Facebook Settles Theft of Trade Secret Lawsuit on the Eve of Mark Zuckerberg’s Congressional Testimony!

10 April 2018 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

Law360.com reported that “Facebook told a California federal judge Monday it had reached a mid-trial settlement of BladeRoom Group Ltd.’s $365 million data center trade secrets suit, prompting co-defendant Emerson Electric Co. to unsuccessfully seek a mistrial on grounds that Facebook’s ongoing Cambridge Analytica scandal will bias jurors against it.”  The April 9, 2018 article entitled “Facebook Settles $365M Trade Secrets Case Mid-Trial” included District Judge Edward J. Davila’s ruling that the trial against Emerson would continue even the lawyers argued that there was “nothing more politically charged in this country”:

Emerson argued that a mistrial or continuation is warranted on the remaining claims against it, saying that because of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook would remain an “elephant in the room” that jurors wouldn’t be able to forget.

Here’s the basis of the lawsuit:

BladeRoom is seeking $365 million in claimed damages, according to court documents, including $18.4 million for allegedly lost profits on the building contract, $88.4 million for future profits BladeRoom said it couldn’t generate as a result of the trade secret theft, and $188.4 million in unjust enrichment that BladeRoom said Emerson received from being able to later sell off part of its business.

Stay tuned to see what happens as the trial proceeds.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services