Tag:Format Of Production

1
Wai Feng Trading Co. v. Quick Fitting, Inc., Nos. 13-33S, 13-56S, 2016 WL 4184014 (D.R.I. June 14, 2016)
2
Kissing Camels Surgery Center, LLC v. Centura Health Corp., No. 12-cv-03012-WJM-NYW, 2016 WL 277721 (D. Colo. Jan. 22, 2016)
3
Thorne Research Inc. v. Atl. Pro-Nutrients, Inc., No. 2:13-cv-784, 2016 WL 1122863 (D. Utah Mar. 22, 2016)
4
Midwest Feeders, Inc. v. The Bank of Franklin (S.D. Mississippi, 2016)
5
Gade v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (District of Vermont, 2016)
6
LBBW Luxemburg S.A. v. Wells Fargo Sec. LLC (Southern District of New York, 2016)
7
Stormo v. City of Sioux Falls, No. 12-04057 (D. S.D. Feb. 19, 2016)
8
SEC v. CKB168 Holdings Inc. (E.D.N.Y., 2016)
9
Granados v. Traffic Bar and Restaurant, Inc. (S.D.N.Y., 2015)
10
In re State Farm Lloyds, 13?14?00616?CV, 2015 WL 6520998 (Tex. App. Oct. 28, 2015)

Wai Feng Trading Co. v. Quick Fitting, Inc., Nos. 13-33S, 13-56S, 2016 WL 4184014 (D.R.I. June 14, 2016)

Key Insight: Following several extensions of discovery, court addressed motion to compel production of documents and email in native format and, noting that a particular format was not requested and that the parties? had consistently produced documents in hard copy or in searchable PDF format, found that only two documents ?arguably might contain metadata that could be relevant? and ordered that those documents be produced, but shifted the costs to the requesting party

Nature of Case: Theft of intellectual property, breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Emails, database, ESI

Kissing Camels Surgery Center, LLC v. Centura Health Corp., No. 12-cv-03012-WJM-NYW, 2016 WL 277721 (D. Colo. Jan. 22, 2016)

Key Insight: Where Plaintiffs objected to Defendants? ?duplicative? requests and claimed they had already produced responsive documents but provided Defendants with no guidance as to where such documents could be found within the voluminous production, the court acknowledged that it would ?ordinarily? conclude that Plaintiffs had no obligation to identify responsive documents but, citing the volume of data at issue, the ?asymmetry of information regarding the production between Plaintiffs,? the time the case had been pending, and the fact that additional discovery would be required, the court concluded that Plaintiff should provide additional information and ordered that Defendants would be permitted to identify ten categories of requested documents that Plaintiffs claimed to be duplicative and that Plaintiffs must then identify documents responsive to those requests

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Gade v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (District of Vermont, 2016)

Key Insight: When the productions of underlying information (exact Excel formulas in this case) may disclose proprietary information, a supplemental disclosure explaining the underlying reasons may be a suitable replacement

Nature of Case: Automobile insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Excel spreadsheet formulas

Keywords: Excel, formulas, moot, metadata, award of sanctions, expenses, fees

View Case Opinion

LBBW Luxemburg S.A. v. Wells Fargo Sec. LLC (Southern District of New York, 2016)

Key Insight: Non-responsive documents should not be produced, even if redacted, and privilege or some sort of reason must be asserted for redactions to be proper

Nature of Case: Fraud

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents generally

Keywords: redactions, bloomberg, non-responsive

View Case Opinion

SEC v. CKB168 Holdings Inc. (E.D.N.Y., 2016)

Key Insight: are the defendants acting in bad faith by not confirming that evidence doesn’t exist or was it not preserved, in that case is it sanctionable

Nature of Case: violation of Securities act, violation of the exchange act and rule 10b-5, unregistered securities offerings

Electronic Data Involved: “back office data” information as to whether defendants explored public offering

Keywords: bad faith, sanctions, spoliation, public offering

View Case Opinion

Granados v. Traffic Bar and Restaurant, Inc. (S.D.N.Y., 2015)

Key Insight: if sanctions can be granted for inconsistent and incomplete response from opposing party

Nature of Case: violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law

Electronic Data Involved: initial interrogatories and verifications

Keywords: spoliation, sanctions, default judgment, defunct business, unreachable party

View Case Opinion

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