Breach of Contract Cases

This intellectual-property dispute between two companies based in California arises out of the alleged misappropriation of trade secrets that initially occurred in California some fifteen years ago. Defendant CrowdStrike, Inc. (CrowdStrike) filed a special appearance, which the Court grants. The Court holds that it lacks general jurisdiction over CrowdStrike because, despite having a large office and sales in Texas, Crowdstrike does not have its principal place of business in Texas and is not "essentially at home" here under the exceptional-case doctrine. The Court holds that it lacks specific jurisdiction over CrowdStrike because plaintiff's claims do not "arise out of or relate to" CrowdStrike's Texas contacts, which occurred years after the initial alleged misappropriation and are peripheral to, rather than substantially connected to, the operative facts of the case. Granting an application for a temporary injunction against the defendant (the plaintiff's former employee) based on plaintiff's breach-of-contract claim with respect to a non-compete agreement and reforming the scope of services covered by the non-compete agreement. Denying temporary injunctive relief based on plaintiff's breach-of-contract claim with respect to a customer non-solicit agreement, a worker non-solicit agreement, and a confidentiality agreement. Denying temporary injunctive relief with respect to alleged TUTSA violations. Granting the defendant's plea to the jurisdiction against the plaintiff's derivative claims on entities' behalf for lack of standing because the plaintiff was no longer a member of the entities when he filed suit. This opinion addresses the division of settlement funds and the entitlement to reimbursement of litigation expenses arising from a prior lawsuit. The settlement funds were placed in an escrow account in 2024 pending the resolution of the present dispute. Denying a motion to remand the case back to district court because the alleged agreement in the case plain