Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe SA, No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 8, 2012) On November 8th, District Court Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. filed his long awaited decision in response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification of Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck. In his short and to the point opinion, Judge Carter… Continue Reading
By: Katie Taylor, K&L Gates SaaS, PaaS and data hosting providers stress the significant efficiencies to be gained from cloud computing when marketing their services. Depending on the cloud computing system you are considering, however, a number of features may have a significant impact on your company’s ability to comply with electronic discovery obligations should it… Continue Reading
As announced in today’s edition of the Federal Register, the International Trade Commission has proposed to amend its Rules of Practice and Procedure to address “concerns that have arisen about the scope of discovery in Commission proceedings under section 337 of the Tarrif Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) (“section 337”).” “The intended effect of… Continue Reading
Yesterday, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that it has issued “final changes to agency procedure that will streamline the FTC’s investigatory process, make updates to keep pace with electronic evidence discovery, and provide more detail on how the agency evaluates allegations of misconduct by attorneys practicing before the Commission.” Among the changes highlighted in… Continue Reading
People v. Harris, No. 2011NY080152 (N.Y. Crim. Ct. 2012) As was previously discussed on this blog (here, here, and here), Twitter, Inc. was recently ordered by New York Judge Matthew Sciarrino to produce both “content” and “non-content” information (including the text of Tweets) associated with the account of criminal defendant Malcolm Harris. Mr. Harris and others… Continue Reading
On July 16, 2012, Defendant MSLGroup filed its Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Rule 72(A) Objection to Magistrate Judge Peck’s June 15, 2012 Opinion and Order (which denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification). The memorandum is available here.
K&L Gates partner Julie Anne Halter was featured on a Q&A panel of litigators discussing e-disclosure as a transformative tool in litigation. Panelists were asked: With technology changing constantly, how can lawyers best use e-disclosure to help their clients through the litigation process? Four experts debate some of the hot topics in this area. Read… Continue Reading
On July 5, 2012, the Supreme Court of Florida adopted amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure to address the discovery of electronically stored information. The amendments will become effective September 1, 2012 at 12:02 a.m. The amendments will affect seven rules of civil procedure: “1.200 (Pretrial Procedure); 1.201 (Complex Litigation); 1.280 (General Provisions… Continue Reading
On June 29, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their Rule 72(A) objection to Magistrate Judge Peck’s denial of their Motion for Recusal or Disqualification. Plaintiffs’ brief is available below. (Plaintiffs’ declaration in support of their brief is over 500 pages long and is available on PACER at http://www.pacer.gov/.) Plaintiffs’ Rule 72(A) Objection to the Magistrate’s June 15, 2012… Continue Reading
The Western District of Washington has published on its website proposed amendments to the Local Civil Rules, including the addition of language that specifically addresses the discovery of electronically stored information. The court has also published a proposed Model Protocol for Discovery of Electronically Stored Information in Civil Litigation, which was “developed in partnership with… Continue Reading
In the latest edition of K&L Gates’ Arbitration World Julie Anne Halter, a Partner in K&L Gates’ e-Discovery Analysis and Technology Group (e-DAT), and William Zoellner, an e-DAT Staff Lawyer, discuss the value of Early Case Assessment in arbitration. From the Editors Welcome to the 19th edition of Arbitration World, a publication from K&L Gates’ Arbitration… Continue Reading
Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck has denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification. The 56-page opinion was filed on Friday, and is available here.
Phase Two of the Seventh Circuit’s Electronic Discovery Pilot Program ended in May and the Final Report on that phase has now been issued. According to that report, much was accomplished during Phase Two, including the creation of several subcommittees such as the Criminal Discovery Subcommittee, dedicated to developing “resources to educate criminal practitioners about… Continue Reading
Last week, Pennsylvania became the most recent state to amend its civil rules to address the discovery of electronically stored information. Unlike many other states, however, Pennsylvania’s Civil Procedural Rules Committee has made clear in its explanatory comment that despite the adoption of the term “electronically stored information,” “there is no intent to incorporate federal… Continue Reading
On June 4, 2012, Defendant MSLGroup filed its opposition to Plaintiffs’ objections to Magistrate Judge Peck’s May 7, 2012 discovery rulings. A full copy of the response is available here.
On May 21, Plaintiffs filed Rule 72(a) objections to Magistrate Judge Peck’s May 7, 2012 discovery rulings related to the relevance of certain documents that comprise the seed set of the parties’ ESI protocol. Plaintiffs’ brief and supporting declaration are available below: Plaintiffs’ Rule 72(a) Objection to the Magistrate’s May 7, 2012 Discovery Ruling Declaration… Continue Reading
In March, the American Bar Association’s Electronic Discovery [ESI] in Bankruptcy Working Group issued its Interim Report on Electronic Discovery Issues in Bankruptcy Cases. The Working Group “was formed to study and prepare guidelines or a best practices report on the scope and timing of a party’s obligation to preserve electronically stored information (ESI) in… Continue Reading
In April 2009, Chief Justice Rabner of the Supreme Court of New Jersey appointed the Supreme Court Special Committee on Discovery in Criminal and Quasi-Criminal Matters (hereinafter the Committee). The Committee “was appointed to recommend solutions to a variety of issues that had arisen as the result of the increasing use of electronically stored information… Continue Reading
It seems every day brings something new in this case. Today we report that on Monday, May 14, Magistrate Judge Peck entered an order staying MSL’s production of ESI, “pending Judge Carter’s decision on plaintiffs’ motions for collective action certification and to amend their complaint.” That order is available here. Also of interest, on Tuesday,… Continue Reading
On May 10, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their reply in support of their motion for recusal or disqualification. Those pleadings are available below. • Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification • Declaration of Steven L. Wittels in Support of Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’’ Motion for Recusal or… Continue Reading
In March, The Sedona Conference® released a public comment version of its latest publication: Commentary on Ethics & Metadata. The commentary is the first “to move beyond [Working Group 1’s] previously exclusive focus on aspects of discovery or records management/preservation” and focuses on ethical obligations surrounding metadata in both the discovery and non-discovery context. The… Continue Reading
Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe SA, No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S.D.N.Y.) On Monday, Defendant MSL Group Americas, Inc. filed its response in opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification. Those pleadings are available below.
On Friday April 13, 2012, Plaintiffs in this matter filed a formal motion for recusal or disqualification, following up on their prior, informal request for the same. • A copy of the Notice of Motion for Recusal or Disqualification is available here. • A copy of the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion… Continue Reading
On Monday, Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck issued an order in response to Plaintiffs’ request for his recusal, which, according to Judge Peck, was contained in a letter dated March 28, 2012 (and is not publicly available at this time). A copy of the order is available here.