ALI-ABA Topical Courses Trade Secrets From the ... - ALI CLE

70point, the Court opined that the focus of Air Products was onthe employee’s “engineering background and the specialknowledge he possessed relating to a method of oil recoverynot yet developed by the competitor company,” despite thecircumstance that the employee, like Finney, was involved insales. Id. at 1327.In Iron Age Corp. v. Dvorak, both the trial court andthe Superior Court refused to enjoin a former district salesmanager of a footwear manufacturer from using or contactingany of the company’s current or prospective customers. 880A.2d 567. The employee, Dvorak, had left the company, IronAge, to work for a competitor. Id. at 661. The SuperiorCourt affirmed the denial of the requested injunction becausethe trial court reasonably concluded that the information atissue—Iron Age’s customer lists—was “available tocompetitors through legitimate means and cannot be declareda trade secret.” Id. at 664. The Court went on to distinguishAir Products on the ground that:In Air Products, the employee possessedintimate knowledge of his former employer’sresearch and development data for on-site gasdelivery technologies. The employee’s newemployer was attempting to develop similartechnologies, and the employee was hired toprovide research and development data obtainedthrough his previous employment. In the instantcase, [Dvorak] possesses no such technicalknowledge, and [his] new employer already hasan extensive customer base. [Dvorak] was not23