Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486-26/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

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

Master File No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL) – [PROPOSED] ORDER FOLLOWING JUNE 23, 2006 DISCOVERY 

CONFERENCE

sf-2152387

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re JDS UNIPHASE CORPORATION 

SECURITIES LITIGATION

This Document Applies To: All Actions. Master File No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL)

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

FOLLOWING JUNE 23, 2006 

DISCOVERY CONFERENCE

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 512 Filed 06/28/06 Page 1 of 4
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

Master File No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL) – [PROPOSED] ORDER FOLLOWING JUNE 23, 2006 DISCOVERY 

CONFERENCE

sf-2152387

1

On June 23, 2006, the Court held a discovery conference in this case to discuss the 

production of metadata from departmental shared drives from which JDSU previously produced 

TIFF images without metadata on March 15, March 22, and March 31, 2006 (the “Departmental 

Shared Drives”). Present in Court were Terri Garland and Philip T. Besirof of Morrison & 

Foerster LLP for the JDSU Defendants; and John Janes, a representative from JDSU’s vendor, 

Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP (“Deloitte FAS”). Attending by telephone were 

Anthony J. Harwood and Conor R. Crowley, of Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP, for Lead

Plaintiff; Lead Plaintiff’s expert, John Ashley, of First Advantage Litigation Consulting; and

Kelley Worley and Dean Halle, representatives of Lead Plaintiffs’ vendor, Encore Legal 

Solutions (“Encore”). For the reasons stated at the conference, the Court rules as follows:

1. JDSU shall direct Deloitte FAS to gather the media containing the SQL Server 

databases that store the Discovery Cracker output created by processing the Departmental Shared 

Drives. Once that media is gathered, Deloitte FAS shall perform the work necessary to bring that 

media on-line for processing, copying, and production, as described below. Deloitte FAS shall 

then create copies (the “Copies”) of the SQL Server databases on removable media for production 

to Lead Plaintiff.

2. The Copies shall include all of the TIFF images, metadata, and full text fields 

present on the Discovery Cracker output in the SQL Server databases, including metadata for the 

encrypted, password-protected, or corrupted documents that are to be produced as part of a clean- up production from the Departmental Shared Drives. Any encrypted, password-protected or 

corrupted documents from the Departmental Shared Drives produced after the clean-up 

production will be produced with TIFF images, all of the metadata, and full text fields. The 

Copies shall not, however, include non-responsive or privileged documents.

3. Deloitte FAS estimates that the cost of producing the Copies will be $9,450 to 

$14,175. This cost will be split evenly between Lead Plaintiff and JDSU. Lead Plaintiff’s 

contribution, however, will be limited to $5,905, which is one-half of the mid-point ($11,810) of 

Deloitte FAS’s estimate. In addition, all costs incurred by Deloitte FAS in removing privileged 

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 512 Filed 06/28/06 Page 2 of 4
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

Master File No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL) – [PROPOSED] ORDER FOLLOWING JUNE 23, 2006 DISCOVERY 

CONFERENCE

sf-2152387

2

documents from the SQL Server databases shall be tracked and invoiced separately, with those 

costs to be borne solely by JDSU. 4. Deloitte FAS shall complete its work within 6 business days of the latter of: (1) 

the date on which JDSU receives written confirmation that (a) Plaintiffs do not object to Deloitte 

FAS conducting the work described above, and (b) Plaintiffs will not use the fact that Deloitte 

FAS has done the work described above as a basis for seeking to disqualify Morrison & 

Foerster LLP or Deloitte; or (2) the date on which the Proposed Order is entered by the Court. In 

turn, JDSU agrees that it will not assert that by allowing Deloitte FAS to conduct the work 

described above, Plaintiffs have waived any right to assert a conflict in connection with other 

work performed by Deloitte FAS. On the date the work is completed, Deloitte FAS shall provide 

counsel for Lead Plaintiff with an invoice by facsimile. Once Deloitte FAS receives the 

appropriate payment from Lead Plaintiff, it shall immediately ship the Copies to Lead Plaintiff, 

by overnight courier, for further processing.

5. Once Lead Plaintiff receives the Copies, it shall provide them to a vendor of its 

choosing. That vendor shall further process the data contained on the Copies to create load files 

containing metadata and text in a format sufficient to enable active searching of the metadata and 

text in a Concordance database. Lead Plaintiff’s vendor shall then copy the processed data and 

load files to removable media for production to JDSU. 6. The parties shall equally share the cost incurred by Lead Plaintiff’s preferred 

vendor in producing metadata, text and load files in a searchable format compatible with 

Concordance. JDSU’s contribution, however, will be limited to $9,055. 7. Lead Plaintiff’s preferred vendor shall complete its work within 6 business days of 

the date on which Lead Plaintiff receives the Copies from Deloitte FAS, and shall provide 

counsel for JDSU with an invoice by facsimile on the date it completes its work. Once Lead 

Plaintiff’s preferred vendor receives the appropriate payment from JDSU, it shall immediately 

ship the removable media containing the metadata, text, and load files to JDSU, by overnight 

courier.

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 512 Filed 06/28/06 Page 3 of 4
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

Master File No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL) – [PROPOSED] ORDER FOLLOWING JUNE 23, 2006 DISCOVERY 

CONFERENCE

sf-2152387

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ______________________________________

 The Honorable Elizabeth D. Laporte

 United States Magistrate Judge

Proposed Order submitted by JDSU.

June 28, 2006

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 512 Filed 06/28/06 Page 4 of 4