IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Philip A. Brimmer

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02274-PAB-BNB

KFORCE INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

EVERETT COSTA,

Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Stipulated Motion for Entry of Stipulated

Injunction [Docket No. 35] filed by plaintiff Kforce, Inc. (“Kforce”) and defendant Everett

Costa (“Costa”). The parties inform the Court that they have settled this matter

pursuant to the terms of the Stipulated Injunction [Docket No. 35-1], which “fully

resolves the Parties’ dispute.” Docket No. 35 at 1-2. The parties agree to the following:

A. Costa has returned any Kforce items in his possession to Kforce, through its

counsel, including any hard copies of any documents containing, regarding, or

referring to Kforce’s confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information in his

possession, custody, or control, and the receipt of the information referenced is

acknowledged by Kforce;

B. On November 22, 2011, Costa surrendered his computer to a forensic

consultant who permanently deleted all electronically stored information and

copies containing, regarding, or referring to Kforce’s confidential, proprietary, and

trade secret information that was on Costa’s computer and each party will pay for

one half of the cost of the forensic consultant’s services;

C. Costa has forwarded Kforce’s confidential, proprietary and trade secret

information to his SofTec email address, however, Softec has deleted those

emails from its computer system, and SofTec has not and will not use those

emails or allow Costa or any other SofTec employee or consultant to use any of

Case 1:11-cv-02274-PAB-BNB Document 36 Filed 12/20/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4
2

the Kforce information Costa emailed to his SofTec email account;

D. Kforce and Costa expressly waive any right to a hearing in connection with the

Court’s entry of this Injunction, and Kforce and Costa hereby expressly waive

any right to appeal from the Court’s entry of this Injunction and each party shall

pay their own fees and costs associated with this above-referenced action; and

E. For purposes of this Injunction, Kforce’s confidential, proprietary, and trade

secret information includes without limitation: (a) actual or prospective applicant,

employment candidate, employee or consultant lists; (b) actual or prospective

applicant, employment candidate, employee or consultant qualifications, and

contact information including but not limited to the documents and information

Costa forwarded to his personal email address prior to his resignation from

Kforce; (c) actual or prospective applicant, employment candidate, employee or

consultant compensation and benefits; (d) client or prospective client lists and

client or prospective client contact information (including but not limited to,

contact persons, and hiring managers); (e) client job openings and job orders

and client pricing information; (f) other client, applicant, employment candidate,

employee or consultant data or information; (g) all information maintained in

Kforce’s Recruitmax database; and (h) all Kforce information e-mailed to Costa’s

personal email address from Kforce’s system between August 2 and 9, 2011.

Pursuant to these stipulations, the parties request that the Court enter a final injunction. 

One proposed provision of Stipulated Injunction provides that “[v]iolation of any

terms of this Injunction shall be punishable through the Court’s contempt powers and

other inherent powers,” and that the “Court shall retain jurisdiction of this case for

purposes of enforcing this Injunction until August 31, 2012.” Docket No. 35-1 at 4, ¶ 6. 

There is no need to both incorporate the terms of the Stipulated Injunction into the

order and separately retain jurisdiction. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce its own

orders. Cf. Floyd v. Ortiz, 300 F.3d 1223, 1226 n.3 (10th Cir. 2002) (“[A] district court

can retain jurisdiction over a settlement agreement if the order of dismissal shows an

intent to retain jurisdiction or incorporates the settlement agreement.”) (citation and

quotation marks omitted, emphasis added). Furthermore, it is unnecessary to expressly

reference the potential consequences of violating a court order, as parties are subject

Case 1:11-cv-02274-PAB-BNB Document 36 Filed 12/20/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4
3

to such consequences regardless of whether they are referenced within an order. With

these exceptions, the Court will issue a final injunction pursuant to the parties’ terms

and, therefore, it is

ORDERED that the Stipulated Motion for Entry of Stipulated Injunction [Docket

No. 35] is GRANTED. It is further

ORDERED that the Stipulated Motion for Entry of Stipulated Injunction [Docket

No. 31] is denied as moot. It is further

ORDERED as follows:

1. Costa and all persons acting in concert with him are restrained and enjoined

from directly or indirectly using, publishing, disclosing, or profiting from, or authorizing

anyone to use, publish, disclose, or profit from Kforce’s confidential information and

trade secrets, as defined in this Injunction.

2. Costa and all persons acting in concert with him are permanently restrained

and enjoined from directly or indirectly assisting other persons, companies, firms and

businesses to utilize or profit from Kforce’s confidential, proprietary, and trade secret

information.

3. Costa is enjoined until August 10, 2012 from directly soliciting, recruiting,

hiring, or placing on assignment any staff candidate, applicant, temporary employee or

consultant with whom Costa had contact while employed by Kforce with the exception

of those contacts with whom Costa had an existing relationship prior to joining Kforce

as an employee.

4. Costa is enjoined until August 10, 2012 from directly or indirectly soliciting any

Case 1:11-cv-02274-PAB-BNB Document 36 Filed 12/20/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4
4

of Kforce’s core (internal) employees for employment with any other person, company,

firm, or business.

5. Costa is enjoined until August 10, 2012 from directly or indirectly soliciting or

accepting business that is competitive with Kforce from any client with whom Costa had

contact while employed by Kforce with the exception of those contacts with whom

Costa had an existing relationship prior to joining Kforce as an employee. 

It is further

ORDERED that, in accordance with the foregoing, final judgment shall enter and

this case shall be closed in its entirety.

DATED December 20, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

 s/Philip A. Brimmer 

PHILIP A. BRIMMER

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02274-PAB-BNB Document 36 Filed 12/20/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4