Knotty Issues of eDiscovery
Fighting over discovery search methodology makes me think of President Richard Nixon’s resignation speech: “Always remember, there are those who hate you. And the only way to keep them from winning is to hate them right back. And then you destroy yourself.” Attacking a party who used predictive coding to[…]
Read moreYou know someone is taking a hit when a judge works in references to Pink Floyd’s “Sorrow” and Simon and Garfunkel’s “Sounds of Silence.” Sound the Division Bell, because there is a Bridge Over Troubled Water. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman did exactly that in Procaps S.A. v. Patheon Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35225[…]
Read moreYou know someone is taking a hit when a judge works in references to Pink Floyd’s “Sorrow” and Simon and Garfunkel’s “Sounds of Silence.” Sound the Division Bell, because there is a Bridge Over Troubled Water. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman did exactly that in Procaps S.A. v. Patheon Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35225[…]
Read moreHere is the big lesson from the latest Biomet opinion over predictive coding: The Steering Committee wants the whole seed set Biomet used for the algorithm’s initial training. That request reaches well beyond the scope of any permissible discovery by seeking irrelevant or privileged documents used to tell the algorithm[…]
Read moreJudge William Orrick summed up a basic truth of eDiscovery: In the age of electronically-stored information (“ESI”), production of all relevant, not privileged and reasonably accessible documents in a company’s custody and control is easier said than done. Banas v. Volcano Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144139, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Oct.[…]
Read moreSome cases begin with such a “wow” introduction they have to be seen to be believed: To put it lightly, there has been a severe shortcoming by Defendants in this action during the discovery process. Not only have Defendants’ resisted providing required information in initial disclosures and resisted previous discovery[…]
Read moreA requesting party has a very difficult problem when a producing party has made a very small production that the requesting party believes is deficient. This situation quickly turns into the requesting party trying to prove a negative to the Court that a production is inadequate, without any evidence to[…]
Read moreThere are attorneys who believe the most effective Rule 26(f) meet and confer is simply meeting at dawn with dueling pistols. The parties in Procongps, Inc. v. Skypatrol, LLC, fought over proclaimed inadequate productions, failures to adequately meet and confer and the defensibility of their productions. Procongps, Inc. v. Skypatrol,[…]
Read moreI am gonna to hit the brakes, he’ll fly right by me. Maverick, Top Gun You’re gonna do what? Merlin, Top Gun Attorneys feel compelled by their duty of competency to their clients to have eyes on every document that might be privileged. Given cases such as J-M Manufacturing it[…]
Read moreThere are judges who have a way with words when they want to make a point. One example of such judicial prose was by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows in Botell v. United States: At this juncture, the United States has purportedly been looking for documents for months, yet the[…]
Read more