Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

New Jersey Superior Court Tosses Trade Secret Claims for Failure to Plead with Sufficient Specificity Under New Jersey Trade Secrets Act

By Helen Ogunyanwo & Julia Milewski on March 22, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

What does it take to sufficiently plead trade secret claims under the New Jersey Trade Secrets Act?

In Lard-Vid, LLC and Visual Image Display UK, Ltd. v. Ground Support Labs LLC et al., 2021 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 323, at *15 (N.J. Sup. Ct. Feb. 26, 2021), the Court addressed exactly this issue and dismissed plaintiffs’ trade secret claims for failure to allege facts sufficient to satisfy the elements of the New Jersey Trade Secrets Act.

Plaintiffs, two digital signage and consumer engagement companies, brought a variety of claims including for trade secret misappropriation against Defendants, who include several former employees who left and started their own businesses and the new companies. Plaintiffs generally alleged in the Complaint that Defendants used confidential and trade secret information to secure a $2.6 million contract for an unnamed client, sent emails from work email accounts to personal accounts prior to their departure, and deleted data belonging to Plaintiffs. The Court noted that the New Jersey Trade Secrets Act defines trade secrets as information that both: “(1) [d]erives independent economic value . . . from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use,” and “(2) [i]s the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.” However, according to the Court, Plaintiffs failed to explain exactly what data was taken or wrongfully used by Defendants, failed to alleged that Defendants used any of the information which was purportedly taken, and did not include information on how Plaintiffs were damaged as a result. Further, with respect to the unnamed client that was allegedly taken from Plaintiffs, the Complaint did not allege that Defendants used any trade secrets or other information to compete with Plaintiffs.  Taken together, the Court found the trade secret claims could not survive a motion to dismiss.

This case is a good reminder not to ignore common pitfalls when pleading general claims and to ensure that trade secret claims are pled with sufficient specificity to comply with the applicable trade secret statutes.

Photo of Helen Ogunyanwo Helen Ogunyanwo
Read more about Helen OgunyanwoEmail
Photo of Julia Milewski Julia Milewski
Read more about Julia MilewskiEmail
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial
  • Blog:
    Trade Secrets Trends
  • Organization:
    Crowell & Moring LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo