No. 23-1575

BIOPOINT, INC.,

Plaintiff, Appellee,

v.

ANDREW DICKHAUT; CATAPULT STAFFING, LLC, d/b/a Catapult Solutions Group,

Defendants, Appellants,

LEAH ATTIS,

Defendant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Richard G. Stearns, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Rikelman, Lynch, and Howard, Circuit Judges.

Dana A. Zakarian, with whom Christopher J. Hurst, Steven D. Procopio, and Smith Duggan Cornell & Gollub LLP were on brief, for appellant. Allison L. Anderson, with whom James W. Bucking, Rachel L. Kerner, and Foley Hoag LLP were on brief, for appellee. July 30, 2024 LYNCH, Circuit Judge. Catapult Staffing, LLC and Andrew Dickhaut (collectively, "Catapult") appeal from separate jury and judge findings that they misappropriated BioPoint, Inc.'s trade secrets, misappropriated its confidential business information, were unjustly enriched by these activities, tortiously interfered with BioPoint's prospective business relationships, and violated the prohibitions on unfair and deceptive trade practices in the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Law, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 11 ("chapter 93A").

The jury found that Catapult had misappropriated and used BioPoint's trade secrets with respect to three candidates recruited by Catapult and with respect to two of BioPoint's clients, the firms Vedanta and Shire/Takeda. It also found Catapult had engaged in tortious interference with BioPoint's business relationship with one candidate. The jury awarded BioPoint $312,000 in lost profits.

The judge, prior to the jury trial, had reserved to the court decision on all equitable claims for relief. He notified the parties he would hold a bench trial and decide those equitable claims after the jury trial. He held a bench trial and then issued a twenty-nine-page decision entitled "Findings of Fact, Rulings of Law, and Order After a Bench Trial." The judge found for BioPoint as to all equitable claims and awarded it $5,061,444, consisting of the amount by which "Catapult was unjustly enriched" by its

- 3 - "misappropriation of BioPoint's trade secrets," trebled because "Catapult's conduct also violated [chapter 93A]." The court also awarded BioPoint reasonable costs, attorneys' fees, and prejudgment and postjudgment interest.

We largely affirm, but reduce the judge's award, and the award of judgment, by $157,068. We also reverse the district court's imposition of joint-and-several liability on Andrew Dickhaut and remand for further proceedings.

I.

"As this case comes to us following a bench trial" and a jury trial, "we recount the relevant facts as found by the district court, consistent with record support." Reyes v. Garland, 26 F.4th 516, 518 (1st Cir. 2022) (quoting Gonzalez-Rucci v. INS, 539 F.3d 66, 67 (1st Cir. 2008)).

BioPoint is a life sciences consulting firm based in Massachusetts which scouts for highly skilled candidates to place in temporary positions at pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, and medical device companies. Those companies pay BioPoint a (typically hourly) rate for the candidates' services (the "bill rate"), and BioPoint remits a portion of that payment to the candidates (the "pay rate"), profiting from the difference. BioPoint maintains an internal database in which it records proprietary information regarding clients, candidates, and