Trade Secret Misappropriation

The $740 Million Jury Question: Massive Trade Secrets Award Overturned Because of Erroneous “Improper Means” Instruction

and Posted on

The right to a jury trial is one of the most important features of modern trade secrets law.  But as a recently issued Order from the Texas Fourth Court of Appeals (“Court of Appeals”) illustrates, the jury trial right is only as good as the jury instructions that execute that right.   READ MORE →

Commentary Sheds Light on Appropriate Level of Detail for Plaintiffs in Misappropriation Cases

Posted on

This May was the fourth anniversary of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), signed into law by President Obama on May 11, 2016. The DTSA does not preempt state laws and plaintiffs can still bring cases under their state’s trade secrets law, but the DTSA has played a big role in the increased number of trade secret cases in recent years. According to Lex Machina’s Trade Secret Litigation report, which covered federal district court data from 2010 to 2019, the DTSA caused a 30% increase in trade secret case filings between 2015 and 2017 and those numbers have remained steady. READ MORE →

If trade secrets misappropriation claims can be brought by non-owners, what should companies do to manage risk?

and Posted on

Last week, we examined the recent Third Circuit decision in Advanced Fluid Systems, which held that a trade secrets plaintiff did not need to be an owner or a licensee of the alleged trade secrets to bring a state law misappropriation claim under Pennsylvania’s UTSA—all that was required was that the plaintiff had “lawful possession” of the trade secrets. In so holding, the Third Circuit added to the weight of the Fourth Circuit’s similar analysis of Maryland’s UTSA in DTM Research, L.L.C. v. AT&T Corp., 245 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 2001).

READ MORE →

Spoliation by Self-Driving Startup Leads to Terminating Sanctions

and Posted on

During the course of a trade secrets litigation, neglecting to preserve electronically stored information (“ESI”) may result in a finding of spoliation. In a recent Order issued by Judge Edward Davila (United States District Court, Northern District of California), two startups in the autonomous vehicle industry, WeRide and AllRide, learned that failure to adequately preserve ESI can also lead to terminating sanctions. READ MORE →

A “Virtual” Home Is Not a Home: Court Sanctions Plaintiffs for “Reckless Disregard” in Deciding the Proper Forum for Their Litigation

Posted on

Toy model house on pier by water A “Virtual” Home Is Not a Home: Court Sanctions Plaintiffs for “Reckless Disregard” in Deciding the Proper Forum for Their Litigation

The following blog post is courtesy of our sister blog, NorCal IP.

Usually, one benefit of being a plaintiff is deciding in what forum to pursue litigation.  Generally, even a foreign-based plaintiff may pursue litigation in a U.S. forum where a defendant may be found or in which there is a substantial connection to the litigation.  There are, however, limits on a plaintiff’s choice of forum, and a recent decision in Tapgerine LLC v. 50Mango, Inc. demonstrates that pushing those limits may result in sanctions.

READ MORE →