Balchem Corporation et al v. Edwards et al

Filing 199

ORDER denying 123 Letter Motion for Conference re: 123 LETTER MOTION for Conference for Leave to Amend Complaint addressed to Judge Kenneth M. Karas from Michael R. Gottfried dated January 25, 2019., 135 LETTER MOTION to Co mpel Balchem Corporation et al to to Respond to Revised Interrogatories addressed to Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy from Larry R. Laycock dated September 4, 2019., 163 MOTION for C.J. Veverka to Withdraw as Attorney ., [ 164] MOTION for Alexis K. Juergens to Withdraw as Attorney ., 174 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Redacted)., 184 MOTION for Leave to File Under Seal ., 193 LETTER MOTION for Leave to File Response to Balch em's Summary Judgment Sur-reply addressed to Judge Kenneth M. Karas from C.J. Veverka dated 4/3/2020. ; terminating 135 Letter Motion to Compel; terminating 163 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. ; terminating 164 Motion to With draw as Attorney. ; granting in part and denying in part 174 Motion for Summary Judgment; terminating 184 Letter Motion for Leave to File Document; terminating 193 Letter Motion for Leave to File DocumentFor the reasons explained on the re cord at Oral Argument on June 2, 2021, Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgment, (Dkt. No. 174), is granted insofar as it relates to the following claims: (1) Plaintiffs' claim that Defendants misappropriated Plaintiffs' trade secret of one of their customers, as discussed at Oral Argument; and (2) Plaintiffs' claim that Defendants violated the Lanham Act by advertising a particular aspect of their products, as discussed at Oral Argument. Otherwise, Defendants' Motion is denied, provided that Plaintiffs submit a translation of Exhibit 70 by June 16, 2021. Plaintiffs may file this exhibit under seal. For the reasons explained on the record at Oral Argument on June 2, 2021, Plaintiffs' Motion To Amend, (Dkt. No. 123), is denied insofar as Plaintiffs seek to base their claim on Edwards's knowledge of information that was public or derivative of public information. Otherwise, Plaintiffs' Motion is granted. Plaintiffs must submit their Second Amended Complaint by June 16, 2021. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motions. (Dkt. Nos. 123, 135, 163, 164, 174, 184, 193.) (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 6/3/2021) (rro)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
BALCHEM CORPORATION, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
-v-

No. 18-CV-2677 (KMK)
ORDER

DANIEL TODD EDWARDS, et al.,
Defendants.
KENNETH M. KARAS, United States District Judge:
For the reasons explained on the record at Oral Argument on June 2, 2021, Defendants’
Motion For Summary Judgment, (Dkt. No. 174), is granted insofar as it relates to the following
claims: (1) Plaintiffs’ claim that Defendants misappropriated Plaintiffs’ trade secret of one of
their customers, as discussed at Oral Argument; and (2) Plaintiffs’ claim that Defendants violated
the Lanham Act by advertising a particular aspect of their products, as discussed at Oral
Argument. Otherwise, Defendants’ Motion is denied, provided that Plaintiffs submit a
translation of Exhibit 70 by June 16, 2021. Plaintiffs may file this exhibit under seal.
For the reasons explained on the record at Oral Argument on June 2, 2021, Plaintiffs’
Motion To Amend, (Dkt. No. 123), is denied insofar as Plaintiffs seek to base their claim on
Edwards’s knowledge of information that was public or derivative of public information.
Otherwise, Plaintiffs’ Motion is granted. Plaintiffs must submit their Second Amended
Complaint by June 16, 2021.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motions. (Dkt. Nos.
123, 135, 163, 164, 174, 184, 193.)
SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 3, 2021
White Plains, New York

KENNETH M. KARAS
United States District Judge

2