3M, Mr. Tint Name Witnesses for Case

April 17th, 2024 by Casey Flores

Both 3M and Mr. Tint have provided answers to the United States District Court for South Carolina in response to a defamation and damages lawsuit filed against the 3M company by the window film dealer Mr. Tint of Columbia, South Carolina.

According to court documents, 3M plans to call as witnesses Pam Dorrough, 3M’s northeastern territory manager, and Tom Nocilo, owner of Mr. Tint, as witnesses. The company will also call upon Ryan Cothran, director of public safety and emergency services of the school district in which Mr. Tint allegedly installed the film.

While an expert witnesses has not been identified, 3M “may identify experts to testify regarding: (1) 3M’s film products and related analyses and comparisons; and (2) damages related to Mr. Tint’s and Mr. Nocilo’s misconduct,” according to court documents.



The 3M company provided this short “statement of the facts” on the case:

“Plaintiff Mr. Tint purchases and installs window film products, including on school buildings.

School district Spartanburg District Five hired Mr. Tint to install specific 3M window film products on school buildings in its district. Thereafter, the school district asked 3M to confirm that Mr. Tint installed the specific 3M window film products that it purchased. 3M tested certain windows and concluded that the film installed was not the product that Mr. Tint represented it would install, and stated so in a letter to the district. Mr. Tint claims that this letter is defamatory. 3M denies these allegations and stands by its statements and test results. 3M has filed a counterclaim against Mr. Tint and its owner Mr. Tom Nocilo for breaching certain contracts that Mr. Tint had with 3M, for making misrepresentations about 3M’s products, and for infringing on 3M’s trademarks.”

Mr. Tint’s “statement of the facts” differs. In part, it reads:

“In fulfilling a procurement agreement with Spartanburg School District 5 (“the School District”), Mr. Tint, as an authorized dealer of 3M safety and security film, purchased and installed such 3M products at schools throughout the School District. This lawsuit arises from a letter 3M sent to Ryan Cothran, the Director of Safety and Emergency Services at Spartanburg District 5, which Mr. Tint alleges is defamatory in that it falsely states that the window film installed by Mr. Tint within the School District was not 3M product. This letter was sent after 3M allegedly tested samples taken from two schools in the School District that 3M claims were installed by Mr. Tint. Following the defamatory letter, the School District terminated its contract with Mr. Tint. In addition, 3M thereafter terminated its dealer agreement with Mr. Tint. In response to the complaint, 3M has counterclaimed against Mr. Tint and Mr. Nocilo alleging a breach of the agreement between the parties, false advertising, violation of the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act, and unfair competition.”

Mr. Nocilo plans to call upon Will Melton, owner of Xponent 21—a digital marketing agency that helped remove all 3M content from his site; Chandler Price, who also helped remove 3M marketing material used by Mr. Tint; Ryan Cochran, who “has knowedge related to Mr. Tint’s procurement of the contract to install 3M film in the School District,” per court documents.

“Mr. Tint and Mr. Nocilo also anticipate calling a 3M witness with knowledge regarding the collection of samples taken from the School District and the testing of the same that 3M alleges serves as the justification for the letter it sent to the School District and its termination of the dealer agreement,” court documents read.

Mr. Tint also “anticipates identifying experts that can testify as to the testing, analyses, and comparisons of 3M products and the samples taken from the School District. Additionally, they will likely retain an expert to testify as to the damages suffered by Mr. Tint and Mr. Nocilo as a result of the misconduct by 3M,” per the recent filing.

The deadline to complete discovery is August 28, 2024. The deadline for expert disclosures is June 27, 2024.

This is a developing story. WINDOW FILM magazine will continue to update.

This article is from Focus on Film, the weekly e-newsletter that covers the latest news regarding window film and related products, including paint protection film. Click HERE to sign up—there is no charge. Interested in a deeper dive? Free subscriptions to Window Film magazine in print or digital format are available. Subscribe at no charge HERE.

Tags: ,

Leave a comment »

  1. Here’s a question that I can’t seem to find an answer to in all of this: What prompted the school district to say, “Hmm… I don’t think this is 3M film that Mr. Tint say he installed in this glass. Let’s find out!” I want to know because it will explain a lot. A good tint shop will track all film going in and out of their building and where it is assigned to if they document roll and lot numbers associated with their product. I can see where mistakes can happen along the way, but should I ever be accused of a bait and switch situation I have roll and lot numbers of my film to back me up. Then I can trace it back to my distributor and then to the manufacturer. If it turns out I didn’t deceive anyone then the onus goes up the chain. The lesson here, I guess, is CYA and keep track of what’s coming in and going out of your shop.

  2. No customer has ever asked for tint by name, they don’t care if it’s 3M or 4C, the shade (%) is all they want to know, so why did school guy question tint guy’s tint to begin with? Good always wins. More investigative reporting needed.

  3. The school district superintendent was notified that the film installed was not 3M because of first-hand knowledge that an installer knew it was not 3M but rather American Standard window film. Mr. Nocilo knew what he was doing by installing American Standard window film instead of 3M ultra s800.

  4. “An installer” knew it wasn’t 3m film. So he went out of his way to tell this of his former boss? Or former friend? Somebody lied somebody spied, and somebody cried, and somebody tried… to gain what???

Leave Comment