Rivian asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Tesla, The argument that two of the three allegations in the case do not contain sufficient allegations of trade secret theft and poaching is an attempt to defame his reputation and undermine his own recruiting efforts.
A remaining infringement lawsuit against four former Tesla employees was not included in this filing and requested "Demurrer" or a dismissal as they are not directly related to Rivian. It is still possible for lawyers representing these former employees to make a similar argument.
Tesla did not respond to a request for comment. theinformationsuperhighway will update the article when the company replies.
In July, Tesla filed a lawsuit against Rivian and four former employers alleging poaching talent and stealing trade secrets. In particular, Tesla alleged that Rivian had informed a recently retiring Tesla employee of the type of confidential information required.
Rivian said in his file filed with the California Supreme Court in Santa Clara on August 10th that it "has strict policies and procedures to ensure that it does not receive confidential information from other companies when it takes employees on board." Rivian said none of the alleged trade secrets in Tesla's complaint were found with Rivian or on any of its systems.
Rivian's main argument is that Tesla has not provided facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. This case law essentially means that the claims made by Tesla are insufficient to warrant a right to sue. Rivian argues that Tesla is using speculation, not fact, as the basis for its lawsuit.
"In particular, the court should not recognize real speculation as it is scattered in Tesla's complaint," Rivian said on the file.
Not only did Rivian deny Tesla's complaint, but he backed himself up with his own claims of inappropriateness.
Lawyers representing Rivian argued that Tesla did not bring the case to defend or protect legitimate intellectual property rights, but instead in "inappropriate and malicious attempts to slow the company's momentum" and damage its brand. The file also alleged that Tesla used the lawsuit to deter its own employees from leaving the company.
Unfortunately, slandering Rivian wasn't Tesla's only ulterior motive. Rather, she wrote her complaint to achieve a second inappropriate purpose – namely to send threatening messages to her own employees: Don't you dare leave Tesla. Aware that the strict public order that encourages employee mobility in California is restricting the use of non-compete agreements, Tesla seeks to punish four of its former employees for leaving Tesla and joining the Rivian team.
The response also questioned the timing of the lawsuit, filed shortly after Rivian announced it had raised $ 2.5 billion in funds and accounts advised by T. Rowe Price Associates Inc.