Former SpaceX Employee Sought Limits on Mental Exam

Michelle Dopak requested specific constraints on a court-ordered evaluation in her lawsuit against SpaceX.

Updated on Sept. 19, 2026 in Remote Work

Former SpaceX Employee Sought Limits on Mental Exam

Former SpaceX production coordinator Michelle Dopak has filed a motion seeking to limit the scope and duration of a court-ordered mental examination. The motion, filed in September 2026, asks that the exam be conducted near her home in Naples, Florida.

Why it matters

The request highlights a legal dispute over the extent to which private medical history is discoverable in emotional injury litigation. Dopak's attorneys argue that claims of emotional distress do not permit an unrestricted probe into every aspect of a plaintiff's life.

Dopak alleges she was paid $5,000 less than a male colleague in a similar role and was once offered $100,000 for an abortion by a supervisor. She is currently 39 years old.

The players

Michelle Dopak

She is a 39-year-old former SpaceX production coordinator who filed a lawsuit against the company in March 2024.

SpaceX

This is an aerospace manufacturer and space transportation company headquartered in Hawthorne, California.

Tony L. Richardson

He is the judge presiding over the case at the Los Angeles Superior Court.

The details

In the ongoing lawsuit filed in March 2024, Dopak alleges she was coerced into a sexual relationship with a supervisor and denied a promotion to a scheduler position. Judge Tony L. Richardson previously blocked an attempt by SpaceX to obtain the entirety of the plaintiff's medical history.

August 2017: Dopak hired as production coordinator at SpaceX.
March 2024: Dopak filed lawsuit against SpaceX.
September 17, 2026: Attorneys filed court papers regarding mental exam.
October 1, 2026: Hearing scheduled for mental exam limitations.
April 20, 2027: Trial scheduled for Dopak's lawsuit.

Market Landscape

This case reflects broader industry challenges regarding workplace conduct investigations and the legal discovery process in high-profile employment litigation. It positions the plaintiff against a major aerospace firm while testing the boundaries of discovery in employment disputes.

The case highlights potential risks and legal precedents for workers navigating corporate human resources and workplace discrimination complaints. Readers should be aware that litigation over workplace conduct can span several years and involve complex privacy considerations.

The takeaway

This case serves as a reminder that legal protections for workers regarding sensitive medical data remain a heavily litigated area in employment law. Employees involved in workplace disputes should ensure they understand their rights concerning the disclosure of personal health records.

What happens next

The court hearing to discuss the limitations on the mental examination is scheduled for October 1, 2026, followed by the main trial on April 20, 2027.