United States: Am. Registry Of Radiologic Technologists v. Bennett

No. 5:12-cv-00109 (W.D. Tex. Apr. 11, 2013)



American Registry of Radiologic Technicians ("Plantiff") is a nonprofit organization that develops and administers examinations for individuals seeking certification in medical radiologic technology.  A number of states use Plaintiff's examinations as state-licensing examinations.  In addition to developing and administering examinations, Plaintiff maintains a registry of certified radiologic technologists.  To be certified, one must graduate from an approved educational program, agree to comply with certain standards, and pass a certification examination.

In 2007, Diane Bennett ("Defendant"), a certified radiologic technologist, launched a test-preparation business under the name Limited X-Ray Licensure Course Providers.  Understanding that Plaintiff often reused questions on the examination, Defendant asked former test takers to e-mail her questions from their prior exams, which she then compiled into a series of e-mails to prep course students.

Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant for copyright infringement, breach of contract, tortious interference, and misappropriation of trade secrets.  The U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota concluded that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Defendant and transferred the case to the Western District of Texas.  Both parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment.


Plaintiff argued that Defendant willfully infringed Plaintiff's copyrights by reproducing and distributing copies of Plaintiff's examination questions.  To establish a claim of copyright infringement, the court held that Plaintiff must show that it owned a valid copyright, that Defendant had access to the copyrighted materials, and that the copyrighted material and allegedly infringing material were substantially similar. Defendant argued that Plaintiff did not own a valid copyright in the individual examination questions because "facts themselves are not copyrightable."  The court disagreed, holding that "although a question that appears on a test may be intended to assess the test-taker's knowledge of facts, the question itself—in its form and substance—is the original product of some author's labor."  Defendant also argued that Plaintiff's questions were "public knowledge," almost identical to questions found on other tests, and therefore not sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection.  The court rejected these arguments, holding that the questions were similar but not identical and that the similarities appeared to be a result of the fact that both Plaintiff and other companies seek to test knowledge of the same facts.  The court found that Plaintiff owned a valid copyright in both the test bank as a whole and the individual examination questions.

Although the court found that Plaintiff's materials were subject to copyright protection, the court denied Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, finding Plaintiff failed to satisfy its burden of establishing Defendant's access to the copyrighted work.  Whereas Plaintiff provided ample evidence that Defendant asked students to send her questions they had seen on examinations, distributed questions she had solicited from students to other individuals, and promised students that she would provide them with prior exam questions, the court held that such evidence did not conclusively establish that Defendant solicited and received questions from Plaintiff's specific examinations.  Plaintiff likewise failed its burden of demonstrating that Defendant's examination questions were "substantially similar" to Plaintiff's questions, as none of the questions Defendant obtained were identical to Plaintiff's and some were "significantly different."  Finding that there was a sufficient question of fact as to whether Defendant had access to Plaintiff's test questions, the court found Plaintiff had failed to meet its burden with respect to the "factual copying" element of a copyright-infringement claim.

The court also emphasized that even if Plaintiff could establish that Defendant had access to the copyrighted work, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment would fail due to the Fifth Circuit's adherence to the rule that the question of "substantial similarity" should "typically . . . be left to the fact finder" unless "the court can conclude, after viewing the evidence and drawing inferences in a manner most favorable to the nonmoving party, that no reasonable juror could find substantial similarity of ideas and expression." Finding that Plaintiff's comparison of the copyrighted questions and the allegedly infringing material revealed that, although not identical, the "works were similar enough that a reasonable juror could find substantial similarity of ideas and expression," the court also denied Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment.

Turning to the breach-of-contract claim, the court held that both parties failed to meet their burdens for summary judgment.  The court found that Plaintiff and Defendant formed a valid contract when Defendant registered to take the examination and submitted her annual renewal applications.  Those registration and renewals required Defendant to agree to Plaintiff's Standard of Ethics, which prohibit, among other things, "disclosing information concerning any portion of a future, current, or previously administered examination," and "disclosing what purports to be, or under all circumstances is likely to be understood by the recipient as . . . 'inside' information concerning any portion of a future, current, or previously administered examination."  Finding that the evidence did not establish with a sufficient level of certainty that Defendant had solicited questions from students who had taken Plaintiff's exam, the court found Plaintiff had likewise failed to satisfy its burden on its breach-of-contract claim.  The court also denied both parties' motions for summary judgment on Plaintiff's tortious-interference claim.  Plaintiff claimed that by "demanding" that her students "recall and relay [exam] questions to her," Defendant induced her students to violate their agreement with Plaintiff.  The evidence, the court held, showed that one student actually sent Defendant a question, but nothing in the e-mail exchanges established that the student in question had taken Plaintiff's exam.  Plaintiff did not produce any nondisclosure agreements signed by any of the individuals with whom Defendant engaged in e-mail correspondence.  Thus, the court held, Plaintiff failed to show the absence of any genuine dispute of material fact with respect to its claim for tortious interference.  In addition, the court disagreed with Defendant's argument that it was entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff's tortious-interference claim because Plaintiff failed to prove that Defendant committed an "independent tort."  The court stated that Defendant's argument applied to tortious interference with business relations, not tortious interference with a contract, and therefore did not apply.

Turning to Plaintiff's trade-secret misappropriations claim, the court again denied both parties' motions for summary judgment.  In Texas, a claim of misappropriation of trade secrets is established by showing "(a) a trade secret existed; (b) the trade secret was acquired through a breach of a confidential relationship or discovered by improper means; and (c) use of the trade secret without authorization from the plaintiff." Finding that Plaintiff did not publish the questions publicly and had set up procedures to ensure that test takers did not disseminate the questions, and that the questions were "extremely valuable" due to the time and expertise required to create them, the court concluded Plaintiff's test bank was a valid trade secret.  The court disagreed with Defendant's argument that the questions were in the "public domain" because they tested knowledge found in public resources, such as the Internet or libraries.  Because Plaintiff did not establish that Defendant acquired its examination questions by improper means, as nothing in Defendant's e-mail solicitations showed that the students in question had taken Plaintiff's examination, it was not entitled to summary judgment on its trade-secret misappropriation claim.


This case confirms that test questions that test knowledge found in public resources are copyrightable both individually and as in test banks, and can qualify as protectable trade secrets.  It emphasizes that the question of both access and substantial similarity are highly fact-specific inquiries not easily resolvable on summary judgment.

This article previously appeared in Incontestable Trademark Newsletter - June 2013.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
23 Oct 2018, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

How do trademark and advertising trends impact your company? Join a discussion on the latest trends in the food and beverage industry in the United States and Europe.

24 Oct 2018, Other, Washington, DC, United States

Join the usual suspects from Finnegan as they take you through a detailed discussion of patent prosecution strategies from drafting to grant.

25 Oct 2018, Seminar, Melbourne, Australia

Finnegan is a Gold sponsor of IAM Magazine’s IPBC Australasia. The program will take place at the Sofitel Hotel in Melbourne, Australia.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions