IP Law Daily, TRADE SECRETS—E.D. Pa.: Preliminary injunction granted in pain detection system dispute, (Nov 10, 2025)

By Kevin M. Finson, J.D.

An injunction was warranted to stop attempts to take control of disputed patents and use of confidential information by a former executive because the disputed intellectual property was central to the petitioner’s business.

A patentee for a pain detection system was entitled to a preliminary injunction against its former president and CEO, the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia has held. The parties disputed the proper ownership of several patents which were central to the patentee’s business (BioTraceIT Corp. v. Dullen, No. 2:25-cv-04444-NIQA (E.D. Pa. Nov. 5, 2025)).

BioTraceIT Corporation (BioTraceIT) was a developer and holder of several patents related to a product known as PainTrace, used to measure pain. Deborah Dullen, one of the founders of BioTraceIT, was alleged to have wrongfully taken control of a Canadian subsidiary, downloaded some 26 gigabytes of confidential information and trade secrets to her personal email, and attempted to gain control over pending patent applications belonging to BioTraceIT. BioTraceIT brought suit for violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act, breach of contract, and related state law claims, and sought a preliminary injunction against Dullen. The court considered the traditional injunction factors.

Likelihood of success on the merits. The court found that BioTraceIT had shown it was likely to succeed on the merits of its breach of fiduciary duty claims because Dullen, who was employed as President and Chief Executive Officer of BioTraceIT, was obliged to assign to it the intellectual property rights which were the essence of why she was employed by the company in the first place and that she had refused to do so.

Irreparable harm. The court found that irreparable harm was likely because the contested patents and applications were all related to BioTraceIT’s primary technology, the PainTrace product, and that loss of that patent protection or exclusive control over that technology would be irreparable.

Balance of hardships. The balance of hardships favored BioTraceIT, which risked the loss of its entire business, as the court found that any harm to Dullen could be remedied by reasonable licensing fees and other remedies in the event she was ultimately determined to be the rightful owner of the disputed patents.

Public interest. The court held that the public interest favored the further development of the PainTrace technology, which could be of benefit to persons and animals globally.

The court granted the motion for a preliminary injunction.

The Case is No. 2:25-cv-04444-NIQA.

Judge: Alejandro, N.

Attorneys: Dmitry Lapin (Axenfeld Law Group, LLC) for BioTraceIT Corp. Jason Alan Little (Farrell Fritz, P.C.) for Deborah Dullen.

Companies: BioTraceIT Corp.

Cases: TradeSecrets PennsylvaniaNews