The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court's summary judgment in favor of MarketDial, Inc. and individual defendants John M. Stoddard and Morgan Davis in a trade secret misappropriation case brought by Applied Predictive Technologies, Inc. The court issued its nonprecedential decision on January 28, 2026, in case number 2024-1751.
The appeal stemmed from a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, where Judge Jill N. Parrish granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on APT's trade secret misappropriation claims. The district court also dismissed APT's breach of contract claim against Stoddard in a separate ruling issued in 2022.
Applied Predictive Technologies is a business analytics company that serves customers across multiple industries, including retail, financial services, and consumer packaged goods. The company owns and licenses predictive business analytics software called Test & Learn, which is used for design and analysis purposes in business decision-making.
The case originated in 2019 when APT filed suit in the District of Utah under case number 2:19-cv-00496-JNP. The litigation centered on allegations that MarketDial and the individual defendants misappropriated APT's trade secrets related to its predictive analytics technology. APT also alleged that Stoddard breached a contract with the company.
MarketDial, Inc. appears to be a competing company in the predictive analytics space, though the specific nature of the alleged trade secret misappropriation is not detailed in the publicly available portions of the court record. The case involved sealed filings, indicating that sensitive business information was at issue in the dispute.
The Federal Circuit panel that decided the appeal consisted of Circuit Judges Kimberly Moore Prost, Pauline Newman Chen, and Alan David Stark. Chief Judge Prost authored the opinion for the court. The three-judge panel unanimously affirmed the district court's rulings in favor of the defendants.
Representing APT on appeal was David Goroff of Foley & Lardner LLP in Chicago, who argued the case before the Federal Circuit. APT's legal team also included Pavan Kumar Agarwal and Eric Sophir from the Washington, D.C. office of Foley & Lardner, as well as Spencer Hamilton from Dentons US LLP in Dallas and Nicholas Hunt Jackson and Kirk Robert Ruthenberg from Washington, D.C.
MarketDial and the individual defendants were represented by Keith Anson Call of Spencer Fane LLP in Salt Lake City, who argued their case before the appeals court. The defense team also included Rodney Parker and Andrew L. Roth.
The Federal Circuit's decision was designated as nonprecedential, meaning it does not establish binding legal precedent for future cases. However, the ruling represents a significant victory for MarketDial and the individual defendants, as it upholds the district court's determination that APT failed to establish viable claims for trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract.
The case highlights the ongoing challenges companies face in protecting proprietary business analytics and predictive modeling technologies. Trade secret litigation has become increasingly common in the technology sector as companies seek to prevent former employees and competitors from using confidential information to gain competitive advantages.
APT's unsuccessful appeal demonstrates the difficulty of proving trade secret misappropriation claims, particularly when defendants can successfully argue for summary judgment at the trial court level. Summary judgment is typically granted when there are no genuine disputes of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
The affirmance by the Federal Circuit means that the case is now concluded, with MarketDial and the individual defendants having successfully defended against APT's claims. The ruling may influence how similar trade secret disputes are litigated in the predictive analytics industry.
For APT, the decision represents a setback in its efforts to protect what it alleged were valuable trade secrets related to its Test & Learn software platform. The company will need to continue relying on other intellectual property protections and contractual safeguards to protect its competitive position in the business analytics market.
The case underscores the importance of companies implementing robust trade secret protection programs, including proper employee agreements, information security measures, and clear policies regarding the handling of confidential business information. It also highlights the challenges of pursuing trade secret claims through litigation when defendants mount effective legal defenses.