Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: BC551112, Date: 2025-02-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC551112    Hearing Date: February 19, 2025    Dept: 31

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 31

HEARING DATE:     February 19, 2025                             TRIAL DATE:  Disposed

CASE:                         Pine Valley, Inc. v. Ajinomoto North America Inc., et al.

CASE NO.:                 BC551112

COURT-APPOINTED RECEIVER PETER S. DAVIS’S THIRD INTERIM REQUEST FOR COMPENSATION OF STAFF AND COUNSEL FEES0

I.          BACKGROUND

 On July 9, 2014, Plaintiff Pine Valley, Inc. (“Pine Valley”) filed a Complaint against Defendants, Ajinomoto North America, Inc., Ajinomoto Frozen Foods, U.S.A, Inc., and Trader Joe’s Company, alleging causes of action for (1) breach of written contract, (2) intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, (3) fraud, (4) negligent misrepresentation, (5) unfair competition, (6) breach of fiduciary duty, (7) aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, (8) violation of California Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and (9) misappropriation of confidential and/or proprietary information.

On January 28, 2016, Plaintiff won a jury verdict against Ajinomoto North America, Inc. and Ajinomoto Frozen Foods, U.S.A, Inc. (“Defendants”).  The jury found, among other things, that Defendants willfully and maliciously misappropriated Plaintiff’s trade secret for frozen-chicken fried rice and frozen-vegetable fried rice (the “Trade Secrets”).  The Court also found that Defendants should pay a reasonable royalty.  The parties stipulated to a royalty of 4% of gross sales from the Trade Secrets sold and to be sold by Defendants starting from January 28, 2016.  

On November 10, 2016, the Court found that the royalty payments were to start on January 28, 2016 and to continue for so long as Defendants sell the Trade Secrets.  On November 10, 2016, the Court issued an order, which provided in relevant part, that Defendants would not be required to pay the royalty when the Trade Secrets cease to exist. 

 On February 28, 2017, the Court entered judgment against Defendants (hereafter, “Judgment Debtors”), which included the royalty payments (the “Judgment”). 

On May 11, 2017, the parties filed appeals.  Pine Valley (“Pine Valley” or “Judgment Creditor”) appealed from orders denying its ability to recover punitive damages; Judgment Debtors appealed (1) the verdict and all of the causes of action (2) the royalty award, and (3) the dismissal with prejudice of Judgment Debtors’ cross-complaint against Pine Valley. 

On April 9, 2019, the Court of Appeal affirmed the Judgment against Judgment Debtors in all respects to all the causes of action, including the royalty award, and affirmed the dismissal of Judgment Debtors’ cross-complaint.  

On June 10, 2019, Pine Valley filed an Acknowledgement of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment in the amount of $7,476,644.28.  Concurrently, the parties executed a signed stipulation stating, in part, that the Judgment is partially satisfied, excluding, as relevant here, the ongoing equitable royalty that Judgment Debtors owe to Judgment Creditor accruing after March 31, 2019.  The stipulation was signed by the Court on July 25, 2019.

In 2021, Pine Valley filed a motion for the appointment of limited purpose receiver.  On May 20, 2022, the court issued an order granting Pine Valley’s motion to appoint a receiver to determine whether Judgment Debtors were selling products using or derived from Pine Valley’s trade secrets. 

On February 7, 2023, Peter S. Davis was appointed as the receiver.

Mr. Davis now submits a Fifth Interim Request for Compensation of Staff and Counsel Fees.

The request is unopposed. 

II.        DISCUSSION

            Peter S. Davis was appointed as receiver by the court to aid in the execution of the Judgment.  Mr. Davis now submits a fifth request for compensation for the interim period of August 1, 2024 through October 31, 2024.  The fees owed to J.S. Held total $99,552.00 and are to be equally paid by the parties in the sum of $47,776.00, respectively.  The fees owed to Mr. Davis’s legal counsel, Perkins Coie LLP, total $99,613.67, to be paid equally by the parties the amount of $49,806.83, respectively

            Given the court’s order appointing Mr. Davis as receiver expressly authorizes him to prepare periodic statements reflecting his fees and those of his staff and counsel (see Minute Order, 2/7/23), and the absence of opposition, the court approves Mr. Davis’s request.

III.       CONCLUSION

            Court-Appointed Receiver Peter S. Davis’s Fifth Interim Request for Compensation is Approved.

            Moving party to give notice.  

Dated:   February 19, 2025