Synchronoss Technologies v. Dropbox Inc
Filing
129
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 125 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Re: Discovery Of Electronically Stored Information For Patent Litigation filed by Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 2/13/17. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/13/2017)
1
[Counsel listed on signature page]
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
7
8
SThCHRONOSS TEC~OLOGIES, NC.,
9
Plaintiff,
10
vs.
11
DROPBOX, INC.
12
Defendant.
3
3)
Case No. 3:16-CV-00119-HSG
STIPULATION & ORDER m~:
DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY
STORED INFORMATION FOR PATENT
LITIGATION
)
))
)
Complaint Filed:
Case Transferred:
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1
March 27, 2015
January 8, 2016
1
Upon the stipulation of the parties, the Court ORDERS as follows:
2
This Order supplements all other discovery rules and orders. It streamlines Electronically
3
Stored Information (“ESI”) production to promote a “just, speedy, and inexpensive
4
determination of this action, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1.”
5
1.
General Provisions.
6
a.
This Order may be modified in the Court’s discretion or by stipulation.
7
b.
As in all cases, costs may be shifted for disproportionate ESI production
8
requests pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. Likewise, a party’s nonresponsive or
9
dilatory discovery tactics are cost-shifting considerations.
10
11
c.
A party’s meaningful compliance with this Order and efforts to promote
efficiency and reduce costs will be considered in cost-shifting determinations.
12
d.
The parties are expected to comply with the District’s E-Discovery Guidelines
13
(“Guidelines”).
14
e.
Proportionality. Parties are expected to use reasonable, good faith and
15
proportional efforts to preserve, identii~r and produce relevant information.’ This includes
16
identi~ing appropriate limits to discovery, including limits on custodians, identification of
17
relevant subject matter, time periods for discovery and other parameters to limit and guide
18
preservation and discovery issues.
19
f.
Except as expressly stated, nothing in this order affects the parties’ discovery
20
obligations under the Federal or Local Rules.
21
2.
22
take reasonable and proportional steps to preserve discoverable information in the party’s
23
possession, custody or control.
24
25
Preservation of Discoverable Information. A party has a common law obligation to
a.
Absent a showing of good cause by the requesting party, the parties shall not be
required to modify, on a going-forward basis, the procedures used by them in the ordinary
26
27
Information can originate in any form, including ESI and paper, and is not limited to information created or stored
electronically.
2
1
course of business to back up and archive data; provided, however, that the parties shall preserve
2
the non-duplicative discoverable information currently in their possession, custody or control.
3
b.
Absent a showing of good cause by the requesting party, the categories of ESI
4
identified in Schedule A attached hereto need not be preserved. Furthermore, the Parties shall
5
have no obligation to preserve, collect, review, or produce the following ESI: (1) all file types on
6
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) database of software applications; (2) all
7
executable files; (3) all system and program files as defined by the NIST library; and (4) all files
8
in the C:\Windows directory (e.g., LOG, DAT, etc. files).
9
3.
10
Privilege.
a.
The parties are to confer on the nature and scope of privilege logs for the case,
11
including whether categories of information may be excluded from any logging requirements
12
and whether alternatives to document-by-document logs can be exchanged.
13
14
b.
not required to include any such information in privilege logs.
15
16
With respect to information generated after the filing of the complaint, parties are
c.
Activities undertaken in compliance with the duty to preserve information are
protected from disclosure and discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3)(A) and (B).
17
d.
The rules and procedures governing the inadvertent disclosure of privileged,
18
work-product-protected documents or otherwise protected materials are outlined in the stipulated
19
protective order governing this case. The inadvertent production of a privileged or work
20
product-protected document is not a waiver of privilege or protection from discovery in this case
21
or in any other federal or state proceeding.
22
4.
23
party shall disclose:
24
Initial Disclosures. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order or agreement of the parties, each
a.
Custodians. Up to 10 custodians per party most likely to have discoverable
25
information in their possession, custody or control. The custodians shall be identified by name,
26
title, role in the instant dispute, and the subject matter of the information.
27
b.
Non-custodial data sources. A list of the non-custodial data sources that are
3
1
most likely to contain non-duplicative discoverable information for preservation and production
2
consideration.
3
c.
4
Notice. The parties shall identify any issues relating to:
1)
Any additional sources of ESI not identified in Schedule A (by type, date,
5
custodian, electronic system or other criteria) that a party asserts are not reasonably accessible
6
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C)(i).
7
8
2)
Third-party discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 and otherwise, including
the timing and sequencing of such discovery.
9
3)
Production of information subject to privacy protections, including
10
information that may need to be produced from outside of the United States and subject to
11
foreign laws.
12
5.
13
Specific E-Discovery Issues.
a.
On-site inspection of electronic media. Such an inspection shall not be
14
permitted absent a demonstration by the requesting party of specific need and good cause.
15
Nothing in this provision shall prevent a party from voluntarily allowing inspection of source
16
code without the Court’s leave.
17
b.
Email Production. General ESI production requests under Federal Rules of
18
Civil Procedure 34 and 45 shall not include email or other forms of electronic correspondence
19
(collectively “email”). To obtain email parties must propound specific email production
20
requests.
21
c.
22
23
Email production requests shall only be propounded for specific issues, rather
than general discovery of a product or business.
d.
Email production requests shall be phased to occur after the parties have
24
exchanged initial disclosures and basic documentation about the patents, the prior art, the
25
accused instrumentalities, and the relevant finances. While this provision does not require the
26
production of such information, the Court encourages prompt and early production of this
27
information to promote efficient and economical streamlining of the case.
4
e.
Email production requests shall identify the custodian, search terms, and time
2
frame. The parties shall cooperate to identify the proper custodians, proper search terms and
3
proper timeframe as set forth herein and in the Guidelines.
4
f.
Each requesting party shall limit its email production requests to a total of five
5
(5) custodians per producing party for all such requests. The parties may jointly agree to
6
modify this limit without the Court’s leave. The Court shall consider contested requests for
7
additional custodians, upon showing a distinct need based on the size, complexity, and issues
8
of this specific case. Cost-shifting may be considered as part of any such request.
9
g.
Each requesting party shall limit its email production requests to a total of five
10
(5) search terms per custodian per party. The parties may jointly agree to modify this limit
11
without the Court’s leave. The Court shall consider contested requests for additional search
12
terms per custodian, upon showing a distinct need based on the size, complexity, and issues of
13
this specific case. The Court encourages the parties to confer on a process to test the efficacy
14
of the search terms. The search terms shall be narrowly tailored to particular issues.
15
Indiscriminate terms, such as the producing company’s name or its product name, are
16
inappropriate unless combined with narrowing search criteria that sufficiently reduce the risk
17
of overproduction. A conjunctive combination of multiple words or phrases (e.g., “computer”
18
and “system”) narrows the search and shall count as a single search term. A disjunctive
19
combination of multiple words or phrases (e.g., “computer” or “system”) broadens the search,
20
and thus each word or phrase shall count as a separate search term unless they are variants of
21
the same word. Use of narrowing search criteria (e.g., “and,” “but not,” “w/x”) is encouraged
22
to limit the production and shall be considered when determining whether to shift costs for
23
disproportionate discovery. Should a party serve email production requests with search terms
24
beyond the limits agreed to by the parties or granted by the Court pursuant to this paragraph,
25
this shall be considered in determining whether any party shall bear all reasonable costs caused
26
by such additional discovery.
27
h.
Search methodology.
5
1
1)
Nothing in this Order shall require a producing party to utilize any
2
particular collection protocol for any particular population of ESI or entire ESI data source. For
3
avoidance of doubt, targeted collection may be used to collect potentially relevant documents
4
from an ESI data source.
5
2)
If the producing party elects to use search terms to locate potentially
6
responsive ESI, it shall disclose a list of search terms to the requesting party. Absent a showing
7
of good cause, a requesting party may request no more than 10 additional terms to be used in
8
connection with the electronic searches conducted by the producing party per discovery track.
9
Focused terms, rather than over-broad terms (e.g., product and company names), shall be
10
employed. The parties shall meet and confer on excluding information that is not discoverable
11
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b), including modifying terms where the burden or expense of the
12
proposed terms outweighs the likely benefit.
13
3)
Each party is required to produce only a single copy of a responsive
14
document and each party may dc-duplicate responsive ESI (based on MD5 or SHA-1 hash
15
values at the document level) across custodians. For emails with attachments (to the extent the
16
parties agree or are ordered to produce emails), the hash value is generated based on the
17
parent/child document grouping. To the extent that dc-duplication through MD5 or SHA-1 hash
18
values is not possible, the parties shall meet and confer to discuss any other proposed method of
19
dc-duplication.
20
4)
In an email thread, only the final-in-time document need be produced,
21
assuming that all previous emails in the thread are contained within the final message. Where a
22
prior email contains an attachment, that email and attachment shall not be removed as a “near
23
duplicate,” unless an identical copy of the attachment is contained in the subsequent-in-time
24
version of the email thread that is being produced.
25
i.
Format. ESI and non-ESI shall be produced to the requesting party in the
26
formats described in Schedule B. When a text-searchable image file is produced, the
27
producing party must preserve the integrity of the underlying 1351, i.e., the original formatting,
6
1
the metadata (as noted below in Schedule B) and the revision history as shown within a
2
document management system (“DMS”), if applicable. Each Party reserves the right to object
3
to production of documents in the format specified herein to the extent that production in such
4
format is impracticable or unreasonably burdensome or expensive.
5
j.
Nothing in this Order prevents the parties from agreeing to use technology
6
assisted review and other techniques insofar as their use improves the efficacy of discovery.
7
Such topics should be discussed pursuant to the District’s E-Discovery Guidelines.
8
9
10
k.
Source Code. No provision of this Order affects any inspection of source code
that is responsive to a discovery request and may be made available consistent with the
protective order governing this case.
11
12
IT IS ORDERED that the forgoing Agreement is approved.
13
14
15
16
17
Dated: 2/13/17
_____________________________________________
HON. HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
HON. KANDIS A. WESTMORE
US MAGISTRATE JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
7
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
2
Dated this 3rd day of February, 2017.
Dated this 3rd day of February, 2017.
3
/s/ Sarah S. Eskandari
SARAH S. ESKANDARI (SBN 271541)
DENTONS US LLP
One Market Plaza,
Spear Tower, 24th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 267-4000
Facsimile: (415) 267-4198
Email: sarah.eskandari@dentons.com
/s/ Jonathan Patchen
STEPHEN E. TAYLOR (SBN 058452)
JONATHAN A. PATCHEN (SBN 237346)
TAYLOR & PATCHEN, LLP
One Ferry Building, Suite 355
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 788-8200
Facsimile: (415) 788-8208
E-mail: staylor~taylorpatchen.com
E-mail: jpatchen~taylorpatchen.com
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
MARK L. H000E (pro hac vice)
SHAILENDRA K. MAHESHWARI
(pro hac vice)
NICHOLAS H. JACKSON (SBN 269976)
DENTONS US LLP
1900 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 408-6400
Facsimile: (202) 408-6399
Email: mark.hogge~dentons.com
Email: shailendra.maheshwari@dentons.com
Email: nicholas.jackson@dentons.com
THOMAS H.L. SELBY (pro hac vice)
DAVID M. KRINSKY (pro hac vice)
ADAM D. HARBER (pro hac vice)
CHRISTOPHER J. MANDERNACH (pro
hac vice)
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
725 Twelfth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone: (202) 434-5000
Facsimile: (202) 434-5029
E-mail: tselby~wc.com
E-mail: dkrinsky~wc.com
E-mail: aharber@wc.com
E-mail: cmandemach@wc.com
JOEL N. BOCK (pro hac vice)
DENTONS US LLP
101 JFK Parkway
Short Hills, New Jersey 07078-2708
Telephone: (973) 912-7100
Facsimile: (973) 912-7199
Email: joel.bock@dentons.com
Attorneys for Defendant
Dropbox, Inc.
Attorneys for PlaintVf
Synchronoss Technologies, Inc.
22
23
24
25
26
27
8
1
SCHEDULE A
2
1.
Deleted, slack, fragmented, or other data only accessible by forensics.
3
2.
Random access memory (RAM), temporary files, or other ephemeral data that
4
5
6
are difficult to preserve without disabling the operating system.
3.
On-line access data such as temporary internet files, history, cache, cookies,
and the like.
7
4.
8
last-opened dates.
9
5.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Data in metadata fields that are frequently updated automatically, such as
Automatically saved versions of documents and emails, where a final version of
said document has been saved and is otherwise discoverable.
6.
Back-up data that are substantially duplicative of data that are more
accessible elsewhere.
7.
Electronic mail or pin-to-pin messages stored on mobile devices (e.g., iPhone
and Blackberry devices), provided that a copy of such mail is routinely saved elsewhere.
8.
Other electronic data stored on a mobile device, such as calendar or contact data
or notes, provided that a copy of such information is routinely saved elsewhere.
17
9.
Logs of calls made from mobile devices.
18
10.
Server, system, network, or transactional logs.
19
11.
Electronic data temporarily stored by laboratory equipment or attached electronic
20
21
22
23
equipment, provided that such data is not ordinarily preserved as part of a laboratory report.
12.
Data remaining from systems no longer in use that is unintelligible on the
systems in use.
13.
System data that are typically overwritten in the normal course of business.
24
25
26
27
9
1
SCHEDULE B
2
PRODUCTION FORMAT AND METADATA
3
4
S
6
7
1. Production Components. Productions shall include, single page TIFFs, Text Files, an
ASCII delimited metadata file (.dat) and an image load file that can be loaded into
commercially acceptable production software (e.g., Concordance and Relativity).
2. Image Load File shall contain the following comma-delimited fields: BEGBATES,
VOLUME, IMAGE FILE PATH, DOCUMENT BREAK, FOLDER BREAK, BOX
BREAK, PAGE COUNT.
8
9
10
11
12
3. Metadata Fields and Metadata File. The parties are only obligated to provide the
following metadata for all ESI produced to the extent such metadata exists. The parties
are not obligated to populate manually any of the fields below if such fields cannot be
extracted from a document, with the exception of the following: BEGBATES,
ENDBATES, BEGATTACH, ENDATTACH, CUSTODIAN, and POD. The metadata
file shall be delimited according to the following characters:
13
• Delimiter = ¶ (ASCII:020)
• Text-Qualifier ~, (ASCII:254)
• New Line = ® (ASCII:174)
14
15
16
Field Name
17
Field Description
BEGBATES
Beginning Bates number as stamped on the production image
ENDBATES
Ending Bates number as stamped on the production image
BEGATTACH
First production Bates number of the first document in a family
ENDATTACH
Last production Bates number of the last document in a family
22
POD
Confidentiality designation
23
CUSTODIAN
Includes the Individual (Custodian) from whom the documents
originated.
18
19
20
21
24
25
CUSTODIAN ALL
—
Semi-colon delimited list of all custodians associated with the
file.
26
SUBJECT
Subject line of email
27
TITLE
Title field extracted from the metadata of a non-email
10
document
1
2
DATESENT
Date email was sent (format: MM/DD/YYYY)
3
DATERCVD
Received date of an email message (format: MM/DD/YYYY)
4
DATECREATED
Date that a file was created (format: MM/DD/YYYY)
5
DATEMODIFIED
Modification date(s) of a document
6
MODIFIEDBY
The name of the person who modified a document
AUTHOR
Author field extracted from the metadata of a non-email
document
TO
All recipients that were included on the “To” line of the email
FROM
The name and email address of the sender of the email
11
CC
All recipients that were included on the “CC” line of the email
12
BCC
All recipients that were included on the “BCC” line of the
email
NATIVELINK
Native File Link (Native Files only)
FILENAME
Filename of the original digital file name
PRODVOLUME
Identifies production media deliverable
REDACTED
“Yes,” for redacted documents; otherwise, blank
EXTRACTEDTEXT
File path to Extracted Text/OCR File
7
8
9
10
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
4. TIFFs. Documents that exist only in hard copy format shall be scanned and produced as
TIFFs. Unless excepted below, documents that exist as ESI shall be converted and
produced as TIFFs. Unless excepted below, single page Group IV TIFFs should be
provided, at least 300 dots per inch (dpi) for all documents. Each TIFF image shall be
named according to a unique corresponding Bates number associated with the document.
Each image shall be branded according to the Bates number and the agreed upon
confidentiality designation. Original document orientation should be maintained (i.e.,
portrait to portrait and landscape to landscape). TIFFs shall show all text and images that
would be visible to a user of the hard copy documents.
5. Color Documents. Documents containing color as they are maintained in the ordinary
course of business should be produced in color.
11
1
2
6. Text Files. A single multi-page (document-level) text file shall be provided for each
document, and the filename should match its respective TIFF filename. A commercially
acceptable technology for optical character recognition “OCR” shall be used for all
3
scanned, hard copy documents. When possible, the text of native files should be
extracted directly from the native file. Text files will not contain the redacted portions of
the documents and OCR text files will be substituted instead of extracted text files for
redacted documents.
4
5
6
8
7. Image Load Files / Data Load Files. Each TIFF in a production must be referenced in
the corresponding image load file. The total number of documents referenced in a
production’s data load file should match the total number of designated document breaks
in the Image Load file(s) in the production. The total number of pages referenced in a
production’s image load file should match the total number of TIFF files in the
production. The total number of documents in a production should match the total
io
number of records in the data load file.
8. Bates Numbering. All images must be assigned a unique Bates number that is
12
13
14
15
sequential within a given document and across the production sets.
~
Redaction Of Information. If documents are produced containing redacted information,
an electronic copy of the original, unredacted data shall be securely preserved in such a
manner so as to preserve without modification, alteration or addition the content of such
data including any metadata therein.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
10. Spreadsheets. TIFF images of databases, spreadsheets, or presentation slides (e.g.
PowerPoint, MS Excel, Google Sheets, Access, Microsoft projects, etc.) need not be
produced unless redacted, in which instance, spreadsheets may be produced in TIFF
format with OCR Text Files. Native copies of databases, spreadsheets or presentation
slides shall be produced with a link in the NativeLink field, along with extracted text and
applicable metadata fields set forth in Paragraph 3. A TIFF placeholder indicating that
the document was provided in native format should accompany the database record. If a
spreadsheet has been redacted, TIFF images and OCR text of the redacted document will
suffice in lieu of a native file and extracted text. The parties will make reasonable efforts
to ensure that any spreadsheets that are produced only as TIFF images are formatted so as
to be readable.
24
25
26
27
~ Proprietary Files. To the extent a response to discovery requires production of ESI
accessible only through proprietary software, the parties should continue to preserve each
version of such information. The parties shall meet and confer to finalize the appropriate
production format.
12
2
3
4
6
12. Request(s) for Additional Native Files. If good cause exists to request production of
certain files, other than those specifically set forth above, in native format, the party may
request such production and provide an explanation of the need for native file review,
which request shall not unreasonably be denied. Any native files that are produced shall
be produced with a link in the NativeLink field, along with extracted text and applicable
metadata fields set forth in Paragraph 3. A TIFF placeholder indicating that the
document was provided in native format should accompany the database record. If a file
has been redacted, TIFF images and OCR text of the redacted document will suffice in
lieu of a native file and extracted text.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
13
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?