Judge Blocks Joby Aviation From CT-Scanning Aerosonic Probe Trade Secret Motion

U.S. District Judge V. Michael Conley rejected Aerosonic’s argument that Joby’s production of documents revealing a CT scan of an Aerosonic air data probe constituted an “exceptional circumstance” warranting a second amendment to the trade secret list.

Aerosonic had originally identified 10 trade secrets in September 2025, later expanding the list to 50 in October. The company argued it could not have identified the additional secret—relating to the internal design and layout of the probe—until it learned during a February 2026 deposition that Joby had sent the probe to a third party for scanning.

The court found the circumstances fell short of the high bar set during a December 2025 discovery hearing, where Judge Conley warned that further amendments would require showing why the secrets could not have been identified back in October.

“Aerosonic explicitly stated, ‘And I want to reiterate, the [trade secret] list is done. Absent something extraordinary in ESI, [like] they hacked a server or something, the list is done,’” the order states, quoting the December hearing.

Judge Conley noted that while the CT scan revealed a potential method of misappropriation, it did not reveal a new, unknown trade secret. Aerosonic already knew Joby possessed the probe and alleged it copied internal designs.

“Reality presents a different situation,” the judge wrote. “Although Aerosonic did not know Joby CT-scanned an Aerosonic probe by reading Joby’s written discovery responses... Aerosonic did know the air data probes in Joby’s possession and did know what trade secrets those probes contained.”

The court also rejected Aerosonic’s claim that Joby prejudiced the case by withholding evidence. Joby produced the documents revealing the scan on January 30, 2026, before the court-ordered February 6 production deadline.

“Joby did not commit a discovery violation, and so the timing of discovery does not provide the exceptional circumstances to permit Aerosonic to amend the trade secret list,” the order says.

Joby argued that allowing the amendment would derail the case schedule and cause immense prejudice, as it would need additional discovery, fact depositions, and expert testimony to explore the new claim. The case is set for a September trial.

The court agreed, stating that permitting the amendment at this late stage would “greatly prejudice Joby’s ability to prepare a defense.”