caltradesecrets.com

Posts Tagged ‘Defendant’

Plaintiffs Awarded Over $1 Million After Bench Trial in a Trade Secrets Case

In Judgments, Verdicts on November 2, 2010 at 11:41 am
Engraving of Gilbert and Sullivan's Trial by Jury.
Image via Wikipedia

After a bench trial in San Francisco Superior Court, plaintiffs in a trade secrets case recovered judgment on the merits against certain defendants in the amount of $921,469, plus pre-judgment interest in the amount of $301,664, and punitive damages of $275,000.  UltraEx Inc. vs. Express It Delivery Services Inc., Case No., CGC-05-447942, 2010 WL 4260535, 44 Trials Digest 13th 5 (Cal. Sup. Ct. Verdict Date: April 1, 2010).

According to court records, on April 29, 1998, plaintiff UltraEx Inc. merged with two other corporations, Express It Courier Services Inc. (“Old Express It”) and 800 Courier Inc.  Id. *1. Plaintiff was the surviving corporation in this merger, but prior to the merger, Old Express It and 800 Courier had each been actively conducting a package delivery business in California.  Id. Defendant Express It Delivery Services Inc. (“New Express It”) was a California corporation formed in November 2004. Id. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Streamlined Jury Trials Bill Passes Legislature

In Breaking News on August 25, 2010 at 4:14 pm
California State Assembly chamber
Image via Wikipedia

In a positive development for both plaintiffs and defendants, a bill establishing an expedited jury trial procedure has sailed through the California Legislature.  The Wall Street Journal Law Blog and The Recorder reported today that Assembly Bill No. 2284 was approved by the legislature on a unanimous vote.  The bill, entitled the Expedited Jury Trials Act, was introduced by Assembly Member Noreen Evans (D-Santa Rosa).  It calls for the establishment of strealined jury trials in civil cases, where the parties stipulate to them.  Some of the highlights:

  • Waiver of all rights to appeal, motions for directed verdict, and post-trial motions;
  • Only 3 hours per side to present its case;
  • Jury sizes of 8 or fewer, with no alternates, and only 3 peremptory challenges;
  • Provision for high/low agreements: (i.e., a voluntarily agreement specifying a minimum and maximum amount of damages, regardless of the ultimate verdict issued returned by the jury).

By CHARLES H. JUNG

Enhanced by Zemanta

Orrick Wins 6-Year Long Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Battle for Intel

In California Appellate Opinions on August 20, 2010 at 1:13 pm
SANTA CLARA, CA - JULY 15:  An Intel sign is d...
Image by Getty Images via @daylife

On Wednesday, the California Supreme Court denied review of Sivaco Data Systems v. Intel Corp., 184 Cal. App. 4th 210, 109 Cal. Rptr.3d 27 (Cal. Ct. App. 6th Dist. Apr. 29, 2010), ending a six-year long trade secret misappropriation battle.

Plaintiff Silvaco Data Systems (Silvaco) sued defendant Intel Corporation (Intel) alleging that Intel had misappropriated certain trade secrets used by Silvaco in its software products. Id. *215.  The gravamen of the dispute was that Intel had used software acquired from another software concern with knowledge that Silvaco had accused that concern of incorporating source code, stolen from Silvaco, in its products. Id. **215-16. Read the rest of this entry »