185 results for 'nos:"Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights"'.
J. Nardacci trims a trade secrets complaint brought by a tugboat services operator that alleges a former employee misappropriated various files related to the company’s tugboats while working for a competitor, such as their tugboats’ respective seaworthiness and what equipment they had onboard. The litigant sufficiently pleads the information constituted trade secrets and that the former employee accessed the information several times while working for the rival firm. Additionally, its claims under the Defense Trade Secrets Act can be imputed to the rival company because the former employee worked as a manager when he allegedly stole the information.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Nardacci, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv163, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets
J. Frimpong grants in part a motion for monetary sanctions in the amount of $149,787 against an importer and its counsel for causing a mistrial in a trade secrets suit against former employees who formed a competitive business. The importer's counsel asked one of the former employees a question concerning a settlement communication during the trial, which "fairly well and truly tainted" the jury. The judge granted the motion for mistrial, recused himself, and the case was transferred to another judge. The judge properly exercised his discretion in granting a mistrial. He held a hearing with the parties and considered their arguments prior to granting the mistrial.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2120, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Sanctions, Trade Secrets
J. Pechman declines to dismiss the mental health service's complaint that two of its former therapists used the mental health service's trade secrets to form the mental health company. The mental health service sufficiently pleads a connection between its DTSA claim and interstate commerce claim, because it alleges that its clients paid for its services through interstate insurance plans such as Medicare while other clients came from outside Washington state, and one of the former therapists solicited many of these clients via email, which affects interstate commerce.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Pechman, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1239, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Jurisdiction
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. Ho grants, in part, a realty company's motion for fee shifting as a sanction against an attorney in a trade secrets case. The attorney relied on assumptions, rather than facts, regarding the existence of requested records when he refused to comply with certain discovery orders.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Ho, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv2847, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Sanctions, Trade Secrets, Discovery
J. Alonso alternatingly grants and denies multiple parties’ motions for summary judgment in this dispute over the plaintiff trucking company’s trade secrets. The company uses the password-protected “Sylectus” software program to make bookings and maintain customer relations. The company claims several of its employees, led by a former manager, used confidential data in the Sylectus system to jump start their own competing freight company and pull in almost $3.5 million in ill-gotten revenue. The company brought multiple trade secret misappropriation, fraud, breach of loyalty and conspiracy charges against the former employees and the new competitor, but the court found that only the breach of loyalty count against the former manager has been sufficiently alleged. The court dismisses all other defendants from the suit, while also granting the manager’s motion to bar certain expert testimony, denying the company’s motion to seal certain documents, and placing sanctions on the manager for deleting certain Dropbox files that can no longer be used as evidence in the company’s case.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Alonso, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2903, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Employment, Sanctions, Trade Secrets
J. Immergut reserves ruling on Nike's motion to compel exhibits consisting of redacted minutes from a meeting among the computer store's board of directors held in August 2018, as well as a 17-page document shared by the computer store's former CEO about another executive. The issue for both exhibits must be resolved through in-camera review, because there is insufficiency regarding the computer store's privilege log entry and there is a lack of evidence of the privileged nature of the cover letter in the 17-page document.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Immergut, Filed On: January 16, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv1556, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Discovery
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
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. 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. 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. 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
J. Robart denies the biopharmaceutical company's motion to seal the Dana Berkowitz declaration related to its complaint accusing the multinational pharmaceutical company of taking credit for the biopharmaceutical company's development of a Covid-19 vaccine. The ingredients listed in the biopharmaceutical company's amended complaint are not trade secrets, and while it may redact information about confidential discussions or agreements with suppliers, the biopharmaceutical company is warned against attempting to redact entire document pages.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Robart, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv334, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Covid-19