Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 1 of 19 PageID 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`ORLANDO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`PREMISE HEALTH HOLDING CORP.,
`
`Civil Action No. _____________
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ERICA L. THOMAS,
`
`Defendant.
`
`INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`REQUESTED
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Premise Health Holding Corp. (“Premise Health”), states for its
`
`Complaint against Defendant Erica L. Thomas (“Thomas”), as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Premise Health is a corporation organized and existing under the laws
`
`of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in Tennessee.
`
`2.
`
`Thomas is an individual residing at 820 Duff Drive, Winter Garden,
`
`Florida, 34787, and, upon information and belief, is a citizen of Florida.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Premise Health’s
`
`Defend Trade Secrets Act claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 18 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1836(c). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), this Court has supplemental
`
`jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims because the these claims are so
`
`related to the claims asserted within the Court’s original jurisdiction that they form
`
`1
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`ORLANDO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`PREMISE HEALTH HOLDING CORP.,
`
`Civil Action No. _____________
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ERICA L. THOMAS,
`
`Defendant.
`
`INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`REQUESTED
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Premise Health Holding Corp. (“Premise Health”), states for its
`
`Complaint against Defendant Erica L. Thomas (“Thomas”), as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Premise Health is a corporation organized and existing under the laws
`
`of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in Tennessee.
`
`2.
`
`Thomas is an individual residing at 820 Duff Drive, Winter Garden,
`
`Florida, 34787, and, upon information and belief, is a citizen of Florida.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Premise Health’s
`
`Defend Trade Secrets Act claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 18 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1836(c). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), this Court has supplemental
`
`jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims because the these claims are so
`
`related to the claims asserted within the Court’s original jurisdiction that they form
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 2 of 19 PageID 2
`
`part of the same case or controversey under Article III of the United States
`
`Constitution.
`
`4.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Thomas because Premise
`
`Health’s causes of action arise from Thomas’s tortious acts or omissions within this
`
`state, Thomas resides in this state, and jurisdiction over Thomas comports with
`
`fair play and substantial justice.
`
`5.
`
`Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because
`
`Thomas resides in this judicial district.
`
`FACTS
`
`A. Premise Health’s business, confidential information, and trade secrets.
`
`6.
`
`Since 1964, Premise Health has provided companies with a wide range
`
`of onsite healthcare services, including primary care, preventive care, dental care,
`
`vision, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and wellness coaching.
`
`7.
`
`The healthcare industry is highly competitive. This is especially true
`
`for healthcare access providers that primarily work with employers to provide
`
`onsite healthcare services.
`
`8.
`
`To be successful, a healthcare access provider must develop strong
`
`relationships with its clients that enable the provider to learn and understand the
`
`clients’ specific needs, requirements, and preferences and deliver high quality
`
`services to the clients’ employees.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 3 of 19 PageID 3
`
`9.
`
`To meet its clients’ expectations, Premise Health has developed and
`
`maintained, at great expense to it, close relationships and substantial goodwill with
`
`its clients, which are necessary to its reputation and success.
`
`10.
`
`In order to establish and maintain client relationships, and further its
`
`business, Premise Health has developed and uses a variety of confidential,
`
`proprietary, and trade secret information.
`
`11.
`
`Premise Health’s
`
`trade secret
`
`information
`
`includes, without
`
`limitation, Premise Health’s business and marketing plans; selling and pricing
`
`procedures and
`
`techniques; customer records,
`
`lists, requirements, and
`
`information; databases and software developed or used by Premise Health;
`
`Premise Health’s pricing, margins, costs, and other financial information and
`
`projections; terms and conditions of contracts to which Premise Health is a party;
`
`techniques and strategies used by Premise Health and on which Premise Health
`
`trains its employees; Premise Health’s employee compensation information; and
`
`other information not generally available to the public and/or for which Premise
`
`Health has assumed an obligation of confidentiality.
`
`12.
`
`Premise Health’s trade secrets derive independent economic value
`
`from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper
`
`means by other persons, including competitors, who can obtain economic value
`
`from their disclosure or use.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 4 of 19 PageID 4
`
`13.
`
`Premise Health’s trade secrets have been compiled by Premise Health
`
`personnel over several years and at great expense and are subject of efforts that are
`
`reasonable under the circumstances to maintain their secrecy.
`
`14.
`
`For example, Premise Health requires those employees with access to
`
`its trade secrets, as a condition of employment, to abide by Premise Health’s Code
`
`of Conduct.
`
`15.
`
`Premise Health requires all employees to read, understand, and
`
`follow Premise Health’s Code of Conduct.
`
`16. Adherence to Premise Health’s Code of Conduct is mandatory and a
`
`condition of employment at Premise Health.
`
`17.
`
`Indeed, Premise Health employees are required to undergo
`
`comprehensive training and education to ensure employees are aware of and agree
`
`to Premise Health’s Code of Conduct.
`
`18.
`
`In fact, in addition to mandatory training at the commencement of
`
`employment, every employee must undergo annual training and acknowledge
`
`his/her agreement to the Code of Conduct.
`
`19.
`
`Premise Health’s Code of Conduct requires, among other things, that
`
`its employees:
`
`(a) Remain free of conflicts of interest in the performance of
`
`his/her responsibilities at Premise Health;
`
`(b) Avoid any personal financial interest that might conflict with
`
`Premise Health’s interest;
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 5 of 19 PageID 5
`
`(c) Use Premise Health’s trade secrets only to perform his/her job
`
`responsibilities;
`
`(d) Not to share Premise Health’s trade secrets with others unless
`
`the individuals and/or entities have a legitimate, documented need to know the
`
`information order to perform their specific job duties or carry out a contractual
`
`business relationship; and
`
`(e) Never divulge Premise Health’s trade secrets or use them for an
`
`employee’s own benefit.
`
`20. Premise Health’s Code of Conduct also advises each employee that if
`
`the employee leaves Premise Health for any reason, that such employee remains
`
`obligated to keep all trade secret information confidential.
`
`21.
`
`Significantly, Premise Health’s Code of Conduct warns that sharing or
`
`using Premise Health’s trade secrets in an improper way is a violation of the Code
`
`of Conduct and could lead to personal liability for the violating employee.
`
`B. Thomas’s employment with Premise Health.
`
`22. From August 4, 2014 until October 29, 2021, Thomas was employed
`
`by Premise Health in various operational roles, culminating in her final position as
`
`the Senior Director of Client Operations.
`
`23. For the entirety of her employment, Thomas was responsible for
`
`Premise Health’s largest client, The Walt Disney Company.
`
`24. As is the case for all of Premise Health’s employees, Thomas
`
`completed the required employee training at the beginning of her employment and
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 6 of 19 PageID 6
`
`annually thereafter, including on March 3, 2021, when Thomas re-affirmed her
`
`agreement to abide by Premise Health’s Code of Conduct.
`
`C. Thomas violates Premise Health’s Code of Conduct and breaches her duty of
`loyalty to Premise Health.
`
`25. Despite Thomas’s agreeing to abide by Premise Health’s Code of
`
`Conduct as a condition of her employment, Thomas did not abide by its terms.
`
`26. As late as August 2021, Thomas began preparing to leave Premise
`
`Health for EmsanaCare Inc., an affiliate of Emsana Health Inc. (“Emsana”).
`
`27. Emsana, a start-up company formed in July 2020, is in the business
`
`of advising and consulting self-funded employers on strategies to engage patient
`
`populations and coordinate care across provider groups.
`
`28. On August 23, 2021, Thomas discussed potential opportunities for her
`
`at Emsana with William Dinger.
`
`29. Dinger is Emsana’s founding board member, currently the Vice
`
`President of Benefits at Providence Health, and the former Director, Labor and
`
`Innovative Director, Healthcare at Walt Disney World.
`
`30.
`
` On September 13, 2021, Thomas emailed a PowerPoint presentation
`
`from her Premise Health email account to Dinger, which according to her words,
`
`described her “vision for what could be” at Emsana.
`
`31.
`
`Thomas titled the PowerPoint presentation “Emsana Health:
`
`Envisioning the Future of Emsana Cares and Emsana RX.”
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 7 of 19 PageID 7
`
`32. Thomas developed the Emsana presentation during Premise Health’s
`
`regular business hours and while she should have been working for Premise
`
`Health.
`
`33.
`
`In the email transmitting the Emsana presentation to Dinger, Thomas
`
`asked Dinger to review and “take a look and poke some holes, [to] see what [she is]
`
`missing” from the Emsana presentation prior to her discussion of it with Emsana
`
`representatives.
`
`34. Hours after sending Dinger the Emsana presentation, Dinger
`
`provided Thomas with comments on how she could improve the presentation in
`
`an effort to land a job with Emsana.
`
`35. The next day, on September 14, 2021—again during Premise Health’s
`
`regular business hours—Thomas revised and resent her presentation to Dinger
`
`after incorporating his suggestions.
`
`36. However, in addition to sending Dinger the revised Emsana
`
`presentation, Thomas also informed Dinger that The Walt Disney Company had
`
`approved a specific project relevant to Thomas’s potential employment with
`
`Emsana, a fact which Thomas only knew due to her position at Premise Health.
`
`37. Thomas informed Dinger that approval of this project could result in
`
`business for Emsana, especially if Emsana followed through with Thomas’s
`
`“vision” for Emsana.
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 8 of 19 PageID 8
`
`38. On information and belief, on September 17, 2021, Thomas accepted
`
`a position with Emsana and thanked Dinger “for this awesome opportunity and for
`
`believing in” Thomas.
`
`39. Thomas promised she “would not let [Dinger] down.”
`
`40. Later that day—again during regular business hours—Thomas
`
`emailed Dinger a video, from her Premise Health email account, prepared for The
`
`Walt Disney Co. that was not publicly available.
`
`D. Thomas resigns from Premise Health and misappropriates Premise Health’s
`trade secrets.
`
`41. On October 12, 2021, Thomas resigned from Premise Health effective
`
`as of October 29, 2021.
`
`42. While Thomas informed Premise Health she would be engaging with
`
`direct competitors of Premise Health at her new job, Thomas stated she did “not
`
`want to burn any bridges relative to ending [her] final days with Premise Health.”
`
`43. Unfortunately, during Thomas’s final days at Premise Health, Thomas
`
`misappropriated Premise Health’s trade secrets by sending its trade secret
`
`information to her new Emsana email account.
`
`44. Specifically, on October 25, 2021, Thomas emailed herself at her new
`
`Emsana email address (erica@emsanacare.com) a spreadsheet containing
`
`Premise Health’s trade secret information, including certain performance
`
`guarantees identifying the amount of management fees at risk for a specific client,
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 9 of 19 PageID 9
`
`the weighing of certain criteria for that client, and criteria regarding a specific
`
`Premise Health customer’s proprietary initiatives.
`
`45. Three days later, on October 28, 2021, Thomas again emailed herself
`
`at her new Emsana email address a spreadsheet containing Premise Health’s trade
`
`secret information, including budgets for Thomas’s primary customer containing
`
`historical revenue, recoveries, and profit margins.
`
`46. Additionally, due to the nature of this spreadsheet Thomas sent to
`
`herself on October 28, 2021, the spreadsheet also contained all of Premise Health’s
`
`information with respect to CareHere, LLC (“CareHere”), a company that Premise
`
`Health acquired in 2020.
`
`47.
`
` The October 28, 2021 email Thomas sent to herself at her Emsana
`
`email address identified all of Premise Health’s CareHere sites along with a census
`
`for each CareHere site as well as the pricing and management fees for those sites,
`
`all of which would be of extreme value to Premise Health’s competitors.
`
`48. After misappropriating Premise Health’s trade secrets, Thomas
`
`attempted to conceal her misconduct.
`
`49. Specifically, Thomas deleted emails regarding Emsana from her
`
`Premise Health’s “Sent” and “Deleted” folders, including the two spreadsheets she
`
`sent herself on October 25 and 28, 2021.
`
`50. On or about October 29, 2021, Premise Health became aware of
`
`Thomas’s misappropriation of the spreadsheets described above (the “Trade
`
`Secrets”).
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 10 of 19 PageID 10
`
`51. On October 29, 2021, Premise Health sent a letter to Thomas
`
`demanding that she immediately and permanently destroy Premise Health’s Trade
`
`Secrets in her possession and to confirm in writing her compliance with Premise
`
`Health’s demand on or before November 1, 2021.
`
`52. Premise Health placed Thomas’s new employer, Emsana, on notice of
`
`her improper conduct by providing a copy of the October 29, 2021 letter to Emsana
`
`via Emsana’s Chairperson and Founding Director Elizabeth Mitchell.1
`
`53. Premise Health also informed Thomas it might require “additional
`
`sworn affirmation regarding the use, dissemination, and destruction” of Premise
`
`Health’s information.
`
`54. Premise Health also advised Thomas that if she failed to comply with
`
`Premise Health’s demands, Premise Health may pursue legal action, including
`
`injunctive relief, as well as all other available remedies.
`
`55. Within hours of receiving Premise Health’s written demand, Thomas
`
`denied any wrongdoing and falsely accused Premise Health of “trying to sabotage”
`
`her future at Emsana.
`
`
`1 In an effort to actively protect Premise Health’s Trade Secrets that Thomas misappropriated and
`emailed to an Emsana server, Premise Health engaged in further communications with Emsana
`to initiate removal of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets from its electronic systems. On November
`10, 2021, Mitchell affirmed in writing that Emsana had in fact: (1) deleted and destroyed all
`confidential and proprietary information of Premise Health, including the information Thomas
`sent from her Premise Health email account to her new Emsana email account; (2) permanently
`deleted and destroyed proposed marketing materials prepared by Thomas for the benefit of
`Emsana, which Thomas sent from her Premise Health email account to Emsana; and (3) would
`not use Premise Health’s confidential and proprietary information in any manner detrimental to
`Premise Health.
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 11 of 19 PageID 11
`
`56. As alluded to in Premise Health’s initial demand, on November 5,
`
`2021, Premise Health asked Thomas to identify under oath the Trade Secrets
`
`Thomas emailed herself and to affirm that she would not disclose the Trade Secrets
`
`to any additional parties.
`
`57. Premise Health informed Thomas that Premise Health would pursue
`
`legal action if Thomas would not make certain assurances to Premise Health
`
`regarding the Trade Secrets Thomas misappropriated.
`
`58. On or about November 8, 2021, Thomas hired counsel who contacted
`
`Premise Health to discuss the contents of the proposed affidavit.
`
`59. On November 8, 2021, counsel for Thomas proposed revisions to the
`
`affidavit.
`
`60. On November 11, 2021, Premise Health responded to Thomas’s
`
`counsel with a revised version of the proposed affidavit.
`
`61. Having heard nothing further from Thomas or her counsel, on
`
`November 23, 2021, Premise Health demanded Thomas provide an executed
`
`affidavit no later than November 29, 2021.
`
`62. Less than two hours later, counsel for Thomas responded and
`
`informed Premise Health that Thomas would “not be executing the affidavit that
`
`Premise Health expects her to sign since we were not able to reach agreement on
`
`the content of the affidavit.”
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 12 of 19 PageID 12
`
`63.
`
` In the hopes of avoiding litigation, on December 16, 2021, counsel for
`
`Premise Health conferred with counsel for Thomas via videoconference to discuss
`
`the proposed affidavit.
`
`64. Counsel for Premise Health memorialized this discussion in an email
`
`dated December 17, 2021, to counsel for Thomas, explaining the extent of
`
`Thomas’s misappropriation and again requesting Thomas agree to remedy what
`
`she did and to declare that she has not shared Premise Health’s Trade Secrets with
`
`anyone else.
`
`65. On December 17, 2021, counsel for Thomas responded to counsel for
`
`Premise Health stating that he “seriously doubt[ed] that [Thomas] is going to have
`
`any renewed interest in signing a newly agreed on version of the proposed affidavit
`
`. . .”2
`
`66. To date, Thomas has refused to remedy her misappropriation or to
`
`affirm she has not shared Premise Health’s Trade Secrets with anyone else. Given
`
`her refusal, Premise Health seeks appropriate relief from this Court, including all
`
`available remedies available under the law along with appropriate injunctive relief.
`
`COUNT I – FEDERAL DEFEND TRADE SECRETS ACT
`
`67. Premise Health incorporates the numbered paragraphs above as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`
`2 Counsel for Thomas falsely accused Premise Health of interfering with Thomas’s employment
`with Emsama. Contrary to Thomas’s accusations, Premise Health informed Emsana that Premise
`Health did not object to Emsana hiring Thomas. Notwithstanding this fact, Emsana placed
`Thomas on unpaid administrative leave on October 31, 2021, and terminated her from Emsana
`soon thereafter.
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 13 of 19 PageID 13
`
`68. As described above, Premise Health owns the Trade Secrets described
`
`above, including the financial information Thomas sent from her Premise Health
`
`email account to her Emsana email account.
`
`69. Premise Health’s Trade Secrets are related to the products and
`
`services Premise Health offers and uses in interstate commerce.
`
`70. Premise Health’s Trade Secrets have been compiled by Premise
`
`Health personnel over several years and at great expense and are subject of efforts
`
`that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain their secrecy.
`
`71.
`
`Premise Health’s Trade Secrets derive independent economic value,
`
`from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper
`
`means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from their disclosure or
`
`use.
`
`72. Thomas misappropriated Premise Health’s Trade Secrets by
`
`acquiring, disclosing, and/or using them, without Premise Health’s express or
`
`implied consent.
`
`73. At the time of the acquisition, disclosure, and/or use by Thomas,
`
`Thomas knew or had reason to know that her knowledge of Premise Health’s Trade
`
`Secrets were acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its
`
`secrecy or to limit its use.
`
`74. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(B), Premise Health seeks damages
`
`for actual loss caused by the misappropriation and damages for unjust enrichment;
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 14 of 19 PageID 14
`
`or damages caused by the misappropriation measured by the imposition of a
`
`reasonable royalty.
`
`75. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(C)—(D), and because Thomas’s
`
`misappropriation of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets was willful and malicious,
`
`Premise Health also seeks exemplary damages and attorneys’ fees, the precise
`
`amount to be determined at trial.
`
`76. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(A), Premise Health is also entitled
`
`to
`
`injunctive relief
`
`to prevent Thomas’s
`
`further actual or
`
`threatened
`
`misappropriation of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets.
`
`COUNT II – FLORIDA UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT
`
`Premise Health incorporates the numbered paragraphs above as if
`
`77.
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`78. As described above, Premise Health owns the Trade Secrets described
`
`above, including the financial information Thomas sent from her Premise Health
`
`email account to her Emsana email account.
`
`79. Premise Health’s Trade Secrets have been compiled by Premise
`
`Health personnel over several years and at great expense and are subject of efforts
`
`that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain their secrecy.
`
`80. Premise Health’s Trade Secrets derive independent economic value,
`
`from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper
`
`means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from their disclosure or
`
`use.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 15 of 19 PageID 15
`
`81. Thomas misappropriated Premise Health’s Trade Secrets by
`
`acquiring, disclosing, and/or using them, without Premise Health’s express or
`
`implied consent.
`
`82. At the time of the acquisition, disclosure, and/or use by Thomas,
`
`Thomas knew or had reason to know that her knowledge of Premise Health’s Trade
`
`Secrets were acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its
`
`secrecy or to limit its use.
`
`83. Pursuant to § 688.004, Florida Statutes, Premise Health seeks
`
`damages for actual loss caused by the misappropriation and damages for unjust
`
`enrichment; or damages caused by the misappropriation measured by the
`
`imposition of a reasonable royalty.
`
`84. Pursuant to § 688.005, Florida Statutes, and because Thomas’s
`
`misappropriation of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets was willful and malicious,
`
`Premise Health also seeks exemplary damages and attorneys’ fees, the precise
`
`amount to be determined at trial.
`
`85. Pursuant to § 688.003, Florida Statutes, Premise Health is also
`
`entitled to injunctive relief to prevent Thomas’s further actual or threatened
`
`misappropriation of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets.
`
`COUNT III – BREACH OF DUTY OF LOYALTY
`
`86. Premise Health incorporates the numbered paragraphs above as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 16 of 19 PageID 16
`
`87. While employed by Premise Health, Thomas owed Premise Health a
`
`common law duty of loyalty to act at all times in Premise Health’s best interest with
`
`diligence and in good faith and to refrain from acting in any manner inconsistent
`
`with its legitimate business interests.
`
`88. Among other things, Thomas’s common duty of loyalty prohibited her
`
`from engaging in disloyal acts in anticipation of future competition.
`
`89. Thomas breached her common law duty of loyalty arising from her
`
`employment relationship with Premise Health in, at least, the following ways:
`
`(a) By using time she should have been providing services to
`
`Premise Health to provide services to Emsana;
`
`(b) By using Premise Health’s resources to provide services to
`
`Emsana;
`
`(c) By acquiring, disclosing, or using Premise Health’s confidential
`
`and proprietary business information; and
`
`(d) By violating Premise Health’s Code of Conduct.
`
`90. Thomas engaged in the foregoing conduct on behalf of and to benefit
`
`herself and Emsana while she was employed by Premise Health and receiving a
`
`salary and benefits from Premise Health.
`
`91. As a result of Thomas’s breaches of the duty of loyalty, Premise Health
`
`has been harmed and is entitled to recover damages from Thomas, including
`
`disgorgement of any salary and benefits received during the period of her
`
`disloyalty.
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 17 of 19 PageID 17
`
`92. Premise Health is also entitled to punitive damages because Thomas’s
`
`conduct was knowing, willful, and intentional.
`
`REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
`
`93. Premise Health incorporates the numbered paragraphs above as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`94. As a result of the foregoing misappropriation by Thomas and pursuant
`
`to 18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(3)(A) and § 688.003, Florida Statutes, Premise Health
`
`requests that the Court enter a preliminary and permanent injunction:
`
`(a)
`
`preventing any actual or threatened misappropriation by
`
`Thomas as the Court deems reasonable;
`
`(b)
`
`requiring Thomas to delete and destroy any and all of Premise
`
`Health’s Trade Secrets in her possession, custody, and/or control; and
`
`(c)
`
`requiring Thomas to certify under oath that such deletion and
`
`destruction has been completed and that she has not and will not disseminate
`
`Premise Health’s Trade Secrets to any other persons or entities.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`Premise Health respectfully requests that the Court:
`
`A.
`
`Enter a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Thomas, her
`
`agents, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with her from
`
`further misappropriating Premise Health’s Trade Secrets, require Thomas to
`
`delete and destroy any and all of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets in her possession,
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 18 of 19 PageID 18
`
`custody, and/or control, and require Thomas to certify that she has deleted,
`
`destroyed, and has not and will not disseminate Premise Health’s Trade Secrets;
`
`B.
`
`Enter an order allowing Premise Health expedited discovery for the
`
`purpose of identifying and securing evidence of Thomas’s unlawful activities;
`
`C.
`
`Award Premise Health damages in the form of actual loss, unjust
`
`enrichment, and/or
`
`reasonable
`
`royalty damages caused by Thomas’s
`
`misappropriation of Premise Health’s Trade Secrets;
`
`D.
`
`Award Premise Health exemplary damages and its attorneys’ fees, the
`
`precise amount to be determined at trial for Thomas’s willful and malicious
`
`misappropriation;
`
`E.
`
`Award Premise Health actual damages, disgorgement, and punitive
`
`damages for Thomas’s breach of her duty of loyalty; and
`
`F.
`
`Award such other and further relief as this Court deems just, proper
`
`and equitable.
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-02166-WWB-LRH Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 19 of 19 PageID 19
`
`Dated: December 28, 2021
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Diana N. Evans
`Diana N. Evans (Fla. Bar No. 98945)
`Email: dnevans@bradley.com
`Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
`100 North Tampa Street, Suite 2200
`Tampa, FL 33602
`Telephone: (813) 559-5500
`Facsimile: (813) 229-5946
`
`-and-
`
`Matthew C. Lonergan (pro hac vice to be filed)
`Email: mlonergan@bradley.com
`R. Brandon Bundren (pro hac vice to be filed)
`Email: bbundren@bradley.com
`Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
`1600 Division Street, Suite 700
`Nashville, TN 37203
`Telephone: (615) 244-2582
`Facsimile: (615) 252-6380
`
`Attorneys for Premise Health Holding Corp.
`
`19
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
