Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

IQPC 2012: Using Proportionality to Reduce Costs and Abuses

493

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
493
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Using Proportionality to Reduce  eDiscovery Costs and Abuses San Francisco, CA  September 11, 2012Alex Ponce de León, Esq. Deborah Baron, MBA IQPC Proportionality 1
  • 2. Introduction The opinions and views expressed here are entirely our  own and do not necessarily represent our employer’s  position, strategies, or opinions.  IQPC Proportionality2
  • 3. Agenda • Introductions • Proportionality: What and Why • Trends: How did we get here?  • Case Law • The Future is Now:  Principles, Model Orders and Practices • Questions Advisory Board Member IQPC Proportionality3
  • 4. Proportionality It’s Not New! Let’s travel back to 1983…when Rule 26(b)(1) was amended…  IQPC Proportionality4
  • 5. Proportionality It’s Not New! In 1983, Rule 26(b)(1) was amended to grant courts the authority to limit  discovery where it was found to be redundant or duplicative.  The Advisory  Committee noted that the amendments were intended to “guard against  redundant or disproportionate discovery by giving the court authority to  reduce the amount of discovery that may be directed to matters that are  otherwise proper subjects of inquiry.” Advisory Committee Notes to 2006 Amendments to FED. R. CIV. P. 26(b)(1). IQPC Proportionality5
  • 6. Proportionality It’s Not New! In 2006, Rule 26(b)(2) was amended to limit the discovery of ESI deemed not  reasonably accessible by reason of the costs and burdens associated with  retrieving such information.  The Advisory Committee Notes to this amendment state that the  costs and burdens of retrieving not reasonably accessible information are  properly considered as part of the proportionality analysis, and that  discovery of such information may be limited or the costs of such discovery  shifted from the responding to the requesting party. Advisory Committee Notes to 2006 Amendments to FED. R. CIV. P. 26(b)(2). Rule 26(g) “…neither unreasonable nor unduly burdensome or expensive,  considering the needs of the case, prior discovery in the case, the amount in  controversy, and the importance of the issues at stake in the action.”  IQPC Proportionality6
  • 7. View from the Bench, Sept. 2006 “It is hard to imagine a greater waste of money than paying a  lawyer $250 an hour to look at recipes, notices of the holiday  party, and NCAA Final Four pool entries while doing a  privilege review. A company that permits that situation to  occur is wasting its shareholders money as surely as if it were  burning it in the parking lot. In the meantime, the staggering  costs of a privilege review will grow, driving the costs of  litigation ever upward ….” US Magistrate Judge John Facciola* *John M. Facciola, “Sailing on Confused Seas: Privilege Waiver and the New Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”, Fed. Cts.. L. Rev. at 6 (Sept. 2006) available at http://www.fclr.org/fclr/articles/html/2006/fedctslrev6.pdf.. IQPC Proportionality7
  • 8. IQPC Proportionality 8Information was simple, centralized, arcane
  • 9. Content is Now Interactive POWER PROTECT PROMOTE • Growing volume of traditional content • Internal and external lines blurred • Business use of social media • Moving to interactive content
  • 10. Caselaw • Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammarata 688 F.Supp.2d 598 S.D.Tex., 2010 • Orbit One Communications, Inc. v. Numerex Corp. 271 F.R.D. 429 S.D.N.Y., 2010 • Mancia v. Mayflower Textile Servs. Co. 253 F.R.D. 354 (D. Md. 2008) • Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe Case No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S. Dist. NY 2012) IQPC Proportionality10
  • 11. Rimkus 688 F.Supp.2d 598 S.D.Tex., 2010 • Treated as spoliation issue:  alleged to have destroyed relevant  information willfully to prevent use at trial – Admitted deleting immediately prior to filing complaint – Recovered (not all) were both good and bad • Discusses reasonableness: – “Whether preservation or discovery conduct is acceptable in a case  depends on what is reasonable, and that in turn depends on whether  what was done—or not done—was proportional to that case and  consistent with clearly established applicable standards.” • Applies the "relevance" and "prejudice" factors of the adverse  inference analysis are often broken down into three subparts:  "(1) whether the evidence is relevant to the lawsuit; (2) whether the  evidence would have supported the inference sought; and (3) whether the  nondestroying party has suffered prejudice from the destruction of the  evidence." (which Pension Commee did apply) IQPC Proportionality11
  • 12. Orbit One 271 F.R.D. 429 S.D.N.Y., 2010 • Judge Francis in Orbit One disagrees with Pension Committee  does not believe that a written legal hold is necessarily the best  approach in every matter. – Judge Francis incorrectly interprets Pension Committee .   • “The implication of Pension Committee, then, appears to be that at  least some sanctions are warranted as long as any information was  lost through the failure to follow proper preservation practices, even  if there have been no showing that the information had discovery  relevance, let alone that it was likely to have been helpful to the  innocent party. If this is a fair reading of Pension Committee, then I  respectfully disagree.” • Judge Francis (in dicta) also went out of his way in Orbit One to  comment negatively on the principle of proportionality: – “…this standard may prove too amorphous to provide much comfort to a  party deciding what files it may delete or backup tapes it may recycle.”  IQPC Proportionality12
  • 13. Mancia 253 F.R.D. 354 (D. Md. 2008) • Overly broad demands, Proportionality and Reasonableness • US Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm highlights the excessive costs of  overly broad disclosure requests and equally vague, boiler plate  objections.  • Judge Grimm applied the proportionality standard (26(b)(2)(C) to  curb discovery abuse and resolve the issues under FRCP 26(g).  • Sanctions under  Rule 26(g): This case prompts parties and  adjudicators to question overly broad requests as well as vague,  unsubstantiated claims of burden. Both behaviors put parties at  risk of sanction.  • While the responding party must make reasonable inquiry  before responding, the requesting party is also required to act  judiciously.  IQPC Proportionality13
  • 14. DaSilva Case No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S. Dist. NY 2012) • Proportionality drives use of non‐linear review  • Employment discrimination class action litigation • “This judicial opinion now recognizes that computer‐assisted  review is an acceptable way to search for relevant ESI in  appropriate cases.” • Keyword searching is often little more than a game of “Go Fish” • Counsel agreed on broad parameters for Technology Assisted  Review, which were endorsed by the Court • Court finds the linear review “gold standard” is a myth and that  technology assisted review can yield a fifty‐fold savings over  manual review • “As with keywords or any other technological solution to  eDiscovery, counsel must design an appropriate process, including  use of available technology with appropriate quality control  testing, to review.” IQPC Proportionality14
  • 15. 2010 Sedona Proportionality Principles 1. The burdens and costs of preservation of potentially relevant  information should be weighed against the potential value and  uniqueness of the information when determining the appropriate  scope of preservation. 2. Discovery should generally be obtained from the most convenient,  least burdensome, and least expensive sources. 3. Undue burden, expense, or delay resulting from a party’s action or  inaction should be weighed against that party. IQPC Proportionality15
  • 16. Sedona Proportionality Principles 4. Extrinsic information and sampling may assist in the analysis of  whether requested discovery is sufficiently important to warrant  the potential burden or expense of its production. 5. Nonmonetary factors should be considered when evaluating the  burdens and benefits of discovery. 6. Technologies to reduce cost and burden should be considered in the  proportionality analysis. IQPC Proportionality16
  • 17. Seventh Circuit, Papers “…reliance solely on a  manual process for Seventh Circuit Electronic Discovery Pilot  the purposes of  – “The proportionality standard set forth in Fed.  finding responsive  R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C) should be applied in each  documents may be  case when formulating a discovery plan.  To  infeasible or  further the application of the proportionality  unwarranted.  In such  standard in discovery, requests for production  cases , the use of  of ESI and related responses should be  automated  search  reasonably targeted, clear, and as specific as  methods should be  practicable.” (Principle 1.03 – Discovery  viewed as reasonable,  Proportionality) valuable, and  even  necessary.” DESI (Intn’l Consortium of Practitioners & Academics) — Sedona Conference: Best  “Strange Bedfellows: Keyword & Conceptual  Practices for Search and  Search Unite to Make Sense of ESI”  Information Retrieval (2007) (See DESI II Paper by Deborah Baron, Ian Black).  IQPC Proportionality17
  • 18. FRE 502(b) Committee Notes: “use of advanced software tools as a sound approach,” Analyze and Cluster Information by Patterns in the data combined with  Keywords, Concepts and Metadata Information Theory and Pattern Detection IQPC Proportionality18
  • 19. Delaware Default Standards for Discovery Key features: Not just for patent cases! Custodians: The 10 custodians most likely to have discoverable  information in their possession, custody or control, from the most  likely to they least likely.  Non‐Custodial Data Sources: A list of the non‐custodial data sources that  are most likely to contain non‐duplicative discoverable information  for preservation and production consideration, ranked from the most  likely to the least likely. Special Patent Case Requirements: Plaintiffs to identify accused  products and the asserted patents they allegedly infringe, and  product the file history for each asserted patent.  The defendant to  produce core tech docs related to the accused products.  Plaintiffs to  produce a claim chart relating to each accused product.   IQPC Proportionality19
  • 20. Rader’s Model Order – ED Texas 0.0074% IQPC Proportionality20
  • 21. Best Practices POWER PROTECT PROMOTE
  • 22. Rader’s Model Order – ED Texas Judge Rader on discovery: “The greatest weakness of the U.S.  court system is its expense. And the driving factor for that  expense is discovery excesses." IQPC Proportionality22
  • 23. Rader’s Model Order – ED Texas Key features: Targets patent cases. Custodian and Data Sources: • E‐mail production requests must be for specific issues "not general discovery of a  product or business.“ • E‐mail production requests should be delayed until after disclosures about the  patents, the accused uses of the invention, relevant financial information and the  prior art — published information about the subject matter of the claimed  invention, including issued patents. • E‐mail requests are limited to five custodians per producing party and five search  terms per custodian. • Courts may consider up to five additional custodians per producing party and five  additional search terms per custodian.  Litigants who submit e‐discovery requests  to adversaries that exceed court orders and the parties agreement must pay for  the extra production. • Receiving parties are barred from using e‐discovery that the producing party  asserts is attorney‐client privileged or work product protected. • A mass production, or the inadvertent release of privileged or work product  protected electronic data, is not a waiver or permission to use it. IQPC Proportionality23
  • 24. Questions and Answers Contacts: Deborah Baron, Autonomy an HP Company, deborahb@hp.com Alex Ponce de León, Intel The panel’s PowerPoint presentation will be available through SlideShare. To get your copy, simply visit http://www.slideshare.net/AlexPDL/ and look for the IQPC presentation. IQPC Proportionality24

×