California and New York recently enacted statutory restrictions aimed at “stay-or-pay” arrangements: California AB 692 (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16608 & Cal. Lab. Code § 926) and the New York Trapped at Work Act (N.Y. Lab. Law art. 37, §§ 1050-1055), respectively. Such arrangements are contractual provisions that, while falling short of a
Proskauer on Trade Secrets
Blog Authors
Latest from Proskauer on Trade Secrets
Tenth Circuit Clarifies Distinction Between “Ownership” and “Possession” in Trade Secret Claims
The Tenth Circuit recently held that an employee who failed to take adequate steps to protect confidential business information could not maintain claims against his former employer for trade secret misappropriation under either federal or state law. In Snyder v. Beam Technologies, Inc., 147 F.4th 1246 (Aug. 5, 2025), where the plaintiff alleged violations of…
9th Circuit Clarifies Trade Secret Disclosure Requirements Under The DTSA
The Ninth Circuit recently held that the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) does not require plaintiffs to identify their allegedly misappropriate trade secrets with reasonable particularity at the outset of discovery—much unlike the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”). Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech, Inc., No. 23-16093 (Aug. 12, 2025). Rather, the DTSA’s…
The High-Stakes Game of AI Trade Secrets and Congress’s Next Move
In a world racing to master artificial intelligence, Congress is worried America’s secrets are slipping away. Recently, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet held a hearing entitled “Protecting Our Edge: Trade Secrets and the Global AI Arms Race” to discuss the growing role of trade secrets in a…
Massive $800 Million Verdict in Landmark Trade Secret Case
A California state jury awarded Propel Fuels, Inc. $604.9 million in damages after finding Phillips 66 Company liable for trade secret misappropriation. Propel Fuels, Inc. v. Phillips 66 Co., Case No. 22CV007197 (Cal. Oct. 16, 2024). The jury found defendant willfully misappropriated the trade secrets after conducting due diligence in connection with a potential acquisition…
$30 Million Message: Jury Awards Substantial Punitive Damages for Trade Secret Theft
A nearly decade-long legal battle in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently concluded with a significant jury verdict, underscoring the potentially severe consequences of trade secret theft claims. In Sonrai Systems, LLC v. Anthony M. Romano and The Heil Co. d/b/a Environmental Solutions Group, Case No. 16-cv-03371, a jury awarded…
Tenth Circuit Decision Highlights Distinction Between Traditional Non-Compete and Forfeiture-for-Competition
By Seth Safra & Jake Lee
In Lawson v. Spirit AeroSystems, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld the forfeiture of certain stock awards for violating a covenant not to compete. Like the Seventh Circuit in LKQ Corp. v. Rutledge(which applied Delaware law), the Tenth Circuit concluded that, under Kansas law, the remedy of forfeiting…
Tenth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Trade Secret Claims for Lack of Particularity and Secrecy
On April 22, 2025, the Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of a sales manager and his new employer on claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”), the Oklahoma Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“OUTSA”), and common law claims for misappropriation of confidential business information and civil conspiracy, which were brought by his former…
Georgia Federal Court Denies TRO and Motion to Dismiss in Trade Secrets Case
On March 27, 2025, in Stimlabs LLC v. Griffiths, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ordered a former executive, Sarah Griffiths, to face claims related to her alleged theft of Stimlab’s trade secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) and the Georgia Trade Secrets Act (“GTSA”) after denying her application…
Eleventh Circuit Revives Trade Secret Misappropriation Claim in Long-Running Litigation
On April 4, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama’s ruling dismissing Alabama Aircraft Industries’ (“AAI”) trade secret misappropriation claim against Boeing, thereby allowing AAI to pursue unjust enrichment damages in addition to amounts previously recovered on its breach of contract claim. See Alabama Aircraft Industries…