Page 35 - CLT061520

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS JUNE 15, 2020 ¦ 35

rendered judgment in favor of defendants, find- petitioner’s third-degree sexual assault con-
ing that plaintiff utterly failed to prove any of viction was a crime of violence and warranted
its claims by a preponderance of the evidence. his removal from the United States. Petition-
Notably, although plaintiff alleged damages as er appealed, and the court denied the petition
to each of the seven counts in its complaint, it after agreeing that that crime is in fact a crime
failed to prove any damages or ascertainable of violence. The court explained that in deter-
loss proximately caused by defendants’ alleged mining whether a state conviction constitutes
conduct. This deficiency, standing alone, was an aggravated felony crime of violence, the
sufficient to support judgment in favor of defen- court uses a categorial approach where it con-
dants. This was not the sole deficiency, however. siders the offense in how the law defines it, not
in its complaint, plaintiff alleged that Jacobs how it was committed in the actual charged
downloaded trade secrets from plaintiff ’s com- incident. The court reasoned that all the com-
puter system onto an external hard drive. But ponents in the state statute have been held to
plaintiff failed to establish either that the down- constitute a crime of violence, and rejected
loaded information actually included any trade the petitioner’s argument that serious physical
secrets or that the downloaded information was injury result. Therefore, the court denied the
ever accessed or used by Jacobs subsequent to petition for review.
the download. Plaintiff also failed to show that
the information was misappropriated by Jacobs,
given that, at all relevant times, he had autho- U.S. DISTRICT COURT
rized access to plaintiff ’s computer through his
employment. Finally, there was no evidence that
the other defendants knew what was on the hard
drive or had any reason to believe that such in- CONSUMER PROTECTION

formation was wrongfully obtained or actually Court Finds Lanham Act and CUTPA
constituted a trade secret. CUTPA makes no Claims Survive Summary Judgment
reference to vendor lists within its definition of
trade secrets. Further, plaintiff conceded that
none of the vendors later engaged by defen- CASE: Lemberg Law, LLC v. Egeneration Marketing, Inc
dants ever subsequently refused to do business COURT: U.S. District Court for Connecticut
with plaintiff. To the contrary, plaintiff ’s prin- DOC. NO.: 3:18-cv-570 (CSH)
cipal fired a majority of plaintiff ’s vendors after COURT OPINION BY: Haight
Jacobs left because he no longer trusted them. DATE: May 29, 2020 • PAGES: 59
Finally, there was no evidence that plaintiff ever
treated its client list as secret. Defendants own and operate a website which
specializes in matching consumers with lawyers
who focus on filing Fair Debt Collection Prac-
tices Act debt collections claims. Plaintiff, a law
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS firm who represents clients in FDCPA claims,
filed the present action against defendant al-
leging unfair business practices, and deceiv-
ing consumers into believing defendants are a
CRIMINAL APPEALS law practice. The claims alleged sound in false

Court Denied Petitioner’s Request To advertising (Lanham Act) and Connecticut
Unfair Trade Practices Act violations. Defen-
Review Decision Of Immigration Judge dants moved to dismiss, arguing that the plain
And Found Third Degree Sexual Assault language of the website makes it clear that it is
Is A Crime Of Violence not a law practice, and that they are not sub-
ject to attorney advertising rules. Defendants
also moved to preclude certain attorneys from
CASE: Kondjoua v. Barr representing plaintiffs, as they may be called as
COURT: U.S. Court of Appeals for Second Circuit witnesses. The court found that the pleading al-
DOC. NO.: 16-296 leged sufficient facts to plausibly demonstrate
COURT OPINION BY: falsity or a likelihood to deceive on both the
DATE: May 28, 2020 • PAGES: 19
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Cameroon. Lanham Act and CUTPA claims to survive mo-
The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed a tion to dismiss. The court directed the plaintiff
decision of an immigration judge finding that law firm to find replacement counsel.

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune