Skip to main content

Trade Secrets

  • Certain Lithium-Ion Batteries, Battery Cells, Battery Modules, Battery Packs, Components Thereof, and Processes Therefor, 337-TA-1159 (USITC) – Represented LG Chem Ltd. in a trade secret investigation in an electric car battery case against SKI, which drove a $1.8 B Settlement for LG.
  • Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc. v. GL Leading, Inc., 1:19-cv-02648 (N.D. Ill.) – Lead counsel to several divisions of Philips Healthcare in a case brought against competitors and a former employee, inter alia, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets relating to the design and manufacture of X-ray tubes used in commuted tomography.
  • Novatrans Group S.A. v. Vital Farms, Inc., et al, 1:18-cv-01012 (D. Del.) – Represented Novatrans Group S.A. in a claim under the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act in the District of Delaware, while simultaneously defending a breach of contract claim in the Western District of Texas. These cases involved dueling claims of inventorship of a system to determine the fertility status and gender of an avian egg before hatching. Obtained a settlement resulting in publicly recorded assignments of the contested patent application to Novatrans.
  • CellInfo, LLC v. American Tower Corporation, et al., 1:18-cv-11250 (D. Mass) – Represented American Tower against claims of trade secret misappropriation by CellInfo. Parties have agreed to arbitration and Mintz continues to represent American Tower through this proceeding.
  • Dallakian v. IPG Photonics, 3:14-cv-11863 (D. Mass.) – Successfully represented defendant against claims for correction of inventorship and trade secret misappropriation. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the complaint after defendant secured expedited discovery and an early summary judgment motion.
  • UgMO Technologies v. HydroPoint Data Systems, 2013-10146 (Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas) – Mintz Levin successfully defended our client and its new employee against allegations of breach of a non-compete restriction. Plaintiff filed suit in Pennsylvania against our client and moved for an immediate temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The litigation was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and the court also denied the TRO and injunction, leading the parties to what amounted to a walk-away settlement and dismissal of both the California and Pennsylvania actions.
  • MKS Instruments v. Emphysys, C.A., 12-1858 (Ma. Super. Ct.) – Served as lead counsel, defending against claims of trade secret misappropriation related to advanced semiconductor manufacturing technology. The case settled very favorably after a positive summary judgment hearing.
  • NK Retail Holdings, Inc., et al. v. Jason Sandlofer, et al., 651344/2012 (NY Supreme Court) – Represented NK Retail Holdings, the operator of a retail novelty store chain and Halloween “pop-up” stores in suing two former employees and a competing retailer who hired away the ex-employees. In connection with an application for a temporary restraining order, the judge ordered that the defendants’ laptops be seized. Shortly after, the case settled on favorable terms.
  • New England Biolabs, et al. v. Enzymatics, Inc., 1:12-cv-12125 (D.Mass) – Defended Enzymatics against claims of trade secrets theft and patent infringement brought by three plaintiffs in a case involving nucleic acid ligands. Resulted in favorable settlement for our client.
  • VLP Watertown L.P. v. Tristate Breeders Cooperative d/b/a/ Accelerated Genetics, 1:17-cv-11487 (D. Mass.) – Represented VLP in litigation of trade secret misappropriation claims involving a cell processing method shown to improve fertility and induce statistically significant female gender bias in dairy herds. Obtained jury verdict of trade secret misappropriation and multimillion dollar judgment in our client’s favor.
  • L3 Communications Security and Detection Systems, Inc. v. Reveal Imaging Technologies, Inc., 1:04-cv-11884 (D. Mass) – Represented Reveal, a start- up technology company in parallel trade secret and patent infringement cases concerning methods and apparatus for scanning explosives in baggage. Following extensive discovery and summary judgment hearings in the proceedings, the cases settled favorably to Reveal.