The Journey of Litigation
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 504: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law and Motions for New Trial (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment
What Litigants Need to Know about Summary Judgment
JONES DAY TALKS®: Tiffany v. Costco Raises Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting Questions
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: Examining FDA’s Enforcement Authority Over Stem Cell Clinics and Compounders
K&L Gates Triage: Avoiding the Risks Associated with Mandatory Vaccination Programs
The Ninth Circuit recently held that the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) does not require plaintiffs to identify their allegedly misappropriate trade secrets with reasonable particularity at the outset of discovery—much...more
Trade secret litigation under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) continues to evolve within the Ninth Circuit....more
On August 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court ruling striking certain trade secrets asserted by a plaintiff on the grounds that the plaintiff had not spelled out its trade...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that a district court abused its discretion by striking several of the plaintiff’s trade secrets, concluding that the court improperly relied on Rule 12(f) and failed to...more
In an August 12, 2025 decision, the Ninth Circuit emphasized important differences between the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) and the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”)—differences which might...more
The Tenth Circuit recently upheld an Oklahoma District Court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of a trade secret defendant based on insufficient specificity as to the trade secrets at issue, as well as a lack of proper...more
On April 22, 2025, the Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of a sales manager and his new employer on claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”), the Oklahoma Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“OUTSA”), and...more
Exploring business partnerships often involves or even requires sharing highly confidential trade secret information. The data center industry is no exception, and its participants have in recent years faced litigation...more
Courts often require a plaintiff to identify a trade secret with reasonable particularity before commencing discovery (and it is a statutory obligation in California). But frequently a trade-secret plaintiff does not know...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed in part and affirmed in part a district court’s decision that a trademark owner’s infringement claims were time-barred, finding that Pennsylvania applies a separate...more
In In re Muhs, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit was called upon to decide whether “the meaning of ‘willful and malicious’ under Alaska law is identical to the meaning of ‘willful and malicious’ under...more
In This Issue - US Taxation of IP After Tax Reform - U.S. taxation of intellectual property has become astoundingly more complex after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new rules are so complex that the IRS and Treasury...more
On October 6, 2017, a federal jury in Utah entered a $2.1 million trade secret verdict in favor of Bimbo Bakeries USA. Following a trial that wrapped up more than four years of litigation, the jury concluded that defendant...more
The California Supreme Court found that the denial of summary judgment in an underlying trade secrets misappropriation action established sufficient probable cause to bring an action under the California interim adverse...more
An ex-employee’s former employer sued him for alleged violations of the Kansas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (KUTSA) and the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The first claim was based on the company’s hunch that he...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