Disputes

Proactive Protection

Insights

About

Contact

Disputes

Case Validation
AI intelligence to assess case strength and likely outcome.

Damages prediction
Quantify potential damages with evidence backed estimates.

Litigation Funding
Non recourse capital to pursue strong trade secret claims.

Enforce your rights
When theft occurs, Tangibly delivers the proof, funding, and expertise to recover what is yours.

Insights

Reasonable Measures Podcast
Expert conversations on trade secrets, IP strategy, and the disputes shaping modern innovation.

Customer Stories
How companies use Tangibly to protect critical know how and pursue enforcement.

Sign up for The Tangibly Brief
Expert insights on trade secret protection and enforcement, delivered to your inbox.

About

Company
About Tangibly, our leadership, and career opportunities.

Newsroom
Press, announcements, and company updates.

Sim IP x Tangibly Litigation Financing Partnership
Learn more about how Tangibly and SIM IP are making trade secret enforcement more accessible for innovators.

Injunction Granted in Shipping Technology Misappropriation Case

by Chris Buntel | Jun 23, 2023 | Blog, Case Law & Industry Trends

My, that was fast!

The speed at which former employees set up an operational competing business was found to be suggestive of trade secret misappropriation in Palltronics v. PALIoT Solutions (DTSA lawsuit in Michigan).

A shipping pallet company declared bankruptcy, and sold its assets (including trade secrets) for USD $5 million. Former employees quickly set up a competing company. The purchaser sued them for trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract (confidentiality).

Trade secrets include a special polymer blend, assembly method for the pallet, and a tracking system to follow movement of the pallet.

The employee NDA contracts provided that the employees would not disclose or use the employer’s trade secrets. The court also found that the competing company was set up and operational so quickly that it suggested theft of trade secrets.

The court granted a preliminary injunction, and the case is ongoing. It helped the plaintiff that the trade secrets were specifically identified, and that employment contracts included confidentiality provisions.

 


Source:

https://www.law360.com/articles/1580681

Last Updated:May, 2026

Table Of Content

Sign up for The Tangibly Brief

Expert insights on trade secret protection and enforcement, delivered to your inbox.