Trade Secrets

February 21, 2023

Central Illinois Railroad Sues Former Employee for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

Crowne Point, Indiana – The Plaintiff, Illinois Central Railroad (“IC”) filed suit against Defendant and former employee, Michael Belcher (“Belcher”) for Breach of Contract, Breach of Duty of Loyalty, Civil Conversion, Indiana Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Defend Trade Secrets Act, and Trespass to Chattels.

Per the Plaintiff’s website, IC is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, and has been in business for 148 years. Its Slogan, “The Main Line of Mid-America,” perfectly describes its unique north-south routing running from Chicago to the Gulf Coast.

According to the complaint, the Defendant, Michael Belcher (“Belcher”) is a resident of Crown Point Indiana. He was employed as a Senior Manager for IC for 20 years until he was terminated on October 19, 2022. Belcher’s duties included writing software code for IC’s financial data systems that included, but was not limited to, IC’s systems for financial metrics, financial records, and compliance. Belcher served as the key point of contact for financial analysis, performance tracking, and corrective action related to Basic Capital budgets for all levels of Engineering management. He also participated in IC’s Share Units Plan and was awarded Performance Share Units (“PSUs”). Each time he was awarded PSUs, he received and accepted an award letter that contained a Confidentiality Clause. This prohibited him from revealing, disclosing or making known any Confidential Information without prior written consent from IC. Belcher also received regular training on the Company’s Code of Business Conduct that requires every employee to safeguard Company assets and intellectual property. The Code of Conduct also contained provisions defining Company Confidential Information, and prohibitions against disclosure.

October 5, 2022

3CHI Sues Former Marketing Manager for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – The Plaintiff, 3C, LLC d/b/a 3CHI (pronounced “three-chee”) filed suit against Defendant and former employee, Jai Journay (“Journay”) for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, Violation of Indiana’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and Breach of Employment Agreement.

Per the Plaintiff’s website, 3CHI was founded by a biochemist that has focused on cannabinoid research and brining minor cannabinoids to market. 3CHI alleges to have almost single handedly put cannabis into national mainstream acceptance. It started with 3CHI’s first CBN products. CBN was the first mildly psychoactive cannabinoid sold nationally in the USA. Shortly after, they became the first company to create and sell Delta 8 THC. 3CHI is the first company to legally vend THC products as a major sporting event, selling its products at NASCAR races. They also proclaim to have taken a leading role in working with government leaders and agencies around the world to help educate and create sensible legislation surrounding Delta 8 THC and other minor cannabinoids.

Defendant, Journay was hired on July 10, 2020 for a position in Sales and Education. During her employment, Journay was promoted to Marketing Manager. An Employment Agreement that protected 3CHI’s Confidential Information and Trade Secrets was signed by the Defendant on March 7^th, 2021. As the Marketing Manager, Journay had access to nearly all of 3CHI’s Confidential Information and Trade Secrets, including product formulas, recipes, customer lists, customer requirements, consumer data, marketing data and other analytics.

September 22, 2022

Orbital Engineering, Inc. Sues Ex-Employee & Competitor for Trade Secret Misappropriation

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Crowne Point, Indiana – The Plaintiff, Orbital Engineering, Inc. (“Orbital”) filed suit against Defendants, DVG Team, Inc. (DVG) and former employee Zachary Topoll (“Topoll”) for Breach of Fiduciary Duty Damages Resulting from Conspiracy, Tortious Interference with Business Relations, Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Trade Secret Misappropriation.

Per the complaint and their website, Orbital, established in 1969, is a certified veteran owned business, which provides full-service solutions in engineering and design, construction management and QA/QC, safety and asset integrity services. The company services a broad range of industries, including infrastructure, metals, refinery, chemical, pipeline, terminal, gas processing and storage, and utilities. Their expertise is in Transmission & Distribution, Midstream and Downstream Oil, Gas and Chemical and Metals. They have six major offices in Pittsburgh (HQ), Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis and Houston and various other locations.

DVG, founded in 1999, purports to be a team of professionals with a variety of expertise in areas of public infrastructure planning and construction, private and public utility development, engineering and site design, economic development and real estate development. They are based in Crown Point, Indiana.

June 28, 2022

Staffing Agency Sues Former Executive for Alleged Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

South Bend, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Peoplelink, LLC (“Peoplelink”), a Delaware Corporation, filed suit in the Northern District of Indiana alleging that Defendant, Kelly Boutell, a former employee of Peoplelink, infringed their rights under the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1832, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) 18 U.S.C. § 1030 and committed Breach of Contract.

According to the Complaint, Boutell was employed by Peoplelink for over 20 years in various roles such as Certified Sales Trainer, Vice President of Fulfillment, and Senior Regional Vice President. Boutell was one of two Certified Sales Trainers. She conducted two-to-three annual sales training sessions for all of Peoplink business entities and functioned informally as a sales leader for Peoplelink’s entire footprint.

July 16, 2021

ABI Attachments, Inc. of Mishawaka Sues for Alleged Trademark Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Apparently, ABI Attachments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Plaintiff entered into a Product Lines Purchase Agreement with Defendants, Kiser Arena Specialists, Inc., (“KAS”) Robert D. Kiser, Individually and as Trustee of The Kiser Family Trust, and James Kiser (collectively, the “Defendants”). Under the Agreement, ABI allegedly acquired assets and intellectual property including the trademark “DRAGMASTER®,” U.S. Trademark Registration No. 4,044,235 (the “Mark”), and “Product Lines” including “specifications, shop drawings, records, and intellectual property rights relating to the Product Lines.” ABI claims Defendants have used those documents relating to the Product Lines to market knockoff products. For example, ABI claims the Defendants’ Kiser 1000 Series is substantially similar to the ABI DragMaster as shown below.

Further, ABI asserts that Defendants have promoted the “new” products as “redesigned” which indicates the Defendants’ products are based on intellectual property now owned by ABI rather than a new product developed from scratch. According to the Complaint, KAS has used the same background music in some of its promotional videos as ABI: Compare

https://youtu.be/CWPjo2Ogzbc (KAS) with https://youtu.be/9lY2X2UvoL4 (ABI). ABI claims it has attained significant goodwill throughout the United States and the world and that Defendants alleged misleading and false advertisements have caused irreparable damage to ABI’s reputation.

ABI first seeks damages for Defendants’ alleged breach of their obligations under the Product Lines Purchase Agreement. Next, ABI claims Defendants have misappropriated its trade secrets by using the “specifications, shop drawings, blueprints, records and intellectual property rights relating to the Product Lines.” Pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116 and 1117, ABI is seeking injunctive relief as well as actual and treble damages for willful trademark infringement. ABI is further claiming Defendants’ actions constitute false designation of origin and false advertising in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Finally, ABI is seeking damages for unfair competition, trademark misappropriation, and unjust enrichment under Indiana common law.

July 12, 2021

Watch Communications Sues Ex-Employees for Alleged Trade Secret Misappropriation

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Apparently, W.A.T.C.H TV Company d/b/a Watch Communications (“Watch”), the Plaintiff, is in the business of providing broadband Internet access to consumers and enterprise customers in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Kentucky. Defendant, Greg Jarman (“Jarman”), was allegedly an employee of Watch beginning in February 2014. According to the Complaint, Jarman was then elected to the positions of Vice President of Operations and Chief Operating Officer in March 2018. In February 2019, Watch claims Jarman approached the President and Chief Executive Officer, Ken Williams (“Williams”) with an opportunity to assist in a project in Tennessee. However, Watch claims Williams instructed Jarman to not proceed with the Tennessee project because Watch did not have a presence in Tennessee.

October 5, 2020

Eli Lilly Declaratory Judgment Suit Transferred to North Carolina

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”) filed suit on November 13, 2019 in the Southern District of Indiana against Defendant SensorRx seeking a declaratory judgment that it had not misappropriated trade secrets among other things. SensorRx in turn, on November 22, 2019 filed a lawsuit in the Western District of North Carolina seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages. SensorRx then filed a Motion to Dismiss or to Transfer Lilly’s declaratory action suit to North Carolina.

The Southern District found Lilly’s declaratory action was an “improper anticipatory filing” as there was a clear threat of litigation prior to the filing of the declaratory action. As such, the Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the declaratory judgment action. The Court further found that the balance of factors under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) weighed in favor of transferring the action to the Western District of North Carolina where SensorRx filed its suit. Therefore, SensorRx’s Motion to Transfer was granted and the case was transferred to the Western District of North Carolina. Continue reading

April 2, 2020

Court Enters Temporary Restraining Order to Protect Trade Secrets

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

South Bend, Indiana – The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana entered a Temporary Restraining Order against Darkhorse Cargo, Inc. (“Darkhorse”) and its employees (collectively “Defendants”) regarding trade secrets and confidential information of Plaintiff, RC Trailers, Inc. (“RC”).

RC manufactures and distributes cargo and specialty trailers throughout the United States. According to RC, it expends a lot of time, effort, and expense to maintain dealer and vendor relationship using trade secrets and confidential business information. RC claims it uses confidentiality provisions in its employee handbooks, passwords, disclaimers on confidential communications, and o

RC’s former president, Defendant Bryan Johnson (“Johnson”), ended his employment with RC in September 2018 and signed an agreement that contained non-solicitation and non-recruitment covenants that expired one year later. After Johnson’s departure, he claims many RC employees were unhappy to see him leave and wanted to work for him elsewhere. In the spring of 2019, RC promoted Defendant Joseph Kiefer (“Kiefer”) from CFO to acting General Manager. Kiefer claims that RC employees were talking about wanting Johnson to open his own trailer company prior to Kiefer terminating his employment with RC in June 2019. Prior to his leaving RC, Kiefer allegedly tried to recruit RC’s sales professional to join Darkhorse, indicating the business would be started by Kiefer and Johnson in the near future. RC claims that unbeknownst to it, Kiefer deleted the post-employment restrictions in his non-compete agreement before signing and returning it to RC upon his departure.

February 6, 2020

Indiana Trade Secret Litigation: Eli Lilly and Company Seeks Declaratory Judgment of Non-Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”) of Indianapolis, Indiana, filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana seeking a declaratory judgment that Lilly did not misappropriate any trade secrets of Defendant, SensorRx, Inc. (“SensorRx”) of Charlotte, North Carolina, or breach a contract with SensorRx. Lilly is seeking declaratory judgment, costs, attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and any other relief the court deems proper.

According to the complaint, Lilly has developed an app to help manage migraines called Vega™ Migraine. Lilly claims it created the app over the course of two years, it released the app on the Apple App Store on November 5, 2019, and the app is currently available for a free download, on a limited basis. Previously, Lilly has allegedly developed other mobile apps including “Go Dose,” a diabetes management and insulin dosing app, which helped Lilly gain experience to create and develop Vega™ Migraine. Lilly claims there are over fifty migraine management and other migraine related apps available to the public and many other health apps directed to various health conditions.

Lilly alleges it began having non-confidential discussions regarding SensorRx’s app, MigrnX™, in mid to late 2018 during which SensorRx discussed the capabilities of the app and demonstrated the app’s usage to Lilly. During the parties’ second in-person meeting in January 2019, they allegedly entered into a Mutual Confidentiality Agreement (“MCA”). Per the complaint, the MCA noted any information already known, becomes known to the public, has been lawfully received without restriction, or has been independently developed without use of confidential information, is not confidential information. Lilly claims due diligence was performed by both parties subsequent the signing of the MCA. After being concerned throughout the process and disappointed after the due diligence was conducted in the level of quality and capability of MigrnX™, Lilly alleges it contacted a representative of SensorRx on or about May 28, 2019 to terminate the due diligence. Continue reading

January 31, 2020

Indiana Trade Secrets Litigation: Dow AgroSciences LLC and Phytogen Seed Company, LLC Sue Two Former Employees for Alleged Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Dow AgroSciences LLC (“Dow”) of Indianapolis, Indiana and Phytogen Seed Company, LLC (“Phytogen”), a Delaware limited liability company, filed suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Defendants, Robert Lemon and Sotero Ramirez, both residents of Texas, infringed their rights under the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, 18 U.S.C. § 1831, et seq. Plaintiffs are seeking permanent injunctions, judgment, compensatory damages, attorney’s fees, costs, and other relief the Court deems proper.

Dow claims to be an industry-leading agricultural chemical and seed company working on innovative ways to increase farm yield and create productive seeds while emphasizing sustainability. Phytogen claims to sell cottonseed under the trade name PhytoGen®, primarily in the southern United States. According to the Complaint, Dow and Phytogen have a mutual controlling member, Mycogen LLC, that allows Dow to provide services to Phytogen via a Service Agreement. Those services allegedly include allowing Dow’s employees to sell PhytoGen® cottonseed.

According to the Complaint, Lemon and Ramirez were both employed by Dow until September 5, 2019. At some point during or before Lemon and Ramirez terminated their employment with Dow, they allegedly both signed Loyalty and Confidentiality Agreements with Plaintiffs (“Agreements”) which included non-compete and non-disclosure agreements. Ramirez allegedly worked for Dow as a Territory Manager and Lemon was a PhytoGen® Cotton Development Specialist, supporting Ramirez and three other Territory Managers.

Prior to giving their two weeks’ notice and resignation from Dow to work for a direct competitor, Americot, Plaintiffs allege Lemon and Ramirez knew of and planned their departure for weeks. Lemon and Ramirez also allegedly lied about the positions they were taking with Americot and told Dow Representatives that they would not be working in similar positions for their new company. Following the resignations, Dow claims it took possession of the Defendants’ company property including their laptops and cell phones.

After an investigation took place, Dow claims it found evidence that the Defendants had attended important, proprietary, strategy meetings after they had received their job offers. Dow further claims the Defendants had deleted and/or transferred information, including proprietary and confidential information, from their company laptops and phones to other devices, including USBs, which were not turned in to Dow. Finally, Dow claims it has text message evidence that shows Lemon planning to utilize training materials developed by Dow in his employment at Americot and shows the Defendants planning to take and utilize contact information for their current clients.

As such, Dow and Phytogen are seeking judgment and damages for the misappropriation of trade secrets against both Defendants pursuant to the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, 18 U.S.C. § 1831, et seq., the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Tex. Civ. Code § 134A.001 et seq., and the Indiana Code § 24-2-3-1, et seq. Dow and Phytogen are also seeking damages from Lemon and Ramirez for breaching their Agreements.