Header graphic for print
Electronic Discovery Law Blog Legal issues, news, and best practices relating to the discovery of electronically stored information.

Monthly Archives: March 2012

Following Comments on Cost Allocation, Court Orders Parties to Split Some Costs and that Plaintiff Post Bond to Receive other Requested Discovery


Lubber Inc. v. Optari, LLC, No. 3:11-0042, 2012 WL 899631 (M.D. Tenn. Mar. 15, 2012) In this case, the court considered defendants’ motion for a protective order to restrict the relevant time frame for additional electronic searches and plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery in nine categories.  Upon consideration of the issues, the court denied defendants’… Continue Reading

Da Silva Moore Plaintiffs File Reply Brief In Support of Objections to Discovery Rulings

Posted in NEWS & UPDATES

Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe SA, No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S.D.N.Y.) As expected, on March 19, 2012, plaintiffs in this case filed their Reply in Support of Rule 72(a) Objection to Magistrate Judge Peck’s February 8, 2012 Discovery Rulings.  In it, plaintiffs summarize their arguments as follows: Extrajudicial activities aside, what should… Continue Reading

Third Circuit Addresses Taxable Costs: Vacates Award of the District Court, Remands with Instructions to Re-Tax Costs in Accordance with Opinion


Race Tires Amer., Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire, Corp., 2012 WL 887593 (3d Cir. Mar. 16, 2012)

On appeal, the Third Circuit vacated the District Court’s approval of taxable costs related to electronic discovery and remanded with instruction to re-tax in accordance with this opinion. Specifically, the court concluded that the relevant vendors’ charges “would not qualify as fees for ‘exemplification'” and that “of the numerous services the vendors performed, only the scanning of hard copy documents, the conversion of native files to TIFF, and the transfer of VHS tapes to DVD involved ‘copying'” and were thus recoverable.

District Court Judge to Have Last Word on Computer-Assisted Review, Grants Plaintiffs’ Motion to Allow Additional Briefing


Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe SA, No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S.D.N.Y.)

On March 13, 2012, approximately 2 ½ weeks after Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck issued his much-talked about opinion approving “computer-assisted review,” District Court Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. has granted plaintiffs’ request to submit additional briefing on their objections to the ruling.

Eastern District of Texas Adopts its own [Model] Order Regarding E-Discovery in Patent Cases

Posted in NEWS & UPDATES

Signed by Chief District Judge Leonard Davis on February 27, 2012, amendments to the Local Rules in the Eastern District of Texas include a [Model] Order Regarding E-Discovery in Patent Cases similar to an order  promulgated by a subcommittee of the Advisory Council of the Federal Circuit late last year.  The new [Model] Order is… Continue Reading

Court Imposes Sanctions for Failure to Conduct Reasonable Inquiry and Late Production


In re Delta/AirTran Baggage Fee Antitrust Litig., 2012 WL 360509 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 3, 2012)
After repeated representations that all responsive documents had been produced, a defendant belatedly discovered and produced an additional 60,000 pages. Upon plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions, the court found that the defendant “did not conduct a reasonable inquiry” to ensure production of all responsive documents and had run “afoul” of Rule 26(e). Accordingly, the court ordered discovery re-opened and that the defendant pay plaintiffs’ reasonable expenses and attorneys’ fees caused by the defendant’s failure, including the cost of the necessary motions and the extended discovery period.