Creative Representation | Expert Litigation

Trying a Trade Secret Case: A Road Map

Trade secret trials challenge and engage all of a trial lawyer’s essential skills and training. Dealing with state-of-the-art technology–intricate circuit designs, sophisticated manufacturing processes, or highly complex formulas–is often a huge challenge, but there are other pitfalls for the unaware lawyer. Special care must be given in these cases to issues of disclosure, discovery, the preparation of witnesses, the handling of experts and juries, and the use of graphics and technology in the courtroom. With legal and other barriers being erected in patent litigation and with the recent passage of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, trade secret cases have moved to the forefront of technology litigation. Trade secrets litigators must understand the unique and critical strategies, requirements, and hazards presented by the trial of a technical trade secret case.

Supreme Court’s TC Heartland Decision Will Change Geography of Patent Litigation

The Supreme Court has overruled decades-old Federal Circuit precedent regarding proper venue for patent infringement cases in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands.

Catch the Conscience! – Scripting a Winning Opening Statement

The opening statement is your first and perhaps best opportunity to convince the jury that your client should win. The jurors know very little about the case, are anxious to get started, and give you their full attention. Their impression of you will probably be set by the time you finish your opening. Opening is the time to establish the jurors’ expectations, start to develop a bond with them, and whet their appetite for your case.

Business as Usual: Email Evidence and the Business Records Exception in the Ninth Circuit

At a time when businesses are increasingly utilizing more ephemeral methods of communication such as chat, text, and instant messaging, email has become the standard form of business communication.

Antitrust Agencies’ “Guidance for Human Resource Professionals” Threatens Criminal Prosecution

On October 20, 2016, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published their “ANTITRUST GUIDANCE FOR HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONALS” (“GUIDANCE”). The GUIDANCE is “intended to alert human resource (HR) professionals and others involved in hiring and compensation decisions to potential violations of the antitrust laws.” The DOJ and FTC have brought a wide variety of civil cases involving employer agreements.

Northern District of California Amends Patent Local Rules to Focus Upon Damages

Northern District of California Amends Patent Local Rules to Focus on Damages

The Line Between Bio and Technology: While Supreme Court Remains Silent, Federal Circuit Provides More Positive Guidance Regarding Patentability of Biotechnology

Bartko Zankel Bunzel Report - The Line Between Bio and Technology.

BZB Alert! President signs “Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016”

For many years, litigants have had original federal court jurisdiction for Patent, Trademark and Copyright cases, but the fourth major area of Intellectual Property law — Trade Secrets — has been governed by state law with no federal court jurisdiction. No longer. On May 11, 2016, President Obama signed the “Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016” to “provide a single, national standard for trade secret misappropriation with clear rules and predictability” in federal court.

“Trade Secret Damages,” Chapter 9, Calculating and Proving Damages

The law of trade secrets protects information that provides independent economic value because others do not generally know that information. The holder of a trade secret seeks to capitalize on the business advantage that derives from ownership of the trade secret and prevent use of the trade secret by competitors. Moreover, the trade secret owner must make reasonable efforts to maintain the secrecy of the trade secrets or risk loss of the trade secret protection.

Injunction Relief in Lanham Act Cases Post-Herb Reed

Motions for preliminary injunctive relief are routinely sought in cases involving claims for trademark infringement. For many years, once a moving party established a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm was presumed and an injunction would usually be issued. This all changed with the Ninth Circuit's holding in Herb Reed Enter., LLC v. Florida Entm't Mgmt., Inc., 736 F.3d 1239 (9th Cir. 2013).