Steven M. Levitan

Steven Levitan's career spans more than 30 years, with a primary focus on trade secret disputes over the past decade. Additionally, he provides invaluable counsel to clients on trade secret matters, offering guidance on internal corporate investigations, employee mobility issues, corporate policies, training, due diligence in M&A transactions, and even collaborating with white-collar lawyers in criminal trade secret cases.

In his role as co-leader of Womble's trade secret litigation and counseling practice, Levitan has handled several major trade secret litigation matters since 2021. One such case was serving as lead counsel for plaintiff Intevac in a pending California state court action. The lawsuit alleges trade secret misappropriation under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA) and breach of contract against a former employee who downloaded and retained highly confidential proprietary information without authorization. Intevac, Inc. v. Raymond Chan , 22CV408245 (Santa Clara Sup. Ct., filed Dec. 8, 2022).

Levitan also represented the defendants against Ouster's complaint for trade secret misappropriation. The case revolved around rotating 3D lidar technology used in autonomous vehicles and was ultimately resolved through Velodyne's merger with Ouster. Ouster, Inc. v. Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Anurag Gupta, and Guilherme Paludeti , 22CV400995 (Santa Clara Sup. Ct., filed July 8, 2022).

Additionally, Levitan was co-lead counsel for plaintiff SambaSafety in Safety Holdings Inc. v. Checkr, Inc. and Hone Data LLC , a trade secret litigation case under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) concerning SambaSafety's proprietary driver risk management platform. The case, following a successful defense motion to dismiss, reached a settlement.

These cases underscore a common theme in trade secret disputes -- allegations of misappropriation arising from former employees retaining confidential information when transitioning to a competitor. Levitan's experience demonstrates the heightened awareness of such conduct and the growing importance of trade secret enforcement efforts in an era of increased employee mobility.

"A challenge in the above-described category of trade secret cases often involves the former employees' failure to recognize or acknowledge that they did anything wrong, perhaps believing (wrongly) that they are entitled to retain and use after employment a company's confidential and proprietary documents that they worked on, or that reflect work that they contributed to, without understanding that it is their former employer that typically owns such documents, information, and work," Levitan said.

Looking ahead, Levitan identifies notable trends in the trade secrets field. Recent legislative developments, such as the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) in the U.S. and the EU Directive in Europe, have enhanced companies' ability to protect their trade secrets. Concerns related to unfair competition, particularly trade secret theft from China, are on the rise. Noncompete agreements, which can impact employee mobility and trade secret concerns, are facing increased scrutiny in the U.S. and are banned in certain states. The shift toward remote work has also introduced new challenges to trade secret protection, as information is more widely dispersed and potentially less secure.