Hilderman v. Enea TekSci, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was an issue of fact with respect to whether pricing information was trade secret information
• holding that a “lack of confidentiality agreements is not dispositive on the issue of secrecy” because a company “may have taken other precautions to keep its information secret”
• denying a motion for summary 23 judgment and allowing the case to proceed to trial even though some employees failed to sign 24 confidentiality agreements
• denying summary judgment because “lack of confidentiality agreements is not 23 dispositive on the issue of secrecy” because plaintiff “may have taken other precautions to keep its 24 information secret”
• “[E]mails on the laptop computer are not stored ‘by an electronic communication service for purposes of backup protection’ as required by subsection (B).”
• “E-mails stored on the laptop computer are not in ‘temporary, intermediate storage’ [as required by § 2510(17)(A)]. Furthermore, the e-mails on the laptop are not stored ‘by an electronic communication service for purposes of backup protection’ as required by subsection (B

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).