Electronic discovery for US litigation and legal proceedings often implicates data outside the US. As data privacy and protection laws evolved around the globe, it’s critical to understand the limitations obstacles that may arise when collecting, processing, reviewing, and producing such data. China’s Data Security Law (“DSL”) and Personal Information Protection Law (“PIPL”), both enacted in 2021, have received heightened attention following China’s imposition of fines totaling roughly $1.2 billion in light of violations of these laws and its Cybersecurity Law (“CSL,” enacted in 2017) by Didi, China’s largest ride-sharing service provider. China’s DSL and PIPL are particularly noteworthy of their potential application to data processing and transfer actions that may occur both during the ordinary course of business and in response to litigation in other jurisdictions, such as the United States.Read More
K&L Gates recently hosted a series of webinars covering potential legal and regulatory implications businesses must consider as a result of the now common hybrid work setting. The cross-practice series focused on compliance issues from a Tax, Data Protection, Privacy, and Security, e-Discovery Analysis and Technology, and Labor, Employment, and Workplace Safety perspective.
Webinar recordings and associated materials are available on the K&L Gates HUB.Read More
Key Insight: The court granted reconsideration of plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of documents in the possession of a corporate defendant in France. In a prior order, the court found that the GDPR did not preclude the court from ordering defendants to produce evidence, but based the order on plaintiffs’ representation that much of the requested information was located in the U.S. and therefore in the possession of domestic defendants. Thus, the court bifurcated its analysis to exclude any documents in the possession of French defendants. On reconsideration, plaintiffs claimed the important and relevant documents were located in France. Applying the factors from Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 442(1)(c), the court found they weighed in favor of disclosure, together with the entry of a protective order that would protect France’s interests under the GDPR.
Nature of Case: Breach of contract
Electronic Data Involved: ESI generally
Key Insight: Defendant claimed that information sought by Plaintiff was discoverable. Plaintiff objected on the basis of confidentiality, and the Court struck Defendant’s confidentiality designations. Specifically, the Court rejected Defendant’s claims that the emails sought contained trade secret and proprietary information, and had the potential to cause it competitive harm. The Court ordered Defendant to use the it’s ruling as an example for dealing with similarly designated documents.
Nature of Case: Diversity, Product Liability
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Plaintiff’s explanation regarding loss of evidence had changed and court ruled that defendant was entitled to have a third party collect and preserve the evidence. Plaintiff offered passwords to accounts, but court was concerned about possible destruction given Plaintiff’s changing explanation regarding social media accounts and recording.
Nature of Case: Sexual Assault
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Devices and Cloud Based Accounts; Recording of conversation
Keywords: invasion of privacy, loss of evidence
Key Insight: Social media posts are generally not protected by privacy concerns, but discovery of social media posts do need to be limited and proportional to the case’s needs
Nature of Case: Wrongful termination
Electronic Data Involved: Social media posts
Keywords: Privacy, Facebook, Microsoft, wrongful termination, ADA, social media
Key Insight: argue that those requests and subpoenas are overly broad
Nature of Case: Motor vehicle accident negligence, personal injury
Electronic Data Involved: medical bills, records, and data for treatment received over a year before incident pertaining to rate of reimbursement
Keywords: subpoena, provider billing structure, medical billing and records, overly broad and burdensome
Key Insight: third parties want the court to investigate all of the people that had access to discovery materials and assure that they are destroyed for fear of future litigation or political liability
Nature of Case: gerrymandering
Electronic Data Involved: discovery that had been produced
Keywords: preserving confidentiality of information, public accessibility