United States District Court, S.D. California
ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ESI ORDER;
AND ENTERING ESI ORDER [ECF NO. 40]
HON.
JILL L. BURKHARDT, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before
the Court is the parties' Joint Motion for Entry of ESI
Order. (ECF No. 40.) For good cause shown, the parties'
Joint Motion is GRANTED, and the following
ESI Order is entered:
This
Order will govern the discovery of electronically stored
information (“ESI”).
RULES
REGARDING E-DISCOVERY
1. This
Order supplements all other discovery rules and orders. It
streamlines Electronically Stored Information
(“ESI”) production to promote a “just,
speedy, and inexpensive determination” of this action,
as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1.
2. This
Order may be modified for good cause. The parties shall
jointly submit any proposed modifications. If the parties
cannot resolve their disagreements regarding these
modifications, the parties shall submit their competing
proposals and a summary of their dispute.
3.
Costs will be shifted for disproportionate ESI production
requests pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.
Likewise, a party's nonresponsive or dilatory discovery
tactics will be cost-shifting considerations.
4. A
party's meaningful compliance with this Order and efforts
to promote efficiency and reduce costs will be considered in
cost-shifting determinations.
5.
General ESI production requests under Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 34 and 45 shall not include metadata absent a
showing of good cause, with the exception of spreadsheets
should be produced in native form with metadata. However,
fields showing the date and time that the document was sent
and received, as well as the complete distribution list,
shall generally be included in the production.
6.
General ESI production requests under Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 34 and 45 shall not include email or other forms of
electronic correspondence (collectively “email”).
To obtain email parties must propound specific email
production requests.
7.
Email production requests shall only be propounded for
specific issues, rather than general discovery of a product
or business.
8.
Email production requests shall be phased to occur after the
parties have exchanged initial disclosures and basic
documentation about the patents, the prior art, the accused
instrumentalities, and the relevant finances. While this
provision does not require the production of such
information, the Court encourages prompt and early production
of this information to promote efficient and economical
streamlining of the case.
9.
Email production requests shall identify the custodian,
search terms, and time frame. The parties shall cooperate to
identify the proper custodians, proper search terms and
proper timeframe.
10.
Each requesting party shall limit its email production
requests to a total of five custodians per producing party
for all such requests. The parties may jointly agree to
modify this limit without the Court's leave. The Court
shall consider contested requests for up to five additional
custodians per producing party, upon showing a distinct need
based on the size, complexity, and issues of this specific
case. Should a party serve email production requests for
additional custodians beyond the limits agreed to by the
...