Relevancy alone is no longer sufficient – discovery must also be proportional to the needs of the case.
In this case, the parties disagreed on the discoverability of certain electronically stored information (“ESI”) generated by foreign entities (subsidiaries or divisions of defendant C.R. Bard) that sell IVC filters abroad. The plaintiffs sought discovery of communications between the foreign entities and foreign regulatory bodies regarding the IVC filters at issue in this case.
RELEVENCY BROADER IN DISCOVERY
Courts generally recognize that relevancy for purposes of discovery is broader than relevancy for purposes of trial.
MARGINALLY RELEVANT
After in-depth analysis by the court for relevancy and proportionality factors, they found the requested discovery only “marginally relevant,” resulting in the court finding that the burden outweighed the expense of discovery.
Download the PDF version of the In re Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation case analysis here.
Because proportionality is now a part of the scope formulation, judges will have to take a more activist role.”