## Facts

- American Chain & Cable Company, Inc. (American) manufactured and sold abrasive cutting wheels.
- Avery, LeBlanc, and Pane worked for American in its abrasive-cutting-wheel business and learned about the business through their work.
- The employees left American and went to work for a new company, Avery Abrasives, Inc. (Avery), which also manufactured and sold abrasive cutting wheels.
- American sued Avery and the former employees for trade-secret misappropriation and related unfair-competition-type conduct.
- American claimed Avery gained an unfair advantage because the former employees used skills and knowledge learned at American, including manufacturing processes and techniques.
- On the record presented, American’s proof did not establish that the processes and techniques allegedly used at Avery were not generally known in the abrasive-wheel industry.
- American also claimed the defendants misappropriated customers’ identities and customer-related information in order to compete.

## Issues

1. Did American prove that the manufacturing processes and techniques at issue were protectable trade secrets (as opposed to generally known industry knowledge) that the defendants misappropriated?
2. Did American prove that the defendants’ use of customer identities and customer-related information amounted to misappropriation of protectable confidential information?

## Decision

- The Connecticut Supreme Court decided in favor of the defendants.
- The court concluded American failed to prove that the manufacturing processes and techniques the defendants allegedly used were secret rather than generally known within the abrasive-cutting-wheel industry.
- The court also rejected American’s claim based on customers’ identities and customer-related information on the evidence offered.
- The judgment for the defendants was affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- Information is not a trade secret when it is generally known within the relevant industry or can be readily determined by others in that field.
- The plaintiff bears the burden to identify the claimed trade secret and prove it is genuinely secret and was misappropriated.
- Former employees may compete with a prior employer using their general skill, knowledge, and work-acquired abilities, unless they misuse protectable trade secrets or other confidential information.
- Customer identities and customer-related information are not protected as trade secrets merely because employees learned them while working for the plaintiff; protection depends on proof that the information is truly confidential and not generally available in the trade.

## Conclusion

American Chain & Cable Co., Inc. v. Avery holds that a trade-secret plaintiff must prove actual secrecy and misappropriation, not simply that former employees used what they learned on the job to compete; because American did not show its abrasive-wheel methods or customer information were protectable secrets on this record, the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed judgment for the defendants.


American Chain & Cable Co., Inc. v. Avery, 143 U.S.P.Q. 126 (1964)