Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

Live Video Broadcast

Live webinar of this one program.
$195 Register

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

Building an Impenetrable Information Fortress: Trade Secret Protection, Client Data Safeguards, and Competitive Advantage in the Post-Restrictive Covenant Era

With the FTC rule vacated and states banning non-competes, trade secret law is the last wall between client information and competitors. Learn to build a secrecy program courts will enforce, draft non-solicits and confidentiality covenants that hold up, and layer protections beyond any single agreement.

2026-11-20 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-11-20 12:00:00

2026-11-20 12:00:00

2h CLE Credits

2026-11-20 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-11-20 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-11-20 12:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-11-20 12:00:00

Course Overview

Without the Non-Compete, “Reasonable Measures” Is the Whole Case

2026-11-20 12:00:00

The FTC’s non-compete rule has been vacated, and a growing number of states now ban or sharply limit non-competes. Employers can no longer count on the covenant to keep information from walking out the door. Trade secret law and information security have become the front line.

The stakes arrive before the complaint is filed. Under the DTSA and every state’s UTSA, protection exists only for information the owner took reasonable measures to keep secret. Recite security in a handbook without practicing it and the court rejects the measure. Draft a non-solicit too broadly for California or Minnesota and it becomes a de facto non-compete. Lose the audit trails, attestations, and access logs and the TRO motion has no story to tell.

This two-session program gives attorneys a practical, state-agnostic playbook they can implement immediately. Attendees leave with a method for inventorying and tiering protectable information and confidentiality language that avoids overbreadth. Onboarding and offboarding protocols generate the evidentiary record. A layered protection framework, from non-solicits to compensation-based retention tools, depends on no single agreement.

Format

CLE Credit

2h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

2

Key topics that will be covered

01
Defining and Inventorying the Asset
Identify what qualifies as a trade secret under the DTSA and state UTSA variations, including customer lists, pricing, and negative know-how, then classify and tier it across business units with IT, HR, and business owners.
02
Reasonable Measures in Practice
Apply access controls, need-to-know restrictions, marking and labeling, encryption, DLP tools, and physical security in the ways courts have credited rather than rejected as insufficient.
03
Agreements That Hold Up
Draft confidentiality and invention-assignment agreements that define confidential information without overbreadth, include the DTSA whistleblower immunity notice, and avoid the de facto non-compete trap and NLRB limits.
04
Lifecycle Protocols and Proof
Run prior-employer clearance and clean-room practices at hire, and exit interviews, device return, forensic imaging, and litigation holds at departure, while preserving the training records, attestations, and access logs that carry a TRO motion.
05
Non-Solicits as the Front Line
Draft customer and employee non-solicits for California, Minnesota, and other restrictive jurisdictions, and apply the “solicit” versus “accept” distinction to social media contact.
06
Layered Protection Strategy
Combine garden leave, forfeiture-for-competition and clawback provisions, CRM ownership and access design, and privacy compliance into a protection strategy that does not depend on any single agreement.

Program schedule

clock 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST

Building a Trade Secret Program Courts Will Enforce

Trade secret claims are won or lost long before the complaint is filed. Under the DTSA and every state’s version of the UTSA, protection exists only for information the owner took reasonable measures to keep secret — and courts increasingly scrutinize whether those measures were real or merely recited in a handbook. This session lays out, step by step, how to identify what a company actually owns, how to secure it in a way that satisfies the statutory standard, and how to generate the documentary record that carries a TRO motion. It covers the full employee lifecycle, from onboarding through the exit interview, with attention to the specific mistakes that routinely sink otherwise strong cases.

Gregory S. BombardGregory S. Bombard
clock 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm EST

Protecting Competitive Advantage Without a Non-Compete

When the non-compete is unavailable or unenforceable, employers still have a substantial toolkit — but each tool carries its own limits, and several states now treat overbroad confidentiality or non-solicitation provisions as de facto non-competes subject to the same bans. This session surveys the alternative contractual, compensation-based, and operational protections, explains where the enforceability lines are being drawn in the most restrictive jurisdictions, and shows how modern information governance and privacy compliance programs double as competitive safeguards. It closes with a practical framework for advising clients on a layered protection strategy that does not depend on any single agreement.

Gregory S. BombardGregory S. Bombard
Gregory S. Bombard

Gregory S. Bombard

Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Gregory S. Bombard

Gregory S. Bombard

Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Gregory S. Bombard is a Shareholder in the Boston office of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, where he is a trial lawyer focused on trade secret litigation, business torts, and complex commercial disputes. He represents pharmaceutical, biotechnology, technology, and manufacturing companies in state and federal courts and in arbitration, on both the plaintiff and defense side, with a practice centered on protecting confidential business information, managing the risks of employee departures, and litigating noncompete, nonsolicitation, and trade secret misappropriation claims. He is a co-author of the American Bar Association’s treatise Protecting and Litigating Trade Secrets (2nd Ed.), and his trade secrets practice is recognized by IAM, The Legal 500, and World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR), which describes him as “renowned for his practice in the area.” As employers across the country confront the narrowing of restrictive covenants, his work sits squarely at the center of how companies must now rely on trade secret law, confidentiality protocols, and litigation strategy to safeguard their most valuable information.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Bombard earned his J.D., cum laude, from Boston College Law School in 2010 and his B.A., summa cum laude, from the University of Connecticut in 2007, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Following law school, he served as a judicial law clerk to the Connecticut Superior Court (2010–2011). He is admitted to practice in Massachusetts, before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Bombard is consistently ranked among the leading trade secrets practitioners in the United States. He is listed in The Best Lawyers in America for Trade Secrets Law (2023–2027) after earlier recognition as a Best Lawyers “Ones to Watch” honoree (2021); in The Legal 500 United States for Trade Secrets (2023–2026); in World Intellectual Property Review’s “USA Trade Secrets” ranking (2025); and in IAM Patent 1000 for Litigation and Trade Secret Litigation (2024–2026). He has been named to Boston magazine’s “Top Lawyers – Commercial Litigation” list (2022), to Massachusetts Super Lawyers (2021–2026) following six consecutive years as a Massachusetts Rising Star (2015–2020), and was honored by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly as an “Excellence in the Law: Up & Coming Lawyer” (2019).

Professional Involvement

Mr. Bombard has served since 2020 as Co-Chair of the American Bar Association’s Trade Secrets Litigation Subcommittee, placing him at the center of the national dialogue on trade secret doctrine, discovery, and remedies. He is a co-author of the ABA’s Protecting and Litigating Trade Secrets (2nd Ed.), a leading practitioner’s treatise on the subject, and is a frequent writer and speaker on trade secret topics, including litigation finance, damages theories, and protective orders. He has held numerous leadership roles in the Boston Bar Association, including Co-Chair of its Intellectual Property Litigation Committee (2017–2020), Co-Chair of the Senior Associates’ Forum Business Development Committee (2018–2020), and Co-Chair of the IP Basics Committee (2016–2017), and he has been a Junior Fellow of the Boston Bar Foundation since 2018. He also serves on the Board of Design Museum Everywhere (2021–present).

Experience

Mr. Bombard’s trade secret and restrictive covenant docket spans the life sciences, technology, cybersecurity, packaging, manufacturing, and energy sectors. He defended Revance Therapeutics against a competitor’s trade secret suit in Tennessee; defended a sports-gaming technology company in combined patent and trade secret litigation in Georgia; secured dismissal of a trade secret claim in Delaware on statute-of-limitations grounds; and represented Dicerna Pharmaceuticals in trade secret litigation in which the company’s counterclaims survived three rounds of dispositive motions, prior to Dicerna’s $3.3 billion acquisition by Novo Nordisk. He has handled numerous employee-departure, noncompete, and internal investigation matters, advising clients on how to lock down confidential information when key personnel leave and how to respond when a competitor’s hires raise misappropriation concerns. His broader litigation experience includes defending the LEGO Group and WarnerMedia in a Delaware patent suit, leading a two-week bench trial in the Massachusetts Business Litigation Session in a university licensing dispute, and defending banks, credit card processors, mortgage servicers, and consumer finance companies in Massachusetts Chapter 93A and class action matters — including a jury verdict for a national mortgage lender in the District of Massachusetts. This combination of courtroom experience and deep subject-matter authority makes him uniquely positioned to guide practitioners through building an information-protection strategy that holds up in the post-restrictive covenant era.
Gregory S. Bombard

Gregory S. Bombard

Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Gregory S. Bombard is a Shareholder in the Boston office of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, where he is a trial lawyer focused on trade secret litigation, business torts, and complex commercial disputes. He represents pharmaceutical, biotechnology, technology, and manufacturing companies in state and federal courts and in arbitration, on both the plaintiff and defense side, with a practice centered on protecting confidential business information, managing the risks of employee departures, and litigating noncompete, nonsolicitation, and trade secret misappropriation claims. He is a co-author of the American Bar Association’s treatise Protecting and Litigating Trade Secrets (2nd Ed.), and his trade secrets practice is recognized by IAM, The Legal 500, and World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR), which describes him as “renowned for his practice in the area.” As employers across the country confront the narrowing of restrictive covenants, his work sits squarely at the center of how companies must now rely on trade secret law, confidentiality protocols, and litigation strategy to safeguard their most valuable information.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Bombard earned his J.D., cum laude, from Boston College Law School in 2010 and his B.A., summa cum laude, from the University of Connecticut in 2007, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Following law school, he served as a judicial law clerk to the Connecticut Superior Court (2010–2011). He is admitted to practice in Massachusetts, before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Bombard is consistently ranked among the leading trade secrets practitioners in the United States. He is listed in The Best Lawyers in America for Trade Secrets Law (2023–2027) after earlier recognition as a Best Lawyers “Ones to Watch” honoree (2021); in The Legal 500 United States for Trade Secrets (2023–2026); in World Intellectual Property Review’s “USA Trade Secrets” ranking (2025); and in IAM Patent 1000 for Litigation and Trade Secret Litigation (2024–2026). He has been named to Boston magazine’s “Top Lawyers – Commercial Litigation” list (2022), to Massachusetts Super Lawyers (2021–2026) following six consecutive years as a Massachusetts Rising Star (2015–2020), and was honored by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly as an “Excellence in the Law: Up & Coming Lawyer” (2019).

Professional Involvement

Mr. Bombard has served since 2020 as Co-Chair of the American Bar Association’s Trade Secrets Litigation Subcommittee, placing him at the center of the national dialogue on trade secret doctrine, discovery, and remedies. He is a co-author of the ABA’s Protecting and Litigating Trade Secrets (2nd Ed.), a leading practitioner’s treatise on the subject, and is a frequent writer and speaker on trade secret topics, including litigation finance, damages theories, and protective orders. He has held numerous leadership roles in the Boston Bar Association, including Co-Chair of its Intellectual Property Litigation Committee (2017–2020), Co-Chair of the Senior Associates’ Forum Business Development Committee (2018–2020), and Co-Chair of the IP Basics Committee (2016–2017), and he has been a Junior Fellow of the Boston Bar Foundation since 2018. He also serves on the Board of Design Museum Everywhere (2021–present).

Experience

Mr. Bombard’s trade secret and restrictive covenant docket spans the life sciences, technology, cybersecurity, packaging, manufacturing, and energy sectors. He defended Revance Therapeutics against a competitor’s trade secret suit in Tennessee; defended a sports-gaming technology company in combined patent and trade secret litigation in Georgia; secured dismissal of a trade secret claim in Delaware on statute-of-limitations grounds; and represented Dicerna Pharmaceuticals in trade secret litigation in which the company’s counterclaims survived three rounds of dispositive motions, prior to Dicerna’s $3.3 billion acquisition by Novo Nordisk. He has handled numerous employee-departure, noncompete, and internal investigation matters, advising clients on how to lock down confidential information when key personnel leave and how to respond when a competitor’s hires raise misappropriation concerns. His broader litigation experience includes defending the LEGO Group and WarnerMedia in a Delaware patent suit, leading a two-week bench trial in the Massachusetts Business Litigation Session in a university licensing dispute, and defending banks, credit card processors, mortgage servicers, and consumer finance companies in Massachusetts Chapter 93A and class action matters — including a jury verdict for a national mortgage lender in the District of Massachusetts. This combination of courtroom experience and deep subject-matter authority makes him uniquely positioned to guide practitioners through building an information-protection strategy that holds up in the post-restrictive covenant era.

Credits by state

AK2.0
AL2.0
AR2.0
AZ2.0
CA2.0
CO2.0
CT2.0
DC2.0
DE2.0
FL2.0
GA2.0
HI2.0
IA2.0
ID2.0
IL2.0
IN2.0
KS2.0
KY2.0
LA2.0
MA2.0
MD2.0
ME2.0
MI2.0
MN2.0
MO2.4
MS2.0
MT2.0
NC2.0
ND2.0
NE2.0
NH120.0
NJ2.0
NM2.0
NV2.0
NY2.0
OH2.0
OK2.5
OR2.0
PA2.0
RI2.5
SC2.0
SD2.0
TN2.0
TX2.0
UT2.0
VA2.0
VT2.0
WA2.0
WI2.0
WV2.4
WY2.0

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Pending
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Approved
Georgia
Pending
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Approved
Indiana
Pending
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Pending
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Pending
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Pending
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Pending
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs