Archive: December 2004

1
Court Applies Rowe Entertainment Balancing Test and Provides Plan for Electronic Discovery
2
Case Dismissed as Sanction for Electronic Discovery Abuses
3
Court Upholds Preliminary Injunction to Preserve Data for Recovery
4
Court Orders Severe Sanctions for Egregious Discovery Abuses
5
Court Determines that Additional Searches Are Largely Unwarranted Based on Test-run of Backup Tape Restoration
6
Court to Order Sanctions if Plaintiff Fails to Correct or Clarify Discovery Record
7
Court has Broad Discretion to Fashion Sanctions for Breach of Discovery Obligations
8
Motion to Compel Search of Backup Tapes Denied Despite Offer to Pay Expenses
9
Plaintiffs Allowed Discovery of Archived Email Only if Willing to Share Expense
10
Court Denies Motion to Compel Production of Electronic Databases

Court Applies Rowe Entertainment Balancing Test and Provides Plan for Electronic Discovery

Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. v. Michelson, 56 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1159, 2003 WL 21468573 (W.D. Tenn. May 13, 2003)

In case involving trade secrets, patents and trade information in the field of spinal fusion medical technology, defendant moved for production of 996 network backup tapes containing, among other things, electronic mail, plus an estimated 300 gigabytes of other electronic data not in a backed-up format. Read More

Case Dismissed as Sanction for Electronic Discovery Abuses

Nartron Corp. v. Gen. Motors Corp., 2003 WL 1985261 (Mich. Ct. App. Apr. 29, 2003)

In contract breach action, plaintiff claimed that GMC prematurely discontinued use of component part, which plaintiff had developed based on GMC’s projections of large volume purchases over an extended period of time. Plaintiff sought damages for research and development costs associated with the component part; consequently, evidence of plaintiff’s R & D payroll was a primary focus of discovery. Read More

Court to Order Sanctions if Plaintiff Fails to Correct or Clarify Discovery Record

Liafail, Inc. v. Learning 2000, Inc., 2002 WL 31954396 (D. Del. Dec. 23, 2002)

In action for contract breach and trademark infringement, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1), Liafail identified its national sales manager as likely to have discoverable information; the sales manager was a former sales manager of defendant (“L2K”). In response to L2K’s discovery requests, the sales manager gave Liafail the L2K-issued laptop that he had used while gaining knowledge of the day-to-day operations of L2K. Read More

Court has Broad Discretion to Fashion Sanctions for Breach of Discovery Obligations

Residential Funding Corp. v. DeGeorge Fin. Corp., 306 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2002)

The litigation involved cross claims for, among other things, breach of contract stemming from events occurring in late 1998. At a discovery planning conference, the parties agreed that discovery would be completed by August 1, 2001, and the case would be ready for trial by September 1, 2001. Defendant’s discovery requests sought the production of email; plaintiff raised no objection to the requests and agreed to “work diligently” to produce the responsive email. 306 F.3d at 102. Read More

Motion to Compel Search of Backup Tapes Denied Despite Offer to Pay Expenses

Cognex Corp. v. Electro Scientific Ind., Inc., 2002 WL 32309413 (D. Mass. July 2, 2002)

In this patent infringement case, plaintiff moved to compel a search of defendant’s backup tapes for documents responsive to its document request, offering to share the cost of the search, or even pay the entire cost. At issue were 820 backup tapes covering 1992 through 2001, which defendant said contained approximately four terabytes of information. It was estimated that, if printed, the tapes would yield almost three billion pages. Read More

Plaintiffs Allowed Discovery of Archived Email Only if Willing to Share Expense

Byers v. Ill. State Police, 2002 WL 1264004, 53 Fed.R.Serv.3d 740 (N.D. Ill. 2002)

Plaintiffs in sex discrimination suit moved to compel defendants to produce email stored on backup tapes created daily over an eight-year period. Based on the cost of the proposed search and plaintiffs’ failure to establish that the search would likely uncover relevant information, the court concluded that plaintiffs were entitled to the archived emails only if they were willing to pay for part of the cost of production. 2002 WL 1264004, at *12. Read More

Court Denies Motion to Compel Production of Electronic Databases

Jones v. Goord, 2002 WL 1007614 (S.D.N.Y. May 16, 2002)

Prisoners brought class action suit challenging state’s program of housing two prisoners in a cell originally designed for one prisoner, arguing that the practice increased disease transmission and violence among the prisoners. After more than three years of discovery, plaintiffs sought the production of six different electronic databases. Read More

Copyright © 2015, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.