The BodyBio lawsuit is a federal trade secrets case the New Jersey supplement company filed in August 2021 against a group of former associates and a competing health business, accusing them of misappropriating proprietary information under the Defend Trade Secrets Act. The district court terminated the case on July 31, 2025, BodyBio appealed to the Third Circuit, and that appellate docket closed at the end of 2025. Much of the record is sealed, so the court’s reasoning and the final outcome are not publicly available.1PACER Monitor. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al2PACER Monitor. Bodybio Inc v. Herbert Pierce, et al
Who Sued Whom
BodyBio, Inc., a Millville, New Jersey nutraceutical company known for phospholipid, butyrate, and electrolyte products, filed the case in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey as Case No. 1:21-cv-15726.1PACER Monitor. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al3BodyBio UK. About Us The defendants are Herbert Pierce, Jeanette Pierce, Joan Pierce, Dr. Krishna Doniparthi, Hema Patel-Doniparthi, K Scientific LLP, and Functional Medicine of Georgia.
Dr. Doniparthi runs Functional Medicine of Georgia, a clinical practice in the Atlanta area, and founded a supplement brand called Precision Nutrients that markets fatty acids, phospholipids, plasmalogens, vitamins, and minerals under a “Cellular Health Triad” positioning.4Precision Nutrients. About Those categories overlap directly with BodyBio’s core products, and that overlap appears central to the trade secret claim, though the specifics are sealed.
What BodyBio Claimed
The complaint was brought under the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016, citing 18 U.S.C. ยง 1836(b), which gives companies a federal civil claim for trade secret misappropriation.1PACER Monitor. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al The DTSA lets plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief, but bars courts from ordering anything that would prevent a person from taking a new job unless the restriction is grounded in evidence of actual or threatened misappropriation.5USPTO. The Defend Trade Secrets Act at Five The particular information BodyBio said was taken, and how it says the defendants used it, is not laid out in the available public docket.
Counterclaims and Discovery
The defense answered back. In January 2022, the Pierce defendants filed counterclaims against BodyBio, CEO Bradley Berman, Frank Taschner, and Reginald Scott. K Scientific LLP, Dr. Doniparthi, Hema Patel-Doniparthi, and Functional Medicine of Georgia filed a separate answer and their own counterclaims against BodyBio. BodyBio and its co-defendants answered those counterclaims in February 2022.6Patexia. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al – Documents The content of the counterclaims is not summarized in the public docket entries.
Discovery ran long and was contentious. A stipulated confidentiality order was entered in April 2022, and the court repeatedly addressed fights over electronically stored information, subpoenas, and attorneys-eyes-only designations while pushing back deadlines through multiple amended scheduling orders.6Patexia. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al – Documents
How the Case Ended
The district court terminated the case on July 31, 2025.1PACER Monitor. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al The ruling that ended it is not detailed in the public docket, and portions of the district court’s opinion are sealed.2PACER Monitor. Bodybio Inc v. Herbert Pierce, et al
BodyBio filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit under Case No. 0:25-cv-01231, opened February 12, 2025. The appellate docket shows the case terminated on December 31, 2025, with an order recorded on January 7, 2026.2PACER Monitor. Bodybio Inc v. Herbert Pierce, et al1PACER Monitor. BodyBio, Inc. v. Pierce et al
Why So Little Is Public
Trade secret cases routinely proceed under seal because the material a plaintiff is trying to protect would be destroyed by public filing. That is what happened here: the district court opinion and related filings remain sealed, and the Third Circuit’s disposition is not publicly summarized as of early 2026.2PACER Monitor. Bodybio Inc v. Herbert Pierce, et al For anyone tracking the case, the public record confirms the parties, the DTSA basis, the timeline, and the closure on appeal, but not who won or on what grounds.