The very phrase, "discovery on discovery," suggests something improper. And so it is no surprise that parties resisting discovery, whether by way of requests for production, interrogatories, or depositions, often complain that the discovery is inappropriate "discovery on discovery." Given the adversarial nature of civil litigation, the expectation for broad discovery, and the complexities inherent to e-discovery, it is almost inevitable that parties will disagree on how much detail about their processes should be shared with each other during discovery (including meet and confers). Judges are thus often called upon to resolve the issue: Is the "discovery on discovery" complaint valid or is the request, including one seeking information about preservation, collection, or search-and-review efforts, legitimate given the facts of the case?