Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01291/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01291-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James Hudson
Plaintiff
Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC
Defendant

Document Text:

S0519001/4841-8574-0342-1 No. 2:16-CV-01291-MCE-DB

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE DISCOVERY OF ESI

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

Derek H. Lim (Bar No. 209496)

Chad D. Greeson (Bar No. 251928)

ARCHER NORRIS

A Professional Law Corporation

2033 North Main Street, Suite 800

Walnut Creek, California 94596-3759

Telephone: 925.930.6600

Facsimile: 925.930.6620

dlim@archernorris.com

cgreeson@archernorris.com

Attorneys for Defendant 

SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO. OF ARIZONA, 

LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION

JAMES HUDSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO. OF 

ARIZONA, LLC, and DOES 1 through 50, 

inclusive,

Defendant.

Fed. Case No. 2:16-CV-01291-MCE-DB

[Honorable Morrison C. England, Jr.]

STIPULATED 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, 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 liaisons to each other who are and will be knowledgeable 

Case 2:16-cv-01291-MCE-DB Document 13 Filed 08/29/16 Page 1 of 4
S0519001/4841-8574-0342-1 2

No. 2:16-CV-01291-MCE-DB

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE DISCOVERY OF ESI

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

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.

4. PRESERVATION

The parties have discussed their preservation obligations and needs 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 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,” 

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

custodians as reasonably necessary;

(b) The parties will agree on the number of custodians per party for whom 

ESI will be preserved;

(c) The parties will exchange a list of data sources that may contain 

potentially relevant information but that are not reasonably accessible 

because of undue burden or cost pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) to 

the extent such data sources exist. These data sources include back-up 

media systems or systems no longer in use that cannot be accessed. ESI 

from these sources will be preserved but not searched, reviewed, or 

produced; 

(d) In addition to the agreements above, the parties may agree that data 

from certain sources (a) could contain relevant information but (b) under the 

proportionality factors, should not be preserved. 

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.

6. PRODUCTION FORMATS

The parties agree to produce documents in single-page PDF and/or TIFF file format. If 

particular documents warrant a different format, the parties will cooperate to arrange for the 

mutually acceptable production of such documents. The parties agree not to degrade the 

Case 2:16-cv-01291-MCE-DB Document 13 Filed 08/29/16 Page 2 of 4
S0519001/4841-8574-0342-1 3

No. 2:16-CV-01291-MCE-DB

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE DISCOVERY OF ESI

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

searchability of documents as part of the document production process. No party has an 

obligation to make its production text-searchable; however, if a party’s documents already exist 

in text-searchable format independent of this litigation, or are converted to text-searchable format 

for use in this litigation, including for use by the producing party’s counsel, then such documents 

shall be produced in the same text-searchable format at no cost to the receiving party.

7. DOCUMENTS PROTECTED FROM DISCOVERY

(a) 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. 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.

(b) Communications involving trial counsel that post-date the filing of the 

complaint need not be placed on a privilege log. Communications may be 

identified on a privilege log by category, rather than individually, if 

appropriate.

8. 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: August 19, 2016

LAW OFFICES OF T. JAMES FISHER

/s/ T. James Fisher

T. James Fisher

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JAMES HUDSON

Case 2:16-cv-01291-MCE-DB Document 13 Filed 08/29/16 Page 3 of 4
S0519001/4841-8574-0342-1 4

No. 2:16-CV-01291-MCE-DB

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER RE DISCOVERY OF ESI

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

Dated: August 19, 2016 ARCHER NORRIS

/s/ Chad D. Greeson

Derek H. Lim

Chad D. Greeson

Attorneys for Defendant

SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO. OF 

ARIZONA, LLC

ORDER

The forgoing Agreement is approved. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 26, 2016

Case 2:16-cv-01291-MCE-DB Document 13 Filed 08/29/16 Page 4 of 4