MCFADYEN et al v. DUKE UNIVERSITY et al

Filing 307

RESPONSE in Opposition re #297 First MOTION to Compel filed by DUKE UNIVERSITY. Replies due by 11/2/2012. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1- Email from Ms. Wells to Mr. Ekstrand, #2 Exhibit 2- Transcript from Rule 26(f) Conference, #3 Exhibit 3- Email from Mr. Ellis to Mr. Ekstrand, #4 Exhibit 4- Dukes Responses to Plaintiffs First Requests for Production, #5 Exhibit 5- Dukes Responses to Plaintiffs Third Requests for Production, #6 Exhibit 6- Dukes Responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories, #7 Exhibit 7- Dukes Amended Responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories, #8 Exhibit 8- Dukes First Supplemental Response to Plaintiffs Third Requests for Production, #9 Exhibit 9- Dukes Responses to Plaintiffs Fourth Requests for Production, #10 Exhibit 10- Dukes Responses to Plaintiffs Second Set of Interrogatories, #11 Exhibit 11- Subpoena to Richard Brodhead, #12 Exhibit 12- Duke Universitys Response to Plaintiffs First Requests for Admissions)(SUN, PAUL)

EXHIBIT 3

From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Dick Ellis
Thursday, September 22, 2011 3:47 PM
'Robert Ekstrand ([e-mail])'
'Stefanie Sparks'; Dixie Wells
McFadyen ESI

Bob:
As you will recall, we have long said, both at the pretrial
conference before Magistrate Judge Dixon and at other times,
that we have carefully considered and concluded that the ESI
from 17 custodians will yield substantial and complete data
without being “unreasonably cumulative or duplicative.”
Searching the 17, considering the volume of electronic data they
have, is proving to be very expensive; searching beyond this
number will escalate the expense hugely. I know neither of us is
motivated to cause unnecessary expense. In the spirit of full
but manageable discovery, we continue to propose that the Duke
defendants' initial review of electronically stored information
be restricted to the 17 custodians. As we have noted before,
these 17 custodians have more than 800 GB of information, which
is, of course, an enormous amount.
Our understanding would be that we would review and produce from
this set of ESI. If, after you’ve had a chance to review what we
produce, that review (or other discovery) points to electronic
materials that are not within the material of the 17, we are
certainly prepared to hear from you, consider any requests you
make, and confer.
The 17 custodians that we have identified for Claims 21 and 24,
are:
• Zoila Airall
• Richard Brodhead
• Stephen Bryan
• Robert Dean
• Matthew Drummond
• Roland Getliffe
• Aaron Graves
• Kate Hendricks
1

• Larry Moneta
• Sara Jane Raines
• Michelle Rasmussen
• Judith Ruderman
• Gary Smith
• Robert Steel
• Greg Stotsenberg
• Suzanne Wasiolek
• Gerald Wilson
I think you will agree, these custodians are significant to your
discovery efforts. I know their names will be familiar to you,
but if you have any questions about who any of them are, or what
role they played with regard to the claims at issue, please let
me know.
Best regards -- Dick Ellis

2