$7.9 million for trade secrets theft

Former Nephron employees stole data for competitors

Special To The Chronicle
Posted 5/27/21

Nephron Pharmaceuticals has won a 3-year trade secrets theft battle.

The case’s lead attorney, Nikole Setzler Mergo, said the settlement sends a strong trade secrets theft message.

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Subscribe to continue reading. Already a subscriber? Sign in

Get 50% of all subscriptions for a limited time. Subscribe today.

You can cancel anytime.
 

Please log in to continue

Log in

$7.9 million for trade secrets theft

Former Nephron employees stole data for competitors

Posted

Nephron Pharmaceuticals has won a 3-year trade secrets theft battle.

The case’s lead attorney, Nikole Setzler Mergo, said the settlement sends a strong trade secrets theft message.

Arkansas-based US Compounding and its parent Adamis Pharmaceuticals agreed to pay the West Columbia-pharmaceutical maker $7.9 million.

They also are permanently barred from using any of the confidential customer and pricing information 2 former Nephron employees provided Nephron’s competitors.

“This represents a win for the good guys – and serves as a reminder that there is a right way and wrong way to do business,” said Nephron CEO Lou Kennedy.

“People should conduct themselves with integrity. There is no substitute for hard work.”

The settlement was reached last month as the case was about to go to trial.

It involves permanent injunctions in Florida, New Jersey and South Carolina.

According to court documents, a former employee downloaded data including customer contacts, purchasing history and pricing details before leaving Nephron to work for US Compounding.

“It was like giving the playbook to a competitor,” Kennedy said.

Mergo said trade secrets cases are complicated because you have to demonstrate that:

• The information was a trade secret, a high standard.

• Nephron used reasonable methods to protect those trade secrets.

The ruling reimbursed Nephron $123,000 in legal fees and imposed fines.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here