Despite The Cheers, The Defend Trade Secrets Act Bill Has Holes: What’s A Plaintiff To Do If It Passes?

by Orrick - Trade Secrets Group
Contact

http://blogs.orrick.com/trade-secrets-watch/files/2014/05/7May2014-200x150.jpgState court or federal court?  If the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014 (DTSA) (S. 2267, introduced on April 29, 2014) becomes law, then trade secrets plaintiffs—not just those who can maintain diversity jurisdiction—could proceed in federal court under new federal law.  But would they want to?  While the knee-jerk reaction of many litigants is a resounding “Yes!,” we wonder whether federal court under the DTSA would be preferable to the well-known Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA), which is available in forty-eight of the fifty states.

Let’s first look at where DTSA and the UTSA appear the same or similar.  Both statutes provide nearly identical definitions of trade secrets and misappropriation.  Both also offer similar remedies for injunctive relief, actual damages, unjust enrichment, reasonable royalties, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees.

But DTSA appears to have some potential advantages over the UTSA.  The most distinguishing feature of DTSA is that plaintiffs would be able to seek an ex parte order for “seizure of any property used, in any manner or part, to commit or facilitate the commission of a violation.”  This section mirrors the requirements for injunctive relief available under the Lanham Act to seize counterfeit goods.  It appears that plaintiffs would be able to obtain an order to seize a computer, external device, or other instrument that a defendant had allegedly used to misappropriate plaintiffs’ trade secrets.  The materials would be under the custody of the court and a hearing would be set no later than fifteen days after the seizure to determine whether the seizure order should remain in effect.

In contrast, UTSA plaintiffs can ask a state court to order the return of the trade secrets in a TRO or preliminary injunction proceeding, but, as a practical matter, it may be difficult to convince a court to order a mandatory injunction like this, and it would be highly unusual for a state court to take custody over the trade secrets.  (State courts will often grant a TRO or preliminary injunction requiring defendants to preserve evidence, similar to the language found in the DTSA.)  For plaintiffs whose crown jewels have been misappropriated, seeking a DTSA seizure order could provide a clear and direct path for some peace of mind.

Also, while both DTSA and the UTSA provide for punitive damages, DTSA permits punitive damages up to three times actual damages, as compared to a cap of two times under the UTSA.  And the DTSA statute of limitations is a generous five years from discovery of the misappropriation whereas the UTSA statute of limitations runs out after three years.

DTSA also may lack some defendant-friendly aspects of the UTSA.  For example, many UTSA state courts have held that the UTSA bars any common law and some similar statutory claims, such as California’s unfair competition statute, that arise from the same “nucleus of facts” as the UTSA misappropriation claim.  In contrast, DTSA expressly states that DTSA does not displace or pre-empt state common law remedies, thus, DTSA plaintiffs might be able to tack on a number of common law claims, which are unavailable in a UTSA lawsuit.

It is also unclear whether DTSA has similar protections for defendants against unscrupulous plaintiffs seeking a peek at a competitor’s trade secrets.  Some UTSA states, like California and Florida, require trade secrets plaintiffs to identify their trade secrets with reasonable particularity before conducting any discovery related to the trade secrets.  This discovery prerequisite was enacted to help ward off the unsavory plaintiff, but the DTSA is silent on this requirement.

At this point, it would seem like proceeding in federal court under DTSA is a no-brainer.  Not so fast.  The path to federal courts has its own limitations.

First, federal jurisdiction is not automatic.  Plaintiffs would need to show that the misappropriated trade secret relates to a product or service used in, or that was intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce (consistent with the Commerce Clause) or was for the benefit of a foreign government or agent.  One might imagine in today’s world that every product or service would meet this test, but there could be cases where the trade secrets in issue are far more localized, such as a local newspaper company’s trade secret customer list for sale of newspapers in the same town.

Second, we wonder if all federal district courts and district judges are prepared or set up to provide the emergency relief often available in state courts.  Many state court jurisdictions offer ex parte calendars, where a trade secrets plaintiff can appear before a judge and secure a TRO upon 24 hours’ notice and the same day as when they file a complaint.  In some state counties, no notice is required.  This is important because preserving the status quo is imperative for trade secret plaintiffs, and any delay in obtaining such relief could mean that they suffer irreparable harm at the hands of their competitors.

In contrast, some federal courts decide ex parte applications for a TRO on the papers and sometimes not for many days after filing.  Some federal judges are extremely reluctant to grant TROs as a matter of principle or practice and tend to decide only preliminary injunction motions.  When valuable trade secrets are on the line and a competitor seeks to gain unfair advantages with another’s trade secrets, the benefit of quick access to the courts may outweigh those benefits that DTSA offers.  And while some lawyers may believe that federal judges know the body of law best, depending on the jurisdiction—such as in the San Francisco Bay Area, where tech companies commonly assert trade secret actions—the state court judges may be just as familiar, if not more, with the relevant trade secrets law.

Additionally, judges in some state courts might be more comfortable with granting expedited relief and moving the case along quickly, particularly as discovery progresses.  A trade secrets plaintiff is almost guaranteed to face discovery battles and obstacles in obtaining necessary evidence and may have to bring a slew of discovery motions.  Federal magistrate judges often require the parties to jump through a variety of hoops before a party can bring a motion to compel, such as requiring an in-person meet and confer or a joint motion to compel.  Those hoops are often lower to the ground and far less numerous in many state courts.

If DTSA passed today, the choice between DTSA and UTSA would not necessarily be a slam-dunk in favor of the new federal right.  Both statutes offer pros and cons.  Careful consideration would be required as to the goals of litigation, the expected lifespan of the case, and the strengths of the state court venue.  Regardless of the jurisdiction, the passage of DTSA would provide additional protections to trade secrets owners, giving plaintiffs more options to protect their trade secrets.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Orrick - Trade Secrets Group | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Orrick - Trade Secrets Group
Contact
more
less

Orrick - Trade Secrets Group on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.