The customer information that defendant took with him when he left plaintiff's employ but then returned when accused by plaintiff of illegal removal appears to be readily ascertainable from publicly available services and otherwise unqualified for trade secret protection ( see, U.S. Reins. Corp. v Humphreys, 205 A.D.2d 187, 191-192; compare, Leo Silfen, Inc. v Cream, 29 N.Y.2d 387, 393, with Business Intelligence Servs. v Hudson, 580 F. Supp. 1068, 1072). Accordingly, injunctive relief restraining defendant's use of that information is not available ( see, American Broadcasting Cos. v Wolf, 52 N.Y.2d 394, 403-404), unless his physical taking of the materials containing the information can be said to have been "an egregious breach of trust and confidence" while still in plaintiff's employ ( Leo Silfen, Inc. v Cream, supra, at 392). At this juncture, such cannot be said ( compare, Bruno Co. v Friedberg, 21 A.D.2d 336). We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Wallach, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.