Recently in Intellectual Property Law Category

In an action for breach of a noncompetition agreement restricting defendants' ability to work with competitors, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where the district court properly distinguished in its findings of fact between plaintiff's general lost profits and profits lost on specific orders.  However, judgment for plaintiff is reversed in part where certain information used by defendants did not qualify as a trade secret because plaintiff disclosed this information to its customers without reservation.

Read Southwest Stainless, LP v. Sappington, No. 08-5127

Appellate Information

Filed September 21, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Lucero

Counsel

For Appellants:

Justin D. Flamm, Conner & Winters, LLP, Tulsa, OK

Timothy P. Reilly, Conner & Winters, LLP, Tulsa, OK

For Appellees:

Dinita L. James, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Phoenix, AZ

William E. Grob, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Phoenix, AZ

In an action for slander of title regarding statements made by defendant about its alleged ownership of certain software copyrights, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where: 1) the parties' agreement satisfied the Copyright Act's writing requirement; and 2) the admissible evidence concerning the ambiguous contract language regarding copyright ownership was not so one-sided as to warrant summary judgment.

Read SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc., No. 08-4217

Appellate Information

Filed August 24, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge McConnell

Counsel

For Appellant:

Stuart Singer, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Fort Lauderdale, FL

Devan V. Padmanabhan, Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Minneapolis, MN

For Appellee:

Michael Jacobs, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA

George C. Harris, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA

In a copyright infringement action based on Defendant's alleged copying of Plaintiff's independent-engineer reports, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed in part, where Plaintiff's state-law claims were preempted by the Copyright Act; but reversed in part, where Plaintiff created genuine disputes of material fact by presenting evidence that: 1) Plaintiff did not take the language in its copyrighted reports from a third-party report; and 2) the copyrighted reports derived their language from earlier, nonpublic reports prepared by Plaintiff.

Read R.W. Beck, Inc. v. E3 Consulting, LLC, No. 08-1344

Appellate Information

Filed August 14, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Hartz

Counsel

For Appellant:

Natalie Hanlon-Leh, Faegre & Benson LLP, Denver, CO

Mary V. Sooter, Faegre & Benson LLP, Denver, CO

For Appellee:

Benjamin B. Lieb, Sheridan Ross P.C., Denver, CO

Ian R. Walsworth, Sheridan Ross P.C., Denver, CO

In a trade secret misappropriation action, partial judgment for plaintiffs and defendants is affirmed in part where plaintiff failed to present adequate claims of tortious interference with contract and prospective business advantage. The ruling is reversed in part, however, where the question of whether defendant's manufacturing process was a trade secret was a question of fact that could not be resolved on the current record.

Read Hertz v. Luzenac Group, No. 06-1324

Appellate Information

Filed August 11, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Holmes

Counsel

For Appellant:

Andrew M. Low, Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, Denver, CO

Janet A. Savage, Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, Denver, CO

For Appellee:

Theresa L. Corrada, Issacson Rosenbaum P.C., Denver, CO

Byeongsook Seo, Issacson Rosenbaum P.C., Denver, CO