Corpus: 543,223 opinions · 3,177 judges · newest 2026-06-23 · expanding Coverage ↗
Opinion

govinfo:USCOURTS-mdd-8_23-cv-03200-0

U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland · 2024-12-05

· GavelSight synced 2026-09-06 03:24:38

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
FTI CONSULTING, INC.,
Plaintiff, ,
V.
JONATHAN M. ORSZAG,
Defendant.
Civ. No. 23-3200 PJM
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this diversity-jurisdiction case, FTI Consulting, Inc. ("FTI") has sued the former leader
of one of its subsidiaries, Jonathan Orszag, to prevent him from carrying out his alleged plans to
poach its employees and compete with FTI. Orszag responded to FTFs initial Corhplaint with a
Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 18,19), which the Court dismissed as moot upon the filing of FTI's
Second Amended Complaint. ECF No. 63; see Second Am. Compl. ("SAC"), ECF No. 48. Orszag
has filed a renewed Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (ECF Nos. 52, 53), which
is now fully briefed (ECF Nos. 59,61). No further hearing is necessary. See D. Md. Local R. 105.6.
For the following reasons, the Court will GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART Orszag's
Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (ECF Nos. 52, 53).
BACKGROUND^
FTI, a Maryland corporation with its principal place of business in Bowie, Maryland,
professes to be "one of the largest consulting firms in the world." SAC I, 8.
' As will be explained below, for the purposes of resolving a motion to dismiss, the Court must accept all
well-pled facts in a complaint as true. See E.I. du Font de Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Indus., Inc., 637 F.3d
435, 440 (4th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, this Background section recounts the facts as they appear in FTI's
Second Amended Complaint. At this stage, the Court does not express any view as to whether the facts
alleged in the Second Amended Complaint are true.
1
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 1 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 2 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 3 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 4 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 5 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 6 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 7 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 8 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 9 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 10 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 11 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 12 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 13 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 14 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 15 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 16 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 17 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 18 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 19 of 20
Case 8:23-cv-03200-BAH     Document 80     Filed 12/05/24     Page 20 of 20

Passage view · GavelSight