332 results for 'cat:"Trade Secrets"'.
J. Mays finds the trial court properly awarded the landscaping company more than $62,000 in damages for side work performed by the former employee while he was still employed. The employee's claim he only took on jobs the company could not handle was rebutted by a coworker's testimony the company was willing and able to complete all of the jobs the employee turned down so he could do the work on his own. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Mays, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-73, Categories: trade Secrets, Damages, Contract
J. Skavdahl mostly denies the credit health company's motion to dismiss the financial services company's complaint, which accuses the credit health company of using the financial services company's former employees to compete with and undermine the financial services company's business. The financial services company sufficiently alleges misappropriation of trade secrets under the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Wyoming Uniform Trade Secrets Act, because it adequately pleads the existence of the trade secrets it owns, that its former employees are contractually bound to keep those secrets, and that the alleged breach of this contract harms the financial services company.
Court: USDC Wyoming, Judge: Skavdahl, Filed On: January 9, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv110, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: trade Secrets, Contract
J. Gwin denies the roofing company's motion for a preliminary injunction against its former sales employee, ruling none of the more than 2,000 files taken by the employee before he left to join a competitor constitute trade secrets because no proprietary software was stolen and any previous bid information was rendered useless by shifting material costs.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Gwin, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1341, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: trade Secrets, Contract, Injunction
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. DeGiusti grants the plaintiff company's motion to compel discovery from certain defendants in this lawsuit concerning "the sale of a small-town valve manufacturing company" and the non-solicitation provisions included in the asset purchase agreement. The defendants, which include a former employee and his new valve company, have a duty to supplement their responses.
Court: USDC Western District of Oklahoma , Judge: DeGiusti, Filed On: January 5, 2024, Case #: 5:21cv368, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: trade Secrets, Discovery, Contract
J. Bredar grants, in part, a financial service company’s motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction prohibiting two of its former employees from sharing confidential information. The company has shown a likelihood of success on its claim that trade secrets were misappropriated when one of the employees downloaded confidential files and passed them onto the other former employee.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bredar, Filed On: January 5, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv3446, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, Interference With Contract
J. Daniel alternately grants and denies multiple dismissal motions from multiple defendants in this sprawling racketeering, trade secret and contract case brought against them by Walgreens. The pharmacy chain accuses the defendants — store landlords, former employees and real estate investors — of conspiring to buy and sell Walgreens-leased properties while denying it its right of first refusal in real estate transactions involving Walgreens locations. The court agrees it lacks jurisdiction over several of the named investors and dismisses the claims against them, while denying the motion to dismiss from the main real estate firms involved in the suit. Against these defendants, the court finds Walgreens has sufficiently alleged the firms conspired to box its right of first refusal out of real estate transactions. The court issues a more complex order against a single investor, finding insufficient support for Walgreens RICO claims against him but allowing its Defend Trade Secrets Act violation claim to mover forward.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Daniel, Filed On: January 4, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2522, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Real Estate, trade Secrets, Racketeering
J. Hightower partially grants a company’s motion to strike a competitor’s reply brief after it sued that competitor for alleged misappropriation of trade secrets and other claims because the first company argues that the reply, which includes more than 230 pages of exhibits, “includes reams of new evidence improperly introduced for the first time on reply.”
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Hightower, Filed On: January 4, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv1327, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Fraud, trade Secrets, Jurisdiction
J. Conrad grants a mortgage company’s renewed motion for preliminary injunction and request for finding of contempt against a similar lender in this ongoing trade secrets and unfair competition suit. The company’s first injunction was granted on Nov. 3, 2023, but the company presents convincing evidence that certain staff members of the lender continued to recruit the company’s workers to itself during litigation and after the injunction date. The company also offers sufficient evidence that the lender stole its confidential information in order to compete directly with it as well as to steal clients.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Conrad, Filed On: January 4, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv633, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Contempt, trade Secrets, Unfair Competition
J. Choudhury, ruling on a motion for reconsideration, finds the court did not err when it denied a rare coin and precious metals supplier’s motion for a temporary restraining order that sought to prohibit a competitor from soliciting its customers. The supplier fails to argue the competitor’s actions could not simply be compensable by money damages as established by legal precedent or that the competitor had obtained its customers’ information solely from its master customer list, not from other sources.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Choudhury, Filed On: January 2, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv6529, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: trade Secrets, Restraining Order
J. Leahy finds the lower court properly determined an administrator, who is also the son of a shipping supply company owner, left the company, taking many of the company’s employees with him to start a competing company. The lower court properly found the employees in breach of contract, as they violated the terms of the non-compete agreement with the supply company, and found that many of the company’s documents were taken, including client lists and proprietary information. However, the lower court erred in accepting the supply company’s calculation of damages, as they were not properly compiled, and also erred in finding the employee’s actions were malicious. The matter is remanded for a re-assessment and calculation of damages. Affirmed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 421, Categories: Antitrust, trade Secrets, Contract
J. Gorton denies an artificial intelligence company and two former employees of an actuarial and consulting firm’s motion to file an amended answer and counterclaims after the actuarial and consulting firm sued them for misappropriation of trade secrets and patent infringement. The deadline for amendments is not going to be extended based on information found during discovery because the AI company and the former employees deferred discovery.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Gorton, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv10865, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, trade Secrets, Discovery
J. Leahy finds the lower court properly determined an administrator, who is also the son of a shipping supply company owner, left the company, taking many of the company’s employees with him to start a competing company. The lower court properly found the employees in breach of contract, as they violated the terms of the non-compete agreement with the supply company, and found that many of the company’s documents were taken, including client lists and proprietary information. However, the lower court erred in accepting the supply company’s calculation of damages, as they were not properly compiled, and also erred in finding the employee’s actions were malicious. The matter is remanded for a re-assessment and calculation of damages. Affirmed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 421, Categories: Antitrust, trade Secrets, Contract
J. Mitchell partly grants a community information company's motion to leave to file a third amended complaint against a competitor. The community information company sufficiently showed that the competitor violated the parties' customer agreement by ordering information from it and reselling it at a higher price, in violation of its trade secrets.
Court: USDC Kansas, Judge: Mitchell, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2475, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, Contract
J. Lin dismisses the chemical distribution company's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim in its complaint alleging that the former salespeople conspired to use the company's trade secrets for a new company and that they "permanently deleted" company emails even after the chemical distribution company ordered them not to. The chemical distribution company argues that the former salespeople violated a use restriction, which is an argument that both the 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected in similar cases.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Lin, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv775, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Fraud, trade Secrets
J. Barbier grants a request by a Texas-based corporation to dismiss theft of trade secrets claims by a Louisiana based-HVAC goods and service business. The complaint does not explain exactly what actions or conduct by the Texas corporation could constitute egregious actions involving elements of fraud, misrepresentation, deception or other unethical conduct, which would violate Louisiana’s law against unfair trade practices. Instead, the HVAC business accuses it of stealing information about the design and production of its product without any supporting evidence, which is insufficient for a determination of whether the Texas company’s conduct was unfair and violative of public policy.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Barbier, Filed On: December 15, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv1669, NOS: Other Personal Property Damage - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, trade Secrets, Unfair Competition
J. Watson grants one of the motions to dismiss filed by a former employee, ruling the district court lacks jurisdiction over Robert Sapio because he has not traveled or communicated with any business in the state of Ohio such that it caused any harm to the parts distribution company. However, because the forum selection clause in each of the other employees' contracts is enforceable based on the distribution company's location in Ohio, the contract and trade secrets claims against those employees will proceed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Watson, Filed On: December 14, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv4049, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, Jurisdiction, Contract
J. Kim partially grants the sued spinal implant manufacturer’s motions in limine against the suing spinal implant manufacturer. This dispute over two competing “expandable cage” spinal implant products that perform the same function will go to jury trial in January 2024. The suing manufacturer accuses the defendant of stealing its design. The court, on the defendant’s motion, bars the suing manufacturer from producing “ambiguous, misleading or new evidence of alleged trade secret misappropriation,” as well as making other claims about the defendant’s product. The court will allow other controversial materials and topics, such as the actions of the defendant’s parent company, to be brought up at trial.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kim, Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: 1:19cv7092, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, Interference With Contract, Business Practices
J. Barker grants, in part, the metal processing company's motion for summary judgment, ruling that because its non-disclosure agreement with the processing equipment manufacturer unambiguously excludes any confidential information disclosed by the manufacturer during negotiations, including several of the trade secrets named in this lawsuit, the processing company cannot be held liable for a breach of the agreement.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Barker, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv662, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, Contract
J. Ellison grants, in part, a company's motion to dismiss a business owner's trade secrets claims related to novel hydrogen liquefaction technology. The business owner's tortious interference, unfair competition, breach of fiduciary duty and conspiracy claims are preempted by the Texas Uniform
Trade Secrets Act.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Ellison, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 4:23cv1615 , NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: trade Secrets, Unfair Competition, Technology