Rule 30(b)(6) May See First Substantive Change in Nearly 50 Years
If left unmanaged, eDiscovery can quickly consume a significant slice of the litigation budget. In the worst case, such costs can dictate litigation strategy. Orrick focuses on ensuring that discovery is proportional to the value of the case. Our eDiscovery lawyers advocate at meet-and-confer, negotiate discovery plans to reduce cost and scope, and when necessary, play a leading role on motion practice and appeals. We have a record of successfully litigating eDiscovery challenges, including issues related to preservation, cost shifting, proportionality and spoliation claims.
Beyond litigation, we advise clients on information management issues associated with data migration and disposition, mergers, IPOs, and acquisitions. We routinely create information governance and records management programs for emerging and Fortune 100 companies.
We also advise clients on a variety of data privacy and security issues, including those related to cross-border transfer of data.
We were retained after a motion for sanctions was granted in IP litigation. We prevailed on a motion to reconsider and the court reversed its decision to sanction the party with an adverse inference.
We were retained to assist with trial strategy in a high profile mass tort litigation with an MDL proceeding and consolidated state court litigation wherespoliation is a key issue.
We served as ediscovery liaison for defendants’ steering committee on an antitrust MDL and negotiated comprehensive ESI protocol.
We worked with a multinational company to develop and implement an internal eDiscovery archive, preservation, collection and processing solution along with record retention policy and schedule.
We serve as national discovery counsel for several technology companies and have standardized procedures, creating toolkits of processes, ESI protocols, production specifications, model protective orders and clawback agreements.
In an ongoing securities action, we assisted the case team in litigating the sufficiency of collection and search protocols, prevailing on a case dispositive motion to compel and motion for sanctions.
We won a motion for protective order denying further restoration of backup tapes and compelling cost shifting of both vendor and attorney review costs. The client paid less than $10,000 for the review and restoration of backup tapes originally estimated at $1,500,000.
In commercial litigation, we prevailed on a motion to quash deposition notice on preservation, collection and production topics avoiding unnecessary cost and disruption for our client.
We assisted the case team and client in identifying, preparing and presenting the client's preservation, collection and IT infrastructure 30(b)(6) witness.
We assisted a financial institution with post-merger reorganization efforts in areas of preservation, records management, data disposition, and e-mail management.
When a multinational client relocated its operations, we advised on the disposition of stale information and transfer of company data overseas.
We assisted a client with the identification of cost savings available through in-sourcing and out-sourcing, including potential return on investment for in-sourced services and technologies.
We assisted an emerging company in creation of information governance policy and procedure in anticipation of an initial public offering.
We were retained by a large West Coast bank to create detailed records retention schedules for each of its business divisions.
We assisted a client in creating an information governance checklist for use in due diligence and then integration of the acquired entity.
October.24.2017 - October.25.2017