Catagory:Case Summaries

1
Centurion Indus., Inc. v. Warren Steurer & Assocs., 665 F.2d 323 (10th Cir. 1981)
2
Cornell Research Found., Inc. v. Hewlett Packard Co., 223 F.R.D. 55 (N.D.N.Y. 2003)
3
Fischbach v. Trustees of Cal. State Univ., 2004 WL 179471 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2004) (Unpublished)
4
Hentsch Henchoz & Cie v. Gubbay, 97 P.3d 1283 (Utah 2004)
5
Katt v. Titan Acquisitions, Inc., 244 F. Supp. 2d 841 (M.D. Tenn. 2003)
6
Madden v. Wyeth, 2003 WL 21443404 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 16, 2003)
7
Nicholas v. Windham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2004)
8
Promega Corp. v. Applera Corp., 2002 WL 32340886 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 27, 2002)
9
Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 948 F. Supp. 923 (N.D. Cal. 1996)
10
Superior Consultant Co. v. Bailey, 2000 WL 1279161 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 22, 2000)

Centurion Indus., Inc. v. Warren Steurer & Assocs., 665 F.2d 323 (10th Cir. 1981)

Key Insight: Subpoena seeking non-party’s software trade secrets enforced since trade secrets were relevant and necessary to patent suit and need for information outweighed possible injury to third party

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Software trade secrets of third party

Cornell Research Found., Inc. v. Hewlett Packard Co., 223 F.R.D. 55 (N.D.N.Y. 2003)

Key Insight: Where defendant resisted production of technical specifications in electronic form because material had already been produced at great expense in hard copy form, magistrate ruled that defendant must allow plaintiff’s expert to view material in electronic form at defendant’s facility during regular business hours under and such further terms and conditions as the parties agree

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Technical specifications

Fischbach v. Trustees of Cal. State Univ., 2004 WL 179471 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2004) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Email discovered and produced after court granted summary judgment for defense and notice of appeal was filed constituted new evidence; appellate court granted writ of coram vobis, reversed and directed the trial court to deny defendants’ motion for summary judgment without prejudice to their renewing the motion after plaintiff had opportunity to conduct further discovery regarding email

Nature of Case: Defamation and invasion of privacy

Electronic Data Involved: Belatedly produced email found on key player’s hard drive

Hentsch Henchoz & Cie v. Gubbay, 97 P.3d 1283 (Utah 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendant shipped all of its documents, records, and computer hard drives from Utah to Spain in defiance of trial court’s orders requiring defendant to comply with discovery requests, and trial court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff, Supreme Court of Utah held that defendant?s appeal of the summary judgment ruling could be dismissed by appellate court based upon defendant?s contumacious conduct, but Supreme Court would first allow defendant an opportunity to bring itself into compliance with trial court?s orders within 30 days, including those orders requiring defendant to comply with discovery and to return all requested documents and evidence to Utah

Nature of Case: Investor sued financial services company for fraud, conspiracy, breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drives

Katt v. Titan Acquisitions, Inc., 244 F. Supp. 2d 841 (M.D. Tenn. 2003)

Key Insight: Despite dismissal of all plaintiffs’ claims and entry of final judgment on the merits, court retained ancillary jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions for spoliation of electronic evidence for purpose of holding a hearing before ruling on the motion

Nature of Case: Securities class action

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic evidence

Madden v. Wyeth, 2003 WL 21443404 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 16, 2003)

Key Insight: Confident that defense counsel would advise their clients of preservation duty and admonish them of dire consequences of violating same, court denied plaintiff’s motion to preserve evidence in absence of some proof that evidence may be lost or destroyed without it

Nature of Case: Drug products liability

Electronic Data Involved: Discoverable information in paper or electronic format

Nicholas v. Windham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2004)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny enforcement of subpoena directed to plaintiffs’ nonparty company where defendants had already deposed plaintiffs and conceded that the company would have no additional information, plaintiffs would be designated Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses if discovery were allowed, and plaintiffs had already produced email from their business accounts and remained under a continuing obligation to supplement their earlier productions

Nature of Case: Ancillary proceeding to enforce subpoena

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Promega Corp. v. Applera Corp., 2002 WL 32340886 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 27, 2002)

Key Insight: After plaintiffs objected to production of sales database because it was not organized to its liking, and defendants produced two further iterations in an attempt to respond to plaintiffs’ complaints, court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel production of “complete and accurate” database since court “was not convinced that defendants have failed to produce this information, even if it is not in the ideal format plaintiff desires”

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Sales database

Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 948 F. Supp. 923 (N.D. Cal. 1996)

Key Insight: Brief reference to court’s granting plaintiff’s requested ex parte TRO and seizure order to seize computers and hardware, copy memory, and delete pirated software before returning items to defendant

Nature of Case: Copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives and memory devices (video game software)

Superior Consultant Co. v. Bailey, 2000 WL 1279161 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 22, 2000)

Key Insight: Reference to previously entered TRO, ordering, among other things, that the parties neither destroy, alter, modify nor conceal any relevant data, including data stored on computer media, that defendants create and thereafter produce to defense counsel a backup file of defendant Bailey’s laptop computer, and a backup file of any personal computer hard-drive to which defendant Bailey has had access at any time, and that defendants produce a redacted copy of these hard-drive backup files to plaintiff’s counsel within three days after entry of the TRO; subsequent preliminary injunction included similar provisions

Nature of Case: Employer sued former employee for breach of employment contract, tortious interference, misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Databases containing sales and customer information

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.