Buffets v. Klinke
73 F.3d 965, *; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 436, **;
37 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1449; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 315
BUFFETS, INC., a Minnesota corporation; and EVERGREEN BUFFETS, INC., an Oregon corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PAUL KLINKE; CAROL KLINKE; GREG KLINKE; GRANNY'S BUFFET, INC., a Washington corporation; and MARK MILLER, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 94-36222
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
73 F.3d 965; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 436; 37 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1449; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 315; 96 Daily Journal DAR 507
December 7, 1995, Argued and Submitted, Seattle, Washington
January 16, 1996, Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. D.C. No. CV-92-00370-FVS. Fred L. Van Sickle, District Judge, Presiding.
CASE SUMMARY PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff appealed a judgment from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington in favor of defendants on claims for misappropriation of trade secrets under Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.010(4), and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86.020. OVERVIEW: The court affirmed judgment for defendants on plaintiff's claims for misappropriation of trade secrets under Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.010(4), and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act (WCPA), Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86.020, in an action involving plaintiff's restaurant recipes and job manuals. The court held that the district court did not err in concluding that plaintiff's recipes were not entitled to trade secret protection because they were readily ascertainable, lacked the requisite novelty, and had no independent economic value. In addition, plaintiff's restaurant job manuals were not trade secrets because they were not the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain their secrecy and had little economic value, notwithstanding the fact that defendants obtained them illegally. The court also affirmed
37 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1449; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 315
BUFFETS, INC., a Minnesota corporation; and EVERGREEN BUFFETS, INC., an Oregon corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PAUL KLINKE; CAROL KLINKE; GREG KLINKE; GRANNY'S BUFFET, INC., a Washington corporation; and MARK MILLER, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 94-36222
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
73 F.3d 965; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 436; 37 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1449; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 315; 96 Daily Journal DAR 507
December 7, 1995, Argued and Submitted, Seattle, Washington
January 16, 1996, Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. D.C. No. CV-92-00370-FVS. Fred L. Van Sickle, District Judge, Presiding.
CASE SUMMARY PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff appealed a judgment from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington in favor of defendants on claims for misappropriation of trade secrets under Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.010(4), and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86.020. OVERVIEW: The court affirmed judgment for defendants on plaintiff's claims for misappropriation of trade secrets under Wash. Rev. Code § 19.108.010(4), and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act (WCPA), Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86.020, in an action involving plaintiff's restaurant recipes and job manuals. The court held that the district court did not err in concluding that plaintiff's recipes were not entitled to trade secret protection because they were readily ascertainable, lacked the requisite novelty, and had no independent economic value. In addition, plaintiff's restaurant job manuals were not trade secrets because they were not the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain their secrecy and had little economic value, notwithstanding the fact that defendants obtained them illegally. The court also affirmed