Tag:Data Preservation

1
Burgess v. Goord, 2005 WL 1458236 (N.D.N.Y. June 15, 2005)
2
Inventory Locator Serv., LLC v. PartsBase, Inc., 2005 WL 6062855 (W.D. Tenn. Oct. 19, 2005)
3
Computer Assoc. Int?l v. Am. Fundware, Inc., 133 F.R.D. 166 (D. Colo. 1990)
4
MasterCard Int’l v. Moulton, 2004 WL 1393992 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2004)
5
QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)
6
ABC Health Servs., Inc. v. IBM Corp., 158 F.R.D. 180 (S.D. Ga. 1994)
7
Convolve, Inc. v. Compaq Computer Corp., 223 F.R.D. 162 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)
8
Mathias v. Jacobs, 197 F.R.D. 29 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), vacated, 167 F. Supp. 2d 606 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)
9
Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)
10
United States v. Koch Ind., Inc., 197 F.R.D. 463 (N.D. Okl. 1998)

Burgess v. Goord, 2005 WL 1458236 (N.D.N.Y. June 15, 2005)

Key Insight: Court denied inmate’s request to preserve videotapes allegedly showing he was denied food trays because they were irrelevant to inmate’s claims; complaint alleged that he was denied medical treatment and should be transferred to another facility, not that he was denied food trays

Nature of Case: Inmate sought injunctive relief transferring him to a different facility

Electronic Data Involved: Videotape

Computer Assoc. Int?l v. Am. Fundware, Inc., 133 F.R.D. 166 (D. Colo. 1990)

Key Insight: Defendant’s duty to preserve source code arose no later than service of complaint, and its subsequent destruction of source code warranted default judgment on issue of liability; even assuming that maintenance of only a single, updated version of source code was, in other circumstances, a bona fide business practice, any destruction of versions of the code after service of complaint could not be excused as a bona fide business practice

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement, unfair competition, breach of computer software agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Source code

MasterCard Int’l v. Moulton, 2004 WL 1393992 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2004)

Key Insight: Finding no bad faith in defendant’s failure to preserve email since defendants simply persevered in their normal document retention practices, court nonetheless ruled that plaintiff would be allowed to prove the facts reflecting the non-retention of email and argue to the trier of fact that this destruction of evidence, in addition to other proof offered at trial, warranted certain inferences

Nature of Case: Trademark infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email

QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion for trial court to strike defendant’s answer and enter judgment for plaintiff on issue of liability, where defendant reformatted computer’s hard drive, effectively erasing any information the computer may have contained, a day before surrendering it for court-ordered inspection

Nature of Case: Dispute between former business partners

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop

ABC Health Servs., Inc. v. IBM Corp., 158 F.R.D. 180 (S.D. Ga. 1994)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff?s motion to dismiss IBM’s counterclaims as sanction for deletion of computer files, since erasure was done before suit was filed and did not amount to willful or bad faith disregard of discovery order or discovery request; court indicated that a jury instruction regarding destruction of documents may be an appropriate lesser sanction

Nature of Case: Breach of contract for development of software

Electronic Data Involved: Computer files containing both project-related documents and purely personal documents

Convolve, Inc. v. Compaq Computer Corp., 223 F.R.D. 162 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)

Key Insight: Court rejected plaintiff’s request for direct access to Compaq’s hard drives, servers, and databases since plaintiff had failed to show widespread destruction or withholding of relevant information by Compaq; court further rejected plaintiff’s request for sanctions for failure to preserve certain evidence

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives, servers, databases, email and electronic data

Mathias v. Jacobs, 197 F.R.D. 29 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), vacated, 167 F. Supp. 2d 606 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s failure to preserve computer printouts and telephone lists loaded onto Palm Pilot did not warrant an adverse inference instruction, but did warrant monetary sanctions of $28,271.75 to be paid by party (not his attorney) to compensate the victim for attorneys’ fees and expenses arising both from additional discovery required to locate equivalent information by alternative means and from the motion practice necessitated by the spoliation

Nature of Case: Action seeking monetary damages and specific performance of stock option agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy material loaded onto Palm Pilot

Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)

Key Insight: Based on in camera review, court granted defendant’s motion to compel based on the crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, ordered production of other documents on same subject matter and further ruled that discovery would be allowed regarding documents produced and on the issue of sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email, backup tapes

United States v. Koch Ind., Inc., 197 F.R.D. 463 (N.D. Okl. 1998)

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

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.