Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Babcock Power Inc. v. Kapsalis

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville

March 6, 2019

BABCOCK POWER, INC., et al. PLAINTIFFS
v.
STEPHEN T. KAPSALIS, et al. DEFENDANTS

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Charles R. Simpson III, Senior Judge United States District Court.

         This matter is before the court on motion of the plaintiffs, Babcock Power, Inc. and Vogt Power International, Inc. (collectively “Babcock”), to alter and amend the Permanent Injunction entered by the court on December 17, 2018 (DN 611, filed in redacted form). Babcock has also filed motions for leave to seal its motion to alter and amend (DN 612) and to seal its reply (DN 624).

         First, we take up Babcock's filing of redacted briefs and its motions for leave to file unredacted versions under seal. The motions to seal contain no particularity or justification whatsoever for filing redacted briefs in the public record. On that basis alone, the motions for leave to seal can and will be denied.

         Further, Babcock has quoted and then redacted passages from two documents. The court has found that both of these purported “CONFIDENTIAL” or “FOR ATTORNEY'S EYES ONLY” documents were previously ordered unsealed by the magistrate judge. See DNs 254-2; 386; 326-23; 387, so there is simply no argument to be made for sealing Babcock's briefs on the basis that they contain quotes from these documents. Babcock's motions for leave to seal will be denied.

         Next we address the plaintiff's motion to alter and amend the Permanent Injunction (DN 611).

         The court ordered that the defendant, Stephen T. Kapsalis, “is PERMANENTLY RESTRAINED from using or disclosing Babcock Power, Inc. and Vogt Power, Inc.'s trade secret information consisting of its strategic plans and schematic and mechanical drawings.” DN 608, PageID #41049. Babcock has noted, and the court agrees, that Kapsalis should also be required to return all copies of trade secret information consisting of schematic and mechanical drawings and strategic plans that are in Kapsalis' possession, custody, and control.[1] The injunction will be modified to reflect this addition.

         The court also stated in the injunction that it “does not apply to categories of information which were not found by the jury to constitute misappropriated trade secrets, as the confidentiality clause of the employment agreement in issue expired by its own terms on April 11, 2018, the five-year anniversary of Kapsalis' termination of his employment with the plaintiffs.” Id.

         Babcock seeks to amend the injunction to (1) permanently restrain Kapsalis from “using disclosing, misusing, or further converting the Plaintiffs' confidential, proprietary or trade secret information, including but not limited to, strategic plans, schematics and mechanical drawings, customer/contact lists, calculation sheets, and CAD standards;” (2) require Kapsalis to return all copies of Babcock's confidential, proprietary and trade secret information relating to “schematics, diagrams, and strategic planning documents, contact lists, calculation sheets, and CAD Standards”[2]that are in Kapsalis' possession, custody, and control; and (3) identify under penalty of perjury “all individuals and organizations” to whom Kapsalis “disclosed, forwarded, communicated in any manner, directly or indirectly, Babcock's confidential, proprietary, or trade secret materials and information…” DN 611-1.

         In its opening brief, Babcock focused on what it referred to as “the employment contract” between the parties entitled “Employee Obligations to Babcock Power and Former Employers, ” a document which does not have an intrinsic expiration date. While this document was admitted in the case, it is not the document which was the subject of the claimed breach. Indeed, the offer letter from Babcock to Kapsalis refers to them as separate documents to be executed by Kapsalis. DN 254-2, p. 3, PageID #28480.

         The jury was instructed to state whether it

Believe[s] from the evidence that it is more likely true than not true that the defendant, Stephen T. Kapsalis, breached the Employee Non-Disclosure, Non-Solicitation, Non-Competition and Assignment Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Babcock Power, Inc. and Vogt Power International, Inc.

DN 604, Page 2, PageID #41038. The instructions explained that to find a breach of contract, it must have been proven that Kapsalis breached the confidentiality portion of the Agreement. The confidentiality clause of the Agreement states:

1. Confidentiality. During the term of my employment with the Company and for a period of five (5) years thereafter, I will not divulge to anyone or use for my own benefit or for the benefit of any third party any confidential information of the Company, its customers or suppliers, or any information received in confidence from third parties by the Company (including without limitation, all technical designs and specifications, trade secrets, manufacturing techniques, financial data and marketing strategies)(collectively, the “Confidential Information”) learned by me as a result of any task assigned me or work performed by me for or on behalf of the Company unless (a) any such Confidential Information becomes generally available to the public other than as a result of disclosure by me or (b) I am requested or required (by oral question, interrogatories, requests for information or documents, subpoena, civil investigative demand or similar process) to disclose any such Confidential Information, in which case I will (i) promptly notify the Company of such request or requirement, ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.