Alfano Law Office, PLLC

Alfano Law Office, PLLC
Phone: (603) 856-8411 • Fax (603) 290-5521
4 Park Street, Concord, NH 03301
  • Home
  • Real Estate Law
    • Road Law
    • Commercial Real Estate Law
    • Tax Abatements
    • Business Law
  • Estate Planning
  • About Us
    • Paul J. Alfano, Attorney
    • John F. Hayes, Attorney
    • Terrie Harman, Attorney
    • David Howard, Attorney
    • Melissa Farr, Attorney
    • Privacy Policy
  • Articles
  • Contact Us
    • Directions
  • Road Law Guide
  • NH Tax Abatement
    • Tax Abatement Team
    • Grounds for Abatement
    • Municipal Application
    • Owners of Properties Outside New Hampshire
    • Transfer Tax Allocation
    • Recent Laws and Rulings
  • Resources and Links
    • Allobar Strategies
    • Calendar and Key Dates
    • Equalization Ratio
    • NAPTA
Home » Blog » GTI Spindle Technology v. Bukowitz

GTI Spindle Technology v. Bukowitz

Summary Judgment Denied in Trade Secrets Dispute

In a November 7, 2022, Order handed down by the Superior Court for the Northern District of Hillsborough (the “Court”), Defendants David Bukowitz, Paul Berberian, and Jose Flores (“Defendants”) failed to persuade the Court that summary judgment was appropriate in an action brought against them for various alleged violations of trade secrets and breach of their employment non-disclosure agreements (“NDAs”).

What started out as a hopeful employee/employer relationship soon turned sour, when Plaintiff GTI Spindle Technology, Inc., (“Plaintiff”) became suspicious of Defendants dealings with its customers and development of products without notifying Plaintiff. Defendants then left Plaintiff’s employment to work for a competing company and began working for several of Plaintiff’s clients. Plaintiff responded by filing an action alleging that Defendants misappropriated its trade secrets and breached their employment nondisclosure agreements (“NDAs”), and Defendants moved for summary judgment on the matter.

The Court began its opinion by explaining New Hampshire’s motion for summary judgment evaluation standards, stating that summary judgement is proper “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits filed, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” RSA 491:8-a, III.

Defendants first argued that Plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to maintain the secrecy of their trade secrets and confidential information, and therefore they committed no breach and are entitled to judgment as a matter of law in accordance with summary judgment standards. Plaintiff argued in response that the adequacy of the measures it took to preserve secrecy is a question of fact, making summary judgment inappropriate at this juncture. The Court pointed to New Hampshire’s Uniform Trade Secret Act (“NHUTSA), which does not specify the protective measures that need to be taken to maintain trade secrets, but simply says the measures must be “reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.” RSA 350-B:1, IV. Additionally, the Court noted that while although the New Hampshire Supreme Court has not specifically addressed this issue, courts in other jurisdictions with similar laws in place have held that whether appropriate measures to maintaining secrecy were taken is a highly fact-specific analysis generally inappropriate for summary judgment. See e.g. Rockwell Graphic Sys., Inc. v. DEV Indus., Inc., 925 F.2d 174, 179 (7th Cir. 1991). The Court found that not only was there a question regarding the reasonableness of the steps taken by Plaintiff, but the parties were also in complete disagreement as to what those steps even were, making summary judgment inappropriate.

Regarding Defendants’ claims that their non-disclosure agreements were unenforceable, the Court took issue with Defendants’ supporting case law (ACAS Acquisitions (Precitech) Inc. v. Hobert, 155 N.H. 381, 389 (2007)), finding that the three-ponged test utilized in ACAS Acquisitions was more appropriate in the evaluation of non-compete agreements, rather than non-disclosure agreements. The Court reasoned, “[n]oncompete agreements may materially limit employees’ ability to work in the same industry, while nondisclosure agreements only prohibit employees from misappropriating employers’ confidential information. It strikes the Court as unreasonable for an employee to claim that not being able to disclose his employer’s confidential information is an unenforceable restriction on employment.” The Court denied Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to this claim as well because it found the NDAs not unreasonable.

You can contact Alfano Law Office by calling (603) 856-8411 or at this link.

Filed Under: General

The above information is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Important Registry Updates
Important Court Updates

Subscribe to the Alfano Law Property Rights Alert

Sign Up Now

For Email Newsletters you can trust.
Allobar Strategies

NH Tax Abatement

  • Road Law Guide
  • NH Tax Abatement
    • Tax Abatement Team
    • Grounds for Abatement
    • Municipal Application
    • Owners of Properties Outside New Hampshire
    • Transfer Tax Allocation
    • Recent Laws and Rulings
  • Resources and Links
    • Allobar Strategies
    • Calendar and Key Dates
    • Equalization Ratio
    • NAPTA

NH Real Estate Law Articles

  • Airbnb
  • Common Neighborly Legal Issues
  • Court Updates
  • Dealing with Neighbors
  • Easements
  • Estate Planning
  • General
  • Historic Designation
  • Legal Documents
  • Legal Terms
  • Legislation
    • Business Law
  • Living Trust
  • New Hampshire Property Tax Alerts
  • Private Road Maintenance
  • Private Roads
  • Property
  • Property Investments
  • Property Rights
  • Property Tax
  • Property Tax Law
  • Quieting Title
  • Real Estate Law
  • Revocable Trust
  • Road Law
  • Tax Abatement
  • Taxes
  • Zoning Boards of Adjustments

Recent Articles

TransFarmations, Inc. v. Town of Amherst

New Hampshire Supreme Court Reverses Planning Board Decision … [Read More...]

Keene Auto Body v. State Farm

ATTENTION INSURANCE COMPANIES! It’s time to look closely at … [Read More...]

The Story of the Hermit and His “Generous” Deed Gift

Have you heard of a famous hermit named Perley E. Swett? He … [Read More...]

Create Your Will and Estate Plan Before It Is Too Late

No one wants to think about something terrible happening to … [Read More...]

Article Archives

  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • October 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2013
  • February 2012
  • December 2011
  • May 2011
  • July 2010
  • December 2005
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Alfano Law Office, PLLC, 4 Park Street, Concord, NH 03301 USA | Phone: (603) 856-8411
Copyright © 2023 · Alfano Law Office, PLLC. All Rights Reserved · Website design by InterActive Synergy, LLC