Header graphic for print
LimeGreenIP News

Tag Archives: DTSA

U.S. Energy disputes: Patents or trade secrets? Yes, please.

Most energy companies implement Intellectual Property (“IP”) strategies to protect and exploit company IP (offense) and navigate third-party rights (defense). Traditionally, these policies emphasize patents. But today’s IP-savvy energy companies strategically manage both patent and trade secret portfolios throughout a company’s particular energy sector focus. The ascendance of trade secrets reflects recent strengthening of U.S.

California non-compete law trumps DTSA

Not long after my article discussing the interplay between the Defend Trade Secret Act (DTSA) injunction provisions and California non-competition law, a federal district court in the Northern District of California opined on this exact issue in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Cook, No. 16-CV-03166-JST, 2016 WL 3418537 (N.D. Cal. June 22, 2016). In Schein, the

US: The DTSA, the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, and the Memory Rule

In the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), Congress generally rejected the “inevitable disclosure doctrine” prevalent in the trade secret law of many jurisdictions. Interestingly, the DTSA appears to leave open whether, and to what extent, the corollary “memory rule” will be applied in connection with a federal trade secret misappropriation claim. Under the inevitable disclosure

US: DTSA Injunctive relief against former employees limited by state law

Although the DTSA provides powerful new rights to trade secret owners, Congress balanced those new rights with the interests of employees by placing important limits on an employer’s ability to restrict employee mobility on trade secret grounds. The DTSA authorizes a federal court to grant an injunction to prevent actual or threatened misappropriation of trade

US: The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) – What you need to know

On May 11, 2016, President Obama signed the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (“DTSA”)  into law, thereby creating a new federal civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation.  Before the DTSA, trade secret misappropriation claims were asserted under state laws that largely follow the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”).  The DTSA does not

US: New DTSA seizure remedy may be difficult to obtain

The new ex-parte seizure remedy created by the Defend Trade Secrets Act contains many hurdles that may prove highly difficult for trade secret owners to clear. Given that the DTSA does not preempt state trade secret law, trade secret owners may fare better petitioning state courts for an ex parte writs of possession or attachment

US: The Defend Trade Secrets Act – employer notice requirement

The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) incentivizes employers to update their employment contracts to give notice to employees of the protections offered by the act. In this context, “employees” include independent contractors and consultants as well as traditional common law employees.  The notice provisions kick in immediately, and will apply to confidentiality agreements that are

US: The DTSA – Creating original federal jurisdiction over trade secret theft

On April 4, 2016, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (“DTSA”) which intends to create a federal civil cause of action for trade secret theft. The bill offers trade secrets owners alternatives to navigating varied state trade secret laws or seeking assistance from the Department of Justice. In essence,

The Defend Trade Secrets Act Attempts to Unify United States Trade Secret Law

If enacted, the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) could be the most important change to U.S. trade secret law in decades. Why have U.S. legislators proposed a bill concerning trade secret law? Democratic Senator Christopher Coons of Delaware introduced the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014 (S. 2267) this past April.  The bill is cosponsored