Publications

Amy Candido, Head of Simpson Thacher’s Intellectual Property Litigation Practice, authored an article titled “The Rise of Trade Secret Specificity as A Jury Question,” which was published by Law360. While the requirement that a trade secret plaintiff identify its trade secret with “sufficient particularity” has long been considered a necessary part of discovery, the article explores how several courts of appeals have recently endorsed treating “sufficient particularity” under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) as a question of fact for the jury. Appellate courts have held that a DTSA plaintiff must identify the trade secret with “sufficient particularity to separate it from matters of general knowledge in the trade or of special knowledge of those persons skilled in the trade,” or risk summary judgment if there is no genuine dispute regarding the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s identification. The article further observes that, in cases where the sufficiency of the plaintiff's trade secret identification remains a fact issue for trial, appropriate jury instructions are necessary and suggests that juries should be instructed regarding the baseline requirements for “sufficient particularity,” as well as those applicable to the specific types of trade secrets at issue.

To read the full article, please click here (subscription required).