Aerotek.

BACKGROUND

In recounting the factual and procedural history of this case, we draw on the statement of facts set forth in Aerotek I. The First Trial In November 2007, Aerotek sued the Johnson Group and Ponce based on allegations in the complaint that Ponce unlawfully solicited 15 of Aerotek’s customers.3 Aerotek alleged Ponce’s solicitations violated the nondisclosure agreement he had signed with Aerotek and constituted a misappropriation of Aerotek’s trade secrets under the UTSA. Aerotek’s complaint asserted its customer list constituted a trade secret under the UTSA. The defendants filed an answer denying any wrongdoing and asserting Aerotek’s customer list did not qualify as a trade secret. The matter proceeded to trial on Aerotek’s narrowed claim defendants solicited only five customers. During the first trial, economist Michael Ward testified there was an “infinitesimally small” chance Ponce randomly solicited the companies on which Aerotek focused. In making the calculation, Ward assumed Ponce “did it randomly, that he did

3 Despite the complaint’s focus on only 15 customers, Aerotek’s first settlement demand was a 24-month prohibition on defendants soliciting the…