Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 1 of 44 Page ID #:1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 BUCHALTER A Professional Corporation WILLMORE F. HOLBROW III (SBN: 169688) wholbrow@buchalter.com MATTHEW L. SEROR (SBN: 235043) mseror@buchalter.com SEAN M. CASEY (SBN: 179641) scasey@buchalter.com 1000 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1500 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: 213.891.0700 BUCHALTER A Professional Corporation DYLAN WISEMAN (SBN: 173669) dwiseman@buchalter.com 55 Second Street, Suite 1700 San Francisco, CA 94105-3493 Tel: (415) 227-3546 Attorneys for Plaintiffs JERRY A. SPOLAR and TONNY JILL WILLIAMSON 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 Case No. 2:20-cv-8837 JERRY A. SPOLAR, an individual; and TONNY JILL WILLIAMSON, an 16 COMPLAINT FOR: individual, 17 Plaintiff, 18 (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT; vs. (2) VIOLATION OF THE DEFEND 19 TRADE SECRETS ACT; DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability 20 (3) UNFAIR COMPETITION company; UNREALISTIC IDEAS, LLC, 21 a Delaware limited liability company; PIECE OF WORK PRODUCTIONS, DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 22 LLC, a California limited liability company; ARCHIE GIPS, an individual; WHITNY BRAUN, an individual; JAMES 23 BRAUN, an individual; and DOES 1 24 through 25, Defendants. 25 26 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 1 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 2 of 44 Page ID #:2 1 This is a dispute about the Defendants’ unauthorized use of Plaintiffs’ life’s 2 work over 24 years to obtain, authenticate, and establish the provenance for what is 3 the 131st and last photographic image of President Abraham Lincoln alive, which 4 was taken on his death bed. Defendants have conspired to use confidential and 5 trade secret information obtained from Plaintiffs, subject to Non-Disclosure 6 Agreements, to create an unauthorized documentary, which is scheduled to air on 7 The Discovery Channel in early October, 2020. 8 Plaintiffs for their Complaint allege as follows: 9 10 JURISDICTION & VENUE 1. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 11 U.S.C. § 1331 insofar as this case arises under the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 12 2016, 18 U.S.C. §1836. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the 13 remaining claims alleged herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 14 2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) insofar 15 as a substantial portion of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims alleged 16 herein occurred in the Central District of California. 17 18 THE PARTIES 3. Plaintiff Tonny Jill Williamson (“Williamson”) is an individual and a 19 resident of St. Augustine, Illinois. 20 4. Plaintiff Jerry A. Spolar (“Spolar”) is an individual and a resident of 21 Putnam, Illinois. 22 5. Defendant Discovery Communications, LLC (“Discovery”) is a 23 limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the state of 24 Delaware with a principal place of business of One Discovery Place, Silver Springs, 25 Maryland 20910. Discovery is qualified to do business in the state of California 26 and Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Discovery 27 operates and conducts business in this judicial district. 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 2 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 3 of 44 Page ID #:3 1 6. Defendant Unrealistic Ideas, LLC (“Unrealistic”) is a limited liability 2 company organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware with a 3 principal place of business of 901 West Alameda Avenue, Suite 102, Burbank, 4 California 91506. Unrealistic is qualified to do business in the state of California 5 and Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Unrealistic 6 operates and conducts business in this judicial district. 7 7. Defendant Piece of Work Productions, LLC (“PWP”) is a limited 8 liability company organized and existing under the laws of the state of California 9 with a principal place of business of 901 West Alameda Avenue, Suite 102, 10 Burbank, California 91506. PWP is qualified to do business in the state of 11 California and Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that 12 PWP operates and conducts business in this judicial district. 13 8. Defendant Whitny Braun (“W. Braun”) is an individual who, upon 14 information and belief is a resident of Downey, California. 15 9. Defendant James Braun (“J. Braun”) is an individual who, based on 16 Plaintiffs’ information and belief is a resident of Downey, California. 17 10. Defendant Archie Gips (“Gips”) is an individual who, based on 18 Plaintiffs’ information and belief is a resident of Los Angeles, California. 19 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants 20 DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, are other as of yet unidentified parties who have 21 participated in and committed the wrongful acts alleged herein. The true names of 22 Defendants 1 through 25 are presently unknown to Plaintiffs, who therefore sue 23 said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this 24 Complaint with their true names and capacities once ascertained. 25 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that at all 26 times relevant hereto each of the Defendants was the agent, employee, alter-ego, 27 affiliate, officer, director, manager, and/or principal of the other Defendants and 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 3 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 4 of 44 Page ID #:4 1 was at all times relevant hereto acting within the course and scope of such agency 2 relationship, employment, alter-ego relationship or affiliation. 3 13. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that each 4 Defendant actively participated in, or subsequently ratified, each of the acts and 5 conduct alleged herein with full knowledge of all the facts and circumstances 6 attendant thereto, including the rights of the Plaintiffs and the damage to be 7 sustained by Plaintiffs as a result of the acts and conduct alleged herein. 8 9 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 14. Plaintiffs are the owners of an ambrotype photograph that is believed 10 to be a long lost photograph of Abraham Lincoln (“Lincoln Ambrotype”), the 16 th 11 president of the United States. An ambrotype is a type of photograph employed in 12 the 1860s, which is taken on glass, sometimes ruby glass, which uses a light13 sensitive silver colloid emulsion spread on the glass to capture and preserve a 14 photographic image thereon. 15 15. There are only 130 known and authenticated photographs of President 16 Lincoln. The Plaintiffs’ Lincoln Ambrotype is the 131st, and was taken the night 17 President Lincoln lay mortally wounded after he had been shot by John Wilkes 18 Booth. 19 16. Plaintiff Spolar acquired the Lincoln Ambrotype on December 8, 1996 20 from individuals who had purchased it from a well-advertised estate auction sale of 21 Hanks (Lincoln) memorabilia on August 29, 1996. In the intervening decades since 22 December1996, Plaintiffs traveled down their long road of authenticating the 23 provenance of the Lincoln Ambrotype, and obtained notarized statements and/or 24 sworn affidavits attesting to Plaintiffs’ ownership and other important historical 25 details regarding the Lincoln Ambrotype’s ties to the Lincoln descendants. 26 17. During the ensuing 24 years, Plaintiffs Spolar and Williamson have 27 consulted, worked with, and hired dozens of experts around the United States to 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 4 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 5 of 44 Page ID #:5 1 examine forensically and authenticate the Lincoln Ambrotype and its historical 2 provenance. 3 18. Plaintiffs’ intense and unrelenting efforts amount to a lifetime of work 4 and due diligence, and have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and thousands of 5 hours of time. This time and money was invested in interviews, examinations, tests, 6 experiments, and travel time to develop a comprehensive historical analysis of the 7 facts and circumstances surrounding the technology, creation, and lineage of the 8 Lincoln Ambrotype. 9 19. At every turn, Plaintiffs were diligent and careful to ensure that all 10 those who came into contact with them and the Lincoln Ambrotype understood that 11 Plaintiffs intended to keep their work secret and confidential at all times. Plaintiffs 12 intended to maintain this confidentiality until such time as they were satisfied that 13 they had succeeded in establishing, by scientific evidence, that the Lincoln 14 Ambrotype was in fact the last known and surviving photograph of President 15 Lincoln alive. 16 20. In connection with their investigation and analysis, and before 17 meaningfully discussing their work or the Lincoln Ambrotype with any third party, 18 Plaintiffs insisted that each such party execute a non-disclosure agreement 19 (“NDA”), and/or a confidential work-for-hire agreement, to memorialize a clear 20 and unequivocal understanding that their work and all work product created would 21 be confidential and Plaintiffs’ sole and exclusive property, without reservation. 22 21. As their work progressed, Plaintiffs developed an extensive network of 23 forensic, authentication, technology, historical, and medical experts, who, after 24 signing Plaintiffs’ confidentiality agreement, embraced these efforts, and spurred 25 Plaintiffs on through the years. Plaintiffs’ network included a confidential list of 26 dozens of medical, forensic, and authentication experts. 27 22. The Plaintiffs’ confidential work product also included many detailed 28 reports, analyses, and conclusions, scientific analytical drawings, annotated images BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 5 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 6 of 44 Page ID #:6 1 and overlays of the Lincoln Ambrotype and features thereon, experimental 2 procedures and results, and related expert and consultant write-ups. Plaintiffs’ 3 assembly of these works resulted in scores of materials, and which comprised 4 Plaintiffs’ authentication, forensic, and provenance roadmap of their journey in 5 investigating the technology and history of the Lincoln Ambrotype. 6 23. In addition, Plaintiffs also accumulated volumes of handwritten notes, 7 annotated figures and images, and detailed notes of their interactions with their core 8 team of collaborators, as well as the many others they worked with over the 24-year 9 sojourn in establishing the provenance of the Lincoln Ambrotype. 10 24. Further, Plaintiffs have also commissioned their experts to create 11 images of their Lincoln Ambrotype using various duplication technologies, for use 12 in, and to enable, more detailed analyses of various photogrammetric and other 13 aspects of the Lincoln Ambrotype. 14 25. Plaintiffs also obtained notarized, authenticating provenance 15 statements from a prior owner of the Lincoln Ambrotype, with knowledge of 16 Lincoln memorabilia, further confirming Plaintiffs’ ownership of the Lincoln 17 Ambrotype and evidencing its authenticity. 18 26. So too did Plaintiffs commission their experts to create a duplicate 19 copy of the Lincoln Ambrotype, using photographic techniques identical to those 20 used in April 14, 1865, when the original ambrotype was created. 21 27. Plaintiffs’ experts and consultants signed and agreed to abide by their 22 respective NDAs and/or confidential work-for-hire agreements, and to deliver all 23 work product to the exclusive custody, possession, and control of Plaintiffs when 24 completed. 25 28. This work product, and the information that Plaintiffs accumulated 26 over the 24-year period, including without limitation, the information identified in 27 the preceding paragraphs, was maintained as confidential trade secrets by Plaintiffs 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 6 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 7 of 44 Page ID #:7 1 (“Confidential Information”). All such Confidential Information was retained by 2 and is owned by Plaintiffs. 3 29. At all times during the 24-year span, the Plaintiffs ensured that the 4 Confidential Information was maintained as confidential and the Lincoln 5 Ambrotype never left their control. 6 30. Plaintiffs ensured that their collaborators released and delivered to 7 Plaintiffs all pre-existing and newly created work product, and that such third 8 parties were not to retain anything related to the Lincoln Ambrotype. 9 31. Towards the end of this 24-year span of time, Plaintiffs came to realize 10 they had succeeded. After more than two decades of intense investigation, study, 11 accumulation of data, and scientific analyses, they were ready to share their results 12 publicly in a way they were able to control. 13 32. Plaintiffs reached out first to the National Geographic Channel to 14 discuss the possibility of making a documentary highlighting their journey and the 15 now well-established provenance of the Lincoln Ambrotype. Through their 16 extensive network, and eager to meet people to discuss their plans, Plaintiffs were 17 also referred to W. Braun, the daughter of firearms historian and gunsmith. J. 18 Braun, who both executed Plaintiffs’ NDA. 19 33. Plaintiffs also learned that W. Braun had some exposure to a 20 documentary related to the authentication of a photograph of Billy the Kid. While 21 that effort had very limited exposure, when Plaintiffs contacted her, Defendant W. 22 Braun was enthusiastic over the telephone. That enthusiasm continued during 23 subsequent correspondence. W. Braun indicated she had an existing relationship 24 with Unrealistic, a documentary film production company. 25 34. The conversations led Plaintiffs to a schedule a brief trip to California 26 from their home in Illinois, to visit with W. Braun and her colleagues at Unrealistic. 27 Prior to the meeting, Gips the President of Unrealistic, W. Braun, J. Braun, and 28 others signed the NDA. At this February 16, 2018 meeting, W. Braun, J. Braun, BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 7 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 8 of 44 Page ID #:8 1 and Unrealistic were shown some of Plaintiffs’ confidential information, including 2 part of a detailed presentation describing their twenty-plus year research journey 3 and their plans for a documentary. 4 35. During the February 16, 2018 meeting, Plaintiffs met with W. Braun, 5 her father J. Braun, and Unrealistic’s President. Plaintiffs set up their laptop to 6 begin their planned presentation, which detailed aspects of their extensive 7 authentication odyssey. During the course of their presentation, subject to the 8 NDA, Plaintiffs identified several of their authenticating experts. 9 36. After only a short time, and well before Plaintiffs would have finished 10 their presentation, Defendant Gips interrupted and informed Plaintiffs that they had 11 to move the meeting to another office in order to present the same to National 12 Geographic representatives from New York, via video conference, namely to 13 National Geographic’s then executive producer, Igal Svet (“Svet”). Svet also 14 agreed by email to protect the confidentiality of Plaintiffs’ information. 15 37. During their meetings in Los Angeles, Plaintiffs explained that all of 16 their information related to the Lincoln Ambrotype was confidential, including for 17 example, the names of and work done by Plaintiffs’ many experts and consultants. 18 Upon returning to Illinois after their brief visit to Los Angeles, Plaintiffs continued 19 in good faith to interact with Defendants Gips, W. Braun, J. Braun, and their 20 colleagues at Unrealistic. 21 38. Shortly after returning to their home in Illinois on or about February 22 20, 2018, Plaintiffs were shocked to receive a message from Defendant W. Braun 23 asking for verification of a typed list of Plaintiffs’ experts and consultants rife with 24 errors, which W. Braun had misappropriated from Plaintiff Williamson’s materials 25 during the Los Angeles visit. 26 39. Williamson admonished W. Braun for creating it, and for return of the 27 materials. Williamson deduced that W. Braun must have reduced it to writing 28 without permission during the Los Angeles meeting. Williamson expressly BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 8 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 9 of 44 Page ID #:9 1 reminded W. Braun of the signed NDA, and that she was obligated to return and/or 2 destroy the list, was not to keep it, was not to use it for any purpose, and was not to 3 contact Plaintiffs’ experts without advance permission. The list was never returned. 4 40. A few weeks later, Defendants W. Braun, J. Braun, and Gips informed 5 Plaintiffs that National Geographic was not interested in the project. However, they 6 proposed meeting with the History Channel to present Plaintiffs’ project to then 7 History Channel executive producers Sean Boyle (“Boyle”) and Kristen Burns 8 (“Burns”), in Chicago in June 2018. 9 41. Plaintiffs traveled to Chicago and obtained signed NDAs from each of 10 these History Channel representatives, and from another Unrealistic representative 11 Paul Sadowski, before presenting their project, which was well received, according 12 to all participants. 13 42. After returning home, Plaintiffs’ received an offer from Defendant 14 Unrealistic’s representative Jessica Navarro, for a mere $2,000. This offer fell far 15 short of their expectations, in view of Unrealistics’ own written assertions that the 16 proposed History Channel project was worth “7-digits.” This low offer from 17 Unrealistic was especially offensive given all of the time, resources, and money 18 expended by Plaintiffs’ during the preceding many years. Consequently, Plaintiffs 19 rejected the unreasonable offer. 20 43. Thereafter, in August 2018, Defendants Unrealistic, Gips, W. Braun, 21 and J. Braun, and others at Unrealistic communicated to Plaintiffs that the History 22 Channel was not interested in the project, and that Defendants Gips and Unrealistic 23 had “pulled the plug,” even though the Plaintiffs’ signed Artists Holding 24 Agreement with Unrealistic had yet to expire. 25 44. Despite Defendants’ claims regarding the lack of interest in the 26 Lincoln Ambrotype project, Plaintiffs began to receive word from their extensive 27 network of experts, historians, and collaborators that one or more of Defendants 28 Discovery, Gips, J. Braun, W. Braun, Unrealistic, PWP, Boyle, Svet, and their BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 9 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 10 of 44 Page ID #:10 1 agents and or others were contacting other of Plaintiffs’ many experts and 2 collaborators. 3 45. Unknown to Plaintiffs at that time, during October 2018, Boyle left 4 The History Channel and moved to Defendant Discovery in an executive producer 5 role. Upon further information and belief, Svet left National Geographic and joined 6 Defendant Discovery in May 2019, also in an executive producer role and to work 7 with Boyle. 8 46. Other than disclosures pursuant to the NDAs, Plaintiffs’ experts and 9 collaborators were known only to Plaintiffs. Many of such individuals were listed 10 in Plaintiffs’ confidential list that Defendant W. Braun misappropriated in the 11 February meeting in Los Angeles. 12 47. Upon learning that W. Braun posted confidential information online, 13 continued to make contact with and may have even filmed activities with one or 14 more of Plaintiffs’ confidential network of experts and collaborators, Plaintiffs sent 15 a cease and desist letter dated August 2, 2019 to Defendants Unrealistic and W. 16 Braun. See Ex. A. 17 48. Defendants Unrealistic and W. Braun failed to respond to the letter. As 18 Plaintiffs’ network uncovered and shared additional information, it became 19 apparent that Defendants had ignored the cease and desist demand and continued to 20 secretly make contact with Plaintiffs’ experts. 21 49. Plaintiffs tried in earnest to piece together conversations and 22 information received from their many experts and collaborators, and Plaintiffs were 23 informed, and on that basis believed, that W. Braun continued to work on filming in 24 violation of her NDA, and was potentially working with Discovery. 25 50. On or about January 21, 2020, Plaintiff caused another cease and desist 26 letter to be sent to W. Braun, and this time, also sent a courtesy copy to Discovery. 27 See Ex. B. 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 10 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 11 of 44 Page ID #:11 1 51. After confirming from their network and publicly available sources, 2 Plaintiffs were informed and on that basis believed, that Boyle and Svet had moved 3 to Discovery, and were likely colluding with one or more Defendants, in continuing 4 violations of Plaintiffs’ rights. 5 52. Consequently, Plaintiffs caused another cease and desist letter dated 6 April 3, 2020 to be communicated to Boyle at Discovery. See Ex. C. 7 53. Counsel for Discovery responded, refusing to confirm or deny that any 8 production was in the works regarding Plaintiffs’ property and confidential 9 materials, and asserted that Boyle was not involved in any such project. 10 54. On September 14, 2020, Discovery announced the airing of new 11 documentary titled, “Discovery Presents Hidden Photo of Lincoln” or 12 “Undiscovered: The Lost Lincoln,” focused on the Lincoln Ambrotype, starring W. 13 Braun. The production is scheduled to be broadcast on or about October 4, 2020 at 14 9 P.M. Eastern Time on The Discovery Channel, which is owned and operated by 15 Defendant Discovery. 16 55. The announcement included a trailer, relating to the Lincoln 17 Ambrotype. See announcement attached hereto as Ex. D. 18 56. In reviewing Discovery’s announcement and the video trailer, 19 Plaintiffs discovered the scope and breadth of Defendants’ unscrupulous conduct 20 and confirmed Defendants' breach of their NDAs and misappropriation of trade 21 secrets. 22 57. Moreover, upon information and belief, Discovery employed Boyle 23 and Svet (who were both subject to an NDA) while this Lincoln Ambrotype 24 documentary was being made. Discovery was put on further notice of Plaintiffs’ 25 proprietary interests, at least as early as January 2020 via a cease and desist letter. 26 Discovery’s decision to produce and display the documentary was a knowing and 27 willful violation of Plaintiffs’ rights. 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 11 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 12 of 44 Page ID #:12 1 58. Elements of the announcement and/or video trailer could have only 2 been obtained from Defendants in violation of the above agreements. 3 59. The broadcast of the October 4, 2020 documentary will cause 4 irreparable harm to the Plaintiffs’ property and the value thereof, including 5 confidential, proprietary, and trade secret work product created over the last 24 6 years. Historical errors in the trailer if propagated to the broadcast will cause further 7 irreparable harm. 8 60. Attached hereto as Exhibit E are copies of signed NDAs, that are part 9 of a larger collection of NDAs, emails, & work-for-hire agreements evidencing 10 Defendants’ duty of confidentiality owed to Plaintiffs, which Defendants have 11 violated in breach of Plaintiffs’ contract rights. 12 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 13 (Violation of the Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016 - 18 U.S.C. § 1831, et seq. – 14 Against All Defendants) 15 61. Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference the allegations contained 16 in Paragraphs 1 through 60 as if fully set forth herein. 17 62. Plaintiffs are the owners of the Confidential and Trade Secret 18 Information, described in paragraphs 17 – 27 above and elsewhere. 19 63. Plaintiffs derive substantial potential economic value from the 20 Confidential and Trade Secret Information not being readily ascertainable through 21 proper means. Plaintiffs have engaged in advanced discussions with third parties 22 regarding the potential exploitation of the Confidential and Trade Secret 23 Information, including, but not limited to, the use of the Confidential and Trade 24 Secret Information in connection with a documentary or other program regarding 25 Abraham Lincoln. The contemplated documentary or program is intended to be 26 broadcast throughout the United States and internationally. 27 64. Plaintiffs have taken reasonable steps to protect the confidentiality of 28 their Confidential and Trade Secret Information by, among other things, restricting BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 12 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 13 of 44 Page ID #:13 1 access to the Confidential and Trade Secret Information and requiring those 2 individuals afforded access to said information to sign confidentiality, non3 disclosure agreements. 4 65. Defendants have misappropriated the Confidential and Trade Secret 5 Information in an unlawful and improper manner as detailed more fully herein. 6 66. Defendants took active measures to conceal their misappropriation of 7 the Confidential and Trade Secret Information through the use of covert meetings, 8 by instructing third parties to conceal their communications with Defendants from 9 Plaintiffs, and by failing to be upfront regarding the use of the Confidential and 10 Trade Secret Information. 11 67. In addition to an award of damages, Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief to 12 protect the Confidential and Trade Secret Information. These materials are vital to 13 Plaintiffs’ business and their efforts to maintain their economic advantage over 14 competitors. Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm absent injunctive relief. 15 68. Defendants’ misappropriation of the Confidential and Trade Secret 16 Information has caused and will continue to cause Plaintiffs significant injury, 17 including, but not limited to actual damages, harm to their reputation, lost profits, 18 and the diminution of the value of their Confidential and Trade Secret Information 19 and items related thereto. 20 69. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that 21 Defendants have been unjustly enriched as a result of their misappropriation of the 22 Confidential and Trade Secret Information. 23 70. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that 24 Defendants’ misappropriation of the Confidential and Trade Secret Information was 25 intentional, willful, knowing, deliberate, fraudulent, malicious, oppressive, and 26 undertaken in bad faith. As a result, Plaintiffs are entitled to exemplary damages 27 and attorney’s fees pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(C) and (D). 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 13 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 14 of 44 Page ID #:14 1 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Breach of Contract – Against Unrealistic, Gips, W. Braun, J. Braun and 3 DOES 1-10) 4 71. Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference the allegations contained 5 in Paragraphs 1 through 70, as if fully set forth herein. 6 72. On or about the noted dates on the attachments to Exhibit E, Plaintiffs 7 and Defendants Unrealistic, Gips, W. Braun, J. Braun, and others, including Svet, 8 and Boyle, entered into NDAs and/or work-for-hire agreements (“Agreements”), 9 designed to restrict the use and exploitation of the Confidential Information. See 10 Exhibit E. 11 73. These Agreements contained various provisions and covenants, which 12 detailed actions that Defendants, respectively, were precluded: retaining for their 13 own benefit certain work product owned by Plaintiffs, and disclosing and sharing 14 certain facts disclosed to them by the Plaintiffs. The Agreements, among other 15 prohibitions, specifically provided that Defendants: 16 a. Shall not disclose or permit access to Confidential Information”; 17 b. Shall take all steps necessary to protect the secrecy of the Confidential 18 Information; 19 c. Not use the … Confidential Information; 20 d. Immediately notify … of any unauthorized disclosure; 21 e. Fully cooperate with the Disclosing Party in any effort undertaken … 22 23 to enforce its rights. 74. The Agreements were executed by Plaintiffs and Defendants 24 Unrealistic, Gips, W. Braun, J. Braun, and others, including Svet, Boyle, M. 25 Osterman, F. Osterman, Hager, and Burns, respectively. 26 75. The Agreements are valid and enforceable contracts. 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 14 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 15 of 44 Page ID #:15 1 76. Plaintiffs have satisfied all of their obligations under the respective 2 Agreements except those obligations that were excused as a result of the 3 Defendants’ breaches. 4 77. The noted Defendants breached the Agreements when (s)he/it 5 committed the acts set forth herein. 6 78. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ respective breaches of 7 the Agreements, Plaintiffs has suffered damages. 8 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 9 (Unfair Competition – Against All Defendants) 10 79. Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference the allegations contained 11 in Paragraphs 1 through 78 as if fully set forth herein. 12 80. By retaining and using Plaintiffs’ Confidential and Trade Secret 13 Information as set forth herein, Defendants have unfairly competed with Plaintiffs. 14 81. Defendants have compromised the confidentiality of the Confidential 15 and Trade Secret Information, have undermined (or attempted to undermine) 16 Plaintiffs’ competitive advantage, and caused, and are continuing to cause, Plaintiff 17 to sustain harm and damage. 18 82. Among other things, Defendants’ conduct, as alleged herein, has 19 deprived Plaintiffs of the opportunity to maximize the value of their Confidential 20 and Trade Secret Information by launching a competing documentary using the 21 Confidential and Trade Secret Information. 22 83. The conduct of the Defendants as set forth herein constitutes acts of 23 unfair competition in violation of California Business and Professions Code § 24 17200, et seq. 25 84. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unfair competition, 26 they have been unjustly enriched in an amount not yet ascertained. 27 85. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unfair competition in 28 violation of California Business and Professions Code, Sections 17200, et seq., BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 15 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 16 of 44 Page ID #:16 1 Plaintiffs have suffered, and will continue to suffer, substantial and irreparable 2 harm. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that 3 Defendants still possess the Confidential and Trade Secret Information and will 4 continue to engage in acts of unfair competition unless enjoined and restrained. 5 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 6 Therefore, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants as follows: 7 On Plaintiffs’ First Cause of Action: 8 1. That the Court issue a preliminary and permanent injunction against 9 Defendants enjoining the actual or threatened misappropriation of Plaintiffs’ 10 Confidential and Trade Secret Information, and enjoining the Defendants from 11 continuing to use, retain and misappropriate Plaintiffs’ Confidential and Trade 12 Secret Information, including without limitation enjoining the airing of Discovery’s 13 documentary on the Lincoln Ambrotype; 14 2. For an order requiring Defendants to return to Plaintiffs all of the 15 Confidential and Trade Secret Information in their possession, custody, or control, 16 including all physical and electronic copies of same; 17 3. That Plaintiffs be awarded damages for the actual loss caused by 18 Defendants’ misappropriation; 19 4. That Plaintiffs be awarded damages for any unjust enrichment caused 20 by the misappropriation; 21 5. That Plaintiffs be awarded, at their option, damages measured by 22 imposition of a reasonable royalty in favor of Plaintiffs for the Defendants’ 23 unauthorized disclosure and use of the Plaintiffs’ Confidential and Trade Secret 24 Information; 25 6. That Plaintiffs be awarded exemplary damages, in an amount two 26 times the amount of other damages awarded to Plaintiffs, based on Defendants’ 27 willful and malicious acts of misappropriation; 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 16 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 17 of 44 Page ID #:17 1 7. That Plaintiffs be awarded their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs 2 based on Defendants’ willful and malicious acts of misappropriation; 3 On Plaintiffs’ Second Cause of Action: 4 8. That Plaintiffs be awarded damages to compensate them for 5 Defendants’ respective breaches of the Agreements; 6 9. For the issuance of a preliminary and permanent injunction against 7 Defendants enjoining them from violating their respective contractual obligations to 8 Plaintiffs; 9 10 On Plaintiffs’ Third Cause of Action: 10. That Defendants be ordered to disgorge all profits and financial gains 11 received as a result of the acts and conduct alleged herein; 12 11. For the issuance of a preliminary and permanent injunction against 13 Defendants enjoining them from continuing their acts of unfair competition; 14 On All of Plaintiffs’ Causes of Action: 15 12. That Plaintiffs be awarded pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; 16 13. That Plaintiffs be awarded the costs of this Action and reasonable 17 attorney’s fees; and 18 14. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 19 20 DATED: September 25, 2020 21 BUCHALTER A Professional Corporation 22 23 By: 24 25 26 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 17 /s/Willmore F. Holbrow III WILLMORE F. HOLBROW III DYLAN WISEMAN MATTHEW L. SEROR SEAN M. CASEY Attorneys for Plaintiffs ______ Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 18 of 44 Page ID #:18 1 2 3 4 JURY TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable in this matter. DATED: September 25, 2020 BUCHALTER A Professional Corporation 5 6 By: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFES SION AL CORPORAT ION IRVINE BN 41697589v2 COMPLAINT 18 /s/Willmore F. Holbrow III WILLMORE F. HOLBROW III DYLAN WISEMAN MATTHEW L. SEROR SEAN M. CASEY Attorneys for Plaintiffs Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 19 of 44 Page ID #:19 EXHIBIT A 1 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT 2:20-cv-8837 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 20 of 44 Page ID #:20 2 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 21 of 44 Page ID #:21 3 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 22 of 44 Page ID #:22 EXHIBIT B 4 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 23 of 44 Page ID #:23 5 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 24 of 44 Page ID #:24 6 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 25 of 44 Page ID #:25 EXHIBIT C 7 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 26 of 44 Page ID #:26 8 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 27 of 44 Page ID #:27 9 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 28 of 44 Page ID #:28 EXHIBIT D DISCOVERY’S WEBSITE ANNOUNCEMENT (2 pages) Captured 9/14/2020 from https://press.discovery.com/us/dsc/programs/lost-lincoln/ 10 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 29 of 44 Page ID #:29 11 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 30 of 44 Page ID #:30 12 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 31 of 44 Page ID #:31 EXHIBIT E 13 BUCHALTER EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION IRVINE Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 32 of 44 Page ID #:32 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 33 of 44 Page ID #:33 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 34 of 44 Page ID #:34 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 35 of 44 Page ID #:35 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 36 of 44 Page ID #:36 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 37 of 44 Page ID #:37 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 38 of 44 Page ID #:38 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 39 of 44 Page ID #:39 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 40 of 44 Page ID #:40 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 41 of 44 Page ID #:41 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 42 of 44 Page ID #:42 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 43 of 44 Page ID #:43 Case 2:20-cv-08837 Document 1 Filed 09/25/20 Page 44 of 44 Page ID #:44