Electronic Discovery Law
Court Enters Order on Sanctions in Phillip M. Adams & Assoc., Concludes Based on "Minimal Evidence" Presented that "It Is Not Clear that [Defendant] Spoliated Evidence"
Phillip M. Adams & Assoc. LLC v. Winbond Elec. Corp., 2010 WL 2977228 (D. Utah July 21, 2010)
In March 2009, the court granted in part plaintiff’s motion for sanctions and ordered the parties to present evidence of prejudice before crafting an appropriate sanction. See, Phillip M. Adams & Assoc., LLC v. Dell, Inc.,621 F. Supp. 2d 1173 (D. Utah 2009). Following analysis of plaintiff’s “minimal evidence”, the court concluded it was “not clear that ASUS spoliated evidence.” The court nonetheless made clear the insufficiency of defendant’s preservation efforts, particularly with regard to original source code. Accordingly, the court declined to order terminating sanctions, but indicated that plaintiff would be allowed to argue to the jury that “ASUS should have the original source code to a program that it both patented and attempted to patent for many years” and that “[t]he jury will consider these facts and draw their inferences.”
K&L Gates includes lawyers practicing out of more than 40 fully integrated offices located in North America, Europe, Asia, South America, and the Middle East, and represents numerous GLOBAL 500, FORTUNE 100, and FTSE 100 corporations, in addition to growth and middle market companies, entrepreneurs, capital market participants and public sector entities. For more information about K&L Gates or its locations and registrations, visit www.klgates.com.
Portions of this Web site may contain Attorney Advertising under the rules of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
e-Discovery Analysis & Technology group at K&L Gates, offering services related to ediscovery, review of electronic documents, electronic discovery and electronic evidence discovery.
K&L Gates LLP
925 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2900, Seattle, Washington 98104-1158
p. 206.623.7580, f. 206.623.7022