# Draft Requests For Production

> Drafting a plaintiff's first set of requests for production in a breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation action requires linking request categories to the pleaded claims and defenses, including a Definitions and Instructions section, and specifying ESI format requirements.

- Skill: `finchipaiorg/draft-requests-for-production` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add finchipaiorg/draft-requests-for-production`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/finchipaiorg/draft-requests-for-production/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Security
- Author: FinchipAIOrg (https://skillmd.com/u/finchipaiorg)
- Updated: 2026-09-22
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/finchipaiorg/draft-requests-for-production

---


# Skill: Draft Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Production of Documents in Breach of Contract and Trade Secret Misappropriation Action

## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting

- Drafting requests that are overbroad or untethered to the pleaded claims, defenses, and expected discovery needs, which triggers avoidable objections and weakens enforceability
- Failing to define core terms that recur across the set, leaving room for disputes over what counts as Documents, Communications, ESI, the parties, the agreements, the trade-secret material, and related business concepts
- Omitting time-period, custodial, and source limits, which can make the set look unfocused or disproportionate
- Leaving ESI production details unspecified, which allows the producing party to control format, metadata, deduplication, and reviewability
- Neglecting confidentiality and protective-order language, which can create unnecessary friction over designation and handling of sensitive material
- Drafting requests as a random list instead of a claim-linked sequence, which makes responses harder to evaluate and follow up
- Missing the basic litigation mechanics that make requests usable: numbered requests, clear instructions, privilege handling, and a practical production pathway

## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply

- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a): permits requests for documents, ESI, and tangible things within the scope of discovery
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(b)(1): requires each request to describe the items or categories with reasonable particularity
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(b)(2): governs the timing and form of responses, including objections and statement of production
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1): proportionality limits discovery to what is relevant and proportional to the needs of the case
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(2)(B): permits objection to sources of ESI not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5): privilege and work-product assertions should be handled by proper claim and description
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c): protective orders may govern confidential or highly sensitive material
- Trade secret and breach-of-contract discovery typically turns on documents showing formation of the agreement, performance, breach, notice, access to information, acquisition or use of the information, transfer or disclosure, competitive development, and damages
- If a case management order, ESI order, or stipulated protective order exists, its limits control the drafting of scope, format, and confidentiality references

## 4. Analytical scaffolds

- Start from the pleaded theories and defenses, then build requests around the facts each side must prove or disprove
- Group requests by subject matter so the set reads as a coherent discovery plan rather than a scattershot list
- Cover the core categories: contract formation and amendments, performance and breach, notices and cure, communications about the agreement, trade-secret identification and handling, access and transfer logs, competing product or service development, customer and market impact, and damages
- Use request language that is specific enough to resist vagueness objections but broad enough to capture responsive variations in naming, storage, and format
- Where several actors, systems, agreements, products, or periods are in play, enumerate them before drafting so each is addressed expressly rather than by implication
- Tie requests to concrete custodians, repositories, projects, or business functions when the source materials identify them
- Include instructions that require production in usable form, preservation of metadata where appropriate, and a clear method for handling duplicates, confidentiality designations, and privilege logs
- Align the drafting with any discovery plan, scheduling order, or ESI protocol in the source materials so the request set does not conflict with governing case-specific rules

## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships

- Use a claim-to-document matrix in the drafting logic: contract formation leads to the agreement and amendments; performance leads to invoices, delivery, acceptance, and compliance materials; breach leads to notices, internal discussions, and corrective actions; trade secret misappropriation leads to access, copying, storage, disclosure, transfer, and use evidence; damages lead to financial, customer, and valuation materials
- Preserve chronology where it matters: pre-agreement negotiations, contract execution, performance period, alleged breach window, notice and cure period, alleged misappropriation window, and post-breach mitigation or exploitation
- If multiple versions of a document or multiple systems contain the same information, draft for version history and system provenance, not just final copies
- If confidential information is central, make the request language compatible with protective-order production and review designations without conceding unnecessary limits
- If the source materials identify a particular product, project, system, or business line, reflect that vertical relationship in the request set so the requests track the actual operational context

## 6. Output structure conventions

- Caption
- Definitions
- Instructions
- Requests for Production, numbered and organized by subject matter
- Use conventional, court-ready language with consistent defined terms and clean numbering
- Include ESI production guidance that addresses format, metadata, native files where appropriate, and reasonable accessibility
- Include privilege and confidentiality handling in the instructions, not buried inside individual requests
- Draft the operative document itself first and ensure the final file is complete and ready to file before any secondary summary or transmittal material is considered