The Federal Circuit recently confirmed the importance of properly identifying the trade secrets underlying a claim under the Ohio Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“OUTSA”) [Ohio Rev. Code §§ 1333.61 et seq.], finding that the plaintiffs’ failure to properly identify the trade secrets entitled the defendant to judgment as a matter of law notwithstanding
Trade Secrets Law Blog
FTC Signals Shift to Targeted Enforcement of Non-Competes in the Healthcare Industry
Earlier this Fall, the Federal Trade Commission (the “Commission” or the “FTC”) officially ceded its fight to impose a nationwide ban on employee noncompete agreements (the “Noncompete Ban”).…
Ninth Circuit Refuses to Apply California’s “Reasonable Particularity” Requirement to Claims Under the Defend Trade Secrets Act
The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech, Inc. underscores an important distinction in trade secret law between California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”) [Cal. Civ. Code, §§ 3426 et seq.] and the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) [18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1832 et seq.]. Specifically, the…
Delaware Courts Limit Noncompete Enforcement in Incentive Plans
Delaware Courts Continue to Scrutinize Noncompete Agreements
As previously reported (here, here and here), courts in Delaware, the once favored “employer-friendly” jurisdiction, have increasingly scrutinized and refused to enforce noncompete agreements. In recent cases, Delaware courts have continued this trend, this time focusing on forfeiture-upon-competition provisions in equity or profit incentive agreements…
Evidence of a Defendant’s Physical or Digital Retention of Trade Secret Information Is Not Required to Prove Trade Secret Misappropriation Under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act
A recent federal district court ruling serves as an important reminder that a former employee may be held liable for trade secret misappropriation even if the alleged trade secrets are not physically or electronically taken by the departing employee, but instead retained only in memory.…
The Rise of Trade Secret Litigation
Legal regimes are shifting, including in the intellectual property world as businesses increasingly seek the protection of trade secrets rather than patents to secure their confidential information. When the Defend Trade Secrets Act was passed in 2016, trade secret litigation skyrocketed, increasing more than 25 percent in a single year. While the number of trade secret cases…
Virginia Court of Appeals Reverses Record $2 Billion Verdict, Emphasizing Damages Resulting from Misappropriation Must Actually Be Proved Under Virginia Trade Secrets Law
By Tyler Baker
The Virginia Court of Appeals recently issued a consequential trade secrets ruling, reversing a jury’s multi-billion dollar damages award, and finding that the trial court committed several legal errors which improperly led to the largest damages verdict in Virginia’s history. The case, Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corp., No. 1399-22-4, involved two companies in the business…
Attorney’s Fees May Be Recoverable in Trade Secret Cases, Even Without Damages
By Luke Bickel*
In California, although the prevailing rule is that each party in litigation must cover their own fees and costs, a litigant can be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs if expressly permitted in a contract. Proprietary information agreements often include an award of attorney’s fees and costs if a company prevails in seeking injunctive relief for…
California Court of Appeal Rules That Partial Sale of Business Can Bind Seller-Owner to a Noncompetition Agreement
In Samuelian v. Life Generations Healthcare, LLC, — Cal. App. 5th —, 2024 WL 3878448 (Cal. App. Aug. 20, 2024), the California Court of Appeal answered two long outstanding questions of California law concerning the enforceability of noncompetition agreements in the context of the sale of a business:…
Maine Governor’s Veto of Non-Compete Ban Bucks Growing Trend Among States and Federal Trade Commission
Amidst a wave of non-compete bans sweeping California, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Minnesota and, most recently, the nation via the Federal Trade Commission’s non-compete prohibition, Maine Governor Janet Mills departed from this growing trend and vetoed L.D. 1496, An Act To Prohibit Noncompete Clauses (“L.D. 1496”) in April 2024. If enacted, the L.D. 1496…