Wins

GMSR’s client EchoSpan alleged that a competitor willfully and maliciously appropriated multiple trade secrets and sought more than $23 million in damages based on the competitor’s unjust enrichment.  A federal jury unanimously agreed regarding one of the trade secrets and awarded $11.7 million in unjust enrichment damages, plus $14 million in punitive damages.

Nevertheless, the district court granted the defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of damages and slashed the jury’s verdict from $25.7 million to zero.  The district court ruled that the jury’s compensatory damages award was speculative in the absence of expert testimony assigning a specific damages amount to each alleged trade secret and, on that basis, eliminated EchoSpan’s entire recovery.

On appeal, GMSR argued that the district court misapplied the standard for granting judgment as a matter of law.  It further argued that, under the correct standard, the jury had ample evidence to support its damages award without the need for expert testimony apportioning damages among the alleged trade secrets.  The Ninth Circuit agreed, reversed, and directed the district court to fully reinstate the $25.7 million verdict.

To read the Court of Appeals’ decision, click here: EchoSpan, Inc. v. Medallia, Inc., 24-4751, 2025 WL 3046753 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2025).

To read the Daily Journal’s reporting about the Ninth Circuit’s reversal, click HERE (subscription required).