United States: The 2014 Proposed Amendments To The Federal Rules On E-Discovery – What Didn’t They Get Right?

Originally published July 30, 2014

In an earlier article, I wrote about the pending proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on e-discovery, and what the new Rules seem to get right as far as improving certain procedures. (You can see that article here.)

Now let's look at the problems that weren't addressed by the proposed amendments, as well as the brand new set of questions that are created by these revisions.

1. What Questions Did the Proposed Amendments Leave Unanswered?

Most notably, the proposed Rules don't address the "trigger" for implementing a litigation hold, or identify exactly when a "reasonable anticipation of litigation" arises. As a result, Courts and the parties will still need to resort to the case law of the specific jurisdiction (which can vary from court to court) as to when the duty to preserve evidence arises.

Similarly, although proposed Rule 37(e) talks about the consequences of losing ESI if it "should have been preserved in the anticipation or conduct of litigation," there may be significant room for disagreement and litigation over exactly what the parties' obligations to preserve entail. This may only get more uncertain in light of the other proposed changes to the Rules. For example, as discussed in the companion to this article, the proposed Amendments call for greater proportionality and seem to be aimed at trying to control or reduce the scope of e-discovery in litigation. Do those principles also extend to what must potentially be preserved in the case?

In practice, lawyers and their clients have routinely struggled in answering the question of "what do I need to preserve"? The proposed amendments don't answer that question. If anything, by emphasizing greater proportionality and stating that sanctions will be available if lost ESI "should have been preserved in the anticipation or conduct of litigation," the new Rule would seem to create room for more debate and uncertainty.

2. What New Questions Are Posed by the Proposed Amendments?

Perhaps the biggest questions surround the proposed change to Rule 37(e), which deals with sanctions for failing to disclose or cooperate in discovery. Although the new Rule sets out the standards for imposing sanctions for "intentional" e-discovery misconduct, other changes to the Rules – specifically, the standards for awarding relief based on the unintentional spoliation of evidence – may only result in greater uncertainty and lack of uniformity among the Courts.

a. The New Proposed Rule 37(e).

The proposed amendment to Rule 37(e) makes the following types of relief available for e-discovery violations:

Rule 37. Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions

(e) Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored Information. If electronically stored information that should have been preserved in the anticipation or conduct of litigation is lost because a party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve it, and it cannot be restored or replaced through additional discovery, the court may:

  1. upon finding prejudice to another party from loss of the information, order measures no greater than necessary to cure the prejudice; or
  2. only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information's use in the litigation:

    1. presume that the lost information was unfavorable to the party;
    2. instruct the jury that it may or must presume the information was unfavorable to the party; or
    3. dismiss the action or enter a default judgment.

Therefore, these proposed amendments establish two categories of conduct that may support an order of relief for the spoliation of ESI: (1) where spoliation was "intentional" (i.e., meant to deprive the other party of the use of the information) (Rule 37(e)(2)); and (2) where spoliation was not intentional but still resulted in prejudice to the innocent party (Rule 37(e)(1)).

Significantly, with respect to unintentional spoliation, proposed Rule 37(e)(1) does not distinguish between "negligent" and "grossly negligent" destruction of evidence (as various Courts have done). Instead, the Rule would allow for the Court to award relief regardless of intent, where ESI that should have been preserved was not, and where that spoliation of evidence results in prejudice to the innocent party.

b. What Does Rule 37(e) Mean, When Applying it Practically to E-Discovery Cases?

The issue of "prejudice" under proposed Rule 37(e)(1) could be subject to varying interpretations and may very well turn out to be the most problematic language in the proposed amendments.

First, although the new Rule states that the Court must find prejudice to the innocent party in order to award relief, the Rule does not indicate which party bears the burden of proving prejudice (or the lack of prejudice). The Committee's Notes confirm that the proposed amendment "does not place a burden of proving or disproving prejudice on one party or the other."

Instead, the proposed Rule and associated Notes provide rather ambiguous direction as to the assignment of the burden of proof. On one hand, the Committee notes that "[d]etermining the content of lost information may be a difficult task in some cases, and placing the burden of proving prejudice on the party that did not lose the information may be unfair." Meanwhile, the Committee notes that in other situations, "the content of the lost information may be fairly evident, the information may appear to be unimportant, or the abundance of preserved information may appear sufficient to meet the needs of all parties," in which case it may be reasonable to place the burden of proof on the party requesting relief.

In other words, the Committee suggests that the burden of proof may be assigned based on the ability to ascertain the content of the lost information. Of course, whenever ESI is lost, it is difficult (if not impossible) to precisely determine "the content of the lost information." True, the parties may be able to resort to alternative sources of similar information to determine the character of the ESI lost by the spoliating party (although this may render a request for relief entirely moot, based on the introductory language of proposed Rule 37(e)). But the proposed amendments and comments don't provide any direction for the parties or the Court as to who bears the burden of proving that the content of the lost information is (or is not) evident. Is it enough for the non-producing party to present evidence that some evidence was lost, without first making an effort to determine if the discovery may be obtained from alternate sources, thereby effectively placing the burden on the allegedly spoliating party to try to obtain the evidence from other sources? Or must the innocent party first make some (unsuccessful) effort to obtain discovery from other sources and attempt to characterize the nature of the lost ESI?

The Rules and Committee Notes make no suggestions on these issues. Although the Committee's Notes expressly reject cases such as Residential Funding that authorize an adverse-inference instruction upon a finding of negligence or gross negligence, will the Courts still distinguish between prejudice and gross negligence for purposes of shifting the burden of proof, as seen in Residential Funding, Pension Committee, etc.?

Second, on a related point, how high is the burden, on either party, to prove or disprove prejudice under the proposed amendment to Rule 37(e)? Must the loss of ESI be potentially so great as to hinder the innocent party from presenting their case, or is some lesser standard appropriate? Certainly, if the moving party bears the initial burden of proof, the fact that the ESI has been lost will make it extremely difficult (again, if not impossible) for that party to prove the extent of any harm to the case.

The non-moving party bears a similar problem in proving the lack of any harm from the loss of evidence. Indeed, viewing the problem from the perspective of the party accused of spoliation, who is to say that the lost evidence didn't actually support their case? In those instances, the spoliating party would suffer not only the loss of helpful evidence, but also, the entry of sanctions or relief.

Third, proposed Rule 37(e)(1) is far from clear as to what types of relief can be awarded against the spoliating party if the Court does find prejudice. Rule 37(e)(2) identifies specific types of sanctions that can be entered as a result of intentional spoliation. But Rule 37(e)(1) does not say anything about the kinds of relief that may be available for unintentional spoliation. Does that mean that none of the sanctions allowed for intentional spoliation are available in cases of unintentional spoliation?

Certainly, a party who has been prejudiced by an unintentional spoliation of ESI might contend that an adverse jury instruction or a presumption as to whether the lost information was helpful or harmful to the case might be necessary to "cure the prejudice" that results from spoliation. Indeed, the Committee's Note suggests that "serious measures" may be necessary to cure prejudice, "such as forbidding the party that failed to preserve information from putting on certain evidence, [or] permitting the parties to present evidence and argument to the jury regarding the loss of information." The Note also indicates that such relief may include "giving the jury instructions to assist in its evaluation of such evidence or argument."

On the other hand, the Note rejects the Residential Funding adverse inference in cases of negligence or gross negligence, suggesting that any such instructions should be different than those "to which subdivision (e)(2) applies," and that "[c]are must be taken... to ensure that curative measures under subdivision (e)(1) do not have the effect of measures that are permitted under subdivision (e)(2) only on a finding of intent to deprive another party of the lost information's use in the litigation." It is unclear how such "serious" measures cannot have both a remedial and punitive effect.

Therefore, because proposed Rule 37(e)(1) does not specify any particular forms of relief, the Courts may have to start from scratch in identifying what types of relief are available for an unintentional but prejudicial loss of ESI.

Overall, the proposed amendments to Rule 37(e) do appear to promote greater uniformity among the Courts in awarding sanctions based on an "intentional" spoliation of ESI. However, significant questions remain as to the standards that apply to cases of unintentional spoliation. It is this latter category of spoliation that seems to comprise the far greater percentage of today's e-discovery motion practice. As a result, it is not difficult to predict that different Courts will produce different results on applications for relief brought under Rule 37(e)(1).

Certainly, all new rules necessarily require judicial interpretation and application of the facts on a case-by-case basis, to reach a just result. However, where the proposed rules offer unclear guidance on the standards and factors to be applied by the Courts, we may very well see inconsistent and scattered results.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.