Unfair Competition and Trade Secret Misappropriation

Conkle, Kremer & Engel prosecutes and defends claims of unfair competition, such as under California Business & Professions Code section 17200.  We also advise businesses about proper labeling and advertising strategies to ensure compliance with state and federal laws and to minimize the risks of claims of false or misleading advertising.  Our experience includes defending against both individual claims and class action lawsuits that product labeling or advertising violates California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law.

Trade Secret Misappropriation Practice

Conkle, Kremer & Engel frequently represents plaintiffs and defendants in trade secret misappropriation matters. We successfully defended a large case between two telephony and data equipment resellers, after our client hired key employees from a failing business that was later acquired by a competitor. Our tactical use of discovery and investigation led to a mediation and a favorable settlement. We prosecuted to a successful resolution claims of trade secret misappropriation and unfair competition when an importer’s business was raided by a competitor who took employees and customer lists. We pursued trade secret claims on behalf of a Fortune 100 client whose programming for updating newspaper website feeds was misappropriated by a former client. Conkle, Kremer & Engel successfully defended trade secret claims after partners in the food industry split and one acquired the partnership’s property. And we efficiently obtained dismissal of claims by a prominent lighting company that charged its former employee with misappropriation of product development ideas.

Dispute Resolution

Disputes about intangible rights such as trade secrets, trademarks, trade dress, patents and copyrights can severely damage a business. For more than twenty years, Conkle, Kremer & Engel has handled all types of intellectual property and unfair competition matters, whether in administrative proceedings, in court, or in arbitration or mediation. William C. Conkle is a registered patent attorney and can help resolve disputes concerning patent rights.

Our attorneys have recovered multi-million dollar verdicts and successfully defended high-risk cases. We have obtained immediate and permanent injunctions against infringement, dilution and diversion, and have prevented abuse of clients’ intellectual property, including internet domain names and trade dress.

Conkle, Kremer & Engel Matters Involving Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition Disputes

Conkle, Kremer & Engel’s matters in unfair competition, trade secret misappropriation and related intellectual property fields include:

  •     CK&E made a presentation to the National Intellectual Property Law Institute, in Washington D.C. Manufacturers and distributors learned of a variety of civil remedies available to enforce their rights against product counterfeiting. See CK&E’s NIPLI presentation slideshow summary (right click, and choose Save As to download the powerpoint presentation).
  •     CK&E wins injunctions and judgments in major litigation action against more than 40 defendants involved in diverting professional hair care products manufactured and distributed by Joico Laboratories.
  •     Court injunctions against PriceCostco’s wrongful diversion of gray market goods, professional hair care products manufactured and distributed by Joico Laboratories and Sebastian International. PriceCostco violated those injunctions by continuing prohibited activity, and has been held in contempt of court.
  •     $5.5 million jury verdict, including punitive damages against L’Anza International, a major hair care product manufacturer and its president Robert DeLanza, for unfair competition against another manufacturer.
  •     Innovative remedies to enforce trademark rights of a large purveyor of foods, against a restaurant chain using its name. Conkle, Kremer & Engel obtained Court orders that the restaurant’s signs be removed and all revenue of the restaurant should be collected to pay fines and expenses of the enforcement proceedings.

Print Friendly