Tag:Taxable Costs

Key Insight: Court found Defendants were entitled to costs, including costs related to scanning, OCR bates labeling, and TIFF/PDF conversion but not costs associated with document collection, password recovery, searching, data hosting/electronic storage services and the fee for an e-discovery specialist

Electronic Data Involved: Taxable costs

Key Insight: Court approved taxation of costs related to TIFF conversion and ?uploading responsive documents through the use of a File Transfer Protocol,? but declined to allow costs related to ?Processing Initial Dataset,? ?Culling and Posting Resulting Data Subset,? ?Optical Character Recognition (OCR) Processing,? ?ID/Conversion of Non-searchable Docs to Searchable,? ?Project Management,? ?Hosting Active-Data,? and ?document unitization?

Electronic Data Involved: Taxable e-Discovery costs

Key Insight: Regarding the taxation of e-Discovery costs, court found that costs ?associated with the conversion of ESI into a readable format, such as scanning or otherwise converting a paper version to an electronic version or converting native files to TIFF files … are compensable under ? 1920(4). But costs related to the ?gathering, preserving, processing, searching, culling, and extracting of ESI simply do not amount to ?making copies? and are thus not taxable.?

Electronic Data Involved: Taxable e-Discovery Cost

Key Insight: Cost of converting native email and other native files into imaged format for purposes of production was one of many items considered by the court in defendant?s application for costs following grant of summary judgment. Despite plaintiffs argument that the requested expenses should only be approved if they pertain to documents actually produced to Plaintiff, court was satisfied with defendant?s explanation that the costs were ?actually and necessarily incurred in responding to the Plaintiff?s discovery demands? and allowed recovery of defendant?s tiffing costs, even though Defendant could not ?state with certainty whether every document that was converted was actually turned over to Plaintiff as being responsive to a particular demand.?

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Imaged native files

Key Insight: District Judge adopted in toto recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, including approval of costs related to converting ESI into a reasonable format, where the conversion was requested by an opposing party and ultimately ordered by the court

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Key Insight: Costs generically described as ?discovery services? and broken down as ?Active Hosting,? ?Nearline Hosting,? and ?User Access Fee? were denied where the generic descriptions were insufficient to meet the standard for specificity in the Ninth Circuit and where the descriptions failed to indicate that the fees were incurred for making copies

Electronic Data Involved: ESI (Taxable costs under 1920(4))

Key Insight: Where Defendant sought to recover for emails and other ESI compiled by Plaintiff?s expert as ?copying costs? (specifically, Defendant sought ?recovery to produce emails as part of discovery and to obtain already compiled electronic data to support its Daubert motion to exclude Dr. Bradley?s testimony, characterizing them as ?digital copies? necessarily obtained for use in the case?), court reasoned that the costs did not ?relate to a deposition transcript or a true ?digital copy,?? that ?creating an electronic database/compilation or enhanced digital files ?goes well beyond the statutory intent? for taxable digital copies,? and that Defendant had not explained how the data was ?necessarily obtained for use in the case rather than the convenience of counsel? and denied the request

Electronic Data Involved: Taxable costs

Key Insight: Court overruled plaintiffs? objection to clerk?s ruling on defendant?s bill of costs to the extent it awarded defendant taxable costs associated with retrieving computer information, noting that defendant sought reimbursement of only the costs incurred in the extraction endeavor — not for help in reviewing the documents; finding the request reasonable, the court observed: “Plaintiffs asked Defendant for 20 years of information from defendant?s mine site in Ladysmith, Wisconsin. Given the nature of the information storage over this period of time, it was reasonable, if not essential, for defendant to employ an expert third-party forensic expert to extract the information.?

Nature of Case: Environmental damage to the Flambeau River

Electronic Data Involved: 20 years of information

Key Insight: After granting summary judgment to defendants, court evaluated defendants’ bills of costs under Race Tires Am., Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp., 674 F.3d 158 (3d Cir. 2012) and sustained plaintiffs’ objections to several categories of defendants’ claimed e-discovery expenses because they did not constitute the cost of “making copies” under Section 1920(4), but were preparatory steps that occurred prior to copying or occurred after copying, e.g., electronic data “processing” expenses, “quality check” expenses, OCR costs, ?tech time,? ?data capture,? ?master CD replication,? costs associated with processing or creation of a “load file,” or cost of software packages used in production process; costs of converting native files to TIFF were recoverable

Nature of Case: Plaintiffs unsuccessfully claimed price-fixing among providers of text messaging services

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Key Insight: Defendant moved for the court to tax costs for e-Discovery tasks including TIFF conversion, native file processing, CD creation, blowbacks and ?Data reduction & filtering? that the clerk had disallowed. The court disallowed costs for data reduction/filtering, native file processing and ?technical time? and allowed costs for Tiff conversion, CD/DVD creation, imaging and blowbacks (costs were reasonable and necessary).

Nature of Case: Taxable costs

Electronic Data Involved: ESI