Appellate Expert Who Argued Similar Out-Of-State Non-Compete Case Available to Comment on Microsoft v. Lee & Google.LOS ANGELES -- The issues in Microsoft v. Lee & Google are similar to those faced by Robin Meadow, a partner in the leading appellate boutique Greines Martin Stein & Richland LLP, when he represented Advanced Bionics bionics /bi·on·ics/ (bi-on´iks) scientific study of functions, characteristics, and phenomena observed in the living world, and the application of knowledge gained therefrom to nonliving systems. bi·on·ics (b Corporation before the California Supreme Court in a lawsuit involving multi-jurisdiction litigation over the enforcement of a non-compete agreement -- Advanced Bionics Corporation v. Medtronic, Inc. Meadow is available to comment on the jurisdictional, strategic and other issues associated with the Microsoft case as both sides wait for the judge's ruling on extending the TRO TRO - Tamil Rehabilitation Organization TRO - Tax Refund Offset TRO - Technical Reviewing Office TRO - Temporary Restraining Order TRO - Test Requirement Outline TRO - Therapeutic Recreation Ontario TRO - Thomas Register Online TRO - Toro Peak, California (earthquake reporting station) TRO - training and readiness oversight (US DoD) TRO - Transportation Officer TRO - Triennial Review Order (FCC) TRO - Trip Reduction Ordinance until the trial, which is set for January. The TRO hearing is set for September 6. "Time is on Microsoft's side," notes Meadow. "Even with an expedited trial, getting an injunction can mean winning the case. Search technology is such a fast-moving area that even a several-month delay could seriously compromise Google's ability to take advantage of Dr. Lee's expertise." "Google is trying to litigate the issues in California, where the law is very much more favorable to it," Meadow adds. "But with Microsoft on a fast track to judgment in Washington, Google is up against a serious problem because of a key difference in the two states' laws. A Washington judgment will be immediately binding on California courts, but the opposite isn't true: Even if Google were to get a judgment today in California, it would have to be affirmed on appeal in order to be binding in Washington." Many companies seek to bind their employees to broad non-compete agreements for a variety of reasons often having to do with protecting trade secrets. While many states will enforce these agreements, including Washington, California law is highly restrictive. California courts will generally not enforce non-competes unless they are narrowly drawn and specifically tailored to legally permissible goals. Litigation outcomes in this area are therefore highly dependent on the choice of forum. You can reach Robin Meadow directly at (310) 859-7811, or call Anne Sage at (310) 396-2400 to arrange an interview. |
|
||||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion