Ferco Enterprises, Inc. v. Taylor Recycling Facility, LLC , 291 F. App'x 304 ( 2008 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
AUG 29, 2008
No. 07-15224 THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________ CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 05-02980-CV-ODE-1
FERCO ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Plaintiff-Counter-
Defendant-Appellant,
versus
TAYLOR RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC,
JAMES W. TAYLOR, JR.,
MARK PAISLEY,
TAYLOR BIOMASS ENERGY, LLC,
TAYLOR HOLDING GROUP, LTD.,
Defendants-Counter-
Claimants-Counter-
Defendants-Appellees,
JAW ENTERPRISES, INC.,
JOHN A. WILLIAMS,
Counter-Defendants-
Counter-Claimants-
Appellants.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________
(August 29, 2008)
Before WILSON, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Appellants FERCO Enterprises, Inc. (“FERCO”), JAW Enterprises, Inc.
(“JAW”), and John A. Williams appeal the district court’s entry of summary
judgment in favor of Appellees Taylor Recycling Facility, LLC, James W. Taylor,
Jr., Taylor Biomass Energy, LLC, Taylor Holding Group, Ltd., (collectively,
“Taylor Appellees”), and Mark Paisley. Appellants sued Taylor Appellees and
Paisley for misappropriation of confidential information and trade secrets, and
breach of confidentiality agreements. The Taylor Appellees then raised claims
against FERCO, JAW, and Williams for breach of contract, quantum meruit, and
tortious interference with contract. JAW then asserted additional claims against
the Taylor Appellees and Paisley. All parties moved for summary judgment, and
the district court granted each motion.
On appeal, FERCO, JAW, and Williams argue the following: (1) genuine
issues of material fact preclude summary judgment for Taylor Appellees and
2
Paisley on the trade secrets claims; (2) the district court erred in rejecting
Appellants’ ratification argument; (3) genuine issues of material fact preclude
summary judgment for Paisley on the breach of duty of loyalty and confidentiality
agreement claims; (4) the district court erred in determining that Appellee James
Taylor is not personally liable for claims against Taylor Recycling Facility and
Taylor Biomass Energy; (5) the district court erred in entering summary judgment
for Taylor Appellees on the tortious interference claim; (6) the district court erred
in finding that the Georgia Trade Secrets Act of 1990, O.C.G.A. § 10-1-760 et seq,
preempted the common law claims; and (7) the district court erred in entering
summary judgment for Paisley on the computer crime claims.
After reviewing the record and the parties’ briefs, and with the benefit of
having heard oral argument, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
3