NEWARK (LN) — A federal magistrate judge awarded Roadtex Transportation LLC $86,684.50 in attorney’s fees and costs incurred in litigating three motions to compel discovery in a trade secrets lawsuit, while reducing hours billed by a junior associate for drafting a deficiency letter and trimming administrative time for hearing scheduling.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Rukhsanah L. Singh found that defendants Salvatore Della Donne, Robert J. Kelly Jr., and High Road Transportation LLC failed to substantially justify their discovery positions, and that defense counsel bore responsibility for the award rather than the individual defendants.
Roadtex filed two successful motions to compel after defendants ignored supplemental discovery requests and misrepresented that responses were forthcoming. The HRT defendants’ competing motion to compel was denied.
The court rejected defendants’ arguments that Roadtex had not yet proven its claims before being entitled to discovery, finding that trade secret plaintiffs need not establish misappropriation before seeking discovery from defendants who may possess the relevant evidence.
Defendants also improperly relied on Avaya Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the court found, noting that case stands only for the unremarkable proposition that discovery must be relevant and proportional under Rule 26(b)(1).
Confidentiality concerns did not justify withholding discovery when a protective order was already in place, the court said.
The court approved hourly rates ranging from $450 to $875 based on counsel experience, finding them consistent with market rates for complex trade secrets litigation in the district.
However, the court reduced hours billed by associate Samantha Marchand for drafting a discovery deficiency letter from 9.4 to 6.0 hours, and associate Katie Burnett’s time on the letter from 4.3 to 3.0 hours, finding the 13.7 hours of attorney time unjustified for a 19-page letter.
The court also excluded 3.4 hours spent on scheduling an adjournment of the August 12, 2025 hearing.
Roadtex originally sought $0.11 million but reduced its request to $86,916.10 by withdrawing 46.5 hours before the court’s ruling.
The award breaks down as $68,538 jointly and severally against all defense counsel, plus an additional $18,146.50 against HRT defendants’ counsel separately.
The court found that defense counsel told clients not to search for responsive documents until Roadtex produced its own discovery responses, and repeatedly assured Roadtex that responses would be forthcoming without ever delivering them.
The court ordered defense counsel to meet and confer regarding payment timing, with disputes to be referred back to the magistrate if necessary.
Roadtex’s underlying claims allege the defendants misappropriated trade secrets, breached confidentiality and non-compete agreements, and improperly used confidential company information to steal clients.