Key Insight: Applying Zubulake balancing test, court ordered parties to share equally the cost of extracting source code from defendant’s database; however, defendant solely to bear cost of copying source code for production once it is extracted
Nature of Case: Infringement action
Electronic Data Involved: Source code
Key Insight: Court entered preliminary injunction prohibiting defendants from, among other things, deleting, destroying or altering any document, email or computer drive containing any ProPath or ProPath related information, and required defendants to segregate said items into a confidential file not to be used in their business
Nature of Case: Contract breach, misappropriation of confidential information, breach of fiduciary duty
Electronic Data Involved: Email and other electronic files
Key Insight: Claiming that it had already spent approximately $1.4 million to restore, review and produce email, and may have to expend as much as $3 million more in order to complete the document review and production, nonparty unsuccessfully attempted to avoid compliance with discovery orders in state proceeding by seeking injunctive and declaratory relief in federal court
Nature of Case: Action for declaratory and injunctive relief
Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes
Key Insight: Where defendants admitted to removing customer sales information from sales representatives’ computers by means of “delete and scrub” utilities in response to plaintiff’s claim that such material constituted trade secrets, and retained copies of deleted information, court granted unopposed motion for preliminary injunction enjoining defendant from distributing customer sales information and recalling and impounding customer sales information database
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement; plaintiff also alleged that defendant obtained private customer sales information from plaintiff’s former sales representative
Electronic Data Involved: Database containing customer sales information
Key Insight: Defendant was negligent in failing to determine which computer tapes in tape library contained information relevant to imminent and ongoing litigation and in failing to communicate clear guidelines regarding preservation of information to data processing personnel and tape librarian; no adverse inference, but plaintiff could inform jury about destruction of tapes and impact on plaintiff’s proof
Nature of Case: Action under False Claims Act
Electronic Data Involved: Computer tapes
Key Insight: Defendant’s production of email five days before trial was to begin did not warrant sanctions, where emails were not produced previously because defendant had changed email systems (thus rendering all previous emails irretrievable) and where email was produced as soon as it was discovered during trial prep of witness; discovery deadline extended
Nature of Case: Wrongful termination (age discrimination)
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Court ordered defendant to supplement interrogatory response where deposition testimony showed that some of the information sought in the interrogatory could be obtained from a simple computer operation
Nature of Case: Insured alleged that insurer’s denial of claim violated 42 U.S.C. ? 1981
Electronic Data Involved: Computerized claim file information
Key Insight: While granting without prejudice defendant’s motion to dismiss and denying without prejudice plaintiff’s motion to certify class, court found that plaintiff’s request for entry of a document preservation order was overbroad but not entirely unnecessary, and entered a more narrow document preservation order
Nature of Case: Class action alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Electronic Data Involved: Computer information relating to defendant’s debt collection policies
Key Insight: Court declined to impose terminating sanctions and instead ordered an adverse inference sanction against defendant for employee?s intentional spoliation of electronic evidence where the destruction was motivated by an intent to eliminate incriminating evidence but where the prejudice was minimal in light of plaintiff?s ability to obtain copies of the deleted evidence by other means
Nature of Case: Patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets
Electronic Data Involved: ESI, emails
Key Insight: Adopting Zubulake and McPeek approaches, court ordered defendant to restore a sampling of five backup tapes selected by the plaintiff; parties would thereafter be required to make additional submissions addressing whether the burden or expense of satisfying the entire request was proportionate to the likely benefit
Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.