MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Charles Ramsey Company, Inc. (“Charles Ramsey” or, simply, “Ramsey”) and Richard Trout (together, “Plaintiffs”) have sued defendants Fabtech-NY LLC (“Fabtech”), Vincent J. Hart, Jeremiah K. Hart (together, the “Harts”), John and Jane Does 1-10, and John Doe Corporation. Dkt. No. 36 (“Amended Complaint”). In essence, this case concerns allegations by Charles Ramsey and owner Trout that the Harts, longstanding Ramsey employees, conspired with Fabtech to embezzle money from Ramsey, steal its trade secrets, and destroy its business. See Am. Compl. Plaintiffs bring six claims under New York State tort law and allege violations of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”), 18 U.S.C. §1836, et seq. Id. Fabtech and the Harts have separately moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and, against Trout, under FRCP 12(b)(1) for lack of standing. Dkt. Nos. 26 (“Fabtech MTD”); 31 (“Hart MTD”); 33 (“Fabtech Letter” clarifying the status of their MTD arguments). Plaintiffs oppose these motions. Dkt. Nos. 39 (“Opposition to Hart MTD”); 40 (“Opposition to Fabtech MTD”). In turn, Fabtech and the Harts have filed replies. Dkt. Nos. 41 (“Fabtech Reply”); 42 (“Hart Reply”). For the following reasons the Court grants in part and denies in part the motions to dismiss. II. BACKGROUND A. Factual Background At this stage, “[t]he Court draws all facts, which are assumed to be true, from the Complaint.” Maddison v. Comfort Sys. USA (Syracuse), Inc., No. 17-CV-359, 2019 WL 4805328, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2019) (Kahn, J.) (citing Bryant v. N.Y. State Educ. Dep’t, 692 F.3d 202, 210 (2d Cir. 2012)). Additionally, “[f]or purposes of a motion to dismiss,…a complaint…include[s] any written instrument attached to it as an exhibit or any statements or documents incorporated in it by reference…and documents that the plaintiffs either possessed or knew about and upon which they relied in bringing the suit.” Sprole v. Underwood, No. 18-CV-1185, 2019 WL 4736241, at *3 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2019) (Kahn, J.) (citing Rothman v. Gregor, 220 F.3d 81, 88-89 (2d Cir. 2000)). 1. The Business and the Purchase Charles Ramsey was founded in the Bronx, New York, in 1895. Am. Compl. 19. The company manufactured specialized hardware and components for pianos, which, until 2017, it supplied to piano manufacturers such as Steinway and Schaff. Id.
17, 68, 158. Much later, in the 2010s, Ramsey diversified its business by beginning to polish “hose and cable reels” for a company called Hannay Reels, which supplied “the firefighting and oil and gas industries.” Id.
