Origen.AI Inc. is pursuing expedited discovery against Daniel Badawi, a former employee who allegedly took proprietary artificial intelligence technology when he left the company. The case centers on Badawi's communications with UniversalAGI regarding a proof-of-concept project and his potential future employment with that company. Origen.AI claims Badawi improperly used confidential information about neural networks and reservoir simulation technology.
Judge Espinosa required Badawi to produce communications containing agreed-upon technical terms including 'u*net,' 'timestep,' 'neural operator,' and 'physics informed neural network.' The judge also granted Origen.AI's request for the abbreviation 'PINN' and 'reservoir simulation,' finding both terms should be included despite Badawi's objections. However, Espinosa rejected some of Origen.AI's broader requests, ruling that the company 'failed to carry its burden with respect to the term residual.'
The discovery dispute arose after Judge Esther Salas issued a temporary restraining order on February 19, 2026. The parties had partially agreed on search terms following a March 23 order, but disagreed on several technical terms that Badawi argued were overbroad and irrelevant. Judge Espinosa also denied without prejudice Origen.AI's request to image Badawi's personal laptop, requiring the company to provide more record support showing the device falls within the TRO's scope.
Badawi must produce responsive documents by March 31, 2026, and provide a privilege log by April 6. Judge Espinosa scheduled a follow-up telephone conference for April 8 to address remaining discovery issues. The case highlights the challenges of defining search terms in AI-related trade secrets litigation, where technical terminology can be both highly specific and potentially overinclusive.