• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Daily Blog, Featured

J. Crew Sues Design Director over Trade Secrets

Submitted by Alexis Patterson on January 31, 2013 – 7:59 AM66846 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2013%2F01%2F31%2Fj-crew-sues-design-director-over-trade-secrets%2FJ.+Crew+Sues+Design+Director+over+Trade+Secrets2013-01-31+12%3A59%3A54Alexis+Pattersonhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6684

 Apparently, not everyone can keep a secret. Just ask J. Crew Group Inc. (“J. Crew”). On Thursday, J. Crew sued one of its former employees, a top designer, because it believed the designer took trade secrets and a multitude of other confidential business information to use at his new job with his new company. J. Crew alleges misappropriation, breach of duty of confidentiality, and unfair competition.

The designer’s name is Dwight Fenton and he served as a senior design director at J. Crew in its men’s design division. On January 15, 2013, he resigned from his position at J. Crew to join Bonobos, which is a “rival men’s apparel company with a ‘similar aesthetic to J. Crew.’” Approximately a week after his announcement, J. Crew performed an “inventory and review of Fenton’s last 30 days of emails from his work computer.”

Through this inventory and review, J. Crew discovered that Fenton sent many “highly confidential and proprietary J. Crew documents to his personal email address,” which is a violation of company policy.

In his position at J. Crew, Fenton had access to extremely valuable proprietary business information. Due to the confidential nature of the information, Fenton agreed to use the information for his job duties, and to “keep it confidential in the event he left the company.” J. Crew alleges that Fenton did not adhere to latter part of the agreement because he forwarded emails containing confidential information two days before he left the company.

In all, Fenton sent himself “product design specifications and measurements, J. Crew’s 2013 production development calendar; contact information for J. Crew’s key manufacturing resources; its men’s design year-end financials, men’s design budgets and men’s presentation samples budgets; lists of third-party collaborating brands; and design inspirations.” J. Crew is concerned that Fenton will use the information with Bonobos to compete unfairly with J. Crew.

The scorned specialty retailer seeks injunctive relief to safeguard it from Fenton’s commercial piracy and compensatory and punitive damages for about $650,000 with a temporary restraining order. J. Crew believes that it is only a matter of time, if it has not been done, until Fenton uses J. Crew’s trade secrets to benefit Bonobos. The company asserts that it met the standard for a preliminary injunctive and that it has established that Fenton violated both J. Crew’s confidentiality policies and his “common law obligations under New York Law by misappropriating the confidential and proprietary information.”

Additionally, J. Crew argues that if it is not granted a preliminary injunction, it will suffer irreparable harm because Bonobos will be allowed to mimic J. Crew’s products in less and time and for less money and “replicate its manufacturing efficiencies, costs, and processes.”

What are your thoughts?

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Alexis Patterson

Alexis Patterson is a 2L at the American University Washington College of Law and the 2012-2013 Vice President of the Intellectual Property Law Society. She has an interest in intellectual property law, especially as it relates to trademarks, trade secrets, and copyrights. Alexis volunteered for the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property and is a blogger for the IP Brief. She also serves as a team director for the Moot Court Honor Society Executive Board. Alexis received her B.A. in Government and Politics from St. John’s University. She is from Miami, FL.

Alexis Patterson has written 8 posts for the IPB.

66846 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2013%2F01%2F31%2Fj-crew-sues-design-director-over-trade-secrets%2FJ.+Crew+Sues+Design+Director+over+Trade+Secrets2013-01-31+12%3A59%3A54Alexis+Pattersonhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6684 »

  • Novella says:
    February 12, 2013 at 12:51 PM

    I am extremely impressed with your writing skills and also with the layout

    on your blog. Is this a paid theme or did you customize

    it yourself? Either way keep up the excellent quality writing,

    it is rare to see a nice blog like this one these days.

    Reply to this comment »
  • Search Engine Optimization says:
    February 14, 2013 at 12:40 PM

    Wow, fantastic weblog structure! How lengthy have you ever been running a
    blog for? you make blogging look easy. The whole look of your website is
    great, as neatly as the content material!

    Reply to this comment »
  • search engine optimization says:
    February 14, 2013 at 3:32 PM

    Thank you for sharing your info. I truly appreciate your efforts and I
    will be waiting for your next post thanks once again.

    Reply to this comment »
  • yahoo.com says:
    February 15, 2013 at 4:44 PM

    Nice post. I used to be checking constantly this blog and I am impressed!
    Very helpful info particularly the ultimate section :) I maintain such info much.
    I was seeking this particular info for a long time. Thank you and best of luck.

    Reply to this comment »
  • Michelle says:
    March 11, 2013 at 12:49 AM

    He is an idiot, anyone who works in design or in today's business world knows that your e- mail is monitored, he really should know better, as for measurements and such , he should know it by heart, no need to copy anything down.

    Reply to this comment »
  • mens watch brands says:
    May 19, 2013 at 3:26 AM

    This piece of writing will assist the internet users
    for creating new blog or even a blog from start to end.

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

3D Printing and Intellectual Property: Copyright

3D Printing and Intellectual Property: Copyright

3D printing is the hot new topic in the tech world and with it come some possible issues related to safeguarding intellectual property. This two part post evaluates the possible issues that may arise due to 3D printing and why there isn’t any cause for alarm, yet.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Shortly after the oral arguments between Monsanto and Bowman, WCL hosted both parties for a post argument discussion. Recently the Supreme Court ruled on the case, requiring annual purchases of Monsanto’s soybeans.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?

Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?

Following the explosions on April 15, “Boston Strong” emerged as a viral hashtag on Twitter, a rallying cry at public events, and a logo on all kinds of apparels. It does not take too long for business opportunists to take advantage of this national tragedy.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Big-Four Tobacco Companies’ Fight Against Plain-Packaging Legislation Kung Fu Panda: Not Dreamt Up by DreamWorks? The Quest For Inner Peace Gets A Little More Complicated. Can Anyone Own Yoga? Prison Toothbrush Design is Functional In re EMC – the Federal Circuit Limits Joinder for Pre-AIA Cases Amicus Brief for Those Who Love to P2P Creator of Iconic Guevara Image Leads Copyright Rebellion Terminating Music Copyright Licensing Agreements: Claim Viability and Industry Effects Unauthorized Stock Photo Use More Likely to Get Infringers in Hot Water Than Music or Video Downloading UFC Plans Suit Against Illegal Stream Viewers Stand up for your Rights: Family Settles Feud over Publicity Rights in Bob Marley. Fake Coachella Merchandise Banned at the Festival
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • 3D Printing and Intellectual Property: Copyright
  • Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?
  • Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business
  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License