Peck, Andrew J., United States Magistrate Judge
In this landmark opinion, the court held—for the first time—that computer-assisted review is an acceptable way to search for ESI in certain cases. Computer-assisted review is appropriate and should be regarded as a useful tool for large-data-volume cases when such review promises to secure a “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination” under FRCP 1, by ensuring discovery’s burden does not outweigh its likely benefit under FRCP 26(b)(2)(C). Computer-assisted review was appropriate in this case because defendant’s predictive coding proposal was transparent, the parties had already largely agreed to it, and the proposal promised to be a better and less costly tool than the alternatives.
v.
PUBLICIS GROUPE & MSL GROUP, Defendants
Counsel
Janette Wipper, Esq., Deepika Bains, Esq., Siham Nurhussein, Esq., Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs and Class.Brett M. Anders, Esq., Victoria Woodin Chavey, Esq., Jeffrey W. Brecher, Esq., Jackson Lewis LLP, Melville, NY, for Defendant MSL Group.
OPINION AND ORDER
(a) paying Plaintiffs and other female PR employees less than similarly-situated male employees; (b) failing to promote or advance Plaintiffs and other female PR employees at the same rate as similarly-situated male employees; and (c) carrying out discriminatory terminations, demotions and/or job reassignments of female PR employees when the company reorganized its PR practice beginning in 2008 ....
But if you get to the seventh round and [plaintiffs] are saying that the computer is still doing weird things, it's not stabilized, etc., we need to do another round or two, either you will agree to that or you will both come in with the appropriate QC information and everything else and [may be ordered to] do another round or two or five or 500 or whatever it takes to stabilize the system.