They argue that the lawsuit is nothing more than speculation and “a desire to chill mobility in a competitive industry.” Even if the allegations are true, they argue, Northland simply hired a former employee of Play Hockey and the two organizations compete in the same marketplace.
“It is competition,” the lawyers wrote.
While Play Hockey has alleged that Knutsen took secret information, Northland argues that all of the information was publicly available.
“There is nothing secret about the identity of ice rinks and their contact information, the location and dates of youth hockey tournaments, contact information for referees, rink coordinators, and timekeepers, and general business practices in the hockey tournament industry,” the motion to dismiss reads.
“Play Hockey’s claim as to the categories of information that constitute its trade secrets are so broad and general as to render all employees like Knutsen unemployable in their industry,” Northland’s lawyers wrote.
And while Northland doesn’t deny that Johnson met with Knutsen and Hawkinson, they note that Play Hockey doesn’t identify any instances where Northland “acquired or used any allegedly confidential information, let alone that it did so by improper means.”