Leavitt Great West Insurance Services, LLC v. Krysta Theriault and Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Montana denies Defendants Krysta Theriault and Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.’s motion to dismiss Leavitt Great West Insurance Services, LLC’s trade-secret claims. The Court holds that the complaint adequately alleges protectable trade-secret information, reasonable measures to maintain secrecy, sufficient particularity, and misappropriation under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The action also includes claims for breach of contract and tortious interference with contractual rights.

Holdings

1. Leavitt adequately identified information capable of constituting trade secrets, including its book of business, client files, account information, customer purchasing histories, preferences, marketing leads, renewal data, quote statuses, and related account information. The allegations concerned data about client relationships rather than the relationships themselves.
2. Leavitt adequately pleaded that the identified information derived independent economic value from not being generally known or readily ascertainable and that Leavitt took reasonable measures to maintain its secrecy.
3. The public availability of individual components of an alleged trade-secret compilation did not compel dismissal because a compilation may remain protectable when its combination provides a competitive advantage.
4. The complaint described the alleged trade secrets with sufficient particularity to distinguish them from general knowledge and to give defendants notice of the boundaries of the alleged theft.
5. The complaint plausibly alleged that Theriault used and disclosed Leavitt's trade secrets without consent and in violation of her duty to maintain secrecy and limit use.
6. The complaint plausibly alleged that Alliant acquired Leavitt's trade secrets while knowing or having reason to know that Theriault acquired or disclosed them in breach of her duty of secrecy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Leavitt adequately pleaded that the client-related information and book-of-business data qualified as information capable of protection as trade secrets under the DTSA and MUTSA.
2. Whether Leavitt adequately pleaded independent economic value, secrecy, and reasonable measures to maintain secrecy.
3. Whether Leavitt described the alleged trade secrets with sufficient particularity at the pleading stage.
4. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged misappropriation by Theriault through use or disclosure.
5. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged that Alliant acquired the trade secrets knowing or having reason to know that they were acquired through improper means.
6. Whether Counts III and IV should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6).

Disposition

other