Whitepapers

TASA ID: 370

Most designers working today use a variety of CAD programs to design products and to generate two-dimensional drawings which can be used as the figures in design patent applications.  Is this really a good idea? 

TASA ID: 4285

On this recent Mother’s Day, I couldn’t help but reflect on lessons learned from my mother while she masterfully raised three sons and a daughter. She taught each of us the importance of knowledge and education, respect for others and a duty to serve those in need. While some lessons came in profound ways, many were made through what seemed like daily routine and minutia. Eat your vegetables. Go out and play. Don’t hit your brother. What I didn’t realize until many years later is that these same lessons that helped me successfully navigate schools and personal relationships growing up, could also be applied to our professional lives.

TASA ID: 4285

Throughout the years I have been asked my advice on what to do and what not to do when it comes to e-Discovery matters. It was only recently on social media that I decided to post some of the advice that I had given out to many. By no means is this an extensive list; however, these tips will help with general inquiries you may have, especially when it comes to cases.

TASA ID: 4285

There have been many articles written on the topic of inadvertent disclosure of privileged information  in litigation, but in Legal Support Partners (LSP) and TASA’s practice of providing e-Discovery services, there are still mistakes being made in how technology is used (or not) in the identification of privileged documents in electronically stored information (ESI). For this reason, it might be helpful to describe some of the e-Discovery tools that can be leveraged to identify privileged communication within a company’s ESI collection to reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure . . .

TASA ID: 4285

Within the last year, there have been many decisions from the bench providing guidance on the handling of electronically stored information (ESI).  One particular case that stands out is I-Med Pharma, Inc.  v.  Biomatrix, Inc., No. 03-3677 (DRD), 2011 WL 6140658 (D.N.J. Dec. 9, 2011) which will be referred to here as simply the I-Med Pharma case.

In this specific case, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey reached a decision affirming a prior judgment by Magistrate Judge Michael Shipp. The defendant appealed the original decision by Judge Shipp not to force the plaintiff to search and review an estimated 95 million pages of records found in the unallocated space on its computer systems using keyword search terms previously agreed upon by both parties.