Design Data Corporation v. Unigate Enterprise, Inc. et al

Filing 81

ORDER re 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 Letters. The Court orders that UE permit a third-party selected by Design Data to conduct a forensic inspection of UEs hard drives, including external hard drives. The parties shall agree on the protocol for the f orensic examination within seven (7) days of the date of this Order. If the parties cannot agree on the protocol, they shall promptly inform the Court. The scheduling deadlines and hearing dates in this case are continued approximately two months. Di scovery cutoff: 6/24/2014. Dispositive motions to be heard by 9/17/2014. Pretrial Conference set for 11/17/2014 02:00 PM and Jury Trial set for 12/15/2014 08:30 AM, both in Courtroom 12, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/24/2014. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/24/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DESIGN DATA CORPORATION,

Case No. 12-cv-04131-WHO

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR FORENSIC
INSPECTION

9
10

UNIGATE ENTERPRISE, INC., et al.,

Re: Dkt. Nos. 76, 77, 78, 79, 80

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Plaintiff Design Data Corporation (Design Data) asks the Court to: (i) compel defendant

13

Unigate Enterprises, Inc. (UE) to permit a forensic inspection of UE’s hard drives; (ii) continue

14

the deadlines in this case three months, including the deadline for responding to defendants’

15

amended motion for summary judgment; and (iii) sanction UE for withholding and/or destroying

16

responsive documents. UE objects to the request, arguing that Design Data has no evidence that

17

UE has failed to produce and/or intentionally destroyed any computer files and UE’s own forensic

18

inspection shows that UE has not done so. UE also asserts that Design Data’s current motion is

19

simply one that seeks to further delay the resolution of this litigation, which will prejudice UE

20

given its precarious financial situation.

21

I have considered both sides’ submissions, up to and including Docket No. 80, and

22

ORDER that UE permit a third-party selected by Design Data to conduct a forensic inspection of

23

UE’s hard drives, including external hard drives. That inspection shall be conducted within thirty

24

(30) days from the date of this Order. That inspection shall be conducted at Design Data’s cost.

25

The parties shall agree on the protocol for the forensic examination within seven (7) days of the

26

date of this Order. If the parties cannot agree on the protocol, they shall promptly inform the

27

Court and I will appoint a Magistrate Judge to resolve the dispute. If evidence arises that UE

28

destroyed or failed to produce discovery, the Court will consider a motion for sanctions and/or to

1
2
3

shift the cost of the forensic inspection.
The scheduling deadlines and hearing dates in this case are continued approximately two
months to the following dates:
Plaintiff’s opposition to defendants’ MSJ:

June 2, 2014

5

Hearing on defendants’ MSJ:

June 25, 2014

6

Fact discovery cutoff:

June 24, 2014

7

Expert Disclosure and reports:

June 24, 2014

8

Expert rebuttal disclosure/reports:

July 14, 2014

9

Expert Discovery cutoff:

August 4, 2014

10

Last day for hearing motions:

September 17, 2014

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

4

Pretrial Conference:

November 17, 2014

12

Trial:

December 15, 2014

13
14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 24, 2014
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2