SAN FRANCISCO — A biotechnology company's former employee is breaching the terms of a permanent injunction and judgment in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit based on his current employment arrangement with an industry competitor, the biotechnology company alleges in an Aug. 27 complaint filed in California federal court (AllCells LLC v. BioIVT LLC, et al., No. 20-6044, N.D. Calif.).
CHICAGO — A provider of equity compensation services asks a federal judge in Illinois in a Sept. 11 motion to grant its request for a preliminary injunction against former employees in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit, arguing that overwhelming evidence shows that the defendants misappropriated the company's trade secrets for its peer tracker software to develop a competing product (Aon plc, et al. v. Infinite Equity Inc., et al., No. 19-7504, N.D. Ill.).
SAN DIEGO — A law firm sued one of its former attorneys, a client and three of the client's senior executives in California federal court on Sept. 10, alleging that the client and its executives engaged in a scheme to poach the former employee, hire him as its in-house counsel and misappropriate the company's confidential and proprietary information and/or trade secrets in violation of an employment agreement the attorney signed with the law firm and in violation of state and federal trade secret laws (Whiteslate LLP v. Derek Dahlin, et al., No. 20-1782, S.D. Calif.).
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A cannabidiol-based (CBD) products manufacturer refiled a previously dismissed trade secret misappropriation lawsuit in Florida federal court on Sept. 3, alleging that a former customer and others misappropriated the manufacturer's proprietary formulas for its CBD products and began marketing a substantially similar CBD product using those trade secrets in violation of state and federal trade secret laws (Healthcare Resources Management Group LLC v. EcoNatura All Healthy World LLC, et al., No. 20-81501 S.D. Fla.).
ST. LOUIS — An Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Sept. 3 dismissed as moot an appeal of a Missouri federal court's issuance of a permanent injunction in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against a consulting and sales for optimization services and software products provider's former employee and an industry competitor, ruling that the terms of the permanent injunction have expired because the appellants failed to seek a stay of the injunction before filing their appeal (Perficient Inc. v. Thomas Munley, et al., No. 19-2951, 8th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28089).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Sept. 1 sentenced a Chinese professor to 18 months in prison and ordered the defendant to pay $476,834.81 in restitution after finding him guilty of economic espionage and theft of trade secrets and conspiracy to commit both offenses stemming from his involvement in a scheme to misappropriate semiconductor technology from two U.S. companies (United States v. Hao Zhang, No. 15-106, N.D. Calif.).
CINCINNATI — In an Aug. 21 ruling, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals left intact a final judgment that copyrighted database-script source code was infringed by Carrier Corp. in its effort to develop heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) testing software (ECIMOS LLC v. Carrier Corporation, Nos. 19-5436, -5519, 6th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26722).
SAN DIEGO — Although a pharmacy benefit management (PBM) services provider and its subsidiaries have sufficiently pleaded allegations to support their claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) that a former business partner and its subsidiary and others violated federal trade secret law by breaching the terms of a joint venture (JV) agreement by misappropriating the provider's trade secrets to create a competing PBM platform, eight of the plaintiffs' remaining claims are preempted by the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA) and must be dismissed, a federal judge in California ruled Aug. 27 (MedImpact Healthcare Systems Inc., et al. v. IQVIA Holdings Inc., et al., No. 19-1865, S.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155996).
SAN ANTONIO — A Texas appellate panel ruled Aug. 26 on rehearing that remand and a new trial are warranted in a breach of contract trade secret misappropriation lawsuit that previously resulted in a nearly $720 million judgment on certain claims because a jury question asking jurors to determine whether the title insurer misappropriated those trade secrets under a "use" or "acquisition by improper means" theory allowed the jury to reach its findings on the question based on invalid theories (Title Source Inc. v. HouseCanary Inc., No. 04-19-44-CV, Texas App., 4th Dist., 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 6835).
LOS ANGELES — The owner of a group-scheduling mobile application has appealed three summary judgment orders that led to the dismissal of all federal claims in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against certain of its former employees and competitors StubHub Inc. and its parent company, eBay Inc., according to an Aug. 24 notice of appeal filed in California federal court (Calendar Research LLC v. StubHub Inc., et al., No. 17-4062, C.D. Calif.).
FRESNO, Calif. — A distributor of digitalized music sued its former chief operations officer and an industry competitor in California federal court on July 29, alleging that the former executive misappropriated its confidential recording codes and metadata in violation of state and federal trade secret law by providing the proprietary information to the competitor so that it may exploit the trade secrets to compete with the plaintiff in the digitalized music industry (Colonize Media Inc. v. Tate A. Palmer, et al., No. 20-1053, E.D. Calif.).
CHICAGO — Although a federal jury was provided with sufficient evidence to support a software developer's assertion that an industry competitor stole its confidential information and trade secrets and used this information to develop a comparative analysis of its product to the developer's to advance its business in the United States, the jury was not provided with evidence that would allow it to determine that the competitor misappropriated any of the developer's other information, a Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Aug. 20 in partially overturning a federal district court's damages award in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit (Epic Systems Corp. v. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., et al., Nos. 19-1528 and 19-1613, 7th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26473).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Dismissal of claims in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against a former employee of confectionery, pet food and other food productsmanufacturer Mars Inc. and an industry competitor is warranted because the claims against the former employee are subject to mandatory arbitration in Belgium and were filed as nothing more than part of a smear campaign against the defendants, the defendants argue in an Aug. 20 motion to dismiss filed in District of Columbia federal court (Mars Inc. v. Jacek Szarzynski, et al., No. 20-1344, D. D.C.).
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — A federal judge in Michigan on Aug. 20 ruled that a company that engages in the sale and installation of solar energy panels has failed to sufficiently identify the trade secrets it alleges a former employee and industry competitor stole and misappropriated in violation of state and federal trade secret laws to improperly compete with the company in the solar energy industry (Skywatcher LLC v. Gregory Oliver, et al., No. 19-409, W.D. Mich., 20202 Dist. LEXIS 150642).
NEW ORLEANS — Stating that the "time has come" for a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit "to be laid to rest once and for all," a federal judge in Louisiana on Aug. 18 granted a motion for attorney fees and costs filed by defendants, granting them 25 percent of an amount to be determined at a later date after an in camera review of their unredacted attorney time records has been completed (Source Production & Equipment Co. Inc., et al. v. Kevin J. Schehr, et al., No. 16-17528, E.D. La., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149827).
LAS VEGAS — A federal judge in Nevada on July 30 ruled that although a multilevel marketing company has failed to sufficiently plead which claims it is asserting in a breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against two former affiliates as statutorily required, it is likely to be able to correct the deficiencies in its complaint (My Daily Choice Inc. v. Shanna Lee Hunter, et al., No. 20-0809, D. Nev., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135671).
ST. LOUIS — An Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Aug. 17 ruled that a federal district court did not err in denying an agriculture technology company's motion for summary judgment in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against its former employees and the industry competitor they formed because the company failed to allege that the trade secrets the defendants are alleged to have misappropriated were protectable within the meaning of state and federal trade secret statutes (Farmers Edge Inc., et al. v. Farmobile LLC, et al., No. 18-2900, 8th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25962).
WILMINGTON, Del. — A federal judge in Delaware on Aug. 13 ruled that a developer of artificial intelligence (AI) products for the pharmaceutical industry has failed to sufficiently state its claim for trade secret misappropriation under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) with the requisite particularity against drug maker AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, stemming from the defendant's alleged misappropriation of proprietary information it obtained during discussions regarding AstraZeneca's interest in becoming a customer of the developer (Lithero LLC v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, No. 19-2320, D. Del., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145592).
ST. LOUIS — Although agreeing with a Minnesota federal judge that claims of copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation involving payroll source code do not warrant preliminary injunctive relief, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 14 vacated the district court's order in part, with instructions to consider "in the first instance" allegations that the software was wrongfully sublicensed (MPAY Inc. v. Erie Custom Computer Applications Inc., et al., No. 19-2206, 8th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25816).
WILMINGTON, Del. — Franchisors of a mobile trash compaction business were awarded a limited preliminary injunction by a Delaware vice chancellor on Aug. 13 because "the record does not support a business-stopping injunction" (Smash Franchise Partners, LLC, et al. v. Kanda Holdings, Inc., et al., No. 2020-0302-JTL, Del. Chanc., 2020 Del. Ch. LEXIS 263).