A New Jersey state court judge has allowed a $10 million jury verdict to stand in favor of biotech firm GenScript USA in its trade secret and employee piracy claims against competitor, Genewiz, Inc. In October 2014, the jury had entered a multi-million dollar verdict in GenScript’s favor following a six-week trial. The jury found
Nike Lawsuit Against Former Designers Will Test Company Security Initiative
Athletic shoe manufacturer Nike filed suit on December 8, 2014 in Multnomah County Circuit Court in Oregon against three of its former designers alleging that the designers misappropriated Nike’s trade secrets and conspired with Adidas to start a new, competing business venture.
The three former designers, Denis Dekovic, Marc Dolce and Mark Miner, all resigned
Half-Billion Dollar Arbitration Award in Trade Secrets Case Affirmed by Minnesota Supreme Court in Trade Secrets Dispute
The Minnesota Supreme Court has affirmed an arbitrator’s eye-popping award of $525 million plus prejudgment interest totaling $96 million and post-award interest in a trade secrets dust up between Seagate Technology, LLC and Western Digital Corporation, et al. Seagate Technology, LLC v. Western Digital Corporation, et al and Sining Mao, No. A12-1994 (Minn. October
California Court Considers Customer Lists, LinkedIn Contacts, in Trade Secrets Case
A federal district court for the Central District of California has issued a detailed decision regarding customer lists and LinkedIn contacts in ruling on cross-motions for summary judgment in the trade secrets dispute captioned Cellular Accessories For Less, Inc. v. Trinitas, LLC, No. CV 12-06736 DDP, including a surprising ruling that LinkedIn contacts might
Claims in Pennsylvania Lawsuit Alleging En Masse Defection of Employees as “Sabotage” Survive Dismissal
A U.S. District Judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has allowed several claims to proceed to trial following a motion for summary judgment by defendants in Ozburn-Hessey Logistics, LLC v. 721 Logistics, LLC, et al, No. 12-0864 (April 4, 2014). The allegations in the case go beyond the typical defection of an employee
Courts Reigning in What It Means to be a “Hacker” Under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Jackson Lewis e-discovery guru Ralph Losey has posted an article about the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) on his e-discovery blog ediscoverylawtoday. Losey posits that more courts may be turning to the minority application of the CFAA as applying only to acts of unauthorized access, as opposed to unauthorized use. As he states
Criminal Prosecution for Employee Theft of Employer’s Documents May Proceed, New Jersey Court Rules
Our colleague Jason C. Gavejian has written about an interesting case in New Jersey involving the criminal prosecution of an employee who took highly confidential documents from her employer to support her employment discrimination suit. The decision distinguishes a 2010 New Jersey Supreme Court ruling in which the court held that an employee who copied
Either Way You Say it, It’s Unauthorized: Mass. Federal Court Declines to Dismiss CFAA Claim
On November 12, 2013, A court in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a decision concerning the ongoing debate about the meaning of “exceeding authorized access” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Moca Systems, Inc. v. Bernier, No. 13-10738-LTS (D. Mass. Nov. 12, 2013). MOCA Systems, Inc. filed suit
Confidentiality, Non-Compete Agreements Held Unenforceable against Former Employee, Arizona Court Holds
Robert K. Jones and Stephen B. Coleman from our Phoenix office have written on the Jackson Lewis website about a significant new court of appeals decision in Arizona striking down restrictive coveants in an employment agreement as overbroad. The article can be viewed here: Confidentiality, Non-Compete Agreements Held Unenforceable against Former Employee, Arizona Court Holds
CA Court Concludes Contract, Common Law Claims not Preempted by Trade Secrets Act
The Court of Appeal for California’s Fourth Appellate District recently confirmed that the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA), a broad statute intended to be the last word in trade secret misappropriation cases, does not preclude separate but related common law claims, so long as these claims are not based entirely on the trade secret