Order | Filed: June 25, 2026
| Entered: June 25, 2026
BioAgilytix Labs, LLC v. McNally et al
Defend Trade Secrets Act (of 2016) | Massachusetts
Order
Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. In consideration of the parties' joint status report, Docket No. 114 :• Docket No. 61 , Sword Bio Document Request No. 17: GRANTED. Defendants shall confirm that they ran search terms to identify communications with employees from Bristol Myers Squibb and that no responsive communications exist by July 8, 2026.
• Docket No. 61 , Sword Bio Document Request No. 18: DENIED as moot.
• Docket No. 61 , Sword Bio Document Request No. 19 and Docket No. 82 , McNally Document Request Nos. 29-30, 33; Sword Bio Request for Production of Documents No. 16: GRANTED. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(E) requires the production of electronically stored documents "as they are kept in the usual course of business." In general, emails must be produced with their attachments. See Cohen v. Trump, No. 13-cv-2519-GPC-WVG, 2015 WL 3617124, at *19 (S.D. Cal. June 9, 2015) (collecting cases from across districts). To the extent not already done, Defendants shall produce all attachments to the documents produced at DEF001347-DEF005697 by July 8, 2026.
• Docket No. 61 , McNally Interrogatory No. 5 and Docket No. 82 , McNally Interrogatory Nos. 12, 14, 15; Sword Bio Interrogatory Nos. 3, 10, 11, 12: GRANTED. "[A]nswering interrogatories simply by directing the proponent to rummage through other discovery materials falls short of the obligations imposed by Rule 33." Mulero-Abreu v. Puerto Rico Police Dept., 675 F.3d 88, 93 (1st Cir. 2012). Defendants may not respond to interrogatories by referring Plaintiff to 100+ documents or to all documents produced in response to their ESI search. Defendants shall revise any interrogatory responses that do not currently conform with that guidance by July 8, 2026.
• Docket No. 82 , McNally Interrogatory No. 11: DENIED as moot.
• Forensic Protocol: The Court understands that the parties are now in agreement regarding the appropriate time frame. To aid the parties (and the Court, if necessary), in making an informed decision about the eighteen disputed search terms, the parties shall take the four steps outlined by Plaintiff in Docket No. 114 at page 9 by July 8, 2026. To the extent that dispute remains live, the parties shall fully brief that dispute in their next status report.
• As to all other pending unresolved issues, the Court's April 24, 2026 and May 15, 2026 orders [Docket Nos. 105 and 109 ] remain in place.
The parties shall file an updated status report by July 10, 2026, updating the court on whether each remaining issue raised in Docket No. 114 , regarding Docket Nos. 61 , 68 , 76 , and 82 has been resolved or remains disputed. For each issue that remains in dispute, the parti... (truncated)