Category: eDiscovery Case Law

  • Plaintiffs Granted Direct Access to Proprietary Database for Metadata and Electronic Evidence

    22 Mar 2013

    In Advanced Tactical Ordnance Systems, LLC v. Real Action Paintball, Inc., No. 1:12-CV-296 (N.D.In. Feb. 25, 2013), plaintiffs sought an injunction against a business competitor for unlawful use of trademarked information. The plaintiff eDiscovery requests included access to defendant’s entire computer software database. Plaintiffs were seeking information on the invoices

  • Court Grants Fees for Predictive Coding of Electronic Discovery

    20 Mar 2013

    The case of Gabriel Technological Corporation v. Qualcomm Incorporated, 2013 WL 410103,(S.D.Cal.) was an exceptional case where the court determined that plaintiffs’ “frivolous claims” in a patent lawsuit (where among others, plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the rightful inventors of the patents at issue) warranted sanctions and cost shifting. 

  • Are Text Messages Different than Email for eDiscovery?

    18 Mar 2013

    Shortly after the case of Christou v. BEATPORT, LLC, No. 10-cv-02912-RBJ-KMT (D.Co. 2013) was filed on December 1, 2010, plaintiff served a “litigation hold letter” on the defendant. One of the items listed for preservation was text messages from defendant’s iPhone. The defendant was then served with plaintiff electronic discovery

  • Emails Bolster Plaintiffs’ Case in Michael Jackson Wrongful Death Suit

    15 Mar 2013

    An ongoing theme of our blog is the importance of email threads and email chains for plaintiffs’ eDiscovery in civil litigation. Rarely does the topic get much major news coverage, but multiple news outlets have reported that emails disclosed in the Michael Jackson wrongful death case may greatly bolster the

  • Video or Stenograph? eDiscovery Cost Shifting in the 21st Century

    13 Mar 2013

    Stenographers have always been a cornerstone of the legal community. Their transcripts are essential for presenting deposition evidence to a judge or for use in cross-examinationn at trial. However, with the onset of video depositions, one has to wonder, is stenography becoming something of a legal relic? In Amana Society,

  • Court Recommends eDiscovery Consultant Help with Defense Production

    11 Mar 2013

    In the employment discrimination case Brown v. FPI Management, No. 4:11-cv-5414 YGR (N.D. Cal 2013), the court issued an order regarding a discovery dispute. The defendants objected to plaintiff electronic discovery requests seeking email communications between the defendant employer and third-parties employees about promotions within the company. The requests were

  • Discovery of Foreign Documents Stayed in Travel Website MDL

    8 Mar 2013

    Plaintiffs who filed two class action lawsuits have now been combined as a multidistrict litigation, alleging certain online travel sites have colluded with major hotels to engage in price-fixing in violation of federal anti-trust laws. The MDL is named In re: Online Travel Company Hotel Booking Antitrust Litigation, Case Number

  • Supreme Court Rules for Plaintiffs in Class Action Securities Fraud

    6 Mar 2013

    On February 27, our nation’s highest court released its decision in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, 568 U.S. ___ (2013) with the Court’s majority deciding in favor of certifying the class in a securities-fraud case filed by named plaintiff Connecticut Retirement. The question before court concerned the requirement in Rule 23(b)(3)

  • ASU’s 2nd Annual eDiscovery Conference to Include Discussion of Updated ABA Model Rules

    4 Mar 2013

    The second annual eDiscovery conference is taking place at Arizona State University from March 13-15. The Sandra Day O’Conner School of Law is hosting the event, entitled “eDiscovery—The present and the future,” with keynote speakers including the Hon. John Facciola, U.S. Magistrate Judge in the District of Columbia and the

  • Metadata is Not “Content” Under the Stored Communications Act

    1 Mar 2013

    All this week, our blog has been discussing the 2013 case Optiver Australia v. Libra Trading, 2013 WL 256771 (N.D.Cal.), where a district court partially quashed a third-party subpoena served upon Google. The plaintiff sought discovery relating to emails directly from Google, as it alleged the defense production was inadequate