A growing number of courts across the country have required plaintiffs to specify with particularity the trade secret that they are accusing a defendant of stealing, and that plaintiffs’ refusal to do so could result in dismissal of the claim. See, e.g., Dura Global, Tech, Inc. v. Magna Donnelly Corp., 2008 WL 2064516 (E.D.Mich. May 14, 2008)
New Jersey
“Circumstantial” Proof of Solicitation Found Insufficient by District of New Jersey
By Eddy Salcedo on
Posted in Restrictive Covenants
ING Life Ins. and Annuity Co. v. Gitterman, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 3283526 (DNJ August 18, 2010)
Plaintiffs ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (“ILIAC”) and ING Financial Advisors (“IFA”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “ING”), sought to enjoin defendants, all of whom were former employees of ING, from soliciting clients to withdraw certain accounts from ING, pending the resolution of…
Continue Reading “Circumstantial” Proof of Solicitation Found Insufficient by District of New Jersey