Tag:Motion for Sanctions

1
Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2004), amending 341 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 813 (2004)
2
Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 2004 WL 2550309 (D.N.J. Oct. 1, 2004) (“Mosaid III”)
3
Armstrong v. Amstead Ind., Inc., 2004 WL 1497779 (N.D. Ill. July 2, 2004)
4
In re Heritage Bond Litig., 223 F.R.D. 527 (C.D.Cal. 2004)
5
Metro. Opera Ass?n, Inc. v. Local 100, 2004 WL 1943099 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2004)
6
3M v. Pribyl, 259 F.3d 587, 606 n.5 (7th Cir. 2001)
7
Black & Veatch Int’l Co. v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp., 211 F.R.D. 641 (D. Kan. 2002)
8
Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
9
MPCT Solutions Corp. v. Methe, 1999 WL 495115 (N.D. Ill. July 2, 1999)
10
United States v. Koch Ind., Inc., 197 F.R.D. 463 (N.D. Okl. 1998)

Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2004), amending 341 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 813 (2004)

Key Insight: Defendant’s subpoena to ISP of plaintiff, which sought all copies of all email sent or received by anyone at plaintiff with no limitation as to time or scope, was “massively overbroad,” “patently unlawful,” and “transparently and egregiously” violated federal rules; besides warranting sanctions in underlying suit, subpoena was grounds for separate action by employees of plaintiff against defendant for violation of federal Stored Communications Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and state law

Nature of Case: Violation of federal electronic privacy and computer fraud statutes

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored by Internet Service Provider

Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 2004 WL 2550309 (D.N.J. Oct. 1, 2004) (“Mosaid III”)

Key Insight: Finding representative parts/assumptions sanctions imposed by magistrate to be moderate, fair, and narrowly tailored to redress defendant’s discovery violations, district court upheld sanctions with slight modifications

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Schematics, completion reports, netlists and other technical documents

Armstrong v. Amstead Ind., Inc., 2004 WL 1497779 (N.D. Ill. July 2, 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions stemming from defendants’ failure to disclose various relevant documents until after the close of fact discovery and plaintiffs’ expert disclosures, though defendants provided the material to their experts; instead, plaintiffs’ experts would be allowed to supplement their reports to address the belatedly-produced material

Nature of Case: Class action alleging violations of ERISA

Electronic Data Involved: Spreadsheets and reports

In re Heritage Bond Litig., 223 F.R.D. 527 (C.D.Cal. 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendants “deliberately and willfully” failed to produce responsive documents, court concluded that defendants had not substantially complied with its prior discovery order and awarded civil contempt sanctions against defendants in the amount of plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs

Nature of Case: Securities litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Documents on individual defendant’s personal computer

Metro. Opera Ass?n, Inc. v. Local 100, 2004 WL 1943099 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2004)

Key Insight: On defendant’s motion for reconsideration, court again described numerous discovery failings by the defendants, concluded that it would adhere to its prior decision at 212 F.R.D. 178, and further rejected two new arguments belatedly advanced by defendant relating the merits of plaintiff’s underlying claims

Nature of Case: Opera company sued union

Electronic Data Involved: Email and electronic documents; hard drives

3M v. Pribyl, 259 F.3d 587, 606 n.5 (7th Cir. 2001)

Key Insight: Negative inference instruction warranted where six gigabytes of music were downloaded onto hard drive the night before the computer was to be turned over for inspection

Nature of Case: Manufacturer sued former employees and their new competing company for misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive

Black & Veatch Int’l Co. v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp., 211 F.R.D. 641 (D. Kan. 2002)

Key Insight: Plaintiff failed to comply with court order by making various misrepresentations about whether all original input files were produced and whether software program changed over time it was used; sanction in form of attorneys’ fees and costs warranted

Nature of Case: Construction litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Software program and input files used to make design calculations

Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

Key Insight: Failure to preserve certain computer hard drives did not warrant sanctions where there was no reasonable possibility that the missing hard drives (which were obtained after protective order was issued) contained evidence of the theft of trade secret information

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drives

MPCT Solutions Corp. v. Methe, 1999 WL 495115 (N.D. Ill. July 2, 1999)

Key Insight: Sanctions in form of preliminary injunction preventing defendant from contacting MPCT clients granted, after defendant violated preservation order by deleting documents from laptop and defragmenting hard drive, thus preventing the recovery of deleted data

Nature of Case: Enforcement of non-competition agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents stored on laptop

United States v. Koch Ind., Inc., 197 F.R.D. 463 (N.D. Okl. 1998)

Key Insight: Defendant was negligent in failing to determine which computer tapes in tape library contained information relevant to imminent and ongoing litigation and in failing to communicate clear guidelines regarding preservation of information to data processing personnel and tape librarian; no adverse inference, but plaintiff could inform jury about destruction of tapes and impact on plaintiff’s proof

Nature of Case: Action under False Claims Act

Electronic Data Involved: Computer tapes

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