![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Summary judgment is appropriate only if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Plaintiff bottled natural spring water and sold the water in 1.5-liter clear plastic bottles. Plaintiff discussed with defendants the possibility of plaintiff supplying bottles to the defendants. The negotiations stopped, and defendants chose another company. The bottles were virtually identical to those used by plaintiff. Plaintiff sued defendants for, inter alia, unjust enrichment, trade dress infringement, and trade secret misappropriation. Defendants were granted summary judgment. Plaintiff appealed.
Did the trial court properly grant summary judgment in favor of defendants?
No, except with respect to the plaintiff’s trade secret claim.
The appellate court found, inter alia, that the record was insufficient to support the lower court's finding that there was no genuine factual dispute as to whether the bottle used had become generic. The defendants did not establish that the statute of frauds barred plaintiff's contract claim. However, because the shape of plaintiff's bottle was not a trade secret and plaintiff offered no evidence of wrongful acquisition or use or disclosure of the remainder of its information, the district court properly dismissed plaintiff's trade secret claim.