`
`MAY 05 2019
`
`NARTMD J.D.
`
`DOCKET NO.: XO7-HHD—CV-14-6049281-S
`
`DUR-A—FLEX, INC.
`
`v.
`
`SAMET DY
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`E
`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
`
`HARTFORD
`
`MAY 6, 2019
`
`Articulation of Memorandum of Decision
`
`In its decision on the first phase of this trial the court found that the plaintiff
`
`Dur-a-Flex maintained certain things as trade secrets. The decision did not find that the
`
`manufacturing process standard procedures were trade secrets. This articulation will
`
`explain why.
`
`The evidence showed Dur-a-Flex followed standing operating procedures when
`
`mixing chemicals to create the products at issue. The purpose of following the
`
`procedures was to ensure continuity between batches. The standing operating
`
`procedures governed the length of mixing time, the choice of blades, the choice whether
`
`to run the machine continuously and how and when chemicals would be added.
`
`There was testimony that Dur-a—Flex experimented with different approaches to
`
`these procedures before settling on standard operating procedures. Nonetheless, the
`
`court is convinced based upon the nature of the experiments performed, the number of
`
`them, and their relative simplicity that the mixing procedures at issue were readily
`
`ascertainable by skilled industry operatives. The experiments involved simple
`
`MM 10 the. %QYCH(’J of Tammi D‘ZLDiOAS
`
`on Show. AHKOS‘HOO
`
`1
`
`
`
`variations of the procedures readily imagined by any skilled person trying to create a
`
`stable mixture. There was no great length of time spanned in the development of the
`
`standard operating procedures, no extensive or sophisticated chemical research or
`
`industry benchmarking and no large number of trials. With inconsiderable effort a Dur-
`
`a—Flex rival could have devised these procedures without help.
`
`Under General Statutes § 35—51 (d) a thing can’t be a trade secret if it is readily
`
`ascertainable. Therefore, the court has concluded the Dur—a-Flex standard operating
`
`procedures aren’t trade secrets.
`
`BY
`
`E
`
`URT
`
`Moukawsher, J.
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
