Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-00158/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-00158-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

1 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

SAM WILLIAMSON, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

McAFEE, INC., 

 Defendant. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

CLASS ACTION 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF 

ELECTRONICALLY STORED 

INFORMATION 

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. 

3. LIAISON 

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

knowledgeable about and responsible for discussing their respective ESI: 

PARTY LIAISON 

Plaintiff Roger N. Heller 

Defendant David S. Kurtzer-Ellenbogen 

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, 

[Re: Dkt. 67]

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 1 of 10
 

2 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

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. 

If the parties are unable to resolve any dispute about any issue in this Order, including 

but not limited to any disputes regarding the lists of custodians or search terms or regarding 

preservation issues, they may present the issue to the Court for resolution in compliance with 

the Court’s Standing Order re Civil Discovery Disputes. 

4. PRESERVATION 

The parties have discussed their preservation obligations and needs and agree that 

preservation of potentially relevant ESI will be reasonable and proportionate. The parties have 

met and conferred on multiple occasions regarding ESI and document preservation issues, and 

each party represents that it has taken reasonable and appropriate steps to preserve potentially 

relevant ESI. To reduce the costs and burdens of preservation and to ensure proper ESI is 

preserved, the parties agree that: 

a) Only ESI created, received, or modified on or after January 1, 2004 will be 

preserved (the parties may agree to shorter time period(s) to apply to particular 

document requests or sets of document requests, or for use in conducting electronic 

document searches); 

b) Within ten (10) days of the entry of this Order, each party shall propose lists of the 

types of ESI that it believes should be produced by it and the custodians (along with 

their job titles), or, as appropriate, the general job titles or descriptions of 

custodians, for whom it believes ESI should be preserved by it (e.g., “HR head,” 

“scientist,” and “marketing manager.” Within ten (10) days of receiving such 

proposed list, each party shall propose any additions or modifications to the other 

party’s proposed lists. The parties shall endeavor to come to an agreement 

regarding these issues in a timely manner, and shall add or remove ESI types during 

the litigation as agreed to by the parties. 

c) Based on the representations of Defendant that the following data sources are not 

reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 

26(b)(2)(B), ESI from these particular sources will not be preserved, searched, 

reviewed, or produced by Defendant even though they may contain relevant ESI. 

The parties may supplement or modify this list by agreement. 

i. “deleted,” “slack,” “fragmented,” “free,” or “unallocated” data on hard drives; 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 2 of 10
 

3 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

ii. random access memory (RAM) or other ephemeral data; 

iii. on-line access data such as temporary internet files, history, cache, cookies, 

etc.; 

iv. data in metadata fields that are frequently updated automatically, such as lastopened dates, except as may be provided herein; 

v. instant messaging; 

vi. automatically saved versions of documents; 

vii. system or executable files (.exe, .dll, etc.); 

viii. unreadable or corrupt files (that a document may be password protected does 

not, standing alone, mean that it falls within this category); 

ix. data from Blackberry, iPhone or other smartphone devices where the 

Producing Party believes based on its standard practices that the information 

contained therein is expected to be duplicative of other sources (e.g., other 

email systems); 

x. systems no longer in use that cannot be accessed; 

xi. text messages, such as cell phone to cell phone SMS messages, and voice mail 

messages; 

xii. materials retained primarily for backup or disaster recovery purposes, with the 

exception of McAfee’s 2013 yearly “snapshot” of portions of its servers that is 

stored on a data domain, which McAfee shall continue to preserve; and 

xiii. any other file types subsequently agreed by the Parties. 

d) The parties also agree that the parties are not required to obtain or preserve a physical

forensic image of any custodian’s computer or hard drive, provided that reasonable 

steps are taken to preserve potentially relevant material on such custodian’s computer 

or hard drive (excluding materials referenced in the preceding subsection). McAfee 

has taken such steps with respect to the custodians that it has identified as having 

material potentially relevant to this case, and will continue to do so as it identifies any 

additional such custodians going forward. 

e) The parties expressly agree that the preservation obligations specified in this section 

shall not be construed as an agreement with respect to collection, search, or 

production of any document or category of ESI, and that the agreement between the 

parties with respect to preservation shall be without prejudice to any objection that 

any party may make to collection, search, or production. 

5. SEARCH 

Custodians: Following receipt of initial Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 requests, the producing 

party shall provide the requesting party with a proposed initial list of custodians whose emails 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 3 of 10
 

4 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

and custodial files are to be searched for responding to such requests. The parties shall 

thereafter meet and confer in good faith to attempt to reach an agreement regarding the list. 

The parties currently anticipate, based on the respective representations made by the parties to 

one another during meet and confer, that the number of custodians will not exceed 15 

custodians per party, exclusive of any shared or departmental files. Additional custodians may 

be added for searches by agreement of the parties or Court Order. 

Search Terms: Following receipt of initial Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 requests, the producing 

party shall provide the requesting party with a proposed initial list of search terms to be used in 

searching email and custodial files for responding to such requests. The parties shall thereafter 

meet and confer in good faith to attempt to reach an agreement regarding the list. The parties 

anticipate that the number of terms will not exceed thirty (30), and that search terms will be 

narrowly tailored to particular issues, including conjunctive combinations of multiple words or 

phrases (e.g., “computer” and “system”) and narrowing search criteria (e.g., “and,” “but not,” 

or “w/x”) wherever possible. Indiscriminate terms, such as the name of software offered for 

subscription, or the name of a party, are inappropriate unless combined with narrowing search 

criteria that sufficiently reduce the risk of overproduction. Additional search terms may be 

added for further searches, and the list may be modified or supplemented, by agreement of the 

parties or Court Order. 

Other Files: Nothing in this section shall be read to obviate the need to preserve or 

search ESI sources besides emails and custodial files, including but not limited to shared and 

department level files. The parties shall meet and confer as necessary about methods to search 

ESI to identify ESI that is subject to production in discovery and filter out ESI that is not 

subject to discovery. However, conducting a search of ESI sources in accordance with this 

protocol and based upon the custodians and search terms agreed to by the parties or ordered by 

the Court (or any other agreement of the parties or Order of the Court as to a specific form or 

source of ESI, including but not limited to regarding shared or departmental level files) shall 

constitute a reasonable search for documents that satisfies the producing party’s obligations 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 4 of 10
 

5 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

under Rule 26(b)(2) as it relates to ESI sources. Nothing in this section shall be read to relieve 

the parties from producing relevant documents, subject to proper discovery requests, that the 

producing party is aware of, whether or not such documents are maintained in electronic 

format. 

6. PRODUCTION FORMATS 

Except as set forth herein, the parties shall produce documents as single page black and 

white tiff format files imaged at 300 dpi, Group IV compression; name each tiff file with a 

unique name matching the Bates number labeled on the corresponding page; and group every 

1000 tiffs into a new folder. The parties agree not to degrade the searchability of documents as 

part of the document production process. The searchable, extracted text for redacted 

documents will be replaced with OCR text. For documents originally created in color, the 

requesting party may, after reviewing such documents and as reasonably necessary, request 

that such documents be produced in compressed .JPG or similar format files. 

Image Load File

Documents will be produced with appropriate accompanying Concordance load files. 

The Concordance load files will contain the path to the extracted text files or the path to the 

OCR text file, the custodian of the document, the Bates number of the document, an indication 

of whether the document is redacted, and an indication of confidentiality designation. The text 

of the document shall not be included in the .dat file, but instead the .dat file shall include a 

link to the .txt file. For images, the parties will provide .OPT (Opticon) files. 

Document Text 

For documents that were originally stored as native electronic files and which do not 

have redactions, the extracted, full text from the body of each document will be produced in a 

separate .txt file named for the beginning Bates number of the document. For documents that 

were originally stored as native electronic files and which have redactions, OCR text will be 

produced from the redacted image(s) associated with each document as a separate .txt file for 

each document named for the beginning Bates number of the document. The text of the 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 5 of 10
 

6 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

document shall not be included in the .dat file, but instead the .dat file shall include a link to 

the .txt file. Any redacted material should be clearly labeled to show the redactions on the tiff 

image. 

Production of ESI in Native Format 

All non-privileged/unredacted files created by spreadsheet programs (e.g., Microsoft 

Excel) as well as other structured data coming from databases (e.g., Access, SQL) or comma 

delimited files (e.g., .csv) shall be produced in native format with a corresponding TIFF image 

of a slip sheet identifying the Bates stamp of the native file. In addition, all media files (e.g., 

video, .mpg, audio) shall be produced in native format with a corresponding TIFF image of a 

slip sheet identifying the Bates stamp of the native file. The producing party shall provide a 

relative file path or link to the native file in the production load file. 

Other than as specifically set forth herein, wholesale requests for production of all files, 

or all files of a certain type, in native format shall be avoided. A receiving party may request 

that particular documents, including but not limited to particular documents created by 

PowerPoint or other presentation programs, be produced in native format, provided that such 

requests are reasonable. The parties agree to cooperate to make any and all native productions 

reasonable and limited to avoid undue burden. 

No ESI produced in native format shall be manipulated, intentionally or otherwise, to 

change the appearance or substance of the document prior to its collection. ESI produced in 

native format should be named with the Bates number of the first page of the corresponding tiff 

production of the document (e.g., “ABC00001.xls,” “ABC00001.ppt”). The original file name 

shall be maintained in a way such that a party will be able to search for the original file name. 

Large Data Productions. 

With respect to large data productions (such as the production of customer and 

transactional data), the parties shall meet and confer as necessary regarding the format and 

logistics of the production, including as necessary conducting a call among the parties’ 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 6 of 10
 

7 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

technical personnel. 

Hard-Copy Documents 

Any documents that exist in hard copy must be scanned and produced in the required 

production format. 

Meet and Confer Among the Parties’ Technical Personnel 

If necessary, the parties shall conduct a meet and confer with the parties’ technical 

personnel to ensure that the processing and format of production is in compliance with this 

order. 

7. DE-DUPLICATION 

Parties may de-duplicate globally (e.g., across custodians) utilizing a standard, industry 

acceptable methodology. 

The parties may use software to identify and suppress lesser inclusive email threads 

(i.e., email threads that are contained entirely within a subsequent email thread) and are not 

required to produce lesser inclusive email threads as long they are produced as part of a longer 

inclusive email thread. However, the parties are required to preserve all suppressed documents 

and to produce in their entirety all lesser inclusive emails with attachments that are not part of 

the more inclusive email thread, and any tangential email threads. 

The parties agree that an email that includes content on the “bcc” or other blind copy 

field shall not be treated as duplicate of an email that does not include content in the “bcc” or 

other blind copy field, even if all remaining content in the email is identical. The parties will 

produce a single unique copy of a given e-mail message and its attachments, or standalone file, 

with references to each custodian/location in which a copy originally appeared as set forth in 

the metadata specifications below. In the case of duplicates maintained by custodians in 

different time zones, it is understood that the image and date/time metadata will reflect Pacific 

Standard Time (“PST”). 

With respect to logging, on a privilege log, longer inclusive email threads that a 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 7 of 10
 

8 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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

designating party asserts are entirely privileged (i.e., where all of the individual emails in the 

thread are claimed to be privileged), the parties shall continue to meet and confer about 

appropriate ways to manage the burden on the designating party of logging such entries while 

still providing the other party with sufficient information to evaluate the claim of privilege.. 

 8. DOCUMENT METADATA

Parties shall produce extracted metadata for each document in the form of a .dat file 

along with standard Concordance image load file, and include the following fields to the 

extent available, except that if the field contains privileged information, that privileged 

information may be redacted. Any redactions for privilege reasons shall be recorded on a 

privilege log: 

Field Description

Bates_Begin The Bates label of the first page of the document 

Bates_End The Bates label of the last page of the document 

Attach_Begin The Bates label of the first page of a family of documents (e.g., email and 

attachment) 

Attach_End The Bates label of the last page of a family of documents 

File Name The filename of an attachment or stand-alone e-file 

File Extension The file extension of the document (e.g., .doc, .xls) 

Subject The subject of an email 

Time_Zone The time zone used to process the document 

Sent_Date For email, the sent date of the message 

Sent_Time For email, the sent time of the message 

Received Date For email, the date the message was received 

Received Time For email, the time the message was received 

Message_ID For email, the message ID 

Create_Date For efiles or attachments, the document’s creation date or operating system 

creation date 

Create_Time For efiles or attachments, the document’s creation time or operating system 

creation time 

Modified_Date For efiles or attachments, document’s last modified date or operating system 

last modified date 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 8 of 10
 

9 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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 Description

Modified_Time For efiles or attachments, the document’s last modified time or operating 

system last modified time 

Author The author of a stand-alone efile or attachment 

From The sender of an email message 

To The recipients of an email message, in a semi-colon delimited multi-value list 

CC The copyee(s) of an email message, in a semi-colon delimited multi-value list 

BCC The blind copyee(s) of an email message, in a semi-colon delimited, multivalue list 

Custodians The custodian in whose file the document was found, and the custodians of 

any duplicates, in a semi-colon delimited multi-value list 

Modified_Author The author who last modified the document 

MD5 The calculated MD5 hash value of the document 

Native_File The file path to the location of the native file if produced natively 

OCR/Txt Path The relative path to the OCR/Txt Files 

Redaction Whether the document is redacted (Yes/No) 

AEO_Conf_Desig The confidentiality designation, if any, for the document pursuant to any 

protective order in the case 

9. RETENTION OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS 

Each party agrees to retain native electronic source documents for all electronically 

stored information produced in this litigation. Each party agrees to use reasonable measures to 

maintain the original native source documents in a manner so as to preserve the metadata 

associated with these electronic materials as it existed at the time of the original production in 

the event the review of such metadata becomes necessary. Notwithstanding this, each party 

understands and acknowledges that producing the metadata may affect some changes in the 

metadata itself, and agrees that any metadata change that results from production to requesting 

parties is permissible. 

10. MODIFICATION 

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

Court. 

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 9 of 10
 

10 Case No. 5:14-cv-00158-EJD (HRL) 

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION 

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 16, 2015 /s/ Roger N. Heller

 Roger N. Heller, Counsel for Plaintiff Sam Williamson 

Dated: March 16, 2015 /s/ David S. Kurtzer-Ellenbogen

 David S. Kurtzer-Ellenbogen, Counsel for Defendant 

McAfee, Inc. 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the foregoing Agreement is approved. 

Dated: 

Hon. Howard R. Lloyd 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

1222131.1 

March 19, 2015

Case 5:14-cv-00158-EJD Document 68 Filed 03/20/15 Page 10 of 10