The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Perrin Bernard Supowitz, LLC v. Morales continues to highlight the high bar necessary for a motion for preliminary injunction, the evidence required to establish irreparable harm, and the limited “abuse of discretion” standard that may be applied during any appeal. Case No. 23-55189, 2023 WL 1415572 (9th Cir. Feb. 5,
VANDA Pharmaceuticals States a Fifth Amendment Claim against the Government for Taking a Trade Secret
The legal battle between VANDA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and the United States government provides guidance on the minimum requirements that the government must meet to protect trade secrets provided during the regulatory approval process for pharmaceuticals. The case, which involves alleged unlawful disclosure of trade secrets by government officials to generic drug competitors, presents several issues
Tips for Santa to Maintain Trade Secrets at the North Pole
- The “Elf on a Shelf” has seen a lot from the outside. Make sure the employment agreement prevents them from sharing within.
- If elves are working remote, make sure they know not to download the gift-wrapping procedure from the Workshop shared drive to personal devices.
- Distribute the “Naughty or Nice” list on a need to
Client Alert: Open Questions Add Uncertainty to Scope and Impact of New Trade Secret Law
- The new law has the potential to have a great impact on how domestic companies protect their IP, and how foreign companies assess theft of trade secrets.
- Many crucial issues, however, are left open. The scope and impact of the law will depend heavily on how the executive branch decides to address these
Sedona Conference’s Commentaries Provides Guidance on Challenges in Trade Secret Litigation and Gain Momentum With Courts
The Sedona Conference’s Trade Secret Working Group recently published an article titled “7 Ways To Approach The Difficulties Of Trade Secret Litigation”. Crowell’s Mark Klapow is a member of the working.
Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1559728/7-ways-to-approach-the-difficulties-of-trade-secret-litigation?copied=1
2022 AIPLA Annual Trade Secret Law Summit
Crowell & Moring is a proud sponsor of this year’s American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) Trade Secrets Summit, taking place December 8-9 in Miami, FL.
Please join us for a panel discussion on “Best Practices for Trade Secret Identification in Litigation,” led by Crowell & Moring attorney Mark Klapow on Thursday, December 8
No Non-Compete? No Problem. Texas Court Grants TRO Forcing Former Employees to Stop Working for Competing Business.
Restrictive covenants and non-compete agreements have been a frequent topic of this blog in recent months, and rightfully so. Non-competes are generally thought to be effective tools to help firms protect trade secrets and competitive advantages. However, these agreements are falling out of favor across the country – the DOJ recently file a Statement of Interest in a state court case taking the position that non-competes may violate the Sherman Antitrust Act. Further, states continue to pass laws limiting or banning the use of noncompete agreements, including Illinois, Oregon, Nevada, D.C., and Colorado.
But one Texas court seems to buck this trend. Last month, Fort Bend County District Judge J. Christian Becerra granted a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) in a trade secret misappropriation case, forcing multiple former employees to stop work for a competing business, and limiting one particular employee from engaging in any competing work for any competitor. The catch? Not a single employee had a non-compete agreement.Continue Reading No Non-Compete? No Problem. Texas Court Grants TRO Forcing Former Employees to Stop Working for Competing Business.
Restrictive Covenants in the First Circuit
To continue our series on trade secret employee contract clauses, we’ve surveyed the First Circuit for updates to the law relating to restrictive covenants. Such covenants remain predominantly governed by statutes in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, while Puerto Rico continues to govern them by common law. And with no significant updates since 2020, restrictive covenants remain disfavored and under increased scrutiny in the First Circuit. Generally, these courts will only enforce noncompete agreements that are reasonable, no broader than necessary to protect an employer’s legitimate business interests, properly noticed, and in line with public policy. The applicable law for each state is set forth below.
Continue Reading Restrictive Covenants in the First Circuit
Second Circuit Reminds Practitioners That A Plausible Claim for Trade Secret Misappropriation Must Detail the Reasonable Measures Used to Protect the Alleged Secret
A recent decision by the Second Circuit reminds litigants that a party asserting a trade secret misappropriation claim under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), or New York law, must detail in a pleading “the “reasonable measures” employed to maintain the secrecy of the alleged trade secret. In Turret Labs USA, Inc. v. CargoSprint, LLC, No. 21-952, Dkt. No 106-1 (2nd Cir. Mar. 9, 2022), the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court’s grant of a motion to dismiss, concluding that plaintiff Turret Labs failed to adequately allege that reasonable measures were taken because, although there was an agreement giving the plaintiff’s customer exclusive access to the alleged trade secret, this agreement (as well as all surrounding security policy documents) failed to contractually obligate the customer to maintain confidentiality of the alleged secret.Continue Reading Second Circuit Reminds Practitioners That A Plausible Claim for Trade Secret Misappropriation Must Detail the Reasonable Measures Used to Protect the Alleged Secret
Restrictive Covenants in the Seventh Circuit
As a part of our series on trade secret employee contract clauses, we have surveyed the Seventh Circuit for updates on the law pertaining to Restrictive Covenants. Each state’s laws are set forth below. But generally in the Seventh Circuit, states focus on reasonableness, geographic, and income restraints in restrictive covenant agreements. Indiana applies a reasonableness-standard common law approach to enforcing covenants, strictly construed against the employer. Wisconsin’s restrictive covenant statute also focuses on reasonableness restraints, and will void all parts of the covenant even if remaining portions are reasonable. Illinois recently passed a restrictive covenant statute in 2021, the Illinois Freedom to Work Act, which codifies the state’s longstanding common law, adding provisions restricting covenants against certain incomes and professions.
Continue Reading Restrictive Covenants in the Seventh Circuit