shutterstock_147490814An Illinois appellate court recently rejected applying the inevitable disclosure doctrine in a trade secret misappropriation spat arising out of a failed business transaction.

After first securing an executed confidentiality agreement, Destiny, the developer of a proprietary healthcare wellness program called “Vitality,” shared details of it with Cigna, a healthcare insurer.  The insurer decided instead

An employee entered into non-compete and confidentiality agreements with his employer.  Following his resignation from that company, he went to work for a competitor.  His job functions and territory with both employers were similar.  In a suit for violation of the non-compete and confidentiality agreements, a Texas federal court held recently that — absent an

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia recently denied a motion to dismiss a counterclaim for violation of Virginia’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“VUTSA”), holding that the counterclaim sufficiently alleged trade secret misappropriation based on improper acquisition of a trade secret, even in the absence of allegations of use or

By Erik Weibust and Ryan Malloy

In an action for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and other claims, Judge Hillman of the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts recently granted a former employer’s motion for a preliminary injunction against three defendants who allegedly stole trade secrets from the plaintiff, without a showing that the defendants

A recent Illinois trade secrets and non-compete decision involving a 3D printing salesman serves as a reminder that some Illinois courts will scrutinze overly broad non-compete provisions and may limit injunctive relief to the territory that the employee actually serviced for their former employer. Fisher/Unitech, Inc. v. Computer Aided Technology, Inc., Case No. 13

On June 19, 2012, a Massachusetts federal court declined to apply an expansive interpretation of the inevitable disclosure doctrine during a preliminary injunction ruling, finding that the rule is best applied to establish irreparable injury supporting enforcement of a non-competition agreement and not as the basis for a future misappropriation of trade secrets claim.

In U.S.

In Moore v. Commercial Aircraft Interiors, 2012 WL 1947890 (Wash. Ct. App., May 29, 2012), a Washington Appeals Court held that a former employee suing his former employer for tortious interference with business expectancy must show actual evidence and not simply conclusory statements of his alleged former employer’s improper purpose, in order to recover.  

Throughout 2010, Seyfarth Shaw LLP’s dedicated Trade Secrets, Computer Fraud & Non-Competes practice group hosted a series of webinars that addressed key issues facing clients today in this important and ever changing area of law. The series consisted of five webinars: The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: What You Need to Know, Protecting the Secrets

             On July 27, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed a district court’s order enjoining a senior executive from Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc., from working for one of Bimbo’s competitors, Hostess, until after the district court resolved the merits of Bimbo’s misappropriation of trade secrets claim against the executive. Among other

When explaining to lay people what we do, trade secret practitioners often use the classic examples of the formula for Coca-Cola or KFC’s secret recipe of eleven herbs and spices. Now, we can add as an illustration the nooks and crannies of Thomas’ English Muffins, as demonstrated by a case filed by Bimbo Bakeries (“BBakeries”) in