The United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana faced significant discovery challenges in a complex trade secrets dispute initiated by a general contractor against several defendants, including former employees of the general contractor. The contractor alleged that defendants misappropriated confidential customer lists, pricing strategies, and business plans in order to unfairly compete against the contractor.

The contractor sought and was granted immediate injunctive relief, and, as the case progressed, the court implemented a protective order and a forensic protocol to manage the exchange and examination of the alleged misappropriated information. Despite these measures, discovery quickly became contentious.

One critical ruling on a motion to compel involved defendants’ suggestions that the contractor had not adequately protected trade secrets -- and defendants’ request for information from the contractor on the topic. The court found no substantial evidence of improper disclosures and ruled that requiring a contractor to review all its documents for potential external disclosures was disproportionate – without tangible evidence of such actions (the court emphasizing the necessity of specificity in discovery requests to avoid undue burdens). In connection therewith, the court also examined the contractor’s efforts to protect its trade secrets, which the court found adequate.