D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: July 2025

This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

In Videray Technologies Inc., et al. v. Viken Detection Corp., No. 1:23-cv-13035, Magistrate Judge Boal granted in part Plaintiffs' motion to compel supplemental interrogatory responses. In relevant part, the Court found:

• Interrogatory responses relying on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d) must actually "identif[y] the documents from which the answer can be derived";
• Facts underlying a patentee's determination that an individual is an inventor on a provisional application but not an inventor on the patents-in-suit are not privileged;