Seng-Tiong Ho v. Taflove

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that preempted conversion claim “focused on the defendants' unauthorized publishing, not possession, of the protected work”
• explaining that a court can amend its judgment only if the petitioner can establish a manifest error of law or present newly discovered evidence
• explaining that the Cop- yright Act preempts state law claims when the right is fixed in tangible form, comes within the subject matter of copyright, and is equivalent to any of the rights specified in § 106
• affirming finding of preemption where 8 In her reply, Plaintiff argues that she is also challenging Defendants’ “use” of the works in “SEC filings and investor packages.” (Doc. 90 at 7.
• declining to decide whether the purported trade secret had economic value because the plaintiffs had not taken reasonable steps to maintain secrecy and thus could not succeed on the ITSA claim
• affirming summary judgment where the plaintiffs “intentionally release[d]” the allegedly confidential information

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).