California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Jasmine Networks, Inc. v. Sup. Ct., H034441

In plaintiff's action under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act claiming that the defendants misappropriated certain trade secrets belonging to plaintiff, trial court's dismissal of the complaint on the ground that plaintiff had forfeited its standing to maintain an action for misappropriation when it had gone through bankruptcy proceedings shortly after filing the complaint is reversed where: 1) a current ownership requirement is not supported by general principles of property or tort law; 2) existing authority imposes no "current ownership requirement" on trade secret plaintiffs; 3) adoption of a current ownership requirement in trade secrets cases is not warranted by analogy to trademark, patent, or copyright law; and 4) no policy concern preponderates in favor of current ownership requirement.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 12/29/2009
  • Published 12/29/2009

Judges

  • RUSHING, P.J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Trepel Law Firm, Anthony J. Trepel, San Jose, McGrane Greenfield, William McGrane, Christopher Sullivan, Maureen Harrington, San Francisco, Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland, Robin Meadow, Marc J. Poster, Alana H. Rotter, Los Angeles, for Petitioner Jasmine Network, Inc., Latham & Watkins, Steven M. Bauer, Charles Crompton, James K. Lynch, San Francisco, Cooke Kobrick & Wu, Steven S. Wu, Christopher C. Cooke, Jeffrey W. Kobrick, San Mateo, for Attorneys for Real Parties in Interest Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., et al.

Copied to clipboard