Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 29, 2004

Nexans Wires S.A. v. Sark-USA, Inc.

Plaintiffs Nexans Wires S.A. and Lacroix & Kress GmbH sued defendants Sark-USA, Inc. and Sarkuysan Elektrolitik Bakir Sanayii Ve Ticaret A.S., alleging unfair competition, trade secret misappropriation, and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The core of the federal claim centered on allegations that defendants induced former employees of a customer, AEB, to steal plaintiffs' proprietary information from AEB's computer systems. The court converted the defendants' motion to dismiss the CFAA claims into a motion for summary judgment to assess if plaintiffs met the CFAA's jurisdictional "loss" threshold of $5,000. It determined that the claimed losses, consisting of executive travel expenses and lost revenue unrelated to computer service interruption, did not qualify as "loss" under the CFAA's definition. Consequently, the federal CFAA claims were dismissed, but the court exercised supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

Computer Fraud and Abuse ActCFAASummary JudgmentTrade Secret MisappropriationUnfair CompetitionJurisdictionStandingFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureData TheftProprietary Information

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

University Sports Publications Co. v. Playmakers Media Co.

The case involves University Sports Publications (USP) suing former employees and competitors for allegedly stealing confidential customer and sales data. USP claims violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) due to unauthorized database access, incurring over $5,000 in investigation costs. Defendants moved for summary judgment, contesting the CFAA claim's sufficiency and the "loss" requirement. The court denied summary judgment on the CFAA claims against Pitta, citing a triable issue of fact on unauthorized access, bolstered by an adverse inference from spoliation of his laptop, and affirmed the sufficiency of the alleged losses. State law claims, including trade secret misappropriation, largely survived dismissal, with only the tortious interference claim abandoned by USP.

Computer Fraud and Abuse ActCFAA ViolationTrade Secrets MisappropriationUnfair CompetitionBreach of Fiduciary DutySummary Judgment MotionSpoliation of EvidenceUnauthorized Computer AccessData TheftConfidential Information

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Civic Center Motors, Ltd. v. Mason Street Import Cars, Ltd.

Plaintiffs, car dealerships including White Plains Honda, Paragon Honda, and Paragon Acura, sued competitors (Greenwich Honda, Marc Wolpo, Rosa Cruz, Lou Sollecito, Scott Jordan) alleging unauthorized access to their customer database, "Buzz Track." The plaintiffs claimed violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and New York State laws, seeking compensation for lost profits and diminished investment value. The defendants moved to dismiss the CFAA claim. The court granted the motion to dismiss, ruling that the alleged financial losses were not a result of computer impairment or damage, and thus not compensable under the CFAA's definition of "loss." Consequently, the federal claim was dismissed, and the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. The plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction was also denied.

Computer Fraud Abuse ActCybersecurity LitigationTrade Secret MisappropriationTortious Interference with BusinessDeceptive Practices LawFalse Advertising ClaimsRule 12(b)(6) DismissalSubject Matter JurisdictionSupplemental JurisdictionPreliminary Injunction Denial

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Wachter, Inc. v. Cabling Innovations, LLC

Plaintiff Wachter, Inc. sued former employees Brian Pitts and Josh Estes, along with Megan Pitts and Cabling Innovations, LLC, alleging various federal and state law violations, including under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), Electronic Communications Protection Act (ECPA), Stored Communications Act (SCA), breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference, unjust enrichment, conversion, and civil conspiracy. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss all claims. The court granted the motion in part and denied in part. It dismissed the federal claims (CFAA, ECPA, SCA) and several state law claims (breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference, unjust enrichment, conversion), finding them either legally insufficient, not applicable to employees, or preempted by the Tennessee Uniform Trade Secrets Act (TUTSA). However, the court allowed the claims for breach of duty of loyalty (Count V) and civil conspiracy (Count IX) to proceed against the relevant defendants.

Computer FraudEmployee MisconductConfidential InformationTrade SecretsMotion to DismissFederal JurisdictionState Law ClaimsBreach of Duty of LoyaltyCivil ConspiracyCFAA

References

Showing 1-4 of 4 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Nexans Wires S.A. v. Sark-USA, Inc.

Computer Fraud and Abuse ActCFAASummary JudgmentTrade Secret MisappropriationUnfair CompetitionJurisdictionStandingFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureData TheftProprietary Information

University Sports Publications Co. v. Playmakers Media Co.

Civic Center Motors, Ltd. v. Mason Street Import Cars, Ltd.

Wachter, Inc. v. Cabling Innovations, LLC

Computer FraudEmployee MisconductConfidential InformationTrade SecretsMotion to DismissFederal JurisdictionState Law ClaimsBreach of Duty of LoyaltyCivil ConspiracyCFAA