Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-10 of 13
Tidings of data theft and coal: California Federal Court holds that trade secret misappropriation statute preempts claim for misappropriation of confidential non-trade secret data
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- December 24 2012
There was only coal delivered for California employers in a recent California federal decision in which the Court refused to permit a plaintiff to proceed
California federal district court issues decision on reasonable secrecy measures, trade secret identification, and preemption
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- June 19 2012
A recent California federal district court decision in FormFactor, Inc. v. Micro-Probe, Inc., Case No. C 10-3095 PJH highlights the importance of companies proactively taking measures to protect their trade secrets before litigation arises and specifically identifying trade secrets that have allegedly been misappropriated
You think trade secrets are important? So does the FBI
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- June 1 2012
The FBI recently launched an initiative to curb the growing rise of trade secret and other intellectual property theft
Ninth Circuit rejects application of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in employee theft cases
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 12 2012
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, a Ninth Circuit en banc panel released its highly anticipated decision in United States v. Nosal
Fireworks fly, California district court enjoins former pyrotechnics company employee from soliciting former employer's customers
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 30 2012
On March 21, 2012, in the case of Pyro Spectaculars, Inc. et al. v. Souza, Case No. 12-CV-00299-GGH, Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows of the USDC for the Eastern District of California (Sacramento Division), issued an order preliminarily enjoining a former Account Executive for a pyrotechnics company from soliciting the customers of his former employer
What happens in Vegas may stay in Vegas, but misappropriation of trade secrets and unauthorized disclosure of confidential information will still land you in hot water according to recent Supreme Court of Nevada decision
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 10 2012
In Finkel v. Cashman Professional, Inc., et al., Case Nos. 54520, 55377, 2012 WL 669897 (Nev. March 1, 2012), the Supreme Court of Nevada addressed the validity of non-solicitation, non-competition, and non-disclosure covenants and the proper duration of a preliminary injunction prohibiting disclosure or use of trade secrets
New Ninth Circuit case aids departing employees in non-compete and non-solicit disputes involving race to judgment
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 5 2012
Contractual choice of law provisions often seek to apply the law of the state that, when applied by a court to the contract at issue, is most likely to result in favorable interpretations, application, andor enforcement of those provisions in the contract most valued by the contracting parties
Wiener v. Wiener: a wiener controversy of a different (trade secrets) sort
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- June 27 2011
There is wiener controversy brewing, but this one does not involve Twitter or a Representative from New York
Bimbo Bakeries v. Botticella: man vs. muffin, muffin wins injunction
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- August 3 2010
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
Comedy Club update
- Seyfarth Shaw LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- October 16 2009
As mentioned in a previous blog entry, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Comedy Club, Inc. v. Improv West Associates, 553 F.3d 1277 (9th Cir. 2009), that an in-term (during the term of the contractrelationship) covenant not to compete governed by California law was enforceable to the extent that it did not foreclose competition in a substantial share of a business, trade, or market
