Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ppe Casino Resorts Maryland, LLC v. Wong

United States District Court, D. Maryland

August 29, 2014

PPE CASINO RESORTS MARYLAND, LLC, d/b/a/MARYLAND LIVE! CASINO, Plaintiff,
v.
HELENA WONG, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

MARVIN J. GARBIS, District Judge.

The Court has before it Plaintiff's Motion For Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [Document 2] and the materials submitted relating thereto. The Court has held a hearing, including the taking of evidence, and had the benefit of the arguments of counsel.

The Court hereby supplements the State of reasons set forth on the records of proceedings held this date.

To obtain a preliminary injunction, Plaintiff must make a clear showing:

(1) That it will likely succeed on the merits at trial;
(2) That it is likely to be irreparably harmed absent preliminary relief;
(3) That the balance of equities tips in its favor; and
(4) That an injunction is in the public interest. Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008); Centro Tepeye v. Montgomery County , 722 F.3d 184 (4th Cir. 2013).

On the evidence now of record, the Plaintiff has met its burden of establishing a significant likelihood of success on the merits as to at least one of its claims, that is, that the Defendant's acknowledgement of the confidentiality provision in the employee's handbook created an obligation on her part. Thus, she would not be able to use confidential customer information, including email addresses, obtained in the course of her employment information. For at least some of the recipients of the solicitation email issue, the email address was obtained by Defendant in the course of her employment and at least the email addresses were recorded for use in the course of the Plaintiff's business.

The balance of equities can include the Court's considering (1) any irreparable harm that would be sustained by Plaintiff if a preliminary injunction or TRO turns out to be erroneously denied against Defendant, (2) any irreparable harm that would be sustained by the Defendant if a preliminary injunction turns out to be erroneously granted. The Court finds that the balance of equities favors the Plaintiff in view of the limited burden imposed on the Defendant by the Preliminary Injunction and the potential for irreparable harm to Plaintiff should the Defendant utilize confidential information to solicit additional customers.

The Case does not involve a public interest that favors either side.

The Court, therefore, concludes that it should issue, and shall issue, a narrowly tailored Preliminary Injunction

For the foregoing reasons:

1. Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED.
2. A Preliminary Injunction shall issue by separate Order.

SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.