Court dismisses NetApp complaint against ex-CTO now at VAST, but NetApp is appealing

NetApp's complaint accusing CTO and SVP Jonsi Stefánsson of breach of contract and allegedly misappropriating its trade secrets has been dismissed without prejudice by a Florida court in a February 2 order [PDF] over jurisdictional issues. NetApp has already appealed, filing notice last week.

The episode dates back to August 2017, when NetApp acquired Iceland-based Greenqloud and its Qstack software for orchestrating and managing cloud services in hybrid cloud environments for $51 million in cash. Greenqloud CEO Stefánsson and his team joined NetApp.

Stefánsson and five other Greenqloud people left NetApp in June 2025 and set up Red Stapler. Four months later, VAST Data bought Red Stapler and its team. Stefánsson became General Manager for Cloud at VAST Data with his five colleagues taking up software architect and engineering positions at VAST. They helped develop code to make VAST’s AI OS software available as a fully managed, multi-tenant, scalable cloud, rivalling what NetApp had already developed for its ONTAP data fabric software. Vast Data is not named as a defendant in the complaint [PDF].

This prompted a legal claim from NetApp in the Florida courts, alleging Stefánsson broke the terms of his employment contract.

The complaint, filed as case number 6:25-cv-2130-JSS-DCI in the Florida district, was dismissed. 

The order [PDF] noted there were two employment documents between Stefánsson and NetApp, signed at around the same time.

When he joined NetApp in 2017, Stefánsson lived in Iceland, which does not have a non-compete law. He signed an employment agreement and a PIIA (Proprietary Information, Inventions, and Non-Solicitation Agreement). The PIIA required Stefánsson to assign to NetApp "any inventions conceived during his employment, to notify the company of any inventions that he conceived in the six months following his employment, to refrain from misappropriating NetApp's confidential and proprietary information, and to abstain from soliciting NetApp's employees and business partners." 

The employment contract was "subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Iceland," specified in a forum selection clause, and the PIIA was also subject to Icelandic jurisdiction if incorporated into the employment contract.

Subsequently, in January 2023, Stefánsson moved to Orlando, Florida, on a three-year visa, when he became a NetApp SVP, and the employment agreement was terminated. He later relocated to Iceland but "returned to Florida to pack his belongings, prepare his home for sale, and otherwise wind up his affairs." At that time, NetApp served him legal papers, suing him under the PIIA but not the employment contract.

When NetApp sued him, Stefánsson said he did not take any NetApp IP to any rivals. Meanwhile NetApp argued in its filings that the Red Stapler acquisition "was simply a vehicle for the competitor to hire Stefánsson and his team." 

This ruling came down to jurisdiction. Stefánsson's lawyers said the dispute should be examined in an Icelandic court as Florida had no jurisdiction in the case.  His legal team wanted the case dismissed because the employment contract specified that legal issues concerning it should be decided in an Icelandic court. The PIIA, they argued, was effectively combined with the employment contract in a single document, meaning Iceland had overall legal jurisdiction. 

NetApp said the proper venue was a Florida court because Stefánsson worked in Florida and "he was personally served with process while voluntarily present in this state."

NetApp's legal team also asserted that "the forum selection clause in Stefánsson's employment agreement is inapplicable to this dispute, as it has sued Stefánsson solely under the PIIA, which has its own choice of law and forum selection provisions."

Florida district judge Julie Sneed disagreed with NetApp's interpretation, stating in her order that "NetApp has not shown that this is the exceptional case in which the public interest factors overwhelmingly disfavor enforcing the parties’ forum selection clause." She granted Stefánsson's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, but without prejudice, and the docket statement was this:

ENDORSED ORDER. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to vacate the Judgment at (Dkt. [143]) as the complaint was dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens. Signed by Judge Julie S. Sneed on 2/3/2026. (DM)

NetApp stated: ""The Florida court has only dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice solely on venue grounds, without addressing the merits of the case. NetApp has already appealed the decision and is advancing separate legal actions in Iceland to ensure these matters are addressed directly and decisive."

NetApp received a case number for its appeal at the 11th Circuit late last week.

Bootnote

Forum non conveniens (Latin for "inconvenient forum") is a common law doctrine allowing a court to dismiss or stay a civil action, even if it has proper jurisdiction, because another court or jurisdiction is more appropriate for trial.