We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics. If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
As mentioned in a previous blog entry, the California Court of Appeal issued a significant trade secret decision earlier this year providing additional clarification concerning the trade secret identification disclosures which a party pursuing claims for trade secret misappropriation must make before commencing civil discovery in California state court
Production companies for Criss Angel, the star of Cirque de Soleil’s "Believe" and the A&E cable television show Mindfreak, were sued in New York state court recently by a twenty-three year old illusionist who claims that Angel’s companies have failed to pay him for the use of three alleged confidential and proprietary magic tricks that he claims that he created
Attorneys for Sylvester Stallone and another named cross-defendant recently filed a petition for review with the California Supreme Court challenging a significant published California Court of Appeal decision (Brescia v. Angelin, 172 Cal.App.4th 133 (March 17, 2009)) regarding the sufficiency of a trade secret identification statement
After obtaining a sweeping nationwide injunction from an arbitrator that enjoined licensee Comedy Club, Inc. (“CCI”) from opening any new comedy clubs until 2019 pursuant to a trademark license agreement, licensorcompetitor Improv West Associates (“Improv”) could not have been in the mood for laughs when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit modified the arbitrator’s injunction by significantly narrowing its scope and breadth
