On September 25, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1241. SB 1241, effective January 1, 2017, adds Section 925 to the Labor Code to restrain the ability of employers to require employees to litigate or arbitrate employment disputes (1) outside of California or (2) under the laws of another state. The only exception is where the … Continue Reading
California, mecca of the film and media production industries in the U.S., is notorious for outlawing non-compete agreements. It is one of the few states that generally prohibits the unlawful restraint of one’s profession or business, with limited exceptions. … Continue Reading
There are indeed limits to the reach of the anti-SLAPP statute, particularly in the trade secret context. In West Hills Research and Development, Inc. v. Terrence M. Wyles, a California appellate court ruled that engaging in activity to set up a competing business is not protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute.
Summary of the Case
West Hills, a medical … Continue Reading
Where a freely negotiated contract between two sophisticated companies included a provision barring an award of monetary relief for breach of contract, the court will enforce the provision as written and award no economic damages. CH2O, Inc. v. Meras Engineering, Inc., No. 45728-8-II (Wash. App. Court, July 21, 2015) (unpublished opinion).
Status of the Case
A non-exclusive distributorship agreement … Continue Reading
Presented by the Trade Secrets Interest Group of The Intellectual Property Law Section of The State Bar of California
Robert B. Milligan, partner of Seyfarth’s Litigation department and co-chair of the firm’s Trade Secrets, Computer Fraud & Non-Competes practice group, is a panelist … Continue Reading
In Seyfarth’s fifth installment of its 2015 Trade Secrets Webinar series, Seyfarth attorneys focused on recent legal developments in California trade secret and non-compete law and how it … Continue Reading
California courts generally favor forum selection clauses entered into freely by parties and where enforcement is not unreasonable. This general principle is true even if the forum selection clause is “mandatory” and requires a party to litigate its dispute exclusively in the designated forum. The party opposing enforcement of a forum selection … Continue Reading
On Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central, Robert Milligan, James McNairy and Joshua Salinas will present the fifth installment in our 2015 Trade Secrets Webinar Series. They will focus on recent legal developments in California trade secret and non-compete law and how it is similar to and diverse from other jurisdictions, including: a discussion of the California Uniform … Continue Reading
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
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
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
In Seyfarth’s eighth installment of its 2014 Trade Secrets Webinar series, Seyfarth attorneys focused on recent legal developments in California trade secret and non-compete law and how it is … Continue Reading
As we reported last week, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has proposed sweeping legislation that would eliminate employee non-compete agreements in Massachusetts. Now that we have had an opportunity to review the Governor’s bill, entitled “An Act to Promote Growth and Opportunity” (HB4045), we wanted to report back on its … Continue Reading
The Boston Globe reported this morning that Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick will propose legislation today that would eliminate non-compete agreements in technology, life sciences, and “other industries,” with his secretary of Housing and Economic Development, Greg Bialecki, stating that the administration “feel[s] like noncompetes are a barrier to innovation in Massachusetts.” No word just … Continue Reading
Cross-Posted from The Global Privacy Watch
With all the high-profile cybersecurity breaches that seem to be in the news lately, there is a plethora of “guidance” on cybersecurity. The Attorney General of California has decided to add to this library of guidance with her “Cybersecurity in the Golden State” offering. Cybersecurity is a pretty mature knowledge domain, … Continue Reading
These tools are part of the modus operandi of every lawyer. This article may use dead language and assonance as running themes, but some lawyers take zealous advocacy ad infinitum. Such attorneys are rarely even admonished … Continue Reading
Spell check features in word processing programs sent correction fluid the way of the buggy whip. Walter Liew and Robert Maegerle, however, saw a $28 million dollar payout to sell the secrets to, among other things, typewriter correction fluid. It is doubtful that they can “white out” the bars of their new prison cells, though.
Liew, a California engineering consultant, … 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 2013. Please join us for our complimentary webinar on March 6, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. P.S.T., where we will discuss them in greater detail. As with all … Continue Reading
On January 8th, after years of litigation and numerous delays, Executive Recruiter David Nosal was sentenced to one year and a day in federal prison for his April 25, 2013 conviction on three counts under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”), two counts under the Economic Espionage Act (“EEA”), and one count of conspiracy to violate the CFAA and … Continue Reading
Prudent employers are often looking for areas in their business where valuable company data may not be adequately protected.
Enter the growing prevalence of third party online data storage for professional and personal use in the workplace, coupled with the increasing accessibility provided by employers to access company data remotely.
While … Continue Reading
Big Brother can’t ask for access to your “personal” social media accounts in the public hiring and employment setting except in certain narrow circumstances if Governor Jerry Brown signs a new social media privacy bill recently passed by the California legislature.
The California Senate passed a bill to extend California’s social media privacy law to public employers last week.
The … Continue Reading
On Tuesday, September 24, 2013, at 12:00 p.m. Central, Seyfarth attorneys Mark Hansen, Jim McNairy, and Jessica Mendelson will present the ninth installment in our 2013 Trade Secrets webinar series. They will focus on ways in which California trade secret law is similar to and diverse from other jurisdictions, including a discussion of the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act, trade … Continue Reading
Who doesn’t love a good, old fashioned hot dog? It just so happens that a pair of litigants agree with this sentiment! In a case filed in Los Angeles this summer, Dog Haus … Continue Reading
The California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”) allows for an award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party on a trade secret misappropriation claim. The statute permits award of attorney’s fees to a plaintiff for a defendant’s “willful and malicious” misappropriation and to a defendant when a plaintiff makes a claim in “bad faith”:
“If a claim of misappropriation is … Continue Reading