FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W323674685> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W323674685 startingPage "115" @default.
• W323674685 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION At its June 2005 meeting, the Standing Committee on the Federal Rules approved amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rules)1 in large part to accommodate the increasingly important, and often under-utilized, discovery method referred to as electronic discovery.2 The proposed changes amend Rule 26(b)(2)(B)3-(C)4 to construct a two-tiered process for electronic discovery production requests.5 The first tier requires responding parties to produce all relevant data6 stored on their digital storage systems along with a description by category and location of all relevant reasonably data that may be on their systems.7 Data that is not reasonably accessible is presumptively outside the scope of discovery unless the requesting party can show good cause,8 which is an ambiguous standard because the phrase good cause is undefined. Litigants enter the second tier of the ediscovery process when the requesting party establishes good cause,9 permitting the court to hear arguments from both litigants and to weigh the cost of production against the purported need.10 Pursuant to the new Rules, even if the requesting party agrees to pay the discovery costs, a court can nevertheless prohibit data discovery if the producing party's burden in reviewing the information for relevance and privilege exceeds the purported need.11 In addition, Rule 37(f), adopted in conjunction with the Rule 26(b)(2) amendments, removes the threat of judicially imposed sanctions absent exceptional circumstances for data lost because of the routine, good-faith operation of an electronic information system.12 Under the proposed Rules, producing parties will no longer be obligated to produce all relevant, non-privileged documents,13 and will arguably be allowed to destroy incriminating documents under a document retention policy without the threat of courtimposed sanctions.14 The Standing Committee on the Federal Rules' solution represents an equitable compromise between escalating discovery costs and enforcing compliance with broad discovery requests to facilitate discovery of facts relevant to a particular litigation.15 This burden has largely been driven by declining electronic document storage device costs coupled with sizable increases in the amount of digitally stored data, resulting in a larger document pool and generally increasing the costs of retrieving and reviewing electronic documents.16 Arguably, the Advisory Committee's proposals do reach a proper balance between cost management and the judicial doctrine of broad discovery. If adopted, the proposed Rules may enable litigants to engage in discovery abuse by hiding or destroying incriminating digital evidence. The proposed Rules also provide greater protection to data that is reasonably and restrict the judiciary's ability to impose sanctions on litigants. By providing greater protection for data that is reasonably the proposed Rules encourage both software programmers and system architects17 to design and develop software storage solutions that render data not reasonably accessible by making access to the data fiscally or technically impractical. By recharacterizing18 data as not reasonably accessible, these parties obviate their production duties pursuant to the proposed Rules. These litigants would store data on inefficient storage systems, making it unduly burdensome or expensive to (1) search for data, (2) restore data, or (3) change the data's format, therefore, making discovery more difficult.19 Additionally, producing parties may obstruct the operation of the two-tiered e-discovery process by failing to disclose adequate descriptions of data categories, descriptors,20 or designs containing relevant or inaccessible data stored on the litigants' systems.21 Finally, the proposed Rule amendments may frustrate the doctrine of broad discovery by shifting costs to requesting parties, forcing them to endure additional rounds of e-discovery motion practice. …" @default.
• W323674685 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W323674685 creator A5002495040 @default.
• W323674685 creator A5023539179 @default.
• W323674685 creator A5073254655 @default.
• W323674685 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W323674685 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W323674685 title "Hiding the Inaccessible Truth: Amending the Federal Rules to Accommodate Electronic Discovery" @default.
• W323674685 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W323674685 type Work @default.
• W323674685 sameAs 323674685 @default.
• W323674685 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W323674685 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W323674685 hasAuthorship W323674685A5002495040 @default.
• W323674685 hasAuthorship W323674685A5023539179 @default.
• W323674685 hasAuthorship W323674685A5073254655 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C158154518 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C2780138299 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C2780858371 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W323674685 hasConcept C538833194 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C144024400 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C144133560 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C158154518 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C17744445 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C190253527 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C199539241 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C2780138299 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C2780858371 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C41008148 @default.
• W323674685 hasConceptScore W323674685C538833194 @default.
• W323674685 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W323674685 hasLocation W3236746851 @default.
• W323674685 hasOpenAccess W323674685 @default.
• W323674685 hasPrimaryLocation W3236746851 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W1491812997 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W1530698690 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W1568546921 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W1592261223 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W189355126 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2075948302 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2412261313 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2602097749 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W273548639 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2796682072 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W283675139 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W287254695 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W288629248 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2900379392 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2914985594 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W316414342 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W338903389 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W751538352 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2737302705 @default.
• W323674685 hasRelatedWork W2904990695 @default.
• W323674685 hasVolume "25" @default.
• W323674685 isParatext "false" @default.
• W323674685 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W323674685 magId "323674685" @default.
• W323674685 workType "article" @default.