121 results for 'cat:"Trade Secrets" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Grant finds that the district court improperly dismissed the company's breach of contract and trade secrets action against the ex-employee and the competitor arising after they allegedly stole trade secrets about the company's government contract to improve the competitor's bid for the same contract. The company and the competitor are both tribally-owned businesses. Since the competitor's alleged misconduct is related to its participation in the business development program, the company's trade secrets claims fall under the scope of the competitor's sovereign immunity waiver. The district court incorrectly failed to consider the enforceability of the forum selection clause naming an allegedly nonexistent tribal court as the proper forum before dismissing the breach of contract claim against the ex-employee. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Grant, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 22-12669, Categories: trade Secrets, contract
J. Frimpong denies in part a former senior vice president's motion for judgment as a matter of law and grants in part his motion for a new trial regarding his former employer's, a human tissue product seller's, allegations that he misappropriated trade secrets, breached relevant contracts and interfered with the company's prospective economic advantage. The jury properly found that the former employer's manufacturing process was confidential, and that the former employee used or disclosed this information. The breach of duty claims are not preempted by trade secret law. The damages are supported by the evidence. There were no legal errors that would justify granting a new trial. However, there was insufficient evidence of the former employee's ability to pay a punitive damages award. The parties are ordered to further brief the issue of an appropriate punitive damages award.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv3444, NOS: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) - Other Suits, Categories: trade Secrets, contract, Racketeering
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. Nalbandian vacates the lower court's injunction against an insurance firm's former employee, finding the court failed to conduct the four-step analysis required under the Ohio Supreme Court's 1975 ruling in Raimonde v. Van Vlerah when it determined whether the insurance firm's non-solicitation agreement was enforceable. Although the client information taken by the employee was properly deemed a trade secret, the injunction's reliance on references to the non-solicitation agreement renders it defective.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Nalbandian, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 23-3638, Categories: trade Secrets, contract, Injunction
J. Ellison finds that a case brought by a distributor of telecommunications products in which a manufacturer terminated an exclusive contract and directed the distributor’s customers to buy directly from the manufacturer can proceed to review an amended complaint from the distributor. The court awaits relevant information to be presented in the amended complaint that will determine if the distributor’s client list constitutes trade secrets.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Ellison, Filed On: April 8, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv48, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, contract
J. Connolly properly denied the fabric manufacturer's motion to dismiss counterclaims brought by a solar shade maker in a copyright dispute over the weaves, patterns, and colors co-produced by the companies in their 30 year partnership. The solar shade maker's counterclaims sufficiently plead that the restrictive covenants in the parties' agreements were enforceable. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Connolly, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 01744, Categories: trade Secrets, Business Practices, contract
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
J. Jackson grants the business owners' motion to dismiss a trade secrets dispute. The business owner and the income tax preparation service entered into an agreement in which the business owners would operate two locations. After the agreement ended, the income tax service accused the business owners of violating their contract by using confidential trade secrets to lure customers from the franchise to the new income tax service business they had started. The income tax service failed to identify a specific trade secret the new business used to steal their customers.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Jackson, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv355, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: trade Secrets, Tax, contract
J. Oliver grants the photographer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the school photography company cannot pursue actual damages for his solicitation of customers because it failed to submit the profit-and-loss statement during the discovery period, but waited until the summary judgment stage, which renders the evidence inadmissible. Meanwhile, the photography company's motion for summary judgment on the photographer's counterclaims will also be granted because the employment contract between the parties allowed the company to unilaterally change the photographer's compensation structure and prevents him from seeking unpaid commissions.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv666, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, contract
J. Hopkins denies the former employee's motion to dismiss, ruling that while she was a remote employee based in Idaho, she reported to a Kroger supervisor based in Ohio, traveled to Ohio several times throughout her employment and communicated with Ohio-based coworkers on a daily basis, all of which grants this court jurisdiction over Kroger's claims for misappropriation of trade secrets.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Hopkins, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv816, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, Jurisdiction, contract
J. Rubin finds the lower court improperly enforced an arbitration award. This dispute concerns two wireless communications companies over breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation and deceptive trade practices. The court did not have an independent basis of subject matter jurisdiction to confirm the arbitration award. Reversed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Rubin, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 22-1253, Categories: Arbitration, trade Secrets, contract
J. Starr denies, in part, a former employee's motion for summary judgment on a motorsports company's trade secrets and other claims. There are questions of fact regarding the company's claims for unfair competition, breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation, among others.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Starr, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv2180, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Employment, trade Secrets, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Brody finds that one of two trial courts hearing aspects of the same dispute over allegedly poached employees and trade secrets abused its discretion when it increased an award from $1 million to $2.3 million, as the award was not the result of passion or prejudice, and its injunctive order was overly broad. The second trial court properly held that the preliminary injunction was overly broad and unenforceable since it restrained lawful conduct. Reversed in part.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Brody, Filed On: February 2, 2024, Case #: 49418, Categories: trade Secrets, Damages, Interference With contract
J. Land denies the parent charity's motion to dismiss the state charity's second amended counterclaim for misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of contract. The state charity sufficiently alleged that its donor list was a protectable trade secret and that the parent charity engaged in misappropriation by accessing the donor list under false pretenses and by sharing it with other charity chapters. However, the motion is granted to the extent that the state charity brings an independent, separate claim for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing.
Court: USDC Middle District of Georgia, Judge: Land, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv207, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, contract
J. Nelson grants the environmental management company's motion for a preliminary injunction for its complaint that its former employees misappropriated the company's trade secrets and solicited its employees and customers. The company will likely suffer irreparable harm without a preliminary injunction because the two former employees had access to the company's confidential information and trade secrets, including the company's customer database for multifamily customers, and they could misuse it.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Nelson, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv1004, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: trade Secrets, contract, Injunction
J. Boyle denies partial summary judgment for a medical imaging systems dealer after it sued a former field service engineer for compromising its trade secrets. The engineer had signed an ethics agreement in 2012 promising not to share confidential company information, but that was only contingent on his employment there, and he resigned in 2020. Also, the dealer has not provided specific enough documentation it alleges the engineer compromised to satisfy the trade secrets violation claim.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: 5:20cv657, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Trade, trade Secrets, contract
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