LEW v Edge thrown out - yes it is, no it isn't!!!

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
KB
Posts: 3868
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULLGARIA UK

by KB

Got a message from my wheel supplier to say LEW's action against Edge has been thrown out of court.

Always seemed a bit tenuous to me. Here's an extract from the press release.

[b]As you may know, on or around April 15, 2008, Lew Racing, Inc., Paul Lew and Lee
Vaccaro (the “Lew Parties”) filed an action against Edge Composites, LLC, and Jason
Schiers (the “Edge Parties”) in Nevada State Court. We believe that all of the allegations made by the Lew Parties are false and unfounded. A hearing on an application by the Lew Parties for a temporary restraining order was held on Wednesday, April 16, 2008, in Clark County, Nevada, at which the Edge Parties were successful in defeating the Lew Parties’ application. Furthermore, on May 5, 2008, the Court issued a written ruling, which affirmed that prior ruling denying the Lew Parties' request for a temporary restraining order. The Court ruled that the Lew Parties failed to demonstrate that they were likely prevail on the underlying merits of their allegations against the Edge Parties.
Moreover, the Court found that the Lew Parties failed to establish that they would be
irreparably injured or damaged without the issuance of a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction.
[/b]
Last edited by KB on Fri May 23, 2008 7:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

BluSkyy
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:22 pm
Location: Owasso, OK, USA
Contact:

by BluSkyy

Am I reading that wrong? To me it only says that they tried to get a preliminary injunction (a cease and desist? designed to throw a monkeywrench in edge's works) relative to their lawsuit against EDGE and were unable to make the case for the injunction. The only news relative to the merit of their case in general is that in reference to the temporary restraining order the judge ruled their case "unlikely to prevail" in court.
I have a blue bike.

by Weenie


User avatar
CharlesM
Posts: 5771
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Phoenix Arizona

by CharlesM

You're not reading it wrong, but your net interpretation might be a bit off.


This was about the merrits of the case and evidence in determining the restraining orders enforcement or rejection.


While the decision relates at this point to rejecting Lew's request for restraining order, it also speaks a bit to the credibility of the evidence presented for the greater case...


I think EDGE wanted to make sure that people had both sides of the story as things stand today. It makes sense for Edge to present info as they see it, as the case it's self was presented to the media by Lew. If asked, Lew may be of the opinion that they benefited because the entire case was not thrown out and the court agrees there is more to this that warrants review.


There are two perspectives to what's happening. That's fair as so far there's been only one perspective for the most part.
Last edited by CharlesM on Thu May 22, 2008 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

KB
Posts: 3868
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULLGARIA UK

by KB

Pez - I agree. There's a subtext to this, which IMO suggests it would be foolhardy and costly to pursue this action any further: what could be classed as a 'vexatious litigant'.

User avatar
CharlesM
Posts: 5771
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Phoenix Arizona

by CharlesM

As a follow up... as it could be interpreted as Edge's opinion if read wrong...

It's been explained to me that It was the court that indicated as part of the ruling that Lew were not likely to prevail.

I actually read that wrong and thought it an Edge opinion versus a part of the court's ruling.
Last edited by CharlesM on Fri May 23, 2008 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
J-Nice
Posts: 1474
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 12:35 am

by J-Nice

What was the restraining order for?

Was Lew trying to shut down Edges' total output of any and all products, or just the rims?

And if it was just the rims, on what grounds did they presume to have a legal leg to stand on?

User avatar
CharlesM
Posts: 5771
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Phoenix Arizona

by CharlesM

There was no restraining order. The suite didn't specify product (at least not the two copies of the suite I have seen) but the case is wheel related. Had the judge found sufficient info / evidence, they would have also then designated what portion of production to stop...

The complaint is several pages but basically said the process / formulation involved in making parts was secrete and that it also might breach national security. There is also a portion of that complaint directed to an individual at EDGE.

The judge didn't find compelling evidence for a shut down based on info on formula or process provided. And from experience I know that companies can be shut immediately if national security is even remotely in question. that didn't happen here either.

lewracingvp
in the industry
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

by lewracingvp

As you may know, on or around April 10, 2008, Lew Racing, Inc., Paul Lew and Lee Vaccaro (the "Lew Parties") filed a twenty page complaint alleging misappropriation of trade secrets against Edge Composites, LLC, and Jason Schiers (the "Edge Parties") in Nevada State Court.

A hearing on an application by the Lew Parties for a temporary restraining order was held on Wednesday, April 16, 2008, in Clark County, Nevada, at which the Court requested further argument. On April 28, 2008, the Court heard argument but did not accept evidence to determine if it would issue injunctive relief to enjoin the further misappropriation of Lew’s trade secrets. Furthermore, on May 5, 2008, the Court issued a minute order denying Lew’s request for extraordinary relief. The Court retained jurisdiction to hear the case on the merits, and Lew intends to litigate the matter to its natural conclusion.

We believe the Court erred but will commence discovery as soon as Edge files its answer in the trial court. We further believe that all of the allegations made will established in court once the evidence is adduced at trial. In other words, the hearings of April, 2008, are merely the first stages of a lengthy legal proceeding, which are required in trade secret infringement cases.

Should you have any questions concerning the information contained herein, please contact our legal counsel, Jeffrey J. Whitehead, Esq., at Whitehead Law Offices, 2431 W. Horizon Ridge Pkwy., Ste. 110, Henderson, NV 89052, 702-451-7272.
Lee Vaccaro
VP of Corporate Development
702-205-5766 direct
702-743-5508 office
www.lewracing.com
www.lewaerospace.com

User avatar
pritchet74
Posts: 1307
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:38 pm
Location: NorCal

by pritchet74

:roll:
:popcorn:
Have you ever wondered if there was more to life, other than being really, really, ridiculously good looking?

by Weenie


KB
Posts: 3868
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULLGARIA UK

by KB

Here's the full mail I received. Seems like it's going to get nasty and us the customers will ultimately pay for these actions. Watch the prices go up. Better get Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones to dust them black suits down or perhaps better to bring back the Blues Brothers because it's turning into a black comedy!!! What a farce.

To all Edge Composites Customers:
As you may know, on or around April 15, 2008, Lew Racing, Inc., Paul Lew and Lee
Vaccaro (the “Lew Parties”) filed an action against Edge Composites, LLC, and Jason
Schiers (the “Edge Parties”) in Nevada State Court. We believe that all of the allegations made by the Lew Parties are false and unfounded. A hearing on an application by the Lew Parties for a temporary restraining order was held on Wednesday, April 16, 2008, in Clark County, Nevada, at which the Edge Parties were successful in defeating the Lew Parties’ application. Furthermore, on May 5, 2008, the Court issued a written ruling, which affirmed that prior ruling denying the Lew Parties' request for a temporary restraining order.The Court ruled that the Lew Parties failed to demonstrate that they were likely prevail on the underlying merits of their allegations against the Edge Parties. Moreover, the Court found that the Lew Parties failed to establish that they would be irreparably injured or damaged without the issuance of a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction.
The Court has made the correct decision both times in this matter, and we are confident that the Court will ultimately rule in favor of the Edge Parties on all issues. We know that litigation such as that involved in this matter may bring uncertainty to many of you— our valued friends, distributors and customers. We sincerely apologize for any concern this matter may have caused you or your customers as a result of the Lew Parties' actions.
We assure you that we have retained competent and experienced legal counsel to handle this matter in our behalf. Our team of attorneys are handling this matter so that it does not distract us from producing the finest composite cycling products on the market. We intend to aggressively pursue our defense in this matter until we have been cleared of any and all allegations of wrong doing.
Should you have any questions concerning the information contained herein, please
contact our legal counsel, Blain H. Johnson, at the law offices of Smith Knowles, P.C.
4723 Harrison Boulevard, Suite 200, Ogden, Utah 84403, 801-476-0303.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post