Judge Burke yesterday unsealed a lengthy opinion addressing a range of discovery disputes in a pending trade secret litigation.
In one instance, plaintiff sought to force a further response to a broad interrogatory, and complained that Defendant's broad answer omitted important time periods. The interrogatory asked:
[D]escribe in detail the stage of R&D, design, documentation, clinical work, marketing and/or sales of the [relevant product] at the time [Defendant] or anyone on behalf of [Defendant] was in first contact with any Former [Plaintiff] Employee . . . .
Judge Burke denied the request, noting that the time periods Plaintiff complained about were from before the alleged trade secret theft, and therefore it was not clear why they were relevant. He also held that even though the response was broad and general,
When you ask a very broad, general question you cannot be surprised if you get a very broad, general answer to that question.
Boston Scientific corp. v. Nevro Corp., C.A. No. 16-1163-CFC-CJB, at 10 (D. Del. August 21, 2020).
That's a nice little quote to keep in your back pocket for a future discovery dispute.
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
