Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 2078

FURTHER TENTATIVE JURY INSTRUCTION [re #2010 TENTATIVE JURY INSTRUCTIONS ON TRADE SECRET MISAPPROPRIATION]. DEADLINES: NOON ON 11/3 to file critique and NOON ON 11/7 to file counter critique. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 10/24/2017. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2017)

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 2078 Filed 10/24/17 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
WAYMO LLC,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC,
OTTOMOTTO LLC, and
OTTO TRUCKING LLC,

18

FURTHER TENTATIVE
JURY INSTRUCTION

Defendants.
/

16
17

No. C 17-00939 WHA

Below please find another tentative jury instruction that may assist our jury. By NOON
ON NOVEMBER 3,

counsel shall please critique (up to six pages total) and by NOON ON

19

NOVEMBER 7, counsel may submit counter critiques (up to four pages total). Please follow the

20

same guidelines as to authorities set forth at Docket No. 2010. (The earlier critiques and

21

counter critiques are still due on their original schedule.)

22
23

An engineer will, through trial and error and application of his or

24

her professional skills, sharpen his or her skills and accumulate insights

25

that supplement the skill and know-how otherwise known in his or her

26

field. When the engineer moves to his or her next job with a new

27

employer, the engineer cannot be expected to delete such on-the-job

28

practical lessons from his or her memory and will remain free under

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 2078 Filed 10/24/17 Page 2 of 2

1

the law to use those practical lessons to the same extent as skill and

2

know-how otherwise known in the field. The engineer cannot, however,

3

go further in his new job with a new employer and misappropriate specific

4

engineering solutions developed by his prior employer, even those

5

developed by him or her, where such specific solutions qualify as a trade

6

secret. It is for the jury to decide in each case whether the engineer has

7

misappropriated a trade secret versus merely used practical lessons from

8

his prior employment.

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13
14

Dated: October 24, 2017.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2