In this FMLA case, the court denied a request for forensic examination of the plaintiff’s devices, finding that it exceeded the scope of discovery.
In this FCRA case, the court granted a motion to compel in part and narrowed the scope of discovery, but held that some information was…
The court compelled production of files in native format, citing Rule 34, the parties’ agreement, and the potential relevance of native-format files.
The court denied sanctions where the plaintiff “accidentally” deleted emails, rejecting as “speculative” the claim that she had a duty to preserve.
The plaintiff stated that he “will produce” responsive discovery when it is available; the court ordered him to supplement this inadequate response.
In this fraudulent inducement claim, the magistrate considered the permissible scope of discovery for the parties’ cross-motions to compel.