EMRCHECK EXPANSION 1.2 — CONNECTICUT ORDERS AND ANAND SUPPRESSION RETRIEVAL
Research date: November 5, 2026. User constraint: free public sources only.

RESULT
Five Connecticut judicial records added from original court-hosted rulings. One Anand docket-only record added; no suppression reasoning is attributed to an unread order. Selected originals preserved unchanged with SHA-256 manifest.

CONNECTICUT VERIFIED CHAIN
2024-07-16 | 100.31 / docket header | Official trial docket lists complaint filing, with a distinct July 23 return date.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=FSTCV246068091S
2025-05-12 | 104.04; see also 104.03 | Dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction denied.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=30001247
2025-06-27 | 118.01 | Clarification characterizes bill of discovery as an independent equitable action and directs proposed schedules.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=30376051
2025-07-30 | 124.01 | Proposed schedule rejected; applications for specific deposition and records orders required for hearing.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=30567023
2025-08-12 | 130.01 / 129.01 | Records proposal approved; separate deposition proposal rejected for insufficient evidence under § 52-156a.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=30675681
2025-12-11 | 139.01 | Compliance order requires payment records, privilege log, specific objections, and documentation of data sources/search methods; testimony denied without prejudice.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=31558813
2025-12-29 | Appeal opening; trial entry 148.00 | Defendants filed appeal AC 49493 from the postjudgment enforcement order.
https://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CRN=105275&Type=AppealNo
2026-03-04 | AC 49493; motion AC 253638 | Appeal dismissed: untimely as to August judgment and no subject-matter jurisdiction over December postjudgment order; no merits affirmance.
https://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentDisplayer.aspx?AppId=2&DocId=2H5NZccTX1RvabPDHWZN%2fw%3d%3d
2026-03-17 | 151.00 | Trial docket lists defendants’ notice of compliance. A party filing is not a judicial finding of complete compliance.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=FSTCV246068091S

MOST DIRECTLY USEFUL RECORDS ORDER
CT-005, Entry 139.01, Dec. 11, 2025, requires written documentation of storage locations/data sources searched, search methods, responsive documents located, and withholding; also payment records, privilege log and specific objections. Testimony denied without prejudice. This is case-specific relief, not a universal EHR rule.

APPEAL: PROCEDURAL DISMISSAL
AC 49493 was dismissed March 4, 2026 as untimely as to the August judgment and for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction as to the December postjudgment order. It was not a merits affirmance. Official appeal docket shows Disposed and no certification petition listed in the displayed field as retrieved Nov. 5. A March 17 trial filing asserts compliance; no later court finding of complete production verified.

DATE AND SOURCE CORRECTIONS
- Grant complaint filed July 16, 2024; July 23 is the return date.
- The clarification order is June 27, 2025; July 7 reporting quoted that text.
- August production/deposition orders are dated Aug. 12; the appellate dismissal refers to the Aug. 11 judgment.
- AC 49493 dismissed for timing/jurisdiction, not affirmed on the merits.
- Anand ECF 427 denied ECF 406, not simply the earlier 2023 motion 321.
The May memorandum contains a caption/body typo “Carolyn”; the official docket and case identity name Carlon. Source copy is preserved without alteration.

DRCHRONO IDENTIFICATION
The state rulings do not name an EHR. The related federal complaint in Colker v. Callis, Doc. 1 ¶ 19 (p. 4), expressly identifies DrChrono as Peak Wellness’s records platform. This tag relies on that related party pleading, not a state-court finding about the software or its features.

ANAND: WHAT WAS AND WAS NOT OBTAINED
Verified exact entry: E.D. Pa. 2:19-cr-00518-CFK, ECF 427, Sept. 5, 2024, denying ECF 406. ECF 406 was filed Aug. 13, 2024. The earlier Oct. 2023 filing was ECF 321; it should not simply be substituted for motion 406.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16243689/427/united-states-v-anand/
Official retrieval URL: https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/doc1/153022282221?caseid=561627
PACER case ID 561627; document ID 153022282221.
CourtListener explicitly says the PDF is not in RECAP. The official link directs to PACER sign-in. Original order, any accompanying reasons, and relevant hearing transcript remain unreviewed. No purchase or subscription login was used.
Original Doc. 682, Sept. 22, 2025 p. 6, independently reports the denial. Original Doc. 833, Sept. 28, 2026 p. 1, describes criminal appeals 25-2804/25-2902 as pending. No later appellate merits decision was verified. An unrelated 2022 Anand/Independence Blue Cross opinion is not this criminal appeal.

FILES
ORIGINAL-SOURCES.json: provenance, roles, byte sizes and SHA-256 hashes for preserved PDFs.
DOCKET-SNAPSHOTS.json: structured official docket observations and precise Anand availability record.
source-notes/: individual ruling/docket briefs, citations, limits and history.

RELIABILITY LIMIT
Original-source verification and current-law clearance are separate. This is not a completed citator review. Official public dockets have their own publication cutoff and can omit sealed material. Do not infer misconduct, authenticity, completeness, or merits approval from a production order, a party notice, or a procedural appeal dismissal.