Mealey's Trade Secret : Mealey's : Legal News & Analysis

Mealey's Trade Secret

September 26, 2019
State, Federal Trade Secret Law Claims Survive Summary Judgment Bid

BALTIMORE — A federal judge in Maryland on Sept. 20 ruled that summary judgment on state and federal trade secret law claims in an employment dispute is not warranted because the defendant conceded that one of two trade secrets she is alleged to have misappropriated meets the necessary statutory definition of a trade secret (Maryland Physician’s Edge LLC v. Nancy Behram, M.D., No. 17-2756, D. Md., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163536).
September 25, 2019
DTSA Claim Dismissed For Failure To Plead ‘Interstate Commerce’ Element

HONOLULU — A federal judge in Hawaii on Sept. 23 ruled that a nonprofit organization that provides hospice care to residents of Hawaii failed to sufficiently plead that its alleged trade secret “relates to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate commerce” as required pursuant to the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) (Islands Hospice Inc. Michael Duick, et al., No. 19-0202, D. Hawaii, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162416).
September 20, 2019
Panel: Counterclaims Properly Dismissed As Superseded By Trade Secret Law

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal district court did not abuse it’s discretion in dismissing a medical technology company’s counterclaims for unfair business practices and unjust enrichment against its competitor in the health care professional clothing industry without leave to amend because those counterclaims are superseded by California’s uniform trade secrets law, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Sept. 16 (Strategic Partners Inc. v. Vestagen Protective Technologies Inc., Nos. 17-56789, 17-56897 and 18-55156, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 27819).
September 20, 2019
Battery Technology Company Sues Chinese Competitor In Trade Secret Dispute

SAN JOSE, Calif. — A manufacturer of new battery technologies sued its Chinese competitor on Sept. 16 in California federal court, alleging that the competitor engaged in a scheme to poach one of the manufacturer’s key employees and misappropriate the company’s confidential and trade secret information for its lithium-ion battery separators in violation of state and federal trade secret laws (Celgard LLC v. Shenzhen Senior Technology Material Co. Ltd. [US] Research Institute, et al., No. 19-5784, N.D. Calif.).
September 20, 2019
High Court Review Of Dischargeability Ruling In Trade Secret Suit Sought

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court should grant review of a federal appellate court’s remand of a bankruptcy court ruling to determine whether a company’s former employee intended to injure his former employer when he misappropriated the company’s trade secrets for the benefit of a competitor in determining whether a trade secrets misappropriation damages judgment against him may be discharged as part of a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding, the company argues in a Sept. 3 petition for writ of certiorari (TKC Aerospace Inc. v. Charles Taylor Muhs, No. 19-293, U.S. Sup.).
September 20, 2019
Coin Dealer Hits Competitor With Trade Secret Misappropriation Suit

LOS ANGELES — An authorized dealer of rare coins and currency sued another dealer and a former employee on Sept. 11 in California state court, alleging that the defendants misappropriated the dealer’s confidential and proprietary inventory software and stole more than $450,000 in inventory (Westford Rare Coins LLC v. Vadim Polyak, et al., No. 19STCV32089, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.).
September 20, 2019
Post-Trial Motions In Long-Running Trade Secret Suit Granted In Part

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — A federal judge in Rhode Island on Sept. 5 granted in part and denied in part two post-trial motions in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit brought by an Italian company against its former employee and its competitor, ruling that the plaintiff failed to introduce sufficient evidence of a protectable trade secret pursuant to the state trade secrets law (Alifax Holding SpA v. Alcor Scientific Inc., et al., No. 14-440, D. R.I., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150856).
September 18, 2019
Husband, Wife Charged With Theft Of Trade Secrets From Children’s Hospital

CINCINNATI — A husband and wife conspired to steal confidential and trade secret information from the Nationwide Children’s Hospital pertaining to the hospital’s exosome and exosome isolation research and provide the information to a company that performs similar work in China, federal prosecutors allege in a criminal indictment unsealed Sept. 16 in Ohio federal court (United States of America v. Yu Zhou, et al., No. 19-cr-163, S.D. Ohio).
September 18, 2019
State, Federal Trade Secret Law Claims Survive Dismissal Attempt

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A federal judge in Tennessee on Sept. 13 ruled that a seller of clear orthodontic aligners has sufficiently stated allegations in support of its claims for misappropriation of trade secrets in violation of state and federal law against the former employee of its business partner (SDC Financial LLC, et al. v. Martin Bremer, et al., No. 19-525, M.D. Tenn., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156806).
September 18, 2019
District Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Claim In Trade Secret Suit, Judge Rules

CINCINNATI — A federal judge in Ohio on Sept. 16 ruled that a freight brokerage services provider has failed to sufficiently show that a federal district court has personal jurisdiction over the provider’s claims against its former employee in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit (Total Quality Logistics LLC v. Tarpon Transportation Services Inc., No. 18-353, S.D. Ohio, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157672).
September 16, 2019
Trade Secret Misappropriation Law Counterclaims Survive Dismissal Bid

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Sept. 13 denied a software company’s motion to dismiss counterclaims for violation of state and federal trade secrets laws filed by its competitor and several former employees, rejecting the company’s assertion that the trade secret counterclaims fail for the same reasons that its trade secret misappropriation claims were found to be deficient in a previous ruling (Vendavo Inc. v. Price f(x) AG, et al., No. 17-6930, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157062).
September 13, 2019
Judge Denies Dismissal Of Added Claims In Trade Secrets Suit Over Sales Agreement

MEDFORD, Ore. — A federal judge in Oregon on Sept. 10 ruled that dismissal of claims added in an amended complaint filed by Rust-Oleum Corp. in its trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against its former business partner is not appropriate because Rust-Oleum provided sufficient factual allegations to support the claims (Rust-Oleum Corp. v. NIC Industries Inc., No. 18-1655, D. Ore., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154998).
September 09, 2019
Claims In Trade Secrets Suit Dismissed As Preempted By Alabama Statute

MOBILE, Ala. — A federal judge in Alabama on Sept. 6 ruled that dismissal of several claims in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against a contactor and one of its employees is warranted because those claims are preempted by Alabama’s trade secret law (Arkema Inc., et al. v. Emerson Process Management LLP, et al., No. 19-296, S.D. Ala., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151783).
September 09, 2019
Reconsideration Of Dismissal Of State, Federal Trade Secret Law Claims Denied

FRESNO, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Sept. 5 denied a provider of water treatment solutions for agriculture irrigation’s motion for reconsideration of a prior ruling dismissing its state and federal trade secret misappropriation law claims, holding that a “procedural problem” exists with the plaintiff’s motion (Deerpoint Group Inc. v. Agrigenix LLC, No. 18-536, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15163).
September 05, 2019
Parties Debate Necessity Of Sanctions Against Attorney In Trade Secret Suit

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California should deny a request made by defendants in trade secret misappropriation lawsuit to issue sanctions against plaintiff’s counsel for sending allegedly threatening communications because the attorney who sent the letters did not commit any violations of ethical rules as the defendants allege, the plaintiff claims in an Aug. 30 opposition brief filed in California federal court (Citcon USA LLC v. RiverPay Inc., et al., No. 18-2585, N.D. Calif.).
September 04, 2019
Injunctive Relief Granted In Company’s Trade Secret Suit Against Former Employee

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Describing a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit defendant’s testimony as “unbelievable, self-serving, and evasive,” a federal judge in Tennessee on Aug. 29 ruled that a supplier of raw pigment materials to the plastics industry has shown a substantial likelihood of success on its claims that the defendant violated state and federal trade secret laws (Uniform Color Co. v. Shaun Langley, No. 19-636, M.D. Tenn., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149066).
September 03, 2019
Judge: Defendant In Trade Secrets Dispute Subject To Personal Jurisdiction

SHERMAN, Texas — A defendant in a trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract lawsuit filed by his former employer did not waive his objection to personal jurisdiction but is subject to such jurisdiction in Texas for a majority of the claims brought against him, a federal judge in Texas ruled Aug. 29 (McAfee LLC v. Jennifer E. Kinney, et al., No. 19-0463, E.D. Texas, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146929).
August 30, 2019
Kansas Federal Judge Dissolves TRO, Won’t Stop Use Of Trademark

WICHITA, Kan. — In an Aug. 28 memorandum, a Kansas federal judge granted a defendant’s motion to dissolve a temporary restraining order (TRO) entered by a Kansas state court, which barred further use of the “GEO-SEAL” trademark (EPRO Services Inc. v. Regenesis Bioremediation Products, No. 19-1220, D. Kan., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146053).
August 29, 2019
Magistrate Judge Orders Sanctions Against Attorney In Trade Secrets Dispute

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California on Aug. 26 awarded counsel for a payment processing company $7,000 in sanctions to be paid by an attorney representing defendants in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit for failing to respond to two motions to compel discovery responses, in addition to $5,000 in sanctions already awarded against the attorney (Granite Payments LLC, et al. v. 1Point Merchant Solutions Inc., et al., No. 18-2727, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144826).
August 29, 2019
Defendants’ Bid To Transfer Trade Secret Suit To Texas Federal Court Denied

OPELIKA, Ala. — A federal judge in Alabama on Aug. 27 ruled that a transfer of venue in a breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation lawsuit is not necessary because defendants have failed to show that a transfer to a Texas federal court would be of convenience to the parties and witnesses and be in the interest of justice (Ham-Let USA Inc. v. Barbara Guthrie, et al., No. 18-679, M.D. Ala., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXS 145305).
August 28, 2019
Former Google Engineer Indicted On Trade Secret Theft Charges

SAN FRANCISCO — In an indictment unsealed Aug. 26, a California grand jury charged a former Google Inc. engineer with stealing the company’s trade secrets for its self-driving car technology and using those trade secrets to form a competing company that was subsequently purchased by Uber Technologies Inc. (United States v. Anthony Scott Levandowski, No. 19-cr-377, N.D. Calif.).
August 23, 2019
Panel: Court’s Summary Judgment Ruling On Trade Secrets Counterclaim Proper

DALLAS — A Texas state appellate panel on Aug. 13 ruled that a state trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of a plaintiff on defendants’ counterclaims for, among other things, trade secret misappropriation because the defendants failed to show that a genuine issue of material fact exists on the challenged elements of their trade secret misappropriation claim (Kenneth W. Morrison, et al. v. John D. Profanchik Sr., No. 05-17-01281-CV, Texas App., 5th Dist., 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 7089).
August 23, 2019
Review Of Sanctions Award In Trade Secrets Suit Not Warranted, Respondents Argue

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Supreme Court review of a federal circuit court’s ruling upholding the issuance of a punitive sua sponte terminating sanctions order (TSO) in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit is not warranted because no “factual or legal grounds” for review exist, respondents argue in an Aug. 12 opposition brief filed in the Supreme Court (Loop AI Labs Inc., et al. v. Anna Gatti, et al., No. 19-59, U.S. Sup.).
August 23, 2019
Energy Company Seeks Declaration That It Did Not Misappropriate Trade Secrets

NEW YORK — A company that addresses energy distribution infrastructure deficiencies in developing markets and others sued investors in New York federal court on Aug. 13, seeking declaration that they did not misappropriate trade secrets under state and federal trade secrets law (Latchable Inc., et al. v. Ben Steiner, et al., No. 19-7575, S.D. N.Y.).
August 22, 2019
Judge Issues Preliminary Injunction In Trade Secret Misappropriation Suit

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Aug. 21 ruled that a preliminary injunction in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit is warranted to “maintain the status quo” because the plaintiff in the action has sufficiently shown that certain of its former employees and the competing company they started misappropriated the plaintiff’s trade secrets and that their continued misrepresentation will harm the company (Pacific Netsoft Inc. v. SkillSource Learning Partners LLC, et al., No. 19-3808, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142329).