24 results for 'cat:"Civil Procedure" AND cat:"Trade Secrets"'.
J. Russell partially grants cross-motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim in this ongoing suit concerning breach of contract and trade secrets between an insurer and a former employee. The employee argues the non-solicitation restrictions shouldn’t be enforceable because Maryland courts generally do not favor “agreements that restrict former employees from soliciting all clients of a former employer, rather than only those with whom the former employer worked directly.” However, the company does not allege the employee’s position within the company, her sales or exposure to customers making the agreement overbroad and unenforceable as matter of state law. The employee must answer the complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Russell, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv961, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, trade Secrets, Contract
[Consolidated.] J. Gibbons finds the lower court erroneously dismissed the false advertising claims filed by the windshield repair sealant manufacturer against the auto glass replacement company. Affidavits from commercial customers about statements made by the glass replacement company about the efficacy of sealant on cracks longer than six inches are sufficient to establish causation in the mind of a reasonable juror. Meanwhile, the Ohio Uniform Trade Secrets Act counterclaim filed by the glass replacement company was also improperly dismissed because the company had no reason to believe any of its trade secrets had been stolen by a former employee until his deposition in this litigation, which rendered the counterclaim timely. Reversed in part.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Gibbons, Filed On: January 16, 2024, Case #: 22-3204, Categories: civil Procedure, Fraud, trade Secrets
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. Kearney grants one software development group’s motion for summary judgment against another in this breach of contract and trade secret dispute. The individual employees accused of wrongdoing did not sign the contract in question, and thus, cannot be held liable for an alleged breach.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Kearney, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv6424, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: civil Procedure, trade Secrets, Contract
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. Eagan denies the plaintiff company's motion for reconsideration of a partial summary judgment in this case "concerning the design, manufacture, and distribution of a part for the AR-15 rifle known as the lower receiver." The plaintiff company seeks reconsideration of a ruling that the designs of certain receivers were not trade secrets. However, the court concludes that there is no basis for reconsidering its prior ruling.
Court: USDC Northern District of Oklahoma , Judge: Eagan, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: 4:20cv341, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: civil Procedure, trade Secrets
J. DeGravelles denies a request by the founding president and majority owner of an environmental services company to dismiss its trade secrets theft lawsuit against him, his daughter and a competitor he started. Because an earlier age-discrimination complaint by the founding president against the first environmental services company he started and that company’s present suit against him “do not arise” from the same set of operative facts, the company now suing its founder was not required by rules of procedure to bring its theft claims as counterclaims-in-reply.
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: DeGravelles, Filed On: September 21, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv866, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, Environment, trade Secrets
J. Earp denies the former employer's motion for reconsideration, ruling it was aware from the outset of the litigation of the employment agreements with the employee who left to join a competing pharmaceutical company and, therefore, there is no reasonable explanation as to why it left its declaratory judgment claim out of the original suit. The addition of a declaratory judgment claim also increases the potential damages for the employee and the competing company, which supports this court's previous decision to deny the employer's motion to amend its complaint. Affirmed.
Court: North Carolina Business Court, Judge: Earp, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 2023 NCBC 60, Categories: civil Procedure, trade Secrets, Contract
J. Calabrese grants the competitors' motion for summary judgment, ruling the trade secrets claim brought by the dietary supplement company is time-barred based on the knowledge it had of the competitors' intent to develop and sell similar products. The company knew the competitors had filed a competing patent application in February 2016 but failed to investigate further and did not file their lawsuit until more than four years later, outside the statute of limitations established under the Ohio Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Calabrese, Filed On: July 18, 2023, Case #: 1:20cv1803, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: civil Procedure, trade Secrets, Contract
J. McCook grants the plaintiff company's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint in this action alleging violations of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Tennessee Uniform Trade Secrets Act, as well as breach of a non-disclosure agreement. The plaintiff company seeks to add new parties to the litigation, including seven new defendants, and there was no "undue delay" in the request.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Tennessee , Judge: McCook, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv288, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, trade Secrets