The question is (What did the court decide in that case?) without making a summary of the whole case.
If you are gonna write just points that is fine too.

1977 WL 22730 (Cal.App.Super.), 203 U.S.P.Q. 1020 Discuss the Cybertek Computer Products, Inc. v. Whitfield et al. California Superior Court, Los Angeles County No. 23911 Decided Nov. 31, 1977 United States Patents Quarterly Headnotes UNFAIR COMPETITION [1] Trade secrets — In general (§ 68.901) Computer software is protectible under trade secret doctrine given appropriate facts and circumstances.

UNFAIR COMPETITION [2] Pleading and practice in courts — State law considered (§ 53.73) Trade secrets — Disclosure by employees (§ 68.905) Nondisclosure agreement which seeks to prohibit employee from disclosing confidential information and trade secrets does not come within ambit of Section 16600 of California Business and Professions Code, which, subject to certain exceptions, bars contracts that prohibit employee from competing with former employer.

UNFAIR COMPETITION [3] Trade secrets — In general (§ 68.901) General concepts are not protectible, per se, as trade secrets but specific implementation involving particular combination of general concepts may amount to trade secret; any information that provides competitive advantage over competitors may well constitute trade secret.

UNFAIR COMPETITION [4] Pleading and practice in courts — Burden of proof — In general (§ 53.131) Trade secrets — In general (§ 68.901) Burden of proof shifts to defendant in trade secret case where defendant claims independent development, and burden places upon defendant heavy burden of persuasion to show that production was result of independent development and not from use of information confidentially secured during prior employment.

UNFAIR COMPETITION [5] Trade secrets — In general (§ 68.901) Appropriation of trade secret by memory is proscribed under same circumstances as appropriation via more tangible means.

TAKAHASHI TIMOTHY 7/20/2012 For Educational Use Only Cybertek Computer Products, Inc. v. Whitfield, 1977 WL 22730 (1977) 203 U.S.P.Q. 1020 © 2012 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 UNFAIR COMPETITION [6] Trade secrets — Disclosure to defendant (§ 68.907) Trade secrets — Parties bound (§ 68.913) New employer may be liable for misappropriation of trade secrets provided that he utilizes information with notice of its secret nature and with notice that employee has disclosed it in breach of duty to former employer.

Action by Cybertek Computer Products, Inc., against Pinckney Whitfield, and Tracor Computing Corporation, for trade secret misappropriation. Judgment for plaintiff. Martin R. Horn, Wayne Willenberg, and Spensley, Horn, Jubas & Lubitz, all of Los Angeles, Calif., for plaintiff. Donnelly, Clark, Chase & Johnson, Los Angeles, Calif., for defendant