Powell Products, Inc. v. Marks

How courts have described this case

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

• holding conversion claim not entirely preempted because plaintiff also sought recovery of physical items stolen
• finding no preemption of claim for interference with business relationships because claim “[did] not depend upon the information in question qualifying as trade secrets”
• finding no preemption of a civil conspiracy claim because that claim required proof of an agreement, which was not an element of the misappropriation claim
• no preemption where claims do not depend upon information in question qualifying as trade secret or include additional elements not necessary for a UTSA misappropriation claim
• “If the design of the plaintiffs machine is not a trade secret, plaintiff has no property right in its design, and it therefore would have no claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).