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

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

Former Sanofi chemist pleads guilty to extensive trade secret theft

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 23 2012

On January 17, 2012, Yuan Li, a former research scientist with Sanofi Aventis, pled guilty to one count of violating 18 U.S.C. 1832 (the section of the Economic Espionage Act dealing with commercial economic espionage

Preliminary injunction issued by Nebraska federal district court to level the playing field in trade secrets dispute

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 13 2013

A federal district court in Nebraska recently issued a significant preliminary injunction preventing trade secret misappropriation and unlawful

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

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

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

Despite allegations that something fishy was occurring, Kentucky federal district court rules that Texas corporate defendant was not subject to personal jurisdiction in trade secret misappropriation suit

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 21 2012

MPI, a Texas company, went to Kentucky and allegedly attempted to hire two Luvata employees, Foster and Meredith

California federal court hammers defendant for destroying evidence in trade secret rift

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 2 2012

A California federal district court judge recently issued a contempt citation and sanction award of $73,000 against a defendant in a trade secret misappropriation dispute for violating a court order to preserve evidence pending a hearing on a temporary restraining order

Growing California trade secret preemption doctrine may thwart efforts to combat employee data theft

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 28 2013

Company information that is sensitive, but may not rise to the level of a trade secret is protectable in California, isn't it? Not necessarily. Some