimin had not provided a sufficient description of the alleged trade secrets at issue to provide the Defendants sufficient notice of those trade secrets, and instead “invited” the Court to acknowledge the existence of trade secrets in the submitted information without bearing the burden of identifying those trade secrets. I-Minerals has brought forward evidence suggesting that the process for purifying quartz is generally known in the industry, and that, in particular, the floatation process, the design and use of rock crushing equipment, the technique of magnetic separation, the process of gassing or hot chlorination, proper gassing temperatures and the process of electrodynamic comminution are all generally known in the mining (and HPQ) industry. Unimin’s failure to show its specific, unique modifications to these well-known processes or techniques either unfairly deprives the Defendants of an opportunity to rebut Unimin’s claim of trade secret protection or suggests that Unimin’s claim for trade secret protection of this information is not well-founded or both. I-Minerals evidence raised further doubt about Unimin’s ability to show that it has a protectable trade secret in this information and substantially negates Unimin’s claim that it could show a likelihood of success on the merits concerning this lawsuit. Accordingly, the Court denied Unimin’s Preliminary Injunction Motion.

I-Minerals’ President, Thomas Conway also stated, “Our Helmer-Bovill Property is some 3,000 miles from Unimin’s deposit and therefore hosted in an entirely different geologic environment. Our processing techniques rely on standard flotation - a technique used in the majority of all mines worldwide. Management of I-Minerals has felt from the beginning of this action that this is nothing more than an empty attempt by Unimin to continue to dominate the high purity quartz industry by using all means at its disposal to preclude competition. We believe it also indicates Unimin must view I-Minerals as credible competition in the high purity quartz markets. “Why else would they have brought this action?”

In an unrelated matter, I-Minerals is seeking a summary dismissal of the action brought by the Brent Thomson Family Trust and Hoodoo Resources, LLC (collectively the Plaintiffs) in the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District of the State Court of Idaho on September 25, 2014. As noted in the Company’s press releases of March 30, 2014 and July 3, 2014, the Company believes the allegations put forward by the Plaintiffs are completely without merit and looks forward to the resolution of this matter such that it can move forward with the development of the Bovill Kaolin Deposit, part of the Company’s Helmer Bovill Property.

About I-Minerals Inc.

I-Minerals is developing multiple deposits of high purity, high value halloysite, quartz, potassium feldspar and kaolin at its strategically located Helmer-Bovill property in north central Idaho. A 2014 Prefeasibility Study on the Bovill Kaolin Deposit completed by SRK Consulting (USA) Inc. highlights the potential of the Helmer-Bovill property’s Bovill Kaolin deposit: after tax NPV6 of $212 million; 30.5% IRR; 3 year payback and $72.7 million initial CAPEX; $84 million CAPEX including life of mine sustaining capital over a 25 year mine life. Ongoing development work is focused on moving project towards production.

I-Minerals Inc.

per: “Thomas M. Conway”

Thomas M. Conway,
President & CEO


I-Minerals Inc.
Barry Girling
877-303-6573 or 604-303-6573
Or visit our website at


This News Release includes certain “forward looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Without limitation, statements regarding potential mineralization and resources, exploration results, and future plans and objectives of the Company are forward looking statements that involve various risks. Actual results could differ materially from those projected as a result of the following factors, among others: changes in the world wide price of mineral market conditions, risks inherent in mineral exploration, risk associated with development, construction and mining operations, the uncertainty of future profitability and uncertainty of access to additional capital.

Back to the News page