Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cosmos Granite (West), LLC v. Minagrex Corp.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

December 11, 2019

COSMOS GRANITE (WEST), LLC, a Washington limited liability company, Plaintiff,
v.
MINAGREX CORPORATION, d/b/a MGX Stone, Defendant.

          SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. Rachel S. Black, Alexander W. Aiken, Attorneys for Plaintiff

          BYRNES KELLER CROMWELL LLP John A. Tondini, Joshua B. Selig

          STOKES LAWRENCE, P.S. Raymond S. Weber Attorneys for Defendant

          AGREEMENT REGARDING DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION AND ORDER

          RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         The parties hereby stipulate to the following provisions regarding the discovery of electronically stored information (“ESI”) in this matter:

         A. General Principles

         1. An attorney's zealous representation of a client is not compromised by conducting discovery in a cooperative manner. The failure of counsel or the parties to litigation to cooperate in facilitating and reasonably limiting discovery requests and responses raises litigation costs and contributes to the risk of sanctions.

         2. The proportionality standard set forth in Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1) must be applied in each case when formulating a discovery plan. To further the application of the proportionality standard in discovery, requests for production of ESI and related responses should be reasonably targeted, clear, and as specific as possible.

         B. ESI Disclosures

         Within 21 days of the entry of this Order, or at a later time if agreed to by the parties, each party shall disclose:

         1. Custodians. The five custodians most likely to have discoverable ESI in their possession, custody or control, if there are five such custodians. The custodians shall be identified by name, title, connection to the instant litigation, and the type of the information under his/her control. If less than five custodians are named, a statement for the reasons why shall be given such that the opposing party may determine whether additional custodians should be identified.

         2. Non-custodial Data Sources. A list of non-custodial data sources (e.g. shared drives, servers, etc.), if any, likely to contain discoverable ESI.

         3. Third-Party Data Sources. A list of third-party data sources, if any, likely to contain discoverable ESI (e.g. third-party email and/or mobile device providers, “cloud” storage, etc.) and, for each such source, the extent to which a party is (or is not) able to preserve information stored in the third-party data source.

         4. Inaccessible Data. A list of data sources, if any, likely to contain discoverable ESI (by type, date, custodian, electronic system or other criteria sufficient to specifically identify the data source) that a party asserts is not reasonably accessible under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)(B). Section (C)(3) below sets forth data sources and ESI which are not required to be preserved by the parties. Those data sources and ESI do not need to be included on this list

         C. Preservation of ESI

         The parties acknowledge that they have a common law obligation to take reasonable and proportional steps to preserve discoverable information in the party's possession, custody or control. With ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.