Our client developed and very successfully marketed a downhole tool used in completion of oil and gas wells. A competitor, which is a much larger company, sued our client claiming that the design and specifications for the tool were in fact the competitor’s design and specifications. The competitor sued our client for misappropriation of trade secrets, conversion, unfair competition, tortious interference with business relations, tortious interference with existing contracts, breach of contract, and conspiracy. During the lawsuit, the competitor repeatedly attempted to force our client to turn over its design and specifications for the downhole tool, identify the customers who were purchasing the tool, and reveal financial information, including costs, revenue, and profit figures. Our client never had to reveal this information because we persuaded the court that the scope of information sought was overbroad because the competitor had repeatedly failed to identify the specific features of the tool that had allegedly been misappropriated. The lawsuit ended with the court granting summary judgment in our client’s favor on all of the competitor’s claims.