Electronic Discovery 
A Client’s Guide to Electronic Discovery Planning
Courts have imposed strict rules governing document preservation. Clients faced with the possibility of litigation should be aware of these rules even before a case is filed, and sometimes before contacting a lawyer.
Qualcomm v. Broadcom: Counsel Sanctioned for Discovery Abuse
In Broadcom v. Qualcomm, the most closely-followed e-discovery case since the Zubulake rulings from the Southern District of New York, Magistrate Judge Barbara L. Major of the Southern District of California took a proverbial “broadsword” to Qualcomm and its counsel for failing to undertake a reasonable search for documents that caused 46,000 relevant emails to be withheld through the time of trial.
Production of Internet Server Log Files
Columbia Pictures et al. v.Bunnell et al., (CACD) is one of the music industry’s noted cases against illegal file sharing of downloaded musical performances. This discovery dispute centered around: (a) whether information temporarily recorded in a computer’s random access memory (“RAM”) could be defined as “electronically stored information” under FRCP Rule 34(a)
Duty of Document Preservation and “Litigation Hold”
In Housing Rights Center v. Sterling, CACD Judge Dale S. Fischer articulated a clear policy requiring document preservation during litigation. Judge Fischer’s opinion largely relies on the landmark case addressing the preservation obligation, Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (“Zubulake IV”).
Search