Toppan Photomasks, Inc. v. Park

Filing 45

STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND ORDER. The August 30, 2013 hearing is vacated. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 21, 2013. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

DANIELLE L. OCHS, CA Bar No. 178677
[e-mail]
BECKI D. GRAHAM, CA Bar No. 238010
[e-mail]
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone:
415.442.4810
Facsimile:
415.442.4870
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS, INC.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

MARC N. BERNSTEIN, CA Bar No. 145837
[e-mail]
WILL B. FITTON, CA Bar No. 182818
[e-mail]
THE BERNSTEIN LAW GROUP. P.C.
555 Montgomery St., Suite 1650
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
415.765.6633
Facsimile:
415.283.4804
Attorneys for Defendant
KEUN TAEK PARK

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18

TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

19
20
21
22

Case No. 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

vs.
KEUN TAEK PARK, an individual,

Complaint Filed: July 15, 2013
Trial Date:
Judge:
Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

Defendant.

23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2

STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2013, Plaintiff Toppan Photomasks, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “TPI”)

3

filed the above-captioned action against Defendant Keun Taek Park (“Defendant” or “Park”)

4

(collectively, the “Parties”) for alleged violation of the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act based

5

on his alleged acquisition of TPI’s trade secrets, and breach of contract in connection with his

6

alleged breach of multiple confidentiality agreements between the Parties.

7

WHEREAS, on July 19, 2013, the Court issued a temporary restraining order and order to

8

show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue (“OSC”) against Park on the grounds

9

that TPI had demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its claims against

10

Park. The Court further found that Plaintiff has demonstrated that, without an order from this

11

Court, TPI will suffer irreparable harm, that the balance of hardships strongly favors TPI, and that

12

issuance of a temporary restraining order and OSC were in the public interest.

13
14

WHEREAS, the Court set an OSC hearing for August 1, 2013, which the Court
subsequently continued to August 30, 2013, upon stipulation of the Parties.

15

WHEREAS, the Parties now wish to stipulate and agree to the issuance of a preliminary

16

injunction, as set forth herein, in lieu of the August 30, 2013 OSC hearing (and agree to request

17

that the Court so order).

18

NOW THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree as follows:

19

1.

The Parties agree that during the pendency of this action or until the Court otherwise

20

orders, Defendant (and anyone acting on his behalf who receives actual notice of this Stipulation

21

and Proposed Order) is hereby preliminarily restrained and enjoined as follows:

22

a.

Defendant is enjoined from accessing TPI’s computer systems or networks;

23

b.

Defendant is enjoined from possessing, using or disclosing any of TPI’s

24

trade secrets related to its plasma creation and dry etching processes including but not limited to

25

the information contained in the Excel file entitled “work_daily tracking.xlsx” and the Word file

26

entitled “work_daily.doc”, both of which were attached to an email dated November 29, 2012 sent

27

from [e-mail] to [e-mail] with a subject line entitled “files”

28

(hereinafter “Trade Secrets”); and
1
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

c.

Defendant is required to account for (through expedited discovery) and

2

return to TPI any and all of TPI’s property, including its Trade Secrets obtained by Defendant from

3

TPI;

4
5
6

2.

No security is required in this matter. There is no realistic likelihood of harm to

Defendant from enjoining his conduct as set forth above.
3.

The Parties shall abide by the confidentiality agreement and stipulated protective

7

order filed in this case governing the use and disclosure of confidential information in connection

8

with this litigation.

9

4.

The August 30, 2013, OSC hearing set in this matter is vacated.

10
11

DATED: August 21, 2013

12

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.

13
14

By: /s/ Becki D. Graham________________
DANIELLE L. OCHS
BECKI D. GRAHAM
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS, INC.

15
16
17
18

DATED: August 21, 2013

THE BERNSTEIN LAW GROUP, P.C.

19
20
21
22

By: /s/ Marc N. Bernstein
MARC N. BERNSTEIN
WILL B. FITTON
Attorneys for Defendant
KEUN TAEK PARK

23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3

ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE IN FILING
In accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained from Marc N. Bernstein.

4
5

Dated: August 21, 2013

6

/s/ Becki D. Graham
DANIELLE L. OCHS
BECKI D. GRAHAM
Attorneys for Plaintiff

7
8
[PROPOSED] ORDER

9
10
11
12
13
14

SO ORDERED.
August 21
Dated: __________, 2013

___________________________________________
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15733936.3

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No.: 3:13-cv-03323-MMC
STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER