DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PAGE 1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

GUY CARPENTER & COMPANY, LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HOWDEN REINSURANCE BROKERS 

LIMITED, HOWDEN REINSURANCE 

BROKERS (US) LLC 

Defendants. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-cv-01819-X 

DEFENDANTS HOWDEN REINSURANCE BROKERS LIMITED AND 

HOWDEN REINSURANCE BROKERS (US), INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Defendants Howden Reinsurance 

Brokers Limited (“Howden UK”) and Howden Reinsurance Brokers (US), Inc.1 (“Howden US”) 

(collectively (“Howden”)) file this Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Guy Carpenter & Company, LLC’s 

(“Plaintiff” or “Guy Carpenter”) Original Complaint and state as follows: 

I. MOTION TO DISMISS

 Plaintiff brings five claims against Howden for: 1) tortious interference with contract; 2) 

knowing participation in breach of fiduciary duties; 3) trade secret misappropriation under the 

Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”); 4) trade secret misappropriation under the Texas Uniform 

Trade Secrets Act (“TUTSA”); and 5) civil conspiracy. Howden seeks dismissal of all of Guy 

Carpenter’s claims against Howden UK and Howden US for the reasons set forth below: 

1

 Plaintiff named Howden Reinsurance Brokers (US) LLC as a defendant in this suit. This entity converted to Howden 

Reinsurance Brokers (US), Inc. on July 29, 2022. 

Case 3:22-cv-01819-X Document 10 Filed 09/08/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID 149
 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PAGE 2 

A. Tortious Interference with Contract – Count 1 

 Howden seeks dismissal of Guy Carpenter’s claims against it for tortious interference with 

contract to the extent that Guy Carpenter’s claim is preempted by TUTSA; because the contractual 

provisions with which Howden allegedly interfered are invalid; and because Guy Carpenter relies 

on vague and conclusory allegations insufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss. 

B. Knowing Participation in Breach of Fiduciary Duties – Count 2 

 Howden seeks dismissal of Guy Carpenter’s claims against it for knowing participation in 

breach of fiduciary duties because Guy Carpenter has failed to plead an underlying breach of 

fiduciary duties; and because Guy Carpenter relies on vague and conclusory allegations 

insufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss 

C. Trade Secret Misappropriation Claims – Count 3 and 4 

 Howden seeks dismissal of the DTSA and TUTSA claims against it for misappropriation 

of trade secret information because Guy Carpenter has failed to include allegations sufficient to 

allow the Court to identify that the information at issue could qualify as trade secret information 

as required by the statutes; because Guy Carpenter has failed to include allegations sufficient to 

allow the Court to infer that Guy Carpenter took reasonable measures to protect the information at 

issue; and because Guy Carpenter has failed to include allegations sufficient to allow the Court to 

infer that Howden misappropriated any information at issue. 

D. Civil Conspiracy – Count 5 

 Howden seeks dismissal of Guy Carpenter’s claims against it for civil conspiracy to the 

extent that Guy Carpenter’s claim is preempted by TUTSA; because the underlying torts of breach 

of fiduciary duty and tortious interference with contract fail; and because a claim based on an 

alleged conspiracy between a corporation and its agents fails as a matter of law. 

Case 3:22-cv-01819-X Document 10 Filed 09/08/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID 150
 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PAGE 3 

II. BRIEF IN SUPPORT

 Howden has contemporaneously filed its Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss containing 

additional support for the instant Motion to Dismiss. 

III. PRAYER

For the reasons set forth above and in the Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiff 

fails to state claims against Howden upon which relief may be granted. Howden respectfully 

requests that the Court grant its Motion to Dismiss and dismiss Plaintiff’s claims in their entirety. 

Howden further requests all such other relief to which it has shown itself entitled. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/ Ann Marie Arcadi 

Ann Marie Arcadi 

State Bar No. 00786994 

annmarie.arcadi@arcadijackson.com 

T. Gregory Jackson 

State Bar No. 24004718 

greg.jackson@arcadijackson.com 

John M. Farrell 

State Bar No. 24059735 

john.farrell@arcadijackson.com 

ARCADI JACKSON, LLP 

2911 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 800 

Dallas, Texas 75219 

Telephone: 214-865-6458 

Facsimile: 214-865-6522 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS 

HOWDEN REINSURANCE BROKERS 

LIMITED AND HOWDEN REINSURANCE 

BROKERS (US), INC. 

 

Case 3:22-cv-01819-X Document 10 Filed 09/08/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID 151
 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PAGE 4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on the 8th day of September, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing 

document with the Clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, using 

the electronic case filing system of the Court. The electronic case filing system sent a “Notice of 

Electronic Filing” to the following attorneys of record who have consented in writing to accept this 

Notice as service of this document by electronic means: 

Karl G. Nelson 

KNelson@gibsondunn.com 

Collin D. Ray 

CDRay@gibsondunn.com 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 2100 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Telephone: 214-698-3100 

Facsimile: 214-571-2900 

/s/ John M. Farrell 

John M. Farrell 

Case 3:22-cv-01819-X Document 10 Filed 09/08/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID 152