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

Monthly Archives: May 2013

Court Orders Adverse Inference for Failure to Prevent Automatic Deletion


Pillay v. Millard Refrigerated Servs., Inc., No. 09 C 5725, 2013 WL 2251727 (N.D. Ill. May 22, 2013)

In this case, the court granted Plaintiff’s motion for an adverse inference instruction where Defendant failed to prevent the automatic deletion of relevant data despite notice of impending litigation and receipt of a specific preservation notice, sent directly to Defendant’s general counsel.

U.S. International Trade Commission Adopts e-Discovery Rules

Posted in NEWS & UPDATES

The U.S. International Trade Commission has adopted “final rules related to its e-discovery practices.”  “The new rules will be effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register and are applicable to investigations instituted 30 days after publication in the Federal Register”—a Federal Register notice was issued on May 15, 2013. The newly adopted rules… Continue Reading

Case Update: For Spoliation, Court Orders $250,000,000 “to be applied as a credit against Rambus’s [$349 million] judgment against SK hynix”


SK Hynix, Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., No. C-00-20905 RMW, 2013 WL 1915865 (N.D. Cal. May 8, 2013) In this ongoing patent infringement action, a major question has been whether Rambus’s destruction of documents constituted spoliation and, if so, what sanctions should be imposed. Different courts considering the same facts (but involving different plaintiffs) came to different conclusions.  Upon… Continue Reading

For Good Cause Shown, Plaintiffs No Longer Required to Utilize Predictive Coding


EORHB, Inc. v. HOA Holdings, LLC, No. 7409-VCL, 2013 WL 1960621 (Del. Ch. May 6, 2013)

Previously, the court ordered the parties to “retain a single discovery vendor to be used by both sides” and to “conduct document review with the assistance of predictive coding.” On May 6, the court entered a new order, stating that Defendants could retain their chosen vendor and utilize computer assisted review but that the parties would not be required to retain a single vendor to be used by both sides and that “Plaintiffs may conduct document review using traditional review methods.”

Upcoming Event: eDiscovery Project Management 2013 (organized by eDiscovery Intelligence)

Posted in EVENTS

“Learn how to Bring Agility and Clarity to the Management of your eDiscovery Process” May 21-22, 2013 Marriot City Center Pittsburgh, PA “The mastery of electronic discovery is a necessary component in the changing business of litigation.  The tools for the seamless management of e discovery workflow are imperative for success.  This is not a… Continue Reading

Fourth Circuit Addresses Taxable Costs Related to ESI


Country Vintner of North Carolina, LLC v. E & J Gallo Winery, Inc., —F. 3d.—, 2013 WL 1789728 (4th Cir. Apr. 29, 2013) In this case, the Fourth Circuit clarified “what expenses related to electronically stored information (“ESI”) are taxable under the federal taxation-of-costs statute as ‘[f]ees for exemplification and the costs of making copies of any… Continue Reading