Aug 19, 2021
Manufacturers, innovators, and companies of all kinds trust Parker Hudson to help monetize and protect their trade secrets and other intellectual property rights — creatively, tenaciously, and cost-effectively. We understand IP law as a tool for protecting our clients’ business interests.
Whether you have trademarks, copyrights, patents, or trade secrets to protect, or allegations of infringement to defend against, our team of legal counselors and litigators can help. Our experience in trade secret and restrictive covenant matters is particularly valuable in light of the increasing importance of these legal areas for today's businesses.
We build long-term relationships with clients who come to rely on us as a go-to source for quick and practical advice, as well as for their most complex disputes. We assess each situation to determine the best strategies, the potential cost of litigation, and the likelihood of achieving the client's desired outcome.
Our counseling is grounded in the real world, taking into account your bottom-line interests and the practical implications of any proposed course of action.
Our approach includes:
- Attorneys with extensive experience in negotiation, litigation, and contract drafting (but with flexible fee arrangements that provide better value for the client)
- Experienced partners who give your legal matter the time, attention, and communication it deserves
- Particular experience in the increasing critical areas of trade secret and restrictive covenant litigation
- Proactive solutions for avoiding costly litigation
- Attorneys who have been extensively published in the fields of IP protection, franchise agreements, and restrictive covenants
- Registering trademarks in many countries and territories throughout the world
- Assisting clients in monetizing their intellectual property through license and other agreements
- Copyright prosecution, enforcement and defense
- Trademark prosecution, enforcement and defense
- Trade secret protection and defense
- Patent litigation
- Restrictive covenants / non-compete agreements and litigation
- Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs)
- License, supply, joint venture, distribution and related agreements
- False advertising claims and defense
- Right of Publicity issues
- Represented one of nation's largest insurance brokers in lawsuit against major competitor and disappointed corporate suitor in the Delaware Court of Chancery asserting breach of a Confidentiality Agreement. Our strategy prevented unlawful poaching and allowed the sale transaction to a different competitor to close.
- Represented a national restaurant franchisor in pursuing and obtaining injunctive relief in federal bankruptcy court against a former franchisee for misuse of our client's trademarks. The firm successfully asserted claims arising under the Lanham Act (trademark infringement and false origin claims) as well as claims for unfair competition and breach of contract. The court granted our client's motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction and ordered the defendants immediately to stop using our client's trademarks and cease operation of the restaurants at issue.
- Represented the subsidiary of a Fortune 500 diagnostic testing company in successfully enforcing restrictive covenants against a top sales representative. Despite having agreed to restrictive covenants, including a non-compete, the sales representative resigned and went to work for a competitor in the same territory. We filed suit on behalf of our client and obtained a preliminary injunction in federal court against the sales representative. Then, based on evidence obtained during discovery, the firm moved for summary judgment on behalf of our client. The Court granted summary judgment as to liability in favor of our client, finding that the sales representative had breached both his non-compete and his non-solicitation covenants. Shortly thereafter, the case settled favorably to our client.
- Represent a hospital in significant litigation against a former physician employee and executive. The case involves several claims and counterclaims relating to the physician's departure from employment with our client and his decision to work for a competitor hospital in violation of his non-competition covenant, as well as disputes relating to compensation issues. After extensive discovery, the firm defeated the physician's motion for summary judgment as to the alleged unenforceability of his non-competition covenant. The case remains ongoing.
- Represented a software company in litigation relating to the alleged breach of a non-disclosure agreement entered with a competitor in connection with the consideration of a potential joint venture. Our client denied misusing confidential information and denied any wrongdoing. We were able to resolve the case early in the litigation and obtain dismissal of the lawsuit and the competitor's motion for injunctive relief, without our client having to incur substantial legal fees.
- Represented a large financial services institution in a series of lawsuits with a major competitor that involved allegations of corporate raiding, misappropriation of trade secrets, and alleged violation of restrictive covenants. The competitor of our client and a former employee initiated a lawsuit in state court, seeking a temporary restraining order to prevent our client from enforcing certain restrictive covenants. The firm removed the case to federal court and successfully defeated a motion to remand when the federal court found that the competitor had fraudulently joined an affiliate of our client in an effort to defeat diversity jurisdiction. The competitor then withdrew its motion for temporary restraining order and instead filed a motion for preliminary injunction. The firm then asserted several counterclaims against the competitor and former employee, defending the enforceability of the restrictive covenants and asserting trade secret claims, tort claims, and claims for breaches of the covenants. After some discovery, the competitor and former employee withdrew their motion for preliminary injunction, and the case resulted in a substantial settlement in favor of our client.