A non-competition covenant prohibited employees of Adhesives Research (AR), a company based in Pennsylvania, from performing services for a competitor of AR anywhere in the world for two years after termination. Newsom, AR’s western U.S. manager of medical products, worked out of her home in California. When she quit and joined another adhesives manufacturer, AR sued and moved for entry … Continue Reading
On Thursday, May 28, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central, in the fourth installment of our 2015 Trade Secret Webinars, Seyfarth attorneys John Tomaszewski, Eric Barton and Joshua Salinas will address the relationship between trade secrets, social media, and privacy.
The Seyfarth panel will specifically address the following topics:Defining, understanding, and protecting trade secrets in social media, including a deeper… Continue Reading
In Seyfarth’s third installment of its 2015 Trade Secrets Webinar series, Seyfarth attorneys focused on non-compete and trade secret considerations from an international perspective. Specifically, the webinar will involved a discussion of non-compete and trade secret … Continue Reading
In Golden v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group, a divided Ninth Circuit panel held that a “no re-hire” provision in a settlement agreement could, under certain circumstances, constitute an unlawful restraint of trade under California law.
Dr. Golden, a physician, agreed to settle his discrimination claim against his employer, California Emergency Physicians Medical Group (“CEP”). Their oral settlement … Continue Reading
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced today that it had made good on its prior promises to take a hard look at employment agreements and policies that could be viewed as attempting to keep securities fraud complaints in-house. In KBR, Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 74619 (April 1, 2015), the … Continue Reading
In Seyfarth’s second installment of its 2015 Trade Secrets Webinar series, Seyfarth attorneys will focus on trade secret and client relationship considerations in the banking and finance industry, with a particular focus … Continue Reading
In a patent infringement case pending in a California federal court, the defendant moved for summary judgment. The parties jointly requested leave to submit to the court under seal, or with redactions, documents containing trade secrets and other confidential information. The court granted the request only in part. Icon-IP Pty Ltd. v. Specialized Bicycle Components, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-03844 (N.D. … Continue Reading
Seyfarth attorneys Wan Li, Ming Henderson and Daniel Hart will focus on non-compete and trade secret considerations from an international perspective. Specifically, the webinar will involve a discussion of … Continue Reading
A Chicago federal judge denied summary judgment to an employer alleged to have misappropriated and converted a subordinate’s trade secrets. Stevens v. Interactive Financial Advisors, Inc., Case No. 11 C 2223 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 24, 2015) (Kennelly, J.).
Summary of the case. After 20 years as a licensed insurance broker, Stevens wanted to provide investment advisory services as well. … Continue Reading
By any measure, the past few weeks have been eventful in Europe. Given the number of challenges facing European lawmakers — from continued hostilities in Ukraine, to last-minute negotiations over Greek debt, to anti-terrorism measures — it’s unlikely that trade secrets protection is at the top of anyone’s agenda in Brussels or Strasbourg. Still — as we have … Continue Reading
On Tuesday, March 10th at 12:00 p.m. central, in the second installment of our 2015 Trade Secret Webinars, Seyfarth attorneys Scott Humphrey, Jason Stiehl and James Yu will focus on trade secret and client relationship considerations in the banking and finance industry, with a particular focus on a firm’s relationship with its FINRA members. Topics will include:Practical steps financial… Continue Reading
The 2014 Year in Review is a compilation of our significant blog posts from throughout last year and is categorized by specific topics such as: Trade Secrets Legislation; Trade Secrets; Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; Non-Compete & Restrictive Covenants; Legislation; International; and Social Media and Privacy. As demonstrated by specific blog entries, including our Top 10 Developments/Headlines and Trade Secrets, … Continue Reading
A recent decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals, Holland Ins. Group, LLC v. Senior Life Ins. Co., 766 S.E.2d 187 (Nov. 20, 2014), includes several excellent reminders regarding the enforceability (and unenforceability) of restrictive covenants in Georgia.
Relevant Facts and Holding
William Holland and Senior Life Insurance Company entered into an agreement (“Agreement”) authorizing Holland to sell Senior Life’s … Continue Reading
Courts are divided on the enforceability by an assignee of a non-compete covenant relating to personal services where the covenant does not state whether it is assignable and the employee does not consent to the assignment.
Status of the case. A non-compete agreement signed by an employee of TSG, Inc., purported to be effective for two years after his termination … Continue Reading
On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central, Michael Wexler, Robert Milligan and Daniel Hart will present the first installment of the 2015 Trade Secrets Webinar series. They will review noteworthy cases and other legal developments from across the nation this past year in the areas of trade secrets and data theft, non-compete enforceability, computer fraud, as well as … Continue Reading
The Federal Circuit recently held that the dismissal of a trade secrets complaint for failure to state a justiciable claim was not warranted merely because the misconduct allegedly involved a number of wrongdoers and began many years before the complaint was filed.
Overview of the case. ABB alleged that, during a several decade period, some of its former employees engaged … Continue Reading
As part of our annual tradition, we are pleased to present our discussion of the top 10 developments/headlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law for 2014. Please join us for our complimentary webinar on January 27, 2015, at 1:00 p.m. e.s.t., where we will discuss them in greater detail. As with all of our other webinars (including the … Continue Reading
On December 4th and 5th, nearly 100 trade secret, non-compete, and economic espionage practitioners convened at the Intel Global Headquarters in Santa Clara, California for the annual American Intellectual Property Law Association Trade Secret Law Summit. Two Seyfarth attorneys, Erik Weibust and Daniel Hart, presented a paper co-authored with Andrew Masak and Robyn Marsh, titled “Lawyer Mobility and Trade Secrets … Continue Reading
Throughout 2014, Seyfarth Shaw LLP’s dedicated Trade Secrets, Computer Fraud & Non-Competes Practice Group hosted a series of CLE webinars that addressed significant issues facing clients today in this important and ever changing area of law. The series consisted of 10 webinars:2013 National Year in Review: What You Need to Know About the Recent Cases/Developments in Trade Secrets, Non-Compete,… Continue Reading
The nineteenth century English jurist Lord Ellenborough once observed that “it is difficult to struggle with the common law.” Kerr v. Willan, 171 Eng. Rep 570 (K.B. 1817). Nearly two centuries later, struggling with the common law is still a formidable task – especially in cases involving claims of trade secrets misappropriation under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”).… Continue Reading
The U.S. Department of Commerce’s Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will host its first Trade Secret Symposium on Thursday, January 8, 2015, at USPTO Headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia. The symposium will provide an opportunity for members of the public to hear from representatives of academia, government, legal practice and industry on important trade secret issues facing innovators today.
The panels … Continue Reading
In Seyfarth’s ninth installment of its 2014 Trade Secrets Webinar series, Seyfarth attorneys focused on considerations involving protecting trade secrets and intellectual property in business transactions, including, mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and other … Continue Reading
Other than to protect good will or trade secrets, a non-compete provision intended to prevent a former employee from acquiring an interest in, or becoming an officer or director of, a competitor of the ex-employer may not be enforceable.
Summary of the case: A stand-alone agreement executed by employee-participants vested in their employer’s profit-sharing plan contained an unusual non-compete provision. … Continue Reading
Employers, although contractually free to terminate the employment of at-will employees for any reason, at any time, cannot dismiss an employee in violation of public policy. A prime California public policy is that employers cannot retaliate against whistleblowers—individuals who have reported suspected unlawful employer conduct. In January 2014, the Legislature expanded the general whistleblowing statute, Labor Code section 1102.5, to … Continue Reading