Apple Inc. don beg one California appeal panel make e uphold the summary judgment win wey the company get on Thursday, for one case wey one environmental consulting company, Envirodigm Inc., carry come, dey claim say the tech giant steal its chemical formula for iPhone design.
Michael von Loewenfeldt, partner for Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP wey dey represent Apple, talk say Envirodigm no even outline the formula well well inside the trade secret documents wey e submit.
“First off, if you no disclose am inside your trade secret disclosure, as precedent hold, you lose the claim. Na dat happen here, plain and simple,” na wetin von Loewenfeldt talk.
The matter be say, the coloured aluminum body for one of Apple 2015 iPhone model use Envirodigm proprietary anodization formula, and dat one violate one non-disclosure agreement wey dem strike after Apple meet with the consulting company owner for design help.
But von Loewenfeldt talk say Envirodigm failure to state the chemical ratio wey e claim Apple use inside im own disclosure dey fatal to im case. E talk am during oral argument. E add say California case law support say undisclosed or vaguely described trade secrets no fit form the basis for misappropriation claims.
For im own side, Benjamin Siminou, partner for Singleton Schreiber LLP wey dey represent Envirodigm, talk say the company still get viable breach of contract claim wey stand on im own, separate from the trade secret misappropriation claim. E talk say Envirodigm for fit pursue just the breach claim based on NDA wey protect confidential information, and the trial court find say that one get triable issues of fact.
“Apple don concede say e use that two-to-one ratio of organic to inorganic acid to anodize the aluminum iPhone body,” Siminou talk. “Dem start to experiment with am within two months of the August 2013 meeting, and dem don dey use am to manufacture iPhones from 2015 reach basically ever since.”
