Phillip M. Adams & Assoc., LLC V. Windbond Elecs. （株）, 2010 WLは 3767318 (D. Utah Sept. 16, 2010)

In this ongoing multi-defendant patent litigation, the court has previously addressed allegations of spoliation.  In March 2009, the court found sanctions were warranted for defendant ASUS Computer International’s violation of its duty to preserve which arose in the “1999-2000 environment” of litigation surrounding the technology to resolve a defect in a particular floppy disk controller (“FDC”).  In this case, the court reaffirmed its earlier holding regarding the trigger for defendants’ duty to preserve, namely that “[の]n late 1999 the entire computer and component manufacturer’s industry was put on notice of a potential for litigation regarding defective floppy disk components (“FDCs”) by the well publicized settlement in a large class action lawsuit against Toshiba.”  Accordingly, for defendant MSI’s failure to uphold its duty to preserve, the court found sanctions were warranted.

Plaintiff sought sanctions for defendant MSI’s spoliation of documents.  Specifically, MSI was unable to produce certain information, including “a utility used at least once to test for FDC problems”, and admitted that when it switched its email server in 2003, “it simply deleted the emails stored on the previous server.”  The Magistrate Judge denied plaintiff’s motion and, upon plaintiff’s objection, the matter went before the District Court Judge.

を介して ここで、 “コンピュータとコンポーネントメーカーの業界全体” 訴訟の可能性に関するお知らせにあった, ワラントの制裁を保持するための被告の失敗 : 電子検出法.