Category: Forensics

Eastern District of New York Denies Spoliation Sanctions Motion as Procedurally Improper

In In re Symbol Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 05-3923 (E.D.N.Y., September 30, 2015), a class action securities lawsuit filed by Iron Workers Union Local 580 Pension Fund, the court recently denied Plaintiff’s motion for spoliation sanctions. Plaintiff sued Defendant for violations of SEC regulations and the Securities Exchange

Court Sanctions Defendant for False Statements Regarding Deleted Files

In Integrated Direct Marketing, LLC v. May, et. al., Case No. 14-1183 (E.D. Va., Sept. 8, 2015), the Eastern District of Virginia considered Plaintiff’s motion to compel and motion for spoliation sanctions after discovery revealed that Defendant had deleted hundreds of potentially relevant electronic files, and had made false statements to the

Court Denies Plaintiff’s Spoliation Motion in Veterinarian Dispute

In Grove City Veterinary Service, LLC et. al. v. Charter Practices International, LLC, Case No. 13-02276 (Aug. 18, 2015), Plaintiff veterinarians filed a Motion for Sanctions against Defendant veterinary hospital owner, claiming that Defendant had spoliated ESI. Defendant had requested that one of the Plaintiff veterinarians produce his responsive emails. When Plaintiff searched for the emails on

Court Weighs Terminating Sanctions After Party Uses “Disk Wiping” Software To Delete Files

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington recently considered whether to dismiss a case as a sanction for discovery abuses in Watkins v. Infosys, Case No. 14-0247 (W.D. Wa., July 23, 2015). Plaintiff sued her former employer for discrimination. In interrogatory responses, Plaintiff stated that she had

District of South Dakota Issues Severe Discovery Sanctions Because of Fraudulent Email

The District of South Dakota recently issued severe sanctions against a defendant engaged in willful discovery misconduct. In Atmosphere Hospitality Management, LLC v. Curtullo et. al., Case No. 13-5040 (July 29, 2015), Plaintiff sued Defendants regarding various contracts between the parties. Multiple discovery disputes arose during litigation, and Plaintiff filed

Southern District of Florida Orders Review and Re-Designation of Highly Confidential Documents

In Procaps S.A. v. Patheon, Inc., Case No. 12-24356 (S.D. Fl., July 20, 2015), the parties entered into a stipulated confidentiality agreement whereby they designated confidential documents as either “Confidential Information” or “Highly Confidential Information.” The parties agreed that the party receiving the confidential information could disclose documents designated as “Confidential Information”

Update on Forensic Examination of Hard Drives and Computers

When Can a Party Obtain a Computer Forensic Examination? A year ago, ILS focused its monthly newsletter on the forensic examination of hard drives, computers, and mobile devices. Since then, the federal courts have issued several new decisions on the subject. Below is a summary of recent case law regarding

Court Holds Forensic Examination Improper Without Good Cause

In Hawkins v. The Center for Spinal Surgery et. al., Case No. 12-1125 (Jun. 18, 2015), the Middle District of Tennessee recently denied an employer’s motion to compel a forensic examination of a former employee’s flash drive. Plaintiff sued Defendant, her former employer, for employment discrimination and unlawful retaliation. Plaintiff,

Forensic ESI Expert Can Rely Upon Properly Authenticated Image of Hard Drive

In Teledyne Technologies, Inc. v. Raj Shekar, Case No. 15-cv-1392 (June 17, 2015), the Northern District of Illinois recently considered whether an image of a hard drive, if properly authenticated, could provide a forensics expert with enough information to draw conclusions. Defendant, a former employee of Plaintiff technology company, worked for Plaintiff in marketing

Bad Faith ESI Destruction A Question For The Jury

In Malibu Media, LLC v. Michael Harrison, Case No. 12-cv-1117 (June 8, 2015), the Southern District of Indiana considered Plaintiff’s objection to the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the court should not sanction Defendant for destroying evidence. Plaintiff, a limited liability company that makes pornographic films, accused Defendant of illegally downloading its