Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-06972/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-06972-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 367
Nature of Suit: TORTS - Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

1

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADRIAN HOLLEY, et al.,

Plaintiff(s),

vs. 

GILEAD SCIENCES INC.,

Defendant(s).

This document relates to: 

 ALL ACTIONS

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case Number: 3:18-cv-06972-JST

[Consolidated with 3:19-cv-00481-JST]

Assigned to: Hon. Jon S. Tigar

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY 

OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED 

INFORMATION FOR STANDARD 

LITIGATION

1. PURPOSE

This Order will govern discovery of electronically stored information (“ESI”) in this case

as a supplement to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court’s Guidelines for the Discovery 

of Electronically Stored Information, and any other applicable orders and rules. 

2. COOPERATION

The parties are aware of the importance the Court places on cooperation and commit to

cooperate in good faith throughout the matter consistent with this Court’s Guidelines for the 

Discovery of ESI. 

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 1 of 13
2

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

3. LIAISON

The parties have identified liaisons to each other who are and will be knowledgeable

about and responsible for discussing their respective ESI. Each e-discovery liaison will be, or 

have access to those who are, knowledgeable about the technical aspects of e-discovery, 

including the location, nature, accessibility, format, collection, search methodologies, and 

production of ESI in this matter. The parties will rely on the liaisons, as needed, to confer about 

ESI and to help resolve disputes without court intervention. Any attorney representing a party in 

the case, including the e-discovery liaison, may participate in meet-and-confer conferences, and 

it is not required that the e-discovery liaison be present for the parties to meet and confer about 

matters involving ESI. 

Plaintiffs Identify:

Lauren Akers

Hilliard Martinez Gonzales LLP

719 S. Shoreline Blvd. 

Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 

Lakers@hmglawfirm.com

361-882-1612

Defendant Identifies:

Scott A. Carlson 

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

233 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 8000 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

scarlson@seyfarth.com 

312-460-5946

4. PRESERVATION

The parties are conferring on their preservation obligations, including specific custodians

and non-custodial sources for preservation purposes, and agree that preservation of potentially 

relevant ESI will be reasonable and proportionate. To reduce the costs and burdens of preservation 

and to ensure proper ESI is preserved, the parties agree that: 

a) The parties will exchange a list of the types of ESI (custodial and non-custodial) they

believe should be preserved and the custodians, or general job titles or descriptions of

custodians, for whom they believe ESI should be preserved, e.g., “HR head,”

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 2 of 13
3

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

“scientist,” and “marketing manager.” The parties shall add or remove custodians as 

reasonably necessary;

c) The parties will agree on the number of custodians per party for whom ESI will be

preserved after they exchange information about the parties’ custodial and noncustodial sources of relevant ESI;

d) These data sources are not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) and ESI from these sources will be preserved

but not searched, reviewed, or produced: To be determined;

e) Among the sources of data the parties agree are not reasonably accessible, the parties

agree not to preserve the following:

1. Deleted, shadowed, fragmented, residual, or cached data, temporary files,

random access memory (“RAM”), or ESI that would only be accessible by

taking a forensic (bit stream) image of a device.

2. Data in metadata fields that are frequently updated automatically, such as lastopened dates.

3. Voicemails or instant messages.

4. Server, system, or network logs.

5. Information stored on cellular telephones, including but not limited to text

messages, voicemails, and telephone call history.

6. Corrupted data or data containing viruses.

7. Back up tapes or other storage media used for disaster recovery purposes.

8. Personal social media content of Gilead employees.

9. Social media content that by its nature is automatically deleted by the

application, settings, operating system or other system related activity.

Additional data sources that are not reasonably accessible may be identified as a result of 

investigation. The parties will meet and confer regarding any disagreement about the 

accessibility of such additional data sources. 

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 3 of 13
4

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

f) In addition to the agreements above, the parties agree data from these sources (a) could

contain relevant information but (b) under the proportionality factors, should not be

preserved: To be determined.

5. SEARCH

The parties agree that in responding to an initial Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 request, or earlier if

appropriate, they will meet and confer about methods to search ESI in order to identify ESI that is 

subject to production in discovery and filter out ESI that is not subject to discovery. Nothing 

herein shall limit a party’s right to use search terms, date ranges and/or technology assisted review 

tools to tailor its review and production. 

6. PRODUCTION FORMATS

The parties agree to produce documents in the formats described below. The parties agree

not to degrade the searchability of documents as part of the document production process. 

a. Images. The parties will produce images in Group IV Single Page TIFF format, scanned

at 300 DPI, with Bates numbers applied on the bottom right. Confidentiality designations

will be applied on the bottom left. Both stamps to be situated so as to not block or

obliterate underlying text. Files shall be named by BegBates. All hidden text (e.g., track

changes, hidden columns, mark-ups, notes) shall be expanded and rendered in the image

file.

b. Native Files. The parties will produce spreadsheets (e.g., Excel, CSV, and other

delimited text files) and multimedia files in native format where reasonably available,

with the exception of native files that correspond to produced documents that have been

redacted. Where documents are produced in native format, the Parties shall rename the

file to the BegBates Number and include any confidentiality designation therein as well.

The Parties shall provide placeholder images with Bates and confidentiality branding for

each natively produced document.

c. Color Documents. If an original document or ESI item contains color markings and it is

necessary to see those markings in their original color to understand the meaning or

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 4 of 13
5

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

content of the document, then the receiving party may, in good faith, request that the 

document or ESI item be produced in its original colors, and such a request will not be 

unreasonably denied by the producing party.

d. Parent-Child Relationships. Parent-child relationships (e.g., the association between

emails and attachments) will be preserved. Email attachments will be consecutively

produced with the parent email, and families will be associated using attachment range

metadata as specified in Exhibit A.

e. Bates Numbering. All documents produced in image format will include a legible,

unique page identifier (“Bates Number”) electronically embossed onto each page at a

location that is reasonably intended to not obliterate, conceal, or interfere with any

information in the document. No other legend or stamp will be placed on the images

other than a confidentiality legend (where applicable), redactions (consistent with any

other protective orders or applicable law), and if desired by a party, a document control

number separate from the Bates Number. With respect to the identification of files

produced in their native format, the parties shall identify each file produced using the

BegBates Number as the name, and link in the applicable load file.

f. File Naming Conventions. Each TIFF Image shall be named with the unique Bates

Number of the page of document. Each corresponding text file shall also be named with

the BegBates Number of the document. In the event the Bates Number contains a symbol

and/or character that cannot be included in a file name, the symbol and/or character will

be omitted from the file name.

g. Load Files. The parties shall produce a Concordance load file with each production.

Each load file shall include the metadata fields provided in Exhibit A to the extent that

they are available as a part of standard processing. The parties shall meet and confer to

the extent reasonably necessary to facilitate the import and use of the produced materials

with commercially available document management or litigation support software.

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 5 of 13
6

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

h. Extracted Text/OCRed Text. The parties shall produce extracted text in ASCII format

where text can be extracted, or OCR files obtained from each produced document or

image to the extent possible and subject to the inherent limitation of the quality of the

image and OCR capabilities. The OCR and extracted text files shall be produced in a

manner suitable for importing the information into commercially available document

management or litigation support software.

i. De-duplication. ESI collected for preservation may be de-duplicated on a global, rather

than per-custodian level using MD5 hash, SHA-1 hash, or any other hash value. For

emails, de-duplication can utilize a combination of hashed metadata fields. Further, the

“most inclusive thread” may be produced in lieu of each and every email thread element

as long as the most inclusive thread does not omit any branches of a particular email

exchange or thread. Documents and ESI with the same content but different metadata

can also be identified through the use of near-duplication technology, provided that only

documents identified by such technology are 100% near-duplicates shall be considered

duplicates for purposes of this paragraph.

j. Structured Data. To the extent a response to a discovery request requires production of

discoverable ESI contained in a database, information typically will be produced via a

standard report using the source’s built in reporting capability or as an export of the

structured data in a format compatible with Microsoft Excel or Microsoft Access. The

production of data via report or export is without prejudice to the requesting party

requesting the information be produced in a different format, and the parties shall meet

and confer regarding the relevant fields, the data sought to be produced, and the requested

form of the production.

k. Privilege Log. Any document falling within the scope of any request for production or

subpoena as negotiated by the parties that is withheld on the basis of a claim of attorneyclient privilege, work-product, or any other claim of privilege or immunity from

discovery shall be identified by the producing party in a privilege log, which contains the

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 6 of 13
7

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

information required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5). The privilege log shall 

be in an electronic format that allows text searching and organization of data. An e-mail 

thread contained within a single document need only be recorded once on the producing 

party’s privilege log, even if a privilege is asserted over multiple portions of the thread, 

provided that all recipients, including copyees, are listed. Privilege log identification is 

not required for communications exchanged between the producing party and their 

litigation counsel or among counsel for the producing party after May 8, 2018, the date 

of filing of the first of the related actions. Communications may be identified on a 

privilege log by category, rather than individually, subject to the parties’ meet and confer 

about the contents of any categorical privilege log and a party’s right to request a 

document-by-document log for specific categories of documents upon articulating a good 

faith basis for the request. Notwithstanding a claim of privilege, any purportedly 

privileged document containing non-privileged matter must be produced with the 

purportedly privileged portion redacted, with the redacted portion indicated on the 

document itself, indicating the reason for the redaction. A privilege log shall be provided 

by the producing party to the receiving party within 45 days following the delivery of 

any applicable production, unless there is good cause for delay. Redacted documents 

need not be logged as long as (a) for e-mails, the bibliographic information is not redacted 

(b) for non-e-mail documents, the redaction and reason for such redaction is noted on the

face of the document, and (c) for all documents, a metadata field consistent with the

requirements of § 6(l) indicates that the document contains redactions.

l. Redactions. Redacted files should be produced as PDFs or TIFFs in redacted form, with

applicable text files, or PDF text layers, containing extracted or OCRed text acquired

after redaction. A metadata field accompanying the document production shall indicate

that the document contains redactions and the reason for the redactions. The redacting

party shall use consistent terminology to reflect the reason(s) for the redactions. A party

may employ native redaction techniques so long as the method of redaction employed

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 7 of 13
8 

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

does not significantly impair the usability or searchability of the non-redacted portions 

of the redacted item and the fact of alteration is disclosed.

7. PHASING

When a party propounds discovery requests pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34, the parties agree

to phase the production of ESI and the initial production shall be consistent with the Court’s April 

23, 2019 Scheduling Order, ECF No. 63. Following the initial production, the parties will continue 

to prioritize the order of subsequent productions. 

8. DOCUMENTS PROTECTED FROM DISCOVERY

As provided in the Protective Order in this litigation, and pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 502(d),

the production of a privileged or work-product-protected document, whether inadvertent or 

otherwise, is not a waiver of privilege or protection from discovery in this case or in any other 

federal or state proceeding, arbitration, patent proceeding, or other administrative proceeding. For 

example, the mere production of privileged or work-product-protected documents in this case as 

part of a mass production is not itself a waiver in this case or in any other federal or state 

proceeding, arbitration, patent proceedings, or other administrative proceedings. Nor shall the fact 

of production by any producing party in this action be used as a basis for arguing that a claim of 

privilege or work-product has been waived in any other proceeding. This non-waiver order shall 

be interpreted to provide the maximum protection allowed by law. 

9. MODIFICATION

This Stipulated Order may be modified by a Stipulated Order of the parties or by the Court

for good cause shown. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, through Counsel of Record.

Dated: May 3, 2019 /s/ Robert C. Hilliard

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Dated: May 3, 2019 /s/ Alycia A. Degen

Counsel for Defendant

Dated: May 7, 2019

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar 

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 8 of 13
9 

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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 forgoing Agreement is approved. 

Dated:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 9 of 13
10 

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

I am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to file the foregoing 

document. Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i), I hereby attest that the concurrence in the filing of this 

document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. 

DATED: May 3, 2019 /s/ Alycia A. Degen

Alycia A. Degen

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 10 of 13
11 

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

EXHIBIT A

Metadata Fields for Production 

Note: Metadata Field names may vary depending on the application which generates them. 

For example, Microsoft Outlook creates different Metadata Field names than does Lotus Notes. 

Accordingly, the chart below describes the Metadata Fields to be produced in generic, commonly 

used terms which the producing party is to adapt to the specific types of ESI it is producing. All 

metadata fields applicable to produced ESI should be filled with the appropriate information, if 

available.

Field Name Description Email

Loose 

Files/

Att.

StartBates The Bates number for the first page of 

the document. 

EndBates The Bates number for the last page of 

the document. 

Start

Attachment

The first Bates number of the first 

attachment to an email.

End

Attachment

The ending Bates number of the last 

page of the last attachment to an Email.

ParentBates First bates number of the parent 

document for each attachment record.

From The reported sender of an Email 

message.

To The reported recipient(s) of an Email 

message contained in the “To” field.

CC The reported recipient(s) of an Email 

message contained in the “CC” field.

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 11 of 13
12 

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

Field Name Description Email

Loose 

Files/

Att.

BCC The reported recipient(s) of an Email 

message contained in the “BCC” field. 

SentDate The date on which an Email was sent 

by the user’s Email software (if 

available) in Pacific time.

SentTime The time at which an Email was sent by 

the user’s Email software (if not 

included in SentDate) in Pacific time.

EmailSubject The Subject Line of an Email.

Attachment

Count 

The number of attachments to an Email 

FileName The file name. 

KIND Descriptor for the kind of document. 

Sample values include: :Calendar 

Entry; Contact; Database; Document; 

Drawing; Email; Image; Multimedia; 

No Data; Other Document; 

Presentation; Spreadsheet; System File; 

Unrecognised.

FileExt The file extension.

Author The author of the file as extracted from 

the file metadata.

CreatedDate The date the file was created as 

extracted from the file metadata.

CreatedTime The time the file was created as 

extracted from the file metadata.

LastModDate The date on which the file was last 

modified as extracted from the file 

metadata.

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 12 of 13
13 

STIPULATED ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

FOR STANDARD LITIGATION

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

Field Name Description Email

Loose 

Files/

Att.

LastModTime The time at which the file was last 

modified as extracted from the file 

metadata.

MD5Hash The MD-5 hash value of the file.

Custodian All custodian(s) or source(s) associated 

with the record. 

TEXTPATH The path to the extracted text for the 

file (if needed).

NATIVE

PATH

The path to the native document on the 

production media (where native file is 

produced). 

REDACTED “Redacted” (or other, similar 

indication) for redacted documents and 

indication of the reason for the 

redaction (e.g., “AC,” “WP,” “PII” or 

similar); otherwise, blank. 

Case 3:18-cv-06972-JST Document 72 Filed 05/07/19 Page 13 of 13