Preview
SUSAN K. HATMAKER 172543
ROBERT W. BRANCH 154963 E-FILED
DANIELLE N. KJAR 291481 1/15/2019 11:46 AM
HATMAKER LAW GROUP FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
A Professional Corporation By: M. Sanchez, Deputy
7522 N. Colonial Avenue, Ste. 105
Fresno, California 93711
Telephone: (559) 374-0077
Facsimile: (559) 374-0078
Attomeys for Plaintiff
OLAM AMERICAS, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF FRESNO
* * OK
10
11 OLAM AMERICAS, INC., Case No. 17CECG04157
12 Plaintiff,
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN
13 vs. SUPPORT OF RENEWED
APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF
14 WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON; and DOES 1 DEFAULT JUDGMENT FOR
through 10, inclusive, PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND
15 AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES BY
Defendants. COURT [CCP§ 585]
16
Complaint Filed: December 5, 2017
17 Trial Date: None Set
18
19
20)
21 Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, Inc., (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “OLAM”) hereby
22 requests the court take judicial notice of the following documents and/or facts, pursuant to
23} Evidence Code sections 452, subdivisions c and d, and section 453, in support of its application
24) for entry of default judgment and award of attomey fees by the court:
25) Ml
26) Ml
27 Ml
Hatmaker Law Group
7522N.CoLom
28) Ml
Fatsno,CA $3)
1
Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Renewed A pplication for Entry of Default J udgment for Permanent Injunction
and Award of Attorney Fees by Court [CCP § 585]
1 Complaint filed on December 5, 2017, initiating the above-captioned action
“Action”), a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Complaint is appropriate as a record of the
Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to Evidence Code
section 452, subdivision (d).
2 Preliminary Injunction entered in this Action on February 28, 2018, a true and
correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference.
Judicial notice of said Preliminary Injunction is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of
the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452,
10 subdivision (d).
11 3 Entry of Default against Defendant WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON in this Action
12 on August 3, 2018, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C and
13 incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Entry of Default is appropriate as a
14 record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to
15 Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d).
16 4 Declaration of Jon Thomas in Support of Plaintiff's Request for Default Judgment
17 by Court [CCP § 585] and Request for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, a true and correct copy of
18 which is attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of
19 said declaration, but not the truth of the contents therein which is offered in the form of evidence,
20) is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this
21 case, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d).
22 5. Petition for Workplace Violence Restraining Orders filed by Olam Americas, Inc.
23} on March 7, 2018, as Fresno County Superior Court Case No. 18CECG00765, a true and correct
24) copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial
25) notice of said Petition is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California
26) pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d).
27 6 Petition for Workplace Violence Restraining Orders filed by Olam Americas, Inc.
Hatmaker Law Group
7522N.CoLom
28) on March 9, 2018, as Fresno County Superior Court Case No. 18CECG00817, a true and correct
Faesno,CA g373
2
Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Renewed A pplication for Entry of Default J udgment for Permanent Injunction
and Award of Attorney Fees by Court [CCP § 585]
copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial
notice of said Petition is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California
pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d).
7 Request for Dismissal of Complaint as against DOES 1 through 50 only, filed on
September 17, 2018, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit G and
incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Dismissal is appropriate as a record
of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to Evidence
Code section 452, subdivision (d).
Date: January 15, 2019 HATMAKER LAW GROUP
A Professional Corporation
10
11
By: /s/ Robert W. Branch
12 ROBERT W. BRANCH
Attomeys for Plaintiff
13 OLAM AMERICAS, INC
14
15
16
17
18
19
20)
21
22
23}
24)
25)
26)
27
Hatmaker Law Group
7522N.CoLom
28)
Faesno,CA g373
3
Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Renewed A pplication for Entry of Default J udgment for Permanent Injunction
and Award of Attorney Fees by Court [CCP § 585]
EXHIBIT “A”
SUSAN K. HATMAKER 172543 E-FILED
BRADLEY J.LEVANG 226922 12/5/2017 8:00 AM
DANIELLE N. KJAR 291481 FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
HATMAKER LAW GROUP By: L Peterson, Deputy
7522 N. Colonial Avenue, Suite 105
Fresno, California 93711
Telephone: (559) 374-0077
Facsimile: (559) 374-0078
Attomeys for Plaintiff:
OLAM AMERICAS, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF FRESNO
10 * *
11 OLAM AMERICAS, INC., a Delaware Case No. 17CECG04157
corporation,
12
13 Plaintiff,
COMPLAINT FOR:
14 vs.
1) Declaratory and Injunctive Relief;
15 WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON, an individual; 2) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, in Violation of California Civil
16 Code §§ 3426, et seq.;
Defendants. 3) Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Duty
17 of Loyalty;
18 4) Breach of C ontract;
5) Conversion; and
19 6) Violation of Penal C ode §502
20)
21
22
23}
24)
25)
26)
Hatmaker Law Group
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
Suite 105
Fresno, CA 93711 28)
1
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, INC. (“OLAM” or “Plaintiff’) complains and alleges
against Defendant WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON (“ROBINSON” or “Defendant”), an individual,
and DOES 1 through 50, as follows:
PARTIES
1 Plaintiff OLAM is a company that sources, process, and distributes agricultural
commodities.
2 Defendant is a former employee of OLAM Americas, Inc. (“OLAM”).
3 At all times herein relevant, and on information and belief and thereon alleged,
ROBINSON and DOES 1 through 50, and each of them, were the agents, partners,
10 representatives, and co-conspirators of one other and all acts or omissions alleged herein were
11 duly committed with the ratification, knowledge, permission, encouragement, authorization and
12 consent of each other.
13 4 The true names and capacities of DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, are unknown to
14 Plaintiff, and Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend his Complaint to allege such names and
15 capacities as soon as they are ascertained.
16 5. Defendant OLAM and DOES 1 through 50 will hereinafter collectively be
17 referred to as “Defendants.”
18 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
19 6 This Court has subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case because Plaintiff is
20) informed and believes that the monetary damages and restitution sought herein for
21 ROBINSON’s conduct exceeds the minimal jurisdictional limits of the Superior Court.
22 7 Venue is proper in this district pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure
23} Sections 395(a) in that in that liability arose in Fresno, California because at least some of the
24) transactions that are the subject matter of this Complaint occurred therein and/or ROBINSON is
25) found therein.
26) 8 Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, INC. (“OLAM”) is, and at all times herein
Hatmaker Law Group mentioned was, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) Delaware, and transacts business in the state of California, including Fresno County.
2
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
9 On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON is, and at all times
relevant was, an individual domiciled in the state of California, including Fresno County.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
10. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has improperly
removed and otherwise misappropriated intangible property and trade secrets belonging to
OLAM.
11. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has threatened to
decrypt and publicly release usernames and passwords for OLA M’s computer system.
12. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has harmed and will
10 continue to harm OLAM, in particular, its computer systems, and its ongoing business
11 operations.
12 13. This complaint seeks an injunction and damages against ROBINSON for the
13 above alleged conduct, as well as the other conduct alleged herein.
14 14. On or about July 3, 2017, ROBINSON was employed by OLAM and as an IT
15 Systems and Voice Administrator.
16 15. The job duties for an IT Systems and Voice Administrator includes, but not is
17 limited to, the management of servers and active directory operations in a distributed
18 environment, and management of post branch exchange (PBX) systems. The role requires the
19 ability to configure and manage physical and virtual servers, storage, phone services, and data
20) center implementation tasks as assigned by the manager of the systems team.
21 16. On or about November 28, 2017, ROBINSON was terminated from his
22 employment with OLAM.
23} 17. Later that same day, Jon Thomas, a supervisor in OLAM’s IT Department began
24) receiving text messages that OLAM’s computer domain had been improperly compromised, an
25) encrypted list of usemames and passwords was compromised, and that it was presently being
26) decrypted and would subsequently be publicly released. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true
Hatmaker Law Group and correct copy of the texts received by Thomas.
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) Ill
3
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
18. On information and belief and thereon alleged, the above-referenced text
messages were sent from ROBINSON to Thomas.
19. In order for ROBINSON to carry out the duties and responsibilities of an IT
Systems and Voice Administrator, OLAM entrusted to him highly confidential and proprietary
information and trade secrets, including but not limited to software, data, and other technical
information; business methods; product information, including, but not limited to, data; corporate
identities; business records; employee lists; business procedures; information technologies; cost,
pricing, margin data and other financial information; customer lists; contact names and related
information; and login and password information to access the computer network, servers,
10 computer systems, and telephone systems (collectively "Confidential Information”).
11 20. All of the above-referenced Confidential Information was developed by OLAM at
12 substantial effort and expense and portions of which were provided to ROBINSON during the
13 course of his employment with OLAM, and which was Confidential Information, proprietary
14 information, and not generally known and/or accessible to the public or third parties.
15 21. In connection with ROBINSON’s employment with OLAM, ROBINSON entered
16 into a Confidentiality Agreement with OLAM. Attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is a tue and
17 correct copy of the signed Confidentiality A greement.
18 22. The above-referenced Confidentiality Agreement defines “Confidential
19 Information,” in part, as data, corporate identities, business records, employee lists, business
20) procedures, and information technologies.
21 23. The above-referenced Confidentiality A greement, further included non-disclosure
22 obligations, including, but not limited to, ROBINSON’s agreement to 1) Protect and safeguard
23} the Confidential Information against unauthorized use, publication, or disclosure; 2) Not to use
24) any of the Confidential Information except for the business purposes; and 3) Not to - directly or
25) indirectly - in any way, reveal, report, publish, disclose, transfer, or otherwise use any of the
26) Confidential Information except as specifically authorized by the Company in accordance with
Hatmaker Law Group this Confidentiality Agreement.
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) Mil
4
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
24. The above-referenced Confidentiality Agreement also indicated that ROBINSON
agreed to return Confidential Information upon termination of his employment and to maintain
OLAM’s proprietary information in strict confidence.
25. OLAM maintains computer login procedures that restrict access to the above-
referenced Confidential Information.
26. OLAM maintains confidential login and password-protected access to its
computers, computer network, servers, and databases.
27. As an IT Systems and Voice Administrator, ROBINSON had access to portions
9 of OLAM'’s protected computer systems and portions of OLAM’s proprietary information and
10 Confidential Information and trade secret information. On information and belief and thereon
11 alleged ROBINSON has improperly accessed, obtained, and/or retained proprietary information
12 and Confidential Information and trade secrets that he had access to during his employment.
13 Further, on information and belief and thereon alleged ROBINSON has improperly accessed,
14 obtained, and/or retained proprietary information and Confidential Information and trade secrets
15 that he did not have authorized access to during his employment. Further still, on information
16 and belief and thereon alleged ROBINSON improperly accessed, obtained, and/or retained
17 proprietary information and Confidential Information and trade secrets that he did not have
18 authorization to access after his separation with OLAM.
19 28. As an employee, ROBINSON owed OLAM a duty of undivided loyalty. This
20) duty required ROBINSON to put forth his best efforts and undivided work time to promote the
21 business of OLAM, and not to use his work at OLAM or its proprietary information,
22 Confidential Information, and trade secret information for his own or others' benefit, or for
23} nefarious purposes, or to the detriment of OLAM.
24) 29. On information and belief and thereon alleged, prior to, in connection with, and/or
25) following his separation with OLAM, ROBINSON, took, copied, removed, and/or accessed
26) OLAM's proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret information.
Hatmaker Law Group 7 30. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has used and/or is
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) seeking to use OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret
5
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
information to provide unauthorized and unlawful access to OLAM’s proprietary information,
Confidential Information, and trade secret in an effort to ham OLAM and its ability to engage in
business.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
(Against All Defendants)
31. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
forth in Paragraphs 1 through 30, inclusive.
32. ROBINSON has undertaken wrongful actions with the plain purpose of
10 interfering with and causing substantial harm to the business interests of OLAM.
11 33. ROBINSON must be enjoined from continuing to ham OLAM and its business
12 interests, and ROBINSON’s ongoing efforts to misappropriate OLA M's proprietary information,
13 Confidential Information, and trade secrets.
14 34. An injunction is necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable harm which
15 could not be compensated by damages. Greater injury would result by refusing it than by
16 granting it. An injunction properly restores the parties to their status as it existed immediately
17 prior to the alleged wrongful conduct. The activity sought to be restrained is actionable and an
18 injunction is reasonably suited to abate that activity.
19 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
20) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets In Violation of California C ivil C ode §§ 3426, et seq.
21 (Against All Defendants)
22 35. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
23} forth in Paragraphs 1 through 34, inclusive.
24) 36. Califomia Code of Civil Procedure section 3426, et seq. (“The California
25) Uniform Trade Secrets A ct”) pertains to the protection of trade secrets.
26) 37. The California Uniform Trade Secrets Act indicates that theft, misrepresentation,
Hatmaker Law Group breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) or other means are improper means of obtaining trade secrets. (C.C.P. § 3426.1(a).)
6
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
38. ROBINSON has wrongfully misappropriated for his own use and benefit
proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret information that OLAM
considers collectively as trade secret information. This trade secret information includes the
above-referenced Confidential Information, which includes but is not limited to, usernames and
passwords and/or the Confidential Information available through the use of those usemmames and
passwords. Said information was created or developed by OLAM at substantial time and
expense.
39. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON is in the possession
9 of and is presently using for his benefit, either economically and/or to further his interference
10 with OLAM, the trade secrets of OLAM, which are derived from OLAM’s proprietary
11 information, Confidential Information, and other trade secrets.
12 40. ROBINSON’s use of these trade secrets will deprive OLAM of an extremely
13 valuable competitive advantage which was gained through substantial time and expense, and was
14 maintained in secrecy using efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances.
15 41. ROBINSON misappropriated trade secrets through improper means, and/or
16 acquired trade secrets under circumstances which give rise to a duty on the part of ROBINSON
17 and other persons with access those trade secrets to maintain their secrecy and limit their use.
18 ROBINSON improperly acquired these trade secrets at a time when he knew, or had reason to
19 know, that this confidential, proprietary information and these trade secrets had been acquired
20) through improper means.
21 42. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has commenced, or
22 is about to commence, solicitation to third-parties the confidential usemames and passwords of
23} OLAM employees to provide further unauthorized access and misappropriation of OLAM’s
24) proprietary information, Confidential Information and trade secrets.
25) 43. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 3426.2, “Actual or threatened
26) misappropriation may be enjoined.” (C.C.P. § 3426.2(a).)
Hatmaker Law Group 7 44. ROBINSON’s improper use of OLAM's trade secrets will continue, to the
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) irreparable injury of OLAM unless enjoined by this Court. OLAM has no speedy or adequate
7
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
remedy at law to prevent this irreparable injury absent the requested injunction. OLAM
accordingly requires an injunction in a form to be submitted to this Court prohibiting the
unauthorized use of OLAM’s trade secret information and requiring the retum of OLAM’s
proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets.
45. As a direct and proximate result of ROBINSON’s misappropriation of OLAM's
trade secrets, OLAM has suffered damages in an amount which is presently unascertainable, plus
interest in accordance with applicable law. OLAM will seek leave of this Court to amend this
Complaint to set forth the precise amount of these damages when that amount has been
ascertained.
10 46. ROBINSON’s conduct in obtaining and exploiting OLAM's trade secrets was and
11 is willful, intentional, fraudulent, malicious, and oppressive, and has been taken in clear violation
12 of OLAM's rights in its trade secrets despite ROBINSON’s knowledge of those rights.
13 ROBINSON’s acts constitute despicable conduct. This wrongful conduct was authorized and
14 ratified by ROBINSON. This conduct entitles OLAM to an award of punitive and exemplary
15 damages.
16 47. ROBINSON’s misappropriation of OLAM's trade secrets has been willful and
17 malicious and has forced OLAM to retain attomeys to protect its legal rights in its proprietary
18 information and trade secrets. ROBINSON’s conduct entitles OLAM to an award of its
19 attomneys' fees incurred and expended in protecting these rights, in an amount according to proof.
20) THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
21 Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Duty of Loyalty
22 (Against all Defendants)
23} 48. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
24) forth in Paragraphs 1 through 47, inclusive.
25) 49. ROBINSON, in his capacity as IT Systems and Voice Administrator occupied a
26) position of trust and confidence with OLAM and had a fiduciary duty to exercise the utmost
Hatmaker Law Group good faith and loyalty to OLAM.
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) Ill
8
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
50. In the course and scope of his duties with OLAM, ROBINSON was granted
access to and entrusted with substantial proprietary information, Confidential Information and
trade secrets with the express understanding and agreement that this information would be used
by ROBINSON solely within the scope of his employment with OLAM and for the benefit of
OLAM and its affiliates and subsidiaries. Further, the fiduciary obligations of ROBINSON
created a duty on the part of ROBINSON not to disclose any of OLAM’s proprietary
information, Confidential Information or trade secrets to any person outside those expressly
authorized by OLAM.
51. ROBINSON has breached his fiduciary duties to, and confidential relationship
10 with, OLAM by misappropriating, disclosing, and disseminating OLAM’s proprietary
11 information, Confidential Information and trade secrets to unauthorized third parties and by
12 using this information to harm OLAM.
13 52. The breach of fiduciary duty by ROBINSON will continue, to the irreparable
14 injury of OLAM, unless enjoined by this Court.
15 53. As a direct and proximate result of ROBINSON’s breach of his fiduciary duty,
16 OLAM has suffered damages in an amount which is presently unascertainable, plus interest in
17 accordance with applicable law. OLAM will seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint to
18 set forth the precise amount of those damages when that amount has been ascertained.
19 1. The conduct of ROBINSON as alleged herein, is a violation of the fiduciary obligations he
20) owed and knew he owed to OLAM, and was and is willful, intentional, malicious, and
21 oppressive. This conduct entitles OLAM to an award of punitive damages against ROBINSON.
22 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
23} Breach of Contract
24) (Against all Defendants)
25) 54. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
26) forth in Paragraphs 1 through 53, inclusive.
Hatmaker Law Group 55. OLAM is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ROBINSON entered
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) into a valid written agreement relating to, inter alia, Confidential Information, proprietary
9
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
information, and trade secrets. The agreement was entered into for the valuable consideration of
ROBINSON’s employment at OLAM. Through the above-identified Confidentiality Agreement,
ROBINSON agreed that, inter alia, he would maintain the Confidential Information, not disclose
Confidential Information, and return the Confidential Information.
56. Based on the above-alleged acts ROBINSON has breached the provisions of the
Confidentiality Agreement with OLAM by, inter alia (a) disclosing OLAM’s proprietary
information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets to third persons not authorized by
OLAM to receive such information; (b) taking, copying and removing OLAM’s proprietary
information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets and property; (c) revealing proprietary
10 information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets to unauthorized individuals; (d)
11 removing, copying, and spying on proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade
12 secrets by gaining unauthorized access to networks, servers and databases.
13 97. OLAM has performed all obligations, covenants, and conditions on its part to be
14 performed pursuant to the Confidentiality Agreement, except where such performance has been
15 prevented or excused.
16 58. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing breaches, OLAM has suffered
17 damages in an amount which is presently unascertainable, plus interest in accordance with
18 applicable law.
19 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
20) Conversion
21 (Against all Defendants)
22 59. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
23} forth in Paragraphs 1 through 58, inclusive.
24) 60. ROBINSON is in possession of OLAM's property, including proprietary
25) information, Confidential Information and trade secrets.
26) 61. OLAM never authorized ROBINSON to take possession of the information
Hatmaker Law Group described above. Nor has any third party lawfully authorized ROBINSON to take possession of
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28) any of the items described herein.
10
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
62. ROBINSON’s possession of OLAM's proprietary information, Confidential
Information and trade secrets is in direct violation of the Confidentiality Agreement and
ROBINSON’s fiduciary duties. Further, ROBINSON’s possession of the items described herein
is the possession of wrongfully obtained trade secrets acquired by an improper means where he
knew, or had reason to know, that the information was acquired under circumstances giving rise
to a duty to limit its use or maintain its secrecy.
63. ROBINSON’s improper taking and misappropriation of OLAM's property,
proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets will continue to irreparably
injure OLAM, unless and until enjoined and restrained by this Court.
10 64. OLAM has no adequate remedy at law to prevent ROBINSON from continuing to
11 refuse to retum to OLAM the proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade
12 secrets misappropriated by ROBINSON. OLAM therefore seeks an order of this Court requiring
13 ROBINSON to retum all OLAM confidential, proprietary information, and trade secrets.
14 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
15 Violation of Penal C ode §502
16 (Against all Defendants)
17 65. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set
18 forth in Paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive.
19 66. California Penal Code section 502(e) provides that a civil cause of action is
20) available against any person who commits any acts in violation of section 502(c).
21 67. OLAM is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that ROBINSON
22 violated section 502(c) by committing the following acts:
(1) Knowingly accesses and without permission alters, damages, deletes,
23} destroys, or otherwise uses any data, computer, computer system, or computer
24) network in order to either (A) devise or execute any scheme or artifice to
defraud, deceive, or extort, or (B) wrongfully control or obtain money, property,
25) or data.
(2) Knowingly accesses and without permission takes, copies, or makes
26) use of any data from a computer, computer system, or computer network, or
takes or copies any supporting documentation, whether existing or residing
Hatmaker Law Group internal or external to a computer, computer system, or computer network.
7522 N. Colonial Ave.
ite 5
Fresno, CA 93711 28)
11
OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A
(3) Knowingly and without permission uses or causes to be used
computer services.
(4) Knowingly accesses and without permission adds, alters, damages,
deletes, or destroys any data, computer software, or computer programs which
reside or exist internal or external to a computer, computer system, or computer
network.
(5) Knowingly and without permission disrupts or causes the disruption
of computer services or denies or causes the denial of computer services to an
authorized user of a computer, computer system, or computer network.
(6) Knowingly and without permis
Preview
SUSAN K. HATMAKER 172543 ROBERT W. BRANCH 154963 E-FILED DANIELLE N. KJAR 291481 1/15/2019 11:46 AM HATMAKER LAW GROUP FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT A Professional Corporation By: M. Sanchez, Deputy 7522 N. Colonial Avenue, Ste. 105 Fresno, California 93711 Telephone: (559) 374-0077 Facsimile: (559) 374-0078 Attomeys for Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF FRESNO * * OK 10 11 OLAM AMERICAS, INC., Case No. 17CECG04157 12 Plaintiff, REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN 13 vs. SUPPORT OF RENEWED APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF 14 WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON; and DOES 1 DEFAULT JUDGMENT FOR through 10, inclusive, PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND 15 AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES BY Defendants. COURT [CCP§ 585] 16 Complaint Filed: December 5, 2017 17 Trial Date: None Set 18 19 20) 21 Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, Inc., (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “OLAM”) hereby 22 requests the court take judicial notice of the following documents and/or facts, pursuant to 23} Evidence Code sections 452, subdivisions c and d, and section 453, in support of its application 24) for entry of default judgment and award of attomey fees by the court: 25) Ml 26) Ml 27 Ml Hatmaker Law Group 7522N.CoLom 28) Ml Fatsno,CA $3) 1 Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Renewed A pplication for Entry of Default J udgment for Permanent Injunction and Award of Attorney Fees by Court [CCP § 585] 1 Complaint filed on December 5, 2017, initiating the above-captioned action “Action”), a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Complaint is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). 2 Preliminary Injunction entered in this Action on February 28, 2018, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Preliminary Injunction is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, 10 subdivision (d). 11 3 Entry of Default against Defendant WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON in this Action 12 on August 3, 2018, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C and 13 incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Entry of Default is appropriate as a 14 record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to 15 Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). 16 4 Declaration of Jon Thomas in Support of Plaintiff's Request for Default Judgment 17 by Court [CCP § 585] and Request for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, a true and correct copy of 18 which is attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of 19 said declaration, but not the truth of the contents therein which is offered in the form of evidence, 20) is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this 21 case, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). 22 5. Petition for Workplace Violence Restraining Orders filed by Olam Americas, Inc. 23} on March 7, 2018, as Fresno County Superior Court Case No. 18CECG00765, a true and correct 24) copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial 25) notice of said Petition is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California 26) pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). 27 6 Petition for Workplace Violence Restraining Orders filed by Olam Americas, Inc. Hatmaker Law Group 7522N.CoLom 28) on March 9, 2018, as Fresno County Superior Court Case No. 18CECG00817, a true and correct Faesno,CA g373 2 Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Renewed A pplication for Entry of Default J udgment for Permanent Injunction and Award of Attorney Fees by Court [CCP § 585] copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Petition is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). 7 Request for Dismissal of Complaint as against DOES 1 through 50 only, filed on September 17, 2018, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit G and incorporated herein by this reference. Judicial notice of said Dismissal is appropriate as a record of the Superior Court of the State of California, and in particular this case, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). Date: January 15, 2019 HATMAKER LAW GROUP A Professional Corporation 10 11 By: /s/ Robert W. Branch 12 ROBERT W. BRANCH Attomeys for Plaintiff 13 OLAM AMERICAS, INC 14 15 16 17 18 19 20) 21 22 23} 24) 25) 26) 27 Hatmaker Law Group 7522N.CoLom 28) Faesno,CA g373 3 Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Renewed A pplication for Entry of Default J udgment for Permanent Injunction and Award of Attorney Fees by Court [CCP § 585] EXHIBIT “A” SUSAN K. HATMAKER 172543 E-FILED BRADLEY J.LEVANG 226922 12/5/2017 8:00 AM DANIELLE N. KJAR 291481 FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT HATMAKER LAW GROUP By: L Peterson, Deputy 7522 N. Colonial Avenue, Suite 105 Fresno, California 93711 Telephone: (559) 374-0077 Facsimile: (559) 374-0078 Attomeys for Plaintiff: OLAM AMERICAS, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF FRESNO 10 * * 11 OLAM AMERICAS, INC., a Delaware Case No. 17CECG04157 corporation, 12 13 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR: 14 vs. 1) Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; 15 WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON, an individual; 2) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, in Violation of California Civil 16 Code §§ 3426, et seq.; Defendants. 3) Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Duty 17 of Loyalty; 18 4) Breach of C ontract; 5) Conversion; and 19 6) Violation of Penal C ode §502 20) 21 22 23} 24) 25) 26) Hatmaker Law Group 7522 N. Colonial Ave. Suite 105 Fresno, CA 93711 28) 1 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, INC. (“OLAM” or “Plaintiff’) complains and alleges against Defendant WILLIAM LEE ROBINSON (“ROBINSON” or “Defendant”), an individual, and DOES 1 through 50, as follows: PARTIES 1 Plaintiff OLAM is a company that sources, process, and distributes agricultural commodities. 2 Defendant is a former employee of OLAM Americas, Inc. (“OLAM”). 3 At all times herein relevant, and on information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON and DOES 1 through 50, and each of them, were the agents, partners, 10 representatives, and co-conspirators of one other and all acts or omissions alleged herein were 11 duly committed with the ratification, knowledge, permission, encouragement, authorization and 12 consent of each other. 13 4 The true names and capacities of DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, are unknown to 14 Plaintiff, and Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend his Complaint to allege such names and 15 capacities as soon as they are ascertained. 16 5. Defendant OLAM and DOES 1 through 50 will hereinafter collectively be 17 referred to as “Defendants.” 18 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 19 6 This Court has subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case because Plaintiff is 20) informed and believes that the monetary damages and restitution sought herein for 21 ROBINSON’s conduct exceeds the minimal jurisdictional limits of the Superior Court. 22 7 Venue is proper in this district pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure 23} Sections 395(a) in that in that liability arose in Fresno, California because at least some of the 24) transactions that are the subject matter of this Complaint occurred therein and/or ROBINSON is 25) found therein. 26) 8 Plaintiff OLAM AMERICAS, INC. (“OLAM”) is, and at all times herein Hatmaker Law Group mentioned was, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) Delaware, and transacts business in the state of California, including Fresno County. 2 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A 9 On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON is, and at all times relevant was, an individual domiciled in the state of California, including Fresno County. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 10. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has improperly removed and otherwise misappropriated intangible property and trade secrets belonging to OLAM. 11. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has threatened to decrypt and publicly release usernames and passwords for OLA M’s computer system. 12. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has harmed and will 10 continue to harm OLAM, in particular, its computer systems, and its ongoing business 11 operations. 12 13. This complaint seeks an injunction and damages against ROBINSON for the 13 above alleged conduct, as well as the other conduct alleged herein. 14 14. On or about July 3, 2017, ROBINSON was employed by OLAM and as an IT 15 Systems and Voice Administrator. 16 15. The job duties for an IT Systems and Voice Administrator includes, but not is 17 limited to, the management of servers and active directory operations in a distributed 18 environment, and management of post branch exchange (PBX) systems. The role requires the 19 ability to configure and manage physical and virtual servers, storage, phone services, and data 20) center implementation tasks as assigned by the manager of the systems team. 21 16. On or about November 28, 2017, ROBINSON was terminated from his 22 employment with OLAM. 23} 17. Later that same day, Jon Thomas, a supervisor in OLAM’s IT Department began 24) receiving text messages that OLAM’s computer domain had been improperly compromised, an 25) encrypted list of usemames and passwords was compromised, and that it was presently being 26) decrypted and would subsequently be publicly released. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true Hatmaker Law Group and correct copy of the texts received by Thomas. 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) Ill 3 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A 18. On information and belief and thereon alleged, the above-referenced text messages were sent from ROBINSON to Thomas. 19. In order for ROBINSON to carry out the duties and responsibilities of an IT Systems and Voice Administrator, OLAM entrusted to him highly confidential and proprietary information and trade secrets, including but not limited to software, data, and other technical information; business methods; product information, including, but not limited to, data; corporate identities; business records; employee lists; business procedures; information technologies; cost, pricing, margin data and other financial information; customer lists; contact names and related information; and login and password information to access the computer network, servers, 10 computer systems, and telephone systems (collectively "Confidential Information”). 11 20. All of the above-referenced Confidential Information was developed by OLAM at 12 substantial effort and expense and portions of which were provided to ROBINSON during the 13 course of his employment with OLAM, and which was Confidential Information, proprietary 14 information, and not generally known and/or accessible to the public or third parties. 15 21. In connection with ROBINSON’s employment with OLAM, ROBINSON entered 16 into a Confidentiality Agreement with OLAM. Attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is a tue and 17 correct copy of the signed Confidentiality A greement. 18 22. The above-referenced Confidentiality Agreement defines “Confidential 19 Information,” in part, as data, corporate identities, business records, employee lists, business 20) procedures, and information technologies. 21 23. The above-referenced Confidentiality A greement, further included non-disclosure 22 obligations, including, but not limited to, ROBINSON’s agreement to 1) Protect and safeguard 23} the Confidential Information against unauthorized use, publication, or disclosure; 2) Not to use 24) any of the Confidential Information except for the business purposes; and 3) Not to - directly or 25) indirectly - in any way, reveal, report, publish, disclose, transfer, or otherwise use any of the 26) Confidential Information except as specifically authorized by the Company in accordance with Hatmaker Law Group this Confidentiality Agreement. 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) Mil 4 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A 24. The above-referenced Confidentiality Agreement also indicated that ROBINSON agreed to return Confidential Information upon termination of his employment and to maintain OLAM’s proprietary information in strict confidence. 25. OLAM maintains computer login procedures that restrict access to the above- referenced Confidential Information. 26. OLAM maintains confidential login and password-protected access to its computers, computer network, servers, and databases. 27. As an IT Systems and Voice Administrator, ROBINSON had access to portions 9 of OLAM'’s protected computer systems and portions of OLAM’s proprietary information and 10 Confidential Information and trade secret information. On information and belief and thereon 11 alleged ROBINSON has improperly accessed, obtained, and/or retained proprietary information 12 and Confidential Information and trade secrets that he had access to during his employment. 13 Further, on information and belief and thereon alleged ROBINSON has improperly accessed, 14 obtained, and/or retained proprietary information and Confidential Information and trade secrets 15 that he did not have authorized access to during his employment. Further still, on information 16 and belief and thereon alleged ROBINSON improperly accessed, obtained, and/or retained 17 proprietary information and Confidential Information and trade secrets that he did not have 18 authorization to access after his separation with OLAM. 19 28. As an employee, ROBINSON owed OLAM a duty of undivided loyalty. This 20) duty required ROBINSON to put forth his best efforts and undivided work time to promote the 21 business of OLAM, and not to use his work at OLAM or its proprietary information, 22 Confidential Information, and trade secret information for his own or others' benefit, or for 23} nefarious purposes, or to the detriment of OLAM. 24) 29. On information and belief and thereon alleged, prior to, in connection with, and/or 25) following his separation with OLAM, ROBINSON, took, copied, removed, and/or accessed 26) OLAM's proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret information. Hatmaker Law Group 7 30. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has used and/or is 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) seeking to use OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret 5 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A information to provide unauthorized and unlawful access to OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret in an effort to ham OLAM and its ability to engage in business. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Against All Defendants) 31. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 30, inclusive. 32. ROBINSON has undertaken wrongful actions with the plain purpose of 10 interfering with and causing substantial harm to the business interests of OLAM. 11 33. ROBINSON must be enjoined from continuing to ham OLAM and its business 12 interests, and ROBINSON’s ongoing efforts to misappropriate OLA M's proprietary information, 13 Confidential Information, and trade secrets. 14 34. An injunction is necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable harm which 15 could not be compensated by damages. Greater injury would result by refusing it than by 16 granting it. An injunction properly restores the parties to their status as it existed immediately 17 prior to the alleged wrongful conduct. The activity sought to be restrained is actionable and an 18 injunction is reasonably suited to abate that activity. 19 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 20) Misappropriation of Trade Secrets In Violation of California C ivil C ode §§ 3426, et seq. 21 (Against All Defendants) 22 35. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set 23} forth in Paragraphs 1 through 34, inclusive. 24) 36. Califomia Code of Civil Procedure section 3426, et seq. (“The California 25) Uniform Trade Secrets A ct”) pertains to the protection of trade secrets. 26) 37. The California Uniform Trade Secrets Act indicates that theft, misrepresentation, Hatmaker Law Group breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) or other means are improper means of obtaining trade secrets. (C.C.P. § 3426.1(a).) 6 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A 38. ROBINSON has wrongfully misappropriated for his own use and benefit proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secret information that OLAM considers collectively as trade secret information. This trade secret information includes the above-referenced Confidential Information, which includes but is not limited to, usernames and passwords and/or the Confidential Information available through the use of those usemmames and passwords. Said information was created or developed by OLAM at substantial time and expense. 39. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON is in the possession 9 of and is presently using for his benefit, either economically and/or to further his interference 10 with OLAM, the trade secrets of OLAM, which are derived from OLAM’s proprietary 11 information, Confidential Information, and other trade secrets. 12 40. ROBINSON’s use of these trade secrets will deprive OLAM of an extremely 13 valuable competitive advantage which was gained through substantial time and expense, and was 14 maintained in secrecy using efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances. 15 41. ROBINSON misappropriated trade secrets through improper means, and/or 16 acquired trade secrets under circumstances which give rise to a duty on the part of ROBINSON 17 and other persons with access those trade secrets to maintain their secrecy and limit their use. 18 ROBINSON improperly acquired these trade secrets at a time when he knew, or had reason to 19 know, that this confidential, proprietary information and these trade secrets had been acquired 20) through improper means. 21 42. On information and belief and thereon alleged, ROBINSON has commenced, or 22 is about to commence, solicitation to third-parties the confidential usemames and passwords of 23} OLAM employees to provide further unauthorized access and misappropriation of OLAM’s 24) proprietary information, Confidential Information and trade secrets. 25) 43. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 3426.2, “Actual or threatened 26) misappropriation may be enjoined.” (C.C.P. § 3426.2(a).) Hatmaker Law Group 7 44. ROBINSON’s improper use of OLAM's trade secrets will continue, to the 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) irreparable injury of OLAM unless enjoined by this Court. OLAM has no speedy or adequate 7 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A remedy at law to prevent this irreparable injury absent the requested injunction. OLAM accordingly requires an injunction in a form to be submitted to this Court prohibiting the unauthorized use of OLAM’s trade secret information and requiring the retum of OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets. 45. As a direct and proximate result of ROBINSON’s misappropriation of OLAM's trade secrets, OLAM has suffered damages in an amount which is presently unascertainable, plus interest in accordance with applicable law. OLAM will seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint to set forth the precise amount of these damages when that amount has been ascertained. 10 46. ROBINSON’s conduct in obtaining and exploiting OLAM's trade secrets was and 11 is willful, intentional, fraudulent, malicious, and oppressive, and has been taken in clear violation 12 of OLAM's rights in its trade secrets despite ROBINSON’s knowledge of those rights. 13 ROBINSON’s acts constitute despicable conduct. This wrongful conduct was authorized and 14 ratified by ROBINSON. This conduct entitles OLAM to an award of punitive and exemplary 15 damages. 16 47. ROBINSON’s misappropriation of OLAM's trade secrets has been willful and 17 malicious and has forced OLAM to retain attomeys to protect its legal rights in its proprietary 18 information and trade secrets. ROBINSON’s conduct entitles OLAM to an award of its 19 attomneys' fees incurred and expended in protecting these rights, in an amount according to proof. 20) THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 21 Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Duty of Loyalty 22 (Against all Defendants) 23} 48. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set 24) forth in Paragraphs 1 through 47, inclusive. 25) 49. ROBINSON, in his capacity as IT Systems and Voice Administrator occupied a 26) position of trust and confidence with OLAM and had a fiduciary duty to exercise the utmost Hatmaker Law Group good faith and loyalty to OLAM. 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) Ill 8 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A 50. In the course and scope of his duties with OLAM, ROBINSON was granted access to and entrusted with substantial proprietary information, Confidential Information and trade secrets with the express understanding and agreement that this information would be used by ROBINSON solely within the scope of his employment with OLAM and for the benefit of OLAM and its affiliates and subsidiaries. Further, the fiduciary obligations of ROBINSON created a duty on the part of ROBINSON not to disclose any of OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information or trade secrets to any person outside those expressly authorized by OLAM. 51. ROBINSON has breached his fiduciary duties to, and confidential relationship 10 with, OLAM by misappropriating, disclosing, and disseminating OLAM’s proprietary 11 information, Confidential Information and trade secrets to unauthorized third parties and by 12 using this information to harm OLAM. 13 52. The breach of fiduciary duty by ROBINSON will continue, to the irreparable 14 injury of OLAM, unless enjoined by this Court. 15 53. As a direct and proximate result of ROBINSON’s breach of his fiduciary duty, 16 OLAM has suffered damages in an amount which is presently unascertainable, plus interest in 17 accordance with applicable law. OLAM will seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint to 18 set forth the precise amount of those damages when that amount has been ascertained. 19 1. The conduct of ROBINSON as alleged herein, is a violation of the fiduciary obligations he 20) owed and knew he owed to OLAM, and was and is willful, intentional, malicious, and 21 oppressive. This conduct entitles OLAM to an award of punitive damages against ROBINSON. 22 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 23} Breach of Contract 24) (Against all Defendants) 25) 54. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set 26) forth in Paragraphs 1 through 53, inclusive. Hatmaker Law Group 55. OLAM is informed and believes and thereon alleges that ROBINSON entered 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) into a valid written agreement relating to, inter alia, Confidential Information, proprietary 9 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A information, and trade secrets. The agreement was entered into for the valuable consideration of ROBINSON’s employment at OLAM. Through the above-identified Confidentiality Agreement, ROBINSON agreed that, inter alia, he would maintain the Confidential Information, not disclose Confidential Information, and return the Confidential Information. 56. Based on the above-alleged acts ROBINSON has breached the provisions of the Confidentiality Agreement with OLAM by, inter alia (a) disclosing OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets to third persons not authorized by OLAM to receive such information; (b) taking, copying and removing OLAM’s proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets and property; (c) revealing proprietary 10 information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets to unauthorized individuals; (d) 11 removing, copying, and spying on proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade 12 secrets by gaining unauthorized access to networks, servers and databases. 13 97. OLAM has performed all obligations, covenants, and conditions on its part to be 14 performed pursuant to the Confidentiality Agreement, except where such performance has been 15 prevented or excused. 16 58. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing breaches, OLAM has suffered 17 damages in an amount which is presently unascertainable, plus interest in accordance with 18 applicable law. 19 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 20) Conversion 21 (Against all Defendants) 22 59. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set 23} forth in Paragraphs 1 through 58, inclusive. 24) 60. ROBINSON is in possession of OLAM's property, including proprietary 25) information, Confidential Information and trade secrets. 26) 61. OLAM never authorized ROBINSON to take possession of the information Hatmaker Law Group described above. Nor has any third party lawfully authorized ROBINSON to take possession of 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) any of the items described herein. 10 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A 62. ROBINSON’s possession of OLAM's proprietary information, Confidential Information and trade secrets is in direct violation of the Confidentiality Agreement and ROBINSON’s fiduciary duties. Further, ROBINSON’s possession of the items described herein is the possession of wrongfully obtained trade secrets acquired by an improper means where he knew, or had reason to know, that the information was acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to limit its use or maintain its secrecy. 63. ROBINSON’s improper taking and misappropriation of OLAM's property, proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade secrets will continue to irreparably injure OLAM, unless and until enjoined and restrained by this Court. 10 64. OLAM has no adequate remedy at law to prevent ROBINSON from continuing to 11 refuse to retum to OLAM the proprietary information, Confidential Information, and trade 12 secrets misappropriated by ROBINSON. OLAM therefore seeks an order of this Court requiring 13 ROBINSON to retum all OLAM confidential, proprietary information, and trade secrets. 14 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 15 Violation of Penal C ode §502 16 (Against all Defendants) 17 65. OLAM realleges and incorporates by this reference each and every allegation set 18 forth in Paragraphs 1 through 64, inclusive. 19 66. California Penal Code section 502(e) provides that a civil cause of action is 20) available against any person who commits any acts in violation of section 502(c). 21 67. OLAM is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that ROBINSON 22 violated section 502(c) by committing the following acts: (1) Knowingly accesses and without permission alters, damages, deletes, 23} destroys, or otherwise uses any data, computer, computer system, or computer 24) network in order to either (A) devise or execute any scheme or artifice to defraud, deceive, or extort, or (B) wrongfully control or obtain money, property, 25) or data. (2) Knowingly accesses and without permission takes, copies, or makes 26) use of any data from a computer, computer system, or computer network, or takes or copies any supporting documentation, whether existing or residing Hatmaker Law Group internal or external to a computer, computer system, or computer network. 7522 N. Colonial Ave. ite 5 Fresno, CA 93711 28) 11 OLAM Americas, Inc.'s Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief EXHIBIT A (3) Knowingly and without permission uses or causes to be used computer services. (4) Knowingly accesses and without permission adds, alters, damages, deletes, or destroys any data, computer software, or computer programs which reside or exist internal or external to a computer, computer system, or computer network. (5) Knowingly and without permission disrupts or causes the disruption of computer services or denies or causes the denial of computer services to an authorized user of a computer, computer system, or computer network. (6) Knowingly and without permis