However, the judge denied this motion, stating that the issues at hand were best left for resolution during the discovery process or at trial. This ruling allows CelLink’s claims of both trade secret theft and patent infringement to proceed in full.
At the core of the trade secret allegations is an assertion that former Tesla employees, now working for Manaflex, shared confidential information they gained while working with CelLink. The lawsuit alleges that these individuals had access to proprietary manufacturing processes during Tesla’s prior supplier evaluation and that this insider knowledge was subsequently used to help Manaflex develop competing products.
CelLink also accuses Manaflex of infringing U.S. Patent No. 11,116,070, which covers methods for forming and arranging conductor traces in flexible circuit assemblies. The allegedly infringing products were imported into the U.S., sparking claims of unauthorized use of patented technology under federal IP law.
In its defense, Manaflex has denied all wrongdoing, claiming it developed its technology independently and that no trade secrets were stolen or improperly used. The company further argued that CelLink’s allegations were overly broad and insufficiently specific — a point the court did not find convincing at this early stage of litigation.
This case brings renewed focus to the importance of intellectual property protection in highly competitive industries where innovation cycles are fast and engineering know-how is often as valuable as registered patents. Trade secret theft claims are particularly sensitive, as they often involve issues of employee mobility, NDAs, and competitive intelligence.
Legal experts note that this case could have broader implications for how courts evaluate the intersection of trade secrets and patent protection, especially in contexts where employees move between rival firms and carry non-public technical knowledge with them.
