Gage Looking for 'Escape Route' in Motion to Dismiss Trade Secret Case: Vox

Defendants in a trade secrets lawsuit are “searching for an escape route” instead of litigating the case on the merits, said plaintiff Vox Network Solutions in a Friday opposition (docket 3:22-cv-09135) to Gage Technologies’ February motion to dismiss (see 2303020019) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco. By denying Vox the chance to develop the complaint’s allegations through discovery, Gage hopes to “disable” Vox’ discovery tools that are crucial to clarify Gage's “clandestine, surreptitious, and conspiratorial acts.” Vox alleges Gage conspired with two former employees to steal trade secrets. In its motion to dismiss, Gage said Vox failed to adequately plead trade secret misappropriation or to identify trade secrets with “sufficient particularity.” Vox alleges Kristopher McGreevey, its then regional sales director, and Kevin Frazier, then senior account executive, conspired with Gage to “raid and exploit” confidential Vox information and resources in order to “poach” Vox clients and employees. Vox learned of the conduct “after the damage had been done,” and it lost a key client, Consumer Cellular, to its competitor, Gage, Vox alleged. To state a claim for trade secret misappropriation under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act, the complaint must show that (1) the plaintiff owned a trade secret; (2) the defendant misappropriated the trade secret; and (3) the defendant's actions damaged the plaintiff; its complaint satisfies all three elements, Vox said. On the issue of sufficient particularity regarding alleged trade secrets, Vox said courts are in “general agreement that trade secrets need not be disclosed in detail” because that would result in “public disclosure of the purported trade secrets.” On the harm and unjust enrichment claims, Vox said it lost well over $1 million as a result of Gage’s conduct.