Dalmatia Import Group Inc. Awarded Damages Under Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)
One year after the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) took effect, fig jam maker Dalmatia Import Group Inc. became the first plaintiff to be awarded damages for federal trade secret misappropriation. The company’s trade secrets suit alleged that its former manufacturer and distributor used its jam recipe to create a competing product that nearly drove Dalmatia out of business.
The DTSA created a federal cause of action for trade secret misappropriation. Prior to the federal law taking effect one year ago, businesses had to rely on a patchwork of state intellectual property laws to protect their trade secrets. The key provision of the DTSA provides that “an owner of a trade secret that is misappropriated may bring a civil action under this subsection if the trade secret is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce.”
The DTSA offers several legal remedies that were not available under state law. Notably, the federal law allows trade secret owners to seek a civil seizure “to prevent the propagation or dissemination of the trade secret.” When “exceptional circumstances” exist that render injunctive relief “inequitable,” courts are also authorized to order the defendant to pay a reasonable royalty for the continued use of the trade secret. Once the court determines that a trade secret has been unlawfully misappropriated, the owner is entitled to compensatory damages, which may include (i) “actual loss of the trade secret”; (ii) “any unjust enrichment”; or (ii) a reasonable royalty for the use. Punitive damages are available when a trade secret is “willfully and maliciously misappropriated,” while attorneys’ fees are available in cases of bad faith.
Dalmatia’s DTSA Suit
In Dalmatia Import Group, Inc. et al. v. FoodMatch, Inc. et al., Dalmatia alleged that FoodMatch, Inc., Lancaster Fine Foods, Inc., and Earth Pride Organics, LLC (Defendants) misappropriated the proprietary recipe and production process for the company’s fig jam. Its complaint included claims for misappropriation of trade secrets, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, conversion, and breach of contract. Dalmatia initially filed suit in a Pennsylvania state court but removed the case to federal court following the enactment of the DTSA.
According to Dalmatia, FoodMatch conspired with Lancaster and Earth Pride to use Dalmatia’s proprietary fruit spread recipes and production processes to launch a copycat line of fruit spreads under FoodMatch’s Divina brand. After Dalmatia terminated its distribution agreement with FoodMatch in 2015, the company hired Lancaster, Dalmatia’s fig spread manufacturer in the United States, to create FoodMatch’s own fig and orange fig spreads. “As Dalmatia’s contract manufacturer for more than seven years, Lancaster had full knowledge of Dalmatia’s proprietary recipes and manufacturing processes – information it was obligated to keep confidential and to use only for Dalmatia’s benefit,” Dalmatia’s complaint alleged. “Lancaster used that knowledge to create fig and orange fig spreads for FoodMatch to sell in competition with Plaintiff’s fig spread products.”
In February, a Pennsylvania jury returned a verdict in favor of Dalmatia for trade secret misappropriation, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, and additional state law violations. The jury awarded $500,000 in damages for misappropriation of trade secrets. Overall, the jury awarded $2.5 million in damages.
On May 10, U.S. District Judge Edward Smith of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered judgment, rejecting the defendants’ argument that Dalmatia failed to prove it incurred damages after DTSA’s effective date. The court also awarded treble damages on the trademark counterfeiting claim, which brings the final award to $5.2 million.
Do you have any questions regarding the DTSA? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Fred Zemel, at 201-806-3364.
IP Infringement: What Steps Can You Take If You're Affected?
IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Public Allegations, Unfinished Investigation: What New Jersey Businesses Should Do Next
When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
BESS Interconnection: Managing Grid, Cost, and Schedule Risk
For battery energy storage system (BESS) developers, securing equipment and site control is only part of the development equation. A project must also connect to the electric grid, and increasingly, BESS interconnection is one of the biggest sources of schedule, cost, and contractual risk. Key Takeaways This article is Part 3 of our Battery Storage […]
Navigating Director and Officer Liability in Times of Financial Distress
Director and officer liability increases sharply when a company is in financial distress. Decisions that would draw little attention in a healthy business can later be challenged by creditors, shareholders, bankruptcy trustees, and regulators as breaches of fiduciary duty, fraudulent transfers, or oversight failures. Understanding where that exposure comes from, and how to manage it, […]
Before You Buy: Managing Real Estate and Permitting Risk for BESS Projects in New York and New Jersey
For developers pursuing battery energy storage system (BESS) projects, finding the right property is only the beginning. BESS site selection is as much a legal and transactional exercise as a real estate decision, with risk analysis central to the project’s ultimate success. Key Takeaways The core questions for BESS site selection in New York and […]
What Business Owners Get Wrong Before Meeting a Litigation Attorney
What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court.
Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal
circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
