Earlier this year, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in Citcon USA, LLC v. RiverPay Inc., No. 20-16929, 2022 WL 287563 (9th Cir. Jan 31, 2022), affirming a district court's denial of an injunction following a finding of trade secret misappropriation. While the opinion is designated as unpublished — and therefore not precedential — the panel's reasoning sheds light on an important issue in trade secrets remedies.

Intellectual property practitioners are no doubt familiar with the Supreme Court's watershed decision in eBay v. MercExchange, 547 U.S. 388 (2006). That decision overturned a line of Federal Circuit authority holding that permanent injunctions should issue as a matter of course in the presence of patent infringement. While acknowledging that patents grant the right to exclude others from practicing the patented invention, the Supreme Court held that a patentee nonetheless must satisfy the traditional four-factor equitable test for injunctive relief, including a showing of irreparable harm. Similarly, in Winter v. Natural Resource Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008), the Supreme Court instructed that plaintiffs seeking preliminary injunctive relief must establish a likelihood of irreparable injury.