From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Animal Blood Bank, Inc. v. Hale

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 24, 2010
NO. CIV. 2:10-2080 FCD/KJN (E.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2010)

Opinion

NO. CIV. 2:10-2080 FCD/KJN.

November 24, 2010


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


Plaintiffs Animal Blood Bank, Inc., et. al. ("ABB") move this court for a preliminary injunction that enjoins defendant from competing or interfering with ABB, and requires defendant to refrain from misappropriating ABB's trade secrets.

Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction that enjoins "defendant Hale, her agents, servants, and employees and all persons acting under, in concert with, or for Hale from taking any action of any nature whatsoever to interfere with ABB, its projects, its employees, its customers, or its vendors, including, but not limited to, operating a competing business." Plaintiffs also request a preliminary injunction that requires "[defendant], her agents, servants and employees, and all persons acting under, in concert with, or for [defendant]: (a) to refrain from continuing the misappropriation or use of ABB's trade secrets by ongoing use or disclosure of ABB's lists; and (b) return all copies of ABB's trade secrets."

Parties are hereby ordered to meet and confer regarding a stipulation as to use of the contents of defendant's laptop within the next forty-five days. In order to allow plaintiffs sufficient time to examine the contents of defendant's laptop, defendant shall refrain from utilizing the information contained on her laptop in her business activities during this forty-five day period. Further, during this forty-five day period, neither party shall disclose the contents of defendant's laptop to any party other than counsel or designated experts.

Plaintiffs withdraw their motion as to defendant's competition, or interference, with ABB's business; therefore this portion of plaintiffs' motion is DENIED as moot.

As to the matter of misappropriation of ABB's trade secrets, this portion of plaintiffs' motion is DENIED without prejudice for failure to submit admissible evidence to establish success on the merits.

This matter is continued to Friday, January 14, 2011 for further status. If the parties inform the Court that they have reached an agreement as to the above matter, the status hearing will be vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 23, 2010


Summaries of

Animal Blood Bank, Inc. v. Hale

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 24, 2010
NO. CIV. 2:10-2080 FCD/KJN (E.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2010)
Case details for

Animal Blood Bank, Inc. v. Hale

Case Details

Full title:ANIMAL BLOOD BANK, INC., a California corporation; MICHAEL W. KAUFMAN, an…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Nov 24, 2010

Citations

NO. CIV. 2:10-2080 FCD/KJN (E.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2010)