Archive: January 6, 2017

1
Citing “Diminishing Returns,” Court Declines to Compel Additional Discovery
2
Ortega v. Management and Training Corp. (D. N.M., 2017)
3
OOO Brunswick Rail Mgmt. v. Sultanov (N.D. Cal., 2017)
4
Jackson v. Haynes & Haynes (N.D. Ala., 2017)
5
Brand Services, LLC v. Irex Corp. (E.D. La., 2017)

Citing “Diminishing Returns,” Court Declines to Compel Additional Discovery

Armstrong Pump, Inc. v. Hartman, No. 10-CV-446S, 2016 WL 7208753 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2016)

“Implicit in both the language and the spirit of the 2015 Amendments is the obligation, at any stage of a case, to prevent parties from expending increasing time and energy pursuing diminishing returns.”

In this case, despite having viewed all of the at-issue documents and printing “approximately half of the total pages” (albeit under strict protocols), Plaintiff sought to compel “formal production” of all of the documents pursuant to the parties’ protective order, arguing that the documents did not contain “actual programming.” Defendant argued that the documents were “functionally equivalent to source code” and should not be subject to production.  Ultimately, the Court reasoned that discovery had “reached the point of diminishing returns” and declined to compel production, with limited exceptions.

Read More

OOO Brunswick Rail Mgmt. v. Sultanov (N.D. Cal., 2017)

Key Insight: necessity of preservation order

Nature of Case: misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: laptop, mobile phone, email

Keywords: email providers, deleted emails, significant concerns, threats to preservation, capability to preserve, irreparable harm, ex parte, seizure order, expedited discovery

View Case Opinion

Jackson v. Haynes & Haynes (N.D. Ala., 2017)

Key Insight: being negligent and irresponsible in maintaining information and knowing of the obligation to preserve the integrity of the information are not sufficient to show an intent to deprive

Nature of Case: improper termination

Electronic Data Involved: ESI concerning arrival and departure times

Keywords: Spoliation sanctions, intent to deprive, obligation to preserve, adverse inference

View Case Opinion

Brand Services, LLC v. Irex Corp. (E.D. La., 2017)

Key Insight: How much access of a party’s electronic information system does rule 34(a) give a party?

Nature of Case: Trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Responsive documents

Keywords: ESI protocol, Forensic images, overly broad

View Case Opinion

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.