Key Insight: Court ordered that all hard copy documents be produced on single page tiff images, uploadable on both Opticon and Concordance, and that all electronic documents be produced in their native format with all associated metadata
Nature of Case: Securities class action
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents
Key Insight: Where court found that ULLICO had in bad faith “grossly abused” the use of the “confidential” designation allowed under parties’ stipulated protective order, court ordered ULLICO to completely re-do its confidentiality designations and also ensure that the documents were correctly identified in parties’ joint discovery database
Nature of Case: ERISA litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Confidential documents, joint discovery database
Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s renewed motion for sanctions where plaintiff had failed to satisfy local meet and confer requirement; parties had previously engaged in meet and confer during recess and agreed on search methodology for responsive documents and emails
Nature of Case: Trademark and copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Spreadsheet; email
Key Insight: Where record showed that defendants’ record keeping was episodic at best, and that existing documentation was inaccurate and possibly manufactured for the litigation, court directed plaintiff, if she wished to undertake a forensic examination of any computer, to provide a detailed affidavit by a specialist who would conduct such testing, including a precise specification of what is to be done, for what purpose and in what period of time
Nature of Case: Breach of fiduciary duty against art gallery
Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drive
Key Insight: In case where parties disputed whether arbitration agreement applied to plaintiff and motion on the issue was pending, court allowed limited discovery and ordered defendant to choose up to 10 individuals whose files (electronic or otherwise) would be searched for information falling within certain categories
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel production of an exact image of the hard drive of defendant’s personal computer and instead ordered that the examination of and production from defendant’s personal computer proceed on the terms spelled out in defendant’s responses to the motion to compel
Electronic Data Involved: PC hard drive
Key Insight: Court granted plaintiff’s request for Rule 56(f) continuance and dismissed defendant’s motion for summary judgment as premature and with leave to refile once defendant had fulfilled all its discovery obligations, where plaintiff had already filed a number of discovery motions and sought, among other things, “information contained in emails which appear to have been deleted by Honda as part of its corporate policy (and which are the subject of a separate Motion for Order Preserving Electronic Data, to Recover[] Deleted Data and Show Cause which is pending before the magistrate)”
Nature of Case: Trademark infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Deleted email
Key Insight: Appellate court affirmed discovery sanctions imposed on two defendants for resisting production of electronic documents on CD, noting: “A CD is simply a copy of the electronic data on the computer. Just as photocopying is proper for copying a document in paper form, downloading computer files onto a CD is an appropriate means for copying the electronic data on a computer’s hard drive.”
Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets
Electronic Data Involved: CD-ROMs containing electronic documents
Key Insight: Motion for forensic examination of opposing party’s computer hard drives denied where movant failed to provide any details about how the examination would be conducted and did not present specific, concrete evidence of concealment or destruction of evidence sufficient to justify the relief requested; instead, court found appropriate the “compromise” suggested by plaintiff that its own attorneys personally review the computers to ensure that any additional responsive documents that may exist in readable form were produced
Nature of Case: Misappropriation of intellectual property
Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives
Key Insight: Court imposed monetary sanctions of $36,391 where defendants “made no effort whatsoever to locate and provide either documentary or electronic data discovery,” and erroneously represented that relevant electronic evidence was irretrievable, thus giving plaintiffs no choice but to incur the extraordinary expense of hiring a computer consulting firm to retrieve what was purportedly ?irretrievable?
Nature of Case: Class action alleging claims under Fair Labor Standards Act and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act
Electronic Data Involved: Payroll data
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.