Air Dynamics Indus. Sys. v. Lehman, CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-2073
| Decision Date | 06 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-2073 |
| Parties | AIR DYNAMICS INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff v. D. AARON LEHMAN and SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania |
(Judge Conner)
Plaintiff Air Dynamics Industrial Systems, Inc. ("Air Dynamics"), alleges that defendants D. Aaron Lehman ("Aaron Lehman" or "Aaron") and System of Systems, Inc. ("SS"), acted unlawfully to compete with Air Dynamics. In its complaint, Air Dynamics advances claims for patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, conversion, tortious interference, breach of the duty of loyalty, and unfair competition. Defendants move to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). We will deny the motion.
Air Dynamics is a Pennsylvania company founded by Air Force veteran Dan Lehman, who serves as the company's president. (Doc. 1 ¶ 13). Aaron Lehman, a Pennsylvania resident, is Dan Lehman's son and the founder of SS, which was incorporated in Pennsylvania in March of 2018. (Id. ¶¶ 2, 43, 53). Air Dynamics alleges that Aaron Lehman and SS have been unlawfully marketing Air Dynamics' patented products and using its trade secrets to solicit business.
In 2002, Dan Lehman hired Aaron Lehman as an employee in Air Dynamics' sales department. (Id. ¶ 16). When Aaron was hired, he was a 21-year-old high school graduate; he had no advanced education, industry-specific training, or managerial training or experience. (Id. ¶ 17). According to the complaint, Dan Lehman endeavored to give Aaron the training and experience necessary to eventually take over Air Dynamics. (Id.)
Aaron was employed by Air Dynamics for the next 16 years, during which time he received raises and promotions as he gained experience and developed necessary skills. (Id. ¶ 18). Air Dynamics paid for Aaron to obtain an American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists Certification from the University of North Carolina. (Id. ¶ 19). The company also allegedly paid for him to be trained in writing programmable logic controller software for Air Dynamics' proprietary and patented equipment described below. (Id. ¶ 20). Aaron was promoted to General Manager in 2016. (Id. ¶ 21).
Air Dynamics makes "large-scale industrial air-handling systems, including air cleaning and purifying equipment (i.e., filtration systems); pneumatic conveyance systems (i.e., systems that use pressurized air to convey material); vacuum systems; and, of particular relevance here, environmental test chamber systems." (Id.) The company sells its environmental test chamber systems to the United States military and other commercial customers under the company's "Desert Wind" trademark. (Id. ¶ 14). These systems allow users to simulate "theconditions of blowing sand, dust, dirt, and other particulates that can be encountered in desert environments." (Id.)
Around 2009, Dan and Aaron Lehman—working in their capacity as Air Dynamics employees and using Air Dynamics' equipment—conceived and developed the Desert Wind™ environmental testing system. (Id. ¶ 22). Air Dynamics filed provisional patent application 61/266,052 on December 2, 2009, and nonprovisional patent application 12/958,132 (the "'132 Application") on December 1, 2010. (Id. ¶ 23). Dan and Aaron Lehman later assigned to Air Dynamics their respective right, title, and interest in the '132 Application, as well as any related patent applications (including divisional applications) or patents. (Id. ¶¶ 25, 27; see also Doc. 1-3; Doc. 1-4). On May 27, 2014, the '132 Application issued as United States Patent 8,733,186 (the "'186 Patent"), titled "Sand and Dust Environmental Test System." (Doc. 1 ¶ 24); see also U.S. Patent No. 8,733,186.
The '186 Patent describes in detail Air Dynamics' Sand and Dust Environmental Test System. According to the patent, the system "is designed for environmental tests that expose test pieces to particulate matter, typically either sand or dust, entrained in an airflow." See U.S. Patent No. 8,733,186 at 12. The '186 Patent describes exactly how, and by what mechanisms, air and particulate matter are circulated through the system. (See id. at 12-18). It also contains several embodiments of the invention. (See id. at 3-10). The '186 Patent includes 15 claims in total—one independent claim and 14 dependent claims. (See id. at 18-19).
On April 15, 2014, Air Dynamics filed patent application 14/253,643 (the "'643 Application") as divisional of the '132 Application. (Doc. 1 ¶ 28). The '643Application issued on June 13, 2017, as United States Patent 9,677,991 (the "'991 Patent"), also titled "Sand and Dust Environmental Test System." (Id.); see also U.S. Patent No. 9,677,991. Dan and Aaron's assignment as it relates to the '991 Patent was recorded on June 5, 2018. (Doc. 1 ¶ 29).
Like the '186 Patent, the '991 Patent describes the Sand and Dust Environmental Test System using substantially the same language as the '186 Patent. Compare U.S. Patent No. 8,733,186 with U.S. Patent. No. 9,677,991. Unlike the '186 Patent, the '991 Patent includes five claims in total—one independent claim and four dependent claims. See U.S. Patent. No. 9,677,991 at 19-20.
Air Dynamics alleges that defendants have misappropriated its technical and nontechnical trade secrets. According to Air Dynamics, its technical trade secrets include certain proprietary technologies related to its ventilation systems and test chambers. (Doc. 1 ¶ 30). Its nontechnical trade secrets include:
(Id. ¶ 31). Air Dynamics alleges that these trade secrets are "not generally known to the public and would not be ascertainable without the expenditure of substantial time, effort, and resources." (Id. ¶ 32). Moreover, the company alleges that the information is "extremely valuable to [it] and would be similarly valuable to its competitors." (Id.)
According to the complaint, Air Dynamics does not share its confidential or proprietary information (including its trade secrets) with the public or anyone outside the company. (Id. ¶ 33). And it purportedly takes various steps to protect that information, including "having new employees sign, when they are hired, standard confidentiality and noncompete agreements; limiting employee access to information on a need-to-know basis; limiting employee access to company computer systems and email on a need-to-use basis; issuing each employee to whom access was granted with unique, password-protected credentials to access the company's computer systems; and charging its management, including Aaron [Lehman], with responsibility for enforcing those policies and protecting Air Dynamics' Trade Secret Information." (Id.) Significantly, however, Aaron is not bound by a confidentiality agreement. (Id. ¶ 144).
Aaron ended his employment with Air Dynamics in March of 2018. (Id. ¶ 36). In the time leading up to his departure, tension had apparently developed betweenAaron and Dan. (Id. ¶ 35). On his last day, Aaron arrived at the Air Dynamics office uncharacteristically early. (Id. ¶ 34). When Dan asked Aaron why he was there so early, Aaron informed him that he was leaving the company. (Id. ¶ 35). Aaron then purportedly told Dan: "I'm not going to do anything illegal, but I'm going to take business from you." (Id.)
Air Dynamics alleges that, before leaving the company, Aaron stored Air Dynamics' technical trade secrets—critical programmable logic controller and human machine interface software files—on a laptop computer. (Id. ¶ 37). These proprietary software files are used to control operation of a Desert Wind™ system for a major military project. (Id.) Air Dynamics avers that Aaron took the laptop containing the software files with him when he left the company. (Id. ¶ 38). Aaron has allegedly failed to return the laptop, despite multiple requests from Air Dynamics. (Id. ¶ 39).
After Aaron left the company, Air Dynamics' military customer—whose software files were taken by Aaron—experienced complications that required the original software to be restored on its system. (Id. ¶ 40). According to the allegata, Air Dynamics was unable to restore the software because Aaron had taken the original version with him. (Id.) The client instead contacted Aaron directly; Aaron restored the original software on the client's system. (Id. ¶ 41). Air Dynamics has purportedly confirmed that the software used in the restoration was in fact Air Dynamics' proprietary software. (Id. ¶ 42).
Air Dynamics, with assistance from forensic computer expert Catzen Computer Consulting Corporation ("Catzen"), also examined the hard drive fromAaron's workplace computer at Air Dynamics. (Id. ¶¶ 46, 47, 51). The examination allegedly revealed that, on several occasions, Aaron copied Air Dynamics' highly sensitive files onto noncompany external storage drives. (Id. ¶ 48). More specifically, Catzen uncovered evidence that Aaron copied his work emails, financial accounting records, internal business files, customer information, sales and marketing information, engineering-related information, manufacturing related information, and other...
To continue reading
Request your trial