Independent Technologies LLC v. Otodata Wireless Network, Inc. et al, No. 3:2020cv00072 - Document 135 (D. Nev. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER granting ECF No. 134 Stipulation re Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin on 9/18/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LW)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Independent Technologies LLC v. Otodata Wireless Network, Inc. et al 1 2 3 Doc. 135 LEIGH T. GODDARD, NV Bar #6315 McDONALD CARANO LLP 100 W. Liberty St., Tenth Floor Reno, Nevada 89501 Telephone: (775) 788-2000 lgoddard@mcdonaldcarano.com 4 5 6 7 8 JAMES C. DUGAN (admitted pro hac vice) JORDAN C. WALL (admitted pro hac vice) WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019 (212) 728-8000 Telephone jdugan@willkie.com jwall@willkie.com 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 INDEPENDENT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC Case No. 3:20-cv-00072 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. 15 16 OTODATA WIRELESS NETWORK, INC., STEVEN RECHENMACHER, and BRIAN RECHENMACHER, STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 17 Defendants. 18 19 20 21 1. PURPOSE This Order will govern discovery of electronically stored information (“ESI”) in 22 this case as a supplement to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and any other 23 applicable orders and rules. 24 2. COOPERATION 25 26 27 28 The parties are aware of the importance the Court places on cooperation and commit to cooperate in good faith throughout the matter. 3. LIAISON The parties have identified liaisons to each other who are and will be Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 2 of 8 1 knowledgeable about and responsible for discussing their respective ESI. For the 2 plaintiff, the liaison is James C. Dugan. For the defendants, the liaison is Stephen S. 3 Smith. Each e-discovery liaison will be, or have access to those who are, 4 knowledgeable about the technical aspects of e-discovery, including the location, 5 nature, accessibility, format, collection, search methodologies, and production of ESI 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 in this matter. The parties will rely on the liaisons, as needed, to confer about ESI and to help resolve disputes without court intervention. 4. PRESERVATION The parties have discussed their preservation obligations and needs and agree that preservation of potentially relevant ESI will be reasonable and proportionate. To reduce the costs and burdens of preservation and to ensure proper ESI is preserved, the parties agree that: a) To the extent it currently exists, only ESI created or received after April 1, 13 2019 through April 30, 2020 will be preserved; 14 b) The parties have exchanged a list of the general job titles or descriptions 15 of custodians, for whom they believe ESI should be preserved: 16 The types/sources of ESI the parties believe should be preserved 17 are as follows: work email servers and accounts, work desktops/laptops, shared 18 and personal work folders, home or personal email servers and accounts 19 (including, but not limited to, accounts at advacts.com), home or personal 20 desktops/laptops, mobile data, text messages, instant messaging, and cloud 21 storage identified by the ESI custodians in consultation with counsel for that 22 party. 23 For plaintiff, the list of custodians is: (1) Chet Reshamwala, (2) Eric 24 Duckworth, (3) Brad Anderson, (4) Steven Rechenmacher and (5) Brian 25 Rechenmacher. Plaintiff additionally agrees to obtain documents from the 26 salesperson(s) primarily responsible for customer accounts that it alleges 27 Defendants wrongfully solicited. 28 Page 2 of 8 Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 3 of 8 For defendants, the list of custodians is: (1) Andre Boulay, (2) Sean Hughes, 1 2 (3) Steven Rechenmacher,(4) Brian Rechenmacher, (5) Jason Gallovich, (6) Rita 3 Pecilunas, (7) David Dodd, and (8) David Tedeschi. The parties shall add or 4 remove custodians as reasonably necessary; 5 c) 6 for whom ESI will be preserved; 7 d) 8 burden or cost pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) and ESI from these 9 sources will be preserved but not searched, reviewed, or produced: backup The parties have agreed/will agree on the number of custodians per party These data sources are not reasonably accessible because of undue 10 media of email and document management systems, systems no longer in use 11 that cannot be accessed. 12 13 5. SEARCH The parties have meet and conferred in responding to their respective initial 14 Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 request, and agree to meet and confer further, if necessary, about 15 methods to search ESI in order to identify ESI that is subject to production in 16 discovery and filter out ESI that is not subject to discovery. 17 18 19 20 21 22 6. PRODUCTION FORMATS The Parties have reached the following agreements regarding the form(s) of production: a. Format. All relevant, responsive and non-privileged Documents shall be produced as follows: (i) To the extent one form of a Document is produced, it need not be 23 produced in another form; however, the Parties reserve the right to request 24 native files for any document that is unreadable or has limited accessibility 25 in the Group IV TIF format (e.g., color documents or databases). 26 27 28 (ii) Microsoft Excel files or other spreadsheet file types, Microsoft PowerPoint presentations, and audio and video media files shall be produced in their Page 3 of 8 Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 4 of 8 1 native formats with links referenced in the “NativePath” field as described 2 below. Natively produced documents will be accompanied by a TIFF image 3 4 slip sheet indicating that the document was produced natively. (iii) To the extent any specialized software is required to allow a Document to 5 be read, interpreted, or translated into usable form, such software shall 6 also be produced or such Documents shall be converted into reasonably 7 usable forms for production. 8 9 (iv) Non-electronic Documents shall be scanned into a static-image format with 10 11 searchable text as specified herein. (v) Images shall be produced as single-page CCITT Group IV TIFF files in 300 12 dpi with an IPRO.LFP reference file containing document (D) and child (C) 13 14 15 16 identifiers. Each TIFF image shall have a unique, sequential identifying number which is the Bates number of the page. (vi) A standard Concordance .DAT load file shall be provided containing all 17 metadata fields specified below. The Concordance data files shall be 18 delimited by the Concordance default format delimiters, e.g., ASCII 020 (for 19 comma), 254 (þ for quote), and 174 (® for newline). 20 (vii) Document text shall be provided in a multipage .TXT file for each 21 22 document, using extracted text for electronic data and OCR for scanned, 23 non-electronic documents. Each .TXT file shall be named per the ProdBeg 24 value for each Document and delivered in a folder named Text. 25 26 27 (viii) Native files shall be named per the ProdBeg value for each document and delivered in a folder named Natives. (ix) In the event a Document is encrypted, password-protected, or otherwise 28 Page 4 of 8 Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 5 of 8 1 protected from third-party access, the Parties shall, to the fullest extent 2 possible, decrypt or unlock such Documents. 3 (x) 4 In producing Documents, if an identical Document appears in more than one person’s files, you must either (1) produce each copy of the Document, 5 or (2) provide the names of each custodian delimited by commas in an 6 additional “All Custodians” metadata field within the Concordance load file. 7 8 9 b. Metadata fields. The parties are obligated to provide the following metadata for all ESI produced, to the extent such metadata exists: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 METADATA FIELDS FOR ALL ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS ProdBeg First bates number of email or document ProdEnd Last bates number of email or document ProdBegAttach First bates number of attachment(s) ProdEndAttach Last bates number of attachment(s) Custodian File_Extension MD5Hash FilePath Starting with container name (PST or NSF) through mailbox folder name - format example: Outlook PST\Inbox\Important Record Type Populated with Email, Attachment, or Loose File NativePath Relative path to native file if provided in production TextPath Relative path to document text/OCR file if provided in production 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 5 of 8 Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 6 of 8 1 ADDITIONAL METADATA FIELDS FOR EMAIL SentDate Format yyyymmdd SentTime Format hh:mm:ss ReceivedDate Format yyyymmdd ReceivedTime Format hh:mm:ss From To CC BCC Subject ThreadID Email thread identification value (Conversation Index or other identifier) Attachment File names of attached documents Names Num_Attachments Number of attached documents 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ADDITIONAL METADATA FIELDS FOR ALL ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS OTHER THAN EMAIL Author CreateDate Format yyyymmdd CreateTime Format hh:mm:ss ModDate Format yyyymmdd ModTime Format hh:mm:ss DocTitle FileName FileSize 12 13 14 15 16 17 c. Redactions. Any producing party may use redactions to protect attorney- 18 19 client or attorney work product privileges. The parties further agree that documents 20 may be redacted for relevance if a portion of a document relates to subject matter that 21 is not relevant to this lawsuit. All redactions should be readily identifiable, for example 22 including the word “REDACTED” over the redacted information. 23 24 d. Manner of production. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the manner of ESI in this litigation is to be governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25 26 27 28 34(b)(2)(E). The production of any requested responsive and non-privileged ESI shall take place through a rolling production process and shall be completed in accordance with the Scheduling Order (ECF No. TBD). Productions shall be sent via Secure File Page 6 of 8 Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 7 of 8 1 Transfer, or other form agreed upon by the parties. 2 3 4 e. De-duplication. Each party shall be permitted to use electronic horizontal and/or vertical de-duplication software to eliminate multiple copies of identical documents (including e-mails). 5 8. DOCUMENTS PROTECTED FROM DISCOVERY 6 a) 7 Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 502(d), the production of a privileged or work- product-protected document, whether inadvertent or otherwise, is not a waiver of 8 privilege or protection from discovery in this case or in any other federal or state 9 proceeding. For example, the mere production of privileged or work-product- 10 protected documents in this case as part of a mass production is not itself a 11 waiver in this case or in any other federal or state proceeding. 12 b) 13 The parties have agreed in the Parties’ Stipulated Protective Order (ECF No. 25 at paragraph 11) upon a claw back process pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 14 26(b)(5). 15 c) 16 Communications involving outside counsel that post-date the filing of the complaint need not be placed on a privilege log. Communications may be 17 identified on a privilege log by category, rather than individually, if appropriate. 18 19 // 20 // 21 // 22 // 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 Page 7 of 8 Case 3:20-cv-00072-RCJ-CLB Document 134 Filed 09/17/20 Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 9. MODIFICATION This Stipulated Order may be modified by a Stipulated Order of the parties or by the Court for good cause shown. 4 5 IT IS SO STIPULATED, through Counsel of Record. 6 DATED: September 17, 2020. 7 By:/s/ Stephen S. Smith STEPHEN S. SMITH, Esq. Admitted Pro Hac Vice 303 North Glenoaks Blvd, Suite 200 Burbank, CA 91502 8 9 By: /s/ Leigh T. Goddard LEIGH T. GODDARD, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6315 McDONALD CARANO, LLP 100 W. Liberty St., Tenth Floor Reno, Nevada 89501 Telephone: (775) 788-2000 10 11 12 13 Matthew D. Francis Arthur A. Zorio BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP 5371 Kietzke Lane Reno, Nevada 89611 James C. Dugan (admitted pro hac vice) Jordan C. Wall (admitted pro hac vice) WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 728-8000 jdugan@willkie.com jwall@willkie.com 14 15 16 Attorneys for Defendants Otodata Wireless Network, Inc., Steven Rechenmacher, and Brian Rechenmacher Attorneys for Independent Technologies, LLC d/b/a Anova 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 DATED: 23 September 18, 2020 24 25 4845-5764-0651, v. 1 26 27 28 Page 8 of 8
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
