Adacel, Inc. v. Adsync Techs., Inc., » The Florida E-Discovery Case Law Database » Levin College of Law » University of Florida

Adacel, Inc. v. Adsync Techs., Inc.,

Adacel, Inc. v. Adsync Techs., Inc.,

Case Date: 03/28/2019
Citation: 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52366
Court Type: Federal District
Court: Middle District of Florida (M.D. Fla.)
Judge: Federal Magistrate Judge: Thomas B. Smith
Rule(s): Rule 26(f)
Issues:

The Defendant moved the court to establish an ESI protocol compelling the Plaintiffs to engage third party vendors and set a date by which the parties would be required to reach agreement on document custodians and search terms. Defendant claimed Plaintiffs and Defendant had not been able to resolve various issues fore over a month. Both parties were admittedly “highly sophisticated technology companies.”

Resolution:

The court denied Defendant’s Motion to Compel Appropriate E-Discovery Protocol without prejudice. The Defendant had not sufficiently established that the parties had exhausted good faith negotiations to resolve the e-discovery issues the case presented. The court reminded the parties that discovery was designed to be self-regulating and conducted with a minimum of judicial involvement. The court further recommended various Sedona Conference publications to the parties.

Relevant Documents:

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Appropriate E-Discovery Protocol

Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Compel Discovery Protocol

Order on Defendant’s Motion to Compel Appropriate E-Discovery Protocol

E-Discovery Issues: Discovery Order, Motion to Compel
E-discovery Tags: Case Management Order (CMO), Sedona Conference

Published: May 6th, 2019

Category: Uncategorized


Deprecated: Theme without comments.php is deprecated since version 3.0.0 with no alternative available. Please include a comments.php template in your theme. in /h/cnswww-ediscovery.law/ediscovery.law.ufl.edu/htdocs/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5411

Comments are closed.