Oldcastle Seeks Partial Summary Judgment in Trade Secret Suit
June 7, 2012

by Erica Terrini, eterrini@glass.com

Oldcastle BuildingEnvelope (OBE) has filed a motion for partial summary judgment in a lawsuit filed late last year against Jon Todd Staley, a former employee whom the company alleges misappropriated its trade secrets and other confidential and proprietary information.

The company is seeking summary judgment on two specific allegations-those related to breach of contract and violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).

"The court should grant summary judgment because the evidence adduced to date establishes all of the elements of these two claims, as a matter of law," alleges the company. "Because there are no genuine issues of material fact on any element of either claim, plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment. In addition, the court should grant Oldcastle reasonable attorneys' fees, to which Oldcastle is entitled because of Staley's breach of contract."

In its brief in support of the motion, OBE alleges that through discovery the company found that on the last day of Staley's employment, "[he] attached a portable hard drive to his Oldcastle computer, copied hundreds of Oldcastle documents onto that hard drive, took that hard drive home after his employment with Oldcastle had ended, and transferred those hundreds of documents to his personal computer, where copies continued to reside at least as of the date of the court-ordered forensic examination in this case."

The company alleges it discovered this when the court "required [Staley] to make his computer available for review."

The company further alleges that when Staley was asked about the external hard drive on his last day at the company, he advised that "one of the managers that worked for [him] inquired if he could have copies of [his] Excel and Word files kept over the years to use as templates in his future endeavors with OBE."

OBE further details its allegations about the emails the company had alleged Staley sent to his personal email account in the final days of his employment, and alleges that among these were the company's "year-over-year cost metrics and lost time performance."

"He also sent Oldcastle's budget comparisons and strategic plans for improving market share," alleges the company.

In addition to its request for summary judgment, Oldcastle is looking for an injunction against Staley as well.

"… [OBE] respectfully asks this court to enjoin Staley from retaining, using, or disclosing the confidential information we now know he indisputably possesses," alleges the company. " … As each new instance of Staley's wrongdoing has been revealed through discovery, he has invented some new excuse. Those excuses, given the weight of evidence against him, are just not credible. But more importantly, those excuses are irrelevant to this motion. Even if he is to be believed, nothing changes the fact that he breached his contract with Oldcastle and violated the CFAA."

Finally, the company alleges that it has been in discussions with Staley's counsel, and that he has agreed to turn over "all computer devices … containing any Oldcastle documents or information" to a computer forensic services provider identified by Oldcastle. The firm will then "be authorized to permanently delete such information from Staley's computer devices, and shall thereafter return such computer devices to Staley."

According to the motion, Staley then "shall certify that he no longer possesses any Oldcastle confidential or proprietary material, including but not limited to any of the documents he accessed or transferred to his personal computer devices or other storage devices during or in connection with his employment with Oldcastle."

The motion also alleges that if summary judgment is granted, Staley would stand to owe costs "no less than $10,781.70, along with prejudgment and post-judgment interest thereon"—the amount OBE allegedly paid the forensics expert to conduct the analysis on Staley's Oldcastle and personal computers.

OBE filed the suit against Staley last fall. Staley had filed a counterclaim against OBE, but filed a motion in February to dismiss the suit.

David Bell of the Law Offices of David Bell, who is representing Staley in the case, offered the following statement to USGNN.com™. "We vigorously oppose Oldcastle’s Partial Motion for Summary Judgment and will be filing a timely response," he says.

This story is an original story by USGlass magazine/USGNN™. Subscribe to USGlass magazine.
Subscribe to receive the free e-newsletter.