'May Litigate' Exception in Arb Clause Lets Trade Secrets Suit Move Forward
A federal judge in New Jersey has ruled that a former tech employee accused of stealing trade secrets from his employer cannot force the company into arbitration based on a contract that says the parties "may litigate" certain disputes.
February 07, 2018 at 05:31 PM
3 minute read
U.S. District Judge Susan Wigenton of the District of New Jersey (Courtesy photo)
A federal judge in New Jersey has ruled that a former tech employee accused of stealing trade secrets from a Wall Street trading company cannot force the company into arbitration based on a contract that says the parties “may litigate” certain disputes.
U.S. District Judge Susan Wigenton, sitting in Newark, said that despite policies favoring arbitration, it is “'strictly a matter of contract. If a party has not agreed to arbitration, the courts have no authority to mandate that they do,'” Wigenton said Tuesday in Virtu KCG Holding v. Li, quoting another District of New Jersey ruling from 2017 in Ranieri v. Banco.
The lawsuit stems from a high-frequency trading company, Virtu KCG, a subsidiary, Virtu Americas, and the now-former employee, Min Li. Virtu markets itself as a company providing quick-time advice to clients in various markets.
According to the decision, Virtu Americas, which is based in New York but has offices in New Jersey and other locations in the United States, hired Li as a “quantitative strategist” on Dec. 19, 2013. His job was to develop algorithms and provide clients with predictions on market activity.
He signed an employment agreement with the company on Jan. 15, 2014, which provided that employment disputes were to be subject to alternative dispute resolution where required by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. But the contract, the decision noted, also contained a provision that the parties “may litigate disputes pertaining to the Agreement's restrictive covenants, including those concerning 'Confidentiality' … and 'Access to and Retrieval of KCG Property.'”
In March 2017, the company began investigating the possible thefts of trade secrets, the decision said. In the course of that investigation, the company allegedly discovered that Li had copied other employees' “predictors,” which are mathematical predictions of market fluctuations, and stored them on his own server.
The company fired him on July 5, and later filed a lawsuit against him in U.S. District Court, alleging theft of trade secrets, breach of contract and other related counts.
Li moved to compel arbitration, but Virtu objected.
Wigenton agreed with Virtu.
The contract “specifically creates an exception to the agreement to arbitrate,” Wigenton said. ”Because plaintiffs' claims relate to the alleged misuse of confidential and proprietary information … the parties may continue to litigate their dispute.”
Li's attorney, New York solo Michael Pappas, said he would appeal the ruling, but declined to comment further.
Virtu's attorney, Kevin Walsh of Gibbons in Newark, didn't return a call about the decision.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOn the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
7 minute readConstruction Worker Hit by Falling Concrete Settles Claims for $2.3M
4 minute readEagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
2 minute read$113K Sanction Award to Law Firm at Stake: NJ Supreme Court Will Consider 'Unsettled Law' Frivolous Litigation Question
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250