185 results for 'nos:"Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights"'.
J. Rubin denies a former employee’s motion to dismiss in this lawsuit brought by a logistics company alleging a scheme to steal confidential trade secrets. The logistics company alleges when the employee provided his resignation he lied and failed to disclose information about his future employment. During the transition period is when the employee misrepresented by concealment the company’s confidential data causing material harm and damages.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Rubin, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv242, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets
J. Marks partially grants a refrigeration company's motion for a temporary restraining order against two former employees in a misappropriation of trade secrets complaint. The employees and any other person or entity that they participate with are hereby enjoined from accessing or disclosing any more information belonging to the company or soliciting business from any person or entity of the refrigeration company. All confidential information and equipment shall be returned within 24 hours. The employees must preserve all evidence that could be relevant to this suit.
Court: USDC Middle District of Alabama, Judge: Marks, Filed On: November 17, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv667, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Restraining Order
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. Boyle grants a die cutting machine distributor's motion to dismiss a manufacturer's allegations of misappropriation of trade secrets and copyright infringement. The manufacturer claims that several of its employees left it for a new direct competitor and took trade secrets with them, with which the distributor helped them in order to expand its own customer base. However, the manufacturer fails to report specific information that was misappropriated and shows no plausible evidence that the distributor aided the former employees.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv134, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright, Trade Secrets, Unfair Competition
J. Currault grants a request by an education technology company that provides classroom audio and camera systems, ordering a software development company to supplement its responses to more specifically identify the trade secrets that the technology company has allegedly stolen. A recently enacted rule requires a statement of a greater degree of particularity than the categories within which the trade secret information may fall, such as that set forth in the publicly available complaint, and more than simple generalized descriptions.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Currault, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2862, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, Evidence, Trade Secrets
J. Brailsford denies a construction equipment rental and logistics company's motion for preliminary injunction to enjoin its competitor from using its customer database which it alleges was accessed by former employees who were hired by the competitor. The company has not shown a likelihood to succeed on the merits of its allegations that the competitor misappropriated its trade secrets, as it has not provided evidence that the competitor or its employees misappropriated the consumer database. The company offers no forensic evidence that former employees downloaded information from the database or accessed the database after their employment ended.
Court: USDC Idaho, Judge: Brailsford, Filed On: November 13, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv430, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Injunction
J. Burkhardt grants a former senior account manager's motion to compel her former life science company employer to produce a modified version of an incentive plan document. The former employee, who is being sued for allegedly stealing trade secrets, sufficiently shows that the document would support her counterclaim for past due incentive rewards.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Burkhardt, Filed On: November 13, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1952, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Employment, Trade Secrets, Discovery
J. Conrad orders one mortgage company to identify all devices that another lender gave to employees of the mortgage company when they previously worked for the lender. This is because the lender accuses said employees of violations of restrictive covenants, misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition when they began working for the company. The company denies any wrongdoing and argues the lender has no right to inspect the devices, nor to continue soliciting the employees for them. However, the order stipulates the company must present the devices for inspection to continue litigation.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Conrad, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv633, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Unfair Competition, Contract
J. Zilly denies the manufacturer's motion to dismiss the battery applications company's tortious interference with business expectancy counterclaim against the former's lawsuit, which alleges that the battery company stole and created a replica of the manufacturer's invention of a silicon-carbon composite for lithium-silicon batteries. The battery applications company reasonably alleges that the manufacturer contacted the former's potential customers and informed them about the claims in this supposedly meritless lawsuit, which would reasonably interfere with the battery applications company's business.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: November 1, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1354, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Interference With Contract
J. Chen issues an expanded, amended injunction to prohibit a rival in the personal injury litigation business from servicing clients or disseminating the litigant’s client list after it was found to have given the list to help form a second rival in violation of the prior injunction. The two companies assist those asserted in personal injury complaints by accompanying the underlying litigants to independent medical examiners. The court finds the litigant’s customer list constitute trade secrets. As well, the court is prepared to find the defendant’s principal in contempt of court for violating the court’s orders and asks the litigant to submit additional documentation detailing the damages it suffered as a result.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Chen, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv1032, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Contempt, Trade Secrets, Injunction
J. Cole grants in part the motion filed by a former employee and his new employer, a power company, to vacate or modify preliminary injunction for violating the company’s non-competition agreement. The power company has not been properly notified or had the chance to be heard because they were not a party at the time the preliminary injunction was issued. This court orders, adjudges and decrees the new preliminary injunction enjoining the employee and those parties in active participation with him from disclosing any documents from the former employer.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: October 18, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv352, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Discovery, Injunction
J. Berger denies the equipment repair and manufacturing company's preliminary injunction to stop a former employee who started a competing company from using confidential information he obtained to reverse engineer decanter centrifuges, conducting business with its existing clients, and soliciting employees. The company cannot establish a "clear showing" of "irreparable harm" by the former employee's use of the equipment drawings in his business.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Berger, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv440, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Business Practices, Injunction
J. Conrad partially grants a former CEO of a data analytics firm that he founded his motion to dismiss an apparent claim of disgorgement because it is actually a request for a remedy in this trade secrets suit brought by the firm. The CEO suggested beginning a subsidiary of the firm based in China because the firm was struggling to succeed in that market. The CEO then secretly began a separate, Chinese-based company without notifying the firm’s board. Although he is granted dismissal as to engorgement, he is denied as to unjust enrichment for the profits he secretly made for years before the firm’s board found out.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Conrad, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv683, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Trade Secrets, Business Practices