Jane Street Group LLC has petitioned a Manhattan federal judge to dismiss the counterclaims and affirmative defenses presented by two former employees and Millennium Management LLC in an ongoing trade secret dispute. The trading firm asserts that the counterclaims are either “redundant” or “unsupported by alleged facts.”
Jane Street Trade Secret Row: Jane Street’s Accusations
Jane Street has accused the ex-employees, Douglas Schadewald and Daniel Spottiswood, along with Millennium, of appropriating confidential trading strategies. In a Friday filing, Jane Street argued that the counterclaims merely reflect the defendants’ denial of the allegations. The firm contends that the defendants are attempting to use the counterclaims to publicize their narrative and tarnish Jane Street with unsubstantiated claims of bad faith.
“Defendants’ aim appears to be to use the improperly asserted counterclaims as vehicles to publicize their views of the case and to smear Jane Street with factually unsupported claims of ‘bad faith,'” the filing states.
Allegations of Misappropriation
In April, Jane Street initiated the lawsuit against Millennium, Schadewald, and Spottiswood. The firm claims that the former employees, bound by confidentiality agreements, took Jane Street’s proprietary trading strategies to Millennium when they joined in February. Jane Street alleges that within weeks of their new employment, evidence emerged indicating that all three defendants were using and exploiting its proprietary strategies.
Dismissal of Counterclaims and Defenses
Jane Street has requested the court dismiss the four counterclaims from the defendants, labeling them as redundant and mere mirror images of Jane Street’s original claims. The firm argues that the issues raised by the counterclaims will be addressed through its affirmative claims, rendering the counterclaims unnecessary for the litigation.
