In Mize-Kurzman v. Marin Community College Dist. (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 832, the court considered whether a jury had been adequately instructed on federal law limits applicable to state whistleblower protection. (Mize-Kurzman, at pp. 844-845.) A special instruction to the jury stated, "reporting publicly known facts is not a disclosure of information" within the meaning of section 1102.5. (Mize-Kurzman, at p. 845.) Consistent with federal law, the Mize-Kurzman court held reporting information that already was known to the employer did not constitute a protected disclosure. (Id. at p. 858.) Citing the Legislature's choice of the word "disclosing," and "discloses," in section 1102.5(b), the court reasoned the plain meaning and dictionary definition of "disclosure," is to " 'reveal something that was hidden and not known.' " (Mize-Kurzman, at p. 858.) The Mize-Kurzman court supported this interpretation of "disclosure," by relying on federal and state cases addressing protected disclosures. (Mize-Kurzman, at p. 859.)