Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05298/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05298-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

FOR PATENT LITIGATION

NO. 3:14-CV-05298-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

KALPANA SRINIVASAN (S.B. 

#237460)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950

Los Angeles, California 90067-6029

Telephone: (310) 789-3100

Facsimile: (310) 789-3150

ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com

BARRY BARNETT (Pro Hac Vice)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

901 Main Street, Suite 5100

Dallas, Texas 75202

Telephone: 214-754-1900

Facsimile: 214-754-1933

bbarnett@susmangodfrey.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

AMERICAN NAVIGATION SYSTEMS, 

INC.

[Additional Counsel listed on Signature 

Page] 

MAX L. TRIBBLE, JR. (Pro Hac Vice)

JOSEPH S. GRINSTEIN (Pro Hac Vice)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100

Houston, Texas 77002

Telephone: 713-651-9366

Facsimile: 713-654-6666

mtribble@susmangodfrey.com

jgrinstein@susmangodfrey.com

PATRICK C. BAGEANT (Pro Hac Vice)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800

Seattle, WA 98101-3000

Telephone: 206-516-3880

Facsimile: 206-516-3883

pbageant@susmangodfrey.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

AMERICAN NAVIGATION SYSTEMS, 

INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC., and SAMSUNG 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, 

LLC,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:14-cv-05298-JST

STIPULATION & ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY OF 

ELECTRONICALLY STORED 

INFORMATION FOR PATENT 

LITIGATION

Case 3:14-cv-05298-JST Document 100 Filed 03/11/15 Page 1 of 6
- 2 -

ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

FOR PATENT LITIGATION

NO. 3:14-CV-05298-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Upon the stipulation of the parties, the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. This Order supplements all other discovery rules and orders. It streamlines 

Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”) production to promote a “just, speedy, and inexpensive 

determination of this action, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1.”

2. This Order may be modified in the Court‟s discretion or by stipulation. The parties 

shall jointly submit any proposed modifications within 30 days after the Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 16 Conference. 

3. As in all cases, costs may be shifted for disproportionate ESI production requests 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. Likewise, a party‟s nonresponsive or dilatory 

discovery tactics are cost-shifting considerations.

4. A party‟s meaningful compliance with this Order and efforts to promote efficiency 

and reduce costs will be considered in cost-shifting determinations.

5. The parties are expected to comply with the District‟s E-Discovery Guidelines 

(“Guidelines”) and are encouraged to employ the District‟s Model Stipulated Order Re: the 

Discovery of Electronically Stored Information and Checklist for Rule 26(f) Meet and Confer 

regarding Electronically Stored Information. 

6. General ESI production requests under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 34 and 45 

shall not include email or other forms of electronic correspondence (collectively “email”). To 

obtain email parties must propound specific email production requests.

7. Email production requests shall only be propounded for specific issues, rather than 

general discovery of a product or business.

8. Email production requests shall be phased to occur after the parties have 

exchanged initial disclosures and basic documentation about the patents, the prior art, the accused 

instrumentalities, and the relevant finances. While this provision does not require the production 

of such information, the Court encourages prompt and early production of this information to 

promote efficient and economical streamlining of the case.

9. Email production requests shall identify the custodian, search terms, and time 

Case 3:14-cv-05298-JST Document 100 Filed 03/11/15 Page 2 of 6
- 3 -

ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

FOR PATENT LITIGATION

NO. 3:14-CV-05298-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

frame. The parties shall cooperate to identify the proper custodians, proper search terms and 

proper timeframe as set forth in the Guidelines.

10. Each requesting party shall limit its email production requests to a total of five 

custodians per producing party for all such requests. The parties may jointly agree to modify this 

limit without the Court‟s leave. The Court shall consider contested requests for additional 

custodians upon showing a distinct need based on the size, complexity, and issues of this specific 

case. Cost-shifting may be considered as part of any such request.

11. Each requesting party shall limit its email production requests to a total of ten

search terms per custodian per party. The parties may jointly agree to modify this limit without 

the Court‟s leave. The Court shall consider contested requests for additional search terms per 

custodian, upon showing a distinct need based on the size, complexity, and issues of this specific 

case. The Court encourages the parties to confer on a process to test the efficacy of the search 

terms. The search terms shall be narrowly tailored to particular issues. Indiscriminate terms, 

such as the producing company‟s name or its product name, are inappropriate unless combined 

with narrowing search criteria that sufficiently reduce the risk of overproduction. A conjunctive 

combination of multiple words or phrases (e.g., “computer” and “system”) narrows the search and 

shall count as a single search term. A disjunctive combination of multiple words or phrases (e.g., 

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

separate search term unless they are variants of the same word. Use of narrowing search criteria 

(e.g., “and,” “but not,” “w/x”) is encouraged to limit the production and shall be considered when 

determining whether to shift costs for disproportionate discovery. Should a party serve email 

production requests with search terms beyond the limits agreed to by the parties or granted by the 

Court pursuant to this paragraph, this shall be considered in determining whether any party shall 

bear all reasonable costs caused by such additional discovery.

12. Nothing in this Order prevents the parties from agreeing to use technology assisted 

review and other techniques insofar as their use improves the efficacy of discovery. Such topics 

should be discussed pursuant to the District‟s E-Discovery Guidelines.

Case 3:14-cv-05298-JST Document 100 Filed 03/11/15 Page 3 of 6
- 4 -

ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

FOR PATENT LITIGATION

NO. 3:14-CV-05298-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IT IS SO STIPULATED, through Counsel of Record.

Dated: March 10, 2015

By: _/s/ Patrick C. Bageant_________

KALPANA SRINIVASAN (S.B. #237460)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950

Los Angeles, California 90067-6029

Telephone: (310) 789-3100

Facsimile: (310) 789-3150

ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com

BARRY BARNETT (Pro Hac Vice)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

901 Main Street, Suite 5100

Dallas, Texas 75202

Telephone: 214-754-1900

Facsimile: 214-754-1933

bbarnett@susmangodfrey.com

MAX L. TRIBBLE, JR. (Pro Hac Vice)

JOSEPH S. GRINSTEIN (Pro Hac Vice)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100

Houston, Texas 77002

Telephone: 713-651-9366

Facsimile: 713-654-6666

mtribble@susmangodfrey.com

jgrinstein@susmangodfrey.com

PATRICK C. BAGEANT (Pro Hac Vice)

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800

Seattle, WA 98101-3000

Telephone: 206-516-3880

Facsimile: 206-516-3883

pbageant@susmangodfrey.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

AMERICAN NAVIGATION SYSTEMS, INC.

Dated: March 10, 2015

By: ___/s/ David Almeling______________

MICHAEL K. PLIMACK (S.B. #133869)

mplimack@cov.com

CHRISTINE S. HASKETT (S.B. #188053)

chaskett@cov.com

COVINGTON & BURLING LLP

One Front Street

San Francisco, CA 94111

Ph: (415) 591-6000

Fax: (415) 591-6091

DARIN W. SNYDER (S.B. #136003)

dsnyder@omm.com

DAVID ALMELING (S.B. #235449)

dalmeling@omm.com

MARK LIANG (S.B. #278487)

mliang@omm.com

O‟MELVENY & MYERS LLP

Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor

San Francisco, California 94111-3823

Tel: (415) 984-8700 Fax: (415) 984-8701

MISHIMA ALAM (S.B. #271621)

malam@omm.com

O„MELVENY & MYERS LLP

1625 Eye Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20006

Tel: (202) 383-5300 Fax: (202) 383-5414

Attorneys for Defendants

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,

INC. 

Case 3:14-cv-05298-JST Document 100 Filed 03/11/15 Page 4 of 6
- 5 -

ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

FOR PATENT LITIGATION

NO. 3:14-CV-05298-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ATTORNEY ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3), I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the 

filing of this document has been obtained from each of its signatories.

Dated: March 10, 2015 By: /s/ David Almeling

David Almeling

Case 3:14-cv-05298-JST Document 100 Filed 03/11/15 Page 5 of 6
- 6 -

ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

FOR PATENT LITIGATION

NO. 3:14-CV-05298-JST

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IT IS ORDERED that the foregoing Agreement is approved.

Dated: March 11, 2015

Honorable Jon S. Tigar

United States District Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar 

Case 3:14-cv-05298-JST Document 100 Filed 03/11/15 Page 6 of 6