Den-Tal-Ez, Inc. v. Siemens Capital Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that projections, unit costs and product-by-product profit margins were protected as trade secrets
• holding that a remand is not required where additional ground supported trial court’s holding
• noting that “sales and profit margins on a product-by-product basis” falls within the definition of confidential business information
• recognizing implicit waiver, inferred from circumstances, and waiver by estoppel, where a party’s conduct misleads another party into reasonably believing that a provision has been waived
• explaining that, for granting injunctive relief, the appropriately prospective inquiry asks “not whether defendant already has used or disclosed, but whether there is sufficient likelihood, or substantial threat, of defendant doing so in the future”
• noting that \ Van Products has been construed to have adopted the 'property' view of trade secrets\ and that \[c]ases decided more recently than Van Products make it clear that this is still the proper focus in a trade secrets case\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).