caltradesecrets.com

Posts Tagged ‘Lawsuit’

Southern District Holds That Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Claim Properly Pled Even Where Complaint Lacks Allegation of Use to Plaintiff’s Detriment

In Motion to Dismiss on November 17, 2010 at 7:47 am
Voigtländer camera, Vitoret F, Lanthar 2.8/50,...
Image via Wikipedia

The Southern District of California denied a motion to dismiss a claim for misappropriation of trade secrets even where counter-claimant does not allege plaintiff’s use of the trade secret to counter-claimant’s detriment.  Young v. Fluorotronics, Inc., No. 10cv976-WQH-BGS, 2010 WL 4569996 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2010) (slip op.).

Background

Plaintiff John Young, M.D. filed a complaint against Fluorotronics, Inc. and others relating to his investment in Fluoro-Raman technology, which was purported to be a portable, non-destructive and rapid screening device able to detect problems with food and drugs before they are distributed and detect counterfeit drugs.  Id. *1.  Plainitff alleged that the Private Placement Memorandum and Balance Sheet falsely stated that Fluorotronics was the owner of the “iStar ICCD Intensified CCD Detector Head camera” (“Camera”) and “certain Laser Equipment” (“Laser”). Id. Young for himself and others invested in Fluorotronics, but contrary to the representations of defendants, Fluorotronics allegedly did not own the Camera, but borrowed it from Andor Technology.  Id. **1-2.  When Fluorotronics failed to pay Andor for the camera, Young purchased it from Andor. Id. *2.  Plaintiff brought claims for (1) fraud; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) intentional misrepresentation; (4) securities fraud in violation of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5; (5) sale of unregistered securities; (6) breach of fiduciary duty; (7) violation of Section 1507(a) of the California General Corporation Law; and (8) violation of Section 2201 of the California General Corporation Law. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Second District Vacates Arbitration Award for Failure to Resolve Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Counterclaim

In Arbitration on November 15, 2010 at 11:08 am
An orb weaver producing silk from its spinnerets
Image via Wikipedia

The Second District Court of Appeal vacated an arbitration award for failure to resolve defendants’ counter-claim for misappropriation of trade secrets.  Rad v. Keehan, No. B222049, 2010 WL 4487142 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. Nov. 10, 2010).  Defendants Michael Keehan, Lucy Keehan, Lucy’s Silk Store, Inc. and Michael’s Imports, Inc. (collectively defendants) appealed from a judgment entered after the trial court denied their motion to vacate an arbitration award against them and instead confirmed the award.  Id. *1.  Defendants contended that the arbitrator failed to decide their counter-claim for misappropriation of trade secrets, and thus the trial court should have vacated the arbitration award for failure to resolve all issues submitted to arbitration. Id. The Second District Agreed. Id.

Background

Plaintiff Ira Rad, on behalf of his company Bita LLC, executed an agreement (Sales Agreement) with one of defendants’ corporations, Michael Imports, Inc., to sell and distribute silk products from defendants’ “Lucy’s Silk” label. Id. Bita paid defendants $60,000 as partial consideration for the exclusive right to sell the products in the eastern United States, but after execution of the Sales Agreement, defendants continued to sell the products directly to East Coast customers, undercutting Bita’s sales.  Id. Plaintiffs sued defendants, alleging, inter alia, causes of action for breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and rescission with respect to the Sales Agreement. Id. The parties ultimately stipulated to submit their disputes to binding arbitration and a stay of the litigation was entered. Id. Read the rest of this entry »

Northern District Grants Leave to Subpoena ISPs to Determine Identity of Anonymous Emailer of Trade Secret Information

In Discovery on September 3, 2010 at 8:07 am
Subpoena and Summons Extrordinary
Image by A Gude via Flickr

The Northern District granted a motion for leave to conduct third-party discovery on various internet service providers to determine the identity of an anonymous sender of trade secret information.  SolarBridge Technologies, Inc. v. Doe, No. C10-03769 LHK (HRL), 2010 WL 3419189 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 27, 2010) (slip op). Read the rest of this entry »

Kaedar Electronics’ Parent Company Suspends a Manager Accused of Paying Kickbacks to Apple Employee in Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Case

In Criminal Theft of Trade Secrets, Fun with Trade Secrets, International on August 18, 2010 at 5:17 am
Sugar apple with its cross section
Image via Wikipedia

Ting-I Tsai of The Wall Street Journal reports that Pegatron Corp., the parent company of Kaedar Electronics Co., said it had suspended a manager who has been accused of paying kickbacks to Paul Devine, an Apple employee.  Pegatron says it is now investigating whether the manager violated the company’s code of conduct.  The company is reportedly working on an iPhone for a second mobile standard for Apple.

Neither Pegatron Corp. nor Kaedar Electronics Co. were named as defendants in the civil suit filed by Apple Inc. on Friday.

If Apple truly believed that confidential information and trade secrets were misappropriated by Devine and Kaedar Electronics, one would expect that Kaedar would be brought in as a party.   Read the rest of this entry »

Plaintiff Awarded $1,000,000 After 5-Day Jury Trial in Los Angeles Superior Court

In Verdicts on August 17, 2010 at 3:58 am
22 jury verdict
Image by daveypea via Flickr

In Quantum Cooking Concepts v. LV Associates, Case No. BC379011, plaintiff was awarded $1,000,000 after a 5-day jury trial in Los Angeles Superior Court.  See 2 Trials Digest 13th 8, 2010 WL 3210865.  Plaintiff sued a competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets and fraud.

Judge and Attorneys

The judge was Hon. Rolf M. Treu.

Plaintiffs were represented by Nam C. Nguyen and Luan K. Phan of the Phan Law Group in Los Angeles.

Defendant was represented by Howard J. Fox of the Law Offices of Jack L. Chegwidden in Encino.

By CHARLES H. JUNG

Enhanced by Zemanta

Breaking News: Apple Sues Its Own Global Supply Manager for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

In Breaking News, Criminal Theft of Trade Secrets, Fun with Trade Secrets, Trade Secrets News on August 16, 2010 at 8:45 pm
apple
Image by nebarnix via Flickr

Apple Inc. filed suit on Friday against one of its Global Supply Managers alleging that he had “abused his position, violated Apple policies, and broken the law by stealing Apple’s proprietary, trade secret and other confidential information and converting it to his own benefit.”   Complaint ¶ 1.  The case is Apple Inc. v. Devine, et al., CV10-03563 PVT (N.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2010).  Defendants are Paul S. Devine and CPK Engineering, Inc.  Apple alleges that it paid Devine over $614,000 in salary and $51,076 in bonus compensation and issued him 4,500 Apple stock options and 900 shares of Apple restricted stock.

Shannon Henson at Law360 reports that Apple served Devine on the day he appeared in court on charges of wire fraud, conspiracy, money laundering and engaging in monetary transactions with criminally derived property.

Apple claims that it investigated Devine since April 2010, and during the course of that investigation, discovered an “Entourage database and cache of e-mail from Devine’s personal Hotmail and Gmail e-mail accounts stored on Devine’s Apple-supplied laptop hard drive.”  Id. ¶ 16.  “These e-mails also confirmed that Devine had demanded and received over a million dollars in illicit payments, kickbacks, bribes, and other things of value (which Devine sometimes refers to in e-mail correspondence as ‘samples’) from numerous suppliers, and had concealed his scheme from Apply over the course of several years.”

Apple alleges 12 separate causes of action (the complaint was carefully pled, but several of the causes of action are likely susceptible to dismissal on a 12(b)(6) motion).

UPDATE: Kaedar Electronics Acknowledges Paying Brokerage Commission

UPDATE: Kaedar Electronics Suspends Employee

Judge and Attorneys

The case has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Patricia V. Trumbull of the Northern District of California.

Attorneys for plaintiff Apple Inc. are George A. Riley, Sharon M. Bunzel, Aaron M. Rofkahr, and Jean B. Niehaus of O’Melveny & Myers in San Francisco.

The criminal case is U.S. v. Devine, case number 10-cr-00603, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The civil suit is Apple Inc. v. Devine et al., case number 10-cv-03563, in the same court.

By CHARLES H. JUNG

Enhanced by Zemanta

Crocs Settles Trade Secrets Misappropriation Suit Brought by Columbia Sportswear

In Fun with Trade Secrets, Settlements on August 5, 2010 at 11:02 am
A boy wearing Crocs
Image via Wikipedia

Columbia Sportswear settled a trade-secrets lawsuit against Crocs.  The suit stemmed from Crocs’s hiring a Columbia employee as an independent contractor.  Columbia alleged claims of misappropriation of trade secrets, intentional interference with contract, and aiding and abetting the employee’s breach of his duty of loyalty to Columbia.  Read a report from the Denver Post here.

By CHARLES H. JUNG

Enhanced by Zemanta