This Article presents the first qualitative empirical review of permanent injunctions in trade secret cases. In addition, it explores the extent to which the Supreme Court’s patent decision in eBay v. MercExchange has influenced the analysis of equitable principles in federal trade secret litigation. Among the more notable findings are that while equitable principles are generally applied in determining whether to grant a permanent injunction to a prevailing party after trial, the courts are not necessarily strictly applying the four factors from eBay. The award of monetary relief does not preclude equitable injunctive relief, and courts can find irreparable harm even where the loss has been compensated monetarily. Moreover, where injunctions are requested but denied, the lack of irreparable harm seemed to have been the factor most often articulated as the reason for the denial.
Citation
Elizabeth A. Rowe, eBay, Permanent Injunctions, and Trade Secrets, 77 Washington and Lee Law Review, 553 (2020).
More in This Category
Gradualism should have won out in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health , exerting gravitational influence on the majority and dissenters alike. In general...
More
In 2018 then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that Chinese espionage was occurring in university research labs, and the Department of Justice...
More
Now that the Supreme Court has revoked the constitutional right to reproductive autonomy, we must reckon with the risks that our surveillance economy...
More
We introduce the first ideology measure covering every non-Supreme-Court Article III judge on a single scale. The dataset comprises dynamic, interval...
More
An upcoming Supreme Court case on Article III standing and disability presents critical questions about the future of litigation that promotes...
More
Cyber stalking involves repeated, often relentless targeting of someone with abuse. Death and rape threats may be part of a perpetrator’s playbook...
More
Ian Ayres
We propose the creation of a Prosecutor Jury—a mechanism designed to balance the need to hold politicians accountable for their crimes, and the need...
More
There is one group that the court does not put into an identity straitjacket—those claiming religious exemptions.
More
Michael S. Knoll
Law students frequently find the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dormant Commerce Clause doctrine confusing. That is no surprise given the sharp disagreement...
More
A federal grand jury in Florida indicted former President Donald Trump on June 8, 2023, on multiple criminal charges related to classified documents...
More
On Thursday, the Supreme Court subtly transformed the rights of religious workers in America. Under the guise of “clarifying” a nearly 50-year-old...
More
In a 6-3 ruling on Thursday, June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the use of race in college admissions at Harvard and the University of...
More
Looking for a federal law to be declared unconstitutional? Religion may well be your best bet -- and that's true regardless of how "real" your...
More
When federal judges are called on to adjudicate separation-of-powers disputes, they are not mere arbiters of the separation of powers. By resolving a...
More
Sonia Suter
Anti-abortion groups are looking for new ways to wage their battle against abortion rights, eyeing the potential implications of a 150-year-old law...
More
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , the Supreme Court distinguished between different kinds of reliance interests — some that would...
More
The past few years have witnessed a particular accusation leveled repeatedly and loudly at the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority: that...
More
Sonia Suter
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency ruling on April 21, 2023, that allows continued access to the abortion pill mifepristone in states where...
More