Federal Rules Update Effective Dec. 1, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Williams v. Sprint/United Management Co.
Advertisements

Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC “Zubulake IV”
The Evolving Law of E-Discovery Joseph J. Ortego, Esq. Nixon Peabody LLP New York, NY Jericho, NY.
1 As of April 2014 Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
1 Agenda for 3rd Class Misc. –Nameplates out –Audio recordings –Model answers Finish up Service of Process Introduction to Motion to Dismiss Haddle History.
© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION ATTACKING THE PLEADINGS.
S A L T L A K E C I T Y | L A S V E G A S | R E N O | P A R S O N S B E H L E L A W. C O M Joe Stultz and Elizabeth Silvestrini Parsons Behle & Latimer.
Q UINCY COLLEGE Paralegal Studies Program Paralegal Studies Program Litigation and Procedure Discovery: Overview and Interrogatories Litigation and Procedure.
Randy J. Cox.  Rule 6 – counting days  Rule 11 – adoption of federal rule  Rule 15 – amended pleadings  Rule 26 – no federal-court disclosure requirements;
Decided May 13, 2003 By the United States Court for the Southern District of New York.
17th Annual ARMA Metro Maryland Spring Seminar Confidentiality, Access, and Use of Electronic Records.
American Tort Law Carolyn McAllaster Clinical Professor of Law Duke University School of Law.
N ORTHERN M ARIANA I SLANDS R ULES FOR M ANDATORY A LTERNATIVE D ISPUTE R ESOLUTION.
Civil Rules Update Denton County Bench-Bar Conference April 25-26, 2013 Justice Phil Johnson Texas Supreme Court 1.
John B. Pegram Fish & Richardson P.C. U.S. Federal Court Rule Changes 1 © AIPLA 2015.
Perspectives on Discovery from an Attorney / Records Manager 3/15/2007 ©The Cadence Group, Inc Confidential & Proprietary Information is our Forté.
The Sedona Principles 1-7
EVIDENCE Some Basics Spring Overview The cases you read involve facts and law Most often appellate courts decide legal issues based on the facts.
E-Discovery in Health Care Litigation By Tracy Vigness Kolb.
4-1 Chapter 4— Litigation REED SHEDD PAGNATTARO MOREHEAD F I F T E E N T H E D I T I O N McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies,
2009 CHANGES IN CALIFORNIA DISCOVERY RULES The California Electronic Discovery Act Batya Swenson E-discovery Task Force
The Challenge of Rule 26(f) Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer July 15, 2011.
Tues. Oct. 29. venue in federal court Sec Venue generally (b) Venue in general.--A civil action may be brought in-- (1) a judicial district.
Rambus v. Infineon Technologies AG 22 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 20 DISCOVERY I Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 7, 2005.
Thurs. Nov. 1. waiver of defenses FRCP 12(g) Joining Motions. (1) Right to Join. A motion under this rule may be joined with any other motion allowed.
Session 6 ERM Case Law: The Annual MER Update of the Latest News, Trends, & Issues Hon. John M. Facciola United States District Court, District of Columbia.
Primary Changes To The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Effective December 1, 2015 Presented By Shuman, McCuskey, & Slicer, PLLC.
Changes to the Federal e- Discovery Rules and Their Impact on HIM and the EHR Arthur J. Fried, Esq. Epstein Becker & Green Daniel Garrie, Esq. Zeichner.
Copyright © 2015 Bradley & Riley PC - All rights reserved. October 30, 2015 IA ACC 2 nd Annual Corp. Counsel Forum Timothy J. Hill Laura M. Hyer N EW F.
The Sedona Principles November 16, Background- What is The Sedona Conference The Sedona Conference is an educational institute, established in 1997,
Law in the Global Marketplace: Intellectual Property and Related Issues Hosted by: Update on U.S. Patent Legislation.
Zubulake IV [Trigger Date]
CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 17 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 4, 2002.
Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC 217 F.R.D. 309 (S.D.N.Y. 2003), 236 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Proposed and Recent Changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 22 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 16, 2002.
CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2005 SECTIONS C & F CLASS 21 DISCOVERY II October 11, 2005.
Electronic Discovery Guidelines FRCP 26(f) mandates that parties “meaningfully meet and confer” to consider the nature of their respective claims and defenses.
1. Understand when and why the Amended Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect; 2. Understand the “gist” of the Amended Rules; 3. Understand the basic.
Wed., Nov. 12. discovery scope of discovery 26(b)(1): Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s.
The Applicability of Patent-Agent Privilege After In re Queen’s University at Kingston Presented by Rachel Perry © 2016 Workman Nydegger.
Forms of Pretrial Discovery in the Auto Property Damage Case Mark Demian and Jeffrey Dubin Javitch, Block & Rathbone LLP.
WELCOME TO EVIDENCE 2016 Miiko Kumar. What is evidence law about? Where is evidence law from? Where is evidence law now? What are the aims of the laws.
2015 Civil Rules Amendments. I. History of Rule 26 Amendments.
The Ever-Changing World of eDiscovery: What You Need to Know in 2016
LITIGATION PROCEDURES
What State Court Practitioners Need to Know About Federal Civil Procedures.
The Amendments to the Federal Rules on Discovery:
CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION
The F.R.C.P. Part II Alan R. Beckman, J.D..
AT-WILL EMPLOYMENT IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT
Pretrial Conference After discovery, a pretrial hearing is held to clarify the issues, consider a settlement, and set rules for trial Once the trial court.
Tues., Oct. 22.
Northern District of California 2017 Judicial Conference
Agenda for 6th Class Misc. Name plates out Slide handout Amendment
CIVIL PROCEDURE ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #4 MODEL ANSWER
The Future of Discovery Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Presented by: Rachael Zichella of Taylor English Duma LLP
Tues. Nov. 12.
Thurs. Sept. 6.
Function of the International Court of Justice (ICJ):
Mon., Sept. 9.
Electronic Medical Records
Civil Pretrial Practice
Civil Pretrial Practice
Agenda for 6th Class Misc. Name plates out Slide handout Relation Back
Agenda for 6th Class Misc. Name plates out Slide handout
James Toupin POST-GRANT REVIEW: A COMPARISON OF USPTO
Presentation transcript:

Federal Rules Update Effective Dec. 1, 2015

Forms Abrogated / Pleading Standards? Rule 84 and Forms, including Form 18 (patent infringement complaint), eliminated. Pleading direct infringement must satisfy Twombly? Indirect infringement already required this. See In re Bill of Lading (FC 2012). BUT Rules Committee Comment: “The abrogation of Rule 84 does not alter existing pleading standards or otherwise change the requirements of Civil Rule 8.” (Pending “reform” legislation would heighten pleading standards in other ways.)

Forms Abrogated Forms 5 and 6 for Waiver of Service move to substantive Rule 4.

Time Limit for Service Rule 4(m) amended regarding dismissal Was: 120 days Now: 90 days

Rule 26 Scope, Proportionality Rephrased Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case, considering the importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Information within this scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.

Rule 26 Scope, Proportionality Rephrased “reasonably calculated to lead” language removed

Rule 26 Timing Can deliver Rule 34 Requests 21 days after summons and complaint. BUT: Considered served (for response time) at Rule 26(f) conference (Corresponding amendment to Rule 34)

Rule 34 Objections Time for Production Must state whether any responsive materials are being withheld. Time for Production “no later than the time for inspection specified in the request or another reasonable time specified in the response.”

Rule 37 and ESI Rule 37(e) Amended Was: sanctions for failure to preserve ESI (lost in routine operations) only for exceptional circumstances Now: Court can order “measures… necessary to cure prejudice” if: Should have been preserved Lost because failure to take reasonable steps; and Cannot be restored/replaced Intent to deprive = presumption of unfavorable info; jury instruction; or dismissal/default.