<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
		<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='http://www.kmklaw.com/rss.xsl?1328918899'?>
		<rss version='2.0' 
			xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'
			xmlns:dc='http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/'>
		<channel>
			<title>Electronic Discovery Road Map</title>     
			<link>http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/</link>
			<atom:link href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/rss' rel='self' type='application/rss+xml' />
			<description></description>
			
			<item>
				<title>"Massive" E-Discovery Failures Result in $8.5 Million Sanction</title>
				<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
				<link>http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/Communication-Is-Key-Electronic-Discovery</link>
				<guid>http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/108</guid>
				<dc:creator>Jamie M. Goetz-Anderson</dc:creator>
				<description>
				<![CDATA[
			<p>For anyone with a few minutes, I would highly recommend reviewing <em>Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp.</em>, a recent decision out of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. In this case, which was originally a patent dispute, the court imposed a $8.5 million sanction against Qualcomm as a result of “massive” e-discovery failures, the fundamental root of which was “an incredible breakdown in communication.” </p>
<p><a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/Communication-Is-Key-Electronic-Discovery'>Read more ...</a> </p>
					<div>Tags: <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,e-discovery'>E-Discovery</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,electronic-data-discovery'>Electronic Data Discovery</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,litigation'>Litigation</a>, Sanctions</div>
				</div>
				]]>
				</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Reasonableness in Electronic Discovery</title>
				<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
				<link>http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/Reasonableness</link>
				<guid>http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/57</guid>
				<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<description>
				<![CDATA[
			<p>In a world of tightening budgets and greater scrutiny, how do litigants act reasonably while still fully prosecuting or defending a case?&nbsp; Is it possible to thoroughly address e-discovery issues without breaking the bank?</p>
<p><a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/Reasonableness'>Read more ...</a> </p>
					<div>Tags: <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,Cooperation-Proclamation'>Cooperation Proclamation</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,e-discovery'>E-Discovery</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,electronic-data-discovery'>Electronic Data Discovery</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,esi'>ESI</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,litigation'>Litigation</a>, Sanctions, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,Sedona-Conference'>Sedona Conference</a>, <a href='http://e-discovery.kmklaw.com/topic,zubulake'>Zubulake</a></div>
				</div>
				]]>
				</description>
			</item>
		</channel>
		</rss>
		
