-
Searchable PDF Production with Metadata Complies with FRCP 34
In Spilker v. Medtronic, Inc., No. 4:13-CV-76-H (E.D.N.C. Apr. 13, 2015), the Eastern District of North Carolina considered whether Defendants’ “document dump” complied with FRCP 34. Plaintiff filed a motion to compel, alleging that Defendants had engaged in a “document dump” that did not comply with FRCP 34. Plaintiff asserted that
-
Court Shifts Subpoenaed Third Party’s eDiscovery Costs Under FRCP 45
In Re Subpoena of American Nurses Association (Hinterberger, et al. v. Catholic Health Sys., Inc., No. 08-CV-0380 (W.D.N.Y.)), Case No. RWT 11-cv-2836 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2015), the District Court of Maryland considered Plaintiffs’ appeal of an award of costs for a third-party electronic data production. Plaintiffs subpoenaed the American Nurses
-
Defendant Must Produce ESI In TIFF or Native Format, Even If It Requires Hiring an ESI Vendor To Do So
FRCP 34(b)(1)(C) allows the party requesting discovery to specify the format in which it wants the producing party to produce electronically stored information (ESI). If the party does not specify a particular format, FRCP 34(b)(2)(E) states that the producing party can produce the ESI in either i) the manner in which it
-
No Sanctions For Failure to Produce Copy of Twitter Feed
The Northern District of Indiana considered whether to sanction Defendants in Haddad v. Lake Central School Corp. et al., Case No. 2:11-cv-430 (N.D. Ind. April 7, 2015) for failing to produce copies of Plaintiff’s twitter feed. Plaintiff, a minor suing a school district for physical and emotional harm suffered due to bullying
-
Court Holds FRCP Imposes No Duty to Meet and Confer Before Filing Motion for Discovery Sanctions
In True Health Chiropractic Inc. v. McKesson Corporation, et al., Case No. 13-cv-02219-HSG (DMR) (N.D. Cal. April 1, 2015), the Northern District of California court considered whether Plaintiffs needed to meet and confer with Defendants before filing a motion for sanctions regarding Defendants’ discovery failures. In this putative class action case, Plaintiffs alleged
-
No Spoliation Where Party Made Efforts to Retrieve and Produce Deleted Emails
In Gladue v. Saint Francis Medical Center, Case No. 1:13-DV-186-CEJ (E.D. Miss. March 24, 2015), the Eastern District of Missouri considered whether Defendant had engaged in spoliation of email communications. Defendant terminated Plaintiff from her employment in December 2011. As part of Defendant’s routine audit procedure, Defendant deleted Plaintiff’s emails in March
-
7-Eleven Ordered to Produce Metadata in Franchise Litigation
In Younes, et al. v. 7-Eleven, Inc., Civil Nos. 13-3500 (RMB/JS), 13-3715 (MAS/JS), 13-4578(RMB/JS) (D.N.J. Mar. 18, 2015), the District Court of New Jersey considered whether to order Defendant 7-Eleven to produce metadata requested by Plaintiffs, despite the parties’ initial agreement to not request metadata production. Plaintiffs, 7-Eleven franchise owners who allege business
-
Court Declines to Order Spoliation Sanctions Despite Intentional Deletion of ESI
In Selectica v. Novatus, Inc., Case No. 6:13-cv-1708-Orl-40TBS (M.D. Fla. Mar. 12, 2015), the Middle District of Florida considered whether to order spoliation sanctions after Defendant’s employee admitted to deleting relevant ESI. Plaintiff’s former employee, Mr. Graham Holt (“Holt”), had left his employment with Plaintiff company to work for Defendant company. While
-
Counsel Ordered to Pay Attorney Fees After Failing to Meet and Confer
In Saliga v. Chemtura Corp., Case No. 3:12cv832 (VAB) (D. Conn. Feb. 26, 2015), the Connecticut district court considered whether plaintiff had satisfied its obligations to first meet and confer in good faith before approaching the court. Plaintiff and Defendant had engaged in what the court described as unnecessarily protracted, contentious, and
-
9th Circuit Reviews Taxable eDiscovery Costs Under §1920(4)
In Re Online DVD-Rental Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 11-18034, 12-16160, 12-16183 (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2015), the Ninth Circuit considered the extent to which a court can tax ESI costs pursuant to U.S. 28 §1920(4). Many courts have struggled to answer this question, and the Ninth Circuit’s decision will provide additional clarity, especially to district