Trade Secrets & Employee Mobility

A recent Seventh Circuit decision underscores the need to re-evaluate the continued prosecution of trade secret misappropriation cases as the facts unfold in discovery.

In a recent decision from the Southern District of New York, Judge William H. Pauley III rejected the use of the "inevitable disclosure" doctrine as a basis for an independent claim and outright granted a Rule 12(6)(6) motion to dismiss the complaint brought by a California employer against its former New York based employee.

California Courts have discretion to award attorneys' fees to a prevailing defendant in a trade secrets action where the commencement or continued prosecution of a trade secrets action is in bad faith. A recent decision underscores that a plaintiff pursuing a trade secret claim in California must be careful that it can actually identify with some particularity what trade secrets have been misappropriated.

A recent lawsuit filed by nationwide fitness club, Equinox, demonstrates the importance of maintaining enforceable restrictive covenants in employment agreements.

Our Epstein Becker Green colleague Angel Gomez, a Member of the Firm in the Labor and Employment and Litigation practices, based in Los Angeles, wrote an article for Law360 titled "In Light of Snowden: How to Use Independent Contractors." (Read the full version - subscription required.)

Following is an excerpt:

Recent events connected with Edward Snowden have captured the world's attention. Snowden, an admitted leaker of national security secrets, was, at the time of the leaks, an employee of the well-known consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton — Booz Allen Hamilton was a ...

The Indiana Court of Appeals recently affirmed a preliminary injunction enforcing a five-year non-compete agreement against a former employee of a printing business. Why was a restriction of that length found to be reasonable?

A bill that would have changed Connecticut's non-compete law was vetoed by the Governor on Friday, July 12, 2013.

A California legislator recently introduced two bills in Congress which, if passed, could have profound effects for companies seeking to pursue claims relating to trade secrets and confidential information - one bill would create a new private right of action under federal law for trade secret theft, while the other bill would appear to limit plaintiffs' abilities to pursue existing remedies for computer fraud and abuse.

In Fifield v. Premier Dealer Services, Inc., an Illinois Appellate Court recently held that, absent other consideration, two years of employment is required for a restrictive covenant to be deemed supported by adequate consideration - even where the employee signed the restrictive covenant as a condition to his employment offer - and even where the employee voluntarily resigned.

In a recent case, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued the latest opinion regarding whether former employees violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act before they joined a competitor by downloading electronic information without authorized access.