![]() ![]() The DTSA has several safeguards meant to prevent the misapplication of the ex parte seizure provision. 4 This provision is, without question, the most controversial aspect of the DTSA. ![]() ![]() The DTSA allows a trade secret owner to request that law enforcement officers seize misappropriated property without advance notice to the alleged thief. The DTSA opens the door for private parties to bring a federal claim for trade secret misappropriation if “the trade secret is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce.” 3 Trade secret owners now have the choice to file suit in federal court as long as the alleged trade secret theft occurred on or after May 11, 2016.Įx Parte Seizures. Before enactment of the DTSA, a private litigant could only pursue a misappropriation of trade secret claim in federal court by meeting diversity jurisdiction requirements or adding a different federal law claim, because no independent civil claim existed under federal law. The DTSA defines the terms “trade secret,” “misappropriation,” and “improper means” similar to the way these terms are defined in the Wisconsin Uniform Trade Secrets Act and includes the following key provisions that will help shape the future of trade secret litigation:įederal Civil Actions for Trade Secret Misappropriation. 2009, is an attorney at Godfrey & Kahn S.C., Milwaukee, where she maintains an active litigation practice, including labor and employment litigation.Įffective May 11, 2016, the DTSA amended the Economic Espionage Act to allow a private party to bring a civil action in federal court if the trade secret relates to a product or service used, or intended to be used, in interstate or international commerce. 2006, is with Godfrey & Kahn S.C., Milwaukee, concentrating on corporate compliance, internal investigations, and commercial litigation.Įrin M. She chairs the litigation team’s trade secret and noncompetition practice group and also concentrates on complex financial services litigation claims.īrian C. Kreiter, Marquette 2004, is a commercial litigator at Godfrey & Kahn S.C., Milwaukee. 1 More than 10 years later, the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 made trade secret theft a federal crime but did not allow corresponding civil claims by private parties. Wisconsin’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, passed in 1985, codified the right of private litigants in Wisconsin to file state-law misappropriation of trade secret claims. ![]() Trade secrets have historically received protection under state law, most notably the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, a model law adopted, with some variations, by 48 states. Passage of the DTSA illustrates the importance Congress has placed on protecting trade secrets and is likely to result in far more federal court litigation involving high stakes and “bet the company” disputes when misappropriation of trade secrets is on the rise with an increasingly mobile workforce. State trade secret protections remain available and are not preempted by the DTSA, which includes enhanced damages provisions for willful and malicious misappropriation. The Defend Trade Secrets Act (commonly referred to as the DTSA) creates a federal civil claim for trade secret misappropriation theft and gives trade secret owners the ability to request law enforcement agencies’ assistance in seizing stolen trade secrets without advance notice to the wrongdoer – an extraordinary remedy unparalleled in any other current federal law. On May 11, 2016, President Barack Obama signed into law the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, one of the most important trade secret laws in decades. Thanks to a new federal law on the books, trade secrets now receive a similar level of protection to that enjoyed by other forms of intellectual property, such as patents, copyrights, and trademarks. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |