Selected pages, not the whole document. Attach the table of contents, the sections the employee authored with their revision history, and any passage that expressly leaves a decision to a qualified operator, together with a short statement explaining what each attachment proves.
Curate the exhibits and explain each one
Filing an entire controlled manual as an exhibit is a common instinct and a poor one. It buries the argument, exposes proprietary detail unnecessarily, and invites the reader to conclude that everything needed is in the binder. A curated set works better.
The contents page shows the scope of the company's proprietary method. Two or three authored sections with revision histories show how the knowledge was built and by whom, over what period. A passage that says a qualified operator must determine the application rate for site conditions shows, in the company's own words, where judgement begins.
Each exhibit should carry a one-line explanation of the point it supports. Add the training records showing how long an internal technologist takes to reach that level, because time-to-competence is the most concrete evidence that the knowledge is not readily available in the labour market. Hypothetical example: a Hope laboratory-equipment maker transfers the technologist who developed a calibration sequence for a new analyzer.
The first review produces a redacted exhibit set: authorship evidence, controlled training milestones, and a U.S. job description tied to the calibration problem. The decisive record may be a change-control log showing that the technologist approved a departure from the standard sequence after a field failure.
The company should remove customer identifiers only where needed, then explain the redaction rather than supplying blank pages that conceal the logic of the evidence.