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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 32

An employee is stealing company documentsthat can’t be protected activity, right?

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 3 2013

A supervisor discovers that an employee has recently downloaded thousands of pages of confidential Company billing and financial information, and

When “the end” is not “the end”: asserting trade secret claims after the execution of a mutual release

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 3 2014

In many cases, the execution of a mutual release is often the last step in resolving a trade secret or non-compete case. Typically included in the

Top 10 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law in 2012

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 31 2012

As part of our annual tradition, here is our list of the top 10 developmentsheadlines in trade secret, computer fraud, and non-compete law for 2012

Conversion claim for theft of confidential information not preempted by trade secrets act

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 4 2013

Can Oregon employers bring conversion claims against employees who misappropriate confidential information without having their claims preempted by

Is your company’s customer list still a trade secret if your company uses labeled delivery trucks?

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 4 2013

Does using a labeled truck identifying your company to deliver products to your clients make your client list publicly available? Will doing so

Employee’s competition with former employer restricted despite absence of signed non-compete

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 21 2014

The former employer failed to prove that the parties entered into an effective non-compete agreement, and also failed to prove that the ex-employee

Massachusetts federal court grants preliminary injunction absent showing of actual use of a trade secret and potentially expands the “inevitable disclosure” doctrine

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 21 2013

In an action for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and other claims, Judge Hillman of the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts

In a case of first impression, a New York state court requires specific pleading of a trade secret cause of action before proceeding with discovery

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 3 2012

In what has been a growing trend across the country, on April 20, 2012, a New York state court has required that a plaintiff specifically plead its trade secrets in detail before proceeding with discovery

Law school exam-type trade secret complaint survives a specific pleading challenge in Colorado federal court

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 24 2012

As discussed in today's trade secrets webinar entitled "Pleading, Proving and Protecting Trade Secrets in Litigation," in an all to common theme, the plaintiff in L3 Communications Corporation v. Jaxon Engineering & Maintenance, Inc. et al., 2012 WL 1020516 (D.Colo. March 27, 2012) contended that several of its former employees devised a plan to leave L3 and create a competing business entity regarding specialty electronic equipment by using, among other things, misappropriated, customer lists and pricing data

Nosal update: court denies motion for acquittal and new trial in marathon CFAA and trade secret misappropriation criminal case Part III

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 3 2013

In Parts I and II of this post, we looked at the Court's ruling on Nosal's motion for acquittal and new trial following his conviction of three CFAA