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.

Chandler v. Arvest Bank

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division

July 30, 2018

JESSICA CHANDLER and ADAM KING, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
ARVEST BANK, Defendant.

          STIPULATED ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY PLAN FOR ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION

          D. P. MARSHALL, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         The parties have stipulated and agreed to entry of this consent order, which meets the Court's approval. Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows:

         1. Electronic Discovery: The Collection and Culling of ESI: The following parameters govern the handling and production of electronically stored information ("ESI") in this matter:

(a). Counsel for Arvest and Plaintiffs will correspond regarding custodians and sources of documents from which they are collecting ESI for production in the above-captioned action. The parties will work in good faith to identify, discuss, agree upon and revise, if necessary, the custodians and sources of documents, including search terms, to avoid an unduly burdensome production or retrieving a large quantity of non-responsive ESI.
(b). If the parties reach an impasse regarding a the collection or production of ESI, they should file a joint report explaining the disagreement. The parties should file this paper under the CM/ECF event called "Joint Report of Discovery Dispute." The joint report must not exceed ten pages, excluding the style and signature block. Each side gets five pages. The parties should not file a motion asking for more pages. Use double spacing and avoid footnotes. Attach documents (such as disputed written discovery or responses) as needed. Redact any attachments as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2 to protect confidential information. The parties should file any joint report sufficiently before the discovery cutoff so that the dispute can be resolved, and any additional discovery completed, without undermining other pretrial deadlines. The Court will rule or schedule a hearing. The parties should alert the law clerk on the case to the joint report's filing. If a dispute arises during a deposition, call chambers so the Judge can rule during the deposition. By entering into this stipulation, no party waives its right to seek assistance from the Court on any matter relating to the handling and production of ESI not specifically addressed herein.
(c). Each party shall make a reasonable and diligent effort to search for and collect reasonably accessible and responsive ESI from each of its designated custodian's e-mail systems utilized during the relevant time period, ESI stored on each custodian's computer hard-drive, ESI on shared drives and repositories identified by relevant custodians as having been utilized during the relevant period, and other locations used by each custodian to store potentially responsive ESI. Arvest will filter the ESI it collects using search terms and will provide a list of its search terms to Plaintiffs if it has not done so already. Plaintiffs will provide Arvest with an explanation of how they are collecting or filtering the data, whether through the use of search terms or another method, and provide Arvest with its list of search terms, where applicable. If either party seeks modification of the other party's list of search terms, the party shall make a written request for modification of the search term list within thirty (30) days of receiving the list. The parties will meet and confer in good faith to address any requested modification thereafter. If a party identifies ESI from its designated custodians or other sources that may contain responsive data that is not reasonably accessible, it will provide the other party a description of the ESI that it claims is not reasonably accessible.
(d). In addition, the parties will run search terms to identify and collect reasonably accessible, non-objectionable and responsive ESI from their servers, electronic document repositories, or any other electronic file storage media, relevant shared network folders or repositories not attributed to any specific custodian, as applicable. If Arvest identifies a shared repository from which it cannot collect data due to the nature of its organization in a database or its voluminous nature, Arvest will identify this shared repository and propose to Plaintiffs a method for collection of that database, and the parties will meet and confer in good faith about the most reasonable method to collect and review the data.
(e). Arvest agrees to collect reasonably accessible, non-objectionable, non-duplicative responsive hard copy documents and produce it in Group IV, single-page TIFF format (Group IV, 300 DPI resolution) with corresponding multi-page OCR text files along with Summation standard load files or Concordance standard load files as described below. Arvest will also provide the following fields in a load file with each hard copy production:
(i). Custodian (Name of Custodian from which the file is being produced);
(ii). Bates Begin (Beginning Production Number);
(iii). Bates End (Ending Production Number);
(iv). Attach Begin (Beginning Attachment Range Number), where available;
(v). Attach End (Ending Attachment Range Number) where available;
(vi). Doc Properties (populated with the confidentiality status or redacted if the document was subjected to redaction); and
(vii). Page Count.
Production of redacted documents are subject to the same criteria as above.
(f). The parties may exclude system, executable, and other non-content files from electronically stored information or data by applying the current standard NIST list Alternatively, the parties may collect documents by including, rather than excluding, file types for collection. Each party agrees to provide a list of file types collected to the other party, and to meet and confer in good faith if there are any file types excluded that the other party reasonably believes contains responsive information. The parties will work together to determine reasonable methods of production for these file types.
(g). For non-e-mail data, where multiple custodians each possess their own copies of an identical document, the document shall be produced once for each custodian in possession of the document. In order to reduce the volume of documents reviewed and produced, each party can, if it wishes, globally de-duplicate e-mail data using the MD5 hash value. De-duplicated originals shall be securely retained and made available for inspection and copying upon reasonable request.

         2. Electronic Discovery: Production Format: The following parameters govern the production of documents that were originally maintained as ESI:

(a). The native format of all non-e-mail, unredacted ESI will be maintained by each party and non-e-mail, unredacted ESI productions shall be produced in single-page TIFF (Group IV, 300 DPI resolution) format and corresponding document-level extracted text format with the following metadata fields, to the extent they exist, provided in a Summation standard load file for Plaintiffs and in Concordance format for Arvest:
(i). Custodian (Name of Custodian from which file is being produced);
(ii). Author (Author of file from properties);
(iii). Doc Title (Title of the document from document properties)
(iv). Doc Subject (Subject of file from ...

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.