Post-employment invention assignment obligation invalidated as non-competion clause

In Applied Materials v. Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment Company, a federal district court in Silicon Valley ruled that an invention assignment clause was invalid. The clause required former employees to assign inventions up to a year after the end of their employment. The court ruled that this was tantamount to an employee non-competition clause, which are illegal in California.

Additional info and commentary:

• Order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment on defendants’ counterclaims [ADDED 6/29/09]
• Court refuses to enforce invention assignment agreement as unlawful noncompete, in Fenwick Employment Brief, June 10, 2009
• Michael Elkon, Inventions Agreements as Unfair Business Practices?, in Trading Secrets blog (by Seyfarth Shaw law firm), June 29, 2009 [ADDED 6/29/09].

See also: (list is automatically generated)

• Invention ownership – watch out for automatic assignment language in the employment agreement
• Employee noncompetition clause invalidated because linked to stock-option grant, not to confidential information
• Signed Google’s non-competition clause, then got laid off
• Stanford loses patent rights because one of its researchers signed a partner company’s visitor agreement
• Kumbaya is no substitute for a good employment agreement

Tagged as: Contract forms, Employment agreements, Invention assignment agreements, Noncompetes, Noncompetition clauses