This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Corporations
Intellectual Property
Trade Secret

Lexar Media Inc. v. Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba America Electronics Components Inc.

Published: Jan. 14, 2006 | Result Date: Mar. 24, 2005 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 102CV812458 Verdict –  $465,400,000

Facts

Plaintiff Lexar Media Inc. manufactures memory cards and other technology used in computers. Defendant Toshiba Corp. obtained a seat on Lexar's board. Lexar sued Toshiba America Electronics Corp. and its Tokyo-based parent company, alleging theft of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair competition.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the defendant obtained its confidential patent applications and began communicating with the plaintiff's rival, SanDisk Corp., after it resigned from the board. Thereafter, the defendant announced it was forming a relationship with SanDisk. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant incorporated its trade secrets into its own products.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that the alleged trade secrets were actually not secrets.

Damages

The plaintiff requested over $1 billion for lost profits and unjust enrichment. The plaintiff also sought punitive damages. The defendant challenged the plaintiff's request for any damages.

Result

$465,400,000; a jury found the defendant liable for breach of fiduciary duty and theft of trade secrets.

Other Information

After the judgment, the plaintiff requested an injunction barring the sale of the defendant's products in the United States. This bar would include any products that incorporated the plaintiff's trade secrets. The Hon. Jack Komar declined the plaintiff's request, but found that the defendant violated the California Business and Professions Code. Judge Komar affirmed the verdict. On December 2, 2005, Judge Komar entered an Order vacating the jury's damages award based on insufficiency of evidence and ordering a new trial on damages.

Deliberation

three days

Length

seven weeks


#89271

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390