Breaking Down Bad Faith: Insurers’ Good Faith Duties and Defending Bad Faith Claims
An Uncompromising Insurer: What is a Policyholder to Do?
Hinshaw Insurance Law TV: Recent Changes in Florida Property Insurance Law and How They Will Affect First Party Insurance
Podcast - The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Lord of The Rings Author’s Estate Clings to its Precious Trademark, Blocking JRR Token
The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Lord of The Rings Author’s Estate Clings to its Precious Trademark, Blocking JRR Token
Butler's Thursday Tips #7 | Civil Remedy Notices
Subro Sense Podcast - Considerations In Fixed Funds/Limited Pool Scenarios
Protecting Your Brand in China
Both the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (“DTSA”) and Pennsylvania Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“PUTSA”) provide that a defendant may recover its attorneys’ fees if it demonstrates that a claim for misappropriation of...more
On May 31, 2023, a Harris County Texas District Court jury found a telecom company acted in bad faith by filing a $23 million trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against a rival where the underlying technology was found to...more
In a late-March 2023 decision out of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, a court denied a plaintiff's request for attorneys' fees against a defendant who filed "objectively specious" counterclaims...more
Litigators know it is generally not easy to recover attorneys’ fees in defense of a trade secret misappropriation action. The Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) permits a court to “award reasonable attorneys’ fees” to...more
The recent case of Multimedia Sales & Marketing, Inc. v. Marzullo, et al., — N.E.3d —-, 2020 IL App (1st) 191790 (1st Dist. Dec. 21, 2020), demonstrates the peril that attorney fees sanctions present for litigants who bring...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that, under Texas law, a plaintiff can sustain an action for trade secret misappropriation even if the plaintiff voluntarily communicated the alleged trade secrets to the...more
Magistrate Judge James L. Cott of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently recommended denial of a motion for attorneys' fees to a prevailing party under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). The...more
Absent an agreement to the contrary, the dismissal of a statutory cause of action providing for attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party would seem to entitle a defendant to its reasonable fees and costs. In a matter of first...more
Earlier this month, the Fifth Circuit ruled that under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. § 1836, et seq.) (“DTSA”), a defendant is not the “prevailing party” by virtue of a plaintiff voluntarily dismissing a DTSA claim,...more
Judge William Alslup of the Northern District of California recently awarded fees to CloudFlare, Inc. (CloudFlare), a defendant in a trade secret misappropriation case under, in part, the relatively new Defend Trade Secrets...more
On February 15, 2017, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission’s imposition of severe, case dispositive sanctions on Respondents for bad faith spoliation of evidence as well as the issuance of a 25-year limited exclusion...more
Restrictive covenants are an important tool for businesses concerned about the protection of their confidential business information and the costs of employee training and turnover. When properly crafted and utilized,...more
Companies get anxious when key employees leave to start new ventures. A company may try to shield itself from the risk of losing confidential information by seeking an injunction preventing its former employees and their new...more
Employee's Inability To Work For A Particular Supervisor Does Not Constitute A "Disability" - Higgins-Williams v. Sutter Med. Found., 237 Cal. App. 4th 78 (2015) - Michaelin Higgins-Williams worked as a clinical...more
California’s Eraser Law: What IP Attorneys and Owners Need to Know - Hector recently graduated from UC Berkeley and is anxious about his upcoming job interview. He is about to enter the adult world. But he has also got...more
In Cypress Semiconductor Corporation v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., the California Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s award of $180,817.50 in attorneys’ fees plus costs to Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. as the...more
A California appellate court recently affirmed the trial court’s ruling in Cypress Semiconductor Corporation v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. that the defendant (“Maxim”) was entitled to attorney’s fees under California...more
A number of states, including Tennessee, have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”). A court may award attorney’s fees, if: - A claim of misappropriation is made in bad faith; - A motion to terminate an...more
Earlier this month, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California awarded more than $11 million in attorneys' fees and costs to three trade secret defendants, finding that plaintiffs who had raised a claim...more