Bravo Company USA, Inc. v. Badger Ordnance LLC et al

Filing 61

ORDER Granting 56 Stipulation re the Production of Hard-Copy and Electronically Stored Information. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 7/21/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

JONATHAN W. FOUNTAIN
Nevada Bar No. 10351
[e-mail]
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER LLP
3993 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 600
Las Vegas, NV 89169
Telephone: [phone]
COLBY B. SPRINGER
admitted pro hac vice
[e-mail]
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER LLP
4300 Bohannon Drive, Suite 230
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone: [phone]
ADAM L. MASSARO
admitted pro hac vice
[e-mail]
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER LLP
1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 3000
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Bravo Company USA,
Inc.

14
15
16
17

WILLIAM B. NASH
admitted pro hac vice
[e-mail]
HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700
Dallas, Texas 75219
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
JASON W. WHITNEY
admitted pro hac vice
[e-mail]
HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
112 E. Pecan Street, Suite 1200
San Antonio, Texas 78205
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DONALD J. CAMPBELL
Nevada Bar No. 1216
[e-mail]
J. COLBY WILLIAMS
Nevada Bar No. 5549
[e-mail]
CAMPBELL & WILLIAMS
700 South Seventh Street
[e-mail]
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

18
Attorneys for Defendant Martin J. Bordson

19
20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

22
23

Bravo Company USA, Inc., a Wisconsin
corporation,

24

Plaintiff,

25
26

vs.
Martin J. Bordson, an individual,

27

Defendant.

28
6211732_1

Case No. 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF
STIPULATION REGARDING THE
PRODUCTION OF HARD-COPY AND
ELECTRONICALLY STORED
INFORMATION

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 2 of 9

WHEREAS Bravo Company, Inc. (“Bravo Company”) and Defendant Martin J. Bordson

1
2

(“Bordson”) are parties to the above action;
AND WHEREAS the parties desire an orderly production of hard copy and electronically

3
4

stored information that will be produced in this action;
WHEREFORE the parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate as

5
6

follows.
1.

7
8

Absent agreement of the parties or further order of this Court, the following

parameters shall apply to electronically stored information production:
General Document Image Format. Each electronic document shall be produced in single-

9
10

page Tagged Image File Format (“TIFF”) format. TIFF files shall be single page and shall be

11

named with a unique production number followed by the appropriate file extension. Load files

12

shall be provided to indicate the location and unitization of the TIFF files. If a document is more

13

than one page, the unitization of the document and any attachments and/or affixed notes shall be

14

maintained as they existed in the original document. When PowerPoint documents are converted

15

to TIFFs, the version that will be converted will show the speaker notes, to the extent that they

16

exist. When Word documents are converted to TIFFs, the version that will be converted is as it

17

was last saved by the custodian. This means that if it was last saved with track changes turned on

18

that the images and metadata will reflect the tracked changes.
Metadata Fields. No metadata will be produced for redacted documents. The metadata

19
20

fields listed in Table A attached to this document will be provided, if they exist, for all other

21

electronically stored information.
Database Load Files/Cross-Reference Files. Documents should be provided with (1) a

22
23

Concordance delimited file and (2) an IPro delimited file.
Native Files. The following file types shall be produced in native format: Excel files,

24
25

Access files, and Microsoft Project files. For all other file types, a party may make a reasonable

26

request to receive the document in its native format, and upon receipt of such a request, the

27

producing party shall produce the document in its native format. Native Files will be produced

28

with a placeholder TIFF image. Each TIFF placeholder will contain the bates number,
6211732_1

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 3 of 9

1

confidentiality designation, and the name of the native file.

2

Gaps. Productions should contain sequential bates numbers with no gaps. There should be

3

no gaps in bates numbers between productions. A unique production volume number will be used

4

for each production. If any unavoidable gaps occur, the parties agree to provide advance notice of

5

those gaps within productions and/or between productions.
Parent-Child Relationships. Parent-child relationships (the association between an

6
7

attachment and its parent document) must be preserved.
Text-Searchable Documents. Electronically stored information shall be produced text-

8
9

searchable.
Footer. Each document image shall contain a footer with a sequentially ascending

10
11

production number.
No Backup Restoration Required. Absent a showing of good cause, no party need restore

12
13

any form of media upon which backup data is maintained in a party’s normal or allowed

14

processes, including but not limited to backup tapes, disks, SAN, and other forms of media, to

15

comply with its discovery obligations in the present case.
Voice-mail and Mobile Devices. Absent a showing of good cause, voice-mails, PDAs and

16
17

mobile phones are deemed not reasonably accessible and need not be collected and preserved.
2.

18

A party’s production of documents responsive to a request under Federal Rules of

19

Civil Procedure 34, 45, or any other rule or method shall include documents and other things in a

20

tangible or electronic form, but shall not include e-mail or other forms of electronic

21

correspondence (collectively “e-mail”). To obtain e-mail from another party, a party must

22

propound specific e-mail production requests, separate and apart from the party’s other requests

23

for production. Custodian limits applicable to e-mail addressed below do not apply to documents

24

and other things in a tangible or electronic form.
3.

25

E-mail production requests shall be phased to occur timely after the parties have

26

exchanged initial disclosures, a specific identification of the fifteen most significant listed e-mail

27

custodians in view of the pleaded claims and defenses. E-mail production requests shall identify

28

the custodian, search terms, and time frame. The parties shall cooperate to identify the proper
6211732_1

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 4 of 9

1

custodians, proper search terms, and proper timeframe. After the application of search terms to a

2

custodian’s e-mail but before review, the parties agree to meet and confer concerning the number

3

of e-mails responsive to the applied search terms.
4.

4

E-mail production requests are subject to the following custodian limits:

5

A.

6

(6) custodians.

7

B.

8

(6) custodians.
5.

9

Bravo Company may obtain e-mail discovery from Bordson from up to six

Bordson may obtain e-mail discovery from Bravo Company from up to six

Each requesting party is limited to ten (10) search terms per custodian. The search

10

terms may be different across a party’s custodians. The search terms shall be tailored to particular

11

products or particular issues. Indiscriminate terms, such as the producing company’s name, may

12

be used with other search criteria but may not be used individually. A conjunctive combination of

13

multiple words or phrases (e.g., “computer” and “system”) narrows the search and shall count as a

14

single search term. A disjunctive combination of multiple words or phrases (e.g., “computer” or

15

“system”) broadens the search, and thus each word or phrase shall count as a separate search term

16

unless each term is a variant of the same word. Use of narrowing search criteria (e.g., “and,” “but

17

not,” “w/x”) is encouraged to limit the production. The parties may jointly agree to modify this

18

limit without the Court’s prior written permission provided, however, that such modification be

19

made in writing and signed by the parties’ respective counsel.
6.

20

Any party may seek additional e-mail production for additional custodians or

21

additional search terms beyond the initial limits established herein upon a showing of good cause,

22

or by written agreement of the parties. The parties shall meet and confer on who shall bear, and the

23

reasonableness of, the costs of e-mail production beyond the initial limits established herein.
7.

24

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, any party that produces

25

documents that were previously produced in any other action or matter may produce such

26

documents in the electronic format in which they were produced previously.
8.

27
28

Each piece of media containing production data will be labeled. The label will

provide the following information:
6211732_1

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 5 of 9

1



Party v. Party (case name)

2



Case No. 000000 (case number)

3



Month, Day, Year (date production was created on the disk)

4



Volume Number

5



Bates Range: (no gaps from production to production and no gaps within
productions unless otherwise notified)

6


7
9.

8
9

Confidential Designation (if necessary)
When scanning paper documents, distinct documents should not be merged into a

single record, and single documents should not be split into multiple records (i.e., paper

10

documents should be logically unitized). The parties will make their best efforts to have their

11

vendors unitize documents correctly and will commit to address situations where there are

12

improperly unitized documents.
10.

13

Documents will be produced on CD-ROM, DVD disks, portable hard drives, or by

14

making them available for download from an FTP site. The media of production is at the option of

15

the producing party. Production media will not be returned unless required under the applicable

16

protective order. Information produced via FTP site may be removed from the FTP site by the

17

producing party within a reasonable time and after the information has been retrieved by the

18

receiving party.
11.

19

Contingent upon each party’s compliance with the obligations set forth in this

20

document, the parties agree that the circumstances of this case do not warrant the preservation,

21

review, or production of ESI that is not reasonably accessible because it is unlikely that significant

22

relevant information would be located in those sources that is not otherwise available in

23

reasonably accessible sources. Moreover, that remote possibility is substantially outweighed by

24

the burden and cost of preservation and/or review and production of ESI from these sources. The

25

parties agree that the following ESI is not reasonably accessible:

26



Backup Tapes;

27



Voice-mail;

28



Instant Messaging;

6211732_1

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 6 of 9

1



Residual, fragmented, damaged, permanently deleted, slack and unallocated data;

2



Handheld PDA-type devices.

3

12.

The agreements set forth herein are without prejudice to the right of a requesting

4

party to request additional information about specific ESI, including sources of ESI previously

5

identified as “inaccessible ESI” above, if that party can demonstrate that material, relevant, and

6

responsive information that is not otherwise cumulative of information already produced can only

7

be found through such additional efforts. The parties will negotiate in good faith with regard to

8

whether such additional efforts are reasonably required and, if so, who should bear the cost, with

9

the Court to resolve such disputes if agreement cannot be reached.
13.

10

The parties may jointly agree to modify any terms of this stipulation without the

11

leave of Court, provided, however, that such modification be made in writing and signed by the

12

parties’ respective counsel.

13

IT IS SO AGREED AND STIPULATED:

14

Dated: July 17, 2015

15

LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER LLP

HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP

16

By: /s/ Jonathan W. Fountain
Jonathan W. Fountain
[e-mail]
3993 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 600
Las Vegas, NV 89169-5996
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

By: /s/ William B. Nash
William B. Nash
2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700
Dallas, Texas 75219
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Admitted pro hac vice

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

Colby B. Springer
[e-mail]
4300 Bohannon Drive, Suite 230
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Admitted pro hac vice
Adam L. Massaro
[e-mail]
1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 3000
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Admitted pro hac vice
Attorneys for Plaintiff Bravo Company USA,
Inc.
6211732_1

Respectfully submitted,

Jason W. Whitney
112 E. Pecan Street, Suite 1200
San Antonio, Texas 78205
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Admitted pro hac vice
CAMPBELL & WILLIAMS
Donald J. Campbell
[e-mail]
J. Colby Williams
[e-mail]
Phillip R. Erwin
[e-mail]

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 7 of 9

700 S. 7th Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys or Defendant Martin J. Bordson

1
2
3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED:

5
6

____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7

July 21, 2015
DATED: ________________________

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6211732_1

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 8 of 9

1

Table A – Metadata Fields

2
Field Name

Description/ Comments

Fields for ESI and/or Hard
Copy

5

BEG_NO

ESI and Hard Copy

6

END_NO

Bates number associated with
the first page of a document.
Bates number associated with
the last page of a document.
Identification of who provided
the document (or, if not
applicable, the source of the
document).
Attachment range for parent
and children. The range
should start with the BEG_NO
of the parent and end with the
END_NO of the last child.
File extension of native file
(e.g., XLS, DOC )
Original file name of native
file for loose documents or email attachments .
The Hash value or
“deduplication key” assigned
to a document. Parties will use
MD5 Hash value for this
unique identifier. PID’s for email families should also be
preserved.
Path on production disk to any
native-produced documents.
Title of document or email
subject.
Author of a document.
Document Creation date / email sent date. Must be in
mm/dd/yyyy
format.
Creation time of the native file
GMT/CST/time is was created
in/Needs to be in military
format.
Date native file was last
modified. Needs to be in
mm/dd/yyyy format

3
4

7

CUSTODIAN

8
9
10

ATTACH_RANGE

11
12
13
14

FILE_EXT
FILE_NAME

15
HASH
16
17
18
19
NATIVE_PATH
20
21
22

TITLE
AUTHOR
CREATE DATE

23
24
25

TIME_CREATED

26
27

DATE_LAST_MOD

28
6211732_1

ESI and Hard Copy
ESI and Hard Copy

ESI and Hard Copy

ESI
ESI

ESI

ESI
ESI
ESI
ESI

ESI

ESI

Case 2:14-cv-00387-RCJ-GWF Document 56 Filed 07/17/15 Page 9 of 9

1

Field Name

Description/ Comments

Fields for ESI and/or Hard
Copy

TIME_LAST_MOD

Time native file was last
modified. GMT/CST/time is
/was created in/Needs to be in
military format.
Author of e-mail Message
Recipients of the e-mail
message
Recipient of Carbon Copies of
the e-mail message

ESI

2
3
4
5
6

FROM
TO

7
CC/BCC
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6211732_1

ESI (e-mail)
ESI (e-mail)
ESI (e-mail)