Deshmukh

Lam Research Corp. v. Deshmukh

Good Law
157 F. App'x 26
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 29, 2005No. 05-35230; D.C. No. CV-04-05435-FDBCalifornia946 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant-Appellant Subhash Deshmukh seeks to vacate a preliminary injunction that enjoins him from working for Applied Materials, his new employer, in certain capacities. Lam Research Corp. (“Lam”), Deshmukh’s former employer, insists that the injunction is necessary to protect it against Deshmukh’s inevitable misappropriation of trade secrets in viola *27 tion of Washington’s Trade Secrets Act. See R.C.W. § 19.108 et seq.

As the procedural history of this case makes clear, Lam’s case turns on an inevitable disclosure theory. In its decision dismissing Lam’s first complaint, the district court observed that Lam “allege[d] no actual misappropriation and no act of threatened misappropriation.” Because the complaint rested “entirely on the ‘inevitable disclosure’ theory,” and because Lam pleaded no facts in support of this theory, the complaint had to be dismissed. Lam then filed an amended complaint in which it alleged facts to support its inevitable disclosure claim. The district court found these allegations sufficient and granted Lam’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

Deshmukh first argues that the district court lacked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.