Tenth Circuit· 3/11/2014

Storagecraft Technology Corp. v. Kirby

Citations

744 F.3d 1183
109 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 2110
37 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1566
2014 WL 929159
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4482

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that University Computing and Georgia-Pacific identified “overlapping” factors
“[I]t is surely important when setting a reasonable royalty award to account for the scope of the license the defendant assumed for himself . . . . [T]he nature of the defendant’s ‘use’ of the trade secret matters a great deal in the reasonable royalty analysis.”
“[T]he line between use and disclosure is hardly as crisp as [the defendant] suggests. Can’t disclosing a trade secret for a particular end or purpose (be it retribution or profit or otherwise) be a way of putting it to use, at least in a broad sense of the word?”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Tymkovich, Seymour, Gorsuch

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.