ROCHESTER, N.Y. — A custom glassware distributor has failed to sufficiently show that a federal district court has jurisdiction over claims against it direct competitor in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit and has failed to sufficiently state a claim for relief against a former employee who allegedly misappropriated the plaintiff’s trade secret information to the competitor, a federal judge in New York ruled Dec. 10 (Mastercraft Decorators v. Randy Orlando, et al, No. 18-6037, W.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207951).
CAMDEN, N.J. — A federal judge in New Jersey on Dec. 10 ruled that a franchiser failed to sufficiently show that defendants in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit developed a competing business with the intent to harm the franchiser in New Jersey, and, as a result, the court lacks specific jurisdiction over the franchiser’s claims (Frutta Bowl Franchising LLC v. Justin Bitner, et al., No. 18-2446, D. N.J., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208311).
NEW YORK — An information technology (IT) company has failed to sufficiently identify any trade secret that its former business partner is alleged to have misappropriated and has failed to provide sufficient evidence showing that the former business partner misappropriated the alleged trade secret by providing it to the company’s competitor, a New York justice ruled Dec. 5 in dismissing several claims (Hyperlync Technologies Inc. v. Verizon Sourcing LLC, No. 650151/2015, N.Y. Sup., New York Co., 2018 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5908).
WILMINGTON, Del. — A federal judge in Delaware on Nov. 19 ruled that the defendant in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit failed to show that a semiconductor developer and manufacturer engaged in any spoliation of evidence sufficient to lead to dismissal of the action (Monolithic Power Systems Inc. v. Intersil Corp., No. 16-1125, D. Del., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201797).
AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas appellate panel on Dec. 4 ruled that a state trial court erred in awarding an Australian provider of DNA tests for skin-care products damages and attorney fees on its breach of contract claim against its former business partner and others in a breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation lawsuit (Ruthie Harper, et al. v. Wellbeing Genomics Pty Ltd., No. 03-17-00035-CV, Tex. App., 3rd Dist., 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 10120).
SAN FRANCISCO — Efforts by SAP SE to obtain dismissal of allegations of copyright infringement allegations were unsuccessful Dec. 12, when a California federal judge deemed the claims adequately pleaded; in the same ruling, however, the judge agreed to dismiss allegations of trade secret misappropriation, upon finding that the asserted trade secrets are not sufficiently identified (Teradata Corp., et al. v. SAP SE, et al., No. 18-3670, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209872).
SALT LAKE CITY — A federal judge in Utah on Dec. 10 ruled that a jury in a trade secrets misappropriation lawsuit brought by Bimbo Bakeries USA Inc. was provided with sufficient evidence to support its allocation of 75 percent of a damages award against a defendant, denying the defendant’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, motion for a new trial or remittitur (Bimbo Bakeries Inc. v. Leland Sycamore, et al., No. 13-749, D. Utah, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208837).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A federal judge in Texas on Dec. 7 ruled that a Texas Anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (anti-SLAPP) statute is “not applicable in federal courts sitting in diversity” and denied a defendant’s motion to dismiss in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit filed by a company working in the health care packaging industry (Platinum Press Inc. v. Danielle Douros-Hawk, No. 18-458, W.D. N.C., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206655).
DALLAS — A company that makes tools for use in hydraulic fracturing operations on Nov. 16 sued an oilfield services company and its executive in Texas state court, contending that they are liable for misappropriation of trade secrets under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (TUTSA) (MCR Tools LLC v. Martin G. Bruce, et al., No. DC-18-17370, 160th Dist., Dallas).
FRESNO, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Dec. 4 ruled that a prior settlement between parties in a misappropriation of trade secrets lawsuit bars a provider of water treatment solutions for agriculture irrigation from bringing any of its claims against its former CEO and current operator of a direct competitor because the settlement “is broad and releases all claims” that the plaintiff brought against the defendant that existed before Jan. 8, 2018 (Deerpoint Group Inc. v. Agrigenix LLC, No. 18-536, E.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205322).
PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge in Pennsylvania on Dec. 3 ruled that although a pharmaceutical company specializing in sleep medications has failed to show that its employees list is a trade secret under state or federal law, it has sufficiently shown that its former business partner violated state and federal trade secrets laws by using the drug company’s confidential and proprietary information to secure a business relationship with a competitor (Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Synchrony Group LLC, et al., No. 18-602, E.D. Pa., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203873).
CHICAGO — Dismissal of a trade secrets misappropriation lawsuit is not warranted because an operator and builder of self-storage facilities has sufficiently shown that several of its former employees misappropriated its confidential and proprietary information to start a competing business while still employed with the plaintiff, the plaintiff argues in a Nov. 30 opposition brief filed in Illinois federal court (LSC Development LLC, et al. v. Stephen R. Osborne, et al., No. 18-5909, N.D. Ill.).
LOS ANGELES — A nonprofit organization that provides services in the gaming industry sued another gaming entity on Dec. 3 in a California federal court, asserting claims for trademark infringement and violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) in relation to the alleged use of its trademarks (GameChanger Charity v. PlayNext Inc., No. 8:18cv2142, C.D. Calif.).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Technology company Intel Corp. sued a former employee in California federal court on Nov. 27, alleging that the defendant stole certain confidential and proprietary information relating to the development of its new memory technology from the company and misappropriated the trade secrets after accepting employment from a competitor in violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and his employment agreements with Intel (Intel Corp. v. Doyle Rivers, et al., No. 18-3061, E.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Nov. 26 declined to compel the production of the terms of a confidential settlement between the plaintiff and co-defendant Facebook Inc. in a trade secrets misappropriation lawsuit, ruling that the other co-defendants are not entitled to an offset of lost profits and unjust enrichment damages (BladeRoom Group Limited, et al. v. Emerson Electric Co., et al., No. 15-1370, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 199738).
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Nov. 26 ruled that dismissal of a company’s second amended complaint in a trade secrets misappropriation lawsuit is not warranted because the company has sufficiently shown that a competitor misappropriated its trade secrets in violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) (Medidata Solutions Inc., et al. v. Veeva Systems Inc., No. 17-589, S.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 199763).
HOUSTON — A motion for summary judgment brought by defendants in a theft and misappropriation of trade secrets lawsuit brought by the owner and operator of a website that lists job postings for professionals working in the oil and gas industry in the Houston area and Gulf Coast region “is — with one exception — completely baseless” and should be denied, plaintiffs argue in a Nov. 16 opposition brief filed in Texas federal court (DHI Group Inc. v. David W. Kent Jr., et al., No. 16-1670, S.D. Texas).
TAMPA, Fla. — Arguing that a third-party administrator of the U.S. government’s 340B drug pricing program’s motion for preliminary injunction in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit is “late, unsupported by fact and contrary to law,” defendants CVS Pharmacy Inc. and subsidiary Wellpartner LLC on Nov. 19 asked a federal judge in Florida to deny the motion in its entirety (RxStrategies Inc. v. CVS Pharmacy Inc., et al., No. 18-1087, M.D. Fla.).
SAN ANTONIO — Arguing that it has uncovered evidence of a massive fraud on the court, an insurance provider on Nov. 13 asked a Texas judge to grant a new trial in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit where a jury had previously awarded a provider of property appraisal software $706.2 million after finding that the insurer breached the terms of a licensing agreement and misappropriated the software provider’s confidential and trade secret information (Title Source Inc. v. HouseCanary Inc., No. 2016-CI-06300, Texas Dist., Bexar Co.).
WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware Superior Court jury on Nov. 7 found that a pharmaceutical company and its co-founders misappropriated its competitor’s trade secret information pertaining to the development of a cancer treatment drug but rejected the competitor’s allegations that the drug maker was unjustly enriched because of the misappropriation (Incyte Corp. v. Flexus Biosciences Inc., et al., No. N15C-09-055 MMJ (CCLD), Del. Super.).