Source: https://www.ipo.org/index.php/ip-chat-channel/ip-chat-channel-trade-secretsemployment/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 10:49:05+00:00

Document:
The recently-settled trade secret action Waymo v. Uber has received plenty of attention over the past year. This IP Chat Channel webinar won’t focus on the one-off oddities in this case, although there were plenty of them. Instead, the program will examine the dispute as a test case for the new federal trade secret law, the DTSA.
Federal judges have been making rigorous demands for specificity of TS description, both at the pleading stage and at the gateway to discovery. For instance, in Space Data v. X, 16-cv-03260-BLF (N.D. Cal. 2017), the defendant’s motion to dismiss was granted because of the failure to specify. The defendant also prevailed on summary judgment in Kuryakyn Holdings, LLC v. Ciro (W.D. Wis. 2017).
Federal courts are more likely than state courts to challenge experts and theories of harm. In Telesocial v. Orange (N.D. Cal., 2017), plaintiff’s expert report was thrown out and a federal jury largely cleared the defendant. In Waymo v. Uber, the court excluded a damages expert under FRE 702 and 403, for insufficient qualification and for failure to separate benefits derived from the trade secrets from those derived from other, legitimate advantages.
The advantages and disadvantages must be analyzed carefully by trade secret plaintiffs thinking of seeking redress under the DTSA. The panel will also discuss the legal twists and turns that led to the unexpected settlement in Waymo v. Uber.
How are the parallel systems of state and federal law working out in practice?
Is the DTSA the best tool against international trade secret theft?
Are employers implementing the mandatory disclosure of employee rights in confidentiality agreements?
Have whistleblowers used the immunity provisions?
In a few days President Obama is expected to sign into law the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, which for the first time provides a federal civil remedy for the misappropriation of trade secrets. The passage of this legislation by a usually-divided Congress underlines the importance of this IP protection to U.S. business and puts trade secrets on an equal federal footing with patents, trademarks, and copyrights.
When might a claim under state law still be the best option?
What jurisdictional questions will arise if there are state and federal cases over the same issues?
What will be best practices after the DTSA’s rejection of the “inevitable disclosure” doctrine?
How will damages under the law be proved?
What changes are employers now required to make to written employment policies and nondisclosure agreements?
Our panelists include trade secret litigators — one who also leads patent litigation and the other with an employment law background – and an in-house counsel at a technology multinational who has experience in trade secret matters.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.