Opinion
Case No. 3:03-cv-079.
April 14, 2006
DECISION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment with Respect to the Fifth and Sixth Claims of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (the "Third SJM," Doc. No. 105).
On March 31, 2006, the Court decided this Motion in part by dismissing with prejudice Plaintiffs' claims under § 2 of the Sherman Act, the Sixth Claim for Relief (Doc. No. 128). There remains for decision that portion of the Motion relating to the Fifth Claim for Relief, Misappropriation of Trade Secrets.
The sole basis on which Defendant seeks summary judgment on the Fifth Claim for Relief is its assertion that "the undisputed evidence establishes that CGB has never made any use of the Seeds Manual." (Third SJM, Doc. No. 105, at 3.) Judge Rose previously decided on Defendant's first Motion for Partial Summary Judgment there were "genuine issues of material fact on whether the Seed Manual was a trade secret and whether Defendant obtained it in a confidential relationship." (Decision and Order, Doc. No. 63, at 21.)
Having reviewed the motion papers, the Court concludes that there are genuine issues of material fact on the sole issue presented in this Third SJM. Accordingly, Defendant's motion for summary judgment as to the Fifth Claim for Relief is denied.