In Peters v. Credit Protection Association LP, Case No. 2:13-cv-767 (S.D. Ohio November 26, 2014), a putative class action lawsuit alleging Defendant violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the FCC rules by making artificial voice and pre-taped calls, Plaintiff’s eDiscovery requests sought information regarding all debt collection calls made in Ohio using an automated telephone system for
Motions to Compel Archives - Page 13 of 14 - ILS
- admin
- November 19, 2014
Plaintiff To Receive FRCP 37 Attorney Fees After Defeating Defendant’s Unjustified Motion To Compel
Under Federal Rule of Procedure 37(a)(5)(B), a court denying a motion to compel may award attorney fees to the prevailing party provided that the court does not conclude that the motion to compel was “substantially justified” or that “other circumstances [would] make an award of expense unjust.” The party who lost the motion bears the burden of persuasion
Read More
- admin
- August 7, 2013
Can Plaintiffs Keep Facebook Profiles “Private” to Shield from eDiscovery?
“Postings on Facebook and other social media present a unique challenge for courts, due to their relative novelty and their ability to be shared by or with someone besides the original poster.” Such was the issue facing a district court in Higgins v. Koch Development Corporation, No. 3:11-cv-81-RLY-WGH(S.D.In. July 5, 2013). In its entry on
Read More
- admin
- July 31, 2013
Plaintiff Awarded Fees for Unorganized and Misclassified Defense Production
In our last blog, we began a discussion of the state court case Hull et al. v. WTI, Inc., A13A0003 (Ga.Ct.App. June 18, 2013). In this complex business litigation case, the defendants produced 156,000 documents that the plaintiffs characterized as unorganized and a violation of defendant’s discovery duties. Additionally, the defendant’s characterized 83 percent of
Read More
- admin
- July 12, 2013
Plaintiff Electronic Discovery in Patent Case: Disclosing the Source (Code)
In a case before the U.S. Court of Appeals to the Federal Circuit, the plaintiff held a patent dealing with weather reporting and forecasting. In Baron Services, Inc. v. Media Weather Innovations LLC, No. 11-CV-1606 (Fed. Cir. 2013), plaintiff Baron filed a patent-in-suit claim against defendant MWI, a company that was started by its own
Read More
- admin
- June 26, 2013
Plaintiffs Sought Spoliation Sanction for Deleted Audio Recordings: Warranted or Not?
In the case Cottle-Banks v. Cox Communications, 2013 WL 2244333 (S.D.Cal 2013), a court considered an electronic discovery issue of whether spoliation sanctions were warranted against the defendant for the automatic destruction of audio recordings saved as electronic data. At issue in the underlying case, filed on September 13, 2010, was whether Cox cable representatives
Read More
- admin
- June 3, 2013
Electronic Discovery Question: Does Predictive Coding Case Law Require Production of Seed Sets?
In an order dated May 21, 2013 in the case Hinterberger v. Catholic Health Systems, 08-CV-380S(F), the court heard arguments from the parties about whether predictive coding case law requires the early production of a “seed set” of documents. In this case, the parties started out sorting and culling electronic data by keyword search, but
Read More
- admin
- May 27, 2013
Judge in TriMet Bus Accident Case: “Discovery is Basically eDiscovery”
It was recently reported that a defendant in a federal court case involving a bus accident in Portland refused to produce email threads in response to discovery requests. The argument? The Oregonian reported that at the April 9, 2013 hearing on plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel, the attorney for the defendant, public transit company TriMet, asserted
Read More
- admin
- May 20, 2013
Court Compels Google to Disclose How it Created the Universe
This title is a paraphrase of the basic question at the heart of an Order dated May 9, 2013 in Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 12-CV-0630-LHK(PSG)(N.D.Ca. 2013), where Apple had a dispute with third-party Google. Apple subpoenaed Google to provide electronic discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. (Non-parties may be subpoenaed to produce documents
Read More
- admin
- May 10, 2013
Search Term Disputes: Valid Arguments or a Simple Lack of Cooperation?
Many times, search term disagreements can be resolved through cooperative efforts. Indeed, the “meet and confer” requirement of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mandates parties to make a good faith effort to resolve such disputes without litigation. In the March 14, 2013 order in the case Robert Bosch LLC v. Snap-on, Inc. Case No.
Read More