Tag: ESI Protocol

1
Cody v. City of St. Louis (E.D. Mo. 2021)
2
Healthedge Software, Inc. v. Sharp Health Plan (D. Mass. 2021)
3
In re Valsartan, Losartan, and Irbesartan Prods. Liab. Litig. (D.N.J. Dec. 2, 2020)
4
Carrington v Graden, (S.D.N.Y. 2020)
5
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. M1 5100 Corporation (E.D. Fla. 2020)
6
Javo Beverage Co. Inc. v. California Extraction Ventures, Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2020).
7
In re Mercedes-Benz Emissions Litig. (District of NJ, 2020)
8
In re Mercedes-Benz Emissions Litigation (D. N.J. 2020)
9
Shotwell, et al. v. Zillow Group Inc., et al. (Western Washington, 2019)
10
Hardin v. Mendocino Coast District Hospital et al (N.D. Cal. , 2019)

Healthedge Software, Inc. v. Sharp Health Plan (D. Mass. 2021)

Key Insight:

Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff to produce documents, including source code, and Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel Defendant to disclose how it collected and searched its electronically stored information (ESI). The Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion while partially granting Defendant’s Motion.

A significant issue in both Motions was the respective parties’ collection of ESI. The Court noted that the parties failed “to engage in cooperative planning regarding ESI”, and directed the parties to confer regarding custodians and search terms of ESI collection and review. In partially granting Defendant’s Motion, the Court directed Plaintiff to further articulate its objections, but stated that some of Defendant’s discovery requests were premature even if Plaintiff was obligated to respond to them by the close of discovery.

Nature of Case: Breach of Contract

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Documents, Source Code

Case Summary

In re Valsartan, Losartan, and Irbesartan Prods. Liab. Litig. (D.N.J. Dec. 2, 2020)

Key Insight: Defendants violated the Court ordered ESI protocol when it unilaterally adopted a CAL platform without input from Plaintiffs. Defendants failed to timely disclose their intentions to use TAR and collaborate in good faith with Plaintiffs on the TAR platform to be used prior to implementation. Due to the cost and time required for a manual review, the Court permitted Defendants to do a TAR review of its non-responsive documents using the protocol previously negotiated but not finalized by the parties.

Nature of Case: Products Liability

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Documents Generally

Case Summary

Carrington v Graden, (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Key Insight: Plaintiff was discovered to have fabricated emails. Court awarded over $500,000 in damages to Defendant.

Nature of Case: antitrust litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Emails

Keywords: sanctions,m fabricated evidence

View Case Opinion

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. M1 5100 Corporation (E.D. Fla. 2020)

Key Insight: Counsel has a duty to oversee their clients’ collection of information and documents during the discovery process, especially when ESI is involved. Here, counsel failed to adequately supervise the ESI collection process. Counsel had no knowledge of the search efforts or process taken by Defendant is its discovery collection. Ultimately, the Defendant was given a final opportunity to produce responsive discovery. The parties were ordered to attempt to come to an agreement regarding and ESI protocol that included relevant data sources, custodians, and search terms.

Nature of Case: Employment Discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Documents Generally

Case Summary

In re Mercedes-Benz Emissions Litig. (District of NJ, 2020)

Key Insight: dispute over search terms meant to identify documents

Nature of Case: environmental litigation

Electronic Data Involved: all discovery, search term protocol

Keywords: search term protocol, predictive coding, technology assisted review,

View Case Opinion

In re Mercedes-Benz Emissions Litigation (D. N.J. 2020)

Key Insight: Although TAR is widely recognized as “cheaper, more efficient, and superior to keyword searching,” the responding party may decide for themselves the best method for producing their ESI. The court will not compel the utilization of TAR but may revisit the issue if Plaintiff contends the actual production is deficient.

Nature of Case: Environmental, Class Action

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Documents Generally

Case Summary

Shotwell, et al. v. Zillow Group Inc., et al. (Western Washington, 2019)

Key Insight: detailed stipulation of the discovery plan

Nature of Case: violation of the securities exchange act

Electronic Data Involved: all relevant discovery

Keywords: stipulation, discovery plan

View Case Opinion

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