NanoMech, Inc. v. Suresh, No. 13-3671 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseNanoMech, researcher and developer of nanotechnologies, filed suit against defendant, a former employee, for breach of a noncompete agreement. On appeal, NanoMech challenged the district court's judgment on the pleadings for defendant. The court affirmed the district court's finding that the noncompete agreement was unenforceable under Arkansas law where any error in the district court's decision to convert defendant's motion to dismiss into a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings was harmless; under Arkansas law, a noncompete agreement must be valid as written; and a blanket prohibition on defendant's ability to seek employment of any kind with an employer in the nanotechnology industry anywhere in the world is overbroad, unreasonable, and therefore unenforceable.
Court Description: Civil case - Contracts. Plaintiffs' pleadings were closed at the time defendant filed her motion to dismiss, and any error in the district court's decision to convert defendant's motion to dismiss into a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings was harmless; the district court did not err in determining the non-compete provision in defendant's employment contract, which prohibited her from working anywhere in any capacity for any business which competed with plaintiff, was overbroad, unreasonable and unenforceable.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.