Key Insight: Where 3rd party established the burden of responding to defendant?s subpoena, including that compliance would result in a total cost of approximately $118,000, the court ordered defendant to bear the reasonable cost of the 3rd party?s compliance with the subpoena, subject to the conditions set forth by the court
Nature of Case: Breach of contract
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Key Insight: Court found plaintiff had shown good cause and granted motion to serve expedited discovery on the identified Internet Service Providers of Does 1-21 for the purpose of learning the identity of the Does for service
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Names and contact information for ISP subscribers
Key Insight: Court found reasonable expectation of privacy existed as to cumulative cell-site-location records such that they were protected by the Fourth Amendment and denied the Government?s motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ? 2703(c)(1) and (d) which sought two orders directing Verizon Wireless to disclose the cell-site-location records pursuant to the Stored Communications Act
Electronic Data Involved: Cell-site-location records
Key Insight: Where plaintiff demonstrated that (1) the Doe defendants are real people who may be sued in federal court; (2) it has unsuccessfully attempted to identify the Doe defendants prior to filing this motion; (3) its infringement and civil conspiracy claims against the Doe defendants could survive a motion to dismiss; and (4) there is a reasonable likelihood that service of the proposed subpoenas on the ISPs will lead to information identifying the Doe defendants, court granted motion for expedited discovery to allow plaintiffs to serve subpoenas seeking information to identify the unknown plaintiffs
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Information related to identity of Does 1-118
Key Insight: Addressing the obligation of a non-party to produce ESI that was deleted through ?normal business operations?, the court found that the Naussau Guidelines provided the best approach to determine the third party?s obligation to produce allegedly inaccessible data where the guidelines called for a cost/benefit analysis involving the difficulty of the production at issue; court found plaintiff had shown ?good cause? for needing the requested ESI but that there was insufficient evidence of the non-party?s alleged burden of production (including, for example, whether the at-issue ESI had actually been deleted, whether it could actually be retrieved, the cost of such retrieval, etc.) and thus remanded the case to the Supreme Court for ?a hearing on whether the information plaintiff seeks is ?inaccessible? and hence whether [the non-party] has the ability to comply with the subpoena; the appellate court reversed the Supreme Court?s ruling holding the non-party in contempt for failure to comply with a judicial subpoena
Nature of Case: Defamation
Electronic Data Involved: Identity of all persons who accessed the internet using a certain computer or internet portal on a certain day
Key Insight: In this case, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision of the District Court that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) applies to foreign citizens and thus precluded Microsoft Corporation from producing a foreign citizen?s emails, which were stored on its server.
Electronic Data Involved: Emails stored on domestic server
Key Insight: Court denied third-party Time Warner?s motion to quash plaintiffs? subpoena seeking identifying information as to a number of allegedly infringing John Does where Time Warner failed to establish undue costs because plaintiff had been ordered to bear the costs of production and failed to establish undue burden, particularly where it admitted that ?more than fifty percent? of the work had already been accomplished
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Identifying information of ISP subscribers
Key Insight: Court denied non-party?s motion to quash defendant?s subpoena where defendant adequately narrowed its request and where the non-party failed to establish that the burden of responding was undue, including by failing to provide particulars related to the expected burden of responding; court?s analysis closely followed standard set forth in Rule 26(b)(2)(C)(iii)
Nature of Case: DOJ investigation
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Key Insight: Where non-party OSU represented that responding to a subpoena seeking 6571 documents would require an expenditure of $1,761.24 and 55 hours of in-house counsel?s time, court found the burden was not so undue as to require protection from compliance and, in so finding, noted OSU?s financial interest in the outcome of the litigation, OSU?s close ties to a party in the case, and the amount in controversy of the underlying litigation (many millions of dollars)
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Key Insight: Where third party objected to plaintiff?s subpoena as overly broad and burdensome but nevertheless undertook a limited search which resulted in the identification of zero documents, but where plaintiff argued the search was halfhearted and that additional searching was required, the court took notice of objective of the recently adopted Model Order on E-Discovery in Patent Cases and indicated its applicability to third parties and thereafter ordered plaintiff to provide the non-party with five search terms to be utilized in additional searching and that plaintiff would bear the costs of any terms beyond the limits agreed to by the parties or granted by the court
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.