Discovery of Mobile Data Doesn't Have to be Complicated or Scary
Mobile data is far more than just text messages. It can include location data, call logs, photos, videos, notes and more—all of it potentially relevant to your next dispute.
October 14, 2019 at 12:11 PM
5 minute read
Document discovery very often becomes a tit-for-tat exercise: Opposing counsel asked for our executive board minutes, so we have to ask for theirs; we asked for their CFO's emails, so we have to be ready to produce ours. These types of decisions proceed all the time, but where they often seem to stall is when it comes to text messages and other mobile data. If we ask for their text messages, they're going to ask for ours, so we'd better not. Hopefully by the end of this column you'll have a bit more confidence including mobile data in your document requests—assuming, of course, that they are relevant and proportional to the needs of your case (just another reminder that "reasonably calculated" was retired in 2015 with updates to the Federal Rules).
Mobile data is far more than just text messages. It can include location data, call logs, photos, videos, notes and more—all of it potentially relevant to your next dispute. That should be obvious without the author having to resort to some terrible cliche like "so much of business is done on the go" or "we're all addicted to our mobile devices." You know this, yet when it comes to discovery requests you suddenly turn into an ostrich. In this article, we'll cover some tips for preservation, extraction and production that should give you the basic lay of the land.
The first hurdle is preservation. In almost all cases, far more information needs to be preserved than will ever be produced, which can quickly translate into preserving the information on dozens of cellphones. But fear not, for there's an easy way to institute custodian-directed preservation of both iPhones and Androids that will avoid the need to create a forensic image of each phone. This level of preservation will be sufficient in the vast majority of, but not all, cases. With iPhones, the answer is iTunes—it allows you to back up your phone, and despite iTunes' imminent retirement, Apple's next OS, Catalina, will have the tools you need to accomplish this same task. With Android devices, the answer is Google One, which provides automated phone backup.
The skeptics out there may be wondering if custodian-directed preservation is sufficient—can we really avoid needing a forensic image of each phone? Yes. Think about how other information is preserved when a litigation hold comes out. Do you go around and create a forensic image of everyone's computer? Or do you tell them not to delete anything, make sure they've acknowledged and understand their hold obligations, and move on? (Don't forget periodic reminders about their continuing duty to preserve.)
There are always exceptions: You wouldn't send a litigation hold letter to someone accused of stealing trade secrets—you'd have security kindly remove them while you immediately create a forensic image of their computer. Similar exceptions will apply in the mobile context.
No matter what the setting, preservation is still a process that requires a good plan and careful monitoring, but it's not rocket science. And mobile data doesn't change the general thesis: Custodian-directed preservation is acceptable for just about every type of data that needs to be preserved. Craig Ball has written extensively about how to preserve mobile data—so when the time comes to act, his "Mobile to the Mainstream" guide should be your first stop.
Now that you've created backups for the mobile devices, how do you review the information? There are plenty of consumer-level tools that will extract just what you need from the backup you've created, and most of them cost less than $100. iMazing, Phone Rescue, and iBackup Viewer are all options, and most of the tools you encounter will: (1) allow you to view contents for free, but require a license to extract; and (2) extract the information into delimited CSV files, which, to the uninitiated, sound scarier than they actually are; they're basically just excel spreadsheets.
Given that mobile data is not as common as email, PDFs, Word documents and other document formats we deal with every day, you'll need to be sure to give consideration to the format in which it's exchanged. It's probably best to leave the required format open for refinement so that you can first take the time to extract the mobile data from the backup you preserved and see what your options are.
Finally, the steps outlined above work best for data that is unique and not app-specific (e.g. messages, calls, photos, videos, etc.). Mobile data is important when it's unique and can't be obtained elsewhere. So if work email is what you're after, just because it's on someone's phone doesn't make it the place to collect it. And if for some reason the contents of someone's Chick-fil-A or Vivino app will make or break the case, hire an expert.
If you want to read more about mobile-data discovery, consider the following sources: Craig Ball's blog "Ball in your Court" is fantastic, as is his "Mobile to the Mainstream" guide, both of which are available for free at http://craigball.com/.
Todd Heffner is a construction litigator and ediscovery specialist with Jones Walker in Atlanta.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow My Legal Career Unexpectedly Led Me to Become an Advocate for Domestic Violence Victims and Survivors
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250