Dalmatia Import Group Inc. Awarded Damages Under Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)
One year after the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) took effect, fig jam maker Dalmatia Import Group Inc. became the first plaintiff to be awarded damages for federal trade secret misappropriation. The company’s trade secrets suit alleged that its former manufacturer and distributor used its jam recipe to create a competing product that nearly drove Dalmatia out of business.
The DTSA created a federal cause of action for trade secret misappropriation. Prior to the federal law taking effect one year ago, businesses had to rely on a patchwork of state intellectual property laws to protect their trade secrets. The key provision of the DTSA provides that “an owner of a trade secret that is misappropriated may bring a civil action under this subsection if the trade secret is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce.”
The DTSA offers several legal remedies that were not available under state law. Notably, the federal law allows trade secret owners to seek a civil seizure “to prevent the propagation or dissemination of the trade secret.” When “exceptional circumstances” exist that render injunctive relief “inequitable,” courts are also authorized to order the defendant to pay a reasonable royalty for the continued use of the trade secret. Once the court determines that a trade secret has been unlawfully misappropriated, the owner is entitled to compensatory damages, which may include (i) “actual loss of the trade secret”; (ii) “any unjust enrichment”; or (ii) a reasonable royalty for the use. Punitive damages are available when a trade secret is “willfully and maliciously misappropriated,” while attorneys’ fees are available in cases of bad faith.
Dalmatia’s DTSA Suit
In Dalmatia Import Group, Inc. et al. v. FoodMatch, Inc. et al., Dalmatia alleged that FoodMatch, Inc., Lancaster Fine Foods, Inc., and Earth Pride Organics, LLC (Defendants) misappropriated the proprietary recipe and production process for the company’s fig jam. Its complaint included claims for misappropriation of trade secrets, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, conversion, and breach of contract. Dalmatia initially filed suit in a Pennsylvania state court but removed the case to federal court following the enactment of the DTSA.
According to Dalmatia, FoodMatch conspired with Lancaster and Earth Pride to use Dalmatia’s proprietary fruit spread recipes and production processes to launch a copycat line of fruit spreads under FoodMatch’s Divina brand. After Dalmatia terminated its distribution agreement with FoodMatch in 2015, the company hired Lancaster, Dalmatia’s fig spread manufacturer in the United States, to create FoodMatch’s own fig and orange fig spreads. “As Dalmatia’s contract manufacturer for more than seven years, Lancaster had full knowledge of Dalmatia’s proprietary recipes and manufacturing processes – information it was obligated to keep confidential and to use only for Dalmatia’s benefit,” Dalmatia’s complaint alleged. “Lancaster used that knowledge to create fig and orange fig spreads for FoodMatch to sell in competition with Plaintiff’s fig spread products.”
In February, a Pennsylvania jury returned a verdict in favor of Dalmatia for trade secret misappropriation, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, and additional state law violations. The jury awarded $500,000 in damages for misappropriation of trade secrets. Overall, the jury awarded $2.5 million in damages.
On May 10, U.S. District Judge Edward Smith of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered judgment, rejecting the defendants’ argument that Dalmatia failed to prove it incurred damages after DTSA’s effective date. The court also awarded treble damages on the trademark counterfeiting claim, which brings the final award to $5.2 million.
Do you have any questions regarding the DTSA? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Fred Zemel, at 201-806-3364.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Jam Manufacturer Makes DTSA Verdict Stick
Author: Fred D. Zemel
Dalmatia Import Group Inc. Awarded Damages Under Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA)
One year after the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) took effect, fig jam maker Dalmatia Import Group Inc. became the first plaintiff to be awarded damages for federal trade secret misappropriation. The company’s trade secrets suit alleged that its former manufacturer and distributor used its jam recipe to create a competing product that nearly drove Dalmatia out of business.
The DTSA created a federal cause of action for trade secret misappropriation. Prior to the federal law taking effect one year ago, businesses had to rely on a patchwork of state intellectual property laws to protect their trade secrets. The key provision of the DTSA provides that “an owner of a trade secret that is misappropriated may bring a civil action under this subsection if the trade secret is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce.”
The DTSA offers several legal remedies that were not available under state law. Notably, the federal law allows trade secret owners to seek a civil seizure “to prevent the propagation or dissemination of the trade secret.” When “exceptional circumstances” exist that render injunctive relief “inequitable,” courts are also authorized to order the defendant to pay a reasonable royalty for the continued use of the trade secret. Once the court determines that a trade secret has been unlawfully misappropriated, the owner is entitled to compensatory damages, which may include (i) “actual loss of the trade secret”; (ii) “any unjust enrichment”; or (ii) a reasonable royalty for the use. Punitive damages are available when a trade secret is “willfully and maliciously misappropriated,” while attorneys’ fees are available in cases of bad faith.
Dalmatia’s DTSA Suit
In Dalmatia Import Group, Inc. et al. v. FoodMatch, Inc. et al., Dalmatia alleged that FoodMatch, Inc., Lancaster Fine Foods, Inc., and Earth Pride Organics, LLC (Defendants) misappropriated the proprietary recipe and production process for the company’s fig jam. Its complaint included claims for misappropriation of trade secrets, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, conversion, and breach of contract. Dalmatia initially filed suit in a Pennsylvania state court but removed the case to federal court following the enactment of the DTSA.
According to Dalmatia, FoodMatch conspired with Lancaster and Earth Pride to use Dalmatia’s proprietary fruit spread recipes and production processes to launch a copycat line of fruit spreads under FoodMatch’s Divina brand. After Dalmatia terminated its distribution agreement with FoodMatch in 2015, the company hired Lancaster, Dalmatia’s fig spread manufacturer in the United States, to create FoodMatch’s own fig and orange fig spreads. “As Dalmatia’s contract manufacturer for more than seven years, Lancaster had full knowledge of Dalmatia’s proprietary recipes and manufacturing processes – information it was obligated to keep confidential and to use only for Dalmatia’s benefit,” Dalmatia’s complaint alleged. “Lancaster used that knowledge to create fig and orange fig spreads for FoodMatch to sell in competition with Plaintiff’s fig spread products.”
In February, a Pennsylvania jury returned a verdict in favor of Dalmatia for trade secret misappropriation, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, and additional state law violations. The jury awarded $500,000 in damages for misappropriation of trade secrets. Overall, the jury awarded $2.5 million in damages.
On May 10, U.S. District Judge Edward Smith of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered judgment, rejecting the defendants’ argument that Dalmatia failed to prove it incurred damages after DTSA’s effective date. The court also awarded treble damages on the trademark counterfeiting claim, which brings the final award to $5.2 million.
Do you have any questions regarding the DTSA? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Fred Zemel, at 201-806-3364.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
