## Facts

- Pyro Spectaculars entities (PSI) operated a fireworks display business whose sales depended on long-developed customer relationships and proprietary customer information.
- PSI compiled detailed “booking forms” for customers, including contact information, prior spending, line-item budgets and cost breakdowns, specific products used for shows, and lists of pyrotechnic operators who worked particular clients.
- PSI treated the booking forms as confidential, limited access to employees with business need, and required key employees (including Steven Souza) to sign nondisclosure agreements.
- Souza worked as a commissioned sales/account executive serving PSI customers.
- Before leaving PSI for a direct competitor, Souza copied booking-form information and made it available to the competitor.
- In the litigation, Souza acknowledged taking and sharing the information, but argued the material was not a trade secret because it could be obtained from customers and public records.

## Issues

1. Whether PSI’s booking forms and customer-related information qualified as trade secrets under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA).
2. Whether Souza’s copying and disclosure to a competitor constituted misappropriation and supported injunctive relief based on threatened continued use.
3. Whether PSI satisfied the preliminary injunction factors (likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of equities, public interest).

## Decision

- The court granted PSI’s motion for a preliminary injunction in substantial part.
- The court found PSI was likely to succeed on its CUTSA trade secret misappropriation claim and related claims, given the nature of the information and Souza’s admissions.
- The court concluded PSI faced likely irreparable harm from loss of customer relationships, goodwill, and competitive position if misuse continued.
- The court held the balance of equities favored PSI because the order primarily restrained use of information Souza had no right to possess.
- The court found the public interest favored enforcing confidentiality obligations and protecting trade secrets to support fair competition.
- The injunction restricted Souza (and those acting in active concert with him) from using or disclosing PSI’s confidential booking-form/customer information and limited certain competitive conduct involving specified PSI customers for a defined period.

## Legal Principles

- Under CUTSA, information is a trade secret if it has independent economic value from not being generally known or readily ascertainable by proper means and is subject to reasonable secrecy measures.
- Customer information may be a trade secret when it reflects substantial investment and includes detailed, non-public operational and purchasing data rather than merely public identifiers.
- Reasonable secrecy measures include confidentiality treatment, access limits based on business need, and nondisclosure agreements with employees handling the information.
- For preliminary injunctive relief, the moving party must show likelihood of success, likely irreparable harm absent relief, equities favoring relief, and that relief serves the public interest.
- An admitted taking and sharing of confidential business information with a competitor can support a finding of misappropriation and a substantial threat of continued misuse warranting injunctive restraints.

## Conclusion

The court issued a preliminary injunction because PSI showed its detailed booking-form customer data was a protectable trade secret, Souza admitted copying and providing it to a competitor, and the ongoing risk of competitive harm justified immediate restraints on use and disclosure pending final resolution.


Pyro Spectaculars N., Inc. v. Souza, 861 F. Supp. 2d 1079 (E.D. Cal. 2012)