“Plaintiff disagrees that Defendants have produced the emails and attachments in a reasonable usable form. She argues that without electronic and native copies of the paper documents produced by Defendants, which documents are all connected to events leading up to, and following Plaintiff’s termination, she is unable to confirm or contradict that the documents were prepared at the time Defendants say they were prepared…. The Court finds that Defendants failed to produce the emails and attachments in either the form in which they are ordinarily maintained, or in a ‘reasonably usable form,’ as required by Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(ii). Defendants’ conversion of the emails and attachments to PDF documents and production of the PDF documents in paper format does not comply with the option to produce them in a reasonable usable form. The advisory committee notes for the 2006 amendments to Rule 34 provide guidance that Defendants’ option to produce in a reasonably usable form does not mean that they are free to convert electronically stored information from the form in which it is ordinarily maintained to a different form that makes it more difficult or burdensome for Plaintiff to use the information efficiently in the litigation. Plaintiff is entitled to have the emails and attachments produced in their native format. She has further explained the critical importance of obtaining them in their native format with metadata intact.” See White v. Graceland College Center, 536 F.Supp.2d 1250 (D.Kan. 2008).
Leave a Reply