Videotronics, Inc. v. Bend Electronics
Federal commercial litigation involving gaming industry trade secrets and unfair competition — one of the early gaming-equipment cases in Nevada's federal courts.
Read the casePartnership dissolutions, contract breaches, commercial fraud, trade secret misappropriation, and business torts. When business disputes escalate beyond negotiation, trial-ready counsel is the essential instrument.
Business disputes in Nevada cross the full range of commercial matters. The practice accepts partnership and shareholder disputes where control, compensation, or dissolution is contested; contract litigation, including breach, interpretation, and enforcement; commercial fraud and misrepresentation claims with meaningful financial exposure; trade secret and non-competition matters, including the early-era gaming industry disputes that have formed part of Mr. McKenna's Nevada practice since the 1980s; and business tort claims, including interference with contract or prospective economic advantage.
Gaming-industry business disputes — regulatory compliance, trade secret litigation involving electronic gaming equipment, and commercial disputes among gaming industry participants — are a Nevada-specific dimension of the practice with four decades of institutional memory behind them.
Business litigation is won on the documents. Discovery posture, motion practice, and expert engagement define what the trial looks like — and what settlement looks like when the other side assesses the weight of their exposure. The engagement proceeds accordingly: every deposition that should be taken is taken, every document review that matters is completed, every expert who belongs in the matter is retained.
Nevada commercial litigation works against a defined statutory architecture. NRS Chapter 78 governs Nevada corporations; NRS Chapter 86 governs limited-liability companies; NRS Chapter 87 governs partnerships and limited partnerships. The choice-of-entity framework, indemnification provisions, and shareholder/member rights derive directly from these chapters and from the operating agreements written against them.
Trade-secret claims in Nevada are pleaded under NRS Chapter 600A — Nevada’s adoption of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The statute defines trade secret narrowly and requires proof of reasonable measures to protect the information; pre-suit investigation almost always involves forensic review of departing-employee electronic activity and contractual restrictions in employment agreements.
Gaming-industry disputes implicate NRS Chapter 463 — the Nevada Gaming Control Act — and the Regulations of the Nevada Gaming Commission and Nevada Gaming Control Board (Regulations 1 through 22). Licensing-status, manufacturer-and-distributor disputes, and player-related litigation interact with the regulatory framework in ways that ordinary commercial litigation does not, which is why Nevada gaming industry matters typically require counsel familiar with both the statutory and regulatory layers.
Shareholder derivative actions are governed by NRS 41.520; the demand-and-futility analysis tracks the Delaware framework with Nevada-specific overlays. Federal removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 is a recurring strategic decision in Nevada commercial cases, particularly where diversity is complete and the amount in controversy exceeds the federal threshold.
Mr. McKenna reviews inquiries personally. Matters with imminent procedural deadlines are reviewed immediately.