In 1979, the Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("UTSA")
was published in an attempt to provide a uniform legal framework
for improved trade secret protection across all 50 U.S. states.
Although the UTSA has been enacted in various forms by 48 states, courts have taken inconsistent
positions about whether the UTSA preempts claims for
misappropriation of non-trade secret information.
On August 9, 2013, a district court in Minnesota ruled that a state
law claim for conversion was preempted by Minnesota's Uniform
Trade Secrets Act ("MUTSA"). The court held that MUTSA
displaced "conflicting tort, restitutionary", and other
state laws "providing civil remedies for misappropriation of a
trade secret." The court reasoned that the plaintiff's
conversion claim was preempted because it was based on factual
allegations that were identical to the plaintiff's MUTSA claim.
In reaching its decision, the court noted that plaintiff did not
allege the conversion or misappropriation of any
