Amlikyan v. Holder

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding similar evidence 17 of use constitutes proof of misappropriation
• discussing what can qualify as a trade secret and what cannot in the context of software programs
• “information is not necessarily a trade secret simply because it is known by one party and not by the other.”
• “[A] court cannot presume that such disclosure is inevitable based 21 only on the fact of a business association between the defendant and the plaintiff’s rivals.”
• interpreting California’s codification of the Uniform Trade Secret Act
• rejecting the inevitable 22 disclosure doctrine

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).