Trade Secret Legal Protection 2025 - Agenda | Kisaco Research
Agenda Days: 
  • Day 1: Monday, 15 Sep, 2025
    08:15 - 09:00
    Registration
    09:00 - 09:15
    Co-Chair Opening Remarks and Welcome
    09:15 - 10:00
    Opening Keynote Session: The Development of IP Landscape in 2025
    10:00 - 11:00

    Monetizing intellectual property (IP) through patents and trade secrets can be a highly lucrative strategy for businesses, but it comes with its own set of legal challenges and issues. This panel session will seek to determine legal issues surrounding IP monetization and brings clarity immediate issues:

    Legal Issues:
    - Licensing trade secrets to third parties
    - Commercializing trade secrets through joint ventures or partnerships
    - Internal processes for maintaining confidentiality while commercializing trade secrets
    Methods for Monetizing Trade Secrets:
    - Explore the nature of the innovation
    - What are competitive advantage considerations—long-term trade secret protection vs. temporary monopoly of a patent
    - What are the market conditions and potential buyers/licensees—are they more likely to value the exclusivity of a patent or the secrecy of a trade secret?

    Author:

    Michael Renaud

    Member/Chair IP Division
    Mintz

    Michael Renaud

    Member/Chair IP Division
    Mintz

    Author:

    Jamie Simpson

    Chief Policy Officer and Counsel, C4IP
    Former Chief Counsel on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, IP, and the Internet and Associate Solicitor at the USPTO

    Jamie Simpson

    Chief Policy Officer and Counsel, C4IP
    Former Chief Counsel on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, IP, and the Internet and Associate Solicitor at the USPTO

    Author:

    Mike Binns

    Director and Associate General Counsel, Head of Patents & Trade Secrets
    Meta

    Micheal Binns is Head of Patent Portfolio Strategy for Meta’s Family of Apps and an Associate General Counsel on the Patent, Licensing, and Open Source team at Meta, formerly Facebook. Michael also leads Meta’s IP Trade Secret and Design Patent protection strategies. As a registered patent attorney, Mike’s helped protect global copyrights and trademarks in addition to patent rights for a wide range of industries. At present, he advises on global IP portfolio strategy and risk mitigation related the future of social networking, AR/VR, and the metaverse. Micheal has and continues to protect the knowledge, systems, and inventions that are business-critical drivers of revenue.

     

    Before joining Facebook, Micheal was the Atlanta Office Development Partner at Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, where his experience included the litigation, counseling, and prosecution of all forms of intellectual property related to a variety of industries and technologies.

    Mike Binns

    Director and Associate General Counsel, Head of Patents & Trade Secrets
    Meta

    Micheal Binns is Head of Patent Portfolio Strategy for Meta’s Family of Apps and an Associate General Counsel on the Patent, Licensing, and Open Source team at Meta, formerly Facebook. Michael also leads Meta’s IP Trade Secret and Design Patent protection strategies. As a registered patent attorney, Mike’s helped protect global copyrights and trademarks in addition to patent rights for a wide range of industries. At present, he advises on global IP portfolio strategy and risk mitigation related the future of social networking, AR/VR, and the metaverse. Micheal has and continues to protect the knowledge, systems, and inventions that are business-critical drivers of revenue.

     

    Before joining Facebook, Micheal was the Atlanta Office Development Partner at Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, where his experience included the litigation, counseling, and prosecution of all forms of intellectual property related to a variety of industries and technologies.

    11:00 - 11:30
    Networking Break
    11:30 - 12:30

    Patents and trade secrets are two key forms of intellectual property protection, but they operate differently and come with distinct advantages and challenges. This panel session will provide the intricate details on when either form of IP
    protection is favoured over the other:

    - Examine how Patent and trade secret protection can dovetail:
    - Strategies for where both protections can work together to lock down IP protection for innovation

    Author:

    Bart Newland

    Head of Legal & IP
    Atalanta Therapeutics

    Bart Newland

    Head of Legal & IP
    Atalanta Therapeutics

    Author:

    Joseph D'Angelo

    Head of IP Litigation
    Analog Devices

    Joseph D’Angelo is a results driven legal partner with more than 15 years of corporate legal department experience at Fortune 500 companies. Extensive experience assisting businesses with intellectual property, litigation, technology licensing, complex negotiations, mergers and acquisitions, commercial law, and supplier matters.

    Joseph D'Angelo

    Head of IP Litigation
    Analog Devices

    Joseph D’Angelo is a results driven legal partner with more than 15 years of corporate legal department experience at Fortune 500 companies. Extensive experience assisting businesses with intellectual property, litigation, technology licensing, complex negotiations, mergers and acquisitions, commercial law, and supplier matters.

    Author:

    Matt Hulse

    Associate General Counsel
    Intel

    Matt Hulse

    Associate General Counsel
    Intel

    Author:

    Julie Lappin

    Senior IP Counsel
    Nestle

    Julie is a Senior IP Counsel at Nestlé S.A. She has worked for multiple business units in her 14+ year career with Nestlé, including Coffee, Nestlé Health Science, and PetCare. Julie significantly contributed to developing and deploying Nestlé's trade secret protection program. Before joining Nestle, she was a Corporate Patent Counsel at Pfizer Inc.

    Julie Lappin

    Senior IP Counsel
    Nestle

    Julie is a Senior IP Counsel at Nestlé S.A. She has worked for multiple business units in her 14+ year career with Nestlé, including Coffee, Nestlé Health Science, and PetCare. Julie significantly contributed to developing and deploying Nestlé's trade secret protection program. Before joining Nestle, she was a Corporate Patent Counsel at Pfizer Inc.

    Author:

    David McGee

    Intellectual Property & Technology Shareholder
    Greenberg Traurig

    David McGee

    Intellectual Property & Technology Shareholder
    Greenberg Traurig
    12:30 - 1:30
    Networking Lunch
    1:30 - 2:00

    Author:

    Brian D. Walters

    Executive Vice-President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary
    Matthews International

    Brian serves as Executive Vice-President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary for Matthews International Corporation having joined the Company as corporate counsel in January 2005 and having been promoted to the role of General Counsel in February 2009.  Brian directs all legal operations for the Company globally, in addition to serving as a member of Matthews’ executive leadership team.   

     

    Established in 1850, Matthews now operates 3 very diverse business segments in over 35 countries.   In 20 years of leading the legal function for Matthews, Brian has directed over 80 mergers and acquisitions, varying in size, complexities, industries and geographies.  During that same period, the annual revenue of the Company has more than tripled to approximately USD 1.8 Billion. 

     

    Brian is also responsible for developing and directing various global compliance programs addressing trade secret protection, anti-trust, anti-corruption, data protection, export controls and insider trading.

    Brian D. Walters

    Executive Vice-President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary
    Matthews International

    Brian serves as Executive Vice-President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary for Matthews International Corporation having joined the Company as corporate counsel in January 2005 and having been promoted to the role of General Counsel in February 2009.  Brian directs all legal operations for the Company globally, in addition to serving as a member of Matthews’ executive leadership team.   

     

    Established in 1850, Matthews now operates 3 very diverse business segments in over 35 countries.   In 20 years of leading the legal function for Matthews, Brian has directed over 80 mergers and acquisitions, varying in size, complexities, industries and geographies.  During that same period, the annual revenue of the Company has more than tripled to approximately USD 1.8 Billion. 

     

    Brian is also responsible for developing and directing various global compliance programs addressing trade secret protection, anti-trust, anti-corruption, data protection, export controls and insider trading.

    2:00 - 3:00

    Intellectual Property (IP) litigation, especially in patent and trade secret cases, can be a critical battleground for businesses trying to protect their innovations. Whether defending their rights or asserting them, companies
    need to understand the strategic dynamics of offensive vs. defensive litigation.

    - Understand the core differences between offensive and defensive litigation in patent and trade secret disputes.
    - Learn the strategic advantages and risks of initiating litigation versus responding to a lawsuit.
    - Explore the best practices for managing complex IP cases, including litigation timing, settlement negotiations, and strategic use of court motions.
    - Gain insights into navigating the evolving landscape of patent and trade secret law, including challenges posed by technology and international jurisdiction
    - Navigating Non practicing entity (NPE) Litigation scenarios

    Author:

    Lana Gladstein

    General Counsel
    Seaport Therapeutics

    Lana Gladstein currently works as a General Counsel for Seaport Therapeutics. She previously worked at APRINOIA Therapeutics as a Group General Counsel. Lana Gladstein attended Northeastern University School of Law.

    Lana Gladstein

    General Counsel
    Seaport Therapeutics

    Lana Gladstein currently works as a General Counsel for Seaport Therapeutics. She previously worked at APRINOIA Therapeutics as a Group General Counsel. Lana Gladstein attended Northeastern University School of Law.

    Author:

    Brad Bidwell

    Assistant General Counsel - IP and HR
    Knowles Corporation

    Brad Bidwell

    Assistant General Counsel - IP and HR
    Knowles Corporation
    3:00 - 3:45
    Networking Break
    3:45 - 5:15 (90 minutes interactive workshop)
    IP Thinktanks 2025: Specialised Workshops Designed to Enhance and Discover Practical Solutions
    5:15
    Patent & Trade Secret IP Day Concludes
    5:15 - 6:15
    Evening Networking Reception
  • Day 2: Tuesday, 16 Sep, 2025
    08:15 - 09:00
    Registration
    09:00 - 09:15
    Co-Chair Opening Remarks and Welcome
    09:15 - 10:00

    Author:

    Gregory Bombard

    Shareholder
    Greenberg Traurig, LLP

    Gregory S. Bombard is a trial lawyer whose practice focuses on trade secret litigation. Greg also handles other IP litigation and complex commercial disputes. His trade secret clients are primarily in high tech industries, including biotech, medical devices, software, robotics, fintech, and manufacturing. Greg is an author of the ABA’s Guide to Protecting and Litigating Trade Secrets, 2nd Ed., and co-chairs of the ABA’s Trade Secret Litigation Subcommittee. Greg is a shareholder in the Boston office of the international law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP. He can be reached at [email protected]

    Gregory Bombard

    Shareholder
    Greenberg Traurig, LLP

    Gregory S. Bombard is a trial lawyer whose practice focuses on trade secret litigation. Greg also handles other IP litigation and complex commercial disputes. His trade secret clients are primarily in high tech industries, including biotech, medical devices, software, robotics, fintech, and manufacturing. Greg is an author of the ABA’s Guide to Protecting and Litigating Trade Secrets, 2nd Ed., and co-chairs of the ABA’s Trade Secret Litigation Subcommittee. Greg is a shareholder in the Boston office of the international law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP. He can be reached at [email protected]

    Author:

    John Lee

    Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property
    U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary

    John Lee

    Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property
    U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary
    10:00 - 11:00

    Trade secret cases have continued to evolve in response to changing business environments, technological advancements, and legal frameworks. As we move further into 2024, several trends are emerging in trade secret litigation, influenced by factors such as globalization, digitalization, and the increasing complexity of intellectual property protection.

    - Discover the latest legal updates in Motorola v. Hytera its subsequent effect on Beijing Meishe v. TikTok, 2024 on the
    extraterritorial reach of DTSA
    - Determine when can plaintiff can recover investment in R&D vs when on loss profits?
     Dissect case law in Pegasystems v. Appian and Echospan v. Medallia to seek out reasoning behind monetary remedies

    Author:

    Bridget Smith

    Assistant General Counsel, IP
    Relativity Space

    Bridget Smith

    Assistant General Counsel, IP
    Relativity Space

    Author:

    Ken Corsello

    US Trade Secrets Counsel / Patent Licensing Counsel
    IBM Corporation

    Ken Corsello is an IP Law Counsel at IBM.  He currently focuses on drafting and negotiating patent licenses and assignment agreements.  At IBM, he has worked on patent procurement, litigation, client counseling, product clearance, and IP transactional matters. 

    Before joining IBM, Ken was a law clerk to Chief Judge Glenn Archer at the Federal Circuit; an Associate Solicitor in the USPTO; and in private practice at law firms in Washington, D.C.  He did his undergraduate work in Computer Science at SUNY Stony Brook, received his JD from the Catholic University, and obtained an LL.M. from George Washington University. 

    Ken has been the chair of IPO’s Trade Secrets Committee since 2016.  His recent presentations on trade secret law include participating in a panel at the USPTO’s “Trending Issues in Trade Secrets: 2019” symposium and as a witness on behalf of IPO at the 2018 hearing on “Safeguarding Trade Secrets in the United States” held by the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet. 

    Ken Corsello

    US Trade Secrets Counsel / Patent Licensing Counsel
    IBM Corporation

    Ken Corsello is an IP Law Counsel at IBM.  He currently focuses on drafting and negotiating patent licenses and assignment agreements.  At IBM, he has worked on patent procurement, litigation, client counseling, product clearance, and IP transactional matters. 

    Before joining IBM, Ken was a law clerk to Chief Judge Glenn Archer at the Federal Circuit; an Associate Solicitor in the USPTO; and in private practice at law firms in Washington, D.C.  He did his undergraduate work in Computer Science at SUNY Stony Brook, received his JD from the Catholic University, and obtained an LL.M. from George Washington University. 

    Ken has been the chair of IPO’s Trade Secrets Committee since 2016.  His recent presentations on trade secret law include participating in a panel at the USPTO’s “Trending Issues in Trade Secrets: 2019” symposium and as a witness on behalf of IPO at the 2018 hearing on “Safeguarding Trade Secrets in the United States” held by the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet. 

    Author:

    Tom Brown

    Senior Managing Legal Director, Head of Intellectual Property Litigation
    Dell

    Tom Brown

    Senior Managing Legal Director, Head of Intellectual Property Litigation
    Dell
    11:00 - 11:30
    Networking Break
    11:15 - 12:15
    Trade Secret Litigation Strategy 2025: Reasonable Measures, Jury Selection and Remediation Trade secret misappropriation is a critical concern for businesses

    Trade secret misappropriation is a critical concern for businesses seeking to protect their most valuable and sensitive intellectual property. However, the path to litigation in trade secret cases requires a strategic approach, involving everything from identifying the theft, proving the misappropriation, and navigating complex legal frameworks. As businesses face increasing risks from cyber threats, employee departures, and competitor actions, a well-thought-out litigation strategy is more important than ever.


    - Determine the current requirement for trade secret owner to exercise “reasonable efforts” (UTSA) or “reasonable measures” (DTSA) to protect the information.
    - Understand the critical elements required to build a strong case in trade secret misappropriation.
    - Learn about the steps involved in securing evidence and effectively proving misappropriation.
    - Gain insights into how to prevent trade secret theft before it occurs and how to respond effectively if theft happens.
    - Explore strategies for settling or resolving trade secret cases before they go to trial.
    - Understand the key legal and practical issues involved in defending against trade secret misappropriation claims.
    - Explore current trends on jury instructions during trade secret litigation cases.

    Author:

    Victoria Cundiff

    Adjunct Professor, PennCarey Law School
    University of Pennsylvania

    Victoria Cundiff

    Adjunct Professor, PennCarey Law School
    University of Pennsylvania

    Author:

    Ksenia Takhistova

    Chief Legal Officer
    LCM Biosensor Technologies

    Ksenia Takhistova

    Chief Legal Officer
    LCM Biosensor Technologies
    12:15 - 1:15
    Networking Lunch
    1:15 - 2:00
    Special Interview: Building a Comprehensive Trade Secret Strategy

    Author:

    Dr. Fortune Shieh

    Chairman of Taiwan Association for Trade Secret Protection Associate General Counsel
    Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.

    Dr. Fortune Shieh

    Chairman of Taiwan Association for Trade Secret Protection Associate General Counsel
    Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.

    Author:

    James Pooley

    Former Deputy Director General
    WIPO

    James Pooley

    Former Deputy Director General
    WIPO
    2:00 - 2:15
    Comfort Break
    2:15 - 3:45
    Trade Secret Specialism Sessions: IP, Labour and Data Protection

    - Different rationale on whether you can log trade secret IP?
     Differences in industries?
     How companies operate that may provide different rationale
    - What variables are available to track their trade secret?
    - How their industries operate,
    - Examine examples of cost/benefits of trade secret tracking
    - How to effectively mark, catalogue trade secret – to avoid litigation
     What tools and controls are available.
     How many categories do you use?
    - How do you define different sensitivity issue and audits.

    Author:

    Shane O`Neill

    Assistant General Counsel
    Norsk Titanium

    Shane O’Neill trained and qualified as a competition lawyer at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer where he advised clients in the aerospace and aviation sectors on merger control and antitrust regulatory matters. Since moving in-house he has advised on a broad range of matters including IT outsourcing, IP licensing, data protection, IPO, cybersecurity, commercial negotiations with aerospace OEMS, corporate transactions, and IP strategy. 

    Currently, he is Assistant General Counsel at Norsk Titanium, a global leader in metal 3D printing which supplies components to the aerospace, defence, and industrial sectors. He is responsible for a number of corporate areas including driving the company’s IP strategy, creation of IP awareness, trade secret protection, IP portfolio management, IP risk reduction, IP collaboration and cybersecurity.

    Shane O`Neill

    Assistant General Counsel
    Norsk Titanium

    Shane O’Neill trained and qualified as a competition lawyer at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer where he advised clients in the aerospace and aviation sectors on merger control and antitrust regulatory matters. Since moving in-house he has advised on a broad range of matters including IT outsourcing, IP licensing, data protection, IPO, cybersecurity, commercial negotiations with aerospace OEMS, corporate transactions, and IP strategy. 

    Currently, he is Assistant General Counsel at Norsk Titanium, a global leader in metal 3D printing which supplies components to the aerospace, defence, and industrial sectors. He is responsible for a number of corporate areas including driving the company’s IP strategy, creation of IP awareness, trade secret protection, IP portfolio management, IP risk reduction, IP collaboration and cybersecurity.

    Author:

    Erica LoRe

    Senior Director, Intellectual Property Counsel
    Invivyd

    Erica LoRe

    Senior Director, Intellectual Property Counsel
    Invivyd

    Author:

    David Joyal

    VP, Legal – Patents
    Coty Inc

    David Joyal

    VP, Legal – Patents
    Coty Inc

    Protecting Trade Secrets: Iron-Clad Strategies for Employee Onboarding and Offboarding

    Onboarding Strategies:
    - Creating clear communication of the company’s trade secret policies and the legal implications of breaches.
    - Design mandatory training sessions focused on data security and confidentiality.
    - Drafting confidentiality agreements that reinforce the employee’s commitment to protecting sensitive information.

    Offboarding Strategies:
    - How to effective exit interview to solidify departing employee of their confidentiality obligations.
    - Determine when and best approach for revoking access to all company systems and retrieving company-issued devices.
    - How to ensure the return or destruction of any physical or digital copies of sensitive information.
    - Continuous monitoring the former employee’s activities post-departure to detect any potential data breaches.

    Legal Considerations and Enforcement:
    - Discuss consequences of trade secret violations in employment contracts and company policies.
    - How to take swift and decisive action against any breaches

    Author:

    James Gale

    Co-Chair (IP Litigation)
    Cozen O'Connor

    James Gale

    Co-Chair (IP Litigation)
    Cozen O'Connor

    Author:

    Ronald Sia Deputy GC

    Technology & Brand; Enterprise Risk & ESG Compliance Officer
    SimpliSafe

    Ron serves as Deputy General Counsel - Technology and Brand, and Enterprise Risk and Sustainability Compliance Officer for SimpliSafe.  Prior to joining SimpliSafe, he spent over a decade in a variety of in house legal roles at P&G / Gillette in Cincinnati and Boston, with his last role as Global Lead Commercial Counsel for the Gillette business unit.  Ron studied Chemical Engineering and Economics at Tufts University and received his JD from UNH School of Law.

    Ronald Sia Deputy GC

    Technology & Brand; Enterprise Risk & ESG Compliance Officer
    SimpliSafe

    Ron serves as Deputy General Counsel - Technology and Brand, and Enterprise Risk and Sustainability Compliance Officer for SimpliSafe.  Prior to joining SimpliSafe, he spent over a decade in a variety of in house legal roles at P&G / Gillette in Cincinnati and Boston, with his last role as Global Lead Commercial Counsel for the Gillette business unit.  Ron studied Chemical Engineering and Economics at Tufts University and received his JD from UNH School of Law.

    One of the biggest hurdles facing the Data Act’s implementation lies in finding the right balance between free access to data and protection of the trade secrets of manufacturers or data holders

    - How the viewing data as trade secret?
    - Examine trade secret provisions.
    - How is this interpreted.
    - How are other interpreted.
    - What kinds of provisions
    - How to trade secret data? Can raw data be a trade secret?

    Author:

    Arian Hassanalizadeh

    VP, Head of Legal and Data Protection Officer
    Genesis Global

    Arian Hassanalizadeh

    VP, Head of Legal and Data Protection Officer
    Genesis Global

    Author:

    Hannah Joseph

    Senior Director of Trade Secret
    Regeneron

    Hannah T. Joseph serves as Director of Trade Secrets at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. At Regeneron, she drives strategy for the protection of trade secrets and proprietary information. Before joining Regeneron, Hannah worked at Beck Reed Riden LLP, a boutique law firm in Boston,  where she specialized in the areas of trade secrets law, restrictive covenants, and employee mobility for nearly a decade. Hannah holds a Juris Doctor from Boston College Law School and a Bachelor of Arts from Binghamton University.

    Hannah Joseph

    Senior Director of Trade Secret
    Regeneron

    Hannah T. Joseph serves as Director of Trade Secrets at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. At Regeneron, she drives strategy for the protection of trade secrets and proprietary information. Before joining Regeneron, Hannah worked at Beck Reed Riden LLP, a boutique law firm in Boston,  where she specialized in the areas of trade secrets law, restrictive covenants, and employee mobility for nearly a decade. Hannah holds a Juris Doctor from Boston College Law School and a Bachelor of Arts from Binghamton University.

    As companies continuously face threats to trade secrets leakage, there is growing recognition that protecting these valuable assets requires a collaborative approach. By uniting a cross disciplinary teams within an organization and ensure that trade secret protection is integrated into every aspect of the business—from legal and technical to operational and strategic levels.

    - Understand the key roles and responsibilities of different departments (legal, cybersecurity, HR, R&D, leadership) in trade secret protection.
    - Learn how to create an effective cross-functional working group to collaborate on trade secret initiatives.
    - Discover strategies for building organizational alignment and fostering cooperation between legal and technical teams.
    - Learn how to integrate trade secret protection into everyday business operations and company culture.

    Author:

    Kelly Burke

    Associate Senior Legal Counsel- IP Investigations
    Adobe

    Kelly Burke is Associate Senior Legal Counsel, IP Investigations at Adobe, where she focuses on IP investigations and protection, and leads the Trade Secret Protection Program.  Prior to that, she was Senior Security Counsel at Apple, concentrating on insider threats.  Before she went in-house, she was a prosecutor for more than a decade at the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, where she specialized in trying complex white collar, public corruption, and public integrity criminal cases.

    Kelly Burke

    Associate Senior Legal Counsel- IP Investigations
    Adobe

    Kelly Burke is Associate Senior Legal Counsel, IP Investigations at Adobe, where she focuses on IP investigations and protection, and leads the Trade Secret Protection Program.  Prior to that, she was Senior Security Counsel at Apple, concentrating on insider threats.  Before she went in-house, she was a prosecutor for more than a decade at the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, where she specialized in trying complex white collar, public corruption, and public integrity criminal cases.

    Author:

    Julie Lappin

    Senior IP Counsel
    Nestle

    Julie is a Senior IP Counsel at Nestlé S.A. She has worked for multiple business units in her 14+ year career with Nestlé, including Coffee, Nestlé Health Science, and PetCare. Julie significantly contributed to developing and deploying Nestlé's trade secret protection program. Before joining Nestle, she was a Corporate Patent Counsel at Pfizer Inc.

    Julie Lappin

    Senior IP Counsel
    Nestle

    Julie is a Senior IP Counsel at Nestlé S.A. She has worked for multiple business units in her 14+ year career with Nestlé, including Coffee, Nestlé Health Science, and PetCare. Julie significantly contributed to developing and deploying Nestlé's trade secret protection program. Before joining Nestle, she was a Corporate Patent Counsel at Pfizer Inc.

    This panel session will examine legal nuances when promoting innovation and collaboration whilst at the same time safeguarding proprietary information

    - Indemnification: Best practice for incorporating trade secret clauses
    - Internal training: How to emphasis training, reporting and enhanced ethical behaviours
    - Successfully establish a risk mitigation framework when collaborating with another party and ensuring reasonable measures are taken to protect your trade secret.

    Author:

    Stephen Bychowski

    Assistant General Counsel
    Sanof

    Stephen Bychowski

    Assistant General Counsel
    Sanof

    Author:

    Will Cottrell

    Executive Director IP Licencing
    RTX

    Will Cottrell

    Executive Director IP Licencing
    RTX

    DLP software detects potential data breaches/data exfiltration transmissions and prevents them by monitoring, detecting and blocking sensitive data

    - How DLP tools work, capabilities, drawbacks, and costs.
    - Can DLP tools form part of the reasonable steps that the company takes to protect its trade secrets
    - Examine the intersection between DLP tools and legal arguments for future litigation scenarios

    3:45 - 4:15
    Networking Break
    4:15 - 5:45
    Trade Secret Leadership Roundtable
    5:45
    Conference Day 1 Ends – Co-Chair Remarks
    6:00
    Evening Networking Drinks & Canapés
  • Day 3: Wednesday, 17 Sep, 2025
    07:30
    Registration Begins
    08:00 - 08:45

    As of August 20, 2024, a federal court in Texas has blocked the FTC’s non-compete ban nationwide, effectively preventing the rule from taking effect due to concerns about the FTC’s authority to enact such a rule; this means employers are currently not required to stop using non-compete agreements with most employees, although legal challenges are ongoing and the FTC may appeal the decision.

    During this breakfast briefing our panel of industry practitioners will shed light on:
    - Exploring the use of non-compete agreements under state laws
    - What Should Employers Do Next?
    - Navigate legal grounds for federal vs state laws on non-compete issues

    09:00 - 09:15
    Co-Chair Opening Remarks and Review Day 1
    09:15 - 10:30
    Around the world in 80 minutes: Examine Major Trade Secret Legal Updates in EU, China and India

    Under the Act companies are obliged to share data under the EU Data Act will be keen to ensure competitors do not use the data to produce competing products or to train AI models.

    - Discuss what is considered as trade secret data?
     Can raw data be a trade secret?
    - Determine how the provision is viewing data as trade secret – or not?
    - Examine provisions relating to trade secret provision.
     How is this interpreted?
    - What remedies are available?

    Discover the growing importance of trade secrets in a patent-dominated field:

    - Implications for companies dealing with proprietary technologies

     “Vanillin Case”
     Understand how infringement occurred
     How the courts determine damage
     Subsequent impact on trade secret implications in China

     “Rubber Antioxidants Case”
     Determine the nature of the Trade Secret
     Legal consequence of employee breach of confidentiality
     Legal outcome and people’s supreme court’s attitude towards Trade Secret cases such as Automobile Chassis case; 2023, SPCIP Civil Final No. 1590

    Protection of Trade Secrets Bill

     Is there is need for a specific legislation for protection of trade secrets?
     Whether there should be one law or separate laws on trade secrets and economic espionage?
     What should be the scope and shape of the proposed law?
     Treating trade secrets as ‘property’ or under principles of unfair competition
     Defining trade secrets
     Defining misappropriation of trade secrets,
     Trade secrets, restrictive covenants and doctrine of inevitable disclosure
     What exceptions should be carved out in the Act? (e.g., Whistle blower protections, Compulsory Licensing & Government Use, Freedom of Speech & Expression, Public interest
     Remedies
     Data Exclusivity

    10:30 - 11:00
    Networking Break
    11:00 - 12:00

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming industries across the globe, but its impact on intellectual property—particularly trade secrets—is both promising and concerning. AI can be a powerful tool for enhancing security and protecting sensitive business information, but concurrently it poses new risks by potentially enabling advanced methods for reverse engineering or misappropriating proprietary knowledge. This panel will explore the dual-edged nature of AI in the context of trade secret protection.

    - Whether or not 2026 will be the year for AI and trade secrets?
    - Current update relating Deepseek and ChatGPT and trade secret misappropriation issues
    - Impact of the AI act on companies relying on trade secrets to protect the trade secrets in their data.
    - Best practice litigation of information that was related to AI Trade Secret
    - How best to utilize AI inhouse to protect/create trade secret
    - Increased cloud based IOT products to protect trade secrets when data is not stored locally but centrally
    - Enhance trade secret training relating to AI and Algorithms
    - How to enhance protection of your trade secrets during an opensource AI world?
    - Identifying creator of trade secret: natural vs Ai
    - U.S, Europe and Asia – Exposing AI risks in Trade Secret?
    - Balancing disclosure requirement and protection of trade secrets in AI regulation.

    Author:

    Dean Alderucci

    Senior Advisor for Artificial Intelligence
    US Congress

    Dean Alderucci

    Senior Advisor for Artificial Intelligence
    US Congress

    Author:

    Kerri Braun

    Senior Corporate Counsel, Trade Secret and Copyright
    Cisco

    Kerri Braun

    Senior Corporate Counsel, Trade Secret and Copyright
    Cisco

    Author:

    Matthew Kohel

    Partner
    Saul Ewing

    Matthew Kohel

    Partner
    Saul Ewing

    Author:

    Matt Hulse

    Associate General Counsel
    Intel

    Matt Hulse

    Associate General Counsel
    Intel
    12:00 - 12:30

    In recent years, law enforcement agencies and prosecutors have increasingly focused on enforcing criminal liability related to trade secrets, especially in cases involving espionage, data breaches, and corporate theft.

    Explore:
    - When will they bring a case? When is most beneficial.
    - What companies can do to prevent trade secret misappropriation
    - Understand the good, bad and the ugly methods in protecting confidential information.

    12:30 - 1:30
    Networking Lunch
    1:30 - 2:30

    Author:

    The Honourable F. Dennis Saylor IV

    Chief Judge
    United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

    The Honourable F. Dennis Saylor IV

    Chief Judge
    United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

    Author:

    The Honorable Kent Jordan

    Director
    Richards Layton & Finger (Former United States circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit)

    Kent A. Jordan is a Director in the Wilmington, Delaware law firm of Richards, Layton & Finger. Previously, since 2006, he served as a United States Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit. Before that, he was a United States District Judge for the District of Delaware from 2002 to 2006. Judge Jordan received a B.A. in Economics in 1981 from Brigham Young University and a J.D. in 1984 from Georgetown University. He was an Assistant United States Attorney and head of the Civil Division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware. Later, he served as an officer and as a member of the boards of directors of privately held businesses and was a partner in a law firm. He is an Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania and Vanderbilt University and has served as President of the Board of Trustees of the American Inns of Court Foundation, as well as on the boards of other non-profit organizations.

    The Honorable Kent Jordan

    Director
    Richards Layton & Finger (Former United States circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit)

    Kent A. Jordan is a Director in the Wilmington, Delaware law firm of Richards, Layton & Finger. Previously, since 2006, he served as a United States Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit. Before that, he was a United States District Judge for the District of Delaware from 2002 to 2006. Judge Jordan received a B.A. in Economics in 1981 from Brigham Young University and a J.D. in 1984 from Georgetown University. He was an Assistant United States Attorney and head of the Civil Division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware. Later, he served as an officer and as a member of the boards of directors of privately held businesses and was a partner in a law firm. He is an Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania and Vanderbilt University and has served as President of the Board of Trustees of the American Inns of Court Foundation, as well as on the boards of other non-profit organizations.

    Author:

    The Honourable Cathy Bissoon

    United States District Judge
    United States District Court For The Western District Of Pennsylvania

    The Honourable Cathy Bissoon

    United States District Judge
    United States District Court For The Western District Of Pennsylvania

    Author:

    Honorable Judge William G Young

    Senior District Judge
    United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

    The Honorable Faith Hochberg is a nationally recognized Federal Judge and former United States Attorney known for her broad expertise spanning judicial, federal law enforcement, and financial institution regulatory top level positions. In 2015, Judge Hochberg retired from the bench to found Hochberg ADR, LLC, which provides mediation, arbitration, and mock court exercises in high profile, complex matters in national and international litigation.  Judge Hochberg serves as a court-appointed Monitor in international cybersecurity cases, and as a court-appointed Special Master in many cases in both federal and state courts, including complex multi-district litigation (MDL cases).  

    Judge Hochberg is a distinguished neutral admitted to the rosters of the AAA, ICDR, ICC, and CPR; she is a Fellow of the College of Commercial Arbitrators and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute.  Her expertise broadly spans many areas of law:  class actions, corporate contract, insurance, banking & financial institutions, securities, antitrust, trade secrets, pharmaceutical development and licensing, patent and other intellectual property litigation and licensing, merger and acquisition transactions, and partnership disputes. 

    Judge Hochberg was twice nominated by the President, and confirmed by the Senate, first as United States Attorney and then as a United States District Judge. During her tenure on the bench, she has presided over thousands of federal cases, including large class actions, securities, banking, patent and intellectual property, pharmaceutical intellectual property and licensing, antitrust, insurance, ERISA, corporate contract, construction related disputes, employment and partnership disputes, and others. The Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation appointed her to preside over large national multi-district cases, filed across the country and consolidated to be managed by Judge Hochberg. She is a frequent speaker both nationally and internationally on patent law, class actions, employment law, and alternative dispute resolution. 

    Judge Hochberg was invited to sit by designation on the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and served as a patent pilot judge with special expertise in this complex area of law.  She was honored as the first Fellow of the Innovation Center for Law and Technology at New York Law School and also serves on the Center’s Advisory Board.  She previously served on the Board of Trustees of the Lasker Foundation, acclaimed for its prominence in promoting outstanding research in science and medicine.

    Judge Hochberg was the top federal law enforcement official when she served as the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, managing strategy and operations of the large public office.  As Deputy Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury Department, she spearheaded multinational tactics to combat money laundering, and was responsible for oversight of the Treasury Department’s enforcement agencies, including the Office of Foreign Assets Control [OFAC], the Bank Secrecy Office, as well as Secret Service, U.S. Customs Service and other agencies. 

    Judge Hochberg has developed risk management and civil regulatory enforcement criteria for financial institutions during her service as Senior Deputy Chief Counsel of the OTS during the S & L crisis.

    Judge Hochberg received her law degree  from Harvard Law School, where she graduated magna cum laude and was an Editor of the Harvard Law Review.  Judge Hochberg graduated, summa cum laude, from Tufts University, and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. She also attended the London School of Economics.

     

    Honorable Judge William G Young

    Senior District Judge
    United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

    The Honorable Faith Hochberg is a nationally recognized Federal Judge and former United States Attorney known for her broad expertise spanning judicial, federal law enforcement, and financial institution regulatory top level positions. In 2015, Judge Hochberg retired from the bench to found Hochberg ADR, LLC, which provides mediation, arbitration, and mock court exercises in high profile, complex matters in national and international litigation.  Judge Hochberg serves as a court-appointed Monitor in international cybersecurity cases, and as a court-appointed Special Master in many cases in both federal and state courts, including complex multi-district litigation (MDL cases).  

    Judge Hochberg is a distinguished neutral admitted to the rosters of the AAA, ICDR, ICC, and CPR; she is a Fellow of the College of Commercial Arbitrators and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute.  Her expertise broadly spans many areas of law:  class actions, corporate contract, insurance, banking & financial institutions, securities, antitrust, trade secrets, pharmaceutical development and licensing, patent and other intellectual property litigation and licensing, merger and acquisition transactions, and partnership disputes. 

    Judge Hochberg was twice nominated by the President, and confirmed by the Senate, first as United States Attorney and then as a United States District Judge. During her tenure on the bench, she has presided over thousands of federal cases, including large class actions, securities, banking, patent and intellectual property, pharmaceutical intellectual property and licensing, antitrust, insurance, ERISA, corporate contract, construction related disputes, employment and partnership disputes, and others. The Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation appointed her to preside over large national multi-district cases, filed across the country and consolidated to be managed by Judge Hochberg. She is a frequent speaker both nationally and internationally on patent law, class actions, employment law, and alternative dispute resolution. 

    Judge Hochberg was invited to sit by designation on the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and served as a patent pilot judge with special expertise in this complex area of law.  She was honored as the first Fellow of the Innovation Center for Law and Technology at New York Law School and also serves on the Center’s Advisory Board.  She previously served on the Board of Trustees of the Lasker Foundation, acclaimed for its prominence in promoting outstanding research in science and medicine.

    Judge Hochberg was the top federal law enforcement official when she served as the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, managing strategy and operations of the large public office.  As Deputy Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury Department, she spearheaded multinational tactics to combat money laundering, and was responsible for oversight of the Treasury Department’s enforcement agencies, including the Office of Foreign Assets Control [OFAC], the Bank Secrecy Office, as well as Secret Service, U.S. Customs Service and other agencies. 

    Judge Hochberg has developed risk management and civil regulatory enforcement criteria for financial institutions during her service as Senior Deputy Chief Counsel of the OTS during the S & L crisis.

    Judge Hochberg received her law degree  from Harvard Law School, where she graduated magna cum laude and was an Editor of the Harvard Law Review.  Judge Hochberg graduated, summa cum laude, from Tufts University, and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. She also attended the London School of Economics.

     

    2:30 - 3:15

    Trade secret litigation often involves highly sensitive and confidential business information, raising
    significant ethical considerations for legal professionals, companies, and employees. Whether you are prosecuting or defending a trade secret case, the ethical challenges can be complex, especially when it comes to issues of confidentiality, misappropriation, and the use of trade secrets in litigation.

    - Understand the ethical challenges involved in prosecuting and defending trade secret claims, including how to handle confidential information.
    - Learn about conflicts of interest and how to avoid unethical practices in trade secret cases.
    - Gain insights into discovery procedures and the ethical responsibilities regarding the disclosure and handling of sensitive information.
    - Explore the balance between aggressive legal tactics and adherence to professional ethical standards.
    - Learn how to navigate ethical issues in settlement negotiations and the use of trade secrets as leverage in litigation.

    3:15 - 3:30
    Co-Chair Closing Remarks and Conclusion of Trade Secret Boston 2025
Agenda Tracks: 
Track Title: 
IP & Compliance
Track Title: 
Restrictive Covenants in Employment
Track Title: 
Data/Privacy
Event Reference: 
Trade Secret Legal Protection Boston