City of Colton v. American Promotional Events, Inc.
277 F.R.D. 578
C.D. Cal.2011Background
- This matter concerns United States’ production of electronically stored information (ESI) in response to Defendants Goodrich and PSI’s First Request for Production of Documents.
- The Special Master, Venetta Tassopoulos, issued a Report resolving discovery disputes over how ESI was produced.
- The United States filed Objections and a Motion for Review De Novo of the Special Master’s Report, seeking vacatur of the August 1, 2011 Order.
- The Court had previously instructed de novo review of Special Master rulings, with objections governed by Rule 72(a).
- The Court denied the United States’ Motion for Review and ordered future ESI productions to be labeled to correspond to production requests or produced in native format with metadata.
- The ruling addresses whether the CMOs supersede Rule 34(b)(2)(E) requirements and whether ESI must be organized like hard-copy documents.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the dispute is moot or capable of repetition. | United States argues mootness persists due to prior re-production. | Goodrich contends mootness since prior production complied. | Mootness exception applies; issue ripe for review. |
| Whether the Case Management Order supersedes Rule 34(b)(2)(E) requirements for ESI. | CMO supersedes Rule 34(b) for ESI. | CMO reflects agreement but does not negate Rule 34. | CMO complements but does not supersede Rule 34(b)(2)(E). |
| Whether Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(i) applies to ESI production. | Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(i) applies to ESI as part of the organization requirement. | US claims distinction between documents and ESI exonerates ESI. | Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(i) applies to ESI; organization required. |
| What format and labeling are required for ESI productions. | Productions in TIFF/JPEG with limited metadata meet rule. | Native format with metadata or labeling per requests is necessary. | Productions must be labeled to correspond to requests or provided in native format with metadata. |
Key Cases Cited
- Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U.S. 9 (U.S. 1992) (mootness and advisory opinions limit court authority to decide moot questions)
- Johnson v. Rancho Santiago Community College Dist., 623 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 2010) (mootness exception for repetition seeking review)
- Independent Living Ctr. of S. Cal., Inc. v. Maxwell-Jolly, 590 F.3d 725 (9th Cir. 2009) (case-or-controversy and live controversy requirements; Article III)
- O’Keefe v. United States, 537 F. Supp. 2d 14 (D.D.C. 2008) (addresses Rule 34(b)(2)(E) organization vs. format for ESI)