The Court has made a ruling on Joe Gibbs Racing's request for a preliminary injunction against former competition director Chris Gabehart and his new team, Spire Motorsports.
Videos by FanBuzz
According to the ruling, Gabehart can not perform the same duties for Spire Motorsports that he did during his time at Joe Gibbs Racing. He is allowed to attend races, but he can not act as a competition director.
MORE: Full Ruling on Preliminary Injunction
The Court will not force Gabehart to resign from his position at Spire Motorsports, so he can remain in the world of motorsports while working as Chief Motorsport Officer.
The Court also reiterated its ruling that Gabehart will "cease and desist" from retaining, transferring, using, or distributing confidential information and trade secrets from Joe Gibbs Racing. He will return any information that he has from his former employer.
The Court ultimately denied the request for a ruling against Spire Motorsports, so it will not take action against the NASCAR team.
Judge Susan C. Rodriguez wrote in a ruling issued late Thursday night that Joe Gibbs Racing had established a likelihood of success in its "misappropriation of trade secrets" claim against Gabehart. However, she said Joe Gibbs Racing could not do the same with its case against Spire Motorsports.
"Conversely, the Court concludes that JGR has not established likelihood of success on the merits as to its misappropriation of trade secret claims against Defendant Spire," Judge Rodriguez wrote.
"JGR has not clearly shown that Spire acquired, used, or disclosed any of the JGR trade secrets resulting in actual or threatened misappropriation. In fact, JGR has not identified a specific trade secret that Defendant Spire has misappropriated, but instead generally points to the information obtained by Defendant Gabehart."
Additionally, Judge Rodriguez addressed the claims from Joe Gibbs Racing that Spire Motorsports had begun contacting its sponsors. She wrote that the sponsor name is public and displayed on the side of the race car, so that this could not "form the basis of a threat of misappropriation claim."
