Trade Secret Claim Failed to Show That Secret Aspects of a Design Were Used

Case: Stratienko v. Cordis Corp. No. 04-6349 (6th Cir. 11/18/05)

The One Sentence Summary: In an idea-submission trade secret case involving the alleged theft of a catheter design, summary judgment for the defendant was affirmed because the plaintiff inventor failed to present evidence that the defendant's design incorporated secret and innovative aspects of plaintiff's design.


What They Were Fighting About: Plaintiff Stratienko submitted a catheter design to defendant Cordis under a confidentiality agreement. In-house counsel for Cordis reviewed the design and rejected it. Cordis then began selling a catheter that plaintiff claimed incorporated his design, and plaintiff sued for trade secret misappropriation, breach of the confidentiality agreement and conversion under Tennessee law.

Sixth Circuit Holdings:

• The declarations of defendants' employees, although self-interested, provided sufficient basis for granting summary judgment when there was no reason to doubt their credibility.
• Leaving plaintiff's proposal in an unlocked office did not allow an inference that it was used by other employees of defendant.
• Plaintiff's evidence of access to his design and similarity of the Cordis product was insufficient circumstantial evidence to avoid summary judgment. Plaintiff failed to show that the innovative features of his design were in the Cordis product.
• Tennessee courts would likely hold that circumstantial evidence alone can be used to infer defendant's use of a trade secret because most other courts have so held.
• Plaintiff failed to present sufficient circumstantial evidence of use because he failed to identify the secret features of his design, and to show that those were used by Cordis.
• Tennessee law does not allow a tort of conversion for intangible property such as trade secrets.