Watch our North America Trade Secrets Practice discusses an often over looked procedural loophole in the federal removal statute called “snap removal”—removing a case based on diversity jurisdiction before any in-state defendant has been served—that has recently been expanded by federal courts by allowing both in-state and out-of-state defendants to remove on this basis.
In this chat, Bradford Newman, Allen Al-Haj, and Mark Ratway also highlight why defendants typically prefer defending trade secret and restrictive covenant litigation in federal court and why quick action by trade secret litigants on both sides of the courtroom is required to protect a parties’ desired forum.
Bradford Newman is a litigation partner resident in Baker McKenzie's Palo Alto Office and Chair of the North America Trade Secrets Practice. According to Chambers USA, Brad is a "recognized authority on trade secrets cases" who "is valued for his tenacious, intelligent and thoughtful approach to trade secrets matters." Bradford regularly serves as lead trial counsel in cases with potential eight and nine-figure liability, and has successfully litigated (both prosecuting and defending) a broad spectrum of trade secrets cases in state and federal courts throughout the country. He routinely advises and represents the world's leading technology, banking, professional service, manufacturing and commerce companies in connection with their most significant data protection and trade secret matters.
Allen is a member of the Firm's North America Litigation and Government Enforcement Practice Group in Dallas. Before joining Baker McKenzie, Allen gained valuable insight into federal motion practice and procedure as a law clerk for the Hon. Jane J. Boyle of the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Prior to joining Baker McKenzie's Intellectual Property and Technology Practice, Mark served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Rebecca Rutherford in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
