Tempo Instrument v. Logitek

229 F. Supp. 1 (1964)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Tempo Instrument v. Logitek

United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
229 F. Supp. 1 (1964)

RW

Facts

Tempo Instrument, Inc. (Tempo) (plaintiff) hired Herbert Fischer (defendant) in order to reap the benefits of Fischer’s experience working for other manufacturers of transistor circuits. Tempo regarded its own so-called Gate circuit as a trade secret, a fact that was well-known to Fischer and other Tempo employees. Tempo eventually obtained a patent for the circuit itself, but the patent did not extend to the purchasing, manufacturing, and testing techniques that Tempo utilized in making the circuits. Fischer remembered and made use of those techniques after he left Tempo to start his own rival company, Logitek, Inc. (defendant). Tempo sued Fischer and Logitek in federal district court, alleging that although the techniques themselves were not patented, they constituted trade secrets that Fischer and Logitek had misappropriated. On the strength of the parties’ pleadings, Tempo moved for a preliminary injunction to stop the alleged misappropriation.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Zavatt, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership