SunPower Corp. v. SolarCity Corp.
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
2012 WL 6160472 (2012)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
SunPower Corp. (plaintiff) manufactured and distributed solar panels and related equipment. SunPower employed a group of individual sales agents (the agents) (defendants) who signed nondisclosure agreements. Thereafter, SolarCity Corp. (defendant) recruited the agents to work for SolarCity. After the agents left SunPower’s employment, SunPower discovered that each of them had used email and/or electronic devices to store and take SunPower’s computer files shortly before ending their employment. The computer files included sales and marketing information. SunPower believed that the agents had delivered the files to SolarCity and were using the data for the benefit of SolarCity. SunPower sued SolarCity and the agents, asserting numerous causes of action. One cause of action was for violating California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) (the trade-secret claim). Other causes of action related to the alleged misappropriation of non-trade-secret, “proprietary information,” e.g., conversion, unfair competition, and trespass to chattels (collectively, the non-trade-secret claims). SunPower’s claims were all based on the same conduct—the agents’ taking of computer files—without further specification. SolarCity and the agents filed a motion to dismiss the non-trade-secret claims.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Koh, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.