Ipsos-Insight, LLC v. Gessel
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-03992
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Ipsos-Insight v. Gessel, Judge Furman granted Ipsos’s conference request about a planned non-compete injunction motion and ordered the parties to appear June 1.
Ipsos-Insight, LLC, Jacob Gessel, and the parties involved in the requested discovery and conference, including Medallia, Inc. as referenced in Ipsos’s letter.
What happened
In Ipsos-Insight, LLC v. Gessel, Ipsos said Jacob Gessel had worked for the company for more than eight years before resigning and joining Medallia, Inc. Ipsos claimed Gessel violated a paid 12-month non-compete agreement.
Ipsos asked the court to hold a conference about limited, expedited information-gathering before its planned request for an order enforcing the non-compete. The requested information included documents about Gessel’s hiring and work at Medallia, a deposition of Gessel, and shorter depositions of Medallia personnel.
Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the application and ordered the parties to appear by telephone for a conference on June 1, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. The order did not decide whether the non-compete was enforceable or whether an injunction should issue. The clerk was also directed to terminate ECF No. 9.
The detailed version
- Ipsos-Insight, LLC v. Gessel · No. 1:21-cv-03992
- Jesse Furman
- May 27, 2021
Background
Ipsos-Insight, LLC asked the court to hold a conference concerning its planned motion for a preliminary injunction, which is a request for a court order issued before final judgment. Ipsos sought to enforce what it described as a paid 12-month non-compete agreement against defendant Jacob Gessel.
According to Ipsos’s letter, Gessel worked for Ipsos for more than eight years, including in positions involving government contracts, legal work, operational matters, and privacy compliance. Ipsos said that Gessel resigned in March 2021, later disclosed that he was joining Medallia, Inc., and then stated that he did not intend to honor the non-compete. Ipsos also said that Gessel had wiped his Ipsos-issued phone before returning it. These were allegations and positions presented by Ipsos; the order did not resolve their truth.
Requested Discovery
Ipsos requested limited, expedited discovery—information exchanged before ordinary discovery—to help prepare its planned injunction motion. The request covered documents concerning Gessel’s hiring by Medallia; documents showing what he had done since joining Medallia and what he was expected to do during the following 12 months; a three- to four-hour deposition of Gessel; and approximately one-hour depositions of the Medallia personnel most involved in hiring or supervising him.
Ipsos also offered to make an Ipsos representative available for a deposition and to produce documents that opposing counsel might reasonably request.
Ruling
The court stated: “Application GRANTED.” The parties were ordered to appear remotely by telephone before Judge Jesse M. Furman on June 1, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. The order required the parties to follow the court’s teleconference procedures, including jointly emailing the court at least 24 hours before the conference with the names of counsel who might speak and the telephone numbers they expected to use.
The order did not rule on the enforceability of the non-compete, the merits of Ipsos’s anticipated preliminary-injunction motion, or whether Gessel violated the agreement. The clerk was directed to terminate ECF No. 9.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.