"On the other hand, if Washington law applies, e.Digital argues that the clauses are unreasonable and therefore unenforceable as written. Alternatively, e.Digital asserts that even if these provisions are enforceable, e.Digital has not breached them."

Management was picked on, were they and their legal aware of CA statute?

"After reviewing the relevant case law, the court agrees with e.Digital."

All that aside...it really didn't come down to CA law, the issue of performance had to be established to make CA law relevant.

"These contacts do not appear to strongly favor either state, but the overall nature of the contacts leans toward California. "

"Mr. Boyer had a one-time duty to reveal the information in
Washington, while the longer-lasting performance– keeping the information confidential and potentially not competing– was placed on e.Digital, which was in California.

"Boyer reached out to a California company to initiate the contracting process in this case. Consequently, California has more significant contacts with the 2002 NDA than does Washington."

"California enacted a statute specifically designed to further competition by its citizens....Meanwhile, Washington’s continuing interest in this dispute appears attenuated, as digEcor has (for the most part) moved to Utah. Moreover, Washington’s interest in enforcing promises not to compete is relatively weak... Utah, as the forum state, also has only a weak policy preference to
enforce non-compete agreements, as it requires such agreements to be reasonable."

"In terms of certainty, predictability, and uniformity, it must be noted that a Washington resident reached out to a California resident here. It is thus predictable that California law would apply. Finally, the laws of Washington and
California are equally easy to determine and apply here. In sum, applying Utah’s choice of law analysis, the court concludes that California law applies to the 2002 NDA."

Two years.....wow, is it too long? It's apparent a lot of thought and analysis went into the decision.

I'm biased to e.Digital, I'm able to read & understand why e.Digital prevailed in the situation and the courts detailing, I'm as they say into it.....note to self...would I be able to understand or pay as close attention to what a judge is saying had we not, as I would not be into it?

Sorry if I rocked the boat, I just like to know how things work.

Thank you 1coyote

doni