Tag: Cost Shifting

1
Lawson v. Spirit Aerosystems (Kansas, 2020)
2
Digital Mentor, Inc. v. Ovivo USA, LLC (Western District of Washington, 2020)
3
Stone Brewing Co., LLC v. MillerCoors LLC (Southern District of California, 2019)
4
Tafolla v. County of Suffolk, No. CV-17-4897 (E.D.N.Y. July 8, 2019)
5
Lotus Indus., LLC v. Archer (E.D. Mich., 2019)
6
Wild Fish Conservancy v. Cooke Aquaculture Pac. (District Court Western District of Washington, 2019)
7
Robinson v. MGM Grand Detroit, LLC (E.D. Mich., 2019)
8
OptoLum v. Cree, Inc., No, 1:17CV687 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 28, 2018)
9
TrueNorth Cos., LC v. TruNorth Warranty Plans of N. Am. (Northern District of Iowa, 2018)
10
United States v. Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders’ and Exhibitors’ Association, No. 17-5925 (6th Cir. March 8, 2018)

Lawson v. Spirit Aerosystems (Kansas, 2020)

Key Insight: When plaintiff was allowed to dictate defendant’s electronic discovery process, cost shifting to plaintiff is appropriate when electronic discovery performed was not proportionate to the case

Nature of Case: Employment non-compete agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records

Keywords: Cost shifting, technology assisted review, TAR, aerospace

View Case Opinion

Digital Mentor, Inc. v. Ovivo USA, LLC (Western District of Washington, 2020)

Key Insight: Failure to produce; Sanctions; Proportionality

Nature of Case: Trademark & Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy; correspondence; email

Keywords: “Functional employee”; Consultant; Third-party communications; Privilege; Spoliation; Unfair prejudice; Attorney’s fees and costs; Proportionality; Access/Resources;

View Case Opinion

Stone Brewing Co., LLC v. MillerCoors LLC (Southern District of California, 2019)

Key Insight: Requests for Production; marketing materials; Unreasonably cumulative or duplicative

Nature of Case: Trademark Infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy; Historical records; on-site inspection; Marketing materials (documents, recordings, video, displays, etc.)

Keywords: Discovery violations; adequacy of discovery responses; Vague/overbroad/burdensome/ not calculated to lead to discovery of documents relevant to claims or defenses; proportionality; access; costs/Attorney’s fees; resources; “Senior user”; Cherrypicking; Evidentiary preclusion; Court order; Representative samples

View Case Opinion

Lotus Indus., LLC v. Archer (E.D. Mich., 2019)

Key Insight: Whether a subpoenaed third party is entitled to costs and portion of fees before engaging in document processing

Nature of Case: RICO and First Amendment Retaliation

Electronic Data Involved: documents

Keywords: fee shifting, undue burden, costs and fees

View Case Opinion

Wild Fish Conservancy v. Cooke Aquaculture Pac. (District Court Western District of Washington, 2019)

Key Insight: Excessive document production shortly before deposition didn’t justify additional attorney’s fees

Nature of Case: industrial pollution

Electronic Data Involved: documents

Keywords: attorney’s fees, deposition, document production, inadequate preparation

View Case Opinion

OptoLum v. Cree, Inc., No, 1:17CV687 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 28, 2018)

Key Insight: Defendant’s email archive system had had issues and was replaced before litigation filed, but servers were kept. Stubbed E-mail attachments were inaccessible. defendant showed attachments were potentially relevant and motion to compel was granted. Costs were to be split since it would be undue burden on plaintiff alone and they had not acted in bad faith.

Nature of Case: Patent Infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Stubbed E-mail Attachments

Keywords: Restoration, undue burden, bad faith, cost shifting

View Case Opinion

TrueNorth Cos., LC v. TruNorth Warranty Plans of N. Am. (Northern District of Iowa, 2018)

Key Insight: Protective order barring opposing council from viewing confidential materials denied for being too far

Nature of Case: trademark infringement, unfair competition

Electronic Data Involved: expert information

Keywords: trademark, protective order

View Case Opinion

United States v. Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders’ and Exhibitors’ Association, No. 17-5925 (6th Cir. March 8, 2018)

Key Insight: Provide only the information requested, especially if it is simple database records, additional work will not be compensated

Nature of Case: Horse Protection Act

Electronic Data Involved: Database records

Copyright © 2021, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.