Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Spear Mktg. v. BancorpSouth Bank

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

June 30, 2015, Filed

No. 14-10753

Opinion

 [*589]  [***1309]   WIENER, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiff-Appellant Spear Marketing, Inc. ("SMI") brought various Texas state law claims against Defendants-Appellees BancorpSouth Bank ("BCS") and ARGO Data Resource Corp. ("ARGO") (collectively, "Defendants") in Texas state court. SMI's claims related to Defendants' alleged theft of trade secrets in connection with a software program developed and sold by SMI. Defendants removed the case to federal court on the basis of complete preemption by the Copyright Act.1 The district court denied SMI's motion to remand and, after discovery, granted [**2]  Defendants' motion for summary judgment on the merits of the claims. SMI appeals both decisions. We affirm.

I. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

SMI is a small, family-run business that produces one product for the banking industry, a computer program called VaultWorks. VaultWorks helps banks manage their cash inventories so that each of their branches has the optimum supply of cash available on site. The program enables  [*590]  banks to identify surplus cash in vaults and ATMs, track daily cash inventory, and eliminate unnecessary cash deliveries to branch and ATM locations.

Although VaultWorks is a software program, none of SMI's customers has access to the software itself. Instead, "SMI's customers can only view the specific user interface screens and reports they are given access to via the internet."2 Bank branches enter their daily cash information into VaultWorks using these interface screens, and VaultWorks's output data is then displayed to those branches. SMI acknowledges that none of its customers was ever provided with the source code, object code, or software for VaultWorks.

BCS was one of SMI's largest customers. BCS and SMI first [**3]  entered into a one-year agreement for the use of VaultWorks in May  [***1310]  2002. The parties extended the agreement several times, the last extension occurring in March 2010 for a term of two years.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

791 F.3d 586 *; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11266 **; 115 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1307 ***

SPEAR MARKETING, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellant v. BANCORPSOUTH BANK; ARGO DATA RESOURCE CORPORATION, Defendants - Appellees

Subsequent History: Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by, in part, Motion denied by, in part, Without prejudice, Judgment entered by Spear Mktg. v. BancorpSouth Bank, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5078 (N.D. Tex., Jan. 14, 2016)

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Spear Mktg., Inc. v. BancorpSouth Bank, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79319 (N.D. Tex., June 11, 2014)Spear Mktg. v. BancorpSouth Bank, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70034 (N.D. Tex., May 16, 2013)

CORE TERMS

trade secret, preempted, district court, preemption, subject matter, software, removal, misappropriation, tangible, original petition, summary judgment, Copyright Act, medium, federal copyright, conversion, interface, copying, remaining claim, state law claim, Teller, rights, cases, confidential information, conversion claim, federal claim, allegations, customers, validate, theft

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, Clearly Erroneous Review, De Novo Review, Preliminary Considerations, Jurisdiction, General Overview, Removal, Postremoval Remands, Jurisdictional Defects, Copyright Law, Constitutional Copyright Protections, Federal & State Law Interrelationships, Federal Preemption, Specific Cases Removed, Federal Questions, Elements for Removal, Removability, Subject Matter, Statutory Copyright & Fixation, Protected Subject Matter, Scope of Copyright Protection, Torts, Business Torts, Unfair Business Practices, Civil Infringement Actions, Elements, Summary Judgment Review, Standards of Review, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, Appropriateness, Judgments, Evidentiary Considerations, Burdens of Proof, Nonmovant Persuasion & Proof, Elements, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review