Key Insight: Plaintiffs’ motion for on-site inspection of computer records granted and defendant ordered to pay all plaintiffs’ expenses and legal fees unnecessarily expended due to defendant’s failure to make an accurate disclosure of its computer capabilities in December 1998
Nature of Case: Trademark infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Computerized information re purchase of goods bearing plaintiffs’ trademarks
Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel defendants to allow experts to perform physical inspection of their computer equipment and files, since full disclosure of email had been provided by defendants and inspection was likely to be unduly burdensome
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Defendant’s computer equipment and files
Key Insight: Granting motion to compel contact list printed out from defendant’s contact management software program which was not timely included on defendant’s privilege log, court rejected “frivolous” argument that the contact list technically did not exist until it was printed: “For more than thirty years, Fed.R.Civ . P. 34(a) has included data stored on electronic media as being subject to a Rule 34 request. The fact that the data has not been printed out does not mean that the document does not exist. Indeed, if BH’s argument were meritorious, any party could avoid producing damaging documents through the simple expedient of storing them on electronic media and never printing them out.”
Nature of Case: SEC enforcement action
Electronic Data Involved: Email, spreadsheets and contact list
Key Insight: Employer entitled to discover, at its own expense, copies of database on computer disk, code books and user manual created by EEOC’s expert from information produced by employer to allow for effective cross-examination of EEOC’s expert; in addition, employer to pay “fair portion of the fees and expenses incurred” in the past by EEOC for the expert’s work in encoding the requested data and formulating the database
Nature of Case: Consolidated Title VII action brought by individual and EEOC
Electronic Data Involved: Database created by EEOC’s expert from information produced by employer
Key Insight: Court found that local Patent Rule 3-4(a) requires production of source code and granted Plaintiff?s motion to compel
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Source Code
Key Insight: Plaintiffs’ motion to retrieve email granted; defendants required to re-search backup tapes using broader subject matter and time period, and to search email folders of any relevant individual in same manner
Nature of Case: ESOP plan participants sued employer and ESOP for breach of fiduciary duty and other wrongs
Electronic Data Involved: Email and other computerized data
Key Insight: Former client’s discovery requests, including request for hard drives of lawyer’s computers that had generated documents pertaining to client, were overbroad, oppressive and annoying
Nature of Case: Fee dispute between lawyer and former client
Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drive
Key Insight: Granting plaintiff’s’ motion to compel production of computerized images of employment records which were created to facilitate review of the documents by geographically-dispersed defense counsel, court held that images did not constitute attorney work product since images did not contain mental impressions or legal theories and would not give plaintiffs insight into defense strategy or opinions; plaintiffs to pay only nominal copying costs and not portion of $250,000 imaging cost incurred by defendant
Nature of Case: Race discrimination
Electronic Data Involved: Computerized images of employment records
Key Insight: Declining to determine whether its May 13, 2003 order contemplated the production of deleted files, court overruled defendant’s objections to special master’s order denying request for production of deleted files, finding that defendant’s request was untimely and that “the process of recovering deleted files at this late stage of litigation would be an undue burden on Medtronic and is based, the court’s opinion, on mere speculation that relevant deleted files could be recovered”
Nature of Case: Intellectual property litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Deleted files
Key Insight: Defense counsel’s failure to produce computer records and to retain all drafts of settlement documents reflected lack of diligence rather than intentional effort to abuse discovery process; testimony of witness barred and $500 awarded as sanctions
Nature of Case: Sexual harassment
Electronic Data Involved: Computer records
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.