Ex-Cartier exec fires back in trade secrets case

New York--A former Cartier advertising executive being sued for attempted digital theft of trade secrets is asking a federal judge to dismiss the case on grounds that she was permitted to access the data in question and never obtained it anyway. 

In July, Cartier parent company Richemont North America Inc. filed a lawsuit in New York federal court against Melissa Pordy, its former director of off-line advertising, claiming that she asked a subordinate to download confidential advertising information to be used when she joined rival Tiffany & Co. and tried to entice that same employee, who once was her assistant, to follow her to Tiffany. Richemont accuses her, among other things, of violation the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or CFAA. 

RELATED CONTENT: Cartier sues former exec for trade secret theft

Last week, Pordy fired back, filing a motion asking the court to dismiss all seven claims in the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot be revisited. 

A memorandum supporting the motion to dismiss filed Thursday in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York states that “In sum, all of these claims commonly rely upon facts that assert that Ms. Pordy, while employed by [Cartier], attempted to obtain information to use after her employment ... information that she never obtained and never used. Accordingly ... these claims must fail.” 

The memo argues that between the date she was informed she was being laid off (March 28) and her last day of employment (April 25), it is “undisputed” that she had authorized access to the information in question and nowhere is it alleged that she accessed, or attempted to access, Cartier’s computer systems after she left the company. 

While the amended complaint alleges that Pordy “induced [her former assistant] to access a protected computer without authorization and in a manner that exceeded [her] authorized access to obtain confidential information in violation of CFAA,” there is no pled allegation that Pordy actually ever got any of this information her former assistant allegedly obtained through the computer system. 

“To the contrary, the amended complaint alleges that Ms. Pordy requested [her former assistant] provide her with the purported information, which confirms that Ms. Pordy never received it,” court papers state.

Thereby, the alleged violation of the CFAA, the sole claim conferring jurisdiction to federal court, should be thrown out, the memo argues. 

It also states that