Cotterman v. Shelby County, et al., No. 3:2018cv00177 - Document 51 (S.D. Ohio 2019)

Court Description: ORDER AND ENTRY GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO COMPEL (DOC. 44 )- Having carefully considered all of the foregoing, the undersigned GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs motion to compel and ORDERS as follows: 1.Def endants shall respond, forthwith, to Plaintiffs interrogatories requesting their identification of electronic devices issued or made available to Defendants and other identified individuals between January 1, 2016 and May 31, 2017; 2.Defendants shall respond, forthwith, to Plaintiffs interrogatories requesting that they identify the personal devices the named individual Defendants used between January 1,2016 and May 31, 2017, with the limitation that the named individual Defendants need only ide ntify those personal devices they actually used for work purposes at any time during this time period (i.e., they need only identify an electronic device is it was actually used for work purposes during the relevant time period); 3.Defendants need no t conduct a forensic search of the identified data storage devices and data storage spaces associated therewith, but may certainly do so if they so choose; 4.However, Defendants shall, forthwith, conduct reasonable searches of all the aforementioned identified devices and/or associated data storage spaces and, absent lawful objections to production (e.g., privilege, relevance, etc.), produce materials responsive to Plaintiffs Rule 34 requests; and 5.Defendants shall disclose to Plaintiff the details of how the aforementioned searches for ESI were conducted (e.g., identifying the search terms used, the storage medium searched,etc.). Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 6/25/19. (kma)