FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Parrish

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that 15 courts apply to California trade secret law to federal DTSA cases because the definitions under the 16 statutes are virtually the same
• explaining that “[a] trade secrets claim could be brought in good faith but warrant attorney fees” when the claim is pursued beyond the point at which it becomes clear that the claim lacks merit
• noting an award under California Civil Code section 3426.4 is considered a sanction
• “Objective speciousness exists where the action superficially appears to have merit but there is a complete lack of evidence to support the claim.”
• “[T]he doctrine 21 of unclean hands relates to misconduct occurring before the lawsuit was filed, not the bad faith 22 filing or maintenance of an action.”
• under CUTSA “[m]ere possession of trade secrets . . . is not enough”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).