caltradesecrets.com

Posts Tagged ‘Northern District of California’

Northern District Applies California Code of Civil Procedure § 2019.210 to Federal “Misappropriation of Business Ideas” Case

In C.C.P. § 2019.210 Pre-Discovery Disclosure, Common Law Misappropriation, Discovery, Patricia V. Trumbull on October 11, 2010 at 8:20 am
notepad
Image by john yaya via Flickr

In a federal case, the Northern District of California applied a California rule of procedure, California Code of Civil Procedure 2019.210, in ordering a plaintiff to identify its allegedly misappropriated business ideas.  Interserve, Inc. v. Fusion Garage Pte Ltd., No. C-09-05812 RS (PVT), 2010 WL 3931100 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2010) (slip op.).  But after the court dismissed without leave to amend plaintiff’s tort claim for “misappropriation of business ideas”, the court rejected defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the disclosure as moot.  Id. *2

Background

Defendant Fusion Garage PTE, Ltd. brought a renewed motion for a protective order pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 2019.210 and Rule 26(c), contending that Plaintiffs Interserve, Inc., doing business as TechCrunch and CrunchPad. failed identify their misappropriated business ideas with any specificity.  Id. *1.  Plaintiffs alleged claims for (1) misappropriation of business ideas; (2) false advertising; (3) breach of fiduciary duty, and (4) fraud.

Defendant asserted the following deficiencies with plaintiffs disclosure: Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Saved Development Costs Available as Measure of Damages

In Remedies on August 22, 2010 at 11:55 am
500 Oracle Parkway at the Oracle Corp. headqua...
Image via Wikipedia

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton of the Northern District of California issued an order this week on motions for partial summary judgment in Oracle Corp. v. SAP AG, et al., No. C 07-1658 PJH, 2010 WL 3258603 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2010) (slip op.).   In considering whether recovery of “saved development costs” is an available measure of damages, the court  distinguished Ajaxo, Inc. v. E*Trade Group, Inc., 135 Cal. App. 4th 21 (2005);

Read the rest of this entry »

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