Key Insight: Converting native documents to a specified type not objected to in an earlier order is not overly burdensome
Nature of Case: Corn litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents
Keywords: Corn, TIFF, native format, bates stamping
Key Insight: A part protesting specific RFPs in an ESI stipulation must show why it is unduly burdensome
Nature of Case: class action unfair competition
Electronic Data Involved: audio files, hard-copy correspondence, archived email
Keywords: pre class certification discovery, ESI protocol, ESI Stipulation, proportionality
Key Insight: Defendant’s failure to preserve and produce ESI responsive to plantiffs’ discovery requests.
Nature of Case: unpaid wages and overtime claims collective action
Electronic Data Involved: deleted electronic records, undecipherable codes, mobile device data, text messages
Keywords: adverse inference instruction, unintelligible, mockery of the orderly administration of justice
Key Insight: Whether US based discovery can be used in a foreign proceeding
Nature of Case: 28 U.S.C. 1782 request for US based Discovery to be used in a foreign proceeding
Electronic Data Involved: Business documents
Keywords: US based discovery, foreign proceeding, serve document subpoenas
Key Insight: Documents produced on eve of deposition allowed for second deposition; text messages of employees not unduly burdensome; Financials in PDF form were OK assuming they were native format
Nature of Case: Fraudulent Inducement
Electronic Data Involved: Excel Spreadsheets/PDF; Text Messages
Keywords: incomplete production; native production; Proportionality
Key Insight: reproduction of files in TIFF format, review production for responsiveness
Nature of Case: False Claims Act
Electronic Data Involved: emails, electronically stored documents, transaction data
Keywords: TIFF, native format, overly burdensome, technology assisted review, TAR, Image Files, Bates number
Key Insight: whether there was accessibility problems or undue burden or cost associated with turning over phones and computers for forensic imaging; also, whether it was sufficient to have plaintiff’s employee’s conduct a search for responsive ESI
Nature of Case: breach of contract, tortious interference
Electronic Data Involved: e-mails, phone messages, physical computers and cellphones and their data
Keywords: “former business relationship”, “information may be discoverable even if not ultimately admissible into evidence”, “Allstate, however, agreed to produce responsive information within its custody”
Key Insight: Courts should be less involved in discovery dispute regarding ESI despite recent FRCP amendments
Nature of Case: Labor Standards Class Action
Electronic Data Involved: third party electronic payroll data
Keywords: FRCP 2015 amendments, electronically readable fomat
Key Insight: sanctions
Nature of Case: class action
Electronic Data Involved: source code
Keywords: sanctions, material misrepresentation, attorney’s fees, expert fees, costs, inherent authority
Key Insight: Defendant moved to compel Plaintiff to produce additional documents, supplement discovery responses, and remove non-responsive documents from their production. Plaintiff had not been able to obtain the entire underlying action file from former counsel, and argued they do not have actual control over the documents. The court found Plaintiffs did have ?possession, custody or control? of the file under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 (even though counsel had not been cooperative in turning the materials over) and granted Defendant?s motion to compel production of additional non-privileged and responsive documents. Plaintiffs were ordered to obtain the file and provide supplemental responses to Defendant?s RFPs. Defendant asserted Plaintiff?s previous production was a ?data dump? without an index (and contained numerous non-responsive documents), and did not comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 34. Plaintiffs contended that Defendant did not request a specific format and that they complied with the discovery order and produced their ESI in a proper format (PDF). Plaintiffs also claimed that Defendant?s request to have Plaintiff organize their production based on RFPs would be disproportionate – the production was in date order, allowing Defendant to ?organize, index and search the data at a low cost and with little effort.? The court agreed, finding the production adequate and cited the advisory committee?s notes for Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 (?contemplated that the parties requesting ESI would be able to organize it themselves?). Finally, the court denied Defendant?s motion for supplemented interrogatory responses, finding the Plaintiffs? responses adequate (the burden of finding the answer would be ?substantially the same for either party?).
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.