In today’s global economy, intense competition, employee mobility, and the proliferation of spin-off and start-up businesses make the protection of trade secrets critical. Often the formulas, devices, techniques, patterns, processes, data compilations, and methods that companies use to bring breakthrough products to market are overlooked from an intellectual property (IP) perspective. Recent headlines confirm the threat of trade secret misappropriation by competitors and nation states, and reported verdicts and settlements in trade secrets misappropriation matters range in the hundreds of millions and even billions. These developments all demonstrate that trade secrets will remain a fundamental part of companies’ IP strategies.
Finnegan focuses its trade secret practice on matters involving complex technology. We have decades of experience counseling and advising on IP strategy in tech-heavy industries, and regularly litigate “bet the company cases.” Our deep bench of technical expertise, which includes 65+ professionals holding Ph.D.’s in disciplines ranging from neurobiology to electrical engineering, serves as a strong foundation to advise and litigate in specialized technology-related trade secret matters. We are able to efficiently and effectively work with engineers and scientists on unique trade secrets issues such as independent development, reverse engineering, and the state of the technical art.
Finnegan provides comprehensive trade secret protection and counseling to Fortune 500 and Global 1000 corporations, as well as innovative start-ups and organizations across all industries. Working closely with each client’s legal, business, and technical personnel, we help identify the key elements surrounding an innovation or technology that will benefit from trade secret protection. We also keep a watchful eye out for types of information that might warrant patent or copyright protection, or protection through various forms of confidentiality and noncompete agreements.
Trade secret investigations and cases often proceed on a fast track. From the moment a problem arises, speed is essential to prevent loss of the secret or to control the damage. This is where Finnegan brings a distinct advantage. We bring immediate and comprehensive legal and technical resources to each matter. If litigation is needed, our deep understanding of the technology allows us to devise persuasive and effective strategies, and to resolve the matter quickly.
When litigation becomes necessary to protect our clients’ trade secrets or to address a challenge from a competitor, our trial lawyers draw on decades of experience in federal and state courts. Trade secret litigation presents unique procedural challenges. We have a proven track record in addressing ex parte and preliminary injunctions, managing discovery, obtaining relief through dispositive motions, and preserving trade secrets during the course of litigation in trade secret actions.
Finnegan represented Emergy, Inc., d/b/a Meati Foods in a trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract, and correction of inventorship case against The Better Meat Company (BMC) and Augustus Pattillo involving alternative meat made from mycelium.
Emergy alleged that Augustus Pattillo stole its trade secrets on the cultivation and production of mycelium that he learned while working as a lab technician for Emergy’s founders, misused them in his work with BMC, breached his nondisclosure agreement with Emergy, and improperly filed patent applications on Emergy’s technology and assigned them to BMC.
BMC filed claims of tortious interference and unfair competition against Emergy, which Emergy succeeded in striking under California’s anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) statute. After prevailing under the anti-SLAPP statute, Emergy was statutorily entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs for defending against BMC’s stricken claims of tortious interference and unfair competition
Early in the litigation, Emergy defeated BMC’s motion to dismiss Emergy’s trade secret misappropriation and breach of implied contract claims. Emergy later defeated BMC’s motion for summary judgment on Emergy’s trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract, and breach of implied contract claims. The case settled soon after the Court issued its summary judgment ruling.
2-21-cv-02338, E.D. Cal., Judge Mueller
2-21-cv-02417, E.D. Cal., Judge Mueller
1:16-cv-00662, D. Del., Judges Fallon, Robinson, Bataillon, Noreika
1:17-cv-05369, N.D. Ill., Judge Kennelly
3:19-cv-00970, N.D. Tex., Judges Ramirez, Starr
Supported client Richwave, including conducting legal researches relating to agencies, authority to act, settlements, etc.
2017-1-CV-311373, California Superior Court, Judge Kuhnle
Articles
The Federal Trade Commission’s Noncompete Ban: What Israeli Companies Need to Know
July 16, 2024
Media Mention
World IP Review Lists Finnegan in Its Inaugural Trade Secrets Rankings
February 6, 2023
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.