On March 13, 2009 the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah issued a partial ruling on the parties’ Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. As part of the ruling, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of e.Digital on digEcor’s claim that e.Digital was in breach of non-competition obligations in an agreement between the parties. Concerning the alleged non-compete provisions, the Court held “that California law applies to the 2002 NDA. Further, the court holds that Paragraphs 1, 4, 5 and 6 of 2002 NDA are invalid under California law because they refrain e.Digital from lawfully competing with digEcor.” This holding vindicates e.Digital’s longstanding position that it is free to conduct its lawful business without non-compete restraint or obligation to digEcor.