Electronic Discovery Law – Page 365 – Legal issues, news and best practices relating to the discovery of electronically stored information.

Io Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc., 2007 WL 1113800 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court granted plaintiff’s motion to compel and denied defendant’s request to shift costs of production to plaintiff, since defendant provided no information about whether and how such information was “inaccessible” or any other information relevant to cost-shifting determination under Zubulake III; court encouraged parties to agree on most efficient means of production and noted that plaintiff had indicated willingness to provide high capacity storage devices

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Adult video content; website traffic information

Wood Group Pressure Control, L.P. v. B & B Oilfield Servs., Inc., 2007 WL 1076702 (E.D. La. Apr. 9, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court directed defense counsel to file supplemental memorandum regarding her communications with defendant regarding supplemental discovery responses and preservation of evidence and to provide documentation of same for in camera inspection; court further directed defendant to make available key player’s hard drive for forensic examination

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Drawings; hard drive

Perez-Farias v. Global Horizons, Inc., 2007 WL 991747 (E.D. Wash. Mar. 30, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court denied defendants’ FRCP 60(b) motion for relief from discovery orders, and ordered defendants to comply with prior orders and, among other things, produce certain database in native format, and produce requested email and Excel spreadsheet

Nature of Case: Class action brought by farm workers

Electronic Data Involved: Database, email and spreadsheet

Koninklijke Philips Elecs. N.V. v. KXD Tech., Inc., 2007 WL 879683 (D. Nev. Mar. 20, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court ordered defendants to organize and label documents to correspond with discovery requests, or provide an index, and to submit declarations by qualified computer technicians or forensic experts setting forth specific details of any lost or destroyed data or damaged hard drives; court reserved the option to appoint a neutral computer forensic expert as a special master to investigate and assess any claim by defendants that their computer servers or hard drives were damaged during the seizures or that electronic records were lost or destroyed

Nature of Case: Infringement litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents, hard drives

Frye v. St. Thomas Health Servs., 2007 WL 908059 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: State appellate court found no error in trial court’s order denying plaintiff’s motion to compel production of certain hard drives of defendant for the purpose of allowing an expert to determine whether they contained relevant email, since discovery requests at issue made no mention of hard drives

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email, hard drives

PML N. Am., LLC v. ACG Enters. of NC, Inc., 2007 WL 925627 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 28, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Further to its December 20, 2006 order granting plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, 2006 WL 3759914, court awarded plaintiff $134,373 representing reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs (including fees of computer forensics expert) incurred because of defendant’s discovery misconduct

Nature of Case: Insurance fraud

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives

Armament Sys. & Procedures, Inc. v. IQ Hong Kong Ltd., 2007 WL 895836 (E.D. Wis. Mar. 21, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court ordered plaintiff to produce mirror image copies of hard drives at location of defendants’ computer forensics expert, since court saw no reason to treat such discovery differently than traditional (paper) discovery, any privacy concerns were addressed in the protocol proposed by defendants, and it was less burdensome than forcing defendants’ experts to conduct their testing at the site of plaintiff’s experts

Nature of Case: Patent litigation involving claims of forgery and fraud

Electronic Data Involved: Mirror image of hard drive

Imig, Inc. v. Electrolux Home Care Prods., Ltd., 2007 WL 900310 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on copyright infringement counterclaims, based in part on adverse inference stemming from plaintiff’s failure to preserve and produce relevant evidence; defendant showed that substantial portion of deleted files recovered by its forensic expert were favorable to its position on various claims

Nature of Case: Plaintiff alleged defendant improperly disparaged plaintiff’s product, and defendant asserted counterlaims for copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data on hard drives

Beardsley v. All Am. Heating, Inc., 2007 WL 869959 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 20, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court ordered defendant to answer certain interrogatories regarding customers and projects and to produce “a complete unedited electronic copy of Defendant’s database” which contained the requested information

Nature of Case: Wrongful termination

Electronic Data Involved: Database

Amersham Biosciences Corp. v. PerkinElmer, Inc, 2007 WL 842038 (D.N.J. Mar. 15, 2007) (Unpublished)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of that portion of its January 31, 2007 order adopting magistrate judge’s finding that plaintiff had waived any privilege that may have applied to the 37 Non-Lotus Notes Documents

Nature of Case: Patent litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Privileged email