Intellectual Property Law
New Matter SUMMER 2021, Volume 46, Number 2
Content
- 2021 New Matter Author Submission Guidelines
- A Look at the Trademark Modernization Act: Early Observations of a Bold New Law
- Cla Staff
- Claiming Priority in the Epo
- Contents
- Copyright News
- Editorial Board
- Enablement of Prior Art Under 35 U.S.C. § 103
- "Failure To Function" When that Catchy Slogan You ♥ is Not a Mark At All
- Federal Circuit Report
- Intellectual Property Section Executive Committee 2019-2021
- Intellectual Property Section Interest Group Representatives 2019-2021
- Ip and Art: An International Perspective
- Letter from the Chair
- Letter from the Editor-in-Chief
- McLe Self-Study Article
- Ninth Circuit Report
- Online Cle For Participatory Credit
- Quarterly International Ip Law Update
- Recognizing California's Notable Dtsa Cases in Honor of Dtsa's 5th Birthday
- The California Lawyers Association Intellectual Property Alumni
- The Licensing Corner
- Ttab Decisions and Developments
- Trade Secret Report
Trade Secret Report
Conor Tucker
Irell & Manella LLP
TRADE SECRETS—EXTRATERRITORIALITY
Defendants in a lawsuit involving trade secrets related to medical businesses in Latin America moved to dismiss the complaint as untimely under relevant statutes of limitations and as improper extraterritorial application of U.S. trade secret law. The Southern District of New York denied the motions. Regarding the statute of limitations, the DTSA provides that the three-year statute of limitation is tolled until the misappropriation "is discovered or by exercise of reasonable diligence should have been discovered." The court held that although defendants raised reasonable arguments that plaintiff should have known of the alleged misappropriation a year before filing suit, where the complaint did not "clearly show[]" plaintiff’s claim is out of time, dismissal under 12(b)(6) is improper.