Trade Secrets Designation After Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech, Inc.: What do trade secret misappropriation plaintiffs really have to show?

Eric Tate and Zoe Escarcega wrote an article for IP Litigator entitled "Trade Secrets Designation After Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech, Inc.: What do trade secret misappropriation plaintiffs really have to show?" which discusses the evolving requirements for trade secret designation in litigation following the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech, Inc. The article analyzes how the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) does not incorporate California’s “reasonable particularity” standard for pre-discovery identification, and discusses how different federal and state courts—including those in California, Massachusetts, Illinois, Texas, and recent Fourth and Tenth Circuit decisions—approach the specificity required in trade secret descriptions. The authors highlight that while California and Massachusetts codify early disclosure requirements, most jurisdictions rely on judicial discretion and fact-intensive inquiries to determine adequacy. The article emphasizes the importance for plaintiffs to clearly articulate what makes their claimed information distinct, confidential, and valuable at every stage of litigation.

Read the full article (subscription required).