Benedict v. Hewlett-Packard Company

Filing 179

ORDER re 156 Supplement to Discovery Dispute Joint Report #2. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 3/7/2014. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/7/2014)

1

*E-Filed: March 7, 2014*

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

For the Northern District of California

NOT FOR CITATION

8

United States District Court

7

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

ERIC BENEDICT, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,

12
v.
13

No. C13-00119 LHK (HRL)
ORDER RE SUPPLEMENT TO
DISCOVERY DISPUTE JOINT
REPORT #2

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY,
14
15
16

[Re: Docket No. 156]
Defendant.
____________________________________/
Eric Benedict is a representative plaintiff in a conditionally certified FLSA collective action

17

against defendant Hewlett-Packard Company (“HP”). Before leaving HP, Benedict made a mirror

18

image of his HP-issued laptop hard drive, which contained some personal information. After

19

learning of the existence of the image, HP demanded it be returned and filed counterclaims against

20

Benedict. With involvement of the presiding judge, the parties agreed to a process whereby a third

21

party would attempt to segregate the contents of the image into proprietary HP information and

22

Benedict’s personal information.

23

While the segregation process was ongoing, the parties filed Discovery Dispute Joint Report

24

#2 (“DDJR #2”) to address HP’s contention that Benedict was required to produce the entirety of

25

the image in response to its previously served requests for production. In December 2013, the

26

undersigned issued an interim order requesting an update on the segregation process and

27

clarification as to whether allowing discovery on the entire hard drive image would frustrate the

28

purpose of the segregation process. The parties’ Supplement to DDJR #2 indicates that the

1

segregation process would be substantially completed in January, with lingering issues to be

2

resolved thereafter through a meet and confer process. Over 99% of the information contained

3

within the image has been deemed to belong to HP, and Benedict has provided HP with brief

4

descriptions of the remaining personal information on a rolling basis.

5

With respect to this less than one percent of information returned to Benedict, upon

6

completion of the segregation process, he shall timely produce any and all information, including

7

metadata, that is responsive to HP’s requests for production. Utilizing the descriptions of

8

Benedict’s information, HP may identify any potentially relevant information it believes was

9

unreasonably withheld, and the parties shall meet and confer to resolve any resulting disputes.

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Based on the record presented, including the arguments of both sides in DDJR #2 and the

11

supplement thereto, HP is not entitled to inspection of the hard drive at this time.

12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 7, 2014
HOWARD R. LLOYD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1

C13-00119 Notice will be electronically mailed to:

2

Adam T. Klein

3

Caryn F Horner [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]

[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

4
Daniel M. Hutchinson

[e-mail]

David Ryan Carpenter

[e-mail]

5
6
Jahan C. Sagafi

[e-mail]

Jennifer Lin Liu

[e-mail]

7
8
9

Juno E. Turner [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail]

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Kelly M. Dermody

[e-mail]

11

Marc Pilotin

12

Mark E. Haddad [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail]

[e-mail], [e-mail]

13
Max Fischer

[e-mail], [e-mail]

14
Wendy M. Lazerson

[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

15
16

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3