## Facts

- Tempo Instrument, Inc. manufactured electronic time delay relays and owned an assignment of U.S. Patent No. 3,082,329 (issued Mar. 19, 1963) covering an electronic “Gate circuit.”
- Herbert L. Fischer worked for Tempo as an engineer from April 1959 to May 1960 and later formed Logitek, Inc., a competing time delay relay manufacturer, in September 1961.
- Tempo sued Logitek and Fischer for (1) patent infringement and (2) unfair competition based on alleged misuse of confidential information and trade secrets learned during Fischer’s employment.
- Tempo sought interim relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 to enjoin alleged infringement and alleged trade-secret use pending final resolution, along with an accounting, treble damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees.

## Issues

1. Whether a preliminary injunction should issue for alleged infringement of a recently issued, unadjudicated patent without evidence of public or industry acquiescence in its validity.
2. Whether Tempo made a sufficient preliminary showing that defendants were using protectable trade secrets (including asserted manufacturing, purchasing, and testing techniques) to justify injunctive relief before trial.

## Decision

- The court denied Tempo’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
- On the patent claim, the court held that preliminary injunctive relief was unavailable because the patent’s validity was not shown to be “clear and beyond question,” and issuance of the patent alone was insufficient.
- On the trade-secret/unfair-competition claim, the court held that the submissions did not justify the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction on the existing record.

## Legal Principles

- In patent cases, a preliminary injunction generally will not issue unless the patent’s validity is clear and beyond question; the mere existence of an issued patent does not satisfy this burden.
- A movant seeking preliminary injunctive relief bears a heavy burden to justify immediate restraints before a full merits determination.
- For trade-secret-based injunctive relief, the claimant must make a strong preliminary showing that the information is a defined, protectable trade secret (not merely general skill or know-how) and that it is likely being misused in a manner warranting immediate restraint.

## Conclusion

The court refused to halt defendants’ business pending trial because Tempo did not establish the heightened prerequisites for preliminary relief on either theory: the patent’s validity had not been confirmed or accepted in the industry, and the alleged trade-secret misconduct was not sufficiently demonstrated on the early record.


Tempo Instrument, Inc. v. Logitek, Inc., 229 F. Supp. 1 (E.D.N.Y. 1964)