The key to maintaining a trade secret is keeping the information confidential.
So what happens when documents containing trade secrets are inadvertently uploaded to a court’s e-filing system? A New York business recently learned the hard way, nearly losing its valuable trade secret protection.
As detailed in court documents, Plaintiff HMS Holdings Corp. (HMS) filed suit against several former employees to enforce a non-competition agreement. At the outset of the litigation, the parties consented to the e-filing and service of legal papers through the New York State Courts Electronic Filing (NYSCEF) system. In support of its motion seeking an injunction, HMS inadvertently uploaded an unredacted affidavit containing more than 1,500 pages of exhibits, including many of the alleged trade secrets that HMS was seeking to protect through its lawsuit.
The e-filing remained online for one month and was not discovered by HMS until the defendants brought it to the attention of the court. They argued that the inadvertent, public disclosure automatically terminated the trade secret status of the information contained in the affidavit, citing authorities holding that “[w]here an alleged trade secret is not secured, left accessible [or] inadvertently disclosed, … the lack of secrecy vitiates trade secret status.”
The NY Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court of New York refused to adopt the defendants’ “sweeping contention” that the inadvertent e-filing of documents containing trade secrets automatically terminates any possible trade secret protection. Rather, the court looked to the six factors set forth in the Restatement of Torts to determine whether “the alleged trade secrets have become generally known or readily ascertainable through proper means.” The factors are:
The means by which access to the e-filing was available; the class of persons who have (or had) access to the information;
How long the e-filing remained accessible;
The extent to which the e-filing actually was viewed and/or downloaded;
The extent to which the material was indexed and/or made searchable on the Internet; and
Whether the material remains cached or otherwise available on the Internet.
In cases where the alleged trade secrets have been accessed and downloaded by third parties, the Court found it is also proper to consider factors such as: the extent of any re-dissemination; the likelihood of any future re-dissemination; the extent to which recipients already knew the secrets; and the extent to which such recipients are obliged to maintain the secrecy of the information.
In Conclusion
Apply this analysis in HMS Holdings Corp. v. Arendt, the Supreme Court of New York concluded that the record was insufficient to find that the HMS information annexed to the affidavit had become generally known or readily ascertainable through proper means. It noted that the only individuals who downloaded the documents were former HMS employees who had access to the same trade secrets while employed at the company.
In the end, HMS was lucky to escape with its trade secrets intact. For New York and New Jersey businesses, the case highlights the importance of safeguarding confidential information during business litigation. When using electronic court filing systems, it is essential to verify that trade secrets are protected. In the event of an inadvertent disclosure, it is imperative to address the issue quickly.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
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.
E-Filing and Trade Secrets: A Dangerous Combination?
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
The key to maintaining a trade secret is keeping the information confidential.
So what happens when documents containing trade secrets are inadvertently uploaded to a court’s e-filing system? A New York business recently learned the hard way, nearly losing its valuable trade secret protection.
As detailed in court documents, Plaintiff HMS Holdings Corp. (HMS) filed suit against several former employees to enforce a non-competition agreement. At the outset of the litigation, the parties consented to the e-filing and service of legal papers through the New York State Courts Electronic Filing (NYSCEF) system. In support of its motion seeking an injunction, HMS inadvertently uploaded an unredacted affidavit containing more than 1,500 pages of exhibits, including many of the alleged trade secrets that HMS was seeking to protect through its lawsuit.
The e-filing remained online for one month and was not discovered by HMS until the defendants brought it to the attention of the court. They argued that the inadvertent, public disclosure automatically terminated the trade secret status of the information contained in the affidavit, citing authorities holding that “[w]here an alleged trade secret is not secured, left accessible [or] inadvertently disclosed, … the lack of secrecy vitiates trade secret status.”
The NY Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court of New York refused to adopt the defendants’ “sweeping contention” that the inadvertent e-filing of documents containing trade secrets automatically terminates any possible trade secret protection. Rather, the court looked to the six factors set forth in the Restatement of Torts to determine whether “the alleged trade secrets have become generally known or readily ascertainable through proper means.” The factors are:
The means by which access to the e-filing was available; the class of persons who have (or had) access to the information;
How long the e-filing remained accessible;
The extent to which the e-filing actually was viewed and/or downloaded;
The extent to which the material was indexed and/or made searchable on the Internet; and
Whether the material remains cached or otherwise available on the Internet.
In cases where the alleged trade secrets have been accessed and downloaded by third parties, the Court found it is also proper to consider factors such as: the extent of any re-dissemination; the likelihood of any future re-dissemination; the extent to which recipients already knew the secrets; and the extent to which such recipients are obliged to maintain the secrecy of the information.
In Conclusion
Apply this analysis in HMS Holdings Corp. v. Arendt, the Supreme Court of New York concluded that the record was insufficient to find that the HMS information annexed to the affidavit had become generally known or readily ascertainable through proper means. It noted that the only individuals who downloaded the documents were former HMS employees who had access to the same trade secrets while employed at the company.
In the end, HMS was lucky to escape with its trade secrets intact. For New York and New Jersey businesses, the case highlights the importance of safeguarding confidential information during business litigation. When using electronic court filing systems, it is essential to verify that trade secrets are protected. In the event of an inadvertent disclosure, it is imperative to address the issue quickly.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
