Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Womble Trade Secrets Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Intellectual Property Law

: Womble Trade Secrets Blog

Credit Suisse Accuses Former Vice President, Departed For Nine Years, Of Trade Secret Theft and Attempting to Patent Certain Proprietary Methodologies

ADVERTISEMENTS

Attached above you'll find a link to the recently filed complaint in federal court in Manhattan that alleges a former VP of Credit Suisse, who was severed in 2000 and received a substantial separation package, has misappropriated certain trade secrets related to an equities valuation model that Credit Suisse says it developed with the former employees assistance. The methodology went by the name Value Dynamics Framework.

The complaint goes on to allege that by happenstance in late 2008, Credit Suisse learned that their former VP, David Trainer, was seeking a patent for an equities valuation model that tracked many of the same capacities fo the Credit Suisse valuation model. Some letter writing ensued, and Trainer's patent attorney returned to Credit Suisse a compact disc that allegedly contained a significant amount of Credit Suisse data on it relating to Trainer's former work there. The complaint acknowledges that Trainer's counsel objected to any characterization of the data and information Trainer retained as "confidential or proprietary."

The complaint also notes the perverse irony of the situation alleged - that the former VP (Trainer) is seeking a patent to obtain rights that could possibly used to deprive Credit Suisse of their interest in continuing to market and utilize their Value Dynamics Framework methodologies (it's now been renamed) without paying Trainer a licensing fee.

This is a very interesting case for two reasons: (a) it involves an employee defection that is almost a decade old; and (b) it involves a former employee allegedly trying to patent a procedure that his former employer allegedly introduced him to.

We'll keep an eye on this one for you.

Full post as published by Womble Trade Secrets Blog on December 22, 2009 (boomark / email).